Template talk:Did you know

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Did you know?
Introduction and Rules
Introduction and rulesWP:DYK
Supplementary rulesWP:DYKSG
Reviewing guideWP:DYKR
General discussion
General discussionWT:DYK
Awaiting approvalWP:DYKN
April 1 hooksWP:DYKAPRIL
Preps and queuesT:DYK/Q
Main Page errorsWP:ERRORS
On the Main Page
Archived setsWP:DYKA
Just for fun
Monthly wrapsWP:DYKW
List of users...
By nominationsWP:WBDYKN
By promotionsWP:WBDYKP

Skip to top
Skip to bottom

This page is to nominate fresh articles to appear in the "Did you know" section on the Main Page with a "hook" (an interesting note). Nominations that have been approved are moved to a staging area and then promoted into the Queue. To update this page, purge it.

Count of DYK Hooks
Section # of Hooks # Verified
January 7 1
January 28 1
March 9 2 1
March 15 1
March 16 2 1
March 17 1
March 19 1
March 20 1
March 22 2 1
March 23 1
March 25 1
March 26 1
March 27 1
March 28 1
March 31 1
April 2 1
April 3 1 1
April 4 2
April 5 1
April 6 1
April 7 5
April 8 1
April 9 2
April 12 3
April 13 1
April 14 3
April 15 1
April 16 1 1
April 17 4 2
April 18 4 2
April 19 4 3
April 20 6 3
April 21 9 2
April 22 5 3
April 23 5 2
April 24 13 5
April 25 10 5
April 26 5 3
April 27 5 2
April 28 9 3
April 29 12 6
April 30 10 4
May 1 8 3
May 2 12 4
May 3 12 7
May 4 10 5
May 5 5 1
May 6 12 4
May 7 8 1
May 8 5 3
May 9 12 4
May 10 16 9
May 11 6 1
May 12 10 1
May 13 11 2
May 14 8 4
May 15 4 2
May 16 10
May 17 10 1
May 18 1
Total 302 102
Last updated 22:19, 18 May 2022 UTC
Current time is 22:38, 18 May 2022 UTC [refresh]

Instructions for nominators[edit]

If this is your first nomination, please read the DYK rules before continuing.

Further information: Official supplementary guidelines and unofficial guide

Nominate an article

Frequently asked questions[edit]

How do I write an interesting hook?

Successful hooks tend to have several traits. Most importantly, they share a surprising or intriguing fact. They give readers enough context to understand the hook, but leave enough out to make them want to learn more. They are written for a general audience who has no prior knowledge of or interest in the topic area. Lastly, they are concise, and do not attempt to cover multiple facts or present information about the subject beyond what's needed to understand the hook.

When will my nomination be reviewed?

This page is often backlogged. As long as your submission is still on the page, it will stay there until an editor reviews it. Since editors are encouraged to review the oldest submissions first, it may take several weeks until your submission is reviewed. In the meantime, please consider reviewing another submission (not your own) to help reduce the backlog (see instructions below).

Where is my hook?

If you can't find the nomination you submitted to this nominations page, it may have been approved and is on the approved nominations page waiting to be promoted. It could also have been added to one of the prep areas, promoted from prep to a queue, or is on the main page.

If the nominated hook is in none of those places, then the nomination has probably been rejected. Such a rejection usually only occurs if it was at least a couple of weeks old and had unresolved issues for which any discussion had gone stale. If you think your nomination was unfairly rejected, you can query this on the DYK discussion page, but as a general rule such nominations will only be restored in exceptional circumstances.

Instructions for reviewers[edit]

Any editor who was not involved in writing/expanding or nominating an article may review it by checking to see that the article meets all the DYK criteria (long enough, new enough, no serious editorial or content issues) and the hook is cited. Editors may also alter the suggested hook to improve it, suggest new hooks, or even lend a hand and make edits to the article to which the hook applies so that the hook is supported and accurate. For a more detailed discussion of the DYK rules and review process see the supplementary guidelines and the WP:Did you know/Reviewing guide.

To post a comment or review on a DYK nomination, follow the steps outlined below:

  • Look through this page, Template talk:Did you know, to find a nomination you would like to comment on.
  • Click the "Review or comment" link at the top of the nomination. You will be taken to the nomination subpage.
  • The top of the page includes a list of the DYK criteria. Check the article to ensure it meets all the relevant criteria.
  • To indicate the result of the review (i.e., whether the nomination passes, fails, or needs some minor changes), leave a signed comment on the page. Please begin with one of the 5 review symbols that appear at the top of the edit screen, and then indicate all aspects of the article that you have reviewed; your comment should look something like the following:

    Article length and age are fine, no copyvio or plagiarism concerns, reliable sources are used. But the hook needs to be shortened.

    If you are the first person to comment on the nomination, there will be a line :* <!-- REPLACE THIS LINE TO WRITE FIRST COMMENT, KEEPING  :* --> showing you where you should put the comment.
  • Save the page.

If there is any problem or concern about a nomination, please consider notifying the nominator by placing {{subst:DYKproblem|Article|header=yes|sig=yes}} on the nominator's talk page.

Instructions for project members[edit]

How to promote an accepted hook[edit]

At-a-glance instructions on how to promote an approved hook to a Prep area
Check list for nomination review completeness
1) Select a hook from the approved nominations page that has one of these ticks at the bottom post: Symbol confirmed.svg Symbol voting keep.svg.
2) Check to make sure basic review requirements were completed.
a. Any outstanding issue following Symbol confirmed.svg Symbol voting keep.svg needs to be addressed before promoting.
3) Check the article history for any substantive changes since it was nominated or reviewed.
4) Images for the lead slot must be freely licensed. Fair-use images are not permitted. Images loaded on Commons that appear on the Main Page are automatically protected by KrinkleBot.
5) Hook must be stated in both the article and source (which must be cited at the end of the article sentence where stated).
6) Hook should make sense grammatically.
7) Try to vary subject matters within each prep area.
8) Try to select a funny, quirky or otherwise upbeat hook for the last or bottom hook in the set.
Steps to add a hook to prep
  • In one tab, open the nomination page of the hook you want to promote.
  • In a second tab, open the prep set you intend to add the hook to.
1) For hooks held for specific dates, refer to "Local update times" section on DYK Queue.
a. Completed Prep area number sets will be promoted by an administrator to corresponding Queue number.
2) Copy and paste the hook into a chosen slot.
a. Make sure there's a space between ... and that, and a ? at the end.
b. Check that there's a bold link to the article.
3) If it's the lead (first) hook, paste the image where indicated at the top of the template.
4) Copy and paste ALL the credit information (the {{DYKmake}} and {{DYKnom}} templates) at the bottom
5) Check your work in the prep's Preview mode.
a. At the bottom under "Credits", to the right of each article should have the link "View nom subpage" ; if not, a subpage parameter will need to be added to the DYKmake.
6) Save the Prep page.
Closing the DYK nomination page
  1. At the upper left
    • Change {{DYKsubpage to {{subst:DYKsubpage
    • Change |passed= to |passed=yes
  2. At the bottom
    • Just above the line containing

      }}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.-->

      insert a new, separate line containing one of the following:
      To [[T:DYK/P1|Prep 1]]
      To [[T:DYK/P2|Prep 2]]
      To [[T:DYK/P3|Prep 3]]
      To [[T:DYK/P4|Prep 4]]
      To [[T:DYK/P5|Prep 5]]
      To [[T:DYK/P6|Prep 6]]
      To [[T:DYK/P7|Prep 7]]
    • Also paste the same thing into the edit summary.
  3. Check in Preview mode. Make sure everything is against a pale blue background (nothing outside) and there are no stray characters, like }}, at the top or bottom.
  4. Save.

For more information, please see T:TDYK#How to promote an accepted hook.

Handy copy sources: To [[T:DYK/P1|Prep 1]] To [[T:DYK/P2|Prep 2]] To [[T:DYK/P3|Prep 3]] To [[T:DYK/P4|Prep 4]] To [[T:DYK/P5|Prep 5]] To [[T:DYK/P6|Prep 6]] To [[T:DYK/P7|Prep 7]]

How to remove a rejected hook[edit]

  • Open the DYK nomination subpage of the hook you would like to remove. (It's best to wait several days after a reviewer has rejected the hook, just in case someone contests or the article undergoes a large change.)
  • In the window where the DYK nomination subpage is open, replace the line {{DYKsubpage with {{subst:DYKsubpage, and replace |passed= with |passed=no. Then save the page. This has the effect of wrapping up the discussion on the DYK nomination subpage in a blue archive box and stating that the nomination was unsuccessful, as well as adding the nomination to a category for archival purposes.

How to remove a hook from the prep areas or queue[edit]

  • Edit the prep area or queue where the hook is and remove the hook and the credits associated with it.
  • Go to the hook's nomination subpage (there should have been a link to it in the credits section).
    • View the edit history for that page
    • Go back to the last version before the edit where the hook was promoted, and revert to that version to make the nomination active again.
    • Add a new icon on the nomination subpage to cancel the previous tick and leave a comment after it explaining that the hook was removed from the prep area or queue, and why, so that later reviewers are aware of this issue.
  • Add a transclusion of the template back to this page so that reviewers can see it. It goes under the date that it was first created/expanded/listed as a GA. You may need to add back the day header for that date if it had been removed from this page.
  • If you removed the hook from a queue, it is best to either replace it with another hook from one of the prep areas, or to leave a message at WT:DYK asking someone else to do so.

How to move a nomination subpage to a new name[edit]

  • Don't; it should not ever be necessary, and will break some links which will later need to be repaired. Even if you change the title of the article, you don't need to move the nomination page.


Older nominations[edit]

Articles created/expanded on January 7[edit]

Tek Fog

  • ... that the web application Tek Fog was used by BJP to amplify right wing propaganda among Indians? Source: the app Tek Fog is used by users to "amplify right-wing propaganda to a domestic audience." The Indian news outlet also claimed the app had links to India's ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Deutsche Welle
    • ALT1: ... that the web application Tek Fog was used to amplify right wing propaganda among Indians? Source: Same as above.
    • ALT2: ... that according to The Wire, the web application Tek Fog was used to amplify right wing propaganda among Indians? Source: Same as above.

Created by Venkat TL (talk). Self-nominated at 12:07, 14 January 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • Comment This cannot go unattributed, AT ALL. TrangaBellam (talk) 14:14, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The contents of the article are currently contested, as the author is aware. It is requested that the DYK nomination is not accepted till outstanding issues are resolvedCaptain Jack Sparrow (talk) 11:04, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • I am not sure the last comment by User:CapnJackSp has been made in good faith. Several politically motivated IP users first tried to delete the article. AfD was closed as Keep. And now this guy is asking for an indefenite hold on on flimsy grounds. The article has 29 mentions of Wire and it is sufficiently attributed.Venkat TL (talk) 13:34, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • Don't confuse me with other editors. You haven't added attribution to the very first sentence of the article. I can say more but this needs to be fixed first. Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 14:48, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol possible vote.svg The article was new enough and long enough at the time of the nomination. No QPQ needed for a nominator with less than five QPQ credits. However, there are multiple issues with the article:
  • Firstly, several paragraphs in the article lack references or have a citation needed template.
  • Secondly, there is no clear description of exactly what the app even is, only what The Wire says about how it hacks. The article doesn't make it clear if Tek Fog is an app that is downloadable by App Stores and thus usable by an end-user, or a secret app that is not willingly or knowingly installed by users. It also doesn't state when it was first released or at least first known, as well as missing other basic app information.
  • Thirdly, the article doesn't seem to meet either WP:NPOV or WP:UNDUE. The article is almost entirely about criticisms about the app, which seems undue weight in my opinion. At the very least, apart from the aforementioned issue about a lack of descriptions about the app itself, there should be more inclusions about denials and statements (or lack thereof) by relevant people in the article. The article lede notes thatThe ruling BJP and the prime minister Narendra Modi were silent.; however, this statement is completely unreferenced and is not mentioned anywhere else in the body. The denials in the article (under the section "Reactions of BJYM, Persistent Systems and ShareChat") are limited to a single paragraph: are these really the only denials given thus far by people or companies involved? If that is all that is available then that would be acceptable, but this needs to be clarified, and in any case I think the article may need some trimming since it focuses too much about the reactions to the app rather than the app itself.
  • Fourthly, the article may need clarifications for non-Indian readers. For example, "BYJM" is mentioned in the article but is not defined anywhere in the text (the lede mentions a "BJP youth wing", but the connection must be made clear).
  • Fifthly, the article needs a copyedit. Mentions of media outlets, such as The Wire, The Hindu, or Washington Post, need to be italicized. The article text also needs revising for grammar and other issues.
  • Finally, multiple concerns have been raised on the article talk page, and as far as I can tell, most have not been addressed.
Right now the article needs a lot of work to be approved for DYK. Since I am largely unfamiliar with Indian politics, I would also appreciate any input from an uninvolved Indian editor or someone else familiar with the topic, but right now, in its current state, I think the article is not ready for DYK. I would also suggest that the article be brought to WP:GOCE or otherwise be copyedited by an uninvolved editor. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:32, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Citation needed tags fixed.
  2. It is a PsyOps software whose access is limited to the operators and their Org. I have included the link in the lead.
  3. What is available has been added. WP:FALSEBALANCE. I will work to add refs, as asked
  4. Fixed
  5. GOCE copyedit requested
  6. All major / relevant concerns raised on talk page have already been resolved. While reviewing the talk page, Be advised that many users with political POV just want this article deleted/bowdlerized etc. Please refer to the AfD discussion to understand.
I will ping the reviewer when I am done with #3 and others. Venkat TL (talk) 11:50, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Your response to #2 needs to be clarified in the article itself, particularly in the lede and ideally in its own section. Rather than mentioning it in a section about The Wire's report, there should be a section about the app itself, perhaps using The Wire as a source. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:56, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I added it in the first line, I will flesh that part more as suggested.Venkat TL (talk) 12:04, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the edits. I will do the rest of the review once the copyedit has been done. However, I am still unhappy with the tone of the article and would welcome any second opinions regarding how to handle it. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:34, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note that the nominator now has had five DYK nominations on the main page, so a QPQ will be required for this one. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:32, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5 and BlueMoonset: I just donated a QPQ to move this forward. --evrik (talk) 04:25, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note that the nominator has retired from Wikipedia, so if no one is able to adopt this nomination and resolve any remaining issues, this nomination will be closed as unsuccessful. I would also highly suggest rewriting the article to have a more neutral tone as currently it seems to have some tone issues and is also too focused on the criticism of the app rather than information about the app itself. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 06:26, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've struck the original hook and ALT1 per TrangaBellam's original objection. Note that the GOCE request made back on March 25 is listed after around three dozen earlier pending requests, and it could easily be several weeks before a copyeditor takes it on, with no guarantee that even if the tone is dealt with, the deficit of information about the app itself will be remedied. I don't think we should wait for the copyedit if the balance is problematic; if no one adopts this nomination soon—perhaps within the standard seven days?—it should be closed. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:42, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • Symbol possible vote.svg Waiting for GOCE edit. --evrik (talk) 14:28, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on January 28[edit]

Beatriz Rico (neuroscientist)

Created by JuliaBrink (talk) and (talk). Nominated by MrMeAndMrMe (talk) at 03:22, 31 January 2022 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: None required.

