Template talk:Did you know

For instructions on how to nominate an article, see below.
"Did you know..."
DiscussionWT:DYK
RulesWP:DYK
Supplementary rulesWP:DYKSG
Noms (awaiting approval)WP:DYKN
Reviewing guideWP:DYKR
Noms (approved)WP:DYKNA
Preps & QueuesT:DYK/Q
Currently on Main Page
Main Page errorsWP:ERRORS
Archive of DYKsWP:DYKA
StatsWP:DYKSTATS
April 1 hooksWP:DYKAPRIL
April 1 talkWT:DYKAPRIL

This page is to nominate fresh articles to appear in the "Did you know" section on the Main Page, by a "hook" (an interesting note). Nominations that have been approved are moved to a staging area, from which the articles are promoted into the Queue.

Contents

TOC:    Go to bottom     Go to top
Count of DYK Hooks
Section # of Hooks # Verified
December 27 1
February 26 1 1
March 4 1 1
March 8 1
March 12 1
March 17 1
March 19 1
March 25 1
March 31 1 1
April 2 1
April 4 1
April 6 1
April 7 1
April 9 1
April 12 1
April 13 1 1
April 14 1 1
April 20 1
April 22 1
April 23 1
April 24 1
April 25 1
April 26 2 1
April 28 2 1
April 30 1
May 1 1 1
May 2 1
May 3 6 2
May 4 1
May 5 2
May 7 1
May 8 3 3
May 9 1
May 11 3 2
May 12 3 1
May 13 3 2
May 14 2 2
May 15 4 3
May 16 2 1
May 17 1
May 18 5 2
May 19 2 1
May 20 9 3
May 21 9 6
May 22 7 2
May 23 3 1
May 24 6 3
May 25 4 4
May 26 3 2
May 27 8 8
May 28 8 5
May 29 9 6
May 30 7 6
May 31 10 5
June 1 9 9
June 2 11 9
June 3 9 4
June 4 8 4
June 5 10 7
June 6 9 5
June 7 9 6
June 8 18 11
June 9 16 9
June 10 8 4
June 11 8 4
June 12 12 9
June 13 6 3
June 14 5 3
June 15 10 5
June 16 7 4
June 17 10 5
June 18 8 2
June 19 9 2
June 20 6 2
June 21 5 1
June 22 1
June 23 9 3
June 24 5
June 25 2
June 26
Total 361 189
Last updated 14:42, 26 June 2019 UTC
Current time is 15:01, 26 June 2019 UTC [refresh]

Instructions for nominators[]

Create a subpage for your new DYK suggestion and then list the page below under the date the article was created or the expansion began or it became a good article (not the date you submit it here), with the newest dates at the bottom. Any registered user may nominate a DYK suggestion (if you are not a registered user, please leave a message at the bottom of the DYK project talk page with the details of the article you would like to nominate and the hook you would like to propose); self-nominations are permitted and encouraged. Thanks for participating and please remember to check back for comments on your nomination (consider watchlisting your nomination page).

If this is your first nomination, please read the DYK rules before continuing:
Official DYK criteria: DYK rules and supplementary guidelines
Unofficial guide: Learning DYK

To nominate an article[]

Read these instructions completely before proceeding.
For simplified instructions, see User:Rjanag/Quick DYK 2.
I.
Create the nomination subpage.

Enter the article title in the box below and click the button. (To nominate multiple articles together, enter any or all of the article titles.) You will then be taken to a preloaded nomination page.


II.
Write the nomination.

On the nomination page, fill in the relevant information. See Template:NewDYKnomination and {{NewDYKnomination/guide}} for further information.

  • Not every line of the template needs to be filled in. For instance, if you are not nominating an image to appear with your hook, there is no need to fill in the image-related lines.
  • Add an summary e.g. "Nominating YOUR ARTICLE TITLE for DYK" and click Save page.
  • Make sure the nomination page is on your watchlist, so you can follow the review discussion.
III.

In the current nominations section find the subsection for the date on which the article was created or on which expansion began (or, if a new Good Article, the date on which it became a GA), not the date on which you make the nomination.

How to review a nomination[]

Any or 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 orial 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 s 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:

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.

Frequently asked questions[]

Backlogged?[]

This page is often backlogged. As long as your submission is still on the page, it will stay there until an or reviews it. Since ors are encouraged to review the oldest submissions first (so that those hooks don't grow stale), 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 above).

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.

Search archived DYK nomination discussions[]

Instructions for other ors[]

How to promote an accepted hook[]

How to remove a rejected hook[]

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

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

Nominations[]

Older nominations[]

Articles created/expanded on December 27[]

XIX Army Corps

Created by Ted52 (talk). Nominated by DannyS712 (talk) at 18:08, 31 December 2018 (UTC).

Policy compliance:

Hook eligiblity:

QPQ: None required.

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg I find the article very interesting and comprehensive; I can tell the creator worked very hard on it and that is much appreciated! However, I'm afraid this will require work before it can be eligible. I'd suggest first making sure all material is supported by a reliable sources and then requesting a copy-. I haven't fully reviewed for neutrality yet but will soon. Best of wishes, SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 03:13, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

@Ted52: can you take a look at this? I'm not any where to as knowledgeable about this page as you are... --DannyS712 (talk) 04:36, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
@DannyS712: All material can be supported by sources, but I was of the impression that citing the same page over and over again is just bad style. I could go through the work of citing every paragraph? Ted52 (talk) 14:29, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
Hey Ted52. Since you're using an inline citation style, then the general rule is that there should be a cite for at least every paragraph, and if a paragraph has material from multiple citations you may sometimes want to distribute multiple refs within that paragraph. Using a cite multiple times it's not a problem; it's certainly better than having unsourced material. The following sections in particular need to be sourced better:
  • Wizna and Brest-Litovsk (6–16 September 1939)
  • The "German-Soviet Parade" and the Conclusion of the Campaign (17 September - 6 October 1939)
  • Preparations
  • Attack towards the Meuse (10–13 May 1940)
  • In the Somme Basin (17–20 May 1940)
  • Towards Dunkirk (21–29 May 1940)
  • Panzergruppe Guderian and southern Redeployment (28 May - 9 June 1940)
  • Southern Offensive (10–22 June 1940)
  • Panzergruppe 2
  • XIX Mountain Army Corps
It's an interesting read, and again, I can tell you worked hard on it. Let me know if you have any questions.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 14:44, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
Template:Reply to:SkyGazer 512Very well, will do. Is there a way I can template one reference and use it for the next? Reentering the same book's info over and over again is cumbersome, but I also don't want to do the thing where it's like "p. 100 - 200", because that's silly. I would like to preferably use the same reference over and over again for like 60% of the passages you inquire about, but with a slightly different page notation each time. The reason why most of the paragraphs aren't cited is exactly that 'cumbersome' functionality of having to build the reference from scratch everytime. Ted52 (talk) 16:19, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
@Ted52: Well, I suppose you could convert to using {{sfn}} refs. Basically how that works is you have two reference sections; one of them has a list of sources and the other usually just contains {{reflist}}. For the list of sources section, you include |ref=harv at the end of each citation template. Then, whenever you want to use a reference in the article, use the coding {{sfn|Author's last name|Year the author wrote it|pp=Page number range (or p=single page number)}}, and make sure that in the list of sources section each ref has a last= parameter and either a year= or date= parameter. If you do everything correctly, when you click on a sfn ref used in the article, it will be abbreviated and take you to the ref section with the reflist; then if you click on the highlighted ref there, it will take you to that ref's entry in the list of full sources, which only need to be listed once. It sounds confusing, yes, but once you get used to it it's not as bad as it seems. The documentation page for the template gives a lot more details. I can give you some examples if you'd like and I could help you convert the refs for this one. It's often a good idea to use it when there are book citations which you use a large number of pages from. Another technique sometimes used is having sfn for some sources and the other "main" ref style for others, such as using sfn for only books.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 16:40, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
An example of a page using sfn for only the book refs is Chinese alligator (e.g., the abbreviated Reading & Miller 2000, p. 72. in the reflist which links to the full ref in the sources subsection: Reading, Richard P.; Miller, Brian (2000). Endangered Animals: A Reference Guide to Conflicting Issues (illustrated ed.). Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0313308161. Retrieved December 9, 2018.). Molly Morgan is an example of a page which uses sfn for all references except one. If you have any further questions, please let me know; this can seem quite confusing. I highly recommend that you read the documentation page for the sfn template if you might want to use this style.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 16:44, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
(btw, Ted52, the correct coding for a ping is {{reply to|USERNAME HERE}}, not {{reply to:USERNAME HERE}} :-)--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 16:47, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Another way to repeat citations of the same source, specifying different pages, is to define a reference by name (e.g. SOURCE) and combine that with a page number template e.g.
    <ref name="SOURCE"/>{{rp|6-42}}
    Repeat as needed, just give relevant page numbers each time. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 02:34, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

─────────────────────────G'day all, I just noticed this on the Milhist alert list. I thought I'd give you a heads-up that Guderian was the commanding general of this formation at the time, and we need to be careful about accepting what he says as gospel, given he is probably too close to the subject. It would be much better if this hook was cited to a reliable source that was independent of the subject. As a general observation, the article relies far too heavily on Guderian's writings, needs more independent reliable sources, and we need to be wary of the clean Wehrmacht trope associated with many Wehrmacht generals trying to whitewash their activities during the war. Also, the article should be at XIX Army Corps (Wehrmacht) IAW pre-emptive disambiguation arrangements for military formations per WP:MILMOS#UNITNAME. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:08, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

