Wikipedia talk:Did you know
Error reports Please do not post error reports for the current Main Page template version here. Instead, post them to Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors. Error reports relating to the next two queues to be promoted can also be posted to ERRORS. If you post an error report on one of the queues here, please include a link to the queue in question. Thank you. |
DYK queue status
Current time: 22:50, 7 December 2024 (UTC) Update frequency: once every 24 hours Last updated: 22 hours ago() |
This is where the Did you know section on the main page, its policies, and its processes can be discussed.
Christmas DYK sets
[edit]With Christmas just over four weeks away, I think this is a good time to ask: does DYK want to do sets for Christmas Eve and Christmas Day?
If yes, here are some potential hooks that can be used:
- Template:Did you know nominations/Pflaumentoffel: Food, needs a review
- Template:Did you know nominations/The Christmas Invasion: TV,
currently in Prep 6at SOHA - Template:Did you know nominations/HMT Night Hawk: Ship,
ApprovedSOHA
In addition, these articles are at WP:GAN and could potentially be used as Christmas hooks:
Thoughts about creating this set are welcome below. Z1720 (talk) 15:38, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
- Excellent idea. I did actually see the Christmas Invasion in prep and wondered why it wasn't being saved. Pinging @DoctorWhoFan91, Piotrus, DimensionalFusion, Thriley, and Grimes2: who are involved with the first two noms. (I've been putting off expanding Piri & Tommy for over a year and they did a track called "Christmas Time" if that's of any use?)--Launchballer 15:56, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
- @Launchballer: Nominate it when its ready: if we decide not to use it for this set, the article will still be better. Z1720 (talk) 16:51, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
- It's fine with me - I can review any new XMAS hook if pinged. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:09, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- @Launchballer: I'm not really familiar with DYK- should I add somewhere that it should be saved for Christmas (I will read the instructions to DYK more comprehensively later). @Z1720: Great idea. Also, I'm working on another Christmas special- if it gets nominated and passed by then, I can nominate that for DYK too. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 11:26, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- No, what someone needs to do is pull the nom, leave a note, and put it in WP:SOHA. I've done that.--Launchballer 11:39, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- I'm planning to do a nativity painting. Johnbod (talk) 01:13, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
Christmas hooks should go into the "Special occasions" section at the bottom of the WP:DYKN page. Thanks guys! Gatoclass (talk) 14:11, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Actually, they should go into the "Special occasions" section at the top of the WP:DYKNA page (direct link: WP:SOHA), and only once they're approved. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:37, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
While not a "Christmassy" hook, it would be nice if Template:Did you know nominations/HMT Night Hawk could run on Christmas Day for the 110th anniversary of her sinking - Dumelow (talk) 20:17, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- @Dumelow: Since the hook mentions Christmas, I think it is appropriate for the set. It will also help us diversity the setZ1720 (talk) 01:11, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
I can work up an article on a Brazilian Krampus species.--Kevmin § 17:51, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Template:Did you know nominations/Dickinson pumpkin. I just made a Christmas hook for this. Thriley (talk) 21:14, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Template:Did you know nominations/Austrosphecodes krampus the "Krampus" hook is live and nominated .--Kevmin § 20:09, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Template:Did you know nominations/Adoration of the Magi in the Snow, a stunning Bruegel painting with pic, is now ready for review. Johnbod (talk) 19:36, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
Pinging Lbal, Viriditas, and Crisco 1492: I originally was going to change "passerby" (singular) to "passersby" (since the implication is that this happened to lots of people), but it isn't people passing by, it's various floating vessels being pulled along the canal by mules where those mules end up in the water, not people riding mules and person and steed getting pulled into the canal and needing rescue. "Passerby" is a "one who" definition, not a "something that" word, so it's not appropriate in this context. What's happening is a swing bridge deliberately being opening late and sometimes entangling the tow lines being pulled by the mules, so the mules are pulled into the water and have to be rescued by the locals. A possible edit: replace "profited from passerby by dragging their mules" with "profited from passing vessels by dragging their tow mules". Thoughts? Suggestions? BlueMoonset (talk) 05:18, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Agreed. Viriditas (talk) 05:31, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- I think that sounds good. Lbal (talk) 15:20, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Updated the hook based on agreement above. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:13, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
@Wolverine X-eye, Rjjiii, and AirshipJungleman29: I don't see where this is in either of the sources and there appears to be a couple of sentences straight out of sources (see Earwig). Also, in trying to cram six images into one slot, I would argue that none of them show up particularly well at a small size. (If you want to go for views, I suggest using the video.)--Launchballer 02:50, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- I agree about the image. Maybe just crop out the one dog in the upper-left and use that? I'm not a huge fan of using videos; they don't have the immediate impact that a still image does. RoySmith (talk) 02:56, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Launchballer & RoySmith, at some point the nomination had this image:
- Also, do the quotes from the sources on the nomination not cover the hook fact? Rjjiii (talk) 03:25, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- I do wish we had a better hook. There are so many cool fun facts about dogs we could include, but this is one of the most well-known things about dog history. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 10:39, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Theleekycauldron: I think dogs are going to get high views no matter what we run. (If I had my way, we'd be running the dog meat hook suggested in the nom, but that technically would be about dog meat, so would technically fail DYKHOOKSTYLE.) What do you suggest?--Launchballer 11:55, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Launchballer:
- ... that some studies suggest dogs can sense and align themselves with Earth's magnetic field? (the sourcing wouldn't pass MEDRS, unfortunately.)