Overall: Symbol confirmed.svg The cited EurekAlert source does not contain the word "inhibitory", but I assume it's an accurate paraphrase of the article. You may want to link to this article from some other article to get rid of the orphan tag. feminist (talk) 10:40, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Symbol question.svg @MrMeAndMrMe, JuliaBrink, Feminist, and SL93: Per discussions at [3], I'm reopening this nomination as it there is some confusion about what the hook means, and it's not really accessible to a broad audience. I suggest it be reworded, or else another hook proposed in its place. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 11:09, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Apologies for the long wait. I have reworded it slightly, does it make more sense now? MrMeAndMrMeLet's talk 05:04, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging Feminist for their opinion. SL93 (talk) 02:38, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The article does not contain the word "neuron" in its prose, while the hook does, but I get what the hook is referring to. The relevant sentence in the article isIn 2019, the Rico Lab uncovered a developmental mechanism for specification of inhibitory connections within the brain. I'm fine with this, though other editors may have different opinions. Symbol confirmed.svg feminist🇺🇦 (talk) 11:35, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Feminist and MrMeAndMrMe: sorry, I'm drawing a blank on what this might mean. Reading the sourced article, would a hook like this be accurate?
  • ALT1: ... that neuroscientist Beatriz Rico and her team discovered a link between a protein and short-term spatial memory?
    • ALT1a: ... that neuroscientist Beatriz Rico and her team discovered a link between Brevican and short-term spatial memory?
    • ALT1b: ... that neuroscientist Beatriz Rico and her team discovered a link between a protein called Brevican and short-term spatial memory?
At the very least, people will think they understand at first glance. If we end up going with this, it'll have to be added into the article. theleekycauldron (talkcontribs) (she/they) 22:55, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Feminist and MrMeAndMrMe? theleekycauldron (talkcontribs) (she/they) 20:49, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps ALT1B. Just writing "a protein" is somewhat non-specific, writing "brevican" is also confusing, final one makes most sense in my opinion. MrMeAndMrMeLet's talk 20:51, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg reviewer needed for ALT1b- thanks! theleekycauldron (talkcontribs) (she/they) 06:51, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg back to DYKN until consensus for a hook is found theleekycauldron (talkcontribs) (she/they) 07:57, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I like ALT1b, and while I do find it interesting, I have some reservations if it's clear enough for readers who don't have much of a background in science. Linking to spatial memory might help, but I don't know if it could resolve the issue. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:01, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps also link neuroscientist. MrMeAndMrMeLet's talk 13:06, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Symbol possible vote.svg @JuliaBrink and MrMeAndMrMe: The hook seems to be coming from [4], which is a press release from King's College London posted unedited by a third party. (It's sometimes hard to identify these, but they're written by university PR staff, aren't peer-reviewed, and are often scientifically unreliable.) For a discovery claim it would be preferable to cite an independent source like [5], or at least the actual peer-reviewed journal article [6]. Also, the hook fact needs to be in the Wikipedia article, but it doesn't mention Brevican or short-term spatial memory. Antony–22 (talkcontribs) 02:34, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, will do in a second. MrMeAndMrMeLet's talk 17:04, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5: you seem to need a paid subscription for the science.org thing, which I do not have. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov does not mention anything about brevican neurons or whatever. MrMeAndMrMeLet's talk 13:34, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 9[edit]

1917 Minsk City Duma election

Created by Soman (talk). Self-nominated at 12:06, 16 March 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • Symbol question.svg A full review will follow, but right now I have reservations if the currently-proposed hook is interesting to a broad audience. The connections aren't made clear to those unfamiliar with Belarusian politics and history, particularly what the significance of Vaynshteyn becoming a city council chairman is. Can another hook be proposed here, one that would be interesting or at least clearer to those unfamiliar with the history of Belarus? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:16, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • I get your concern, but at same time the factoid that a Jewish socialist party won the chairmanship in the city seems to be the most DYK-worthy element in the article? --Soman (talk) 13:03, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The connection is not clear at all and does not meet the broad interest criterion. Readers will not immediately get the socialist or Jewish connection. Please propose a new hook with a completely different hook fact. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 16:15, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm - I think the Jewish connection is clear (and the socialist connection implied) from just the name General Jewish Labour Bund. Besides, it's wikilinked! I'm not sure a complete rejection of this hook fact is merited here, though I agree the hook needs some workshopping. How about these:
Pings for Soman and Narutolovehinata5. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 22:10, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Admittedly the direction still feels rather niche, but I think ALT1 is the best option among the hooks proposed so far. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:03, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
ALT1 looks good for me also. --Soman (talk) 12:28, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg I no longer have time to review this nomination so I would request that a new reviewer take over. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:30, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol question.svg new enough at time of nomination (65 days ago?) and long enough; I'll have to AGF on source quality, neutrality is okay (being mostly a factsheet), no plagiarism detected (AGF on foreign-language sources). I'm... hesitant to approve ALT1, though. Is it all that unusual that two not-too-distant political parties would elect a chairman from one of the parties? I am interested in the fact that the leader was elected from the smaller party in the coalition, though... QPQ has been done, but we still need a viable hook. theleekycauldron (talkcontribs) (she/they) 18:50, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pinging Soman for feedback... theleekycauldron (talkcontribs) (she/they) 06:58, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 15[edit]

Wings over Kabul: The First Airlift

Created by Whispyhistory (talk) and Philafrenzy (talk). Nominated by Whispyhistory (talk) at 18:55, 22 March 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 16[edit]

Bald's eyesalve

Recipe from Bald's Leechbook
Recipe from Bald's Leechbook
  • ... that an Anglo-Saxon eye medicine (recipe pictured) has proven effective against MRSA? Source: "Our interdisciplinary team, comprising researchers from both sciences and humanities, identified and reconstructed a potential remedy for Staphylococcus aureus infection from a 10th century Anglo-Saxon leechbook. The remedy repeatedly killed established S. aureus biofilms in an in vitro model of soft tissue infection and killed methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) in a mouse chronic wound model ... One of Bald's remedies, a salve for a “wen” or lump in the eye (Fig. 1), is particularly interesting to the modern microbiologist." from: Harrison, Freya; Roberts, Aled E. L.; Gabrilska, Rebecca; Rumbaugh, Kendra P.; Lee, Christina; Diggle, Stephen P. (September 2015). "A 1,000-Year-Old Antimicrobial Remedy with Antistaphylococcal Activity". mBio. 6 (4). doi:10.1128/mbio.01129-15. ISSN 2161-2129.

Moved to mainspace by Dumelow (talk). Self-nominated at 16:35, 16 March 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • REJECT!!! Any claim for a medical treatment, in this case antibiotic-resistant staph infection of the eye ("has proven effective"), requires that evidence meet the standards of WP:MEDRS, meaning, briefly, a review of more than one human trial. In Bald's eyesalve, all of the evidence is in vitro. In the cited reference, bacteria-infected mouse wounds were removed from the mouse and treated with the test product for four hours. This reduced the number of bacteria, i.e., killed bacteria, but there was no testing of actual wound healing. There is no live animal evidence, no infected eye evidence in an animal model, and a complete lack of human testing. The DYK should be rejected and the article radically revised to remove any implication that it is a potentially functional treatment rather than a historical curiousity. David notMD (talk) 23:05, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Symbol possible vote.svg Hi David notMD, thanks for your message here and at my talk page. As you surmise I write mainly on history and came at this from that angle. I have no medical knowledge and have never written in that field (nor intend to in the future). I must confess to not being familiar with the part of WP:MEDRS that generally prohibits the use of research such as this, many thanks for bringing this up. I think I will go through the article and remove the majority of the "Studies on efficacy" section because of this. Placing on hold for now, if you could bear with me, I would appreciate your input once I have made changes. All the best - Dumelow (talk) 07:48, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've made the first trim. How does it look now? Striking the original and suggesting an ALT hook below - Dumelow (talk) 08:13, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
ALT1: ... the Anglo-Saxons may have used a mixture of garlic, another Allium, wine and bovine bile to treat styes?
  • IMPROVED ALT1 is properly historical. Consider inserting "may have" before "used", as not known how widespread the use of the salve was. I recommend removing the sentence "Most modern styes are caused by Staphylococcus aureus and several studies have investigated the performance of Bald's eyesalve against this and other bacteria in laboratory conditions. No live animal or human tests have been carried out.[1][3][4][5]" from the article, as it still implies possible efficacy. You don't want home remedy people asking at slaughterhouses for bovine gallbladders! I also recommend not using references 4 (Furner-Purdoe) or 5 (Anonye). Also, remove the bacteria image. David notMD (talk) 08:46, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks David notMD, I've amended the hook to "may have", deleted the passage you suggested and added in the source on corneal blindness. I've shifted Furner and Anonye to further reading - Dumelow (talk) 09:19, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I removed Furner and Anonye from Further reading. I recommend more effort to remove specifics about this having potential modern-day medicinal value. The Brennesssel ref should be upgraded to a reference. David notMD (talk) 11:46, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What is the rationale for removing the "further reading"? I have trimmed the description of some of the specifics. I don't have access to Brennessel but would welcome you adding content if you do? - Dumelow (talk) 07:03, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am back to Reject. As it exists on 24 March, the article still has too much medical/health content not supported by WP:MEDRS.

  • "The eyesalve us described as a treatment for a "wen" (lump) in the eye, likely a stye, a bacterial infection of an eyelash follicle."[1] The authors of a 2015 science journal article are making an assumption of what was meant by a thousand-year old description of an ailment.
  • "Anglo-Saxon physicians may have used observation and experience to design anti-microbial treatments such as the eyesalve.[1]" A scientific concept of microbes and anti-microbial treatment did not exist until centuries later. See Microorganism.
  • Naming ingredients as containing anti-microbial compounds presumes the illness being treated was microbial.
  • "Bile is a surfactant and may also hold anti-bacterial properties; it is generally thought to prevent bacterial growth in the small intestine." This (unreferenced) statement has no connection to the types of bacteria that might be present in the eye, if in fact what the medievalists were treating was a bacterial infection.
  • "Wine may also contain small quantities of plant-based anti-microbial compounds" This is (weakly) based on our knowledge of present day wine. There is no information on the composition of 10th centufy wine.
  • "The copper-based vessels in which the salve was prepared may allow the leaching of copper salts into the mixture, which are known to limit bacterial growth. There is some evidence that Allium-derived anti-bacterials may work synergistically with copper." The metallic composition of the period-piece containers is not known. The "some evidence" is from present day in vitro research, clearly not WP:MEDRS. Same for speculation of purpose of a nine day storage.

All in all, I see no redemption for this proposed DYK. David notMD (talk) 00:13, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Right, I've cut out all mention of styes and any mention of the ingredients performance against microbes. What remains is basically a description of the remedy and its preparation. Much reduced but still just above the minimum DYK length. Proposing another hook - Dumelow (talk) 09:47, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
ALT2: ... the Anglo-Saxons may have used a mixture of garlic, another Allium, wine and bovine bile as an eye medicine?

I will look at again, with a fresh eye. Would anything be gained by having a translation of the text? David notMD (talk) 14:03, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing, I've added a transcription of the original text and the British Library's translation - Dumelow (talk) 14:44, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize for the delay. With the transcription and translation this has become a historical article versus a medicinal one. I will mark this as possibly aceptable pending an evaluation of the copyright situation. David notMD (talk) 20:22, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Symbol question.svg Article is new, long enough, Alt2 hook is interesting and citation supported by ref #1, QPQ met. Outstanding issue: the facsimile, reproduction of the text and translation are from ref #1. That science journal article describes this content as copyright by British Library Board, Reproduced with permission. David notMD (talk) 20:24, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I consider the copyright issue unresolved and above my pay grade. Reference #1 has an image of the text, the same script copied, and the translation. All three are used in the Wikipedia article. That journal describes this content as copyright to the British Library Board, Reproduced with permission [in the journal article]. I question the use of same at Wikipedia. David notMD (talk) 15:10, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'll weigh in here since copyright is what I focus on. File:Balds-eyesalve-recipe.png is allegedly not in the public domain in the UK, but is in the United States because of different copyright standards. WMF legal counsel has previously weighed in and we take the side of the US regarding old public domain stuff - see commons:Commons:When to use the PD-Art tag if you want the gory details. So the license tag isn't quite right (and I'll work on that in a bit), but it is PD and certainly usable here. VernoWhitney (talk) 21:01, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The script copied is also fine, for the same reasons as above. The translation, however, is not completely free. Translations are derivative works, which means they're subject to the copyright claim of both the original text (PD, so not a problem) and the translator (appears to be the British Library). Now it looks like the British Library puts everything out under CC-BY-4.0, which isn't quite compatible with us, but there's certainly a strong argument to be made that the translation satisfies our non-free content requirements. I'll do some more research into the British Library angle for my own edification, but I'm not inclined to call the use in the article a copyvio. I just looked it up and I had remembered it wrong--we can use that license just fine. We can probably cite it a little better, but it's decently attributed as is. VernoWhitney (talk) 21:12, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 17[edit]


Pytest logo
Pytest logo
  • ... that technology projects from across the internet, including those of Mozilla and Dropbox, are switching to Pytest from other frameworks for software testing?

Quote: In fact, projects all over the Internet have switched from unittest or nose to pytest, including Mozilla and Dropbox.Okken, Brian (September 2017). Python Testing with Pytest (1st ed.). The Pragmatic Bookshelf. ISBN 9781680502404. Retrieved 19 March 2022.

Created by Thomas Meng (talk). Self-nominated at 01:29, 19 March 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • Symbol possible vote.svg An interesting topic and clearly notable. However, the article is correctly tagged as being in need of rewriting, to be less like an instruction manual, and more like a NPOV article. And in that should make hopefully make the article understandable to a normal reader- I understand the article and its details, but only because I work in the field. This will need to be fixed before this DYK can proceed. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:41, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Joseph2302: Thank you for your feedback. In the past few days, I took up an effor to fix those issues you mentioned. Now I think the article is in better shape. Please let me know how far it is now from DYK's standard. Thank you. Thomas Meng (talk) 01:54, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies, this slipped my mind. Reviewing properly now:
The article still has multiple paragraphs without citations. The minimum amount of sourcing I'd expect is one source per paragraph- if the sources already in the article support the text where I've added citation needed tags, then that should be quick to fix
The text is better, but it still very technical (which does seem to be the case for a lots of computing articles I've noticed). I understand that it's a technical topic, but there's almost nothing in the article that an average reader would understand. Some articles like Node for example has a "History" section, which would be beneficial to a less technical reader. There's still so much code in this article that it's too technical and confusing, and still feels to me like it's a manual on how to use it. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:56, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Joseph2302: Here's what I've done to address the problems you pointed out:
  • Modified every section so that each section's first paragraph(s) would only include pytest concepts, and implementation details are saved for the end. Additionally, wording/explanations are improved where possible.
  • Added a History section for less technical users to read. The lead section should also be understandble for them.
  • Added ~20 wikilinks for programming related concepts.
  • The citations problem is also fixed.
  • Unecessary code templates (e.g. for file, project names) that hinder readability are removed.
Thank you for your time and I look forward to hearing back from you. Thomas Meng (talk) 02:19, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 19[edit]