@Ted52: It's been a while since this nom has received any activity; would it be possible for you to cite the hook to a source that is independent of the subject and reliable, per Peacemaker67's suggestion? Thanks, --SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 04:19, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
@SkyGazer 512:@Peacemaker67: I think I have been quite careful in pointing out the rather obvious flaws with Guderian's writings in terms of the war crimes committed by the German units during the operation, and used them strictly for the purpose of the unit's military movement. Yes, there are authors I could cite - Piekalkiewicz, Mazouwer, Shirer, Frieser, Kershaw, Bishop and others have all at least tangentially written about XIX Army Corps, especially as it was so central to the operational success of the whole campaign. But - and this a big but -, they all go back to Guderian's writings as their source for any troop movements they describe. You'll reliably find his books in their bibliographies, and, if inline citations are used, they either reference him or often earlier authors that also referenced him. You're not going to find precise primary source information about what battle lines the units were to take on Guderian's orders or what crossroads they were to advance to or what towns were or weren't captured in a single day outside of Guderian, who got to use his personal notes for the information at hand. I tried desperately to staff up any information that could be double checked, but even good old Percy Schramm couldn't help me, as his war diaries don't start before August of 1940. So, if it's okay to just phantom cite Guderian through other authors, I guess I can try and do that, but that's hardly intellectually honest. Ted52 (talk) 08:36, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

Symbol question.svg I appreciate the substantial effort that has been put into this article, and I would like to see this nomination move forward. Before I pick up the review, I have a couple suggestions. The article's introduction is very small compared to the text in the main body. I think it should be expanded to adequate summarize the key points of the article. I also note that there are several properly licensed photos in the article which would be suitable for a photo hook. It would be nice to feature this nomination in the photo slot. Once the introduction is expanded, I will go ahead with the full review. Flibirigit (talk) 02:05, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Ted52, thank you for the expanded introduction. It looks good at first glance. I will start reading through in more detail later today. It might take me a few days to do a full review because this is a big article, but I promise to do a bit each day until we are done! Flibirigit (talk) 13:38, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
EdChem, your contriubtions to the introduction are noted here. Would you like to help out with this nomination? Thanks again. Flibirigit (talk) 19:25, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
Flibirigit, thanks for the acknowledgement. I actually came here as I need to do some QPQ reviews, saw that this needed an intro, and started it. I do mean to extend on it to cover France but have not returned – real life and all that! – but I will get to it within a few days. I can't be a reviewer now that I've added half an intro, but I will help out if I can. Certainly the article deserves main page exposure, but also a copy and some referencing work like including English-language titles of references. EdChem (talk) 14:48, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
EdChem, thanks again for what you have do so far. I can wait a day or two if time is needed. I understand, as we all get busy. I will likely do this review in bits and pieces since it is a substantial work. Aside from the introduction, I am curious if a hook can be formed from one or more of the photos in the article. I'm also curious about limiting the very long table of contents via Template:TOC limit. We could leave each day as a header, but add one more level to the hierarchy and group them by week or battle perhaps? Flibirigit (talk) 15:14, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
I apologize for not getting back to this sooner. I will go over it again in more detail tomorrow and on the weekend. Flibirigit (talk) 21:20, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Ted52, EdChem, I am about halfway finished reading through the article. I will post a finished review tomorrow. I can work with the present hook, but are either of you interested in proposing a hook with a photo? Flibirigit (talk) 03:18, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Second review

Policy compliance:

QPQ: Red XN - ?
Overall: Symbol question.svg The article is still new enough and long enough as in the first review. I found nothing that makes the article biased in favour of either side of the war, and is neutral in tone. I alos detected no plagiarism issues. The hook is interesting, mentioned inline, and is cited by a combination of sources. There is not photo used in this nomination as of yet. The nominator User:DannyS712 has more than five DYK crs, therefore QPQ is required. There are still a few paragraphs which need citations, however I note a big improvement from the first review. Also, there are a few section headers which are blank. I'm unsure if more text is coming to fill these in, or if they can be removed. The introduction appears to summarize only the eastern front. It needs to be expanded with content from the western front. Flibirigit (talk) 03:17, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

@Flibirigit: qpq added --DannyS712 (talk) 04:58, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Thank you. Flibirigit (talk) 05:08, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  • DannyS712, Flibirigit, I note that the 27 May 1940 and 21 June 1940 sections still remain blank, which is not allowed under DYK rules. Also, if there are any sections that are uncited, these need to be taken care of. DannyS712, do you think these can be taken care of soon? This nomination has been open since the final day of 2018, over five months ago, and really needs to be concluded. Thank you very much for whatever you can do. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:07, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
I have posted on the talk pages for Ted52 and EdChem to find out if either have time to contribute. I am willing to do copying, but I do not have the time or expertise to research the concerns I mentioned in my review above. If no help is coming soon, I will mark the review for closure. If that happens, I hope the article is eventually improved to GA status and nominated again for DYK. Flibirigit (talk) 21:38, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
@Flibirigit: It has to be noted that neither or has ed this month. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:26, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
@Flibirigit:@Narutolovehinata5: Removed those sections. But frankly, I am no longer interested in this DYK thing. I have no idea why you guys are pursuing this if the article was previously already rejected. But whatever. Ted52 (talk) 13:33, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
Symbol possible vote.svg I am sorry to hear that Ted52 no longer wishes to be involved, despite this nomination not being rejected at this time. Since there are still some unsourced sections at this time, this nomination cannot be approved at this time. I will wait a few days to see if EdChem or DannyS712 wish to continue. Flibirigit (talk) 15:22, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
@Flibirigit:: It's not so much about no longer wishing to be involved and more so my dissatisfaction with the intransparency of the process. However, I am interested in keeping the article to the highest quality possible. What do you think needs more sourcing? Ted52 (talk) 19:32, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
Ted, thank you for be willing to continue with the article. I will compile of list of sourcing questions and post it here by tomorrow or Friday at the latest. As for the transparency of DYK, I am more than willing to answer any questions. The rules and processes for the project are outlined here at Wikipedia:Did you know. At the Wikipedia talk:Did you know page, you are also welcome to ask any questions you like. Thanks again. Flibirigit (talk) 20:32, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
Sourcing questions

Please see list of sourcing questions below. All paragraphs must have at least one citation at the end, as per the DYK rules. Flibirigit (talk) 19:29, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

  1. Section: Poland Campaign-->Preparations. Last two sentences of the second paragraph are not cited.
  2. Section: Poland Campaign-->Action at Tuchola Forest (1–5 September 1939). First paragraph is not cited. Maybe it should be combined with the paragraph which follows it.
  3. Section: Western Campaign-->Preparations for the Western Campaign. Ambiguous whether citation [35] applies to some of all of lists which follow it.
  4. Section: Western Campaign-->10 May 1940. First paragraph has no citation.
  5. Section: Western Campaign-->12 May 1940. First paragraph has no citation.
  6. Section: Western Campaign-->13 May 1940. Second paragraph has no citation.
  7. Section: Western Campaign-->13 May 1940. Last paragraph has no citation at the end.
  8. Section: Western Campaign-->14 May 1940. First two paragraphs have no citations.
  9. Section: Western Campaign-->14 May 1940. Fourth paragraph has no citation at the end.
  10. Section: Western Campaign-->16 May 1940. Paragraph has citations in it, but not at the end.
  11. Section: Western Campaign-->21 May 1940. Last paragraph has no citation at the end.
  12. Section: Western Campaign-->22 May 1940. Second paragraph has no citation at the end.
  13. Section: Western Campaign-->25 May 1940. Paragraph has citations in it, but not at the end.
  14. Section: Western Campaign-->29 May 1940. Paragraph has citations in it, but not at the end.
  15. Section: Western Campaign-->11 June 1940. First paragraph has no citation at the end.
  • Flibirigit I've always interpreted the sourcing requirements to be one per paragraph, not one per paragraph, required to be at the end of the paragraph. Where are you seeing that? --valereee (talk) 20:28, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
  • That's correct, valereee. WP:DYKSG#D2 includes the following: A rule of thumb is one inline citation per paragraph, excluding the lead, plot summaries, and paragraphs which summarize other cited content. The uncited paragraphs need to be cited. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:25, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
In the interests of not overwhelming this creator, who is a very new or, does anyone object to me striking the questions that only object to paragraphs that have no citation at the end? --valereee (talk) 20:47, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
With all due respect to everyone involved, this review has been going on for months, with numerous issues being hacked out on the nomination page. Meanwhile the article in question hasn't been ed by User:Ted52 in more than a week. My suggestion at this point would be to remove this DYK nomination, and bring the XIX Army Corps article up to GA, where in that event it will be once again elligable for another DYK nomination. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 21:55, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
Once again, I don't get tagged when something is demanded of me. I really cannot reasonably be expected to follow a DYK nomination process that I myself didn't initiate. I apologize to have wasted everyone's time, but please cancel the DYK nomination now. That said, I have now complied with the citation requests by Flibirigit. Ted52 (talk) 05:52, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
I'm sorry for initiating this - when I first came across the article I thought it had potential for DYK. I didn't realize how much of a burden this would be. @Ted52: sorry --DannyS712 (talk) 05:59, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg The added citations by @Ted52: are a great improvement to the article. The only remaining concern I have mentioned is the introduction summarizing the Eastern Front, and not the Western Front. If anyone wishes to expand the introduction accordingly, the nomination will be a pass in my review. Flibirigit (talk) 22:47, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
Flibirigit, pinging nom DannyS712 as Ted52 is simply the creator. From reading through the review, I'm not sure Ted52 was actually up for the DYK process. I like the article a lot and would like to see it get to DYK, but I'm not sure it's fair for us to ask Ted52 to do the work! :D --valereee (talk) 15:30, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
Flibirigit, I would like to suggest that the article is complete enough for DYK standards. WP:DYKSG#D7 is the relevant guideline: while it would be nice to have the Western front information in the introduction, it is all included in the body of the article. DYK articles are expected to be works in progress, for the most part. The nomination has been open for five and a half months; we shouldn't be keeping it pending when the actual DYK requirements appear to have been met. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:35, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
It is not necessary to ping me on this page. If I do some minor copying, expand the introduction and the pass the review, would the DYK community still feel I am a neutral reviewer? Flibirigit (talk) 16:56, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
Sorry for the ping; I'm using an autoresponder that adds it in as a default, but I'll try to remember to delete it when replying to you! I have no objection to you making article s and then finishing the review here. --valereee (talk) 17:11, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
I will start updating the introduction today, and hopefully give final approval by tomorrow. Flibirigit (talk) 16:08, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
I am still working on this in my sandbox. I should finish within a day or two. Flibirigit (talk) 02:41, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
Still working on this in my sandbox. Please be assured I have every intention of passing this nomination. I hope to be finished within a couple days. Real life if rather busy. Thank you for your patience. Flibirigit (talk) 17:59, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the update Flibirigit, I've taken the liberty of adding you as a co-nom for this nomination. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 19:01, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
Narutolovehinata5, if someone has done significant work on the article and is added, they get a DYKmake as a contributor, not a DYKnom, which is just about the initial nomination. Also, as a cred contributor, Flibirigit becomes ineligible to review, which sort of defeats the purpose of the above: I hope you'll be willing to offer yourself as the final reviewer in their place. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:40, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
I apologizes for delays in expanding the introduction. I am close to being finished and will post by tomorrow. Flibirigit (talk) 19:26, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 8[]

British Rail Class 458

A South West Trains Class 458 which was converted from a former Gatwick Express Class 460. The unit number is 458533.
A South West Trains Class 458 which was converted from a former Gatwick Express Class 460. The unit number is 458533.

