Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Did you know

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Did you know?
Introduction and rules
IntroductionWP:DYK
General discussionWT:DYK
GuidelinesWP:DYKCRIT
Reviewer instructionsWP:DYKRI
Nominations
Nominate an articleWP:DYKCNN
Awaiting approvalWP:DYKN
ApprovedWP:DYKNA
April 1 hooksWP:DYKAPRIL
Holding areaWP:SOHA
Preparation
Preps and queuesT:DYK/Q
Prepper instructionsWP:DYKPBI
Admin instructionsWP:DYKAI
Main Page errorsWP:ERRORS
History
StatisticsWP:DYKSTATS
Archived setsWP:DYKA
Just for fun
Monthly wrapsWP:DYKW
AwardsWP:DYKAWARDS
UserboxesWP:DYKUBX
Hall of FameWP:DYK/HoF
List of users ...
... by nominationsWP:DYKNC
... by promotionsWP:DYKPC
Administrative
Scripts and botsWP:DYKSB
On the Main Page
Main Page errorsWP:ERRORS
To ping the DYK admins{{DYK admins}}
Shortcut

This is where the Did you know section on the main page, its policies, and its processes can be discussed.

One queue left

[edit]

Just going to note here that I populated a lot of Preps 1 through 5, and thus I cannot promote.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:51, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why is it that the next six preps contain five hooks on Polish literature, in addition to one that ran a couple of days ago? Did no-one think to space them out? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:57, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I actually reviewed the first hook last night as it was three in the morning and I couldn't sleep. From memory, the article seems fine, though both it and another exceeds 200 characters, and that Nazi hook definitely fails WP:DYKINT (and there probably shouldn't be two train hooks). I'll do a deep dive in the evening if no-one else does by then - and I think I'll pull every other Polish hook while I'm at it.--Launchballer 13:00, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pulled Krzyż i półksiężyc and kicked back Kazimierz Sakowicz.--Launchballer 17:06, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Posted. I kicked back the second train hook and pulled the Nazi hook.--Launchballer 00:22, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
While we're here, just noting that the currently-running image hook shouldn't be there per the "diversion" part of WP:DYKIMG (@ promoter Crisco 1492). ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:05, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See also #How You Get the Girl.--Launchballer 13:09, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Planning on queuing prep 2 this evening. @Theleekycauldron, RoySmith, and Chipmunkdavis:, you've all raised concerns about Destruction of cultural heritage during the Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip - have they been resolved or should it go to GAR, because I don't plan on kicking this back again (it's been in the preps over a month)?--Launchballer 16:25, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sigh. I had some time last night to work on DYK, so I took a look at the next prep set up for promotion, i.e. Prep 2 where Destruction of cultural heritage during the Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip is. I don't think we should be running that article because of the POV-pushing. I happen to agree with the POV, but I don't see the wikipedia main page as the place to be promoting that. The sigh at the beginning of this is because I fear I will get dragged into a longer discussion about this, which I don't want. But since you explicitly asked for my opinion, I've given it. RoySmith (talk) 16:34, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
+1 to all of that. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:00, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pulled. I'll have a rummage round the preps after I've eaten, unless either of you want to promote something from Approved.--Launchballer 20:14, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What is the POV supposedly being pushed, other than the neutral point of view of reliable sources that this military action has resulted in the destruction of cultural heritage? With sources like mainstream news (The Observer, NPR), academically-published journals (Public Archaeology, by Taylor and Francis)... I would hope that the existence of a people group's cultural heritage isn't to be considered too controversial to mention. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 20:36, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Theleekycauldron, RoySmith, Chipmunkdavis, Launchballer, and Hydrangeans: Thank you for taking the time to consider the hook. I especially appreciate that extra time was given twice to address the concerns raised by editors, and a third time would not have been reasonable. I had been thinking about this myself as if further issues were raised I would not have time to adequately address them before the end of the month due to other commitments. It probably would not have been fair to the DYK community to take up more of their time.
While I am of course disappointed the actionable feedback here has helped. A topic of this nature was always going to be contentious. Where there are outstanding concerns about the article I am more than happy to discuss them at another venue, the article talk page might be best and GAR if needed. Richard Nevell (talk) 19:53, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Responding to ping, many of my points were addressed and the article improved, a couple of issues hung around. Much like RoySmith, this isn't something I am looking to go back into, I do wish more people had weighed in during the initial discussion. CMD (talk) 03:20, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:DYKUBM