When Jews Were Funny, Being Canadian

10× expanded (When Jews Were Funny) and new article (Being Canadian) by Reidgreg (talk). Self-nominated at 02:27, 19 March 2022 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol question.svg TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 11:50, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol question.svg TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 11:50, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@TonyTheTiger: Thanks for the review! I've done some additional paraphrasing. For WJWF, one source still has over 10% Earwig score due to proper names and the quote from the TIFF jury, which I'd prefer to keep. For BC, the 13 and 14% scores are from proper names; the 17% score is from an illustrative review quote which I'd prefer to keep. As for citations, I feel it's up to DYK standards. The Synopsis sections are essentially the same as Plot sections for a non-documentary, using the work itself as the source. Are there any specific places you would like to be cited? (or in general if you feel there's a lot) – Reidgreg (talk) 07:08, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
O.K.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:21, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@TonyTheTiger: There may need to be additional citations for the hook fact(s), depending on which hooks we go with. We can eliminate the hooks you feel are problematic and concentrate on what's left. What do you think? What should I be working on? – 23:17, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I approve the first hook and 2a and 2b.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:44, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@TonyTheTiger: I've struck ALT1 and ALT2. Could you give it a tick so it can be moved to the approved page? Thanks! – Reidgreg (talk) 23:04, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I still see uncited paragraphs in each article.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:15, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@TonyTheTiger: Whoops! Sorry, I saw "approved" and got excited. I went over the articles for uncited material:
  • The Synopsis sections are verifiable to the work itself, like plot sections. I tried to add RSS where I could.
  • The interview lists are also verifiable to the work itself, with on-screen text when they first appear and also in the credits. I have some RSS which give partial lists (usually the more famous names) if you'd like me to add those.
  • I am inclined to let the interview lists slide as WP:PRIMARY sourced when you don't have WP:RSs. These are very objective facts so there is no room for interpretation in this regard. Those subjects that you can source, you should use RSs.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:27, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • There was a line in Financing of Being Canadian which had in-text attribution to the Indiegogo fundraising website. I literally couldn't cite this because the editor wouldn't save it – Indiegogo is blacklisted – so I removed it. It's too bad, because this provided contextual information for the delay of the film's release.
  • Also in BC, I removed some uncited film festival appearances.
  • In the Inverviews section of WJWF is an uncited line:among the last filmed interviews or appearances by Shelley Berman, Jack Carter, and David Brenner. I believe that these are their last filmed interviews before their deaths (Berman died in 2017, Carter in 2015 and Brenner in 2014). I wasn't able to find anything else, but didn't have a source to specifically state that and so I put among. Let me know and I'll remove it if you feel it isn't good enough.
I believe those are the only problem areas. – Reidgreg (talk) 15:54, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@TonyTheTiger: I've cited the interviewees where I had secondary sources, cited quotations, and removed the 'last filmed appearances' line from the lead of WJWF (but kept it in the body for now). BTW, I found this at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Film § Documentaries:Documentary films require a modified approach for their articles. Instead of a plot summary, a documentary article should have a synopsis that serves as an overview of the documentary. The synopsis should describe the on-screen events of the film without interpretation, following the same guidelines that apply to a plot summary (see WP:FILMPLOT). – Reidgreg (talk) 14:22, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't just concerned about the last filmed appearances in the WP:LEAD. I don't know how relevant the "among the last filmed interviews or appearances" content is for people who went on to live for a couple of years after this was filmed and aired.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:43, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I feel it's important on a couple points: It's the last known interview with a couple, and likely several, of these legendary comedians. In some cases, their last filmed performances (ie: telling a joke). That they have died also underlines how this older generation of Jews is disappearing. I feel like this gives the film a place in the history of comedy, as well as discussing it. Not every in-depth source mentions this, but a couple do, and I feel it's worth including even if it might not be of interest to every reader. – Reidgreg (talk) 05:32, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If what you are saying is relevant to a particular individual the phrase "among the last filmed interviews or appearances by Shelley Berman, Jack Carter, and David Brenner" should have some sort of WP:RS should it not?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 08:41, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I concede. Removed. – Reidgreg (talk) 15:41, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Coming here per a note left on WT:DYK. From what I recall before, plot summaries/synopses do not seem to be excluded from the "all hook facts must have a footnote" requirement. One possible way to get around this, especially if an independent source can't be found, could be to simply cite the documentary itself, perhaps with a timestamp. I think there's a citation template for AV media so that could work. Synopses/plot descriptions are excluded from the "all paragraphs must have at least one footnote" requirement provided that the synopses are neutral and do not have any interpretation, but this does not apply if hook facts themselves are based on the synopses. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 03:43, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • User:Narutolovehinata5 suggested using timestamp. I am not sure that the method of adding a {{RP}} format timestamp is what is kosher here. I have never seen this and am not sure the reader will understand. I think the timestamp needs to somehow get inside the WP:IC rather than fly next to it. Does someone know what template we are looking for?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:06, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I was thinking of using Template:Cite AV media, which has a "time" (as in timestamp) parameter. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 06:59, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't believe the hook fact is dependent on the synopsis. The question, I believe, was about uncited paragraphs in the synopsis. That's done, I think, and I don't believe citation formatting is a reason to hold up the nomination.
If {{rp}} is acceptable/understandable for book pages, I don't know why it would be unacceptable/confusing for time in a video. I'm sure I've seen formatting like this used somewhere, though I may not have executed it the proper way (it's not the easiest thing to search for). I'd rather not clutter the references with a separate cite AV media template for each of the 8 uses (especially when most of them aren't necessary per MOS:FILM). – Reidgreg (talk) 19:08, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If an independent source confirms the hook fact, it could just be added to another section and have that be used as the hook fact cite. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:50, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
User:Reidgreg, the reason that I feel that {{rp}} is a suboptimal solution is that when one looks at the inline citation, one would miss the timestamp. The less expert reader might get confused with a separate timestamp not embedded in the WP:IC. User:Narutolovehinata5 responded above with the clarification that Template:Cite AV media was his intended suggestion. That is a specialized template for this exact use. Let's use it so that the formatting comes out right.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:22, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, added a half-dozen cite AV media templates for that. – Reidgreg (talk) 16:07, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
TonyTheTiger, have your concerns been addressed? BlueMoonset (talk) 15:19, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 20[edit]

Electricity sector in Turkey

Improved to Good Article status by Chidgk1 (talk). Self-nominated at 12:29, 20 March 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • Symbol possible vote.svg I actually like the hook, but as far as I can tell it's not directly mentioned in the article. I also checked the source and it doesn't really say that electricity in Turkey in general flows from the east to the west, merely that in that case electricity was unable to "flow westwards". Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:26, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Made an ALT1 a bit more precise with a more up to date source Chidgk1 (talk) 14:09, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Any other possible suggestions? ALT1 is not really that interesting of a hook in my opinion. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 07:24, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you can let me know which are interesting I will cite them.Chidgk1 (talk) 09:23, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think the best option is ALT6; however, all the hooks and the article itself may need some copyediting. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:07, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cited ALT6 and requested copyedit. Chidgk1 (talk) 05:49, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 22[edit]

Judiciary of Poland

  • ... that in Poland a mean court judge processed almost four cases per day? Source: 14.38 million estimate given by GUS; 10,000 judge estimate can be seen in table, divide this per 365 per WP:CALC, which is in the text
    • ALT1: ... that in Poland the courts processed 14.38 million cases in 2020 while having fewer than 10,000 judges? Source: Same as above, just not divided
    • ALT2: ... that the ECHR found three of five chambers of the Supreme Court, Poland's top court, not to be properly constituted within the meaning of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights? Source: See "Partisan control of the National Council of the Judiciary" part, last para
    • ALT3: ... that the Constitutional Tribunal, Poland's top court, ruled it was not a court? Source: Notes from Poland
    • ALT4: ... that the State Tribunal, the Polish court tasked with trial of the highest politicians, only convened three times in the past 40 years? Source: In text
    • Reviewed: User:Szmenderowiecki/Sort of recognised contributions
    • Comment: Please refer to the (exhaustive AFAIK) list of all of my DYK reviews and submissions for the purposes of QPQ. Feel free to add an entry to the list once the nomination is processed and (hopefully) accepted. 4 cases per day may be substituted by 1,500 per year, as verified here. ALT3 could actually go to April 1 if possible, though the problem might be that the ruling (unfortunately) exists and that the argument relies on the technicality of the Polish Constitution described in the lead (about tribunals in general).

5x expanded by Szmenderowiecki (talk). Self-nominated at 00:53, 22 March 2022 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

Hook eligibility:

QPQ: Red XN - You need to link the specific review that you're claiming credit for
Overall: Symbol question.svg I don't think that ALT0 checks out because you don't have figures for the "average (median?) court judge", but are just dividing the cases by the number of judges. I don't consider ALT4 to be interesting because due to the small number of top politicians, it doesn't make sense for the court to convene a lot. For ALT2, the precise findings were that these courts were not "established by law", mainly because of irregular appointments. See here for an explanation of the exact provision and how it's applied by the ECHR. See below for another version. For ALT3, I think it could be reworded but is confusing as it stands (it would be clearer with "itself", but still confusing). (t · c) buidhe 06:12, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As for ALT0/ALT1, the quote being verified is translated from Polish as: "Polish judges (there are about 10,000 of them) process approx. 15 million cases, which means that an average [mean, not median] judge processes about 1,500 cases per year," which was verified using 2018 data. I've used 2020 data and the same methodology. It was fact-checked as true back in 2020. Yes, it is a number of cases divided by judges (with all the problems that appear with measuring mean not median values, but this does not invalidate the hook as such, as I properly state that I calculate an average. I do have that data.
I don't see what's confusing about ALT3. Granted, it is apparently contradictory, but that's the point of DYKs (beshort, punchy, catchy, and likely to draw the readers in to wanting to read the article – as long as they don't misstate the article content). Additionally, I don't actually see how I can reword it using "itself". Will you propose the rewording for this one, considering the article to which this is sourced?
ALT2a is OK, but I'd consider other options first.
ALT4 is at the low end of my priorities, so I'll drop this one to expedite the process.
Re QPQ requirement, that's not my reading of the QPQ rules. It merely says that I mustreview one other nomination (unrelated to you)‍ and provide proof of that for examination. The full registry is available there, with my submissions reviewed (6) and my reviews (18). How is that not sufficient? Besides, I don't want to accidentally duplicate the QPQ claims, which AFAIK are not logged anywhere (unlike credits for reviews). If the newest review must be claimed for QPQ and I'm misreading the policy (not you), take my Template:Did you know nominations/Vitamin A review. Szmenderowiecki (talk) 13:12, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I do not know about Polish, but in English many people are going to see "average" and think it means "median" in this context. It would be clearer to talk about the mean number of cases handled per judge. Not to mention, each day is unclear whether we're talking about all days or working days...
Looking at ALT3 and not knowing the details of this case, I wouldn't know "what is it". Admittedly, right now I can't think of a good rewrite.
The reason most DYK participants link which DYK hook they are counting for QPQ is because otherwise it's impossible to tell if they claim the same review twice (I've done this by accident). (t · c) buidhe 21:05, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
OK, got it. The relevant ruling (summary) for ALT3 is here. In Polish (see full case here). The funny thing is, the English version says that the trial must happen in atribunal established by law, while the Polish version talks ofsąd ustanowiony ustawą. The ruling heavily relies on the technical distinction between what the Constitution calls a "court" and a "tribunal". The ruling basically says that the ECHR did not properly analyse the legal position of the Tribunal, and, since the Constitutional Tribunal is only a judicial organ but does not determine the outcome of cases like most courts do, it does not administer justice and therefore is not a tribunal/court within Article 6, which they argue only applies to the courts which administer justice. Szmenderowiecki (talk) 08:55, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Second opinion requested as this review has stalled for a month and there have been some changes by Micga to the article in the meantime, which might impact the new assessment. Consider him as a co-nom to this nomination due to these changes.Szmenderowiecki (talk) 14:28, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 23[edit]

Normandy massacres

Private Charles Doucette, who was one of the first victims of the Normandy massacres
Private Charles Doucette, who was one of the first victims of the Normandy massacres
  • ... that during the Battle of Normandy, one out of every seven Canadian soldiers killed June 6–11, 1944, were murdered after surrendering? Source: One out of every seven Canadian soldiers killed between June 6–11 were murdered after surrendering — a figure that rises to one in five if the range is reduced to June 7–11, when Canadian units started engaging with elements of the 12th SS Panzer Division.[1]}

Created by CplKlinger (talk). Self-nominated at 20:11, 26 March 2022 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation

Image eligibility:

  • Freely licensed: Red XN - photo's attribution is somewhat unclear. It was originally published in a Canadian history blog without apparent editorial oversight. Though its public domain status labeling over on Commons looks good, I am concerned about its origin and its labeling/title/name/ownership.
  • Used in article: Green tickY
  • Clear at 100px: Green tickY
QPQ: None required.

Overall: Symbol question.svg Though many aspects of this DYK? nom are good - interesting hook/no copyvios/length is fine/QPQ is NA for this editor/etc - the article in its present state is ineligible for DYK? as it now has a single source maintenance template (placed on April 4th). The template is valid/appropriate — out of the article's 98 inline citations, 95 are to a single source. Shearonink (talk) 06:57, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking the time to respond. I have one last final due this week, and after I submit it I'll work on the citations. The book provides extensive footnotes, so it shouldn't be too difficult for me to track down alternative sources. CplKlinger (talk) 23:58, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]


  1. ^ Margolian, Howard (1998). Conduct unbecoming : the story of the murder of Canadian prisoners of war in Normandy. Toronto [Ont.]: University of Toronto Press. p. 123. ISBN 978-1-4426-7321-2. OCLC 431557826.

Articles created/expanded on March 26[edit]

Handstand (song)

Created by Infsai (talk). Self-nominated at 01:11, 26 March 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • Symbol question.svg Article was a redirect prior to creation as a standalone on March 26. It's well written, neutral, and sourced throughout. Nominator is QPQ exempt. The hook is a problem, though. The source saysA video has already been shot and may have been the reason why French’s album was delayed, according to Doja. Emphasis mine. Any other ideas for hooks? – Muboshgu (talk) 21:22, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 27[edit]

Whistleblower Aid

Source: "The Facebook whistleblower whose disclosures have shaken the world’s largest social network has drawn behind-the-scenes help from a big player in the online world: Pierre Omidyar, the billionaire tech critic who founded eBay."

"Omidyar’s financial support, which was previously unreported, offers one of the most striking examples yet of how Frances Haugen’s disclosures have generated enthusiasm among critics of U.S. tech giants — offering a potentially crucial boost as she takes on one of the world’s most powerful companies. This gives her an edge that many corporate whistleblowers lack as she warns lawmakers, regulators and media organizations on both sides of the Atlantic that Facebook is endangering society by putting “profits before people.”"

"Omidyar’s global philanthropic organization Luminate is handling Haugen’s press and government relations in Europe, and his foundation last year gave $150,000 to Whistleblower Aid, the nonprofit organization that is providing Haugen’s legal representation and advice."


Moved to mainspace by Thriley (talk) and Jaredscribe (talk). Nominated by Thriley (talk) at 04:16, 31 March 2022 (UTC). Symbol question.svg[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol question.svg Eligibility looks good - long enough and hook is sourced. The article feels a little promotional, especially the second paragraph of 'History.' I would also edit the article to make it more clear how Haugen's actions and Omidyar are related, since that's what the hook focuses on. Once those things are fixed, we should be good to go! Ganesha811 (talk) 16:12, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I’ll add a bit more and perhaps make a second hook. Thriley (talk) 01:50, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 28[edit]

Hydroelectricity in Turkey

Improved to Good Article status by Chidgk1 (talk). Self-nominated at 16:34, 28 March 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • Presumably the fish are threatened by dams, not by the use of hydroelectricity... (t · c) buidhe 05:12, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Unlike Wikipedia the cite uses a hyphen so search for "Kiss-lip himri". Page 73 of the cite says "hydropower hazard high". But as the hook says not enough is known - fish could be just fine I guess - I hope someone will read it and give some money to scientists to find out. Whether dams would have been built just for irrigation if there was no possibility of hydropower I don't know - certainly proponents say it is the hydropower which has repaid cost. Chidgk1 (talk) 06:13, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Chidgk1: (a) Buddy's making a point about English grammar. Hydroelectricity is an abstract principle and a subset of electricity when differentiated by source. Dams are walls thrown across rivers. It's impossible that the fish are being hurt by the concept. (b) Similarly, I don't know if it's the result of a typo or mistaken edit by someone else but the current hook makes no sense. It has the abstract form of "the dinner needs to be found, because of the guests coming over." The verb needs to be changed to something on topic and a more logical connection established.

On the other hand, you just need a new hook. "We should go check and see if these fish are OK because maybe they aren't" isn't an actual statement. The provided cite above needs some info from p. 43 to work as support, but you're really trying to say something about the Turkish hydropower authorities shirking their duty to check on the consquences of their actions.

Relatedly, before this can be approved, you'll need to go to somewhere on the community portal and get some copy editing done. Sentences like "Large hydropower may be bad..." and "...dammed hydro can be dispatched within 3 to 5 minutes..." will need reworking. — LlywelynII 18:48, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@LlywelynII: I have requested copyedit at https:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Guild_of_Copy_Editors/Requests#Hydroelectricity_in_Turkey If you or anyone else have a better hook suggestion I will be happy to hear it. Chidgk1 (talk) 06:28, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • ALT1... that the kisslip himri has disappeared: can you find out whether dams built for hydroelectricity in Turkey were responsible? Source: "Restricted to the Euphrates and Tigris river drainages, although the precise extent of its range is unknown. Its biology is poorly understood" [10]
  • ALT2... that the kisslip himri has not been seen for years: can you find out whether dams built for hydroelectricity in Turkey are responsible and if so can we fix them? Source: "Restricted to the Euphrates and Tigris river drainages, although the precise extent of its range is unknown. Its biology is poorly understood" [11]
Really focused on the fish, huh? — LlywelynII 01:21, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Seemed an amusing name - the rest of the article (most of which I wrote) looks rather boring - maybe you or someone else can spot something else hooky? Chidgk1 (talk) 05:10, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 31[edit]

Dun dun duuun!