Improved to Good Article status by Pkbwcgs (talk). Self-nominated at 17:28, 8 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg I find it hard to find ALT5 in the article. All I see is a chart with the (unsourced) number 6 as to the number of trains. I also think that all the life has gone out of the hook. This is a GA; could you suggest something else that is interesting and has an inline cite? Yoninah (talk) 20:23, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg Of the new hooks, I think ALT10 and ALT11 are the best, with a slight preference for ALT11 as it shows both the reliability and unreliability. I don't have access to the sources used for them so I am assuming good faith. This is almost ready to go: my only concern is that there's no footnote in the "Fleet details" section. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 07:49, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
I like ALT11 and I think that this should be used as the source for the hook. Pkbwcgs (talk) 20:49, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
@Pkbwcgs: Can you please cite the "Fleet details" sections so that this can be approved? Thanks. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:16, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5: I have cited the "Fleet details" section. Pkbwcgs (talk) 17:34, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
Almost good to go: however only one of the cells has a footnote, when both probably need it (I can't seem to verify one cell in the source given, the one about TSOL). Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:54, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
@Pkbwcgs: Ping. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:31, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5: I haven't been ing regularly so I couldn't reply. I can't find sources for the extra Class 460 TSOL vehicle. I have looked everywhere. Pkbwcgs (talk) 18:49, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
@Pkbwcgs: If that's the case it's probably better to simply comment it out. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:35, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 12[]

Media coverage of 2019 India–Pakistan standoff

Created by DiplomatTesterMan (talk). Self-nominated at 23:18, 16 March 2019 (UTC), co-nom by DBigXray 12:40, 22 March 2019 (UTC) .

Articles created/expanded on March 17[]

Felipe Reinoso

Created/expanded by Vycl1994 (talk). Self-nominated at 22:46, 19 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg The lead is too short. In the original hook "state legislature" must be replaced by "state legislature of US". RRD (talk) 17:07, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
The article lede now mentions Reinoso's tenure on the Connecticut House, and his election to the Peruvian legislature. ALT3 above specifies U. S. state legislature in addition to the wikilink state legislature (United States) that was already present. Vycl1994 (talk) 17:39, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
@Vycl1994: The lead claims that he was born in circa 1950. However, there is no source for it in the article. I have also added a when tag to the article. The article needs a little copy also. RRD (talk) 07:04, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
@Royroydeb: The biographical sketch attached to Reinoso's interview with Reyes states "Reinoso was born in Peru and immigrated to Connecticut in 1969" Keating, Pazniokas, and Lender (2008) states "Rep. Felipe Reinoso, a Bridgeport Democrat, flew back from his native Peru - where he lived for 19 years before moving to Connecticut".... Both references are linked to the sentence "Reinoso and his family immigrated to the United States in 1969, settling in Bridgeport, Connecticut." at the moment. Vycl1994 (talk) 14:33, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Sources I mentioned in my last post on this page are still accessible, support statements made in the article, and remain in position on the article itself. Every statement in the article body is sourced. If something is still not right, I welcome Royroydeb or any reviewer to let me know. The newest addition to the article is a barebones infobox, added by me, just prior to this . Vycl1994 (talk) 07:39, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 19[]

Pema Dhondup

Created by CAPTAIN MEDUSA (talk). Self-nominated at 21:35, 19 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg The article is too short, and contains less than 500 bytes of readable prose, which is all in the lead section. Please expand the article to have at least 1,500 bytes of readable prose. List and plot info do not count toward this total. —Ynhockey (Talk) 00:58, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
  • @Ynhockey: I've expand the article.___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 12:44, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
    • @CAPTAIN MEDUSA: Thanks, the length looks OK now, though I would still recommend expanding the article further. In any case, the article requires copying for grammar and style; I have added a relevant tag, this will likely be addressed by the guild of copyors. Feel free to post a request on their page to speed up the process. —Ynhockey (Talk) 13:28, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
    • @Ynhockey: I've fixed copying for grammar and style. ___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 13:24, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
      • @CAPTAIN MEDUSA: It seems that the article is still not well-written, and contains many English language mistakes. I see that you have requested a review at GOCE though, I think we can wait until they help you. I might be able to do so at a later time, but then another reviewer needs to look at the nom. —Ynhockey (Talk) 18:28, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
      • @Ynhockey: Article has been copy ed by Guild of Copy Editors___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 12:49, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Hook + source look good, article issues have been fixed. —Ynhockey (Talk) 13:44, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Hi, I came by to promote this, but I do not understand the hook. What is a "Nepalese Hollywood film"? The source doesn't call it that, nor does Wikipedia's article about it. Also, the hook seems to be implying that it is the first Nepalese Hollywood film, while the article says it is Dhondup's first Nepalese Hollywood film. I suggest you fix this description in the article and try a different hook. Mentioning his background or studies in Los Angeles might lend themselves to a better hook. Yoninah (talk) 20:10, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  • @CAPTAIN MEDUSA: you new hook doesn't make sense. "Between" implies a contrast between two things, not one. I also don't see the hook fact in the article. I fleshed out the biography and note that you are not making full use of your sources in writing the article. While I used his LinkedIn page for biographical details, you can look up these facts online and then cr them to other sources if you wish. Here is another hook idea:
  • ALT2: ... that Pema Dhondup studied filmmaking at the University of Southern California on a Fulbright scholarship so he could use the medium to tell the story of his "lost generation" of Tibetan youth? Yoninah (talk) 21:13, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
I like ALT2 the best but at 193 it's really long and probably could use some trimming. Yoninah. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:17, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
Narutolovehinata5, I have fixed the capitalized trademarks.___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 12:15, 16 June 2019 (UTC)


Articles created/expanded on March 25[]

Golem (Casken opera)

Created by Marosc9 (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 16:35, 1 April 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg - new and long enough (barely). Inline citations checks. Review made. No image to review. Hook looks interesting enough for inclusion. BabbaQ (talk) 22:10, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg What is this award? If it's notable, can a page be started to link it? Yoninah (talk) 21:54, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • No idea. Midnight, and Easter for 2 days. Patience please. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:04, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • I would have created a page on the Britten Award for Composition myself but research on the internet came up with almost nothing on it beyond John Casken being the first winner for Golem and Philip Cashian being the second winner, though I don't know what the composition was in his case. I've emailed the Britten Pears Foundation today who, if anyone should, should have more information. Let's see what they come back with. --Marosc9 (talk)
  • @Marosc9: thank you. But if it's not a notable award, why are you using it as a hook fact? Could you suggest another hook? Yoninah (talk) 22:48, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • I think you need to ask those questions of the nominator Gerda Arendt. I'm hoping the Pears Britten Foundation will be able to provide enough of a lead so that I can write an article on the award.
ALT1 ... that John Casken's 1989 opera Golem won the 1991 Gramophone Classical Music Award for Best Contemporary Recording?
ALT2 ... that John Casken's 1989 opera Golem is a recipient of a Gramophone Classical Music Award, often considered as the "Oscars of classical music"?
@Gerda Arendt, Marosc9, BabbaQ, and Yoninah: Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:06, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for offering. ALT1 is fine by me. ALT2 has too much focus on the award for my taste. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:10, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg This article was new enough when nominated and is long enough. The ALT1 hook facts are cited inline, the article is neutral and I detected no copyright issues. A QPQ has been done. However, the article needs some citations for the "Roles and scoring" section and for the first paragraph of the "Recordings" section. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:08, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
Ok, looked, reorganised a bit, used ref Schott more which has the details. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:26, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on April 2[]

Nasir-ud-Daulah

Nasir-ud-Daulah
Nasir-ud-Daulah

5x expanded by Royroydeb (talk). Self-nominated at 10:33, 2 April 2019 (UTC).

@Narutolovehinata5: The children table has been removed. New hook
I think that's a much better hook. Will try to give this a full review by tomorrow. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 14:25, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
I apologize for the delay as I had been caught up in other matters. Anyway, I have two issues at the moment: firstly, the sentence discussing ALT1 lacks a footnote. Secondly, are there more details about this revenue administration system? The sentence that comes after seems to talk more about government administration than the revenue administration. Or was that sentence the one which discussed the revenue administration system? The wording isn't very clear on that. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 07:53, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5: I have now added an inline cite
Comment I know we've moved on from Alt0, but just in case: 'restrained' is probably not the intended word. Refrained? --valereee (talk) 00:19, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
@Valereee: Probably. I am not a native speaker of English. What I meant that Lord Bentick did not interfere into Hyderabad state during the reign of the Nizam Nasir-ud-daulah. RRD (talk) 09:15, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
Royroydeb, 'refrained from interfering', then! He might have 'restrained himself from interfering' also. It's a mistake even native speakers might make. --valereee (talk) 10:59, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
I think my issue with ALT2 is that it uses simply "Nizam" despite being a relatively unfamiliar word: using the full term "Nizam of Hyderabad" might be a better option here. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 05:07, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on April 4[]

Proposed 2019 amendment to the Constitution of Malaysia

Created by Night Lantern (talk). Self-nominated at 09:00, 10 April 2019 (UTC).