- ... that dogs have much more sensitive noses and ears than humans, but have trouble distinguishing red from green?
- ... that dogs can see color, but have trouble distinguishing red from green? (is common misconception, but misconception would have to be sourced and added to article)
- ... that dogs can develop post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)? :(
- ... that dogs have served as shepherds, police, mayors, pest control, and astronauts? (mayors would have to be inserted and sourced as well)
- theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 12:12, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- I saw "that dogs prefer to defecate with their spines aligned in a north–south position", but that probably fails WP:DYKGRAT. The PTSD hook is punchier and definitely checks out at least to the American Kennel Club. @Wolverine X-eye, Rjjiii, and AirshipJungleman29:, what is your opinion of this?--Launchballer 12:36, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- I'm a big fan of Everyone Poops myself, but it's totally your call :) theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 12:40, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- I think you should let your dog decide which fact they'd like to see, but as for me, I think the original fact is interesting but maybe, just maybe, my judgment here is off. I wouldn't mind a change in the hook, as long as it's somewhat more intriguing than the original like that fact about dogs wagging their tails in a certain direction. I'm sure this is the most popular article DYK has seen in a long time, so I get where the enthusiasm is coming from. Wolverine X-eye (talk to me) 13:42, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- I did the GA review and so, I think, cannot technically approve a hook. Di (they-them) did the DYK review, so I'll ping them in, Rjjiii (ii) (talk) 14:18, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Hi! I think that
... that dogs have much more sensitive noses and ears than humans, but have trouble distinguishing red from green?
is my favorite of the ones proposed here because it provides a nice sense of contrast between the two facts, with dogs having superior senses in some ways and inferior senses in others. All of the hooks seem cool, but this is my favorite. Di (they-them) (talk) 14:41, 3 December 2024 (UTC)- I like that hook as well and it checks out. If there are no objections by the end of the day, I'll swap it in.--Launchballer 15:11, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- If you're looking for something pithier: "... that dogs are dichromats?" RoySmith (talk) 15:20, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- If I saw that hook, my first instinct would be to either click on 'dichromats' or to google it.--Launchballer 23:44, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Swapped.--Launchballer 23:44, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- If you're looking for something pithier: "... that dogs are dichromats?" RoySmith (talk) 15:20, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- I like that hook as well and it checks out. If there are no objections by the end of the day, I'll swap it in.--Launchballer 15:11, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Hi! I think that
- I'm a big fan of Everyone Poops myself, but it's totally your call :) theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 12:40, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- I saw "that dogs prefer to defecate with their spines aligned in a north–south position", but that probably fails WP:DYKGRAT. The PTSD hook is punchier and definitely checks out at least to the American Kennel Club. @Wolverine X-eye, Rjjiii, and AirshipJungleman29:, what is your opinion of this?--Launchballer 12:36, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Launchballer:
- @Theleekycauldron: I think dogs are going to get high views no matter what we run. (If I had my way, we'd be running the dog meat hook suggested in the nom, but that technically would be about dog meat, so would technically fail DYKHOOKSTYLE.) What do you suggest?--Launchballer 11:55, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
That's an improvement, but I think
would work even better. RoySmith (talk) 03:38, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- @RoySmith Looks good, "examples" needs to be singular. Rjjiii (talk) 03:43, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Done RoySmith (talk) 03:59, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- PS, I noticed that dog had been indef semi-protected 14 years ago. I'm not a fan of indef protection, so I've put it back to unprotected. Let's see what happens. We can always reprotect it if necessary. RoySmith (talk) 04:04, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- I still don't see it in the first source but I do see "The researchers determined that dogs were probably domesticated from now-extinct wolves between 11,000 and 16,000 years ago — before humans began farming around 10,000 years ago" in the second. I recommend truncating the hook at wolves.--Launchballer 10:22, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Launchballer, I've slightly expanded the language in the article and added a mention and link to the Bonn–Oberkassel dog, the earliest widely accepted remains of a dog to have been found, dating to between 14,000 and 15,000 years ago. The source says the remains date to about 15,000 years ago, but following the citations, it's clear that those papers are saying between 14 and 15 thousand years ago. The source also talks about the genetic evidence for a much older domestication. If this is not clear enough I'll list several other sources below:
- The oldest fossils generally agreed to be domestic dogs date to about 14,000 years, but several disputed fossils more than twice that age may also be dogs or at least their no longer entirely wolf ancestors.
- Archeological evidence for the coexistence of dogs with humans has been identified from as early as 14–17,000 years before present (ybp) in Russia, (Sablin and Khlopachev, 2002); 14,000 ybp in Germany (Nobis, 1979); and 12,000 ybp in Israel (Tchernov and Valla, 1997; Davis and Valla, 1978; Dayan, 1994).
- The fossil jaw and teeth of a domesticated dog, recovered from a cave in Iraq, have been found to be about 14,000 years old. This is the oldest known evidence for man's taming of a wild animal—the wolf in this case.
- Wolf domestication is seen as the result of 2 interwoven processes originating >14,000 years ago during our hunter-gatherer nomadic period.