[edit]

Time to activate the unreviewed backlog mode? WP:DYKN is consistently hitting the WP:PEIS limit. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:31, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe. The backlog's high due to the recent GA drive. There are some very easy closures/approvals near the top of the pile. Another day I think.--Launchballer 15:21, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
BlueMoonset's list shows ~180 unapproved noms for the past week. If we can get that under 100, I'd think that's a good idea. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 02:19, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think it might be time to implement it. The PEIS issue doesn't seem to be going away anytime soon and if anything is only getting worse. It's hard to see all the new nominations because they can't even be seen from DYKN. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:10, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DYK admins: (and any other interested regulars) if there are no objections I think it would be good to activate it tonight at 00:00 UTC, with the goal of reducing the number of noms at WP:DYKN to 80 or so. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:16, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As a reminder, the steps are: adjusting Template:Did you know/Backlog mode?, commenting in the box at the top of Template talk:Did you know, and adding an appropriate note at WP:DYKUBM. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:21, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. if approved, it would have to start at 0001 UTC on 27 November. We may even consider increasing to 2x hooks a day too, since that hasn't been implemented for a while. JuniperChill (talk) 11:17, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There was a discussion recently which resulted in a new procedure for that, because of burnout among promoters. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:21, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have the link to both the new procedure and the discussion? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:29, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't really participate and can't remember when it was, but the change can be found at WP:DYKCRIT. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:41, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Specifically WP:DYKROTATE. If we are at one set per day and immediately after the midnight (UTC) update finishes there are more than 120 approved nominations with six filled queues, we rotate to two sets per day, and rotate back to one set per day immediately after the midnight (UTC) update three days later. If I remember correctly, it used to start if it we were at 120 approved nominations with 10 filled queues. I only joined DYK in March 2024, so it might've just changed recently. I think that's the reason why its been a while since we did 2x hooks a day. Looking at the history page, that hasn't been edited since May 2024. JuniperChill (talk) 11:48, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The main reason that we haven't done 2x/day is the switch to a nine-hook set. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:51, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I misread the question. I thought there was a new procedure for DYKUBM regarding how and when to implement it. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:56, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We might need to find a few additional prep-to-queue promoters before we can attempt 2/day again. —Kusma (talk) 11:33, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely. There haven't been two sets a day for a long time, because there aren't sufficient volunteers working on the project, checks become more cursory and errors creep in as a result. I strongly oppose moving to two per day.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:06, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There was a suggestion at Wikipedia talk:Did you know/Archive 202#Approaching 12-hour backlog mode? that we do two-a-day for a fixed three days.--Launchballer 12:42, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If all of the queues and preps were filled (except the last prep set, which should be left empty for moving hooks around) we would have about 70 approved noms, which is far lower than the 120 that was recommended. In my opinion, the preps and the queues should be filled before the switch to ensure that DYK can handle 2-a-day. Z1720 (talk) 13:31, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That was exactly the point of the 3 days and 6 filled queues. Even if nobody does any more promoting, we have enough in the bank to get through the sprint. We can always do another sprint if we need to. RoySmith-Mobile (talk) 18:59, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just noting that I have implemented backlog mode on all of Template:Did you know/Backlog mode?, Template talk:Did you know, and WP:DYKUBM. I say let's worry about 2/day when we get there.--Launchballer 01:27, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Prep 6: 2024 Kansas City metropolitan area rent strike (nom)

[edit]

@LunaEclipse, Morgan695, and AirshipJungleman29: First hooks are extraordinary claims, and this in particular is an incredibly sweeping claim made by a non-independent party, reprinted in a local paper. I'd honestly say it's more likely than not to be untrue, unless there's some really obvious procedural reason it has to be true. (Also, what does "target" mean in this case?) theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 13:31, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This has now been pulled from prep after no one responded to this JuniperChill (talk) 15:14, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Crisco 1492 and Theleekycauldron: It was still in queue, so I took it out myself. I'll replace it this evening.--Launchballer 16:05, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oun Yao-ling

[edit]

... that the weightlifter Oun Yao-ling was asked to compete in the South African Games, but the opportunity was swiftly rescinded once the organisers found out he was Chinese?