  • Will be claiming this for review; I have struck ALT1 as being too long and too winding. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:42, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi there! Thanks for the review Mr. errr.. Naruto? 😅 Regarding the "background section", do you mean the POV on word such as "ignorance"? Seems I don't have idea on what choice of words that are very suitable for the replacement, mind to share some suggestion? Night Lanternhalo? 08:28, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
This would include words that "Among the very sensitive breached agreement", "negligence", "cannot appreciate the diversity and decentralisation were connected in the process aside from the ignorance", which are not suitable for Wikipedia in their current form. One suggestion I could give could be to request for a copy of the article over at WP:GOCE/R; this could also prove useful as there are also quite a few grammatical errors in the article. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 08:38, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Symbol possible vote.svg I've gone ahead and requested a copy; this nomination should be put on hold until that is finished. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:46, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Thank you Mr. Naruto. ☺ Night Lanternhalo? 02:25, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

───────────────────────── Hi Narutolovehinata5, I have rewritten the background section. There's still a lot of room for improvement, so it would still benefit from a GOCE lookover, but I believe it is an improvement in terms of POV. CMD (talk) 14:04, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

I'll defer comment until the copy is accomplished given the sheer length of the article. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:24, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
After the copy- by Mr. Blackmane, the percentage of copyright violation is about 37.9% based on data from Earwig's. I agree there still the need for sentence restructuring, thank you for taking your time to review the nomination. Many thanks to the copy or as well. ☺ Night Lanternhalo? 00:45, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
As I've been pinged, I'll add a few comments. The biggest problem (apart from copyvio) is the chronology is all over the place, especially with the use of sources. Some sources are used to discuss aspects that occurred before the vote, but the same source would also be used for aspects that occurred after the vote. This would be very confusing for the reader. I would suggest reconsidering the layout of the reaction section. Also, the responses sections needs a massive pruning, there's more material on the response than there is on the actual substance of the amendment. Just my 2 cents. Blackmane (talk) 02:03, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Adam Aziz (9 April 2019). "No two-thirds majority for Bill to make Sabah, Sarawak equal partners". The Edge Markets. Retrieved 10 April 2019.
  2. ^ "Status of Sabah, Sarawak stays". Bernama. Daily Express. 10 April 2019. Retrieved 10 April 2019.
  3. ^ "Bill to make Sabah, Sarawak equal partners rejected in Malaysia parliament". Bernama. Channel NewsAsia. 10 April 2019. Retrieved 10 April 2019.

Articles created/expanded on April 6[]

Amy Wax

Created by Mhym (talk). Self-nominated at 02:43, 6 April 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Comment. There was an earlier (first paragraphs nearly identical, except for some deletions by the nom in this second one) version of this page at AFC by an or other than the nom here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Amy_Wax&action=&redlink=1 In some ways that earlier version was better -- it had footnotes for every assertion in the first few paragraphs, while in this version nom took them out. This version also needs grammar cleanup - "the" and "a" and similar words were dropped from the first version, where needed. Also, some facts, like that the subject attended Harvard Law School, were deleted for some reason. I think if the first version is made viewable and this one is improved along these lines this will be better for approval for this category. Also, when in this version nom writes "Amy Wax has been called "notorious..", maybe it would be an improvement to say by whom. Also, it may be a good idea to have the controversy paragraph, which presents only one side, instead comply with wp:npov (representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without orial bias, all of the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic; and switching out "claimed" for "said"; etc.).2604:2000:E010:1100:A066:E3A3:DD44:3FFC (talk) 17:02, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
  • This is a stub, not a WP:GA. I agree it can use some work. That's part of the purpose of DYK - to bring attention to new or newly revised article, if I remember correctly. As to your assertion - I did not copy anyone's previous article but wrote from scratch instead. Some technical wording is copied from Wax's CV, which may explain similarities. I don't think terminology and official award titles are a copyvio. Please fee free to improve the article and/or the hook. Mhym (talk) 07:12, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Thanks. First, can an admin please make available the article that was hidden from view here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Amy_Wax&action=&redlink=1 ? It has important information that should be in this article, for one thing. Its was created before this draft, its deletion followed shortly (by mere hours) the submission of this article, and its deletion is not un-controversial (which was the asserted basis for its deletion).
Second, I agree a stub is fine. But for an article to appear at DYK on the main page, I think we should be careful to have footnotes for every assertion. The deleted draft had them - for the same information where the footnotes are missing here. One of the reasons I have asked for the deleted draft page to be restored.
The prior version also has fixes to the grammatical problems of missing words that I noted we have in this second version. For the main page, I do not think we want such errors.
Also, you did not say anything about the problem I pointed out with the controversy paragraph you drafted. It presents only one side. I think for the main page in particular, we would want to comply with wp:npov. This does not. To do that we would have to represent fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without orial bias, all of the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on the topic. We would also switch out "claimed" for "said", as wp:npov suggests.2604:2000:E010:1100:CD84:F876:2C42:BC9E (talk) 22:08, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
  • As far as providing all the refs and links - I don't have access to those which used to be there. Please help me with this if you have them. I guess I don't see any vio of WP:NPOV. Basically, it's all biographical, no opinion based. As in she said something. Others didn't like it. Some people called on UPenn to fire her. UPenn didn't. What exactly is non-neutral here? Reporting groundswell of support of Wax? I don't know if that happened. Mhym (talk) 01:30, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Happy to help. I've now twice asked the or who deleted it to restore it (in addition, it its deletion is not controversial, the reason given for deleting it). I've also asked here - maybe an admin here will help. It has more information (her attending Harvard Law, family background, etc). If you read NPOV, you will see that the cherry-picking of those with one view of her statement, while leaving out completely those who support her statement (or her right to make it), is something we are supposed to try to avoid. There are a number of articles pointing out the other camp; in your research you would have seen them. If you want me to, I will do the work. Also, saying "claimed" instead of "said" - as the guideline states - is a sign of not being sensitive to the need for npov. The guideline explains why. Anyway, once we get the original draft, which was more complete and had all the references that are missing, I will be happy to help you get this promoted. BTW - what inspired you to write this article just now (unless it was coincidence), while there was another draft article awaiting promotion (that incident was in the news, but quite a while ago)?2604:2000:E010:1100:B951:7500:D62B:D57A (talk) 00:53, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Glad to hear you can help. I came across critique/praise of her research work, tried to look her up and found no WP article. I don't care for the controversies and didn't hear them at the time. But they clearly make her notable, probably more than her research work, unfortunately. Thus I included the section. AFIK, the wording can be massaged and improved in any way. That's also why I made a DYK nom - so that other or help improve on the article while I am no longer very involved. Mhym (talk) 05:06, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Great. I am happy to help you improve this article as soon as an admin helps us by restoring for reference the draft that preceded this one, with the relevant text and footnotes that this later version is missing. It was deleted as a "non-controversial" deletion, but since there is now controversy about it being deleted, I hope an admin can restore it (at least long enough for us to look at it to improve this one). Then we can improve this, improve the npov issue, and put this in shape for a DYK for you. 2604:2000:E010:1100:B951:7500:D62B:D57A (talk) 05:26, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
Here, see why this was so weird! Just when the draft of this subject was cleared of any question of copyvio, after it had been sitting awaiting for a couple of days for all to see, as it awaited promotion to article status -- that was the very same day of all days that your article was created! [1] And its not as though she was in the news that day, or week, or month. And as you can see, the article that had been put up for review prior to your draft is very similar (except for the last paragraph that yours added). [2] I will work now to help you to make your draft better, adding the omitted footnotes, etc.2604:2000:E010:1100:D0B2:B1DE:173C:580 (talk) 17:08, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for your work! The article is in a good shape now and ready for review. Mhym (talk) 19:21, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Drive-by comment: I would recommend against using the word "controversial" in a hook without explaining how she has been controversial. feminist (talk) 06:34, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Came to suggest the same thing. Taken by itself, "controversial" is confusing because it doesn't define what kind of statements caused the controversy. hinnk (talk) 03:49, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg I agree with the above two comments. I think the article itself is now fine. I added the footnotes from the prior article, so that every assertion has a footnote. And there is now a balance in the controversy section, with views on both sides reflected -- rather than just one side. But as the prior ors point out, the hook could use some massaging (also, the bit in the third hook about race relations isn't quite accurate). 2604:2000:E010:1100:A82D:DCDC:4C65:430B (talk) 16:06, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg - New enough, long enough, inline citations checks out. I prefer the second hook. Good to go.BabbaQ (talk) 11:24, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Symbol possible vote.svg I've had to pull this from prep for two reasons: firstly, there were objections by other ors above that the word "controversial" shouldn't be used in the hook, and secondly, the nominator appears to have more than five DYK crs (based on their talk page) and appears to have not done a QPQ. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 09:08, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

