Jump to content

Template talk:Did you know

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
DYK queue status

There is currently 1 filled queue. Admin assistance in moving preps is requested.

To discuss the content or layout of the Template:Did you know page itself, go to Wikipedia talk:Did you know.
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}}
Skip to top
Skip to bottom
For instructions on how to nominate an article, see Template:DYK nomination header § Instructions for nominators.
"Template:Did you know nominations" redirects here. For the list of approved nominations, see Template talk:Did you know/Approved.

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
September 27 1
September 28 1
October 7 1 1
October 8 1
October 9 1
October 13 4 1
October 15 4 1
October 16 2 1
October 17 1
October 18 5 3
October 19 3 2
October 20 2
October 22 3 1
October 23 2 1
October 24 2 1
October 25 2 1
October 27 1
October 28 3
October 30 4 2
October 31 7 4
November 1 7 5
November 2 8 6
November 3 10 6
November 4 7 4
November 5 8 5
November 6 3 2
November 7 8 5
November 8 7 3
November 9 6 4
November 10 8 4
November 11 7 6
November 12 4 2
November 13 6 1
November 14 7 5
November 15 9 5
November 16 5 3
November 17 6 3
November 18 15 13
November 19 12 5
November 20 10 9
November 21 13 7
November 22 10 5
November 23 5 3
November 24 3 1
November 25 2
November 26 5
November 27 4
November 28 2
November 29 5
November 30 3
December 1 7 1
December 2 5
December 3 4
December 4 4 1
December 5 1
Total 276 133
Last updated 07:30, 5 December 2024 UTC
Current time is 07:36, 5 December 2024 UTC [refresh]

Instructions for nominators

[edit]
Shortcut

If this is your first nomination, please read the DYK rules before continuing. Further information can be found at the DYK guidelines.

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). Because of WP:DYKTIMEOUT, a nomination should be reviewed within two months since the reviewer/promoter may agree to reject and close an unpromoted hook after that time has passed.

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]
Main page: Wikipedia:Did you know/Reviewing guide

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.
  • After the nomination is approved, a bot will automatically list the nomination page on Template talk:Did you know/Approved.

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.

Advanced procedures

[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: .
  2. Check to make sure basic review requirements were completed.
    • Any outstanding issue following 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.

Wanna skip all this fuss? Install WP:PSHAW instead! Does most of the heavy lifting for ya :)

  1. For hooks held for specific dates, refer to "Local update times" section on DYK Queue.
    • 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.
    • Make sure there's a space between ... and that, and a ? at the end.
    • 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.
    • 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. did you know, e.g that king jaja opobo was a great warrior, who fought the Ashanti the war in Ghana, a war the British could not accomplished.

Nominations

[edit]

Older nominations

[edit]

Articles created/expanded on September 27

[edit]

Phoebe Plummer

( Comment or view )
Created by Launchballer (talk) and Folkezoft (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 253 past nominations.

Launchballer 03:13, 2 October 2024 (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: Done.

Overall: Ooh, a quadruple hook. All of the articles are new enough, long enough, and well cited. There are a few places where phrasing could be a bit more neutral (I feel like inspired would be better than empowered, for example), but those may also be stylstic considerations. Earwig isn't happy, but it's the large block quote that speaks to Plummer's inspiration in that instance. Ideally Hehir's article would have a bit more on his early life, but if the sources aren't talking about it, rather difficult. (Minor quibble: the source says "unfortunately" rather than "unfortunate", but I think it works here).  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 19:27, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This has been sitting near the top of Approved for over a week. What else do I have to do to get this promoted? (For the record, I believe "unfortunately" --> "unfortunate" is covered by MOS:SIC.)--Launchballer 02:04, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not entirely sure that Holland in particular meets the independent notability standards of WP:CRIMINAL. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:03, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
She's a lot more borderline than Plummer, I'll admit that. From memory, there's significant coverage of her role in Politico at least and this Prospect piece was what clinched it for me, but I will of course take another look later.--Launchballer 16:30, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Since we are dealing with a BLP, I think we should veer on the side of safety as described in WP:CRIMINAL. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:02, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've had another look and I believe Holland meets WP:CRIMINAL#unusual crime.--Launchballer 00:16, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll wait for another promoter's opinion. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:44, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@AirshipJungleman29: This nomination is over two months old. I still believe Holland meets WP:CRIMINAL, but is it worth posting at WT:DYK (though arguably this'll get another review when it's queued anyway)?--Launchballer 14:30, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, why not? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:12, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Posted there.--Launchballer 03:00, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have started an AfD. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:29, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Articles created/expanded on September 28

[edit]

Old City of Gaza, Old City of Nablus

( Comment or view )
( Article history links:
)
Church of Saint Porphyrius and the Katib al-Wilaya Mosque
Church of Saint Porphyrius and the Katib al-Wilaya Mosque
  • Source: Awad, Jihad (2017-01-15). "Conserving the Palestinian Architectural Heritage". International Journal of Heritage Architecture: Studies, Repairs and Maintenance. 1 (3): 454. doi:10.2495/ha-v1-n3-451-460. ISSN 2058-833X. The old city of Nablus has suffered, probably more than any other Palestinian city, from the massive invasion by Israeli forces during the second uprising which started in 2000. Many restoration projects were previously completed by the municipality but unfortunately destroyed by the Israeli bombing of the old city. Many buildings were heavily damaged by Israeli rockets during April 2002. A project was carried out by UNDP and funded by the Japanese government to rebuild the houses. Then in December of 2003, many houses were again damaged during Israeli military activity. This kept recurring: buildings were repaired and then damaged.
    Mraffko, Clothilde; Forey, Samuel (2024-02-14). "Israeli bombs are wiping out Gaza's heritage and history". Le Monde.fr. Retrieved 2024-09-29. Whether the Israelis act intentionally or not, "the result is effectively the erasure of a heritage and a history. Symbolically, this is important because this is one of the ways in which people are attached to their territory," warned Benoît Tadié, former cultural adviser to the French consulate general in Jerusalem between 2009 and 2013. He takes as an example the Old City of Gaza, which, like much of the north of the enclave, is now a vast field of ruins. "It wasn't just a site, it was also the heart of today's city. The hammam and the Pacha's Palace were extremely popular places. The museum also served as a place of education for schoolchildren," explained Tadié.
Created by Onceinawhile (talk). Number of QPQs required: 2. Nominator has 80 past nominations.

Onceinawhile (talk) 09:57, 29 September 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks Launchballer. All the sources are in the bibliography - let me add in-line citations throughout where they have been missed. I will confirm when done.
On the Jihad Awad source, I am confident that it is reliable - Professor Awad is full professor of architecture, currently head of architecture department at Ajman University, and this paper (a conference submission) is cited in his official University biography page. He subsequently published an article covering a similar topic here. The statement is not difficult to source elsewhere if needed. Onceinawhile (talk) 20:05, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fine by me. Full review needed.--Launchballer 03:19, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WIT Press conferences are scams. That source must absolutely be replaced. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 00:34, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Onceinawhile: Please address the above.--Launchballer 00:18, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Launchballer thank you for bringing this to my attention. I have removed the source referred to above and replaced it with this: Abujidi, Nurhan; Verschure, Han (2006-07-01). "Military Occupation as Urbicide by Construction and Destruction: The Case of Nablus, Palestine". The Arab World Geographer. 9 (2). Allen Press: 206. ISSN 1480-6800. Given the large number of frequent Israeli army invasions of the Old Town, the so called Operation Defensive Shield in April 2002 is considered the heaviest single operation. It caused damage to 47.5% of the housing blocks that structure the Old Town's urban fabric… During other invasions, a shift in the mechanism and location of destruction is evident. Highly focused, limited-scale demolitions targeting specific sections of the city were identified. The size and scale of destruction are not always determined by the type of invasion. For example, the scale of destruction resulting from the overnight incursion of January 2005 was larger than that of the short-term invasion of January 2004, which lasted 10 days. Moreover, a repeated rhythm in invading and destroying the same buildings during the several invasions was registered over the past four years, with each invasion accompanied by destruction, looting, and vandalism.
Onceinawhile (talk) 23:02, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine. I still see unsourced content in both the articles though.--Launchballer 11:53, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @Launchballer: I added the remaining sources. Both articles are ready for a full review.Onceinawhile (talk) 14:27, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You're just in time, I was about to mark this for closure! I will review this within the next 24 hours.--Launchballer 14:28, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Long enough, new enough. I don't see any reason why this might deserve a maintenance template, and the hook checks out and the QPQ is done. This is fine, although I would invite promoters to read Wikipedia talk:Did you know/Archive 203#Negative Israel hooks.--Launchballer 11:30, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Onceinawhile, Launchballer, AirshipJungleman29, Gatoclass, and Chipmunkdavis: I've reopened this following discussion at [1] there was a bit of disagreement, but IMHO the article does not satisfy WP:DYKCOMPLETE, and CMD notes that the hook fact is not directly mentioned either.  — Amakuru (talk) 21:11, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Amakuru: understood and thanks for this. I agree with you, and was thinking about this history section when drafting and reviewing. From memory, the chosen areas of history followed the Arabic article versions. It's a difficult balance, faced by all our Old City and Historic district articles, as we don't want to duplicate the entire pre-modern history section of the much more fulsome main articles. Most such articles provide a light overview of the history, and instead focus on the cultural and architectural legacy.
I will have a go at building out - grateful for your comments. Onceinawhile (talk) 07:52, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Onceinawhile: thanks. I do know what you mean... It's tricky to know how to balance content across intertwined topics. In theory each article is standalone, but we don't want redundancy all the same. A broad-bush overview of the major points across the centuries would be sufficient here anyway. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 08:08, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Onceinawhile: The nomination has already timed out as of today, so if the issues can't be addressed promptly then unfortunately the nomination will be closed as unsuccessful. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:02, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Narutolovehinata5: thanks for the ping. I finished Amakuru’s suggested improvements at Old City of Gaza two days ago, and have just finished at Old City of Nablus. Perhaps Amakuru could take a quick look and confirm if any further comments or changes are needed? Onceinawhile (talk) 09:00, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on October 8

[edit]

Diane Leather

(
)
  • ... that Diane Leather was the first woman to run a mile in under five minutes?
5x expanded by Oldelpaso (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

Oldelpaso (talk) 22:24, 14 October 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • Can we do better than this? If any woman has run the mile in under 5 minutes, someone had to be the first, and the hook doesn't provide any more information. (t · c) buidhe 23:51, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are you saying a world record isn't notable and/or hook worthy? Or are you asking for more context such as a link to Mile run world record progression? I was trying to keep the hook as succinct as possible. Oldelpaso (talk) 02:01, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Another issue is that the hook proposed is a "first" hook, which per WP:DYKHOOK usually needs exceptionally strong sourcing given the exceptional claim involved (how are we sure that no other woman before Leather ran a mile in under five minutes?) Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:21, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article includes cites describing her in those terms from the World Athletics website (the organisation that ratifies world records in the discipline, formerly known as the IAAF)[2], the BBC [3], Guardian [4], NYT [5], Washington Post [6] and others. Oldelpaso (talk) 21:37, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I could work in some reference to Roger Bannister in the hook, as his far more well-known first sub-four minute mile occurred the same month and thus they are frequently compared, but I'd rather not. It was how overlooked Leather's achievement was compared to the male equivalent that prompted me to expand the article in the first place! Oldelpaso (talk) 21:55, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A bit of a late comment, but ALT1 is probably a lot better because it's not a "first" hook and is thus more likely to be accurate. Plus it's also arguably more intriguing than a simple "first" hook. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:16, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Oldelpaso: Please address the above. For the record, I'd truncate ALT1 at "world record".--Launchballer 00:58, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are multiple sentences or paragraphs where the sourcing is unclear. Please see the {{citation needed}} tags added. Also, it appears that this article has not yet had a full review. Does any other user commenting here intend to? Flibirigit (talk) 22:36, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Articles created/expanded on October 9

[edit]

Musa al-Gharbi

(
)
Musa al-Gharbi
Musa al-Gharbi
  • ... that Musa al-Gharbi has argued since the 2016 election of Donald Trump that media outlets including The New York Times opinion page and MSNBC have failed to understand his supporters?
  • Source: "For the past four years, Al-Gharbi tried to tell anyone who would listen that Trump supporters did not in fact fit the sociological profile offered on The New York Times opinion page or on MSNBC’s nightly pearl-clutching roundtables." Tablet
Created by Thriley (talk) and Oganguly (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 148 past nominations.

Thriley (talk) 07:16, 18 October 2024 (UTC).[reply]

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

Hook eligibility:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Regards, Aafi (talk) 15:57, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Although all checks are okay, I am not happy with how the proposed hook is worded? 183 characters is quite close to 200. Could you please suggest a few more hooks? Regards, Aafi (talk) 15:57, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Thriley: Please address the above.--Launchballer 12:20, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Aafi: is there something wrong with the hook aside from its length? Thriley (talk) 17:01, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

At a glance, I'd lose "including The New York Times opinion page and MSNBC" and "since the 2016 election of Donald Trump" for concision, obviously replacing "his" with "Donald Trump's". (I wouldn't wikilink "his supporters" per MOS:EGG.)--Launchballer 21:26, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:DYKTRIM, I was thinking along the lines of ALT1a: ... that Musa al-Gharbi has argued that media outlets have failed to understand supporters of Donald Trump?.--Launchballer 22:26, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am good with Launchballer proposed Alt1a, if Thriley doesn't have any objections to this, I would be glad to pass this one. Regards, Aafi (talk) 07:28, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Alt1a is not accurate. He is calling out specific media outlets. Thriley (talk) 12:41, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What if we tweak it to something like, "several media outlets", which could make the case easily? Regards, Aafi (talk) 12:54, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ALT1b: ... that Musa al-Gharbi has argued that several media outlets have failed to understand supporters of Donald Trump?--Launchballer 12:57, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This hook is too broad. He is specifically calling out liberal media outlets. Thriley (talk) 13:04, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The source doesn't mention that either The New York Times or MSNBC are liberal and I think their leanings are extraneous and would qualify for trimming.--Launchballer 03:08, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Right. I would also suggest removing the image until we have permissions. Regards, Aafi (talk) 12:31, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Both of the outlets are part of the class of "symbolic capitalists" al-Gharbi describes in his book. To specify the outlets is essential. There's probably a better hook I can come up with. Will add it in the next 12 hours. Thriley (talk) 16:30, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Articles created/expanded on October 13

[edit]

Elin Falk

(
)
Elin Falk
Elin Falk
  • ... that Elin Falk revolutionised the teaching of gymnastics in Swedish schools in the early twentieth century?
  • Reviewed:
Created by MumphingSquirrel (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

MumphingSquirrel (talk) 21:01, 17 October 2024 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Yes
  • Interesting: No - discuss, please offer an ALT or two
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
QPQ: None required.