@Cunard, PARAKANYAA, Crisco 1492, and Waggers: I don't think this hook meets WP:DYKHOOKBLP as it focuses on nothing other than an incident of racism. As there is a date request above, I recommend queuing the above date request in its place.--Launchballer 02:39, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't interpret this as a "negative aspect" of the BLP, in that there is no wrongdoing on his part. It's also not an insignificant fact given the ramifications of race on the Olympics in that specific case. But do what you want to do. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:43, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I concur with Prakanyaa that this isn't an "negative aspect" of the living person. If it reflects on anyone it would be the games organisation not the living person. TarnishedPathtalk 02:59, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I wouldn't consider this a negative aspect about him. It was the South African organizers being Lethal Weapon II villains.Crisco 1492 mobile (talk) 03:21, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Point taken. I still think something from that set should be put back to entertain the above date request.--Launchballer 03:26, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You absolutely butchered my former name, but that's fine. I don't mind, it'll have it's glory day eventually. :) EF5 19:52, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's a straight choice between Florentina Holzinger and Apricot dress of Jacqueline Bouvier Kennedy. I wrote the hook for Holzinger, so the dress it is. I'd still need another pair of eyes for the song hook.--Launchballer 03:49, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I'll swap it after I've slept.--Launchballer 03:52, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I ended up using Charles J. M. Gwinn as the only one that was both clear at a small size and had been expressly approved at the nom.--Launchballer 12:50, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Swapped the top two hooks in queues 6 and 7.--Launchballer 19:49, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edward W. Gantt

[edit]

This is a recent GA promotion of mine. I think it has some really good DYK potential - an American slaveholder, pro-secession firebrand, and Confederate officer who later defected to the Union and after the Civil War worked with the Freedman's Bureau to improve the lives of former slaves. For various IRL reasons, I'm not going to have the time/energy to nominate this myself, so I'm sticking this out here in case anyone else thinks they can make an interesting hook out of it. Hog Farm Talk 03:37, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hog Farm: ... that Edward W. Gantt went from owning slaves to speaking out against the practice? You'd need an end-of-sentence citation for the first half of that though.--Launchballer 10:50, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Hog Farm or ... that Edward W. Gantt was a Confederate soldier who defected to the Union during the American Civil War? TarnishedPathtalk 11:35, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominated, with the caveat that I can't see all of the sources.--Launchballer 13:46, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can't see the sources either but I'm going to AGF given it's a GA. TarnishedPathtalk 13:59, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Launchballer & TarnishedPath, this Wikipedia library link https://muse-jhu-edu.wikipedialibrary.idm.oclc.org/pub/189/edited_volume/chapter/2024970 is the chapter cited. The page range should start at page 64 (fn. 17 in the article). Page 66 is where his neighbors go on off on him in ways that are really of the time ("Most astonishing of all is Gantt on negro slavery. He is done with it. He swings off to the rankest abolitionism.") I think the citations in the article (citing different pages for different parts of the paragraph) are clear, but if it's ambigiuous for the hook fact, a citation for pages 64-68 could be added to the lead where the hook fact is stated. Rjjiii (talk) 18:56, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know/Preparation area 1

[edit]

Rei Nakashima

[edit]
I promoted this, so I can't help - but I will do the other two in the morning.--Launchballer 22:18, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yen and Ai-Lee

[edit]

Qian Jin Bao

[edit]
I can't see anything wrong with either.--Launchballer 13:01, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know/Preparation area 2

[edit]

The Children's Book of Virtues

[edit]
Looks good to me.--Launchballer 03:11, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Veiqia

[edit]

Wikipedia:Recent additions date error

[edit]