- We can replace the article's citation with one of these, if needed to meet WP:V, Rjjiii (ii) (talk) 00:23, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Not Science Direct, that's coming up underlined on WP:UPSD, but something's there and it checks out, so I'm happy with that. Two further sentences appear in their respective sources (see Earwig); who copied who?--Launchballer 02:56, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Wolverine X-eye: Both of these are copied from cited sources, and the facts should be re-stated: [1][2] Each one is a single sentence copied nearly verbatim, by two different editors. @Launchballer: Thanks for following up. Of those, this is probably the most reliable and the most relevant if a source needs to be added: [3] Also, the ScienceDirect excerpt is from page 277 in this book. I somehow missed that ScienceDirect's "topics" pages are curated by a chatbot and exist on dubious copyright grounds, so thanks for pointing that out. Rjjiii (talk) 05:00, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Rephrased both. Wolverine X-eye (talk to me) 10:15, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Wolverine X-eye: Both of these are copied from cited sources, and the facts should be re-stated: [1][2] Each one is a single sentence copied nearly verbatim, by two different editors. @Launchballer: Thanks for following up. Of those, this is probably the most reliable and the most relevant if a source needs to be added: [3] Also, the ScienceDirect excerpt is from page 277 in this book. I somehow missed that ScienceDirect's "topics" pages are curated by a chatbot and exist on dubious copyright grounds, so thanks for pointing that out. Rjjiii (talk) 05:00, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Not Science Direct, that's coming up underlined on WP:UPSD, but something's there and it checks out, so I'm happy with that. Two further sentences appear in their respective sources (see Earwig); who copied who?--Launchballer 02:56, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Launchballer, I've slightly expanded the language in the article and added a mention and link to the Bonn–Oberkassel dog, the earliest widely accepted remains of a dog to have been found, dating to between 14,000 and 15,000 years ago. The source says the remains date to about 15,000 years ago, but following the citations, it's clear that those papers are saying between 14 and 15 thousand years ago. The source also talks about the genetic evidence for a much older domestication. If this is not clear enough I'll list several other sources below:
- @RoySmith: That went well.--Launchballer 02:56, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- I still don't see it in the first source but I do see "The researchers determined that dogs were probably domesticated from now-extinct wolves between 11,000 and 16,000 years ago — before humans began farming around 10,000 years ago" in the second. I recommend truncating the hook at wolves.--Launchballer 10:22, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- PS, I noticed that dog had been indef semi-protected 14 years ago. I'm not a fan of indef protection, so I've put it back to unprotected. Let's see what happens. We can always reprotect it if necessary. RoySmith (talk) 04:04, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Done RoySmith (talk) 03:59, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
@Michael G. Lind and Seefooddiet: I just added two {{cn}} tags that will need rectifying before this can run.--Launchballer 02:50, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Crisco 1492 fixed this, so I believe this is good to go.--Launchballer 02:59, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Just noting that I did prep-to-queue for this last month; its title was the problem and that's been fixed, so I will rely on my earlier review.--Launchballer 02:50, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
@Soman, Crisco 1492, and NightWolf1223: There's an unsourced footnote which should probably be cited. (And I hate that WP:CLUMP on a cellular level, however much it isn't a DYK issue.)--Launchballer 02:50, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Soman, if you have a ref... otherwise a fundamental part of me wants to hide it. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 04:32, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- I agree, having that long of a list in the footnote detracts from the article and is bordering on indescriminate. I would not be opposed to removal. NightWolf1223 <Howl at me•My hunts> 05:10, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- The ref for the footnote is the same as the ref for all the geographic delimitation of the constituencies, the Manipur Gazette. I find no other way to express the the delimitation of the constituency than to include the list, I have no euphemism for this group of villages. --Soman (talk) 09:35, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- I agree, having that long of a list in the footnote detracts from the article and is bordering on indescriminate. I would not be opposed to removal. NightWolf1223 <Howl at me•My hunts> 05:10, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- My concern has been resolved.--Launchballer 10:23, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
Me and @AirshipJungleman29: disagree as to the notability for Anna Holland; he believes that they do not meet WP:CRIMINAL but I believe that they meet WP:CRIMINAL#unusual crime. I'd appreciate another opinion on this. Also pinging @Crisco 1492: as reviewer.--Launchballer 02:59, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- At time of review, they seemed to be an edge case, but I'll be the first to admit that I don't write enough about crime to have the precedent of WP:CRIMINAL memorized. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 03:02, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- When in doubt, AFD. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 06:03, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- I've done so. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:28, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- When in doubt, AFD. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 06:03, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Older nominations needing DYK reviewers
[edit]The previous list was archived yesterday afternoon, so I've created a new list of 30 nominations that need reviewing in the Older nominations section of the Nominations page, covering everything through November 6. We have a total of 307 nominations, of which 163 have been approved, a gap of 144 nominations that has decreased by 44 over the past 6 days. Thanks to everyone who reviews these and any other nominations!