Overall: Great to see this article. I have questions about the choice and use of some sources. I think these can all be corrected, and some discussion may be beneficial. ProfGray (talk) 19:45, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hook: "revolutionised" seems laudatory and afaik that word is not in the source; "reform" is used and seems more NPOV. Would help to have a hook that says something about the reforms, such as from a military to a more playful style. Or about how the reforms were met with anger and condemnation.
  • Posture not mentioned in source cited, but perhaps "correcting body position" is meant?
  • Primary sources are at current footnotes #1, #4. And #7 is by the subject herself. #2 unclear. Second opinion would be helpful here.
  • Source #5 links to a WP article IINM, seems to need correction.
  • It'd be helpful to find more independent sources about her.
  • Overly praising POV includes: "Like so many innovative thinkers, Falk met opposition in her lifetime, with full recognition and appreciation," "Newspapers became involved, publishing condemnation of the exercises without having read about them, let alone tried them" (i.e., critical of her critics), praising: "was as critical of herself as of others, jetisoning any of her ideas which did not work as she had hoped," ProfGray (talk) 20:11, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@MumphingSquirrel: Please address the above.--Launchballer 12:21, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've been gradually working through the points above, editied the text and linked #5 to where it should have gone. Added a number of academic references. Alternative hook below. Let me know if you think anything further needs to be done. Thanks for helful pointers. ALT1: ... that Elin Falk caused a national controversy in 1913 with her suggestions for reforming how gymnastics was taught in Swedish schools? MumphingSquirrel (talk) 18:49, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anastasia Somoza

(
)
Created by Innisfree987 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 40 past nominations.

Innisfree987 (talk) 09:30, 13 October 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • Article is new enough, long enough, and within policy. No copyright violation detected. The hook however is not usable. “Mainstreaming” is an American special education term that only educators from the United States and American parents of special needs students are likely to be familiar with. As such it fails WP:DYKCRIT/ WP:DYKHOOKSTYLE for requiring specialized knowledge and not targeting a global audience. Additionally it is not at all clear the twin sisters are themselves disabled so the hook even to an American audience is confusing. We need a different hook.4meter4 (talk) 17:01, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. I still think it is a term not familiar to most people and requires specialized knowledge.4meter4 (talk) 22:36, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm from England and we use it over here. I think this passes WP:DYKINT.--Launchballer 12:07, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Philippines here and while I do agree the use of "mainstream" is rather specialist (and I'm not sure if we use that word in that sense here), the context should be rather clear given the earlier mention of "mainstream". It's possible a different word to "mainstream" could be used, but the intended meaning seems accurate at least. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 03:54, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Given, my difference of opinion with two editors, I will allow a new editor to review this.4meter4 (talk) 15:09, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Would changing "mainstream" to "normal" or "regular" address concerns, or are such terms considered loaded or pejorative in this context? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:11, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For what it's worth, even if you don't understand the precise technical meaning of "mainstream", I think from context it's clear that the sister is educated separately and the subject is fighting that. Would it help to have the hook say "her special needs sister" to provide additional context? I think "normal" or "regular" comes off pejorative in this context. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:36, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nazi crimes against children

(
)
Created by Piotrus (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 530 past nominations.

Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:09, 13 October 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • Hellow Piotrus, review is as follows: article created within 7 days of nomination, hook is good, article is well-written, QPQ done, offline source accepted in good faith. Nihil obstat. ~Darth StabroTalk • Contribs 02:41, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Piotrus, I don't think this meets WP:DYKCOMPLETE, it seems generally focused on Poland. I would expect more coverage of children from other occupied territories too. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:42, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • @AirshipJungleman29: I thought it was generally focused on euthanasia (of disabled or sick children)? About half of the article is about that, Poland is primarily covered under shorter 'collective punishment'. Based on sources I found this seems to be due, and I think I link to all subarticles. Based on my lit review for this (note I am not aiming to get this to GA, too depressing) the sources focus primarily on euthanasia, with plight of Jewish and Polish children discussed by fewer sources; anything else seems to be pretty fringe (or at least, I did not find any sources focusing on other topics, nor Wikipedia articles to summarize in relevant subcategories). PS. I see there was also one more paragraph mostly about Poland in 'other crimes', but I stand by my view that this reflects what the sources say. That said, I realized I forgot to write up about Nazi child soldiers - I've added a paragraph. I expect more could be said, but this seems very poorly researched; it took me half an hour before I found a reliable source with some data on this (I couldn't even locate a single academic article that would cover this...). PS. I've added a bit more content, mostly about non-Polish topics. I expect more could be added, but I cannot locate sources (for example, surely Nazis used collective punishment in USSR and murdered children there, but I am unable to locate any work covering this - perhaps it requires a Russian speaker to query Russian or other Cyrillic sources). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:59, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on October 15

[edit]

Common fixed point problem

(
)
  • Source: "The purpose of this paper is to answer Dyer's question in the negative by the construction of a pair of commuting functions which have no fixed point in common. [...] This paper is a condensation of the author's 1967 doctoral dissertation", from a paper by Boyce . "It has been conjectured that any two continuous functions f, g mapping the closed unit interval into itself which commute under composition [...] must have a common fixed point [...] Chapter 2 defines a pair of functions which show that the conjecture is false", from Huneke's 1967 PhD dissertation.
  • Reviewed:
  • Comment: If the reviewer doesn't have ProQuest access, I can provide a copy of Huneke's dissertation over email.
Created by WillisBlackburn (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

jlwoodwa (talk) 19:15, 16 October 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • Starting review...
  • Article is new enough and long enough
  • Sources all appear to be WP:RS and for the most part, adequately cited with in-line citations. There are however two {{citation needed}} tags which need to be addressed.
  • Earwig calls out a few phrases here and there but they all look like technical terms which can't be rephrased, so no problems there.
  • Extra brownie points for taking an exceptionally technical article and writing a hook which will appeal to most readers. RoySmith (talk) 22:16, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jlwoodwa: just want to make sure you saw this. RoySmith (talk) 01:18, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@RoySmith: Thanks for the ping. I've removed the first statement tagged with {{citation needed}} (since WillisBlackburn said on the talk page that it turned out to be false), and added a citation for the other statement. jlwoodwa (talk) 01:58, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at this closer, I see that there's still some statements that need citations. I've added some more {{citation needed}} tags. My apologies for not picking up on this the first time. RoySmith (talk) 02:06, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jlwoodwa: please see the above. RoySmith (talk) 14:21, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like the claim in the hook is sourced to the dissertations themselves, so there's no source actually saying they were independent, which sounds like a WP:SYNTH problem to me. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 11:16, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Secondary sources agree that Boyce and Huneke came up with their solutions independently. For example, from the Brown article: "It seems appropriate that a question that independently occurred to more than one person should have been answered independently by two people." The McDowell article: "The Dyer/Shields/Dubins/Isbell conjecture (hereafter referred to as the common fixed-point conjecture) was independently settled in the negative by William M. Boyce [7] and Huneke [22] in 1967." The McCrosky dissertation: "Finally, in 1967, the unit interval was shown to not have the common fixed point property by two men working independently on their dissertations." And of course Huneke's published paper (separate from his disseration) says "Simultaneous to and independent of the author's preceding work, W. M. Boyce [1], [2] constructed essentially the same solution." WillisBlackburn (talk) 22:33, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ratnākara

(
)
  • ... that Ratnākara may have invented the poetic device of vakrokti ("verbal distortion")?
  • ALT1: ... that Ratnākara's Vakroktipañcāśikā contains fifty verses of dialogue between Śiva and Pārvatī, employing the poetic device of vakrokti ("verbal distortion")?
  • ALT2: ... that a now-lost chronicle of the kings of Kashmir, covering two "gaps" in Kalhaṇa's Rājataraṅginī, is attributed to Ratnākara?
  • Reviewed:
Created by TryKid (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

TryKid [dubious – discuss] 07:48, 15 October 2024 (UTC).[reply]

It might be better to just focus on ALT2 as ALT1 still seems to rely on specialist knowledge and not something that's self-evident from a reading. ALT2 is still slightly specialist but it's at least more understandable. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:02, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The nominator has been given well over a month to propose a usable hook. The current hooks require specialized knowledge and fail the WP:DYKHOOKSTYLE guideline. Given how much time has passed since this issue was pointed out by Narutolovehinata5 to TryKid, it is time to pass on this nomination.4meter4 (talk) 18:01, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

4meter4, my understanding was that Narutolovehinata5 had passed on the review for someone else to do it, not that I was being asked to make a new hook! That's not what I expected "Symbol redirect vote 4" to mean. It's fine if it's too late to salvage this, but Narutolovehinata5 and other reviewers, please be clearer about this stuff, and clearly state what is expected from the nominators. TryKid [dubious – discuss] 18:44, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TryKid I'm happy to hold off on a rejection if you still wish to try and propose a usable hook. Narutolovehinata5 has raised a WP:DYKHOOKSTYLE objection, which I agree with. You need to propose a hook that anyone can understand which means contextualizing the term "Ratnākara" (most people won't know what or who this is; ie its not clear this is even a person in the current hooks). I also would avoid using too many foreign language terms or names. "Kalhaṇa's Rājataraṅginī" for example will have no obvious context or meaning to the average English speaking person. You need to try and find a hook fact that someone who knows nothing about India or its history or its literature or its languages can understand. Best.4meter4 (talk) 18:56, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TryKid here is an example of a hook that would be understandable to an English reader: ...that the poet Ratnākara is credited with authoring a now-lost chronicle of the kings of Kashmir that fulfills two gaps in the historical chronicle of the north-western part of Indian sub-continent? Best.4meter4 (talk) 19:19, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
4meter4, I thank you for the suggestion, and for allowing the nom more time despite the initial miscommunication. How about ALT 0a: ... that the poet Ratnākara may have invented the Sanskrit-language poetic device of "willful misconstrucal" (vakrokti)?
I understand it's not immediately clear what "willful misconstrucal" is to a non-specialist audience, but it would be something that draws the audience in, rather than all of the interesting information being in the hook. The phrase is from the Bronner and McCrea, p.436: "This device, vakrokti – “verbal perversion” or, more literally, “distortive-talk” – is traditionally defined as one speaker’s willful misconstrual of what has been said by another."
If this still fails the "specialised knowledge" criterion, feel free to reject the nomination as you initially intended, I can't really think of anything much better. Articles like this might not be cut-out for DYK. There's a "longest extant Sanskrit mahākāvya" hook, but that already ran with Haravijaya itself. regards, TryKid [dubious – discuss] 20:22, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TryKid I think it reads weirdly but a slight modification based on that quote would be better: ALT 0b: ... that the poet Ratnākara may have invented the Sanskrit-language poetic device of "verbal perversion" (vakrokti)? I think this is hookier because the language is much more provocative. It will grab a reader's attention.4meter4 (talk) 21:17, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@4meter4 I don't think putting up suggestive stuff or innuendos even in a "bait and switch" contexts is a good DYK practice. Any of the other phrases from the paper—distortive talk, willful misconstrucal, intentional misinterpretation, verbal distortion—would be better. regards, TryKid [dubious – discuss] 21:38, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TryKid That's fair. Based on that I think this would work: ALT 0c: ... that the poet Ratnākara may have invented the Sanskrit-language poetic device of "verbal distortion" (vakrokti)?
I am going to have another editor look at this alt since arguably I helped write Alt Oc.4meter4 (talk) 21:47, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just need an editor to approve of Alt Oc.4meter4 (talk) 21:47, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ALT0c fails WP:DYKDEFINITE as it is not a definite fact and would require attribution anyway.--Launchballer 12:13, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Launchballer, are attributed statments allowed on DYK? How about ALT 0d: ... that according to Yigal Bronner and Lawrence McCrea, the poet Ratnākara may have invented the Sanskrit-language poetic device of "verbal distortion" (vakrokti)?
Alternatively, a simpler version of alt2: ALT2b: ... that a now-lost chronicle of the kings of Kashmir is attributed to the author Ratnākara?
Even ALT1b: ... that the Sanskrit-language poem Vakroktipañcāśikā, authored by Ratnākara, employs the poetic device of "willful misconstrucal"? I believe these should be understandable by a lay Western audience. regards, TryKid [dubious – discuss] 16:06, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2018 Batman by-election

(
)
Improved to Good Article status by GraziePrego (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 6 past nominations.

GraziePrego (talk) 03:11, 15 October 2024 (UTC).[reply]

TarnishedPathtalk 06:38, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

— Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 21:16, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Vigilantcosmicpenguin your suggested alt isn't supported by the source you gave, however it is supported by https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-03-17/voters-head-to-polls-for-batman-byelection/9553388. @GraziePrego, what do you think of the suggested alts? Also it appears that you need to do QPQ for one review. TarnishedPathtalk 05:46, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would be happy with either of the suggested Alt hooks, I think I'm happy to let a reviewer choose between them and the original ones I suggested. I have also done a QPQ by reviewing the DYK for Bill Morrow (Australian politician). GraziePrego (talk) 07:03, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies, I'm new to this and wasn't reading all of the nomination. TarnishedPathtalk 03:48, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This nomination has not yet received a full review. Flibirigit (talk) 18:32, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on October 16

[edit]

Lyncoya Jackson

(
)
Jackson adopts Lyncoya
Jackson adopts Lyncoya
  • ... that the adoption of a Muscogee orphan Lyncoya by Andrew Jackson (pictured) was framed by Jackson's political allies as a defense against charges that Jackson was a bloodthirsty Indian killer?
5x expanded by Jengod (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 199 past nominations.