The hooks in Wikipedia:Recent additions are out of step. The DYKs for yesterday, 23 November, are listed at Wikipedia:Recent additions#24 November 2024, though the DYK notification on the relevant talk pages point correctly to #23 November 2024. Could this be fixed please? — Voice of Clam (talk) 08:49, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

right now, the way the bot is programmed, sets are archived according to the time they're taken off the Main Page :) theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 09:47, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
At present the headers produced by the bot do not match the links produced by {{DYK talk}}, so one or the other needs fixing. — Voice of Clam (talk) 09:54, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've brought this up before, but apparently it's a feature and not a bug. Still can't get my head around it. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:21, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
An article which I nominated for DYK, the bot didn't add the notice for some reason, so I did it manually. Same to my talk page JuniperChill (talk) 11:25, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Caused by this edit. (I believe there was talk of moving hooks within sets using PSHAW?)--Launchballer 12:21, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It makes some more sense if you expect DYK to sometimes be updated four times per day and sometimes only once every three days: you don't automatically know when the set that has been just archived has been put on the Main Page, but you do know what time it is now. (Having said that, I have reported this same issue as a bug before, so I certainly feel with the OP on this). —Kusma (talk) 14:05, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For the latest conversation on this, check out Special:Permalink/1216864813#Main page DYK now and Wikipedia:Recent_additions/2024/March#27 March 2024 don't match?. This conversation implies it's a bot issue, when the issues holding up progress are around community consensus - please see the linked conversation. Shubinator (talk) 00:26, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Christmas DYK sets

[edit]
A. krampus living in Brazil

With Christmas just over four weeks away, I think this is a good time to ask: does DYK want to do sets for Christmas Eve and Christmas Day?

If yes, here are some potential hooks that can be used:

In addition, these articles are at WP:GAN and could potentially be used as Christmas hooks:

Thoughts about creating this set are welcome below. Z1720 (talk) 15:38, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent idea. I did actually see the Christmas Invasion in prep and wondered why it wasn't being saved. Pinging @DoctorWhoFan91, Piotrus, DimensionalFusion, Thriley, and Grimes2: who are involved with the first two noms. (I've been putting off expanding Piri & Tommy for over a year and they did a track called "Christmas Time" if that's of any use?)--Launchballer 15:56, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Launchballer: Nominate it when its ready: if we decide not to use it for this set, the article will still be better. Z1720 (talk) 16:51, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's fine with me - I can review any new XMAS hook if pinged. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:09, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Launchballer: I'm not really familiar with DYK- should I add somewhere that it should be saved for Christmas (I will read the instructions to DYK more comprehensively later). @Z1720: Great idea. Also, I'm working on another Christmas special- if it gets nominated and passed by then, I can nominate that for DYK too. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 11:26, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, what someone needs to do is pull the nom, leave a note, and put it in WP:SOHA. I've done that.--Launchballer 11:39, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Christmas hooks should go into the "Special occasions" section at the bottom of the WP:DYKN page. Thanks guys! Gatoclass (talk) 14:11, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, they should go into the "Special occasions" section at the top of the WP:DYKNA page (direct link: WP:SOHA), and only once they're approved. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:37, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

While not a "Christmassy" hook, it would be nice if Template:Did you know nominations/HMT Night Hawk could run on Christmas Day for the 110th anniversary of her sinking - Dumelow (talk) 20:17, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dumelow: Since the hook mentions Christmas, I think it is appropriate for the set. It will also help us diversity the setZ1720 (talk) 01:11, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can work up an article on a Brazilian Krampus species.--Kevmin § 17:51, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Today's DYK (fact that is unlikely to change)

[edit]