More than one month old
October 8: Template:Did you know nominations/Diane Leather- October 13: Template:Did you know nominations/Anastasia Somoza
- October 15: Template:Did you know nominations/Ratnākara
October 15: Template:Did you know nominations/2018 Batman by-electionOctober 16: Template:Did you know nominations/Lyncoya Jackson- October 18: Template:Did you know nominations/Luo Shiwen
- October 19: Template:Did you know nominations/Izvestiya Soveta rabochikh i soldatskikh deputatov goroda Askhabada
- October 20: Template:Did you know nominations/Mwene Muji
- October 22: Template:Did you know nominations/Revant Himatsingka
October 22: Template:Did you know nominations/Aaron Kennedy- October 23: Template:Did you know nominations/Foreign policy of the Masoud Pezeshkian administration
- October 24: Template:Did you know nominations/A Nail Clipper Romance
- October 28: Template:Did you know nominations/Gilopez Kabayao
- October 28: Template:Did you know nominations/Chromakopia
- October 30: Template:Did you know nominations/Karl Thielscher
October 30: Template:Did you know nominations/Tommy Suggs- October 30: Template:Did you know nominations/7th National Eucharistic Congress (United States)
- October 31: Template:Did you know nominations/Gifted (2022 novella)
October 31: Template:Did you know nominations/Details Cannot Body WantsOctober 31: Template:Did you know nominations/Backflip (figure skating)- October 31: Template:Did you know nominations/Zhu Baosan
- November 1: Template:Did you know nominations/Museiliha inscription
- November 1: Template:Did you know nominations/Tel al-Sultan attack
- November 3: Template:Did you know nominations/Moe's Books
- November 3: Template:Did you know nominations/2023 European Athletics Indoor Championships – Women's 400 metres
Other nominations
- November 4: Template:Did you know nominations/Clifton House School (two articles)
November 4: Template:Did you know nominations/James Michael Reardon- November 4: Template:Did you know nominations/Pro-Fatimid conspiracy against Saladin
- November 5: Template:Did you know nominations/Oasis (Minecraft clone)
- November 5: Template:Did you know nominations/Gohobi
- November 6: Template:Did you know nominations/Dostrotime
Please remember to cross off entries, including the date, as you finish reviewing them (unless you're asking for further review), even if the review was not an approval. Please do not remove them entirely. Many thanks! BlueMoonset (talk) 20:52, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
I approved this one, so somebody else will need to review it. RoySmith (talk) 14:48, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- The article uses a Wiktionary link for "mouthpiece". Should the hook?--Launchballer 18:36, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- My opinion is no, due to the poor quality of the Wiktionary defintion on the one hand, which tells me it should be removed from the article as well. On the other hand, the article is using the term loosely, and a close reading of the text shows that it was an allegation waged by an opposition party to make claims about propaganda, which might not be accurate. However, one could conceivably link to state media, which is true, and yet has other connotations that lend itself well to "government mouthpiece". However, is is unlikely that ZIZ is factually classified as "state media", so I must rule that out as well. The article states that ZIZ is public media that relies on a revenue model. Best to leave it unlinked due to the nature of the claims at hand. Just my opinion, of course. Viriditas (talk) 02:37, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Cut from the article.--Launchballer 12:44, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- My opinion is no, due to the poor quality of the Wiktionary defintion on the one hand, which tells me it should be removed from the article as well. On the other hand, the article is using the term loosely, and a close reading of the text shows that it was an allegation waged by an opposition party to make claims about propaganda, which might not be accurate. However, one could conceivably link to state media, which is true, and yet has other connotations that lend itself well to "government mouthpiece". However, is is unlikely that ZIZ is factually classified as "state media", so I must rule that out as well. The article states that ZIZ is public media that relies on a revenue model. Best to leave it unlinked due to the nature of the claims at hand. Just my opinion, of course. Viriditas (talk) 02:37, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
@Crisco 1492, Elias Ziade, and Dwkaminski: The article says the funds were "intended for", which got turned into "were used for" in the hook. That's not quite the same thing. RoySmith (talk) 14:50, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- This is going live in an hour so I went ahead and made the change to the hook. I verified that the source says "intended to be used". RoySmith (talk) 22:51, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- @RoySmith apologies for the oversight. el.ziade (talkallam) 15:40, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not seeing geta bera anywhere in the article. Ping Gerda Arendt, CurryTime7-24, and AirshipJungleman29. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:05, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Please give me a couple of hours. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 16:09, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- CurryTime introduced it, and I understood would also add it to the article. I have no source, and no time (travel). -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:00, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Done! Take a look and let me know if it works. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 20:13, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah, that looks good. I'll promote when I get home... The Peanut discussion below isn't worth holding up the promotion.Crisco 1492 mobile (talk) 21:45, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
Anyone who likes British naval history need a DYK project?
[edit]Hi all. I just knocked off a quick stub on Thomas Fenner (sea captain) earlier today after creating a disambiguation page at Thomas Fenner. Naval history is not really my thing, but if anyone wants to work on expanding this beyond a stub, there was a lot more on this man in his Oxford Dictionary of National Biography entry. I would imagine there would be lots of coverage in google books. He was Francis Drake's second-in-command during some major Elizabethan era Royal Navy events. Probably could make a good hook from this. Best.4meter4 (talk) 15:02, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- ... that the death of a squirrel named Peanut became a rallying cry before the 2024 United States election?