KAVEBEAR (talk) 03:00, 17 October 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Proposed a shorter wording for the original hook. This nomination still needs a full review. Flibirigit (talk) 19:16, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • shorter wording ALT0a looks great to me. TY! jengod (talk) 00:20, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • New and long enough at nomination time. No concerns about sourcing. Earwig flags quotes, but nothing else. That being said, I am concerned about the extent of the quoting in the article. DYKchecker says the article is 2754 words, not counting the block quotes (~2300 if you discount the lead). When you strip out the lengthy inline quotes, it drops to ~1800 words (~1400 without the lead). That's a solid 30% of the article (40% without the lead). Quoting to this extent verges on a copyright issue; even ignoring that, it isn't in line with MOS:QUOTE, which says overuse of quotations isn't encyclopedic writing. At a glance, much of it could be easily paraphrased.
      This isn't a DYK issue, but there is also extensive WP:SANDWICHing of text between images, which makes the block quoting even worse, visually. The newspaper articles should be removed; we're not supposed to include the full text of lengthy primary sources. The plant and the tornado should also be removed as irrelevant. The remaining images should be assessed for placement once that's sorted out.
      With apologies, on the basis of the quoting issues, I don't think this is ready for DYK right now. I have not yet assessed the hook, but I will if the rest is resolved. Courtesy pinging creator Jengod & nominator KAVEBEAR to advise. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 08:27, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • Just to clarify I am not the creator I just expanded it in passing. I have cut some of the images and am working on summarizing all quotes from secondary sources. That said, I agree this article is not ready for the main page. Going into our holiday season, it might be a while before it's up to par. Could we close this nomination for now? Maybe we can revisit sometime next year when it's been further revised and had time to "mature" and develop the deeper flavors. Like good stew! Thanks to everyone engaging with it. You're all lovely. jengod (talk) 13:19, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Articles created/expanded on October 17

[edit]

Rich Romer

(
)
5x expanded by WikiOriginal-9 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 23:24, 18 October 2024 (UTC).[reply]

ALT2 ... that American football player Rich Romer was thrice selected as an All-American by Pizza Hut?
ALT3 ... that following his NFL career, Rich Romer worked in an anti-drugs and anti-drunk driving program?
Even the article's treatment of the Pizza Hut thing is confusing. It mentions both second teams and first teams: is there a difference or are they still called Pizza Hut All-Americans? It also mentions that he was named an All-American by multiple entities and not just Pizza Hut, so limiting it to just Pizza Hut, while accurate, also seems confusing. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:01, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@WikiOriginal-9: Pinging for the above. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:23, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm fine with either of those hooks. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 16:29, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging Cunard and AirshipJungleman29 regarding the new hooks. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 05:08, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Articles created/expanded on October 18

[edit]
The rent strike in Independence, Missouri
The rent strike in Independence, Missouri

2024 Kansas City metropolitan area rent strike

(
)
Moved to mainspace by LunaEclipse (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 14 past nominations.

💽 LunaEclipse 💽 ⚧ 【=◈︿◈=】 00:15, 18 October 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Luo Shiwen

(
)
Luo Shiwen
Luo Shiwen
Created by Crisco 1492 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 691 past nominations.

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:06, 18 October 2024 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

  • Adequate sourcing: No - Much of the article is cited to sources like "Devoting One's Efforts to the Party and the People is the Least of One's Worries——Deeds of Martyr Luo Shiwen", which doesn't speak well to their reliability. There is no consensus that Chinese government published sources are reliable for heroic deeds of party members (see, eg, WP:XINHUA).
  • Neutral: No - Unclear, see above
  • Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing: No - ? Unable to evaluate translation copyvio from Chinese language sources

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Yes
  • Interesting: No - Hook could use improvement. Such underground groups developed in so many locations that political prisoners are jailed together

Image eligibility:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: (t · c) buidhe 04:59, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Buidhe. Thank you for taking a look at this article, though I note that you are supposed to notify the article's creator if you find issues.
Referring to WP:XINHUA, which you mentioned in your review, the quorum mentioned there reads "Caution should be exercised in using this source, extremely so in case of extraordinary claims on controversial subjects or biographies of living people. When in doubt, try to find better sources instead; use inline attribution if you must use Xinhua." Little mentioned in the Luo Xinhua article crosses the bar of "extraordinary claims", and what does cross that bar is specifically attributed to the source (with an indication that it is state-owned). He lived, he did something, he was detained, he was executed. Where these government sources have been used, I have been careful not to use their description of persons whom the CCP has no reason to like (for example, the conflict with Zhang Guotao is cited to Howard rather than the decidedly less neutral CCP sources, and discussion of Xifeng is cited predominantly to a Harvard University Press book). Likewise, I have deliberately excluded politically charged claims such as Luo's father being bankrupted by the high ROC taxes.
As per WP:PARTISAN, "reliable sources are not required to be neutral, unbiased, or objective." WP:CONTEXTMATTERS clarifies that "Each source must be carefully weighed to judge whether it is reliable for the statement being made in the Wikipedia article and is an appropriate source for that content." In this case, the sources are used specifically for basic statements of biography. Where statements were extraordinary, such as Mao and Zhou specifically asking for Luo's release, it has been attributed to the source with an indication of the source's potential bias.
As for the hook, I am deliberately avoiding claims that are sourced exclusively to state-media. How do you feel about:
ALT1 ... that Luo Shiwen (pictured) led a secret cell of the Chinese Communist Party that negotiated better conditions for inmates at their concentration camp?
That ALT is supported entirely by Mühlhahn. Regards,  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:28, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Xinhua is, according to consensus, generally reliable for factual reporting except in areas where the government of China may have a reason to use it for propaganda, but this topic is exactly one where the Chinese government would have an interest in distorting its own history in order to make the CCP look better. Perhaps other reviewers would have a different opinion, but I don't think that Chinese government published sources should be cited so heavily. (In case you are looking for additional sources, this one is accessible via TWL and seems to mention the article subject). (t · c) buidhe 00:48, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think I have Wakeman sitting around somewhere. I'll cite that for a few points, and I can cite some more to the pithy provided by Howard. That being said, a blanket prohibition against mainland Chinese sources (we've been talking about Xinhua, but Sichuan Annals are cited more prevalently, and both the original books and the web edition have the same government ties) for a figure of little interest to KMT historians does seem counter-productive. It may be best to have a third opinion. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:39, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I also don't think there should be a ban on CCP sources for uncontroversial statements. I'll investigate further when my head's a bit clearer.--Launchballer 10:55, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Or indeed, any Chinese government-backed sources; claims should be assessed on their merits. (They probably aren't making up "son of a saltmonger", for example.) @Buidhe: what specific sentences are you objecting to?--Launchballer 13:06, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My interpretation (see above) is that there is a consensus that the Chinese government sources are not reliable where they have an incentive to lie for propaganda purposes. When it comes to the heroic deeds of a Communist party member, there is an obvious incentive for propaganda. This does not apply to basic biographical information that does not reflect positively or negatively on the subject (t · c) buidhe 02:12, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Crisco 1492: Are you able to find other, more reliable sources to verify the information? Z1720 (talk) 15:48, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi Z1720; as I mentioned above, I have attributed all extraordinary claims to non-Party sources, or made it explicit that sources may be biased in the running text. The remainder is, to the best of my assessment, basic biographic data (for example, "At the time, following the May Fourth Movement and in the midst of the New Culture Movement, he and his cousins had begun reading communist publication", cited to the Sichuan Annals). One might object to "inciting more [peasant] uprisings", but given that was the standard MO of the CCP in the 1930s, I don't feel that it meets the extraordinary or heroic threshold.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:00, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at the article, I don't think any of the claims sourced to refs 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 13, 17, 18, or 19 meet the criteria outlined at WP:EXCEPTIONAL.--Launchballer 01:18, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting a reviewer. Right now we seem to be at an impasse.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:22, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Articles created/expanded on October 19

[edit]

Izvestiya Soveta rabochikh i soldatskikh deputatov goroda Askhabada

(
)
  • Source: А. А Росляков. Большевики Туркменистана в борьбе за власть Советов. Туркменское государственное изд-во, 1961. p. 328
Created by Soman (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 406 past nominations.

Soman (talk) 17:35, 19 October 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • Comment: We've had issues with hooks about "firsts", particularly when it comes to newspapers. It's best to avoid superlatives that are difficult to substaniate, but it's also not that interesting. Also, why not have the title in English? RoySmith is working on an essay that explores the idea: First is worst. Viriditas (talk) 20:28, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think there are a few different issues here. I see the argument that RoySmith is trying to make in the draft essay, but at the same time that's a draft essay and not a policy at this stage. Blanket avoidance of any superlatives will have a pretty big impact on the entire DYK process, and whilst I think it fair to reflect on the issues linked to claims of 'first', 'biggest' etc I would not agree to that it should be enforced as a strict rule.
  • One say to perhaps make the hook slightly more interesting would be to rephrase Transcaspian Oblast (unknown to most readers) to 'present-day Turkmenistan'. It is slightly different than to say 'first Bolshevik newspaper in Pskov', it illustrates that the political organization of the movements of the Russian revolution covered what is today many different countries and societies.
  • Another approach for ALT could be to focus on the role of the newspaper in the tensions inside the Ashkhabad Soviet, that the newspaper supposedly published by the Soviet frequently attacked the leadership of the Soviet. But I find it more difficult to construe the sourcing to explicitly state that the newspaper was indeed the organ of the Soviet (in spite of the name), it seemingly was a Bolshevik party organ de facto.
  • In regards to the name, I generally think translating newspaper names is a bad idea. We refer to Le Monde as Le Monde, not The World. We refer to Pravda as Pravda, not Truth. And so forth. With Chinese newspapers there are some cases where it possible to argue to that names like People's Daily could be considered WP:COMMONNAME, although I think that is gradually becoming an anachronism. --Soman (talk) 09:44, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Surely, the paper was known by a nickname that can be used? It seems unlikely that anyone would say, "Hey comrade, did you read the News of the Council of Workers and Soldiers Deputies of the City of Askhabad this morning?" Viriditas (talk) 09:29, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I find 'Известия Асхабадского Совета' being used in some sources. --Soman (talk) 01:07, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Soman: That's a good step forward. Can it be added to the article with the English translation? And can we use the shortened format in the hook? Viriditas (talk) 09:05, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How about ALT1 - "... that Izvestiya Askhabadskogo Soveta was the first Bolshevik newspaper published in present-day Turkmenistan? The alt name added in article now. --Soman (talk) 00:28, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on October 20

[edit]

Mwene Muji

(
)
  • ... that Mwene Muji was a polity in the Congo Basin which declined in the late 19th century, and when the Belgians collected traditions in 1926, grand claims of its once imperial status were dismissed?
  • ALT1 ... that Mwene Muji was a polity in the Congo Basin, and when the Belgians collected traditions in 1926, grand claims of its once imperial status were dismissed?
  • ALT2 ... that the grand claims from the ruler of Mwene Muji of them once having imperial status were dismissed by Belgian colonial authorities?
  • Reviewed:
Created by Kowal2701 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

Kowal2701 (talk) 19:48, 20 October 2024 (UTC).[reply]

@Kowal2701: I've also checked the article and right now it's less than 1500 characters long. DYK requires a minimum of 1500 characters of prose to be accepted. If you can expand the article further so that it meets the guidelines then less us know, but if that is not feasible then unfortunately the nomination will have to be rejected. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:20, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@User:Narutolovehinata5 the hook is 197 words long, and it gives context the fact which is that their grand claims were dismissed. I wouldn't say it summarises the article, just the last few sentences. I can expand it further, I think at the moment it's at 1200 words. Are you sure the hook isn't okay?

Yes, the hook is far too long for DYK, even if it is slightly under the character limit. Perhaps another editor like Launchballer can give some advice on what makes a good hook, especially one that isn't too long. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:50, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@User:Narutolovehinata5 but surely if it's under the character limit then the length is okay?
I’ve added alts, I think I know what you were getting at, that the initial hook had too much information in it and wouldn’t entice the reader to click on the article. I think ALT2 is okay? Kowal2701 (talk) 13:18, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, ALT2 would work. Since the original issues about length and hooks are now addressed this is ready for a full review. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:42, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Głos Kolejarzy Ewakuowanych — Golos Evakuirovannykh Zheleznodorozhnikov

(
)
  • Source: Ludwik Bazylow, Jan Sobczak. Encyklopedia Rewolucji Październikowej. Wiedza Powszechna, 1987. p. 118
Created by Soman (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 408 past nominations.