Just a heads up that I've edited the current Every Night hook to remove "released ten years ago today", as that violates WP:DYKHOOK: "The hook should include a definite fact that is unlikely to change". RoySmith (talk) 17:13, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@RoySmith: Why? This does not violate the guideline you stated, as the release date is unlikely to change. There is no prohibition to using relative dates, nor should there be. (We had references to "today" or similar all the time during the Olympics). —Kusma (talk) 18:52, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Because that statement is only true today. Tomorrow that statement will be incorrect. RoySmith (talk) 19:03, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Tomorrow that statement will not be on the Main Page. Everywhere it is archived, it is clear that "today" is referring to the day when the hook was on the Main Page. If you find that unclear, please suggest a modification of the wording of the rule so it expresses its spirit more clearly. —Kusma (talk) 19:11, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I thought this would be an uncontroversial change, but I guess not. I've reverted it. RoySmith (talk) 19:29, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. It may be worth discussing how explicit we want to be about anniversaries of this type, but let's do that separately from the "unlikely to change" rule. —Kusma (talk) 19:41, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think we should leave the anniversaries to OTD :-) RoySmith (talk) 19:54, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We've had this sort of hook as an allowed special occasion type ever since I started at DYK, and it's not been seen as a problem before. As Kusma notes, the day it runs/ran will always be a fixed period in time from the original event, and that certainly shouldn't change. OTD deals with famous anniversaries; DYK can be more specialized. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:51, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It might be useful to clarify exactly what the "unlikely to change" guideline even means as it's caused confusion in the past as to how it should be interpreted. Maybe a reword or rephrasing is in order? Like what does "unlikely to change" even mean: at the time the hook runs, or indefinitely? The current wording is vague. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:14, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
theleekycauldron, can I ask if there was any reasoning behind changing "established" to "definite" when the switch to WP:DYKCRIT was made? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:04, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
mm, no, I don't remember there being any intention behind that. Honestly, I think "unlikely to change" should be cut. There's nothing with temporally grounding a hook that only airs for one day, they're all time-indexed in the archives. Besides, we do that all the time when we refer to someone as alive or holding a current job when, inevitably, they won't be doing that at some point. We shouldn't be reporting breaking news at DYK, but the process takes so long I can't imagine how that would happen anyway.
As for "definite facts", I think it's important that we don't air that something can be true, or air an opinion or disputed fact as truth. We have to air either that something is true or that people say it is true (which is not the same thing as a single study suggesting something). But I think that hooks like tomato sandwich are fine, great even. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 11:14, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, what do people think about:
... that the name of Kim Jong Un's daughter has not been publicly disclosed?
in Prep 3? RoySmith (talk) 15:13, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A little trickier, because it's theoretically possible that her name has been disclosed since the article was written - somebody might want to check that just before it hits the main page. Other than that, I would suggest adding the word "preteen", because the really amazing part is that the girl is 11 or 12 years old and still nobody outside the regime knows her name! Gatoclass (talk) 15:43, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Now in queue, although I would never have promoted it in a month of Sundays given that her name could be outed at any minute. I strongly recommend pulling.--Launchballer 13:10, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The spirit should be that its unlikely to change before posting. Otherwise, posts about being the current record holder or regarding current roles would need to be revamped, and would be a departure from past practice. —Bagumba (talk) 01:29, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've gone ahead and boldly changed the wording over at WP:DYKHOOK. Wordsmithing or changes to the phrasing are welcome, but the point I tried to say there is something like "the fact is unlikely to change before or during its DYK appearance, but what happens next is beyond our purview." Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:43, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know/Preparation area 4

[edit]

Ragnvi Torslow

[edit]
@MumphingSquirrel, Crisco 1492, and AirshipJungleman29: I'll give this a proper review in the morning, but I've added a {{cn}} tag to the article and there are two bare URLs, which need to be fixed per WP:DYKCITE.--Launchballer 03:20, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hook also needs an end-of-sentence citation.--Launchballer 11:03, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My concern has been resolved.--Launchballer 22:16, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Muthkwey

[edit]

This hook got pulled a couple weeks back over accessibility issues. There is significant use of Americanist Phonetic Notation, which is an (arguably) non-English script, but one which is widely used in secondary sources (even the popular ones) and has no ready transliteration into the usual English alphabet. Back and forth discussion with the nominator @Ornithoptera: has left me unclear how to proceed. Does anyone have any insight here? Best, Tenpop421 (talk) 20:56, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've readded it to T:TDYK.--Launchballer 21:13, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Celie Ellis Turner