The Walter variation.

Created by Maury Markowitz (talk). Self-nominated at 13:13, 31 March 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • I would argue the requirement for a trailing ? should be relaxed in this example. Maury Markowitz (talk) 13:33, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Since the title of the article is "Dun dun duuun!", perhaps the question mark could be replaced with an interrobang (‽).  MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM  20:54, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Added free version of the sound. Maury Markowitz (talk) 13:29, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Policy compliance:

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Red XN - n
  • Interesting: Green tickY
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg This article is a great idea and it will be awesome to have the sound on the frontpage (which appears to be licensed fine) but "Does the article contain at least one citation to a reliable source for each paragraph and direct quote?" - right now it doesn't, although there are primary sources which are all youtube links. Maybe these sites can help 1, 2, 3. Also the claim "no one knows where it came from" is not mentioned and cited in the article presently. On the !? thing, I think ALT0a works fine. Mujinga (talk) 11:02, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Narutolovehinata5: Sorry, I did not see this review. A quick look shows every para does indeed have a cite, and I'm not sure I understand the bit about direct quotes (there are none) or primary sources (its a sound). The three links provided in the review are (1) a blog post, (2) talking about the famous Jaws theme (duuuh dun, duuuuuh dun...), and (3) an article about rebuilding a bridge (???). Not sure what to make of this, but seems good as is to me. Maury Markowitz (talk) 13:30, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 2[edit]

Zionism as settler colonialism

  • ... that according to one study, settler colonialism has been successful inside Israel, but not in the territories occupied in 1967? Source: "Israeli/Zionist settler colonialism was remarkably successful before 1967, and was largely unsuccessful thereafter... When we think about settler colonialism in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, we need to direct our gaze both towards the West Bank, where it has manifestly failed, and towards Israel proper, where it succeeded." Veracini 2013

Created by Buidhe (talk). Self-nominated at 07:33, 2 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • Symbol possible vote.svg @Buidhe: Can we get other hook proposals? Reason: colonization (more recently; settler colonization in the past) is a valid frame to look at Zionism as, probably (?) the correct one, but the lead of the nominated article itself says thatit is still not the dominant framing as of 2022. Thus, having a hook which states the view as fact is inaccurate to the subject. While the hook does credit itself to "one study", the phrasing at the moment still states the settler colonialism as pure fact and only the perspectives on its success as what the study is claiming. The other question is if the study in question was cherry-picked for the hook fact, as I do note a recent string of anti-Israel hooks. And, like I asked recently with hooks for even Russia, where there is conflict, we should look to neutrality and accuracy (taken in balance to each other). So is there nothing else to say on the topic? Maybe there is a hook to be made about kibbutzim as proto-settlements? I am surprised the article doesn't mention early IDF objectives to destroy and resettle Arab villages, but recognise it is a work in progress. Kingsif (talk) 11:13, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Kingsif: I disagree that it states as fact, since it's clearly attributed to one study. As far as I can tell from the reading I've done, Zionism is undisputed as a form of settler colonialism by scholars of settler colonialism and was highlighted as such by the main pioneer in establishing the field, Patrick Wolfe. The journal Settler Colonial Studies has published a lot of articles about I/P but as far as I know, none that reject the paradigm. Rejection comes from outside this specific field of study; many scholars of the I/P conflict analyze it as a national or territorial conflict (although this is not mutually exclusive with settler colonialism). If you do a Scholar search, it's clear that the virtually all results discussing the topic (settler colonialism in Israel/Palestine) are using this analysis, so focusing on rejection would require cherry-picking. Obviously, the article is not complete and could be expanded a lot from the sources available. No one complained when I came up with a long string of hooks that reflected poorly on Germany, Turkey or Slovakia, so I think the same is true of any other country. (t · c) buidhe 18:32, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Buidhe: As I said, the phrasing attributes the views on success to the study, treating the idea of settler colonialism happening there as a given and just something to be assessed. It would be like saying "that, according to one source, Russia's denazification of Ukraine has been successful, but only in the south and east" - this statement is true (Kremlin as the source), and it sounds like the source is just weighing in on the places of success, with "Russia's denazification of Ukraine" basically in wikivoice. I'm not comparing the two situations, but hope this analogy gets across how the "settler colonialism in Israel" statement does not seem to be coming from the study mentioned. I'm also not saying it's bad or wrong or anything, but that the article doesn't, at the moment, seem to support such certainty. Perhaps a little more expansion would make all well. Kingsif (talk) 20:28, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Otherwise; new enough, long enough, QPQ done. The ref section looks a little unusual, and again concerned about overall coverage. Sectioning also doesn't seem standard for history/ideology article? I presume the article will improve with expanding. Kingsif (talk) 13:30, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OK, article has now been expanded and reorganized. If you don't like the original hook, how about:

(t · c) buidhe 04:43, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Thank you for the update, I think there are still some article issues, but, you know, better quality than a lot out there. Ideally, hooks shouldn't just be X says "quote", so alt3 is the best from that standpoint, but all of them are a little unwieldy. I acknowledge you're trying to work around my comments of stating as fact, so thanks for that. It is for these issues, though (lack of article quality and a suitable hook), that I would, personally, fail this nom. I don't want you to think that I'm out to stop your noms, though, because I'm not, so I'll offer this up for someone else to review. Sorry about that. Kingsif (talk) 10:24, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks for your opinion and pushing me to improve the article. When dealing with an abstract topic, I've found quotes to be a successful way of building hooks. (t · c) buidhe 17:03, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
From cursory look I have found at least three sources written by academic or printed in academic press that oppose the notion that presnted in the article [12],[13],[14](p46-47) I think important to include them per WP:NPOV . I am willing to send full text version to anyone intersted --Shrike (talk) 12:09, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't add the first source because it's a news not academic source. Colonialism isn't the same thing as settler colonialism and the second source is about the former rather than the latter, not mentioning settler colonialism at all. The third source is about campus debates on Israel and does not discuss settler colonialism either, only mentioning it in a few quotes from other sources. Of course relevant criticism can be added (in fact it already exists in the article), but in order to avoid cherrypicking, I would only cite sources that are about settler colonialism of which there are many. (t · c) buidhe 16:22, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 4[edit]

U.S. support for Saudi-led operations in Yemen

Created by Mhhossein (talk). Self-nominated at 05:05, 10 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Red XN - n
  • Interesting: Green tickY
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg This is an inherently controversial article, as nearly every paragraph talks about really large quantities of human suffering caused by other humans. So we need to be careful to get it right; especially if we link to it from the front page. Right now, it doesn't.

  • First, the hooks. They're not strictly accurate, either of them. Hook 1, yes, The Intercept does say that even though Biden vowed to halt US support, Yemen's humanitarian crisis is worse. However we can't, in Wikipedia's voice, say that these two things are this closely related. The distance between the US (country 1) support for Saudi Arabia (country 2) being involved in the civil war in Yemen (country 3) causing a humanitarian crisis (event 4) is very large, and implying this strongly that the US support is what is directly causing the humanitarian crisis is a stretch of rather large proportions. We'd need quite a bit more than one source for backing that before we should say this. The Intercept doesn't need to be balanced, we do.
  • Hook 2 is slightly better, but still not quite right. What Joe Biden actually stated was " That includes ending Donald Trump’s “blank check” for Saudi Arabia’s human rights abuses at home and abroad and ending the war in Yemen." See the "and" in there? That means he is specifically differentiating between the Trump blank check and ending the war. He's saying they're related, but not saying they're equivalent. So we can't say he said the US support is a blank check. We can't put words into people's mouths that way. Especially not in Joe Biden's, there would be no room for his foot.
  • Then there are general problems with the article. First, it rather avoids the important fact of explaining about the war! We can be pretty sure that any person reading the Wikipedia in English knows what the United States is, and it's reasonably likely they know what Saudi Arabia is, but what Yemen is and what the war in Yemen is all about are both much more obscure and rather important to understanding the article. We need to explain about the war, not as the whole article, but as a paragraph rather early in the body at least. That's called Wikipedia:Summary style: "A fuller treatment of any major subtopic should go in a separate article of its own. Each subtopic or child article is a complete encyclopedic article in its own right and contains its own lead section that is quite similar to the summary in its parent article. It also contains a link back to the parent article and enough information about the broader parent subject to place the subject in context for the reader, even if this produces some duplication between the parent and child articles." Instead what we have is "During Barack Obama's presidency, the United States began providing Saudi Arabia with critical support to "sustain" its war in Yemen" - what war in Yemen? War in Yemen isn't linked, and even if it were, that goes to a list of over a dozen wars! Yemen is not a historically peaceful place! Put a link to Yemeni Civil War (2014–present), the war in question, prominently in the very first sentence. Put a section explaining the war early in the article - not in the lead, but probably as the first article subsection. In there we need to at least briefly mention about Saudi Arabia's relationship with Yemen, and with the United States, and with Iran, and possibly about the North Yemen/South Yemen split and merger since it seems to be a rather important factor in the origin of the war. We need to explain who the Houthi are, and what their objection to the government is. It is a civil war, after all, even if this article is about the US support here. We can't just leave this out, or again it implies that the United States is a major player here, when again, as in the objection to hook 1, despite all its power, the US is at least 2 steps away from the conflict.
  • In fact, that seems to be an objection to the neutrality of the article, the implication that "this whole war (like everything from the extinction of the dinosaurs to the eventual heat death of the universe) is the fault of the current President of the United States, whoever that may currently be". This is supported by linking to the articles about the 3 US Presidents in the lead - at least change those links to their respective administrations, or even better their international policies if we have those, rather than those about them personally, surely this article about the US support isn't influenced by the fact that Barack Obama was a member of the Democratic Party, when exactly he was born and that he was the first African-American president. This is a civil war first; with the various sides supported by the Saudis and Iran second; and by the US only third.
  • And the sentence in the lead "In 2021, Joe Biden vowed to halt U.S. support for the war, though U.S. arms sales to the coalition have continued." that second part after the "though" is a powerful tactic, and I don't see it either cited or stated anywhere in the body of the article.
  • And the long quote in the body that includes "the United States provides..." - there isn't a date on that quote, it's set in the present tense! The whole point is that Biden promised to stop it, right? Did he or didn't he? The date is rather important for that. There are a number of present tense quotes without dates on them like that.
  • In fact, over half the article is analysis from think tanks and talking heads, rather than heavily cited actual facts. That worries me that opinions are getting wp:undue prominence. This isn't an article about whether a book or movie is good or bad, which pretty much has to be opinions, this is an article about rather cold, rather hard, rather bloody truths, I'd think we're required to focus more on facts and less on opinions.

In short, even besides a new hook, this article needs work. I know this is only DYK, not FA or GA, but as it is, the article is neither comprehensive nor neutral, and needs to be more of each before we can link to it from the front page. If you need chapter and verse, that's WP:DYKCRIT 3a, Neutral point of view, and Wikipedia:Did you know/Supplementary guidelines D7, the bits about " should appear to be complete and not ... fail to deal adequately with the topic ... rejected as insufficiently comprehensive." Not impossible to fix, but not a trivial tweak either, I'm afraid, noticeable work is required here. Good luck. GRuban (talk) 15:53, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@GRuban: Thanks for the review. Wow it's the longest DYK review I have ever seen, thanks for your interest and time! Anyway, here I have tried to give a due response to your review:
  • The fact is that there's no wikivoicing here. Hook1 explicitly says "the humanitarian situation of Yemen has reportedly worsened". This attribution should be enough to stay on the safe side. If it is not making you happy, we may add something like "according to the intercept". Also, I don't agree with you that the original hook implies US has made humanitarian crisis in Yemen. Why not assuming the Intercept meant US decision has nothing to do with the crisis in Yemen? Furthermore, as opposed to what you tried to imply, "The United States is far from an innocent bystander in the Yemen war. It has supplied tens of billions of dollars-worth of bombs, missiles, combat aircraft, and attack helicopters to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), weapons that have been the backbone of the Saudi/UAE war effort."Forbes See the differences?
  • I agree with you over Alt1 (hook2). Not because of the differentiation you explained, but because on the second look I realized the hook is not explicitly supported by the source. Striking Alt1.
  • I have added a background section to the page as per your third bullet point saying that there are more info to be added. Although this is not actually following the reviewer's guide. I noticed your reference to Wikipedia:Did you know/Supplementary guidelines D7. I think more than the minimum level is satisfied in this article.
  • I have changed the links from the names of the US presidents. The body already uses "administration" in the section topics as of the presidents. Plus I don't know much about the ranking you just stated, though I think that is irrelevant to this article and the DYK review.
  • In the fifth bullet point, you're actually referring to this change. You are right, that should be added to the body, but before that, it should be backed by a RS. I have now added the required materials to the body along with the backing sources.
  • I have inserted some of the dates into the article. Please let me know if there's more to be done.
  • In the analysis section, 'just a paragraph' is from Brookings (which is still reliable enough).
You say "noticeable work is required here". Please let me know if there is something specific to be resolved, I'd like to do them. Otherwise I'd like to remind you that DYK is not FA, as you just mentioned. --Mhhossein talk 06:29, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@GRuban: --Mhhossein talk 06:44, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Much better, thank you! A few minor points, but the article is mostly good enough for DYK.
  • "adminstration" needs an additional "i" in three section headings. Also there's a double period in the middle of the Trump section.
  • "Hadi" needs a qualifier before first introduction - President, or Yemeni President, or something like that?
  • "Human rights records" should just be "Human rights record" - it's almost never plural.
  • Not sure what the sentence about the Nitze is doing in that section - move to Obama administration?
I'm basically ready to approve, but I still don't like either hook, I'm afraid. For the first hook, it's writing "Although Fact A happened Fact B still happened", and that, to me, is too much like writing "Although Macron won in France, Orban won in Hungary", without a clear statement of linkage. Yes, that is the exact way The Intercept is putting it, but I would be much more confident if our sources actually said "Due to Fact A happening, Fact B is happening", and they really don't. Can we go for a hook with more straightforward backing from our sources? It doesn't even have to be weaker, it can be a stronger statement, just with explicit source backing; how about something like "... that due to (US support for SA-led ops in Yemen), both have been accused of war crimes?" with backing from the Human Rights Watch article and the Nation article? (By the way, the link to The Nation article backing that is dead, I found it at https:thenation.com/article/archive/war-crimes-united-states-saudi-arabia-yemen/ or even https:web.archive.org/web/20201107231028https://thenation.com/article/archive/war-crimes-united-states-saudi-arabia-yemen/ ; the HRW article is still up at https:hrw.org/news/2016/03/21/yemen-embargo-arms-saudi-arabia but an archive wouldn't hurt). That's a clear "due to" statement from our sources. Or something else; the article is good now, but the proposed hooks are weak. --GRuban (talk) 17:06, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hey GRuban: Sorry for the delay. I have done some of the changes covering your concerns. As for the hooks, I am OK with your suggestion. I checked the source and found a portion saying "US participation in specific military operations, such as providing advice on targeting decisions and aerial refueling during bombing raids, may make US forces jointly responsible for laws-of-war violations by coalition forces." How about going with the following hook:
ALT2: ... that due to U.S. support for Saudi-led operations in Yemen both Saudi Arabia and United States may be hold responsible for laws-of-war violations?
--Mhhossein talk 18:06, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the ping. So looking at it, there are still balance issues. Also more minor things.
  • the lead says "In 2021, Joe Biden vowed to halt U.S. support for the war, though U.S. arms sales to the coalition have continued." Where is that stated in the body? And cited?
  • it also says "According to the Human Rights Watch 2016 assessment, U.S. aid to Saudi Arabia in the Yemen war "may make U.S. forces jointly responsible for laws-of-war violations by coalition forces." - that's cited, but I don't think it should be in the lead, it's one small detail, and the key word is "may". That statement is OK for the DYK, which is supposed to be about small details, but the lead is supposed to be a summary of the body.
  • I still think the Analysis and Human Rights sections devote too much coverage to opinions in general. That's a matter of editorial decision, of course, but exacerbates help the next point.
  • I don't see a single opinion that supports the US position here, while there are plenty that criticize it. That seems unbalanced.
  • Another matter of editorial decision is the large number of long direct quotes from sources. Can't we summarize the meaning? We quote when the specific wording is important, on most of these cases rephrasing seems like it would be very possible.
  • Still two periods in Trump section. --GRuban (talk) 21:54, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • The continuation of US support was inserted here. I think the sources [15] and [16] would back the mentioned phrase.
  • The detailed portion was removed.
  • Thanks for the insight, but I don't think the opinions are payed too much weight in the Human rights record. Actually it was tried to make proper attributions whenever needed. That is what WP:NPOV demands. Also, you don't see a single opinion that supports the actions because I could not find one. Let me know if there's any.
  • The concern with the quotes are not really necessary for the sake of DYK !!! not a GA or FA.
I hope the article is now ready for the main page. --Mhhossein talk 18:01, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah Sayifwanda

  • ... that Sarah Sayifwanda, the first Zambian Minister of Gender and Development, was once arrested for allegedly inciting a tribal fight? Source: "Last year, Zambia Police arrested Ms Sayifwanda in connection with the tribal fight that occurred in Zambezi district between the Lunda’s and Luvales during an ECZ delimitation.