Soman (talk) 12:08, 20 October 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Articles created/expanded on October 22

[edit]

Revant Himatsingka

(
)
  • Reviewed:
  • Comment: I think this is quite an interesting feat on the part of the influencer that a viral video was able to get Cadbury to reduce added sugar in Bournvita (marketed as children's health drink in India) by almost 15%, even as they sent legal notices and filed lawsuits against him. Also, I am new to DYK, and not sure if the hook could be made better than this. Thanks!
Moved to mainspace by CX Zoom (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

—CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 20:22, 26 October 2024 (UTC).[reply]

National Gingerbread House Competition

(
)
2008 competition entries
2008 competition entries
  • Reviewed:
Created by Hkeely (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

Hkeely (talk) 15:55, 22 October 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks Hkeely. The length is now fine, article was created on time (22 October), sources used look to be reliable for the content and I found no issues with overly close paraphrasing, image is good (I trimmed the caption quite a bit). A couple of questions on sourcing:
  • I couldn't see in the Fox Carolina source where it said this was the only time the event had been cancelled?
  • Can you add a citation in the article for the last sentence of the first paragraph about the TV channels it has been broadcast on?
Apart from that I think this is good to go - Dumelow (talk) 07:32, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Dumelow. Thank you for checking this and trimming the caption. I've added a citation for the TV channel coverage. The cancelation information is because the contest started in 1992 and this would have been the 32nd annual event. Since there were 31 events prior, that adds up mathematically. I did include new information about the public display portion being canceled during the Covid pandemic in 2020, though judging did continue that year. - Hkeely (talk) 17:47, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Hkeely, if the first event was held in 1992 and it was held every year then 2024 would have been the 33rd event. There are 32 years between the first and last event but 33 events (see fencepost error) - Dumelow (talk) 08:28, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Hkeely: Please address the above. Z1720 (talk) 15:54, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Z1720: The competition hosts themselves say that the event started in 1992 and that 2024 would have been the 32nd annual competition. https://www.omnihotels.com/hotels/asheville-grove-park/things-to-do/national-gingerbread-competition I presume this is the case because the first year wasn't actually judged. Hkeely (talk) 19:37, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Hkeely and Z1720: Sorry for delay in replying. I am not sure that is enough for us to assume it is the first time, but happy if another reviewer thinks it is. Is there an alternative wording we can look at? - Dumelow (talk) 10:22, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Hkeely: Going purely off what's on this nom, the hook is not accurate and should be replaced.--Launchballer 13:04, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ALT1 ... that despite its name, the National Gingerbread House Competition (pictured) has featured gingerbread clock towers, ocean liners, and giant pandas?
Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 14:48, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ALT2: ... that despite its name, the National Gingerbread House Competition (pictured) has featured gingerbread merry-go-rounds, sea monsters, and even the Statue of Liberty?
Hi all. Merry-go-rounds, sea monsters, and the Statue of Liberty proposed in (what I have labelled) ALT2 are not mentioned in the article. "clock towers, ocean liners, and giant pandas" are mentioned in the article but not the source cited there - Dumelow (talk) 18:43, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Hkeely: Just for clarification, you should not have replaced the original hook (ALT0) with the new one (ALT2), as this could cause confusion regarding the nomination history. I've restored the original hook to its place (albeit struck out to show that it is no longer under consideration), and moved ALT2 to later in the discussion. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 05:07, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Articles created/expanded on October 23

[edit]

Foreign policy of the Masoud Pezeshkian administration

(
)
Created by Sportsnut24 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

Sportsnut24 (talk) 13:45, 23 October 2024 (UTC).[reply]

@JuniperChill: WP:PRESSTV policy is itself based on a deprecated source. Ergo, there is no policy.Sportsnut24 (talk) 12:25, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm confused with what your saying, or you got confused with what you said. While this isn't a full review, deprecated sources are almost never used in articles (Daily Mail is a notable example, and so is Press TV), and are likely not permitted for DYK and you even pointed it out to yourself. I suggest removing them. Another user will give a proper review. JuniperChill (talk) 18:56, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Let's make it clear I'm requesting a review from another user. JuniperChill (talk) 10:29, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sportsnut24: Please address the above.--Launchballer 12:17, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on October 24

[edit]

A Nail Clipper Romance

(
)
Created by Prince of Erebor (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 22 past nominations.

Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 06:17, 24 October 2024 (UTC). [reply]