[edit]

Hook situation resolved but I've raised issues with excessive sourcing to contemporary newspapers, would like someone else to take a look and see if my concerns are legitimate. Mach61 05:57, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mach61, I think I have found a date of death and noted it on the talk page. TSventon (talk) 09:37, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Prep 6

[edit]

Carrlyn Bathe

[edit]

@JuniperChill: Just making it clear that the promoted hook (ALT0) was implicitly rejected in the review, and only ALT1 was approved. As I'm the reviewer, I cannot swap out the hook myself, so I'm just leaving this comment. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:12, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. I just thought ALT0 was more interesting but forgot to realise it wasn't suitable as determined by a reviewer. JuniperChill (talk) 10:26, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I tend to strike hooks I haven't approved to avoid this kind of problem. RoySmith-Mobile (talk) 18:31, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Or explicitly state the one approved (in bold). Saying one is "better" doesn't necessarily mean the other one was rejected, and approvers often dont state a preference, effectively deferring to the promoter's judgement. —Bagumba (talk) 01:40, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/HMS Unruffled

[edit]

Hello, I am requesting more eyes on my review for Template:Did you know nominations/HMS Unruffled. I am concerned that the use of a self-published source to accomplish the almost 5x expansion for the nomination does not meet our strict RS/SPS criteria. Thank you. Viriditas (talk) 20:52, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Queue 3

[edit]

Symonds St Public Conveniences and Former Tram Shelter

[edit]

A minor point possibly, but the hook and article claim doesn't quite match the source, which describes it as "the first standalone street toilets in Auckland to contain facilities for women as well as men" (emphasis mine). So possibly there could have been women's toilets elsewhere before this, but not in the street. Also, I'm not really sure what "standalone" means in this context. Pinging @TarnishedPath, Panamitsu, and JuniperChill: who were involved with the hook.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:40, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Amakuru, thanks for raising this. This is due to my sloppy writing and this should have been picked up earlier. The word street, and the fact that the toilets also contained men's facilitates should certainly be included in the hook.
Including that I would suggest "... that the first standalone street toilets to cater to both men and women in Auckland were converted into a male-only facility during the Second World War?
As per standalone, my reading from the source, is that the toilets were not incidental to some other purpose. That the toilets were the raison d'existence. To me this is conveyed in the sentence from the source "Also incorporating a public transport shelter" which implies that the public transport shelter was incidental or ancillary. TarnishedPathtalk 13:48, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TarnishedPath: great, thanks. I'll update accordingly. Please could you update the article to match? Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 14:42, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Done I've updated the article and the hook.  — Amakuru (talk) 21:09, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Queue 4

[edit]

Old City of Gaza and Old City of Nablus

[edit]