@AirshipJungleman29: This was brought up in the nomination, but the reviewer preferred ALT0 and I objected to ALT1 (the hook that was promoted) on interest grounds. I understand the nominator article creator preferred ALT1, but arguably ALT0 was the better hook in terms of meeting WP:DYKINT. Suggesting a swap. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 17:23, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- I really can't see how this hook is uninteresting Narutolovehinata5! ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:26, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- I explained my side in the nomination page, but the short answer is that ALT0 seemed more likely to get clicks or at least readership interest. It also seemed more unusual than a mere reference to the 2024 election. Having seen multiple election-related noms lately, it seemed cheap to focus on the election. In any case, given that there were two editors who noted a preference for ALT0, at the very least there isn't any consensus to go with ALT1 other than the nominator's preference. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 17:29, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- I really can't see how this hook is uninteresting Narutolovehinata5! ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:26, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- The nominator (me) also prefers ALT0. @Thriley: was the only person to oppose the hook.--Launchballer 17:46, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- (ec) If we had any sort of indication that the death of Peanut influenced the results, that might be more interesting for average readers, but given the media saturation that this had during the election (and the fact that it's not even two months behind us) I feel like ALT0 is definitely better for WP:DYKINT purposes. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 17:48, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- I think the primary reason this got picked by national and international news was because of the election. It is still the primary reason it gets coverage one month later. This article from USA Today two days ago doesn't even mention only fans: [4] Thriley (talk) 18:01, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Primary reason for notability =/= hook, though. Otherwise every hook would be like "... that Zheng Zhegu was an actor and filmmaker with Mingxing?" — Chris Woodrich (talk) 18:20, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- This squirrel was the subject of widely read stories that described its relationship to the election, which more than 153 million Americans participated in. It's compelling and hardly obscure. Thriley (talk) 18:27, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Primary reason for notability =/= hook, though. Otherwise every hook would be like "... that Zheng Zhegu was an actor and filmmaker with Mingxing?" — Chris Woodrich (talk) 18:20, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- I think the primary reason this got picked by national and international news was because of the election. It is still the primary reason it gets coverage one month later. This article from USA Today two days ago doesn't even mention only fans: [4] Thriley (talk) 18:01, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- You sure it's supported by the source? "The Longos said they bought their 350-acre spread near Elmira with the $800,000 that they made in one month posting their porn online. Then P’Nut started making big money with his separate fan base" sounds almost contradictory to what the proposed hook is saying. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:17, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- (ec) If we had any sort of indication that the death of Peanut influenced the results, that might be more interesting for average readers, but given the media saturation that this had during the election (and the fact that it's not even two months behind us) I feel like ALT0 is definitely better for WP:DYKINT purposes. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 17:48, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
Given the opposition to ALT1 and the concern raised about ALT0, I've gone ahead and pulled it for now. Discussion can continue on the nomination page. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:10, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Please revert Narutolovehinata5, discussion can perfectly well continue here for a hook that is a week (!) away from running. The only objection to ALT1 that I can see is that it is less interesting than a hook not supported by the source. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:17, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Eh, with how there's no consensus against ALT1 (four editors opposed as opposed to two in support), it's probably safer this way. We don't want to risk it ending up in Queue if discussion peters out. Besides, ALT0 is also problematic for the reason you raised, so it couldn't just be a simple swap: had it not been for the issue with ALT0, I wouldn't have done the pull. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:45, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Just to be clear, I wasn't opposed to ALT1. It was certainly workable.Crisco 1492 mobile (talk) 01:04, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- It appears that the sourcing issue was addressed so I guess this can be put back to Prep (I don't know if I can do it myself since I commented in the discussion). Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:31, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
Date request
[edit]Last month I made a DYK nomination for Bob Hainlen. I recently realized that it might make a good special occasion hook for December 18, which will be the subject's 98th birthday. However, it appears the nomination was made a little outside of the six-week limit allowed for special occasion hooks. As per DYK guidelines (Exceptions to the six-week limit can be implemented by way of a local consensus at WT:DYK
), I'm coming here to request an exception. Would having this be featured on December 18 be alright? Thanks, BeanieFan11 (talk) 21:53, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Fine by me. I'm sure others can enlighten me as to the history, but I suspect the six week limit is an artefact from when most nominations stayed on T:TDYK for less than that and is more than a bit daft when we time out noms after two months. I'd be inclined to do away with the rule.--Launchballer 23:27, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Dropping the six-week limit has been discussed before and is actually something I'd personally support, but it's been shut down over logistical reasons (something about it being impractical to nominate articles then have them run much later), as well as violating the spirit of DYK's purpose (to highlight new and newly-improved content, with emphasis on the new part). If they ran too far, they wouldn't be new anymore. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:07, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Was dropping it discussed before or after WP:DYKTIMEOUT was introduced?--Launchballer 01:08, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- It was before that, although the reasons for its imposition as well as the reasons to oppose it were separate from the concerns that led to DYKTIMEOUT. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:12, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Was dropping it discussed before or after WP:DYKTIMEOUT was introduced?--Launchballer 01:08, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Dropping the six-week limit has been discussed before and is actually something I'd personally support, but it's been shut down over logistical reasons (something about it being impractical to nominate articles then have them run much later), as well as violating the spirit of DYK's purpose (to highlight new and newly-improved content, with emphasis on the new part). If they ran too far, they wouldn't be new anymore. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:07, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