I am the nominator. My last nom was in 2010. I have no idea what is QPQ, but I am guessing this is a post-2010 invention. For practical purposes, after so many years, I am a newcomer. Please WP:DBN! Mhym (talk) 16:25, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
As your last nomination was before the QPQ rule was implemented, perhaps there could be an WP:IAR case here and ignore that requirement for the purposes of this nomination (if you want to read more about the rule, please read WP:QPQ). However, there is still the problem of the hooks having the word "controversial", which other ors have objected to. One possible solution could be to simply delete the word from the hooks, though I'm not sure if there's consensus that this would solve the issue. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:01, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
I am the 2604 IP above. I'm ok with the article, and ok with the hook with the word controversial (it is a hook -- it is supposed to hook the reader in to get them to read more, not explain everything .. as wp:hook says it should be "short, punchy, catchy, and likely to draw the readers in to wanting to read the article") or without the word controversial. 2604:2000:E010:1100:A4C1:B86F:6F82:993D (talk) 03:58, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
You may want to read WP:BLP. In any case, I think referring to a living person as "controversial", especially on the main page, regardless of whatever really happened, is a very very bad idea. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 09:56, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
I would actually prefer ALT2 which moves "controversial" away from Dr. Wax to her statements. There is no BLP issue in that case, as numerous issues are controversial by their nature, including race relations. Mhym (talk) 14:09, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
Agree. And her comments being controversial is mentioned and referenced in the article itself. And -- get this -- the living person herself (Wax) wrote in the Wall Street Journal that she wrote "a controversial op-ed." I don't see a BLP issue here at all, under the circumstances. 2604:2000:E010:1100:9DA0:73BE:71E9:B67E (talk) 16:54, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
There still appears to be reservations about the use of the word "controversial", and based on the comments by Feminist and Hinnk above, I'm not sure if ALT2 would be enough to allay those concerns. A new direction may be needed in any case. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:14, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
I was initially in that camp, above. But now am with the majority. Given the points made above. But anyway, how about changing it to "controversial statements regarding Black law school student performance." That's actually probably better. 2604:2000:E010:1100:4C10:48F3:E1AA:BC6A (talk) 02:01, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Since the time that those reservations were raised by me and others, I've changed my view for the above reasons. And importantly I've pointed out that the subject of the article herself used the word "controversial" to describe her op-ed - making our use of it less than controversial. So, I think the old concerns, which preceded that being pointed out, are addressed now. And propose that we use the below more precise construct:
"ALT3:... that American academic Amy Wax, who made controversial statements regarding Black law school student performance, graduated from Harvard Medical School before becoming a lawyer?"
I'm not sure about this: sure it may be a self-description, but I'm still uncomfortable with its use either way. In any case, you may need to contact those other ors to see if their reservations can be allayed. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 21:01, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
I contacted the two of them to see if they still had reservations, given the above. In the meantime, I agree with Mhym and BabbaQ (who had promoted it), with the ALT3 approach. 2604:2000:E010:1100:7DB3:9666:7A65:4DF9 (talk) 15:42, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on April 9[]

Bohumil Herlischka

5x expanded by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 15:51, 10 April 2019 (UTC).

  • I've struck ALT0 as being insufficiently interesting to a broad audience. ALT1 is somewhat better, if only because of the mention of the tour stopping in Israel. I will leave the reviewing to another or. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:03, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
I object to the striking but leave it to someone else to undo it. A Czech stage director introduces the works by a underrated Czech composer to Germany, initiating him to be staged rather frequently, and this is so much appreciated that a cycle is done, comparable to the Wagner's Ring cycle, and the Zurich Mozart cycle, and you think that's not interesting? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:12, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
I don't think it's interesting to people unfamiliar with classical music, which I'd assume is the vast majority of Wikipedia readers. Remember that we are writing for general audiences, not opera fans, and I don't think the typical reader would know or even care who these people are or what these songs are. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:23, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
These songs are operas - works of several hours each, and the staging of a single one is a giant and expensive effort, and now it's six! - and again, people who don't know what an opera is will not enjoy the article, but we can also tells those something special who recognize names as being Czech. - For some reason, you seamed to understand that for the artist Overton we should say something differentiating her work of giant sculptures from tiny pictures, - why not here? The Schoenberg was a great feat, no doubt about that (people though it could not be staged at all, and the premiere was music only), but the Czech, where the soprano said that he really knew about peasants in that area and how to get that on the stage, connects better to his origins. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:32, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
I'm sorry Gerda, but are you having difficulty understanding my point? You said that "people who don't know what an opera is will not enjoy the article", and that is actually a major issue! If anything, that kind of viewpoint would even further disqualify the hook fact from being allowed: a hook being interesting to a broad audience is required, and those that do not meet that standard tend to be rejected. DYK is intended for people who don't know about a topic, and writing hooks with that are intentionally made to be interesting only to a specific audience not only is against DYK rules, but defeats the whole purpose of the project. Think of it this way: you want to educate common people about classical music, right? Well if I was an ordinary reader, no way would I read the hook or the article since I would not get the point. We're trying to help you here Gerda: this is not intended to discr you, your contributions, or your interests, we are only trying to help you avoid complaints and the like. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:51, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
I can't help that my topics are kind of in a niche, and the hooks about them have a tendency to follow, - or would not say something specific to the topics. - I was trained to make only 2 comments in a discussion, sorry for a third. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:14, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

New day (from my talk, where this came up): If I have only one sentence to speak about a person's life achievements, I want that to be his best, regardless of that it may not be of interest to the general reader, just believing firmly that it should interest the general leader. For the sake of brevity (but loosing that it was a project that took 8 years to be accomplished):

ALT2: ... that Bohumil Herlischka staged a cycle of six operas by Leoš Janáček, presented at the Deutsche Oper am Rhein in the 1977/78 season? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:59, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Honestly, ALT2 doesn't really solve the issues I had raised above regarding broad interest. Again, it really only appeals to classical music enthusiasts, and I can't see people of other interests being fond of this one. Right now, one possible way move forward appears to be to go with a variation of ALT1. Something along the lines of:
ALT3... that Bohumil Herlischka's production of Schoenberg's Moses und Aron, which premiered at the Hamburg State Opera, was later performed in Israel?
Personally I think that a German production being performed at a non-European country could be appealing. If you don't like this suggestion, there are still other possibilities, like how one of his plays was created to celebrate the 25th anniversary of the Deutsche Oper am Rhein. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:53, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Since Gerda wasn't able to respond, I'll propose the following hooks below based on my above suggestion; she is free to reject them if she doesn't like them, or to suggest a reword:

ALT4 ... that Bohumil Herlischka directed the opera Behold the Sun – Die Wiedertäufer, which was commissioned for the 25th anniversary of the Deutsche Oper am Rhein?
ALT4a ... that Bohumil Herlischka directed the opera Behold the Sun – Die Wiedertäufer for the 25th anniversary of the Deutsche Oper am Rhein?
ALT4b ... that to commemorate the 25th anniversary of the Deutsche Oper am Rhein, Bohumil Herlischka directed the opera Behold the Sun – Die Wiedertäufer?

I just realized that had this been proposed earlier, the hook could have worked as a special occasion hook for April 19, but I guess it's too late now. Here are other possible alternatives that hopefully aren't too complicated:

ALT5 ... that Bohumil Herlischka served as the stage director of the Prague National Theatre from 1951 to 1957?
ALT6 ... that Bohumil Herlischka's staging of Weber's opera Der Freischütz (The Marksman) was met with strong opposition as he did not stage its traditional Happy Ending?
ALT7 ... that Bohumil Herlischka's 1964 staging of Der ferne Klang (The Distant Sound) was the first performance of a Franz Schreker opera since the banning of Schreker's music by the Nazis in 1933?

Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 16:30, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Late to this feast, - when I show playlist on my user talk, I'm out singing, and can't reply. We do have a massive misunderstanding. I didn't say find a hook, I objected to striking one, not being the reviewer, just because it's not fascinating for you. I fight less when I invested less time in an article, but this one was really hard for me to expand enough. Of all the hooks, take ALT1. I am still convinced that the original (or ALT2) is a better summary of this specific person's cultural background and enormous feat. I don't remember any cycle of six operas, and then unknown ones that are much harder to teach the performers! - All the Wiedertäufer hooks miss world premiere, and I'm not sure our average reader would deduce that from "commissioned". Nice hooks for the opera, but not for him. Perhaps I'll write it some day. Talking about Prague while his mature career was NOT there seems wrong to me. I saw a performance of Der Freischütz last year, also without happy ending. ALT7 is good, but again, says more about Schreker's work and fate than Herlischka, other than that he has courage. Yes, go for ALT7a (formatted), it mentions Nazi, that's always good for click numbers. I hope some sarcasm can be noticed.
ALT7a ... that Bohumil Herlischka's 1964 staging of Der ferne Klang was the first performance of a Schreker opera since the banning of his music by the Nazis? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:37, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
The issue here though is not about Janáček, but the hook fact about staging of the six operas, and the hook doesn't even imply anything about the "introducing to Western audiences" part. And in all honestly, there are other facts mentioned in the article that are more intriguing to broad audiences (unlike ALT0 which in all honesty only really appeals to classical music fans). Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:21, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

It's been over a month since the last comment here. I've gone ahead and restruck ALT0 as I don't believe that Zingarese's comments sufficiently addressed the concerns I had about the hook (specifically, when they said that Herlischka helped raised Janacek's profile in Western circles, while the hook itself does not say that and is frankly too complicated as I don't think the part about the cycle is necessary). As a compromise, I am listing below a simplified version and making a request at WT:DYK for a new reviewer (I personally find both ALT0 and the ALT0a I'm proposing below as rather bland, but I'll let the new reviewer decide). Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 15:06, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

ALT0a... that Bohumil Herlischka staged six operas by Leoš Janáček at the Deutsche Oper am Rhein?
Better than nothing, but you are missing the most unusual aspect, that they were also played in one season. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:18, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
I'm not sure how to accommodate that request in the context of ALT0a, and honestly I don't think that would appeal to a broad audience. Reading through this again, ALT5, ALT6, and ATL7a might be our best options here. Would anyone new be willing to take a look at this? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:47, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
Have it your way. (I think the original hook did just that.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:43, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on April 12[]

George Ali Murad Khan

George Ali Murad Khan seated on throne
George Ali Murad Khan seated on throne

Created by Royroydeb (talk). Self-nominated at 14:41, 19 April 2019 (UTC).