I don't think either of these articles can be said to satisfy WP:DYKCOMPLETE ("articles that fail to deal adequately with the topic are likely to be rejected" as there really isn't enough detail to get a full picture of the topics. For example, the history sectino of Old City of Gaza mentions nothing at all between 1516 and the 2023–24 conflict (and even that is only covered in a single sentence). Similarly, the history of Old City of Nablus has almost nothing since antiquity, other than mention of 1202 and 1927 earthquakes. For a part of the world which has a very rich history with frequent upheavals over the centuries, I would expect considerably more detail than this before they could be considered main page ready. Pinging @Onceinawhile, Launchballer, and AirshipJungleman29:  — Amakuru (talk) 13:09, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The hook is not supported by the articles. The Old City of Gaza article mentions only one period of damage caused by Israel (it does mention 3,000 years of other invasions, but does not talk about damage there). The Old City of Nablus has a relevant sentence in the lead (but not the body?) although it's worded in a very different manner, and I'm not sure is fully supported by the quote in the source (the only place in the article with the word "invasion"). Also, as Amakuru notes, both areas with an extensive history. The most interesting thing about them, that we choose to devote their main page mention to, is that they were damaged in recent wars? CMD (talk) 14:05, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
These articles are about the "old" cities of, not the cities themselves. There may not be that much in the historical record that pertains specifically to the old cities as opposed to the cities generally. If this complaint hadn't been made, I personally doubt that I would have thought for a moment that they weren't comprehensive enough. The Gaza one has an interesting section on neighbourhoods and a list of landmarks, the Nablus one has sections on landmarks, architecture and conservation, and both articles have copious images. Neither of them look "unfinished" to me, though like everything they can probably be improved upon. Gatoclass (talk) 14:16, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How can an old town, the historic heart of these cities, have no recorded history between 1516 and 2023? I'm sorry, but that's just absurd. Coupled with CMD's point about the hook not representing the state of the article either, my opinion is we should just close these as rejected. At the very least it needs to go back to the nom. page for a rethink of the hook and expansion of the history sections. It's possible these articles don't even need to exist at all... other famous old towns such as Dubrovnik don't seem to have their own articles, and any relevant information about the landmarks can easily enough go in the main city page...  — Amakuru (talk) 14:39, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, for one thing, the Ottoman Empire was in control of the Middle East for the 500 years before WWI, and it's often said the whole region atrophied during that period. So maybe there just wasn't a lot going on.
As for whether or not they should have their own articles, I have no opinion but there is nothing to stop you putting them up for a merge if you think so.
Again, as for the hook, I wasn't addressing that, I was addressing the original suggestion that the articles didn't meet DYKCOMPLETE. DYKCOMPLETE is really there to ensure that articles that hit the main page are not an embarrassment to Wikipedia, and I very much doubt we'd get any complaints about either of these.
But since you seem adamant about this, sure, return them to DYKN, put them up for a merge if you like, and give the authors a chance to address the concerns. Gatoclass (talk) 15:01, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
minus Replaced. See Template:Did you know nominations/Old City of Gaza for further discussion.  — Amakuru (talk) 21:09, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ragnvi Torslow

[edit]

I have put an orange tag for {{One source}} on this article as it has a very large reliance on the source [1], currently number [3]. The entirety of the "Early life" and "Sporting career" sections is cited to that, and the majority of the other two sections too. This makes me worried that large parts of the article are likely to be WP:Close paraphrasing... It seems like it might need some more sources added in and if necessary the text rewritten so it doesn't look like a copy of the [3] source. It's always possible I've missed something here though, so do holler if so. Pinging @MumphingSquirrel, Crisco 1492, and AirshipJungleman29: who were involved in the hook.  — Amakuru (talk) 17:23, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that this breaches WP:TRANSVIO, and apologise for not noticing it. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:29, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
minus Replaced. See Template:Did you know nominations/Ragnvi Torslow for further discussion.  — Amakuru (talk) 21:09, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know/Preparation area 1

[edit]
  • ... that Oliver Hutchinson was the subject of the first successful live demonstration (pictured) of the television on 26 January 1926?

As discussed at Template:Did you know nominations/Oliver Hutchinson I had deliberately worded it as "Oliver Hutchinson (pictured)" rather than "demonstration (pictured)" as I am not sure when the photograph was taken (except that it was published in June 1926). It is the first photograph taken of a television image but not necessarily taken during the demonstration of 26 January 1926. Also, I included the full date in the hope that it might run on its anniversary; I am more than happy for it to run whenever but you can probably trim the full date to just "in 1926" - Dumelow (talk) 18:27, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The thing is, January 26, 2024 is way beyond the six-week maximum for special occasion hooks, given that the nomination was on November 16. If the January 26 date is to be granted, it first needs to be discussed here per WP:IAR and WP:SOHA. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:20, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Older nominations needing DYK reviewers

[edit]

The previous list was archived yesterday afternoon, so I've created a new list of 31 nominations that need reviewing in the Older nominations section of the Nominations page, covering everything through October 30. We have a total of 296 nominations, of which 108 have been approved, a gap of 188 nominations that has increased by 10 over the past 7 days. Thanks to everyone who reviews these and any other nominations!

More than one month old

Other nominations

Please remember to cross off entries, including the date, as you finish reviewing them (unless you're asking for further review), even if the review was not an approval. Please do not remove them entirely. Many thanks! BlueMoonset (talk) 05:01, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know&oldid=1259866870"