Diane Leather is up for adoption
[edit]Does anyone want to adopt or write about Diane Leather? Her biography claims that she is the first woman to run a sub-5-minute mile. The nonimation is 9 days away from being two months old, and the nominator has not edited in a while. Flibirigit (talk) 01:37, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
Request for review
[edit]For Dune (Kenshi Yonezu song), I added two new DYK hooks and pinged all the DYK admins, but two days have gone by and no one seems to ready to point me in the right direction, and I'm not quite sure what the next step in the process should be, so I'm now requesting help here. ときさき くるみ not because they are easy, but because they are hard 09:59, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Tokisaki Kurumi: I see this is your first nomination. The first person to ask is Launchballer, so I have pinged him. TSventon (talk) 12:00, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Tokisaki Kurumi: DYK rules get complicated. I would suggest looking at previous hooks going back from November and searching for "song" to see what has worked in the recent past. TSventon (talk) 15:56, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
@DYK admins: Just noting that although I just queued this (with 15 seconds to spare!), there are still significant issues with this set and I am now no longer able to edit it.--Launchballer 00:15, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Also, at least the Lizzie Esau hook on the next set is mine, so I'll need a hand with it if I queue that set.--Launchballer 00:20, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
I approved the hook, so need more eyes.--Launchballer 15:08, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Launchballer: Having read the sources, I'm concerned that the article may not be under its common name, which appears to be "Khan Younis". Additionally, the spelling used in the article name doesn't appear in the lead. Not sure this is a barrier to running, but it might need a move discussion. ~ Pbritti (talk) 23:38, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Pinging @Onceinawhile:.--Launchballer 00:15, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Pbritti’s question on commonname is one I wondered myself for some time. I ran an assessment of the sources and concluded that Barquq Castle (and its cognates, with different spellings and words for castle) is the more common name. I believe that scholarly and media sources shy away from calling it Khan Yunis because of the same reason we have WP:NATURALDAB as part of our own article title policy – it causes confusion with the name of the surrounding city.
- There are many other options for the title, including the Arabic version Qalat Barquq, or Khan Yunis Castle, each with various spellings. We can have an RM or RFP on the title but this nuanced question is not related to DYK policies.
- Onceinawhile (talk) 07:02, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- I never noticed until now that the first word of the article said Burquq not Barquq! That was a typo - thanks for spotting.
- On the change of Khan Yunis to Khan Younis, personally I find it confusing for Wikipedia to transliterate the same Arabic word differently in different places. Khan Yunis is how we name the city named after this building. Onceinawhile (talk) 07:09, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Pinging @Onceinawhile:.--Launchballer 00:15, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
@Yakikaki, Gerda Arendt, and AirshipJungleman29: My apologies for not checking this before I brought it forward and therefore having to ping you twice. The hook for this needs an end-of-sentence citation.--Launchballer 15:08, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Hi, I've added it. Yakikaki (talk) 09:27, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Source appears to say Livonia, unless I'm reading it incorrectly, and the article and hook both say "the present-day Baltic states". Are these the same thing?--Launchballer 14:40, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
@FaysaLBinDaruL, Darth Stabro, and Crisco 1492: This article is 1454 characters, so slightly short of 1500. I'd be seriously tempted to IAR for an underrepresented topic like this, but I absolutely must have an end-of-sentence citation.--Launchballer 15:08, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Launchballer article is given a little extension, now it's 1534. That would help. FaysaLBinDaruL (talk) 15:26, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- @AirshipJungleman29 after your edit, characters comes down to 1488, we need 12 more characters to reach 1500. Please kindly expand a bit. ~ Φαϊσάλ (talk) 15:36, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- @AirshipJungleman29 Thanks for copyedit. Now its 1505. ~ Φαϊσάλ (talk) 15:38, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- This still needs an end-of-sentence citation.--Launchballer 15:48, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Launchballer: Sorted on end-of-sentence citation requirement. ~ Pbritti (talk) 00:25, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- My concern has been resolved.--Launchballer 14:40, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Launchballer: Sorted on end-of-sentence citation requirement. ~ Pbritti (talk) 00:25, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- This still needs an end-of-sentence citation.--Launchballer 15:48, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- @AirshipJungleman29 Thanks for copyedit. Now its 1505. ~ Φαϊσάλ (talk) 15:38, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- @AirshipJungleman29 after your edit, characters comes down to 1488, we need 12 more characters to reach 1500. Please kindly expand a bit. ~ Φαϊσάλ (talk) 15:36, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
I nominated this, so need more eyes.--Launchballer 15:08, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
I'm involved with this, so need more eyes.--Launchballer 15:08, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
@JuniperChill: I don't see where this is in either of the cited sources and I'm struggling to see how it meets WP:DYKINT; something was always going to come fourth.--Launchballer 15:08, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Agreed. Coming fourth doesn't seem as impressive as coming first or even second, and while gaming is big, I imagine that many readers would not know what Steam Next Fest is and get its significance.
Will be pulling within 24 hours if a new hook isn't proposed soon.Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:29, 7 December 2024 (UTC)- (edit conflict) Proposing ALT1:
- ALT1: ... that Tiny Glade was developed by a two-person studio and was the fourth most-played demo on 2024's Steam Next Fest?