It was alleged that Ms Sayifwanda was the one who forcefully grabbed the microphone from the ECZ official and strongly opposed the creation of a central constituency which the majority voted in favor of. Ms Sayifwanda’s behaviour was said to be what triggered the throwing of chairs at each other by the lundas and luvales as she accused the electoral commission of Zambia officials of siding with the luvales."


Created by 1hi (talk). Self-nominated at 00:50, 5 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • Symbol question.svg @1hi: Article new and long enough and hook is verifiable. At this point though, I'm not entirely comfortable with the article's shape - the "Childhood and family" subsection is blank, and the subsection lengths are just around 2-3 sentences each - they could just be merged into one single undivided section. Also, the references are naked urls - not necessarily a DYK requirement, but it would certainly help a lot to follow the guideline WP:BURL. Again, not necessary, but makes it look nice. Juxlos (talk) 08:36, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi, I did not know about the BURL guideline, thank you for pointing it out. That has been resolved. 1hi (talk) 13:00, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Symbol confirmed.svg Nice work. Hope you make more Zambia DYKs - always nice to see more of the less covered countries here. Juxlos (talk) 13:52, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • @1hi and Juxlos: Hi there! I'm gonna strike ALT0 on BLP guidelines; yes, she's no longer alive, but those can apply for a relatively long amount of time after death. She appears to be a national politician, I don't think we should run a hook that alleges she committed a crime she wasn't convicted of, it falls afoul of WP:BLPCRIME. theleekycauldron (talkcontribs) (she/they) 12:12, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • Symbol possible vote.svg without a viable hook, the nomination can't proceed. theleekycauldron (talkcontribs) (she/they) 22:22, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
For what it's worth, the nom appears to be a student editor and hasn't responded to a talk page message. Perhaps someone more familiar with African topics can help out here? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:33, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Without additional context that hook doesn't really say much. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:31, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 5[edit]

Imam Reza shrine stabbings

Created by Kelhuri (talk) and Mhhossein (talk). Nominated by Mhhossein (talk) at 06:13, 11 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • Thanks for the suggestions, but I still stand with the original hook. Your Alts are too simple I believe. The incident was apparently a move against the Sunni-Shia unity (it happened after the killing of a sunni scholar in a mosque in northern Iran). That's why Sunni scholars unanimously condemned the attack. --Mhhossein talk 05:16, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also the page has not been featured on the main page. --Mhhossein talk 05:20, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mhossein, I'm looking at this, and at the article--but I'm stuck already in the second sentence of the description. "A second cleric who had died" needs a lot of ... well it needs some editing. Drmies (talk) 01:15, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Drmies: Hey, I was not notified due to the misspell. I have nominated the page at GOCE. --Mhhossein talk 11:45, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
User:Mhhossein, I apologize, my friend--I should have checked better. Drmies (talk) 16:12, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No worries Drmies. Will the DYK nomination be reviewed by you after the GOCE job is finished?--Mhhossein talk 17:46, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sure thing, Mhhossein--please just ping me when you're done. Drmies (talk) 19:56, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 6[edit]

Esau Chulu

Created by 1hi (talk). Self-nominated at 01:37, 6 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • Comment: Is that unusual? Since I imagine Zambia has more than 4 political parties. Juxlos (talk) 08:27, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yes, as fas as I understand it is unusual because the parties in favor of his appointment were the opposition to the party of the president who appointed him.
  • @1hi: Are there any other ways of wording it? If someone isn't familiar whatsoever with Zambian politics (which, to be honest, is going to be most cases), that wouldn't sound to interesting. In Indonesia, for example, the government coalition has 7 parties, so 4 would if anything sound small. Maybe contrast it with his predecessors, if supported by sources? Juxlos (talk) 13:48, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol possible vote.svg New enough, long enough. No QPQ needed. Earwig has flagged some problematic passages. A bigger issue is that this piece doesn't say alot. I fact, doing a search, I came up with other news sources, like this one,Moonga, Chambwa (2020-09-25). "ESAU CHULU MUST RESIGN…he's shown weakness, dishonesty – Sacika"., that seem to say there is more that could be written. I'm not inclined to pass this one. --evrik (talk) 00:37, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol delete vote.svg There has been no action on this. I'm going to go ahead and say no. --evrik (talk) 17:39, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 7[edit]

2022 Birmingham Stallions season

Created by PCN02WPS (talk). Self-nominated at 05:29, 15 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Symbol possible vote.svg I notice that this nomination is now more than three weeks old, but the nominator has not provided a QPQ. As per RfC on excessively late supply of QPQ credits, the QPQ should be done within one week. Please provide a QPQ promptly. Flibirigit (talk) 14:55, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Symbol question.svg I think we might have to go with some variant of ALT3, but I would suggest proposing an alternate version which mentions that the Stallions are the only USFL team playing in their home city in 2022. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:37, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kim E. Nielsen

Moved to mainspace by Thriley (talk), Penny Richards (talk), and Dodger67 (talk). Nominated by Thriley (talk) at 15:47, 10 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Callaway Gardens

5x expanded by Mgreason (talk). Self-nominated at 21:00, 8 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Needs further work. There's uncited text in the article which should be taken care of, and having the word "beloved" in the DYK hook looks like a WP:NPOV violation. QPQ is done, and 5x expansion confirmed. The fact that Herschend co-owns Dollywood isn't in the article, so that parts of those alts is problematical. There are also some tone issues - instructions to the reader such as "Pay attention to the instructor and wear gloves", "but once on the course, you're responsible for yourself", and "If the Discovery Course was too difficult, the Lake Course should not be attempted" should not be present. There's also a tendency to go into not-needed details, such as the list of items with the pioneer log cabin. This needs sizable further work, and probably a bit of a trimming in places - at time this diverges from an article on to the Callaway Gardens to a Wikivoyage description of what you can do there. There's really way too much detail for most of these attractions - an encyclopedia shouldn't be recording height requirements for the TreeTop Adventure, the length/time table for all the trails, or a list of everything available for rent at the beach. Hog Farm Talk 14:03, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
* I've revised the hooks as suggested and trimmed details from the article. Please advise. Mgrē@sŏn (Talk) 00:20, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Mgreason: - There's still a lot of uncited text in the article. You're going to need to have pretty much everything in there cited to a reliable source. Hog Farm Talk 04:52, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]


  1. ^ a b c Rice, Mark (April 6, 2022). "Ownership changing at Callaway Resort & Gardens, largest employer in Harris County". Columbus Ledger-Enquirer. Retrieved 6 April 2022.
  2. ^ a b Caldwell, Carla (Nov 10, 2015). "Online petition seeks to stop Thursday closing of Callaway Gardens attraction". Atlanta Business Chronicle. Retrieved 6 April 2022.

Nicholas Jakubovics

Created by Nangaf (talk). Self-nominated at 19:13, 8 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • Symbol question.svg New enough and long enough. QPQ exempt (2nd nomination). @Nangaf: Neither hook is mentioned in the article with a source. (I would prefer ALT1, but both should be added in as appropriate.) Please ping me when the L-arginine and rose petals items are mentioned in the article text. Sammi Brie (she/her • tc) 03:58, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm also not sure if the mention of the school is necessary for ALT1. To me the main hook fact is the investigation of the antimicrobial properties of rose petals and the mention of the school just distracts from that. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:42, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Life Speaks to Me

Created by Eurohunter (talk). Self-nominated at 10:19, 7 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • Your hook need wikilinks and the target article needs to use bold font. Schwede66 18:03, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: "his" and "him" in the last half of the sentence read as ambiguous; it is not immediately clear to a reader whether they refer to Basshunter, Avicii, or a mix of the two. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 19:50, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

@Legoktm: I paraphrased it a little but I don't have idea how to write "Basshunter flex his artistry in different synthy and softer electronic-pop directions" and "The track replicates the boundary-pushing signature style" in different way and not change the meaning so for now it is "since "Home" and "Angels Ain't Listening" Basshunter developed his music style in different synthy and softer electronic-pop directions" and "track recreates the boundary-pushing style of the late Avicii music". Eurohunter (talk) 07:31, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Other problems: Red XN - I am skeptical this meets WP:NSINGLE, at best it's pretty borderline. The Aftonbladet source is good, and then there's one from EQ Music. The NetFan.pl article covers Boten Anna more than this single (and reads like a press release), and the Radar de Media one is 3 sentences. With only two non-trivial sources, I'm really not sure.
@Legoktm: There are listed a few additional sources on article talk page but I did not find the way to use them in article. Eurohunter (talk) 07:31, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I reviewed all the sources on the talk page and they're all trivial mentions or just inclusion in a list of new music. I also spent some time looking for more sources and couldn't find any. My inclination is to decline this on the ground that the article is not notable, but I'm going to ask for a second opinion, please stay tuned. Legoktm (talk) 04:35, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Legoktm: I will look for more sources but there are also pages like NetFan.pl which seems to be quite serious with partners such as Polskie Radio, Agora or distributor pl:e-Muzyka and it exist since 2003. They are also a patrons for such festiwals - for example Festiwal Piosenki "O wolności" organised by Institute of National Remembrance. DJ Raport is a news site published by DJ Promotion (since 1990) and since 1995 they organised courses for profesional DJ-s. DJ Promotion has also own chart Top w dyskotekach - which was published by Polish Society of the Phonographic Industry Eurohunter (talk) 11:15, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Green tickY
  • Interesting: Green tickY
  • Other problems: Red XN - As mentioned earlier, the he/him/his is ambiguous, and the text in the article has the same issue.
@Legoktm: I added the names to quote and article. Should last "his" be ommitted? Eurohunter (talk) 07:31, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
QPQ: None required.

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg I'm going to make a few minor copy edits to the article as well. Legoktm (talk) 05:39, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • One more thing, the lead currently is a list of a bunch of companies that released the single, which feels unnecessarily promotional. I think the lead would benefit from dropping that, just focusing on the people who wrote it and a sentence about its creation or meaning. Legoktm (talk) 05:49, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • On hold pending the result of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Life Speaks to Me. Legoktm (talk) 05:32, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 8[edit]

Ich will den Kreuzstab gerne tragen, BWV 56 discography

5* expanded by Gerda Arendt (talk), Mathsci (talk) and Thoughtfortheday (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 21:09, 15 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • Comment. Unfortunately the statement here is completely inaccurate. Two recordings were made by Mack Harrell (van Beinum, Shaw); Gérard Souzay (Winschermann, Geraint Jones); Barry McDaniel (Werner, Hochreiter); Peter Kooy (Herreweghe, Suzuki); Klaus Mertens (Lutz, Koopman [three recordings]); and others (see discogs). For example, a recording was made with Stephan McLeod in 2007 and a second will be released on 29 April 2022. More interesting is the story behind Mack Harrell (b. Texas) and Barry McDaniel (b. Kansas). I therefore suggest this alternative: did you know
This is at least accurate. Mathsci (talk) 23:38, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Mathsci (talk) 06:07, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for helping. I wanted to add you as author but hit submit too soon, sorry, and now corrected. My hook: I picked the first thing obvious, because it was the last day to nominate, and I was tired. The recordings you mention are not yet in the article (unless it happened overnight), so could not yet be used. Discogs is not regarded as a reliable source, so when adding them please use other references. The hook is not "completely inaccurate" because it nowhere says that these were the only ones. We could add "among others" if that helps. I am no friend of ALT2 because it provides no hint at how many singers were attracted to this particular piece, and the pretty image is not picturing "recording". It's "quirky", though, that this very German piece was first recorded by an American in the Netherlands (an then not again for decade) The teacher-son relationship could also be used for DFD and Goerne, btw. I also find interesting that these two both did it again a decade or two later. Just DYK has this limit of 200 chars and I don't now how to say so without mentioning only quantities and years. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:39, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Potential recordings for the Kreuzstab cantata can be hunted down off-wiki on "authority control" links, bach-cantatas.com, Allmusic, Muziekweb, discogs, , spotify, archive.org, etc; after that, refs in gramophone, diapason,tor, etc, can be pinned down. But the list so for is inadequate. On archive.org, it was easy to find Harrell's recording with Robert Shaw; Harrell was one of the greatest singers of his generation. The events of 1939 are fairly well known. Nowadays, Bach's music is regarded as universal, not"German music". You write:I am no friend of ALT2 because it provides no hint at how many singers were attracted to this particular piece, and the pretty image is not picturing "recording". The so-called "pretty image" is a routine photograph of the Concertgebouw, prior to Nazi occupation. The interior of the main hall of the Concertgebouw is unaltered; the performance can be heard on archive.org, YouTube, etc.
For the 1939 recording, the citation is already in the article.[18] For the second recording of Harrell in 1958, Jonathan Woolf writes: "Mack was seemingly the most instinctively noble of singers. There is an unselfconscious gravity in his singing but never one that elides into the statuesque. He is careful to ensure clarity and rigorous attention to the text and his noble seriousness works outstandingly in the recitatives."
The recording of Barry McDaniel is already cited.[19] John Quinn writes: "Mention must also be made of Barry McDaniel’s splendid performance of the solo cantata, Ich will den Kreuzstab gerne tragen, BWV 56. He offers a dignified and elevated account of this moving cantata, as does Werner. McDaniel’s tone is even and full throughout the compass of his voice and he sings with sensitivity and intelligence, making the most of the words. In the great aria 'Endlich, endlich wird mein Joch' he has the inestimable benefit of a partnership with Pierre Pierlot. Pierlot’s playing is sprightly and stylish while McDaniel’s divisions are excellently clean. The performance of this cantata is one of the highlights of the collection." Mathsci (talk) 13:33, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I wonder why you don't say so on the article talk, or in the article. We know it's a work in progress, and we should admit that it will not be complete. - This template is for a reviewer to check. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:06, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's already happened in the article; that affected the choice of external link for BWV 56. There are more than 70 recordings but only 22 in the table. Schreier and Bär are missing. According to Jonathan Freeman-Attwood on Gramophone, Barry McDaniel and Fritz Werner are still rated as being in a league of its own. The first recording of Goerne and Norrington receives high praise; but the later one with Goerne, not so. The Peter Wollny's pdf commentary, however, is useful and new. Mathsci (talk) 15:49, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 9[edit]

John A. Sibley Horticultural Center

Created by Mgreason (talk). Self-nominated at 18:40, 9 April 2022 (UTC). QPQ=[20][reply]

  • Symbol question.svg New enough and long enough. If the Horticultural Center hasn't closed over six years ago, I might be worried about promotional language due to the detailed descriptions of the garden's features. It is all adequately sourced in-line. I noticed an instance of close paraphrasing, but I think that I fixed it. Regarding the hooks, the information for ALT1 and ALT2 is not in the page itself (and I didn't accidentally remove it!). In other words, there's nowhere on the page that mentions that the Horticultural Center was a popular attraction for 30 years. There is also no mention of Herschend Family Entertainment in the page. The first hook is accurate and supported in-line on the page. QPQ done. If you want to use ALT1 or ALT2, you need to include information about them on the page itself. Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 20:26, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]


  1. ^ a b Adams, Tony (30 October 2015). "Callaway Gardens closing Sibley Horticultural Center, with Mr. Cason's Vegetable Garden being relocated". Columbus Ledger-Enquirer. Retrieved 27 March 2022.
  2. ^ a b c Caldwell, Carla (Nov 2, 2015). "Callaway Gardens shutters large attractions". Atlanta Business Chronicle. Retrieved 9 April 2022.
  3. ^ Rice, Mark (April 6, 2022). "Ownership changing at Callaway Resort & Gardens, largest employer in Harris County". Columbus Ledger-Enquirer. Retrieved 6 April 2022.