  • Nice decent article but we need a better source for the claim. Will indulge in some copy-ing. WBGconverse 12:10, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Expanded the article by 2X. Struck out hook; for being inaccurate. Once again, I cannot over-emphasize the need to abide by WP:HISTRS.To quote a reliable source:-In contrast, by 1951 India – all princely states included – was participating in the first nationwide general elections on the principles of ‘one person, one vote’ and representative government, while in Pakistan only Khairpur and Bahawalpur even achieved universal adult franchise, and no state realised full responsible government. The issue of pin-pointing the state that first achieved universal-suffrage -- Bahawalpur (wherein a very similar law was passed days before Khairpur's) or Khairpur or the entire country of India (which has decided on suffrage, long back and preparations of voters list et al were in swing for years) is not easy. WBGconverse 15:03, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
  • @Winged Blades of Godric: The claim in the hook was cited from The Friday Times, a Pakistani newspaper. Also in this revision, you have added a fact and added citation needed to it! RRD (talk) 12:44, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
  • A Pakistani source has all the reasons to claim exaggerated stuff. Similar for Indian sources; if this was an India-based article. My source was a peer-reviewed scholarly publication and I see at-least one leading expert in the area, as a co-author.
  • As to cn template; I need to get the precise bibliographic data of the source, once I go for my next visit to National Library of India :-( The soft-copy that I can access through my subscriptions has a lack of it. WBGconverse 13:32, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
I also have to note that the article currently has a citation needed tag. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:47, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5: I have removed the unsourced statement.
ALT1a ... that George Ali Murad Khan, who was the ruler of the princely state of Khairpur in Pakistan, initially wanted his state to join India?
The main issue that it now appears that the information is no longer in the article, which would make ALT1/ALT1a unsuitable. If that is the case, I'm proposing an alternative below:
ALT2 ... that George Ali Murad Khan, who was the ruler of the princely state of Khairpur in Pakistan, survived accidentally being shot by his father when he was nine months old?
Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 14:59, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
@Winged Blades of Godric and Royroydeb: Are either of you fine with ALT2? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 21:49, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5: Yes. RRD (talk) 10:29, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on April 13[]

Articles created/expanded on April 14[]

Articles created/expanded on April 20[]

LGBT history in Poland

Created by KamillaŚ (talk). Self-nominated at 20:04, 20 April 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg I would love to get this through, but the article is lacking citations for a lot of text, and needs a copy. I'll wait for a response and see if there are significant updates. Kingsif (talk) 21:23, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
    • @Kingsif: I added the citations in place of all "citation neededs" and clarified few parts. but I would love to see someone help me with writing style, copy etc, as its not my strongest side in english. KamillaŚ (talk) 19:36, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

I made some corrections and added something. And maybe we should consider a more eye-catching DYK question - e.g. ... that throughout its history homosexuality has never been criminalized by the Polish law? (However, we would have to make sure whether it's really true.). BasileusAutokratorPL (talk) 13:22, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Symbol possible vote.svg It looks mostly OK, but there are some serious concerns in the article. Firstly, it seems to contradict itself in the lead by saying that there have never been any Polish laws that persecute LGBT people, and then also says homosexuality was decriminalized in 1932 so this requires some clarification. Secondly, there are some POV issues. The statement in the lead that "Homophobia has been a common public attitude in Poland, thanks to the influence of Catholic Church in Polish public life, and the widespread conservatism of Polish society." is a clear POV indictment of the Catholic Church and perpetuates the misconception that the Church's opposition to homosexuality is based in homophobia (I am not saying there are no homophobic Catholics, but it is factually false to claim this is the reason the Catholic Church as an institution has historically opposed LGBT rights). Similarly, in the Second Polish Republic section, the article attributes the Catholic cultural taboo on homosexuality to ignorance. I do not see how that cannot be construed as a POV violation. (Keep in mind WP:OUTRAGE: Even perspectives you find morally offensive must be accurately portrayed). As another point, it should be mentioned in the main text that there is significant controversy over the sexual/asexual nature of adelphopoiesis, relegating that mention to a footnote makes this paragraph, in its context, seem to imply that these relationships were definitively sexual. Ashorocetus (talk | contribs) 21:09, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

@Ashorocetus, KamillaŚ, Kingsif, and BasileusAutokratorPL: Seeing as it is a DYK and not a GA, I think it would be sufficient to fix the lead. The POV and bias and such of claims in the main body can be discussed on the article's talk. Through the fact that the nominator has not joined this discussion in two months suggests this may soon be failed due to this, unless someone else wants to take a stab at the lead, at least? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:37, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on April 23[]

Mambo (Vodou)

Created/expanded by Thatgirljessie (talk). Nominated by Enwebb (talk) at 18:50, 23 April 2019 (UTC).

  • Just a comment and not a review, but perhaps the hook could be reworded somewhat, as the wording does not make it immediately clear that "mambos" are female vodou priests (i.e. that fact is at the end rather than at the start). Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 08:32, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg This nomination falls short of the 5x expansion requirement according to DYKcheck, going from 978 to 3634 prose characters, when it would need to be 4890 prose characters, so currently less than a 4x expansion. In addition, the expansion started back on April 2 and the article should have been nominated within seven days, so it's two weeks late. Under those circumstances, it seems unlikely that the article will qualify for DYK, although as a first-time nominator—this is part of course work for a class at Bowdoin College—it might be possible for the an exception to be made for the nomination delay. The further expansion would be necessary for this to be considered. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:36, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Symbol possible vote.svg If no or has agreed to adopt this nomination or do a copy by June 24, this nomination will be marked for closure as stale. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:24, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on April 25[]

Madrasa and tomb of Alauddin Khilji

Madrasa of Alauddin Khilji
Madrasa of Alauddin Khilji

Created by Royroydeb (talk). Self-nominated at 10:18, 26 April 2019 (UTC).

  • Doing...-Nizil (talk) 11:51, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
@Nizil Shah: I have moved the page, gave assessments and done the QPQ. RRD (talk) 14:38, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
@Royroydeb: New, long enough, cited, neutral, no copyvio, image free licensed and would look ok at 100x100 px, QPQ done. The hook is not interesting enough and bit long. Can you propose another one or reword it?-Nizil (talk) 11:30, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
@Nizil Shah:
@Royroydeb: It is still long and bit confusing. I tweak it a little to make it more hooky. How is it? -Nizil (talk) 16:54, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
@Nizil Shah: The fact that it is tomb of Alauddin Khalji and is the first such tomb to be built in a school in India is missing. RRD (talk) 15:35, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
@Royroydeb:, its OK to not have king's name and first built in the hook. The hook should sound interesting and should lead reader to the article. So do you find ALTa more interesting and easy to understand?-Nizil (talk) 07:00, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
@Royroydeb:. -Nizil (talk) 07:55, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
@Nizil Shah: I would still push for tomb of Alauddin Khalji instead oftomb of the king. RRD (talk) 15:37, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
@Royroydeb: Is it OK?-Nizil (talk) 05:41, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on April 28[]

Motivation crowding theory

brought to GA by W.S.Campbell (talk). Self-nominated at 01:16, 29 April 2019 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on April 30[]

IM 67118

  • Comment: It would be nice to include a photograph of the tablet, but I have not been able to find any with an appropriate license.

Created by Will Orrick (talk). Self-nominated at 22:42, 2 May 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg @Will Orrick: This article is new enough and long enough. The hook facts are cited inline, the article is neutral and I detected no copyright issues. No QPQ is needed. Please could you incorporate a date for Pythagoras' birth (with an inline citation) into the article. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:49, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg I have added the information and an inline citation about the date of Pythagoras' birth into the article (it's the last sentence in IM_67118#Significance). RebeccaGreen (talk) 21:30, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Thank you. This is now good to go. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:48, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 2[]

Le Groupement (cycling team)

  • Comment: Unfortunately, no image for this one...

Created by Zwerg Nase (talk). Self-nominated at 18:23, 2 May 2019 (UTC).

Policy compliance:

Hook eligiblity:

QPQ: Red XN - As you have 8 previous DYK crs, you need to complete a QPQ.
Overall: Symbol question.svg Interesting article, and I have taken the liberty of moving it to a title without disambiguation (as there is no conflicting use of that name). SounderBruce 04:22, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

@Narutolovehinata5: Sorry, I overlooked your message, it got swamped by the Signpost on my talk page... It's true that I have not yet found the time to resolve the issue, even though it's not that hard, I would just need to use the Millar biography even more. All I have to do is find the respective page numbers, which I could do tomorrow, if that is OK. Thank you for stepping in and reminding me that this was still ongoing, I had almost forgot... Zwerg Nase (talk) 08:43, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
@Zwerg Nase: It's been almost three weeks since your last comment here. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:39, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5: Sorry about that. I am withdrawing the nomination. Zwerg Nase (talk) 11:43, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
Noted. Symbol delete vote.svg Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:45, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 3[]