- Has the advantage of a pre-existing citation at the end of the sentence and notes that such a small team managed to pull off a fairly impressive feat. ~ Pbritti (talk) 00:31, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Given that it's now in the next set, the hook will need a review and a swap from a sysop. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:32, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry for the delay. Its just that im on holiday until end if month. (see my user talk page for more) Anyway ALT1 looks better than what i proposed so im fine with using the alt hook. JuniperChill (talk) 02:16, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Crisco 1492: Needs a swap ASAP. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:45, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Done. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:21, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Crisco 1492: Needs a swap ASAP. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:45, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry for the delay. Its just that im on holiday until end if month. (see my user talk page for more) Anyway ALT1 looks better than what i proposed so im fine with using the alt hook. JuniperChill (talk) 02:16, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Given that it's now in the next set, the hook will need a review and a swap from a sysop. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:32, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Proposing ALT1:
@4meter4: Both parts of this hook needs an end-of-sentence citation.--Launchballer 15:08, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- @ Launchballer I repeated the citation for the peace committee at the end of the sentence. It was in the source used after the following sentence which stated he was in that committee from 1950-1958. Best.4meter4 (talk) 15:23, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- That's fine, and I think "Li Peiji (李沛基) was tasked with killing Fengshan with explosives; if he were to fail, Chen and fellow revolutionary Zhou Huipu (周惠普) would ambush Fengshan near the Li Renxuan Medical Clinic." covers "would-be assassin".--Launchballer 15:48, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- Precisely. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:15, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
- That's fine, and I think "Li Peiji (李沛基) was tasked with killing Fengshan with explosives; if he were to fail, Chen and fellow revolutionary Zhou Huipu (周惠普) would ambush Fengshan near the Li Renxuan Medical Clinic." covers "would-be assassin".--Launchballer 15:48, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
Not seeing 5x expansion; the version before expansion was 1,425 characters, whereas the current one is 6,474 characters (so 700 characters short). Pinging Alsoriano97, Dumelow, and AirshipJungleman29 (I see that the reviewer mentioned 1,222 characters; not sure where the different counts are coming from). — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:02, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- The text I counted as 1,222 is the below in green (arguably it should be lower at around 1,159 by excluding the Portuguese pronunciation guide which is a template). This excludes "wikitext, templates, lists, tables, section headers, image captions, block quotes, the table of contents, and references" per WP:DYKPROSE, I can get your count of 1,425 only by including the infobox, section headers and image caption - Dumelow (talk) 10:52, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
Celeste Martins Caeiro (Portuguese pronunciation: [sɨˈlɛʃtɨ kaˈɐjɾu]; born 2 May 1933), also known as Celeste dos cravos ("Celeste of the carnations") is a Portuguese pacifist and former restaurant worker. Her actions led to the naming of the 1974 coup as the Carnation Revolution.Caeiro was born in 1933. She came to prominence during the revolution to overthrow Marcelo Caetano. She gave out red and white carnations to the soldiers, leading to the action of 25 April 1974 being known as the "Carnation Revolution". She was working in a self-service restaurant in Lisbon called "Sir" located at Franjinhas Building on Rua Braamcamp. The restaurant was opened on 25 April 1973 and for its first anniversary the owners planned to give out flowers to all its customers on 25 April 1974 but this had to be cancelled because of the coup. She was sent home and told that she could take the wasted red and white flowers.She offered the flowers to the tanks involved with the coup and they placed the flowers in the muzzle of their guns. The idea was copied and flower sellers donated more flowers to decorate the mutinous soldiers and their weapons. The anniversary of the Carnation Revolution is a national holiday in Portugal.
- Dumelow, DYKcheck returns a result of 1425 characters for this article before expansion, that is the tool used for character count at DYK. Update: It seems that DYKcheck is miscounting the text, this is a problem - maybe it needs an overhaul? Gatoclass (talk) 13:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- It's picking up content from {{IPA-pt}}, which in turn comes from {{IPA}}, which invokes Lua and is thus beyond my knowledge. Editing the version before expansion to remove that template and showing preview gives me 1183.--Launchballer 14:10, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Okay, and removing the IPA template from the current article gives me 6,230 characters, which is easily 5x. Frustrating glitch, but thankfully that means this can go to queue. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:25, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Just to note that WP:DYKPROSE states "DYKcheck is generally considered the authoritative counter of prose size, but manual counts are admissible as well". I am not sure why DYKcheck is considered "authoritative" when, as in this case, it can go awry - Dumelow (talk) 14:33, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Before now, it's been considered the authoritative counter because other prose counters have proven to have issues and DYKcheck has not - AFAIK this is the first such issue to be encountered for DYKcheck. It needs to be fixed. Gatoclass (talk) 14:54, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not enthusiastic about the 5x rule, but given that we have it, and people seem to be enforcing it rigidly (vis-a-vis a request yesterday to add 12 characters to an article), we should at least have an authoritative tool that nominators can rely on to provide correct numbers, or at least the same numbers as a reviewer gets. RoySmith (talk) 15:08, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- The x5 rule could use a tweak (should be less for bigger articles IMO) but that's another issue. Gatoclass (talk) 15:33, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Perhaps just a flat out character count? Say 5,000 or 6,000? TarnishedPathtalk 15:40, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- No, that would not be appropriate IMO - it should be some sort of sliding scale. x5 for smallish articles, x3 for midsize, x2 for big ones - something like that. Gatoclass (talk) 15:46, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Although now that it occurs to me, there is probably less need to tweak it now that users have the GAN path to nomination. Gatoclass (talk) 15:50, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- My Simone Murphy hook wasn't technically a 5x expansion, but was approved anyway (the queuer actually cited IAR when they ticked it off). This could be formalised.