Viaud Ridge

  • ... that Viaud Ridge was named after Gustave Viaud, who was buried in the range? Source: ISBN 978-2-84050-607-2; source 1
    • ALT1: ... that Viaud Ridge was discovered in 1970 by ships passing through the Indian Ocean? Source: GEBCO; source 8, dead link
    • ALT2: ... that Viaud Ridge, discovered in 1970, was poorly defined until 2018? Source: Source 9, dead link
    • ALT3: ... that Viaud Ridge was named after Gustave Viaud, who was immersed in the range? Source: ISBN 978-2-84050-607-2; source 1

Created by EpicPupper (talk). Self-nominated at 04:22, 9 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • Symbol question.svgArticle is new enough (translated articles are eligible) and long enough. ALT hooks are a little boring, the main one is misleading as dropping someone in the sea is not "burying". I think there is a maintenance template and the coordinate map seems to have some kind of problem. I can't speak French nor access most of the sources but I can verify some of the sources. Source #8 and #9 appear to be broken. Didn't see any copyvio or plagiarism, dropping a few sentences into yielded nothing untoward. QPQ exemption is in effect. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:53, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for the feedback! I will try to resolve these issues as soon as possible. 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him | talk) 18:55, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Hiya! I've fixed the link for source #8. Source #9 seems to be permanently dead. ALT3 added to fix inaccuracy in main hook. Orphan template removed. Coordinate map fixed. Thanks! 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him | talk) 08:20, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Not so sure that you want to use a downloading link nor a permanently broken one, myself - is there another GEBCO source? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:37, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 12[edit]

Wayne Cooper (basketball)

5x expanded by Bloom6132 (talk). Self-nominated at 00:30, 19 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • Note that per the DYK guidelines, if an IAR exemption to the special occasions requirements is requested, it has to be done at WT:DYK rather than at the nomination page. This is to ensure that the wider DYK community can provide input rather than just a single reviewer. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 22:32, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Turzak

Created by JohnPomeranz (talk). Self-nominated at 19:14, 18 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Key Underwood Coon Dog Memorial Graveyard

Thanks for the reply. Northwest Alabama is a very long way from home for me. The restaurant looks like fun, and I will add it to my itinerary if and when I am in the area. But the likelihood is very slim, unless I can serendipitously land work in the area, and that too is unlikely. This is way off my beat. 7&6=thirteen () 16:01, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, I have been told in a phone converation that better photographs will be uploaded in the next few days to Wikimedia commons. I hope so. 7&6=thirteen () 16:26, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The cemetery caretakers sent me excellent pictures today. Since they are the copyright holders/creators, I have asked them to please upload them Wikimedia Commons, since I can't waive their copyright. They sent them from their phone; and doing the upload process is probably best done from a computer. I've told them all that. I expect this will be resolved this evening. 7&6=thirteen () 12:56, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Drmies A sidetrip while thereHames, Melea (July 9, 2017). "CARLEY'S ADVENTURES: RATTLESNAKE SALOON & COON DOG CEMETERY". Rattlesnake saloon. Not worth putting in this article, but interesting nonetheless. 7&6=thirteen () 14:28, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
So that place is kind of cool--you get to ride in the bed of a pick up truck down from the parking lot, and the kids love that. Underneath that ledge it's nice and cool. But the music is that old-timey country, and the food, well, it's OK I guess, sort of mediocre standard bar food. Not bad but not great. But the setting of the place is of course spectacular, and it's a pretty well-known here; I'm sure there's enough coverage to write a short article. Drmies (talk) 15:07, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol question.svg 5x expansion confirmed, QPQ done, hook acceptable, hook cited. Earwig has flagged areas of concern. The article needs some clean-up. The lead section is too long, and somewhat confusing. Some copy editing is needed. --evrik (talk) 18:29, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 13[edit]

Frequency modulation encoding

  • ... that early floppy disks used FM encoding that used only half the available storage? Source: Wakeman pg 1
    • Comment: I added this with the DYK tool when I uploaded, but it seems it never got posted to the DYK nom page. Trying again...

Created by Maury Markowitz (talk). Self-nominated at 20:27, 13 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

@David Eppstein: FM is a specific implementation of DME in the same fashion that MFM is a different specific implementation of DME. FM referrs to both the encoding of the individual data bits as well as the disk format and the header timing signals. I believe this is well explained in the article. Maury Markowitz (talk) 21:45, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The lead sentence of the article says that it is about the code 0 → 01, 1 → 10, and mentions its usage in multiple applications. If it is intended to be only about the way floppy disks were formatted using this code, and not about the code itself, I think it needs significant rewriting to make that clear. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:51, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@David Eppstein: The lead sentence of the article is "Frequency Modulation encoding, or simply FM, is a simple type of run length limited code that saw widespread use in early floppy disk drives and hard disk drives." I see nothing like "it is about the code 0 → 01, 1 → 10" and I think it clearly indicates the field is disk storage. I have added a link to DME in the appropriate location and I assume from the wording of your reply that the merge tag can now be removed? Maury Markowitz (talk) 23:09, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"is a simple type of run length limited code". That describes it as a code. It is the same code as the one described in differential Manchester encoding. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:18, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"That describes it as a code" ... in a specific setting. I have added words to this effect. Maury Markowitz (talk) 14:27, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
But it's the same code, used for the same basic purpose (maintaining synch). How is it notable for two articles rather than just one? —David Eppstein (talk) 18:03, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As I am now stating for the third time, this article is not about the code, it is about the entire system of which DFE is used for one part. I have made several changes to the text to make this distinction clear and you haven't commented on any of them. Maury Markowitz (talk) 18:40, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
While we're repeating stuff we've already said, maybe I should repeat that the first sentence of Frequency modulation encoding states that FM encoding "is a type of run length limited code". If you don't want to think the article is about a type of code, maybe you shouldn't say in the first sentence that it is about a type of code? —David Eppstein (talk) 19:46, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

By all means, suggest alternative phrasing. Maury Markowitz (talk) 16:48, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 14[edit]

Environmental impact of the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine

Source: “ The Black Sea Biosphere Reserve, on the southern coast of Ukraine, is a haven for migrating birds. More than 120,000 birds spend the winter flitting about its shores, and a multicolored spectrum of rare species — the white-tailed eagle, red-breasted merganser and black-winged stilt, to name just a few — nest among its protected waters and wetlands.

The reserve is also home to the endangered sandy blind mole rat, the Black Sea bottlenose dolphin, rare flowers, countless mollusks, dozens of species of fish — and, in recent weeks, an invading military.

“Today the territory of the reserve is occupied by the Russian troops,” Oleksandr Krasnolutskyi, a deputy minister of environmental protection and natural resources in Ukraine, said in an email last month. “Currently there is no information on environmental losses.”

But military activity in the area sparked fires large enough to be seen from space, prompting concerns about the destruction of critical bird breeding habitats.”

The New York Times

Created by Thriley (talk), MaitreyaVaruna (talk), and Matthiaspaul (talk). Nominated by Thriley (talk) at 04:12, 20 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

@LordPeterII: Thank you. I fixed it. Thriley (talk) 17:07, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Helen Hadsell

Created by Bruxton (talk). Self-nominated at 02:15, 15 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • ALT1a: ... that Helen Hadsell claims to have won every contest that she entered? Source: Source
  • ALT2a: ... that metaphysicist Helen Hadsell claims that she won things she wanted by projecting energy?
  • (Not a review) I've added ALT1a because there's no way of knowing if it's true, since we only have her word on it. I added ALT2a because, frankly, ALT2 is completely unencyclopedic.  MANdARAXXAЯAbИAM  20:43, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Symbol redirect vote 4.svg this one still needs a full review. Bruxton (talk) 23:57, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Symbol possible vote.svg The problem with this nomination extends beyond the hooks, since the article itself is way too credulous. I read the article and looked at the newspaper stories in footnotes 3 through 6 and there's not a shred of proof presented in any of them that Helene Hadsell won even one contest, much less every one she ever entered. Each of these stories is of the mushy, back-of-the-paper soft news variety (so much for the good old days of pre-Internet local journalism ...). We need Snopes to go back in a time machine and do a fact check on this lady. Until that can happen, sentences in the article like She entered and won many contests for items and for all-expense paid trips. and She also won a house at the 1964 New York World's Fair. and After reading the book she began entering and winning contests. and Her first win was an outboard motor in a contest sponsored by Coca Cola. and Next she won a bicycle for her daughter, and then trips to Europe, Disneyland and New York. and Hadsell won the home. cannot stand as they are. Each of them need to be modified with "She claimed" or equivalent words. Wasted Time R (talk) 01:17, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Wasted Time R: Hey, thanks for checking out the article. I was extremely interested in the subject and the metaphysical/positivity angle. FYI: I think her actual claim was she never failed to win something that she wanted, but some reporters took that to mean she never lost a contest. And I used those references for the hooks, so now I have tainted the nomination. Bruxton (talk) 03:52, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Bruxton: To dig a little deeper: Back then, there was a hobby/activity/obsession called "contesting", in which people would increase their chance of winning contests, by submitting tons of entries to random drawings or becoming creative at submitting entries to contests that wanted inspirational words or marketing phrases or limericks or whatever. There are newspaper stories about contesting and its contestors, such as this UPI story about a different woman, Joan Seltzer, that ran in a lot of papers, or this Cincinnati Enquirer story about an Ohio man, Wesley Hurley, who after 15 years of compulsive sweepstakes entering was apparently involved in setting up the American Contest Association, which issued bulletins listing every active contests at a given time. Like Helen Hadsell, these people all have instructional help they are trying to sell, as does Joanne Allison, who ran this ad in a Wyoming paper. Perhaps the best profile is that of Chuck Brucks of Florida, in this Orlando Sentinel story, who has spent five years contesting and has won a lot of things but never, apparently, anything he wanted much. Now if you look at the continuation, this last story does mention Helen Hadsell, who is credited by this American Contest Association as being the biggest winner of all of these contestors ... and the American Contest Association is marketing her The Name It & Claim It Game book.
What to take from all this? Are these people are winning some things in sweepstakes and other contests? Yes. Are they exaggerating their accomplishments in order to sell their instructional wares? Maybe. But to the extent they do win, it is by what the Orlando Sentinel describes as "the contester's three-pronged credo: 'persistence, patience and postage.'" Seltzer describes entering thousands of contests with hundreds of wins. Brucks describes spending $6000 on thousands of entries and winning 230 times for a total value of $6000, meaning he's only breaking even.
So Helen Hadsell did not win every contest she entered, nor did she win everything she wanted to win. It's impossible. Nor were her wins due to psychic techniques or positive thinking. If she won, it was by the same methods that the others contestors used. Wasted Time R (talk) 13:02, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Wasted Time R: Did she enter many contests? yes. I do not think she ever denied that. And I am just learning that she entered many contests under her husband's name Pat Hadsell - in the 60's they called her Mrs. Pat Hadsell. When she won the outboard motor from Coca Cola she entered as Pat Hadsell - probably thinking why would they let a woman win an outboard motor, (the contest was won with an essay). Last night I added another news article of her family posing with a model of the house her family won. Did she win a house? You made a very strong statement above which I think is argumentative. Does positivity work? The answer is I don't know, and neither do you. However, the statements about her positivity are all qualified in the article with "She claimed". So focusing on that aspect is sidetracking. Regarding winning everything she ever wanted - it is not in the article... so again not something to focus on in a DYK. I erased the claim of her winning every contest. I followed the news articles reporting her many wins - and some of it was also her own self promotion. Helen Hadsell promoted herself well with speeches and books and courses. Finally you can give a red tick, or you can tag the article as a wp:hoax if you like. Bruxton (talk) 15:04, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Bruxton: I didn't mean to sound argumentative towards you, apologies if I did. And I don't want to fail the nomination; it's an interesting subject. But I do want to get the article in the fairest shape possible. So some more digging. Look at this Daily News Tex story from early 1964, before the Formica house win, in which she sounds just like every other contestor from that era – indeed she is head of a local contesting club. Her family submitted lots of entries, didn't win anything for a long time, then she took a correspondence course in contesting and got a better idea of what kinds of phrases contest judges were looking for. At that point she starts winning, but she still hadn't won anything big. No mention of the power of positive thinking whatsoever, no mention of how reading Norman Vincent Peale turned things around for her. Now look again at the December 1965 Fort Worth Star Telegram story you added recently, which is after she won the Formica house contest. Again, no mention whatsoever of Peale, positive thinking, auric energy, or anything like it. Now jump ahead half a decade and go to this Irving Daily News story from early 1972. Her Name It and Claim It book had just been published in 1971 and she's full of her positive thinking/she-wins-every-contest stuff. It's completely different. So as I see it, the article needs to present that she was originally a contestor, and was the head of a contesting club, and she used contesting techniques to get some wins; and then later she became an author and instructional sales person, and pitched a different source for her wins. Wasted Time R (talk) 23:42, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Wasted Time R: thanks, you have done a considerable amount of research for this nom. I wonder if you might consider editing the article and adding the verbiage and research. It will be much appreciated. Bruxton (talk) 02:21, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Wasted Time R: Please let me know what edits I should make to advance for the nomination to proceed. Bruxton (talk) 02:07, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Bruxton: I took your invitation to add to the article and ran with it (and maybe I went overboard? hopefully not). I'm now finished with my additions and changes; see what you think of them. Wasted Time R (talk) 11:07, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Wasted Time R: It is a more thorough and comprehensive article after the edits. I think the "contestors" part provides context and neutrality to for the metaphysical claims. I also think you have enough to start work on a contestor article. If you start one I will participate. Thanks for making Wikipedia better. Bruxton (talk) 13:28, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Okay good. At this point I'm obviously a contributor to the article and can no longer be a reviewer, so I'm marking it as such and flagging it for a fresh look by someone else. Wasted Time R (talk) 13:53, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Anna October

Created by Trillfendi (talk). Self-nominated at 21:41, 14 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • Symbol question.svg On the knife edge of size (I did make some copyediting for language) at 1511 bytes and new enough. QPQ present. @Trillfendi: I don't see a mention of employees delivering clothes in the hook source for ALT0, and ALT1's bureaucracy claim is not included in the article but is in the hook, so it should be added to the article. If those issues could be rectified, both hooks would be suitable, though I prefer ALT0. Sammi Brie (she/her • tc) 06:36, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Sammi Brie: I now realize it was the Vogue source for ALT0, not Marie Claire UK, so I now replaced it. For ALT1, The Guardian source inline (in the same sentence as sustainable) talked about bureaucracy and reuse of materials; in that source it’s all in the same paragraph. Although in the article someone else user:Victuallers claims the ethical reuse of material is not sustainable fashion, despite what Vogue' said in their description, and they changed it. Trillfendi (talk) 16:24, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"claims the ethical reuse of material is not sustainable fashion" umm citation required I think. I don't think I said that or even typed it. Sustainable Fashion means being sustainable. Using deadstock is not sustainable ... you run out of deadstock! If you are convinced that Vogue are not greenwashing (I reckon they have blinkers on) then change it back ... but are you sure Vogue are not just saying that using deadstock isnt quite as bad as what is uually done? Victuallers (talk) 17:01, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You said here that using last years material doesnt make you sustainable. Its a contradiction. In this, Vogue described a Ukrainian designer being sustainable by using deadstock (although October is focused on in the second half of the article), Marie Claire Ukraine said that Anna October's collection using deadstock (Ukrainian: дедсток) makes it more ethical and ecological. That's what makes her a sustainable fashion brand. Trillfendi (talk) 18:44, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The contradiction is that being "sustainable" is not a graduated scale. You are either sustainable or you are not. So when your quote above says that using dead stock "makes it more ethical and ecological" then it confirms that they are becoming "more" .... ie they are not there yet. i.e. "sustainable". This marketing stuff about being "more ethical and ecological" can be said of a coal mine than now uses recyclable plastic cups on Tuesdays. It sounds great ... but the coal mine is not sustainable. ..... the same applies to using deadstock. Imagine a designer goes to the store and chooses a material to use for this years collection. "Oh" says the marketing guy.... "just before you chose the material it was deadstock"... wooo ! I think we can claim we are becoming "more ethical and ecological" ... why I bet some may be convinced that we are now "sustainable". Victuallers (talk) 22:51, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Sammi Brie: The comments seem to have distracted the review... I made my point and its not important. Victuallers (talk) 09:44, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 15[edit]