Hallo Ü-Wagen

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 20:44, 7 May 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg The article was nominated within the 7-day requirement, it is adequately sourced, free of plagiarism, and AGF sourced to German sources. QPQ still required. The hook is okay but I think a more interesting fact in the article is the one about the host being called one of Germany's 100 Most Influential Women. Would it be okay for you to propose a hook based on that? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:53, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
  • In the above hook, "listeners" is somewhat confusing. The article refers to those on location as the "public" and those listening by radio as "listeners". Jmar67 (talk) 11:17, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
I've boldly moved the "(pictured)" to after the article subject, since it appears that the picture is referring to the van itself rather than the listeners. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:28, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
I am not happy with that, and please make your own ALT(s) instead of changing something with my signature under it. Here's yours:
ALT1: ... that Hallo Ü-Wagen (Hello Radio Van, pictured) was a weekly travelling talk radio show of the WDR from 1974 to 2010, with participation of experts, guests and listeners?
Formally, I haven't seen pictured in the same brackets as a translation, also how can you follow the rule to have the brackets italic for one but not the other? Content: the van is NOT pictured (compare image in the source), the program is, presenter talking to public or guests, - ok, I therefore move pictured:
ALT2: ... that Hallo Ü-Wagen (Hello Radio Van) was a weekly travelling talk radio show of the WDR from 1974 to 2010, with participation of experts and guests at the location (pictured), and of listeners?
How do you call people who come to a live radio talk? - Back to the first question: We had the "influential women" thingy already, on 7 May, still on my talk. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:11, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
Those on location are the "live audience". How about
ALT3: ... that Hallo Ü-Wagen (Hello Radio Van) was a weekly travelling talk radio show of the WDR from 1974 to 2010, with participation of experts, guests, the live audience (pictured), and listeners?
Jmar67 (talk) 12:52, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
Re deletion of "guests": The article refers to experts and invited guests. Seems OK to mention them. Jmar67 (talk) 13:36, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
OK, guests back. Can you help with the nom for Pütz, arts vs. art? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:54, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
ALT4: ... that Hallo Ü-Wagen (Hello Radio Van), a weekly travelling talk radio show of the WDR from 1974 to 2010, featured experts, guests, the live audience (pictured), and listeners?
Jmar67 (talk) 20:18, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
The thing I had with the original hook is that it didn't exactly flow well: ALT4 sounds snappier. Talk shows though tend to all have "experts, guests, live audiences, and listeners", and I think it would be a lot catchier to focus on either the travelling aspect or the van itself. I don't think radio shows that take place on the road are that common, are they? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 21:24, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
I was expecting Gerda to pick up on this. But my question now is: how valid is this nomination in the light of the similar DYK appearance here? Jmar67 (talk) 03:38, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
I always do it like that, avoiding double and triple hooks. She had a career beyond that show, the show lasted beyond her time, - different things. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:30, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
Als, no objection means consent. What it needs is a reviewer. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:32, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
This just occurred to me:
ALT5: ... that Hallo Ü-Wagen (Hello Radio Van), a weekly talk radio programme of the WDR from 1974 to 2010, was an audience participation (pictured) show on wheels?
Jmar67 (talk) 11:07, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
Sorry, in "participation (pictured) show", - the "show" comes as a surprise. How about this then:
ALT6: ... that Hallo Ü-Wagen (Hello Radio Van) was a weekly radio talk show on wheels of the WDR from 1974 to 2010, with audience participation (pictured)? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:43, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
ALT7: ... that Hallo Ü-Wagen (Hello Radio Van) was a long-running weekly German radio talk show on wheels, with audience participation (pictured)?
The WDR ref has always irritated me. Jmar67 (talk) 12:55, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
I won't fight, but do Main page readers know German public radio? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:18, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
I very much doubt it. Which doesn't mean that a hook about German public radio would be disallowed, only that additional context would be needed for international readers. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 09:51, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
Context would be established by a link to WDR. It could be piped:
ALT8: ... that Hallo Ü-Wagen (Hello Radio Van) was a long-running weekly German radio travelling talk show, with audience participation (pictured)? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:21, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
I don't see a need for a link in the hook. There is one in the lead sentence of the article. Jmar67 (talk) 23:15, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
ALT9: ... that Hallo Ü-Wagen (Hello Radio Van) (pictured) was a long-running weekly German radio talk show on wheels?
I mean, I don't think travelling talk shows are that common in the first place. I know of a few but they're not the norm. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:29, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
Yes, thank you. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:15, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Thanks, probably ready for a new reviewer. Courtesy ping Jmar67. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:04, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
ALT9 is OK with me. Jmar67 (talk) 01:30, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Operation Crossfire Hurricane

Converted from a redirect by Starship.paint (talk) and Shinealittlelight (talk). Nominated by Starship.paint (talk) at 01:15, 8 May 2019 (UTC).

Otherwise, this is a really bad idea as the focus is not on the late discovery of the code-name "Crossfire Hurricane", but on common knowledge about the Russia investigation (which is the common name for what was originally referred to by agents as Crossfire Hurricane). This can end up confusing people into thinking that they were two different investigations, and thus Wikipedia would be engaged in creating/furthering a fringe conspiracy theory. We shouldn't do that.
Create a new hook which focuses on the code-name, without getting into anything about the relation of the code-name to the investigation, as that is an unresolved discussion on the article's talk page.
This makes me think the article is now only two steps away from an AfD. Before it was three steps. I haven't done that yet because I'm hoping it can turn into a good article which collects into one place all the information about the Russia investigation which is spread around in different articles. If that doesn't happen, then the article has no right to exist. -- BullRangifer (talk) 03:27, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Might as well just have a little fun with it:
  • ALT3: ... that the Mueller Report was born in a crossfire hurricane? (Hope it's alll ... riiiiight ... nooow) Daniel Case (talk) 21:39, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
    Oh yes. Very nice. starship.paint (talk) 13:00, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
    Yay, baby, yay! — JFG talk 21:48, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
    Still, for exactitude, we should say ALT4 …that the Mueller probe was born in a crossfire hurricane? — JFG talk 21:50, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
    Source: NPR Comey was leading the Justice Department's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and potential connections between Russia and the Trump campaign. Mueller is now leading that investigation New York Times Within hours of opening an investigation into the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia in the summer of 2016 [...] at the time, a small group of F.B.I. officials knew it by its code name: Crossfire Hurricane. starship.paint (talk) 01:22, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
    Oh yes to ALT4. Sorry Daniel! starship.paint (talk) 00:10, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

Please post on my talk page if you review this, or need my response. Also, note: Page has been moved to Crossfire Hurricane (FBI investigation). starship.paint (talk) 13:09, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

What is Democracy?

Converted from a redirect by StudiesWorld (talk). Self-nominated at 20:58, 3 May 2019 (UTC).

  • I should note that this was my first DYK nom for QPQ review. PublicWorld (talk) 18:04, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Will review soon. – Teratix 04:56, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg The article is new enough and long enough, neutral, and cites reliable sources inline (excepting sentences previously sourced to IMDb, which will need to be replaced with better citations). No copyright problems Earwig or I could detect. No QPQ required and the hook is within 200 characters.
  • However, the hooks aren't quite up to standard. ALT0 is not terribly interesting to a general audience, even if they know what The Allegory of Good and Bad Government is. It's an unsurprising statement of fact. ALT1 is far better but still has some problems. Firstly, the documentary features a barber (singular), not many. Secondly, it's not surprising a documentary on the definition of democracy would feature interviews with philosophers (experts, after all, at defining these broad terms), but The New Yorker mentions trauma surgeons, a poet, and refugees as subjects, all of which would be much more interesting to include in the hook. Secondly, a documentary cannot interview a person; it should read something like "In documentary X, John Doe interviews ..."
  • This isn't strictly in the DYK criteria, but the article should have a reception section; it's a basic component of film articles. Also, there's no need to provide inline citations for the summary, as the work itself is implied to be cited. – Teratix 13:55, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
Teratix, Thanks for the feedback. The reason that I included inline citations for the summary is that I saw the film at a screening and therefore couldn't refer to it while writing the summary, so I primarily relied on sources. Should I remove the inline citations? Looking at other Reception sections, they seem to focus on box office statistics. However, I can't find those for this film. Would it be acceptable to only discuss its award nominations and media reviews? Here's a rephrasing:
Although I will note, that I like the barber's inclusion. StudiesWorld (talk) 14:12, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
I realized that I didn't address your other concern:

Pamela Nadell

Created by Cawhee (talk). Self-nominated at 15:22, 9 May 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article is new enough, long enough, neutral, and mostly referenced. Hooks are interesting and supported by supplied sources. QPQ not required for new nominator, no copyvio detected. However, the article needs more references. Multiple paragraphs in "Life and education" and "Role in public life" sections lack sources. -Zanhe (talk) 00:38, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 4[]

Agadzagadza

  • Reviewed: I think I'm exempt from review, but please let me know if this isn't the case!

Created by You've got Koalatee (talk). Nominated by Gardneca (talk) at 06:34, 10 May 2019 (UTC).

Review

Hook eligiblity:

This is my fault, I meant Nigeria not Uganda! Whoops. Linking to Bura people should work. Gardneca (talk) 17:29, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
QPQ: None required.

Overall: Symbol question.svg It's not clear to me whether the word Agadzagadza is the Bura/Pabir name for a lizard or whether it's the proper name of this particular trickster. I suppose it's a bit of both like Coyote.

I think you're right Gardneca (talk) 17:36, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Shalor (Wiki Ed) Andrew Davidson I'd like to continue with this but since I'm new to the process I'm not sure what the next step should be. I responded to the issues and made changes, so please advise as to how to proceed. Thanks! Gardneca (talk) 07:49, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
  • I'll take another look. More anon. Andrew D. (talk) 09:13, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 5[]

Saadat Ali Khan I

Saadat Ali Khan I
Saadat Ali Khan I

5x expanded by Royroydeb (talk). Self-nominated at 16:25, 10 May 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg The hook sounds rather vague and doesn't say much. It doesn't catch attention, and I don't think it appeals to anyone but history buffs. Can something more exciting be proposed? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 05:14, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

@Narutolovehinata5:. RRD (talk) 05:59, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

I personally think that hook is even more niche. Probably a new direction is needed here. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:43, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Fatwa

Improved to Good Article status by Eperoton (talk). Self-nominated at 23:15, 6 May 2019 (UTC).

Article is well sourced, and hooks are reasonably interesting. They do suggest that the reader knows what a fatwa is, before reading the article, however. QPQ not required. Hooks are cited. No copyvio. See below for more comments. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 14:48, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

  • Definitely newly promoted enough and long enough. An Earwig check is a liiiiitle iffy. Specifically, "allowed a female convert to Islam to remain married to her non-Muslim husband, based in part on the existence of European laws and customs which guarantee women the freedom of religion" If the source is somehow freely licensed or public domain, then fine enough. Otherwise that's stretching the limits of fair use a bit too far. Similarly, (though Earwig doesn't pick this bit up) the opening sentence is nearly verbatim from the Princeton Encyclopedia source. The hook, is exactly verbatim from the Princeton Encyclopedia source. So these really need to be quoted or they need to be reworded. Fair use gives us leeway with attributed quotes, but not with unatributed ones. Additional manual spot checks only picked up one additional issue. A large portion of this was either copied to Fatwa from Mufti or visa versa. But I don't see on either article, either in summaries or on the talk page where the original is attributed. This is required by the CCBYSA license, and so it needs to be sorted out which is the original and which is the copy, so we can make sure we're in compliance with WP:COPYWITHIN.
User:Lee Vilenski it looks like we had an conflict, but you probably want to revisit your approval given the above. GMGtalk 14:46, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

───────────────────────── @GreenMeansGo: thanks for the closer review.