--Launchballer 16:05, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- I'm fine with the IAR on the 5x, but I'm less sanguine about Schwede66's basing his approval on an assumption about how a WP:GAN will end up. Looking at that another way, GAN needs all the help it can get; if you've read the article in sufficient detail to determine it meets WP:GACR, you should just review it there and help them clear out their backlog. RoySmith (talk) 16:12, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think you meant to ping me, RoySmith. Schwede66 19:11, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Sure I did. You wrote Special:Diff/1225059149, no? RoySmith (talk) 19:19, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think you meant to ping me, RoySmith. Schwede66 19:11, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- I'm fine with the IAR on the 5x, but I'm less sanguine about Schwede66's basing his approval on an assumption about how a WP:GAN will end up. Looking at that another way, GAN needs all the help it can get; if you've read the article in sufficient detail to determine it meets WP:GACR, you should just review it there and help them clear out their backlog. RoySmith (talk) 16:12, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- My Simone Murphy hook wasn't technically a 5x expansion, but was approved anyway (the queuer actually cited IAR when they ticked it off). This could be formalised.--Launchballer 16:05, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Perhaps just a flat out character count? Say 5,000 or 6,000? TarnishedPathtalk 15:40, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- The x5 rule could use a tweak (should be less for bigger articles IMO) but that's another issue. Gatoclass (talk) 15:33, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not enthusiastic about the 5x rule, but given that we have it, and people seem to be enforcing it rigidly (vis-a-vis a request yesterday to add 12 characters to an article), we should at least have an authoritative tool that nominators can rely on to provide correct numbers, or at least the same numbers as a reviewer gets. RoySmith (talk) 15:08, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Before now, it's been considered the authoritative counter because other prose counters have proven to have issues and DYKcheck has not - AFAIK this is the first such issue to be encountered for DYKcheck. It needs to be fixed. Gatoclass (talk) 14:54, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Just to note that WP:DYKPROSE states "DYKcheck is generally considered the authoritative counter of prose size, but manual counts are admissible as well". I am not sure why DYKcheck is considered "authoritative" when, as in this case, it can go awry - Dumelow (talk) 14:33, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- It's picking up content from {{IPA-pt}}, which in turn comes from {{IPA}}, which invokes Lua and is thus beyond my knowledge. Editing the version before expansion to remove that template and showing preview gives me 1183.--Launchballer 14:10, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Dumelow, DYKcheck returns a result of 1425 characters for this article before expansion, that is the tool used for character count at DYK. Update: It seems that DYKcheck is miscounting the text, this is a problem - maybe it needs an overhaul? Gatoclass (talk) 13:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Just going to note that an issue with DYK check and its reading of templates was also brought up at Dundonald House, and Shubinator was pinged... there weren't any responses then. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:39, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- The French Wikipedia's list of consuls general a) doesn't cover all of the information cited, and b) isn't a reliable source. This needs better sourcing. Pinging Farrest, Personman, and AirshipJungleman29. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:02, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- You're right, I had missed this mistake from the original French, thanks! I've found that all the information in that paragraph is found in one of the Boutin sources, and I've changed the citation accordingly. Farrest (talk) 10:56, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
Just going to note that, once these are okay, I plan to also promote Prep 7. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:16, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
Images
[edit]I replaced the image in Queue 5 with an adjusted version (geometry and exposure correction). It's not great, but better than what was there before.
I suggest we not use the Lizzie Esau image in Queue 6. It's quite poor from a technical point of view. I tried to apply some exposure corrections, but couldn't make any substantial improvement. I looked through the other articles in this set and don't see any great images in any of them. Maybe Light Weight Air Warning Radar, but that's not wonderful either. RoySmith (talk) 15:36, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- The Esau image is fairly competent, as such images go. It's certainly not FP quality, but I don't feel like it's so bad as to remove it from the queue. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:40, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Looking at the preps, if we swapped Esau with Peter Capaldi from Prep 1, it would be a substantial improvement. That's a much superior photo. RoySmith (talk) 15:44, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
Using image
[edit]While with most of my other DYK nominations I'm fairly indifferent about whether the image gets used, I think that the dual Third Cathedral of Saint Paul (Minnesota)/Hamm Building DYK in Prep 4 really could benefit from showing the before/after image used in the nom. I'd appreciate a second look/opinion but no skin off my back if it remains where it is.~Darth StabroTalk • Contribs 15:45, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
It seems that the DYK wizard's date check to prevent late nominations is imperfect
[edit]See this link for details. Template:Did you know nominations/Charles Herman Allen managed to get through despite being a late creation, and even though the DYK wizard has a built in check that would block nominations from being created if an article was 10 days beyond eligibility. Maybe the the code needs to be fixed to prevent this from happening again? Courtesy ping to the nominator SammySpartan for details regarding how they were able to make the nomination using the wizard. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 22:39, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- I'm also curious why the tool didn't catch that, but it's only two days and this is a newcomer to DYK, so I'm inclined to IAR allow it. RoySmith (talk) 22:46, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
- Created just after half past one on 23 November and nominated just before half past eleven on 2 December, so I reckon just over 9.9 days. I'd take it.--Launchballer 22:50, 7 December 2024 (UTC)