Kasymaly Jantöshev

  • ... that a 1955 satirical comedy play by Kasymaly Jantöshev was one of the first signs of the relaxation of Soviet literary restrictions after the death of Joseph Stalin? Source: "Stylistic and production restrictions began to be lifted in the mid-1950s, after the death of Stalin. [...] One of the first signs of positive change was the appearance of satirical comedies such as [...] The Lasso for the Shrew (1955) by Jantoshev". [21]
    • ALT1: ... that before he became one of Kyrgyzstan's most prominent writers, Kasymaly Jantöshev taught courses preparing the chairmen of collective farms? Source: "Further Dzhantoshev entered the pedagogical technical school in Frunze, and after graduating in 1930, began his teaching career in the same educational institution, preparing future chairmen of the collective farm." [22]
    • ALT2: ... that Kasymaly Jantöshev translated How the Steel Was Tempered into Kyrgyz? Source: "Zhantoshev is also known as a translator. He translated into Kyrgyz Nikolai Ostrovsky's novel "How Steel Was Sharpened," the play "The Silent Girl," and works by a number of children's writers. He also translated works by foreign writers such as Mikhail Lermontov, Hans Christian Andersen, and Lydia Budogorskaya." [23]
    • ALT3: ... that Kasymaly Jantöshev translated works by Hans Christian Andersen into Kyrgyz? Source: "Zhantoshev is also known as a translator. He translated into Kyrgyz Nikolai Ostrovsky's novel "How Steel Was Sharpened," the play "The Silent Girl," and works by a number of children's writers. He also translated works by foreign writers such as Mikhail Lermontov, Hans Christian Andersen, and Lydia Budogorskaya." [24]

Created by Curbon7 (talk). Self-nominated at 10:46, 15 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • I dunced while nominating, this was created on April 14, not 15. Curbon7 (talk) 10:51, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • On it. — LlywelynII 21:21, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

    Symbol question.svg @Curbon7: Moved to mainspace just ahead of the submission; long enough (9.8k elig. chars.); no copyvio issues per Earwig; no need for QPQ; not a living person but well sourced overall regardless; all of the category links aren't necessary but very welcome and appreciated; links added or filled from main related pages, also not necessary but very welcome. ALT1, ALT2, ALT3 cut as uninteresting especially given the buried lead that this person seems to have written one of the masterworks of his culture. A translation even Kyrgyz people will ignore in favor of Disney movies pales in comparison.

    (1) The organization is a little silly. The biographical sections should all be under a #Life or similar heading and shouldn't go Early Life, Early Career + 2 Book Titles, Late Career + Death; at some point he should have his actual career. (Maybe that's what the 2 book titles are, but then they shouldn't be organized as part of the #Early_career section.) It's also unclear why the 2 titles are grouped together. They should probably be separate sections on their own, especially if they form the entirety of Jantoeshev's main career. (2) The section on Kanybek especially needs minor reworking. Some of it belongs on a separate page for just the book itself or should be worked into Jantoeshev's later life and #Legacy at the appropriate moments. (3) The article generally shouldn't see-saw back and forth in time as much as it does. (4) There's some unclear phrasing to clean up, like "a class war against deemed oppressors", saying a work from the 1960s "is set contemporaneously", &c. (5) Most importantly, you have a major culturally-defining work from within the Soviet Union that sends its protagonist off to Siberia at the hands of "the oppressors" with no discussion whatsoever about what that means. Within the novel, had the fasco-capitalist powers taken over Russia? or was he really portraying Russia as the oppressor against the Kyrgyz people? If the latter, htf did that fly and htf did he have any later career? Similarly, the most important hook and biographical data besides Kanybek is the bit on his work showing a greater openness within Russian society, without explaining what it said, how it was received at the time, and whether it caused trouble later once Brezhnev & co. swung the pendulum back towards greater repression. — LlywelynII 21:54, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

    (6) The (correct) Frunze in the running text needs to clarify that it's now Bishkek at least during its first mention. The infobox on the right should similarly use or include the modern names of the locations. (7) There should be some discussion of how the USSR handled his legacy in later years and what difference (if any) occurred with his memory once Kyrgyzstan gained its independence. Finally, (8) less essential, but for anyone primarily known as an author, it would be best if there were a #Works section with at least the start of a list of his output condensed to a single list with a {{incomplete list}} header if needed. My own habit is to do it using the {{citation}} template and using the |display-authors=0 field to avoid repeating his name 20 times. — LlywelynII 22:00, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 17[edit]


Created by Hindustani.Hulk and Bookku. Nominated by Bookku (talk) at 06:12, 24 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Earwig not working. New enough, long enough, no QPQ needed. Article sourced. Hook needs some work. Article needs copy editing. I red through it and could not figure out what it was about. I suggest more clearly stating the issue in the lead. Perhaps submit this to the GOCE. --evrik (talk) 18:03, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think either hook can run under the current wording per the "unduly focuses on one side of an issue" criterion. They also don't sound very neutral. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:02, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please let us know when that is done. ALt1 is better, but are there any other hook ideas? --evrik (talk) 13:07, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
IMO, there is reasonable scope and opportunity for User:Hindustani.Hulk to expand the article further and also make it neutral. And such expansion likely to open more hook ideas.
I got interested in DyK for this article because it brings forth how politicians play politics and a political process (in Pakistan or else where) takes shape.
Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 16:43, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would be very reluctant to link to this article from anywhere on Wikipedia, let alone the main page. The article does not explain what it is about. I left notes on the talk page and a few {{clarify}} templates. This article needs explanation and development, not copy editing of existing prose. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:48, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm willing to give this a limited time to get edited into shape. --evrik (talk) 18:54, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg I'm not thrilled with this piece. Is it notable? Is it well written? Anyone else want to weigh in? --evrik (talk) 17:45, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

William West (botanist), William West Jr, George Stephen West

5x expanded by Storye book (talk). Self-nominated at 17:38, 19 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 18[edit]


  • ... that Brassey's, a prominent name in the publishing of books on military topics, had a divergent history between Britain and the United States? Source: see fn 17 in article - "Dymott moves to Brassey's US" (via Gale)

Converted from a redirect by Wasted Time R (talk). Self-nominated at 09:48, 19 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • Symbol question.svg I'm not sure if I'm going to do a full review of this nomination, so for now I'll be leaving some comments. Firstly, the hook seems really vague: what does "divergent history" mean? If it's meant to be "it's vague on purpose to encourage readers to read it", I don't think this is the best way to word the hook. Secondly, I noticed that the article has a lot of bold, which I think should be avoided. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:25, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
How about any of these?
  • ALT0b: ... that Brassey's, a prominent name in the publishing of books on military topics, had a divergent corporate history between Britain and the United States?
  • ALT1: ... that Brassey's, a prominent name in the publishing of books on military topics, eventually underwent separate acquisitions in Britain and in the United States?
  • ALT2: ... that Brassey's, a prominent British name in the publishing of books on military topics, has a history that goes back to 1886?
As for the boldings, that is per MOS:BOLDREDIRECT; each is a target of a redirect and several of them are already linked from existing articles. Wasted Time R (talk) 21:41, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg I'm still not sure if the bolding is appropriate here so I'll defer to more knowledgeable editors on the topic. I'll also leave the review to an editor more familiar with the topic. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 03:16, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Bolding looks great – in addition to solving the redirect target issue, it makes a rather complicated corporate history very easy to follow. Article itself looks good – long enough, no copyvios, QPQ is done. So it's really just the hooks that are not quite doing this prestigious military publisher justice. Here are some hooks for consideration by Wasted Time R:
  • ALT3: ... that Brassey's Defence Publishing, acquired by Robert Maxwell in 1980, could trace its history back to 1886?
  • ALT4: ... that Brassey's, "the oldest name in defence publishing" in the UK, branched into sports titles in the US?
  • ALT4a: ... that Brassey's, "the oldest established name in defence publishing" in the UK, branched into sports titles in the US?
  • ALT5: ... that Brassey's own history spans The Naval Annual in the UK to "military blunders" in the US? Note: Could even highlight some titles that are attention-getting; of course would require some corresponding edits to the article. Happy to help if needed. Cielquiparle (talk) 11:40, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Cielquiparle: Thanks for doing the review. I think ALT3a is better than ALT3, because it uses the simpler form of the name. ALT4 leaves the word 'established' out of the quote from the article; if this is intentional, it would need an ellipsis. Regarding ALT5, how is Brassey's Book of Military Blunders specific to the US? It covers mistakes throughout history and per this WorldCat listing, was published by Batsford Brassey in the UK before it was published by Brasseys Inc. in the US. Wasted Time R (talk) 12:40, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Passing baton for re-review by someone else. Remaining hooks for now are ALT2, ALT3a, and ALT4a (corrected per feedback). Have deleted other hooks based on feedback from Wasted Time R, plus the earlier ALT hooks that were too generic (i.e., could apply to any number of UK/US international conglomerates or publishers). (Or, there may be more hook ideas out there.) Cielquiparle (talk) 16:51, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tapuae-o-Uenuku / Hector Mountains

  • ... that on two separate occasions, the Tapuae-o-Uenuku / Hector Mountains have permanently redirected water away from the Mataura River? Source: FMC, p.11 (About five million years ago the Nevis Valley drained south to the Mataura catchment. Uplift of the Garvie and Tapuae-o-Uenuku/Hector Mountains cut off this exit) and Turnbull, p. 6 (The eastern Mataura outlet was blocked by alluvial fan gravels from Lorn Peak)
    • ALT1: ... that the Tapuae-o-Uenuku / Hector Mountains have been an important mahinga kai for Māori for over 600 years? Source: FMC, p. 19 (The Nevis Valley has a long history of human activity with at least two recorded pre-European sites dating from around the 14th century) and BWA, p.10 (Tangata Whenua uses/values – mahinga kai, nohoanga and te ara tawhito.)
    • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Geko (rapper)
    • Comment: Fewer than 5 articles nominated but still finding an article for QPQ (edit: updated 22:00, 22 April 2022 (UTC) with QPQ review)

Created by Turnagra (talk). Self-nominated at 22:11, 18 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 19[edit]

N. Sankar

Created by Ktin (talk). Self-nominated at 02:42, 19 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • Open to other suggestions. Though not a doorbuster, I think this would appeal to the cricket following populace, which is a reasonable bit of the english speaking populace. But, I am open. Cheers. Ktin (talk) 04:15, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 20[edit]

Josh Hudson

Converted from a redirect by Soaper1234 (talk). Self-nominated at 20:14, 20 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Climate change in Uganda

Created by Micheal Kaluba (talk). Self-nominated at 17:53, 20 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Micheal Kaluba I added a hook but it is not great - if you would like a different hook please fill in ALT1 above Chidgk1 (talk) 07:01, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArsenalGhanaPartey I am not reviewing but I can suggest more hooks if needed as I think this is Micheal Kaluba's first submission for DYK - was not sure if you are reviewing as you wrote below comment line - would you like to continue review? Chidgk1 (talk) 07:11, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ahichchhatra Jain temples

Ahichchhatra Jain temple
Ahichchhatra Jain temple

Created by Pratyk321 (talk). Self-nominated at 07:07, 20 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 21[edit]

Yi Jeonggyu

Created by Jirangmoon (talk). Self-nominated at 10:44, 26 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Green tickY
  • Interesting: Red XN - Not particularly interesting or notable.
  • Other problems: Red XN - The hook is also not grammatically correct and should replace the comma with "was".
QPQ: None required.

Overall: Symbol question.svg The article needs some work and a new hook. SounderBruce 22:21, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the review. I fixed the grammatical error in the hook and in the article (using Grammarly). As for neutrality and the hook, I don't see any problems - aren't those subjective assessments? If you tell me what is non-neutral, I'll take another look. As for interesting or not, I think this hook is interesting. Do we need a third opinion? --Jirangmoon (talk)
Third opinion: Yeah, I don't think it's a particularly interesting hook either. It's also not particularly notable by itself, given that the crossover between Korean anarchism and nationalism are very well documented. On this issue, Yi Jeonggyu was far from unique. --Grnrchst (talk) 16:44, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've added alts based on items sourced in the lede but they need page numbers for verification. czar 18:53, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
User:Czar Thank you very much! For Alt1, the page number is 12 : "Undoubtedly, the goal of Korean independence movement was to regain independence from Japanese colonialism, to which Yi had devoted himself with anarchism."
For Alt2, the page number is 25 : "Yi Jeonggyu (1897–1984), one of the most active Korean anarchists in 1920s China, just like other Korean exiles, began his career as an independence activist and converted later to anarchism." --Jirangmoon (talk) 19:26, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, @Jirangmoon! Those sources do not quite confirm the language used in the alts and the article, if you can rephrase both to match their sources? I.e., they do not say he was a "pioneer" or "key", unless there is another section that says so. czar 19:36, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
User:Czar Thank you. Can you review the following quote which contains the word pioneer? It's from page 11.

Echoes to Sim’s description of his complex life as both an anarchist and a nationalist can be found in Yi Jeonggyu’s recall. Yi, a prominent anarchist active in various educational and rural movements before and after 1945, too poses his life as one with such a tension but, in his case, shifting further toward anarchism that offered him a vision of social revolution, rather than simply a nationalism-driven political revolution that aimed merely at national independence. Yi explains the shift that occurred in his life as follows: The first half of my life had gone through a life for struggle for independence movement, and [then in the second half] turned for a movement for social revolution of an ideological idea [sic] that has been viewed in this world, without any good reason, as too extreme. [The second half has been] a life as one of the pioneers, who has been indulged in anarchism, that is, no-government movement.