Sources
  1. ^ 羅偉強 (16 April 2017). "【指甲刀人魔】彭浩翔關智耀專訪 拆解人魔由來". HK01 (in Chinese). Retrieved 24 October 2024. 《指甲刀人魔》雲集兩岸三地演員，而香港代表僅得鄭伊健一人。在戲中作為唯一香港演員，卻不融入一眾內地與台灣演員中一起說普通話，到底為什麼有這樣的安排呢？莫非導演想令《指甲刀人魔》保留多一點香港氣息？原來導演與監製別有心思。「我們想演員以他最熟悉的語言去演繹，會令他以最自然的狀態去完成演出。」關智耀這樣說。而一旁的彭浩翔則從夏威夷的角色出發，他說：「我們在夏威夷所見的，就是很多華人根本就是廣東話與普通話夾雜。他們有一部分人從香港來，亦有部分從內地台灣來。因此我們覺得鄭伊健說廣東話，而其他人說普通話是很夏威夷的一件事。」無論原因是何，作為香港人的大家在戲中聽著伊健講廣東話，都會有多一分親切感吧。 [The film A Nail Clipper Romance features a cast from China, Taiwan, and Hong Kong, with only Ekin Cheng representing Hong Kong. As the sole actor from Hong Kong, he does not speak Mandarin alongside the Chinese and Taiwanese actors. Why is this arrangement in place? Could it be that the director wants to retain a bit of Hong Kong’s essence in A Nail Clipper Romance? It turns out the director and producer have their reasons. "We want the actors to perform in the language they are most comfortable with, as it allows them to present their most natural state", says director Jason Kwan. Meanwhile, Pang Ho-cheung reflects on the Hawaiian context, stating, "What we see in Hawaii is that many Chinese people mix Cantonese and Mandarin. Some come from Hong Kong, while others come from the mainland and Taiwan. Therefore, we felt that having Ekin Cheng speak Cantonese while the others speak Mandarin is very representative of Hawaii". Regardless of the reason, as Hong Kongers, hearing Ekin speak Cantonese in the film adds a sense of familiarity and warmth.]
  2. ^ Ku, Daniel (6 April 2017). "愛情奇幻喜劇《指甲刀人魔》，張孝全、周冬雨夏威夷浪漫談情". Vogue Taiwan (in Chinese). Retrieved 7 October 2024. 到2010年，彭導與網路大電影合作，拍了名為《4夜奇譚》的網路短片系列，其中一夜就是由曾國祥和尹志文執導的《指甲刀人魔》，女主角更是找來周迅。當時影片獲得極高評價，大家都想知道故事的後續發展，因此彭導便有延伸為長篇電影的計畫，只是沒想到計畫一擱就是七年。 [By 2010, director Pang [Ho-cheung] collaborated with an online production company to create a series of web shorts called 4+1 Project, one of which is A Nail Clipper Romance, directed by Derek Tsang and Jimmy Wan, starring Zhou Xun as the female lead. At the time, the film was positively received, and everyone wanted to know what happened next in the story. As a result, Pang decided to expand it into a feature film, although the project ended up being put on hold for seven years.]
  3. ^ "鄭伊健去夏威夷拍戲勁開心 周冬雨讚張孝全性格夠獨特". Sing Tao Daily (in Chinese). 9 March 2017. Archived from the original on 12 March 2017. Retrieved 7 October 2024. 由於全片在夏威夷取景，周冬雨因此愛上衝浪，她更透露跟監製彭浩翔一起衝浪有無比的榮耀感，彭浩翔學了七八節課，但她學了兩節就追上了。 [Since the entire film is shot in Hawaii, Zhou Dongyu falls in love with surfing. She also reveals that she was proud to surf with producer Pang Ho-cheung, as Pang took seven or eight lessons, while she only took two lessons before catching up to him.]
  4. ^ 翁新涵 (25 November 2016). "尷尬了╱阮經天緋聞女友 來台喊許瑋甯「奶奶」". Nownews (in Chinese). Retrieved 21 October 2024. 根據周冬雨表示，她主演的新片《指甲刀人魔》，有邀請許瑋甯客串 [According to Zhou Dongyu, in her new film A Nail Clipper Romance, [she] did invite Tiffany Ann Hsu to make a cameo appearance.]
  5. ^ Wong, Silva (16 March 2017). "'Love Off The Cuff' director talks Hong Kong festival opener". Screen Daily. Retrieved 24 October 2024. Despite his busy schedule as a writer/director, Pang takes time out to produce for new filmmakers such as Wan, Luk and Jason Kwan, the DoP on both Love In A Puff and Love In The Buff. The latter's directorial debut A Nail Clipper Romance, starring Zhou Dongyu and Joseph Chang, opens on April 14.
  • Comment: @Prince of Erebor: A few things stand out to me: the poor critical reception/box office performance? is played down in the lead section in a somewhat ingenious way, by emphasizing the positive reviews of the short film it is based upon. I think you should fix that as it presents a neutrality issue. In other words, summarize the reception in the lead, not the previous work. The other thing I noticed is that the article says the film took place in the state of Hawaii several times. While it’s fine to say that at least once, subsequent mention should specify it was filmed specifically on the island of Oahu in and around the city of Honolulu, if the sources can support that. There are also opportunities to link to specific articles about the Chinese population in Hawaii. Leaning towards ALT2 at the moment although I wonder if it can be made more interesting than it is with other details. More later. Viriditas (talk) 18:10, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hi Viriditas! Thanks a lot for taking up the review, but I beg to differ with both of your current suggestions. The "positive reviews" in the lead refer to the short film, which explains why a full-length feature was developed afterward, and this is supported by multiple sources. I do not find this description to be faulty. Meanwhile, I have not found any sources that comment on or summarize the critical reception and box office performance. From the current reviews listed, I do not believe it is conclusive that the film was poorly received, as some critics have given it 3.5/5 and expressed various positive opinions on the premise, themes, and performances. Regarding box office performance, it is also subjective to judge whether it is positive or negative, as arthouse films like this one typically gross less than blockbusters. I would summarize the box office performance as poor only if supported by multiple sources, like in Miss Shampoo or The Invincible Dragon. For your second suggestion, I have only mentioned the film being shot in Hawaii once in the filming section. The other mentions focus on different topics, like casting choices or creative decisions based on the demographics of Hawaiians. There are no specific references to the filming locations in Hawaii, so I cannot specify which part of Hawaii the film was shot in. I am also unsure if mentioning the specific location has any bearing on why the crew chose to film there or why Ekin Cheng was willing to join the project. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 18:40, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think you might have misunderstood me. By emphasizing the positive review of a different film in the lead, and ignoring the poor critical reception (3.5 is pretty mediocre, and there are other poor reviews and apparently bad box office results) that presents a neutrality issue. You will want to very briefly note the critical reception of this film in the lead, regardless of the positive reception of the other film. As for Hawaii, there are eight islands in the state. The film industry is in Oahu, but not all films are shot there. Given what we know so far, this entire film was shot on Oahu in and around Honolulu. This should be easy to source. I’m sorry we disagree. Viriditas (talk) 18:46, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Viriditas, I believe we are on the same page. My point is that the characterization of the film's box office performance and critical reception as "poor" is not supported by sources and is purely subjective. I see this as a form of OR. But I understand your concerns, and perhaps it would be better to remove the mention of positive reviews for the short film from the lead instead? Regarding the filming location, could you please provide me with the source that confirms the film was shot in Oahu? I conducted a research quite thoroughly while writing the article and do not recall seeing this mentioned in any English or Chinese RS. Please let me know if I am mistaken or have overlooked any sources. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 19:05, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Let's take it one topic at a time; my old brain doesn't multitask as well as it should. First things first: can you briefly summarize the critical reception in the lead? Viriditas (talk) 19:10, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Viriditas, my answer is no, because I do not see a conclusive consensus among the reviews. Summarizing the box office performance and a handful of critics' opinions subjectively and labeling the film as "poorly received" is a form of WP:SYNTH in my opinion. But if you find the phrase "positive reviews" in the lead to be misleading, I am fine with removing the mention of the short film's reception. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 19:25, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I think we might be speaking past each other. Is there any reason you cannot summarize the critical reception section you've written in the body of the article and add it to the lead, to the best of your ability? Just in case you don't know, we summarize "mixed reviews" in the lead all the time. Maybe check out other articles with similar reception? Perhaps you aren't aware of this, which would explain the back and forth. There's several ways to do it, but the most common involve characterizing the type of review in the first part of the sentence ("The film received mixed reviews from critics"), and then in the second part, describing the box office results ("and became a box office bomb"). These are just examples. Viriditas (talk) 19:34, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Viriditas, I believe we are still on the same page. I am aware that mixed reviews exist, I have used this term in another recent article of mine (Get the Hell Out). In that case, the inclusion was based on a cited Rotten Tomatoes score of 5.9, so it does not involve original research. Many film articles lack a summary of critical reception exactly because of WP:SYNTH. An example that come to mind is Deadpool and Wolverine, where editors voted not to include a critical reception summary in the lead due to concerns about SYNTH. There are also no sources indicating that the film failed at the box office. While it may not have grossed enough to make the list of top grossing films in 2017, that does not equate to it being a box office bomb, and I still see the assertion as a form of OR. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 19:53, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry, but it appears that you are still misreading me. Please summarize the critical reception to the best of your ability (as I described above) and place it in the lead section. The specific decision and rationale not to include a critical reception section in Deadpool and Wolverine does not apply here. Further, that film received mostly positive reviews, so the dispute in that particular instance isn't really relevant. We know D&W received a positive, critical reception. One of the problems here is how accurate or inaccurate Metacritic scores are in this regard, and that led to the perception that D&W received a less than positive reception. That's really getting into the weeds, and there's no similar problem here. However, you could ask, did this film receive mostly positive reviews, did it receive mixed reviews, or did it receive poor reviews? Whatever your answer is, please briefly mention it in the lead. By describing a different film as "positive" and ignoring the critical reception in the lead, you are giving readers a false impression of what the reception was actually like. This is a problem. Viriditas (talk) 20:04, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Viriditas, sorry but I believe you are also misreading me. I have already acknowledged your concern that the term "positive reviews" could mislead readers regarding the reception of this film, and I proposed removing the mention of the short film's reception. (But if you find the phrase "positive reviews" in the lead to be misleading, I am fine with removing the mention of the short film's reception.) This should have already addressed your concerns about neutrality or misleading information. The reason a summary was not included in the D&W article is the same rationale for why I am not adding one now. Adding a summary (positive, mixed, negative, whatever) you are suggesting is purely original research and a synthesis of the sources. If there are no sources or review aggregators to support the claim that the article is generally viewed as positive, divisive, or negative by critics, then adding my own assessment of their opinions would be considered SYNTH. I am also somewhat puzzled by this conversation, as identifying OR should be WP editing 101 and my concerns about WP:V should be quite clear. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 20:35, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The reason a summary was not included in the D&W article is the same rationale for why I am not adding one now. No, it's actually quite different. It is not OR to summarize or to state the critical reception for this film in the lead and there's literally no connection to the arguments made in the D&W article, which received overwhelmingly positive reviews. This is why ignoring the critical reception in the lead for D&W is the default, as it received mostly positive, not negative feedback. I can assure you, if D&W had received a negative reception, the default would have been to mention that. By not mentioning it in D&W, the reader is not given information about negative reception. Do you see how this works? The opposite is true here. You are free, of course, to do what you like, but priming the reader with mentioning a "positive" review of an altogether different film while ignoring the poor to mediocre, to mixed reviews (and box office performance) of this film is a neutrality issue. I'm once again sorry that we see this so differently. Perhaps you will find others to agree with your position. Viriditas (talk) 20:42, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Viriditas, I must respectfully disagree with you. The editors who participated in the survey for the D&W article specifically discussed issues related to synthesis. While the film may seem overwhelmingly positive to you, there are also negative reviews out there. In fact, all four wording options discussed in that survey addressed the non-positive, divisive reviews. By not mentioning it in D&W, the reader is not given information about negative reception. The current critical response section also included negative reviews from like San Francisco Chronicle, The Hollywood Reporter, and one-star review from The Irish Times. So no, that is not the case. It is because reviews from an opposite stance exist, a positive/mixed reception summary would not be appropriate. This echoes my point that adding a subjective summary suggesting that the film underperformed based on what you and I think, constitutes original research. I have also repeatedly acknowledged your concern that the positive reception of the short film in the lead is misleading and have offered to remove that line. (I have rephrased it just now and I hope this address your concerns.) So I do not really see a reason to continue adding a summary of the reception and box office performance. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 20:54, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's definitely an improvement, but I do want to say that I see zero relationship between the argument made in the D&W discussion, which defaults to the absence of negative critical commentary in the lead based on all of the available evidence, as well as an indication that the critical reception was first and foremost controversial, and this article, which did not receive a positive reception and where the critical reception was not controversial. There's literally no comparison. I get that you are making this comparison, but it doesn't exist, IMO. Now, if you think the critical reception of this film was controversial, I am happy to review the matter, and if true, that is indeed, a supporting argument for keeping it out of the lead. But as far as I can tell, the critics and the audiences didn't like this film and it performed poorly at the box office. By keeping this out of the lead, it gives the impression of a neutrality problem. Now, with all that said, the question becomes, does it need to be in the lead? Aside from obvious controversies where representing the critical reception is difficult or disputed (i.e. D&W), I would say yes, but with the additional caveat that local consensus, as we've seen with D&W, can override this, particularly in instances where the default position doesn't deviate from the overall reception. It might help to get clarification from the film project talk page on this. They are usually pretty active, even during the holidays. The NPOV noticeboard might even be a better place, I don't know. However, keeping it out of the lead does not appear neutral to me at all. More so, if the sources emphasize that the film was received poorly with critics and the box office. So we are still divided on this subtopic. I would prefer to work towards an agreement on this with you, but I don't think that's going to happen. One other thing: have you added critical reception to the lead before in your other film articles that notes a poor, mediocre, or mixed reception status? If so, what makes this article different than the others? If not, why not? Your careful reasoning and answer to those two questions could conceivably bring me over to your side, leading me to drop this. Viriditas (talk) 21:20, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Viriditas , sorry, but I still only see you asserting that critics and audiences didn't like this film and that it performed poorly at the box office. Based on what is currently in the article, there are at least some positive to mediocre reviews, and the total gross exceeds the film's budget. It is hardly accurate to describe it as having a negative reception or being a box office bomb. Labeling the film in this way is just your subjective judgement based on what you have seen about the film and it truly harms the article's neutrality. While if the reception is mixed and the box office performance is merely average, whether or not to mention these is unrelated to neutrality and I do not see the urge to add such phrases. I am generally open to adding or removing content from articles, like I would be happy to include the precise filming locations you mentioned if sources are available, but this just seems like original research to me. I also do not see the necessity to escalate this, as again, I think this is WP editing 101. But I would not object to seeking a third opinion.
  • Regarding your final question, yes, I certainly do. Examples include positive reviews for Mongrel (2024 film), mixed reviews for Get the Hell Out, and negative reviews for The Invincible Dragon. My rationale for adding a summary is based on the existence of a conclusive consensus among critics' opinions. For these articles, there are Rotten Tomatoes scores, which aggregate all critical reviews and can be interpreted as the consensus of the majority of critics. There are exceptions, like 18×2 Beyond Youthful Days, where multiple reputable sources describe the film as both a box office and critical success. But in this case, there is neither a consensus summarized by review aggregators nor multiple reliable sources. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 21:52, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Was this film a box office success or a box office bomb? In other words, did it break even by a large amount? When you look at the budget and compare it to the raw, unadjusted revenue, it looks like the film made US $34,000 dollars. Perhaps I'm reading this wrong? Also, your own source says it did poorly at the box office and implies it lost money because in that market romantic films do poorly. We're still not on the same page. I have not fully analyzed the critical reviews just yet so I'm keeping that separate until later. But it appears that in terms of the box office, the sources say it did not do well. Viriditas (talk) 22:18, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Viriditas: Yes, you have read things wrong. The film had a budget of USD$386,000 (HKD$3 million) excluding government funding, and grossed approximately USD$620,000 (RMB$4.49 million). I would not classify it as a box office success, and I am not well-versed in the film industry and cannot determine how much profit or loss the production company made based on these figures. However, it is common sense that a gross greater than the budget would not typically qualify as a box office bomb. Regarding the translated source, it refers to Zhou Dongyu's other film The Breaking Ice (燃冬), not this one (A Nail Clipper Romance; 指甲刀人魔). I am the one who added that source so of course I know what was written there... I have found no sources indicating that this film was a "box office failure". Please share any you might find. To be honest, I am starting to find this discussion somewhat pointless, as neither of us seems able to convince the other. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 22:31, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • 4.9 million including government funding, 3 million excluding. Do you really think I do not know what I typed in the article??
  • Okay Viriditas, let me be clear. I believe your request to add a subjective summary labeling the film as poorly received and a box office failure constitutes blatant original research and violates WP:V. Your concerns about WP:NPOV have already been addressed with the removal of the short film's reception (which was actually sourced) from the lead. Even if a summary were included, it would only reflect "mixed reviews" and "average box office performance", which does not relate to your concerns about misleading or sugarcoating the film's actual reception. Since not adding a summary would no longer have anything to do with WP:NPOV, but adding one could impact both verifiability and neutrality imo, I refuse to include these policy-violating claims in the article. So we can either continue the review and set this issue aside, as your concerns have been adequately addressed, or you may choose to seek a third opinion, though I believe that is totally unnecessary. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 22:55, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t know why you think summarizing the critical reception in the lead is a policy violation. That is an extremely unusual idea. Last comment to address the previous ones I ignored: "If a film released in theatres fails to break even by a large amount, it is considered a box-office bomb." List of biggest box-office bombs lists dozens of films that made more than their budget. That is neither here nor there. To address your previous point, you said I was citing material about a different film, but looking at it again after your criticism, it appears to be referring to this film. Here’s the material I was referring to: 和关智斌、张孝全等人主演的《指甲刀人魔》票房449.9万元。事实证明，演员能不能扛票房真的不好说，有运气和选剧本的能力左右，比如吴京主演的《巨齿鲨2》票房不如第一部，还有沈腾演出的《超能一家人》票房才3亿多，所以没有演员敢拍着胸膛说自己主演的电影票房一定大卖。当然周冬雨主演票房很低的电影，其实制作成本可能也不是很高，但绝对都亏损。周冬雨很少演出商业大片，所以她的票房都不怎么样，爱情片的票房本身就不是很高，特别偏文艺片的电影。If that means something else, let me know. My reading of this (当然周冬雨主演票房很低的电影，其实制作成本可能也不是很高，但绝对都亏损。周冬雨很少演出商业大片，所以她的票房都不怎么样，爱情片的票房本身就不是很高，特别偏文艺片的电影) is that it is referring to both films. Also, throughout this discussion you have insisted that I have wanted to add a qualitative statement to the lead, but you ignored the original question mark in my initial comment, identifying that I don’t know what that statement should actually be. I’ve tried to explain this to you, but you keep repeating the same thing for some odd reason. The questions remain: "how did critics receive this film and how well did it do at the box office?" As the reader, I wanted to know the answer. When I read the lead, I expected to find out, only to discover than an altogether different film received a positive reception, not this one. That is my last and final comment on this matter. Viriditas (talk) 23:15, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Viriditas, yes, I have already mentioned that the source did not address this. The source lists the box office grosses of Zhou Dongyu's entire filmography, ranging from A Fangirl's Romance at USD 329,000 to Embrace Again at USD 129 million. Even if you are viewing it through Google Translate, you can still see the listings and it is separated into different paragraphs. So the statements you quoted obviously do not refer to A Nail Clipper Romance, otherwise the $129 million gross would also become a box office failure. And no, I did not ignore your statements. I have repeatedly mentioned that mixed reviews fall under SYNTH as well, but you have repeatedly focused on the poor reception you perceive in your replies, which is why I feel the need to address it more often than the other potential stances. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 23:37, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I said I wasn't going to revisit the above, so I won't. The problem of synth in regards to critical reception in lead sections was a specific, local consensus problem for D&W, not for other film articles. This was because of the unique set of circumstances regarding the sources. This was made clear in the responses by the participants. You are extrapolating the result of an article content page RFC out to all film leads. That's not how an article-specific RFC works at all. See WP:LOCALCONSENSUS. It may be wise to get some input from the larger film community over at their project page. Viriditas (talk) 23:59, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Viriditas, this will be my final response on this issue as well, as I do not find this conversation progressing in a meaningful way. The reason I mentioned D&W is that you brought up "other articles". Just in case you don't know, we summarize "mixed reviews" in the lead all the time. Maybe check out other articles with similar reception? Therefore, I raised another article that also has a divisive reception and involved thorough discussions among editors regarding the decision to omit the reception summary, that aligns with the rationale I am proposing here. My intention was to provide a noteworthy example, one that is more high-traffic and has a relatively large number of participants in the RFC, to ensure we are on the same page and that the summary is not left out for other reasons or merely reflecting the consensus of a handful of random editors. Of course, I understand if you view the concerns raised by the editors in that RFC as specific to that article and reflective of a mere local consensus, as context always matters. I only hope this gives you a clearer picture of my and at least some editors' perspectives about the potential SYNTHiness in the lead reception summary. D&W is just an example, synthesis is my main point, and I have explained my rationale on adding these summaries as well. Perhaps we have different interpretations of the definition of OR, which is perfectly fine, as editors often have varying views on WP guidelines. I have already offered to remove the potentially NPOV-violating weasel words that has disturbed you multiple times (since my second reply), in hopes of truly addressing the issues. However, you have ignored this and instead continue to push for the addition of a summary that you deem necessary, without fully addressing why you believe SYNTH does not apply to the reception summary in this case, convincing me that the poor reception is supported by RS rather than personal opinions, or providing a new rationale after the NPOV concerns have been addressed. Therefore, as I said, while I would not object to seeking a third opinion to move this review forward, I still find it unnecessary because, to me, this is a clear case of SYNTH, and I do not find it beneficial to continue wasting time on it.
  • Regarding the source, Sino-Cinema.com appeared to be a WP:RSPWORDPRESS blog to me. But upon checking the author, I would not object that Derek Elley may be considered a SME due to his career at Variety, and the filming locations are not controversial claims that would require the best, reputable sources, so I will treat this as a SPS. It is a nice addition, as it even details the filming period as late 2014, while the Screen Daily source only vaguely suggested the timeframe. I have added it to the article. Thanks for your finding!! —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 04:55, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Second opinion requested. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:28, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Articles created/expanded on October 25

[edit]

Boxheim Documents

(
)
SPD poster for the 1932 Prussian state election using these documents to attack the NSDAP
SPD poster for the 1932 Prussian state election using these documents to attack the NSDAP
  • Source: Press and Politics in the Weimar Republic. OUP Oxford. pp. 186–187.
Created by Jean Po (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

Jean Po (talk) 15:40, 25 October 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • The article was made on the 25th, so is new enough. At many times the required length, it is long enough. The article reads neutrally and properly uses in-line citations. The copyvio detector finds nothing outside of explicit quotes in the article. Both hooks are interesting and cited in-line and utilized properly from the listed sources. The suggested image is in the public domain and visibly identifiable. No QPQ needs to be done. Looks good to go! SilverserenC 01:20, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jean Po, Silver seren, and Crisco 1492: I have pulled this hook on interestingness grounds. There is nothing whatsoever unusual about Nazis treating Jews poorly.--Launchballer 21:46, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, what about the original hook? I think that the Nazis were planning a full out coup, rather than their (admitted coerced through other events) political victory later, is interesting, particularly the effects that had at the time of the reveal of this plan. SilverserenC 22:11, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No comment on interestingness, but I have tagged uncited material in the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:17, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jean Po: Please address the above.--Launchballer 01:25, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Citations added. --Jean Po (talk) 17:40, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Articles created/expanded on October 27

[edit]

Bob Hainlen

(
)
Improved to Good Article status by BeanieFan11 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 267 past nominations.

BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:51, 3 November 2024 (UTC).[reply]

That actually adds further complexity: might be better to just drop "youngest players". Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 22:57, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5: What about then: ALT3 ... that 22-year-old Bob Hainlen, in addition to playing for the Wilmington Clippers professional football team, also served as their assistant coach? Also, if that works, what do you think about the possibility of a date request for December 18, his 98th birthday? BeanieFan11 (talk) 03:17, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Articles created/expanded on October 28

[edit]

Gilopez Kabayao

(
)
  • Source: "As the first Filipino violinist to perform at the prestigious Carnegie Hall in New York in 1950, Gilopez Kabayao broke new ground and brought pride to the nation." —Philippine Daily Inquirer / Inquirer.net; "He performed in prestigious venues, including Carnegie Hall in New York in 1950, making him the first Filipino violinist to do so." —SunStar
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Anatolii Brezvin
  • Comment: Many sources state that Kabayao's Carnegie Hall performance in 1950 was done when he was 19 years old, but this is impossible if he was born in 1929 so I omitted this from the article and therefore the hook. This error might affect the hook under WP:EXCEPTIONAL and especially since a different source (Manila Bulletin) says, "Kabayao is widely believed to be the first Filipino to play at the prestigious Carnegie Hall in New York City".
Created by Seav (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

seav (talk) 23:53, 3 November 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • Considering the exceptional claim of him being the first, and thus the related uncertainty, maybe we could go with a different hook angle here. How about:
ALT1 ... that Filipino violinist Gilopez Kabayao was nicknamed the "Mozart to the Barrios"?
No opinion on the state of the article itself, although admittedly it is rather lacking in hooky material. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:04, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chromakopia

(
)
  • ... that the physical version of Chromakopia contains an extra song?
  • ... that Tyler's album-related truck could be seen in Tyler?
    • 5x expanded by MontanaMako (talk).
    • Reviewed:
    Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    MontanaMako (talk) 21:50, 30 October 2024 (UTC).[reply]

    @Narutolovehinata5; just added a new one. Is it any better? MontanaMako (talk) 16:38, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Narutolovehinata5: Please respond to the above. Z1720 (talk) 16:08, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Will leave the decision to another reviewer, but it's better than the original. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 18:05, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    New reviewer needed. Z1720 (talk) 15:08, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Zeng Laishun

    (
    )
    Zeng, c. 1880s
    Zeng, c. 1880s
    • ... that Zeng Laishun (pictured) was the first Chinese person to attend college in the United States?
    • Source: Rhoads, Edward J. M. (2011) Stepping Forth into the World: The Chinese Educational Mission to the United States, 1872–81. Pg. 3
    Moved to mainspace by Generalissima (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 87 past nominations.

    Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 21:33, 28 October 2024 (UTC).[reply]

    Comment to the reviewer: given that this is a "first" hook, and a pretty exceptional one at that, please be sure to check if the sources adequately support the claim, and see if counterexamples can be found. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:14, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Narutolovehinata5: Since Blervis looks like a pretty new reviewer, and this is a hook with higher sourcing standards than usual, should I put this up for second opinion? I think that might be a good idea. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 04:33, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    We can have a second opinion from an experienced editor, who at the same time could try teaching Blervis the ropes. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:36, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Sounds like a good idea. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 05:17, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


    Articles created/expanded on October 30

    [edit]

    Karl Thielscher

    (
    )
    Improved to Good Article status by BeanieFan11 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 268 past nominations.

    BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:55, 6 November 2024 (UTC).[reply]

    7th National Eucharistic Congress (United States)

    (
    )
    Moved to mainspace by Maximilian775 (talk) and Darth Stabro (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    ~Darth StabroTalk • Contribs 21:55, 30 October 2024 (UTC).[reply]


    Articles created/expanded on October 31

    [edit]

    Gifted (2022 novella)

    (
    )
    • ... that in 2022, all five book nominations for the Akutagawa Prize were written by women, including former Japanese adult actress Suzumi Suzuki, who wrote Gifted after her own experiences?
    • Source: (Translated from Japanese to English)

    Suzuki Suzumi, whose book "Gifted" (Bungeishunju) was nominated for the 167th Akutagawa Prize, says that while her unexpected background has attracted attention, it has also led to prejudice and labelling.

    For the first time in history, only female writers have been nominated for the 167th Akutagawa Prize, which will be announced on July 20th. Among them, Suzuki Suzumi, who was nominated for "Gifted," made her AV debut while studying at Keio University. After that, she worked for a newspaper company and graduated from the University of Tokyo, and is now active as a writer and columnist, which has attracted attention for her unusual career.

    Source: Oricon News (https://www.oricon.co.jp/special/59840/)
      • ALT1: ... that former adult film actress Suzumi Suzuki pivoted to writing literature in 2022 with her novel, Gifted, which became one of five books nominated for the Akutagawa Prize that year? Source: Same as first source
      • Reviewed:
    Created by Phibeatrice (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    Phibeatrice (talk) 00:51, 4 November 2024 (UTC).[reply]

    • If anything, the fact that the writer of the novel is a former adult film actress is the interesting part here, not the award (which not all readers may recognize, even if it's prestigious). Suggesting a far simpler hook:
    ALT3 ... that the 2022 novel Gifted was written by a former adult film actress?
    Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:51, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    ALT4 ... that former Japanese adult actress Suzumi Suzuki's book Gifted was nominated for the Akutagawa Prize in 2022? Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 20:08, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Mary Mark Ockerbloom: WP:DYKTRIM is the relevant guideline. Oftentimes, but not always, the shortest and simplest hooks are the best. There are times when hooks do need additional context, but generally speaking, we tend to target the widest audience possible with hooks that require the least amount of specialist information. The issue I have with the prize angle is that readers may not know that it is a prestigious award or even be familiar with it, making the angle less accessible. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 07:22, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Presumably then, they will have an added incentive to click through and find out. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 15:37, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Numerous ALT hooks have been proposed: a reviewer is needed to ensure that they and this article are approved. Z1720 (talk) 15:12, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Details Cannot Body Wants

    (
    )
    Created by Imbluey2 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    Imbluey2. Please ping me so that I get notified of your response 06:29, 2 November 2024 (UTC).[reply]

    Zhu Baosan

    (
    )
    Zhu Baosan
    Zhu Baosan
    • ... that the fortune left by Zhu Baosan (pictured) was reported to have been greatly diminished by his philanthropic activities?
    • Source: "The Mourning Ceremonies for Mr. Chu Pao-san". The North-China Herald. 6 November 1926. p. 257. "Although Mr. Chu Pao-san was a successful merchant and had such numerous business interests, friends believe that he left only a small fortune, as his contributions to charity were so large."
    • ALT1: ... that the business interests of Zhu Baosan (pictured) ranged from banking and insurance to shipping and coal mining? Source: "The Mourning Ceremonies for Mr. Chu Pao-san". The North-China Herald. 6 November 1926. p. 257. "He promoted the Commercial’ Bank of China, the Ningpo Commercial Bank, the Chekiang Industrial Bank and the Chung Hua Commercial. and Savings Bank. He was an organizer of the Wah An Fire and Marine Insurance Company, the Wah Sing Insurance Company, and the China United Assurance Society. He was a director of the Liu Kiang and Chang Hsin Mining Companies. He was interested in the Nantao Tramway Company, the Tinghai Electric [Construction “Company” and the Chousan Electric Company. He was a director of the Chousan Steam Navigation Company, the Yung An Steamship Company, the Yung Leo Shipping Company, 'the Chang Ko Navigation Company, the Ta Tah Navigation Company and in several other shipping interests. He was a prominent shareholder in many cotton and flour mills, pap factories and other industrial enterprises."
    • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Flag of Falcón state (1 of 2)
    Created by Crisco 1492 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 700 past nominations.

     — Chris Woodrich (talk) 22:58, 31 October 2024 (UTC).[reply]


    Articles created/expanded on November 1

    [edit]

    Museiliha inscription

    (
    )
    • Source: de Ruggiero 1893, p. 443.
      Louvre Museum, 2024
    • ALT1: ... that the Museiliha inscription, a boundary marker from the first century AD, helped delineate ancient territories between the citizens of Caesarea-ad-Libanum and the Gigartans? Source: Renan 1864, p. 149.
      Mommsen, Hirschfeld & Domaszewski 1873, p. 31, insc. 183.
      Louvre Museum, 2024
    • ALT2: ... that the Museiliha inscription, a boundary marker from the first century AD, is considered a rare ancient example of a documented border dispute? Source: de Ruggiero 1893, p. 443.
      Louvre Museum, 2024
    • ALT3: ... that the Museiliha inscription, a boundary marker from the first century AD, includes carefully erased names, likely of Roman officials? Source: Mancini 1884, pp. 71–72.
      Louvre Museum, 2024
    • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Abu Sulayman Da'ud
    Created by Elias Ziade (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 38 past nominations.

    el.ziade (talkallam) 10:12, 6 November 2024 (UTC).[reply]

    Tel al-Sultan attack

    (
    )
    • Reviewed:
    Improved to Good Article status by Personisinsterest (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    Personisinsterest (talk) 12:25, 1 November 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • Smallangryplanet (talk) 09:24, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    • Articles created/expanded on November 2

    [edit]

    Naz Arıcı

    (
    )

    * ... that several-times international champion adult figure skater Naz Arıcı started ice skating from scratch at the age of 29?

    • Source: "İkiz gibi büyüdüğü arkadaşı ölünce kararını verdi! 29 yaşında başladı, 5 kez şampiyon oldu", "29 yaşında sıfırdan başladığı buz pateninde 32 yaşında yetişkinler artistik buz pateni dünya şampiyonu oldu." [13]
    • ALT1: ... that electrical/electronics engineer Naz Arıcı quit her profession at the age of 34 to devote herself to competitions of adult figure skating she started when she was 29? Source: "... Naz Arıcı,“İlk şampiyonluğumdan sonra 2016 da katılacağım yarışma için işimi bıraktım ..." [14]", "29 yaşında sıfırdan başladığı buz pateninde 32 yaşında yetişkinler artistik buz pateni dünya şampiyonu oldu." [15]
    • ALT2: ... that Naz Arıcı paved the way to the establishment of the adult figure skating branch in Turkey in 2016? Source: " Yetişkinler dalını 2015 yılında dünyada aldığı ilk şampiyonlukla (15 ülkeden 38 kişinin katıldığı Naz’ın ilk yarışması) Türkiye’ye getirdi ve 2016 yılında ülkemize yeni bir dalın açılmasını sağladı." [16]
    • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Arthur France
    Created by CeeGee (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 223 past nominations.

    CeeGee 11:43, 7 November 2024 (UTC).[reply]

    General: Article is new enough and long enough

    Policy compliance:

    Hook eligibility:

    • Cited: Yes - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith
    • Interesting: Yes
    • Other problems: No - n
    QPQ: Done.

    Overall: I was excited to see this bio at DYK, since I work on figure skating articles, too, and I value creating and improving fs articles, especially ones about women skaters. Such a beautiful story about adult figure skating in Turkey. However and unfortunately, I don't think that this bio is ready for the main page. The bio uses, for example, overly promotional and puffery language, such as most of the third paragraph in the "Early life" section. Much of the prose also suffers from awkward wording in English as well. The hooks for this DYK suffers from similar issues; all hooks are worded awkwardly. It's awkward in English, for example, to state that one starts something from scratch. Rather, it should read something like this: ALT3:... that several-times international champion adult figure skater Naz Arıcı, with no previous experience, first learned how to figure skate the age of 29? Since I don't know Turkish and depend entirely on Google Translate, I'm AGF that the sources are accurately cited and worded and that there's no plagiarism. I think that if you worked on the article's prose, improving the hooks would be an easy fix. Please understand that I'm not being disrespectful, but I'm coming from a place of valuing the sport of figure skating on WP. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 04:18, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    ALT3: ... that several-times international champion adult figure skater Naz Arıcı, with no previous experience, first learned how to figure skate at the age of 29?

    Eastern Venus

    (
    )
    Eastern Venus at Kobe
    Eastern Venus at Kobe
    • ... that on the ship Eastern Venus (pictured), the "Modern" suite is not in modern style?
    "The largest cabins onboard Pacific Venus are 4 Royal Suites (65 m2) located behind the bridge, named "Archaic" (1001), "Modern" (1002), "Elegant" (1003), "Noble" (1004). They are decorated in two styles, with "Modern" and "Archaic" in traditional Japanese style, "Noble" and "Elegant" being more contemporary."
      • Reviewed:
    Created by Memer15151 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    UserMemer (chat) Tribs 21:03, 3 November 2024 (UTC).[reply]

    I have removed the aforementioned self-published sources and found better citations; all unsupported claims were removed. In addition, I removed "Castles of the Seas" as it is obviously self-published too. UserMemer (chat) Tribs 22:29, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Articles created/expanded on November 3

    [edit]

    Jordan Watkins

    (
    )
    • Source: Clarion Ledger ("Much has changed for Ole Miss football receiver Jordan Watkins recently. Two weeks ago, he had a different life perspectiv, and he'd never had a multi-touchdown game ... Watkins was a huge part of Ole Miss' offensive explosion. He had eight catches for 254 yards and five touchdowns. ... The five receiving touchdowns are also a record")
    5x expanded by BeanieFan11 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 270 past nominations.

    BeanieFan11 (talk) 22:47, 10 November 2024 (UTC).[reply]

    Moe's Books

    (
    )
    • ... that in 2016, two thieves stole a van filled with $350,000 worth of rare books in Oakland, California, and tried to sell first editions of William Faulkner and Cormac McCarthy to Moe's Books nearby?
    • Source: He’s been in the book dealing business for more than 15 years, but Lawrence Van De Carr said he’d never come across such a jewel of a title: a mint copy of Isaac Asimov’s 1950 classic “I, Robot” valued at $8,500.

    That novel, once a prized possession of Van De Carr’s, is now gone, along with around 400 of his other books worth well over $350,000. Someone stole his van while it was parked outside a friend’s Oakland home this week.

    Joshua Anderson, 30, went to Moe’s Books in Berkeley shortly after the bookseller’ association sent out an alert. He and an alleged accomplice had four books, valued around $14,000, that they were trying to sell, said John Wong, manager at the store.

    Among the classic first-editions they were trying to deal were “A Hornbook for Witches: Poems of Fantasy” by Leah Bodine Drake, one of only 563 known copies; “No Country for Old Men” by McCarthy, “Always Comes Evening” by Robert E. Howard, and “Pylon” by William Faulkner.

    Source: SFGate (https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Van-filled-with-350-000-rare-books-stolen-in-6843521.php)
      • Reviewed:
    Converted from a redirect by Phibeatrice (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    Phibeatrice (talk) 23:41, 3 November 2024 (UTC).[reply]

    Ethanoligenens harbinense

    (
    )
    • Reviewed:
    5x expanded by Hmsuth4770 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    Hmsuth4770 (talk) 17:52, 3 November 2024 (UTC).[reply]

    Technically, it's not far off, but either way it's a few hundred off 1,500 characters and very stubby. I say give @Hmsuth4770: a chance.--Launchballer 22:41, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ian (Wiki Ed), this actually almost a 5x expansion: 235 prose characters prior to the recent edits, and 1102 at present (5x would be 1175). However, it fails to meet the 1500 prose character minimum required of every article nominated for DYK. When nominators come up short—mainly because they're not counting prose characters, which DYK check can count for you—we typically allow them to expand the nominated article, if they can do so in a timely manner. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:49, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Ian (Wiki Ed) and Hmsuth4770: Please address the above.--Launchballer 02:25, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That's fine. I'll let a reviewer adjudicate as to whether the stub tag is deserved.--Launchballer 17:40, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • The hook as currently written probably violates MOS:EGG as it suggests it's about bacteria as a whole when in fact it's talking about a specific species of bacteria. The hook will need adjustment. Note that the nominator hasn't edited since the 11th and seemingly did not respond to Ian, so the nomination may have to be closed if no one is willing to adopt this. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 14:56, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Ian (Wiki Ed): Following up: did they respond to your e-mail? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:34, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Narutolovehinata5: - I didn't hear back from them directly, but they did make an edit to the article after that, which I assumed was a response. But I may have been wrong. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 14:52, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Without an active editor taking care of this nomination and being on standby/duty to address concerns, that's an issue. It's a shame since the length issues appear to have been addressed, but with no one actually active working on the article, it appears that (like many other WikiEdu student nominations), the nomination has been abandoned. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:59, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Chaiten1:, would you be interested in taking over this nomination?--Launchballer 01:26, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Launchballer: sure, will do later today!Chaiten1 (talk) 08:51, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Two new hooks to consider:

    Chaiten1 (talk) 14:40, 30 November 2024 (UTC) @Launchballer:@Narutolovehinata5:[reply]

    Still too easter eggy I think. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 21:24, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't quite follow. The page is about a species of bacteria that metabolises glucose to make hydrogen (a biofuel). So the hook seems to me to be sufficiently precise to be factually correct? Chaiten1 (talk) 21:39, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Although accurate, the hook suggests that it's multiple species of bacteria rather than a specific species of bacteria (which was the main hook fact), hence the EGG concerns. One possible way to fix the hook would be to simply spell out the species name, the other could be wording like "... that a species of bacteria" for precision. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 21:59, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you - I see this now! Three more ALTs below:
    Might be best to stick to ALT5 for precision purposes. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:47, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    2023 European Athletics Indoor Championships – Women's 400 metres

    (
    )
    Femke Bol wins the 400 m
    Femke Bol wins the 400 m
    • Source: "1 49.26 Femke BOL 23 FEB 2000 NED 1 Omnisport, Apeldoorn (NED) (i) 19 FEB 2023 1269" / "3 49.85 Femke BOL 23 FEB 2000 NED 1 Ataköy Arena, Istanbul (TUR) (i) 04 MAR 2023 1245" / "4 49.96 Femke BOL 23 FEB 2000 NED 1f3 L'Anneau-Halle d'athlétisme de Metz, Metz (FRA) (i) 11 FEB 2023 1240" (link)
    5x expanded by Editør (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 14 past nominations.

    Editør (talk) 11:14, 3 November 2024 (UTC).[reply]

    ALT1 ... that Femke Bol won the women's 400 metres at the 2023 European Athletics Indoor Championships (final pictured) successfully defending her 400 metres indoor title from 2021?
    Source: "While Warholm likes to inflict his damage over the opening 200m, Bol’s trademark is tearing her rivals to shreds over the latter half. That was again the case here, the defending champion opening broad daylight between her and her rivals down the back straight and looking magnificently majestic as she strode to the finish in 49.85, with Klaver winning silver in 50.57 and Poland’s Anna Kielbasinska taking bronze in 51.25." (link)
    – Editør (talk) 10:59, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This DYK may be scheduled during the 2025 European Athletics Indoor Championships, with round 1 for this event on 7 March 2025. – Editør (talk) 15:25, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Articles created/expanded on November 4

    [edit]

    Clifton House School, Harold Styan

    ( Comment or view )
    ( Article history links:
    )
    Created by Storye book (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 110 past nominations.

    Storye book (talk) 11:54, 9 November 2024 (UTC).[reply]

    • I'm not yet sure if I will give this a full review, so I'll just leave this as a comment for now. Although the angle provided meets DYKINT, I have reservations if it meets the guidelines. For one, both hooks may need a trimming (it might be better to focus on the "two attackers were knocked out" angle alone without mentioning the gymnast or music hall clauses). More importantly, I'm not sure if the hooks as currently written meet WP:DYKHOOKSTYLE, specifically the part about avoiding writing hooks where the bolded article is only tangentially related to the main hook fact (the hooks seem to be more about Styan than the school itself). Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 07:26, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • ALT0 is 155 characters. According to the link you provided about trimming, it is ideal length.
    • ALT1 is 180 characters. Being 180 characters is not a trimming issue by itself.
    • Styan was a big part of that school, as can be seen in the article. There is plenty of material about him in the article, because he was a big presence there. If our readers click on the bold link, they will read more about Styan there than anywhere else online. Therefore he is relevant to the hook.
    • Meanwhile I'll go and find an extra hook or two, anyway. Storye book (talk) 10:04, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • ALT2: ... Clifton House School formed a scout pack which received an award from Lord Baden Powell for "best pack the United Kingdom"? Source: Neesam, Malcolm (26 February 1999). "Lord Baden Powell on the Stray". Harrogate Advertiser and Weekly List of the Visitors. p. 7 col.4. Retrieved 30 October 2024 – via British Newspaper Archive. "Lord Baden Powell was in Harrogate for the special purpose of presenting Peter's Pole to the Clifton House School Pack, which had won the award of best pack in the United Kingdom, an exceptional commendation".
    • ALT0a: ... that sports teacher Harold Styan of Clifton House School played the music halls when young, and knocked out two attackers in his old age? Source as above
    • ALT0b: ... that Clifton House School's sports teacher Harold Styan played the music halls when young, and knocked out two attackers in his old age? Source as above Storye book (talk) 11:12, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    One issue is that, while not an official rule or guidelines, it is usually discouraged to mention people without articles by name in hooks. I'm not sure how strict that practice is, but it's been brought up many times in the past. In any case, it might be necessary to remove Styan's name from the hooks. As for the trimming part, the wording I had was something like "... that a Clifton House School sports teacher knocked out two attackers in his old age?", which is more straightforward. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:19, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't think your suggestion is appropriate, because this was an expensive private school, and Styan had the Order of the British Empire for his youth work. In other words, he was a hero and teacher, not a gangster. The hooks that I gave suggest that he was a complicated and interesting character, but your hook suggests that he might be just some kind of felon or that he ultimately developed dementia. If there is no specific rule against using his name, then I don't see why we should remove it. However I shall look at that section of the article and see whether there is enough there to make Styan into a separate article, then the hooks will have his name in lights, and this nom will be a double nom. Storye book (talk) 16:52, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Update. I am separating the two articles, but it will take a day or two. Thank you for your patience. Please note that the Harold Styan link is currently a redirect to Clifton House School. I shall correct that when I publish his article. Storye book (talk) 18:03, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's not a rule that's formally codified and thus not in the guidelines, but I remember it being discouraged before. I think Theleekycauldron might know about it. In any case, if the hook becomes a double nom then that particular issue becomes moot. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:09, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    see WP:DYKG#C1 theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 23:13, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I am not sure what you are referring to, Leeky, but the redirect is temporary on this page as explained above, and not intended for publication on the Main Page. I have nearly finished Styan's own page, and hope to publish today or tomorrow (when the redirect will resolve to a direct link). Thank you for your patience. Storye book (talk) 12:09, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Sounds good to me! :) theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 08:36, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    James Michael Reardon

    (
    )
    Msgr. Reardon speaking in the Basilica of Saint Mary
    Msgr. Reardon speaking in the Basilica of Saint Mary
    Created by Darth Stabro (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 6 past nominations.

    ~Darth StabroTalk • Contribs 02:56, 5 November 2024 (UTC).[reply]

    Pro-Fatimid conspiracy against Saladin

    (
    )
    • Source: summary of the entire article
    Improved to Good Article status by Cplakidas (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 145 past nominations.

    Constantine ✍ 19:27, 4 November 2024 (UTC).[reply]

    @Cplakidas: Please address the above.--Launchballer 01:27, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Launchballer and Aafi: what am I supposed to address? If there is any specific criticism or suggestion for improvement, I'll gladly consider it, but 'can be made better' or 'not appealing enough' is little to go on. The fact that Muslims would make common cause with the Crusaders, or with a sect known as 'Assassins' of all things, is IMO plenty interesting, especially compared to many other hooks I have encountered in DYK in the past. Constantine ✍ 17:18, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    as I said in my comment (not a review) but I do agree that the latter part "are said to have made common cause with the Crusaders and the Assassins?" is pretty much interesting. The initial part didn't appeal to me and I dropped a comment. Up to you or a reviewer, to work on this. This wasn't a serious review but a simple suggestions that this could be worked upon. Regards, Aafi (talk) 17:34, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks Aafi for clarifying. How about ALT1 ... that the members of an abortive conspiracy to restore the Fatimid Caliphate are said to have asked the Order of Assassins for assistance in eliminating Saladin? Constantine ✍ 10:49, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Articles created/expanded on November 5

    [edit]

    Oasis (Minecraft clone)

    (
    )
    Created by Johnson524 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    Loytra (talk) 13:36, 7 November 2024 (UTC).[reply]

    • Comment The disambiguation is incorrect - if this is considered a video game, then per WP:NCVGDAB it should be (2024 video game) instead (since there is already a 2005 video game of the same name). That said, I am not sure I would consider it a video game, given that it does not work according to anything but dream logic, and is more of a vague approximation of a game. Therefore, (simulation) or (AI simulation) could be a better disambiguation. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:30, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • If it's not clear exactly what Oasis is, then why would the disambiguation be considered incorrect? The software is most notable for being a clone of Minecraft, surely that should be mentioned in the title for clarity sake? Hell, half the time it's referred to as "AI Minecraft" rather than its actual name. Loytra (talk) 01:43, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        • It is incorrect because "Minecraft clone" is overly specific and therefore goes against disambiguation guidelines. It is like using (black dog with long fur and floppy ears) instead of (dog). It must be made more broad, whether by calling it "video game" or "simulation". Furthermore, calling it a "clone" may in fact be incorrect. It is literally Minecraft, as played by interpreting the game through an AI, whereas "clone" is typically used to describe games that are similar to, but not identical to another. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 06:42, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
          • Most of the sources referenced in the article describe it as a "version of Minecraft" or simply "AI-generated Minecraft". It really isn't commonly referred to as "Oasis"; I don't think most people would recognise the software if it was under the title "Oasis (2024 video game)" or "Oasis (simulation)". Imo it has to have "Minecraft" in the title. I know naming conventions are pretty strict but I'd almost argue that this is an WP:IAR situation. Loytra (talk) 11:54, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
            • I can confidently say it's not an IAR situation. After looking at the sources more, I am convinced that (AI model) is the best DAB for this as it is first and foremost a model that can be "played" using a game interface. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:43, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment. I don't think arguing over the title should block this from DYK. Only truly egregiously wrong titles would cause that kind of problem, and the current title is clearly not that bad - as noted, the COMMONNAME is something like "AI Minecraft". (And I don't think the case is as open-and-shut as Zxc thinks it is, either.) Zxc, you should file a WP:RM and see what the community thinks IMO. SnowFire (talk) 19:21, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • I agree. Its now time to keep discussion in this template related to DYK reviews and any discussion about the name of this article, should take place via an RM and any discussion about improving this article should take place at the relevant talk page. Article titles are outside the scope of a DYK review. side note: sounds like I'm a forum moderator at this point JuniperChill (talk) 16:19, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    A reviewer is needed for this nomination. Z1720 (talk) 15:16, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Abortion in Kyrgyzstan

    (
    )
    • Reviewed:
    Created by PhoenixCaelestis (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    -Emily (PhoenixCaelestis) (talk) 15:41, 5 November 2024 (UTC).[reply]

    • @PhoenixCaelestis: The article looks good. No copyvios. QPQ not needed. Hook is interesting. I would add a link to haram. In the sources I was unable to find the part that said that it is haram, and that women refuse to do it for this reason. I see that part about that woman in Osh, but the source doesn't say the "haram" bit. Could you provide one that does say "haram" please? ―Panamitsu (talk) 05:14, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Panamitsu: I've added a link to haram, and here's a source for the part on whether or not abortion is haram. It is from the Australian National Imams Council, an organization of mosque leaders.

    https://www.anic.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/THE-ISLAMIC-POSITION-ON-ABORTION.pdf

    ―PhoenixCaelestis (talk) 07:26, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    • @PhoenixCaelestis: Thank you for working on this article. The source you suggest states the formal position as haram, but I do not see information in the article or the source you added to support the statement "that women refuse to do it for this reason". You need statistics if you want to support this claim. The only case mentioned is one woman doctor who says that she is now afraid to counsel people about abortion. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 20:18, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Mary Mark Ockerbloom: I've added two more sources to the article to back the claim, and I will provide them here as well.

    https://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/Review/responses/KYRGYZSTAN-English.pdf https://europe.ippf.org/blogs/kyrgyzstans-cocktail-conservatism-and-apathy-bitter-draught-women

    -Emily (PhoenixCaelestis) (talk) 13:05, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    • @PhoenixCaelestis: The new sources generally talk about culture and issues in medical care for women, but I don't see that either one clearly presents either a claim or evidence that many women refuse to go through with abortion because it is considered haram. One source even comments (without data?) that women may be more likely to get abortions because contraception is costly. The sources are also not very current. I'm not trying to be difficult here, but I think you'll need to either rephrase the hook or find more explicit sources that clearly support what you state. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 17:02, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The hook is very unlikely to be true. In addition to what Mary Mark Ockerbloom wrote, I should also note that the claim that abortion is haram is in itself either misleading or outright incorrect, as explained by Islam and abortion. Each of the four Sunni schools considers abortion permitted but under different circumstances, and the dominant school in Kyrgyzstan is the one that is most permitting regarding abortion. Surtsicna (talk) 23:12, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @PhoenixCaelestis: Please address the above. Z1720 (talk) 15:17, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Isn't that rather common even in some countries where abortion is legal? Even where it is legal, there is often a stigma around it. I don't see how that's limited to Kyrgyzstan. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:55, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @PhoenixCaelestis: Per my above comment, this probably needs a completely different angle. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:21, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Gohobi

    (
    )
    Created by Narutolovehinata5 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 109 past nominations.

    Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:26, 5 November 2024 (UTC).[reply]

    • @Narutolovehinata5:, Thanks for the article. This is a suggestion: could you expand the article slightly to give some idea of what it means to have a "tofu mentality"? For those of us who won't be able to read the original sources if we click through, the current Wikipedia article gives no explanation of the hook. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 20:26, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    For what it's worth, the sources regarding the band only use "tofu mentality" without further elaboration (other than it was a term they gave to themselves), so I can't really add more to the article without doing original research. Technically, in Japanese, the term "tofu mentality" means something similar to what English speakers would call a "snowflake", although the article uses a literal translation of "豆腐メンタル" rather than the translated version (which is probably still accurate since the literal meaning is correct in Japanese). The full explanation about what the term means would probably not work for the band's article since it would delve into original research or even WP:COAT, but that's the explanation for context. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:06, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    jp:豆腐メンタル maps to Snowflake (slang), so maybe a piped link to Snowflake (slang) in the hook would suffice?
    have created redirect for tofu mentality, and updating hook below -Bogger (talk) 15:11, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    ALT0A... that the Japanese band Gohobi describes themselves as having a tofu mentality? (same source) -Bogger (talk) 14:43, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I actually think the link would distract from the main article and divert clicks, so linking in the hook might not be a good idea. Should be fine for the article, though. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:00, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    "tofu mentality" ..? -Bogger (talk) 09:37, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I mentioned in the original nomination comment that I'd leave it to the reviewer if "tofu mentality" should have quotes or not since I wasn't sure if they were necessary. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:44, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


    Articles created/expanded on November 6

    [edit]

    Dostrotime

    (
    )
    • Source: On 23 January 2024, the music video for the lead single "Wendorlan" was released on YouTube. The visuals for the music video were made by Jenkinson himself, using an oscilloscope. It was filmed in one take and, according to Jenkinson, he used "custom processing to generate the XY signal from components of track audio and control data". https://thequietus.com/news/squarepusher-wendorlan/
    • Reviewed:
    Created by Beachweak (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    Beachweak (talk) 12:55, 6 November 2024 (UTC).[reply]

    Articles created/expanded on November 7

    [edit]

    Organization of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

    (
    )
    Moved to mainspace by John P. Sadowski (NIOSH) (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 43 past nominations.

    John P. Sadowski (NIOSH) (talk) 00:07, 8 November 2024 (UTC).[reply]

    Petergofsky District

    (
    )
    • Source: M. Mitelʹman. Борьба партии большевиков за упрочение советской власти (1917- 1918 гг.). Политиздат при ЦК ВКП(б), 1940. p. 20
    Moved to mainspace by Soman (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 410 past nominations.

    Soman (talk) 23:33, 7 November 2024 (UTC).[reply]

    Bunt sind schon die Wälder

    (
    )
    J. F. Reichardt
    J. F. Reichardt
    Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 2124 past nominations.

    Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:16, 7 November 2024 (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
    Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
    QPQ: Done.

    Overall: Thank you for this interesting article. I would like to hear this one. A few comments:

    • Earwig finds only quotations and proper names. No problem there.
    • The hook citation (above) for ALT0 was not in the article, so I added it there. I also gave the article a very minor copyedit. That does not affect this DYK review.
    • One issue: The citation given above for ALT0 does not confirm popularity. Popularity is mentioned in the name of the website, but not in the main text of the website. Also, the website name says (if I understand correctly) "popular and traditional lieder", so according to that, this piece could be in traditional style (which does not imply popularity). So I think we need to EITHER find another citation OR another hook. Storye book (talk) 11:27, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Storye book: Not really a fan of the proposed hook, since the context given does not seem to make it clear why it is important that it has remained popular, and the context of it remaining popular is not clear (what is intended by "remained popular"?). I was going to suggest a hook involving Schubert, but the meaning of "different setting" is not clear: does it mean he wrote another melody to the song, or that Reichardt's melody was later re-used by Schubert? If it's the latter then perhaps that could work as a hook. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 14:39, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The wording I had in mind was something like "... that the melody of "Bunt sind schon die Wälder" (Colourful are the forests already) by Johann Friedrich Reichardt (pictured) was later used by Franz Schubert?", but I'm not sure if that was the intended context of the "Schubert wrote a different setting" part. That suggestion could probably still be worked on, I just threw it out here for brainstorming purposes. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 15:42, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you - both - for thinking. I am open to rewording. Grammar: in German, "und" says that something is both, both traditional and popular", - if it was only one, German would use "oder". As you will have seen, there were multiple melodies, before and after, but this is the one in most publications, recorded, sung. Take Hannes Wader, a singer-songwriter himself: singing that old melody. (yt at the bottom) - Schubert wrote a different setting (= different melody + different piano), which didn't become popular, - note that only one of the uses mentioned has his version, - it remained for art singers and higher school education. What word would you choose instead of "popular" for: is the one that people know and sing? Schubert is really only a side note here, his setting didn't get popular in any sense, it's not Erlkönig. I didn't know he wrote a melody, but now he wrote 700 (as DYK once informed us). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:35, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Would it help to add that it was recorded among the "80 most popular Volkslieder" [27]. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:39, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The new reference given by Gerda Arendt is satisfactory, and it explains the meaning of popularity in the article's context. Gerda, could you please give us an ALT1, and put the new sentence and citation in the article? Thank you. Storye book (talk) 08:16, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Storye bookYou mean a sentence about that collection? (In another nom, someone mentioned "promotional". Anyway, ref added, which supports "remained popular. Will search for more. As a little gift: a children's tv version ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:30, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I added two more indications of popularity, a 2011 poll and a 2017 collection. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:11, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    ALT0a: ... that the Volkslied "Bunt sind schon die Wälder" (Colourful are the forests already) has remained popular with the 1799 melody by Johann Friedrich Reichardt (pictured)?
    to avoid the impression that only the melody remained popular. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:14, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you, Gerda. The citation is now in the article, and I approve ALT0a, with image. Storye book (talk) 09:40, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Pulling this per this discussion. Jlwoodwa raised concerns that the hook was hard to understand. In addition, the hook at best probably borderline meets WP:DYKINT. Some possible alternative suggestions:
    Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:48, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    for ALT 1 or 1a, subject to Gerda Arendt's approval. Storye book (talk) 09:47, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I am sorry that I wrote so misleading. Not true. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:58, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Gerda Arendt: As far as I can see, you have not written anything misleading or untrue. Please explain? Thanks.
    Regarding the word, "popular", in the discussion someone appeared confused by the word, presumably because they lived in a world so narrow that they did not know that "popular music" is a subsidiary meaning of "popular", which has for hundreds of years just meant that a lot of people liked something. Storye book (talk) 10:19, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The poll had 20 suggestions without Herbstlied. IT was No. 2 of the additional ones. - Please word for me. A song with a 1799 tune is still popular. The song hast a longish title in German, which I thought was good to translate. The title could mean anything, so we have to say what it is if you ask me. As you will not have noticed the hook is a bit quirky because with a composed melody it's not what you'd expect a Volkslied to be. Why would we not credit the composer who won over Schubert in popularity? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:09, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    ALT2 ... that the folk-style melody for "Bunt sind schon die Wälder" was composed long ago by Johann Friedrich Reichardt (pictured) and it is still liked by many?
    ALT1b .... that radio listeners voted "Bunt sind schon die Wälder" second in their suggested list of the most beautiful German folk songs? (See Gerda's comment above, regarding this one). Storye book (talk) 11:53, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Third party required to approve ALT2 and/or ALT1b only. Storye book (talk) 11:53, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think ALT1b would get us into trouble with ERRORS because it's more No. 22, and tough to explain with the 20 from the station. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:33, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    I really don't think ALT2 as currently written is going to work out. It's rather vague and basically says "did you know that this song written long ago is still popular?", which actually isn't all that uncommon. It would be like a hook saying "that the folk song "Yankee Doodle" from the 1700s remains popular?" I still think something about the poll would be the best option here, although if that really can't work out then either a completely different angle be suggested here, or the nomination be rejected for lack of a hook. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:23, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    And I really don't think that slamming down the hopes of a nomination which bores you (and bores you alone, so far) is a constructive way to contribute. If this subject matter bores you, go and contribute to a nomination about your own favourite music, sport or whatever, and leave us to work productively on this one. Thank you.
    Controversy about which tune is the "right" one for a favourite set of verses can be a powerful force, and can cause concerts to be spoiled or cancelled. For example, in the UK (and possibly Europe, I don't know), a favoured tune for Psalm 23 is Crimond. There are many competing tunes for it, including Brother James' Air, which allows more fancy choral settings. However, when some people (including me) hear that tune used instead of Crimond, they become very angry. There is nothing wrong with Brother James' Air, but Crimond is loved for sentimental reasons. I can assure you that the subject matter of ALT 2 is far from boring. Storye book (talk) 10:17, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    ALT3 ... that the melody for "Bunt sind schon die Wälder", composed by Johann Friedrich Reichardt (pictured), is still preferred by many, even though the famous Franz Schubert wrote a tune for it? (176 characters)
    Third party approval still required for ALT2 and/or ALT3. Storye book (talk) 10:17, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    We could go with some variation of ALT3 (we probably need to reject ALT2 however due to WP:DYKINT reasons). However, the issue with ALT3 is that it is not directly stated in the article or the source (there is nothing in the article that directly says that people prefer Recihardt's version, just that it exists and is popular while one by Schubert exists). If that could be addressed, ALT3 would be a suitable option.
    As for the "bores me" aspect, for what it's worth, Gerda's nominations and hooks have long had a reputation among several DYK regulars (not just me) for failing to meet the interestingness criterion, so it's not just me who has raised concerns. Other editors such as 4meter4 and CurryTime7-24 (incidentally both also classical music experts) have also raised concerns about her nominations and hooks in the past. While one could argue that DYKINT is by its nature a subjective criterion, the fact that Gerda's reputation exists, along with how the current wording of DYKINT was a direct response to one of her nominations, can't be discounted. For what it's worth, I have no issue with classical music as a topic itself and there have been plenty of acceptable hooks about the field from Gerda and other editors like 4meter4 and CurryTime among others. The issue has usually been the hooks themselves, not the field. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:10, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Gerda Arendt: Are there any citations available, to support ALT3? Or is there any content in the existing citations, which could be added to the article in support of ALT3? Storye book (talk) 13:18, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Narutolovehinata5: Broadly speaking, classical music is that European vocal and orchestral music composed mostly in the 17th and 18th centuries, the name being reflective of that era's interest in the classical arts, such as Palladian architecture. Classical music tends to be emotionally controlled, with certain formal rules. Then you get transitional composers such as Beethoven who take the mickey out of classical music and play with more emotional stuff. Full-blown 19th-century orchestral music, and music for trained singers at that time in Europe, is called Romantic music, partly because it breaks with the previous century's emotional control. So we are not dealing here on this nom with classical music. It is music from the Romantic era. The confusion arises from today's usage of the word, "classical", where it has come to mean "not pop music". That is to say, when used in that way, the word has little real meaning. Storye book (talk) 13:35, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (ec) Packing for return trip. Will be about a day. Hate editing mobile. - Sorry, Schubert takes us too far away. The 2 melodies don't compare. Schubert's is an art song, with no chance to become popular. The composer of such a successful thing deserves mentioning by name, imho. - After edit conflict: indeed, Not classical, but POPULAR. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:43, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Articles created/expanded on November 8

    [edit]

    Death of Milton King

    (
    )
    • Source: Source 1: Cobley, Alan Gregor (June 1992). "'Far from home': the origins and significance of the Afro‐Caribbean community in South Africa to 1930". Journal of Southern African Studies. 18 (2): 349–370. doi:10.1080/03057079208708318. Source 2: "West Indies Boycott South African Goods". Rand Daily Mail. Johannesburg, South Africa. October 10, 1951. p. 4.
    Improved to Good Article status by SunTunnels (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    SunTunnels (talk) 01:49, 15 November 2024 (UTC).[reply]

    Artur Bubnevych

    (
    )
    Created by Maximilian775 (talk) and Darth Stabro (talk). Number of QPQs req