Will this be ok for ALT2? --Jirangmoon (talk) 13:15, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Jirangmoon, it looks like that quotes Yi as saying that he himself is a pioneer. Since that is an exceptional claim, it requires an exceptional, secondary source. We could say "Yi thought of himself as a pioneer" for ALT2. I've updated both ALTs to match the source but the article text will need to be corrected for both as well. czar 13:47, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
User:Czar Sorry for a late reply.
Regarding the ALT2 matter, I am a bit confused in editing things on Wikipedia as a Wiki beginner. I do not remember why I wrote the sentence with the word, “pioneer” for Yi Jeonggyu because I started the article more than 6 months ago. Anyhow, I have tried not to move or copy source sentences to the Wikipedia articles as they are except for quotations. In that process, even though the source articles does not have the word “pioneer” for Yi Jeonggyu, I thought that Yi Jeonggyu could be one of the pioneers of Korean anarchist movement because Yi Jeonggyu influenced Yi Hoeyeong who was called “the pioneer of Korean anarchism” in the source. So if someone was doing something before the “pioneer”, isn’t he even more of a pioneer?
See the quotations below:
Page 23: In addition, Shin’s friendship with Yi Hoeyeong (1867–1932), often called “the pioneer of Korean anarchism,” must have been a factor as well for his acceptance of anarchism.
Page 27-28: It seems that Yi Hoeyeong surely was impressed with Yi Jeonggyu’s project and anarchist ideas with regard to the proposed ideal farming villages in Hunan. Indeed, it is said that Yi Jeonggyu’s role was decisive in converting Yi Hoeyeong, who was persuaded by the former about the goal of anarchism and thus accepted it in later 1923.38 Discussing with many kinds of independence activists and radicals, including Chinese and Taiwanese, Yi Hoeyeong finally chose anarchism for his own answer. The national goal, of course, was the key that drew him to anarchism.
Page 28: In this sense, to call Yi Hoeyeong “the pioneer of Korean anarchism” is an interesting indication of the coming trajectory and transnational character of Korean anarchism in China in the 1930s and ’40s.
Also, from a Korean article at http:m.kyeongin.com/view.php?key=20190501010000158: “우당 이회영을 아나키즘 사상가로 인도한 이가 바로 이정규다 “ It was Yi Jeonggyu who led Yi Hoeyeong to become an anarchist.
--Jirangmoon (talk) 14:49, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good to me! I've updated ALT2. @SounderBruce, want to take another peek? czar 01:26, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Clingers

The Clingers in 1969.
The Clingers in 1969.
  • ... that The Clingers was the first girl band to play their own instruments and be signed with a major label? Source: Documentary called "The Clinger Sisters: The First All Girl Rock & Roll Band"
    • ALT1: ... that Melody Clinger of the girl band The Clingers met the drummer for The Beach Boys, Dennis Wilson, after wolf-whistling his Rolls Royce on her way home from a guitar lesson? Source: pg. 76 of the Ugly Things article on The Clingers: (quoting Melody): "You know how I met [Dennis Wilson]? I was walking home with my guitar from my guitar lesson. It was right there on Riverside and Vineland where the freeway comes over there. I was walking and I saw this Rolls Royce. I used to wolf whistle real good [...] I whistled real loud, and they put on the brakes and backed up, and it turns out to be Dennis Wilson!"
    • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Goodbye Normal Street

Created by Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk). Self-nominated at 18:08, 25 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Divya Saxena

Created by Bahnfrend (talk). Self-nominated at 08:01, 22 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Thank you. A full DYK review is still needed. Flibirigit (talk) 14:38, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Divertimento No. 15 (ballet)

Created by Corachow (talk). Self-nominated at 00:20, 22 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Detention of Pavel Pernikaŭ

Moved to mainspace by Homoatrox (talk) and Levivich (talk). Nominated by Levivich and Homoatrox (talk) at 18:40, 21 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • Pinging EEng, my hooker of choice. Levivich 18:42, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I've returned to this several times in hopes of coming up with something better, but I've drawn a blank, partly because even I think this maybe isn't such a good basis for a joke. I did have the idea of comparing a Belarusian prison to an Arbcom case (which is worse?) but it didn't gel. Sorry. EEng 02:44, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks. I guess that makes four of us so I've struck 2 and 3. Levivich 13:45, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment from an uninvolved editor I dislike ALT2 and 3, since they are too vague and aren't true to the actual meaning. — Mcguy15 (talk, contribs) 21:53, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree, ALT1 and ALT0 could be shortened as well. ArsenalGhanaPartey (talk) 17:01, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

2021 ban of Palestinian human rights organizations

Created by Buidhe (talk). Self-nominated at 09:54, 21 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • Comment: I don't think "was described as" is sufficient attribution for a comparison between Israel and "totalitarian regimes", especially given WP:RSP's notes on Al Jazeera. theleekycauldron (talkcontribs) (she/they) 08:04, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hi TLC, it wasn't Al Jazeera that said it but the Israeli human rights organization B'Tselem. That could be attributed in the hook if desired, or one of the ALTs could be used. (t · c) buidhe 08:10, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • that's my mistake- looks like the quote was printed in PBS, too, so that's fine. I do think that even if it's B'Tselem (the way I learned hebrew pronunciation would render it betselem, but I digress), it should be attributed—it's firebrand-y language. theleekycauldron (talkcontribs) (she/they) 09:22, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The DYK rules say that "hooks that ... promote one side of an ongoing dispute should be avoided." In this case all the alternatives present only one side of the events. I would suggest writing a hook that either gives both perspectives per WP:DUE or focuses on a less controversial aspect of these events. Alaexis¿question? 10:39, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • How are ALT1 and ALT2 not a basic statement of fact? Israeli officials stated that the goal of the designation was to reduce the groups' funding. (t · c) buidhe 17:33, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • Well, it would also be a basic statement of fact to say "Israel designated six human rights organizations as terrorist saying that they were linked to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine." This would reflect the Israeli perspective. My point is that the hooks should follow NPOV either by reflecting, with appropriate weight, different perspectives or by using uncontroversial facts for hooks. Alaexis¿question? 05:53, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • And re ALT2, it appears factually not true, the evidence was apparently strong enough that at least one organisation has been blacklisted had its funding by Netherlands cut [33]. Tbh I think the article itself should be improved before featuring at DYK. Alaexis¿question? 06:14, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
        • From the article you cite: "“The external review shows that no evidence has been found of financial flows between the UAWC and the PFLP. Nor has any proof been found of organization unity between the UAWC and the PFLP or of the PFLP’s providing direction to the UAWC,” wrote Foreign Minister Ben Knapen and Foreign Trade Minister Tom de Brujin." The key allegation relating to the ban is precisely that these groups are fronts for the PFLP and are secretly funding it. The article also doesn't say the organization was "blacklisted" except by Israel. The +972 source is talking about a specific dossier being unpersuasive, which is not contradicted by the source you provided. I've edited the hook to clarify. (t · c) buidhe 11:22, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Princeton–Deepwater District

Created by Antony-22 (talk). Self-nominated at 03:48, 21 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • Symbol question.svg The article is new and long enough, but I'm just wondering if the hook could more precisely match what's in the actual article. "The 2% grade..." bit reads quite technically and isn't directly cited either. At least state somewhere in the article that the railway was so steep instead of giving the reader the extra job of having to infer/click on the grade link. More importantly, I'm not sure how reliable some of the references are, blogspot ones are 99% of the time a no-no---in this instance, the photog page you've cited is almost certainly bad. Kingoflettuce (talk) 23:23, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Kingoflettuce: I added that a 2% grade is very steep to the article text. Given the topic, I think that a blog post from someone who specializes in railroad photography is reasonably reliable enough. I could try to find a more reliable source if you really want one. Antony–22 (talkcontribs) 19:10, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 22[edit]

Drane Scrivener

  • ... that All-American cornerback Drane Scrivener later became a published author on fire safety issues involving children with special needs, newborns, and older adults? Source: This article supports his All-America status. Sources 14-19 are his published works.

Created by Cbl62 (talk) and BeanieFan11 (talk). Nominated by Cbl62 (talk) at 22:41, 29 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • Symbol question.svg Article mostly meets requirements; the hook is interesting, mentioned in the article, and cited inline and verified. Only issue is that a QPQ is needed. @Cbl62: As no QPQ was provided within seven days of the nomination, per DYK guidelines I am giving another seven days for a QPQ to be done from the date of this review. If no QPQ is provided within seven days the nomination will be marked for closure. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:45, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Babi Yar. Context

Babi Yar in 1941
Babi Yar in 1941
  • ... that the documentary Babi Yar. Context shows long-unseen footage of buildings in central Kyiv being bombed by the Soviets, by remote control, after the Nazi occupation began? Source: https:europeanfilmawards.eu/en_EN/film/babi-yar-context.19560 "Some of the footage I work with has been buried in the archives for decades – nobody has ever seen it. Not even historians, specialising in the Holocaust in the USSR. One such episode is the explosions of Kreschatik in September 1941. Kiev’s central street was mined with remote controlled explosives by the NKVD (Soviet secret service) before the Red army had retreated from Kiev. The detonations of the explosives were carried out a few days after the Germans took the city."

Created by Coretheapple (talk). Self-nominated at 18:48, 24 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 23[edit]

Friedrich Oberschelp

5* expanded by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 11:44, 29 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Crisis of the late 16th century in Russia

Created by Alaexis (talk). Self-nominated at 11:22, 27 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Sonya Legg

Created by Jesswade88 (talk) and MainlyTwelve (talk). Nominated by Victuallers (talk) at 09:23, 25 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • Support: Would just like to say I am definitely not a creator of the page! I did some light CE and categorization work but all credit goes to @Jesswade88. That said, this nomination looks good to me. — Mainly 12:51, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@MainlyTwelve: You helped! Still if you are unwilling to take the credit offered, then can you complete the review? Victuallers (talk) 15:52, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks to newbie Henrifdrake who has negotiated an image as we had the wrong one. Victuallers (talk) 07:16, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I think kilometers is much too big of a measurement to use here, why not use meters instead? 0.2 km is a bit of a weird measurement to compare with feet in my mind. Ornithoptera (talk) 06:19, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Ornithoptera: "Feel free to fix any errors you find ... and thank you." ... change it, if you prefer it differently, and you think its important. (I never added the conversion but someone else thought it important). thanks Victuallers (talk) 11:17, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 24[edit]

Anomaly Six

  • ... that American media intelligence company Anomaly Six uses software development kits in commonly used apps to track the movements of hundreds of millions of mobile phones? Source: “A small U.S. company with ties to the U.S. defense and intelligence communities has embedded its software in numerous mobile apps, allowing it to track the movements of hundreds of millions of mobile phones world-wide, according to interviews and documents reviewed by The Wall Street Journal.

    Anomaly Six LLC, a Virginia-based company founded by two U.S. military veterans with a background in intelligence, said in marketing material it is able to draw location data from more than 500 mobile applications, in part through its own software development kit, or SDK, that is embedded directly in some of the apps. An SDK allows the company to obtain the phone's location if consumers have allowed the app containing the software to access the phone's GPS coordinates.“ The Wall Street Journal

Created by Thriley (talk). Self-nominated at 08:23, 2 May 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Florence Bravo

  • ... that Florence Bravo requested the "most celebrated" physician in England to see her husband after he swallowed poison?
    • ALT1: ... that after three days of questioning about her sexual past, Florence Bravo finally told the inquest that it was irrelevant to the death of her husband? Note: See sub-section on "Second inquest" under "Investigation" section on article page.
    • ALT2: ... that after her husband swallowed poison, Florence Bravo requested Sir William Gull to come to the Priory to see him? Note: See sub-section on "Diagnosis" under "Death of Charles Bravo" section on article page.
    • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Andrew Barclay (bookbinder)
    • Comment: Created from Redirect on 24 April 2022.

Created by Cielquiparle (talk). Self-nominated at 07:54, 1 May 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Clayton Weishuhn

5x expanded by Bloom6132 (talk). Self-nominated at 13:59, 30 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Ana Štěrba-Böhm

Created by Yerpo (talk). Self-nominated at 15:07, 25 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • More of a comment than a review, but maybe it would be better to shorten the hook and just focus on the "first Slovene woman with a doctorate in science" part? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:18, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I'd be okay with leaving out the alma mater (see ALT 1). — Yerpo Eh? 18:12, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Takogo kak Putin

Created by Benlisquare (talk). Self-nominated at 00:51, 25 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Dorothy Binney Palmer

Immokolee was built by Dorothy Binney Palmer in 1931
Immokolee was built by Dorothy Binney Palmer in 1931

Created by DaffodilOcean (talk). Self-nominated at 18:17, 24 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]


  1. ^ Crowell, James (2019-02-28). "Early Bend Takes Flight". Bend Lifestyle Magazine. Archived from the original on September 3, 2019. Retrieved 2019-09-03.
  2. ^ Hartman, Bea (2010). Florida's treasures : 55 great sites on the National Register of Historic Places. Internet Archive. Bradenton, Florida : Bradenton Press. ISBN 978-0-615-70577-4.
  3. ^ Enders-Hudson, Julie (1984-11-30). "Amelia's husband created the legend". St. Lucie News Tribune. pp. [1], [2]. Retrieved 2022-04-04.
  4. ^ Chapman, Sally Putnam (1997). Whistled like a bird : the untold story of Dorothy Putnam, George Putnam, and Amelia Earhart. New York: Warner Books. ISBN 978-0446520553.

Yosef Avidar

Yosef Avidar in 1960
Yosef Avidar in 1960

Created by Dunutubble (talk). Self-nominated at 16:58, 24 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

2022 Sweden riots

  • ... that the leader of an anti-Islam group in Sweden burned a Quran, the Muslim holy book, during the holy month of Ramadan with police permission and caused 2022 Sweden riots?

Created by Dunutubble (talk). Nominated by Aye1399 (talk) at 14:25, 24 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • Comment (not review), Aye1399, the hook needs to contain a bolded wikilink to the subject, e.g. 2022 Sweden riots or riots. I have done some edits to the hook's grammar. TSventon (talk) 14:54, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • TSventon, Thank you for the edits.Aye1399 (talk) 07:07, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Aye1399, please can you edit the hook so it mentions the subject of the article, otherwise it won't be usable for DYK. By the way, you need to add a user name and sign your comment in the same edit to generate a notification. TSventon (talk) 06:38, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment the article was created by Dunutubble, not Aye1399. Dunutubble, are you happy with this nomination? TSventon (talk) 08:59, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Just pointing out that anyone can nominate an article created by someone else; it happens all the time at DYK. If the creator sees issues with the nomination, they are free to point them out, or to suggest alternate hooks. I've adjusted the "Created by" line above to reflect the creation and nomination info; the DYKmake templates are correct. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:56, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • TSventon, Do you like to review and judge this hook?Aye1399 (talk) 13:17, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 25[edit]

John D'Orazio

5x expanded by Steelkamp (talk). Self-nominated at 16:11, 2 May 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • This is not a review, but this hook fails DYK criteria 4a: "Articles and hooks that focus unduly on negative aspects of living individuals...should be avoided." ♠PMC(talk) 16:00, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ambati Rambabu

5x expanded by DaxServer (talk). Self-nominated at 17:20, 28 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Jesus Christus, Menschensohn

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 21:28, 25 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • Symbol question.svg A new hook may be needed here as I don't see how the currently proposed hook (i.e. a liturgy being included in a collection for young people) appeals to anyone but specialists. A hook about the stanzas may be more promising here. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 03:22, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Gerda usually has a pretty good reason why she finds a fact interesting, so let's wait for that... theleekycauldron (talkcontribs) (she/they) 06:10, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • I am not sure what you mean about the stanzas. I'd like to be as little theological as possible. I think that this hymn addresses Jesus 3 times, while the normal Kyrie calls "God - Jesus - God" might require rather more knowledge than the present suggestion. - Typically, "old" liturgical things like Kyrie are not for young people, - this one tries to appeal to them. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:45, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • The first stanza requests enlightenment to see God face to face. The second stanza recalls that Jesus carried on the Cross what we suffer. The third stanza requests that Jesus, called ("gerufen") from grave and death, may be with us on life's steps ("Stufen"). This part of the article could work as a hook in my opinion. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:05, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
        • This is a lot of theology, - what should a Muslim reader do with this information? It's also not unusual, but rather typical for Kyrie to word three things - spoken or sung - and end each with "Kyrie eleison" or "Christe eleison". I also would not know how to squeeze it fairly - mentioning all three - in a hook. This author (Schlegel) is good in wording religious things in a way appealling to young people - that's the basic message, and not only for specialists, - perhaps you can word that better? Or do you want to make it quirky by saying that he sort of rhymed the Greek "eleison" with the German "Menschensohn" three times? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:19, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
          • If the elesion rhyming thing can be mentioned/referenced in the article, sure. I'm also not sure why the theology thing is being brought up since it was far from my mind when I looked at the article and the hook. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:29, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
            • No reference mentions the rhyme because it's just there (son - sohn). What about a Muslim who may know nothing about Jesus carrying the Cross. The concept of "Menschensohn" is hard enough for Christians, so I was shy there. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:17, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In any case, I really don't see how being included in a collection for young people works as a DYK hook. I think something about the content itself could work better. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:51, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see any specific thing without relying on Christian background. It's unusual to call Jesus three times instead of Lord - Jesus - Lord, but I wouldn't know how to say so in 200 chars. - Need (to make) food. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:58, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

James McChord

Created by PCN02WPS (talk). Self-nominated at 21:14, 25 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]