Let me know if you still have concerns. Eperoton (talk) 22:35, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

@Lee Vilenski: Do you think we should gloss fatwa as "(nonbinding legal opinion)" or "(nonbinding legal opinion on a point of Islamic law)" in the hooks? Eperoton (talk) 22:57, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Wouldn't an opinion by definition not be legally binding? I think fatwa (legal opinion) makes sense, but It's not really something I understand entirely. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 08:23, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
@Lee Vilenski: Binding legal opinions do exist in some legal systems, but we can use the shorter gloss in the hook for brevity. Eperoton (talk) 22:15, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
Just to be safe, I'll see if we can't get a second opinion on whether the hook runs into close paraphrasing issues. Maybe I'm over thinking it. Never hurts to ask. GMGtalk 12:15, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
@GreenMeansGo: Thanks, second opinion on the hook would be good. Regarding attribution, the text of both articles either came out of my sandbox or was added by me to both articles at about the same time. I do include attributions in summaries when I copy text with other contributors. Eperoton (talk) 22:15, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

No comment on the close paraphrasing issue, but terms like "fatwa" do not need to be defined in hooks, the hook is only there to tweak interest in a topic not to define terms, if we did the latter DYK would end up looking like a dictionary extract. People who don't know what a "fatwa" is and would like to know more get to click on the link, that's the whole point. Gatoclass (talk) 03:29, 15 May 2019 (UTC).

Can you elaborate your concern, Nikkimaria? I can't quite connect it to WP:CLOP. Nothing in this sentence strikes me as a "creative expression", and as I far as I can tell, there's a limited number of ways of expressing this particular assertion without changing the meaning or using unnatural language. This is a general issue that's important for articles on contentious topics, where I tend to , so I want to clarify for the future. I normally try to rephrase and rearrange content as much as the subject permits, and alternate statements drawing on different sources, but no so much as to introduce OR. CLOP, and particularly WP:LIMITED, seems to be formulated in a reasonably flexible way that permits this approach. Eperoton (talk) 22:57, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
P.S. So, for example, I now rewrote this as "A mufti's understanding of the query commonly depended on their familiarity with local customs and colloquialisms", which would minimize Earwig-style issues. Does that address your concern, or do you consider any statement that conveys the meaning of a statement from the source with a similar syntactic structure to be a CLOP violation, regardless of whether it can be naturally expressed otherwise? Eperoton (talk) 00:18, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
NOCREATIVE applies to things like "X was born on 1 January 1900", when there truly is no originality in the phrasing; that's not the case with the example I've cited. If you truly cannot find an adequate way to represent such a phrase, you can always quote it. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:50, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Ok, so did the rephrased version address this particular concern? Eperoton (talk) 22:26, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 11[]

Peruna (patent medicine)

Created/expanded by Eddie891 (talk). Self-nominated at 16:10, 12 May 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article meets DYK requirements, hook facts are cited inline, QPQ done. I think the first hook probably appeals best to a general audience. However, ALT0's citation comes not in the sentence that discusses it, but the one after; DYK rules require the actual hook fact sentence to have the relevant inline citation. In addition, Earwigs detects a large overlap with this page, which in turn appears to be a copy of our article on Adams. Both issues need to be addressed before this can be approved. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:20, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia for details. In any case, it feels that the similarities are too close for comfort, especially since I don't think this article is a split from Adams's article; this would have been more acceptable if the latter was the case Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:23, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 12[]

Roy J. Snell

Created/expanded by EncyclopediaUpdaticus (talk). Self-nominated at 10:03, 15 May 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg A few issues need to be fixed here. Readable prose is just under the line at 1,471 characters, it needs a minimum of 1,500. The hook fact sentence is not cited, and the only cite source for that paragraph does not contain the fact. It does appear in another source used in the article, so that would need need citing directly, especially as "the great sum of $6.24" is a direct quote. Another short paragraph is uncited. No apparent copyvio, only trigger is the list of book titles. QPQ-exempt as from what I can tell you have less than five DYK crs. The hook I think passes muster as being broadly interesting. Once the issues are fixed, this should be ready for promotion. Spokoyni (talk) 09:40, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Ravindra Dave

Created by Nizil Shah (talk) and Coderzombie (talk). Nominated by Nizil Shah (talk) at 06:35, 15 May 2019 (UTC).

  • Nice article. Will opt for Hook 2 but prior to that, the article needs a copy-. WBGconverse 09:23, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 13[]

KPPC (AM)

  • Reviewed: Golden State Killer
  • Comment: This was a new article created as part of the merger of KPPC (defunct) into KROQ-FM. The previous article mostly talked about the FM and had little information about the AM station.

Created by Raymie (talk). Self-nominated at 04:12, 19 May 2019 (UTC).

  • @Narutolovehinata5: I realize I could have emphasized the continuity/longevity of these broadcasts better... Raymie (tc) 02:49, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
ALT0a: that the first and last programs on radio station KPPC were services of the Pasadena Presbyterian Church, which were aired each Sunday for 72 years?
Sounds a lot better. I'll follow up with the full review soon. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:05, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
@Raymie: I'm still a bit too busy to do the full review, but so far the article looks good. I think the hook could be rephrased somehow though: perhaps it could instead focus on the 72 years part? Another hook suggestion could be that they were planning to close the station but they found out they still had a number of months left in their permit? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:41, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
Why do I feel that might be a bit...dry for a DYK? Raymie (tc) 03:05, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
I don't know about you but personally I think that a station continuing broadcasting after winding down their operations because they found out they still had time left in their permit sounds quirky. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 14:46, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5: ALT1: ... that after going off the air, KPPC radio went on air once a week for six five months to fulfill a contract to broadcast church services? Raymie (tc) 21:11, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
@Raymie: That's a rather confusing hook at first read, how can a station "go off the air" then "go on air" again? At least that's likely what the average reader might think. The hook could probably be rephrased further. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:36, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5: ALT1a: ... that after discontinuing normal programming, KPPC radio broadcast once a week for five months to fulfill a contract to broadcast church services? Raymie (tc) 04:23, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
I think that's more like it. Will try to follow up with the full review by tomorrow. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 09:55, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
One more suggestion: ALT1a can probably be rephrased because the wording "KPPC radio broadcast" sounds vague, since in this case broadcast can be (mis)interpreted as being a noun instead of a verb. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:43, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5: Good catch, also avoids using the same word twice in the same sentence... Raymie (tc) 18:43, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
ALT1b: ... that after discontinuing normal programming, KPPC radio signed on once a week for five months to fulfill a contract to broadcast church services?
  • @Narutolovehinata5: I just beefed up the lede and added a few more needed citations. Raymie (tc) 02:19, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 15[]

Erik Werba

5x expanded by LouisAlain (talk) and Gerda Arendt (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 20:16, 19 May 2019 (UTC).

Symbol possible vote.svg Unfortunately, I don't think the hook appeals to a broad audience. It requires knowledge of names that are not well-known outside of opera circles, and there's nothing else in the hook that would catch the attention of those unfamiliar with the subject matter. Looking at the article, I regret to say that I have not been able to find anything that could interest a wide audience. If you can find some more information about his life or career that could raise interest, please do it so that a new, more appealing hook can be proposed. But right now, the article and hook are not looking like DYK material. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:59, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
Sigh. We could end the hook at "singers". It's quite unusual that a pianist is not known for solo work but for accompaniment. All the rest is extra for those who want to know a little more, the singers have links (and should get known if they aren't already), and how teaching for more than 40 years - which means shaping the playing of more than a generation - isn't interesting, is beyond me. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:42, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
It's not that, it's simply that the hook doesn't appeal to a general audience, only to those who are familiar with Seefried and Schreier (who are presumably not the majority of our readership), and the hook lacks context that would catch the attention of even someone uninterested in classical music. And yes, interesting is not the same as appealing, but there is significant overlap. Let's put it this way: let's say for example I was an average reader. I do not know who these Seefried or Schreier people are. I have no idea why they are important. I see that there is a hook where this person (Werba) was mentioned as performing with them. Unless I know who Seefried or Schreier are, I would have no idea why this is such a big deal. And that's the problem here: there's nothing in the hook that would allow those who are not "in the know" to appreciate the hook. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:41, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
I am sorry to have another language difficulty. I think you equation of "interesting" with "has to appeal" is your personal interpretation. I say that "interesting" only means "not trivia, not something that everybody knows already". I am tired of it. Do we really have to discuss at WP:DYK once more, or could you perhaps just leave the topic alone? - Today: Ernst Gutstein, just sad that we mention a minor role in a minor old opera, instead of a signature role in a well-known one at a major well-known house + a new role at a notable festival. Why? To insert "castrato" which appeals to those looking for sex-related things. I am ashamed. If Gutstein was still alive, I would have fought harder, but my time on Earth is limited, so I let t go, but still ashamed. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:55, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 16[]

Wächter (Anatol)

Wächter der Goitzsche
Wächter der Goitzsche
  • Reviewed: New York City Board of Aldermen
  • Comment: I wrote this article in defiance. The artist recently died, but proceedings to get the article ready for Recent deaths ITN took too long. This is in memory of a great person who deserves more attention. I wish I had an image of the latter sculpture, then I'd happily focus on that one. - I don't know how to handle that in German, Wächter is the same singular and plural, while in English it's Guard(s), plural for the first, singular for the second. - David, I think the image would be better cropped in this size, do you agree? - asap please
  • Gerda:Yes, I agree. I've cropped the image. —David Levy 00:46, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 15:51, 17 May 2019 (UTC).

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol question.svg An interesting article that is new enough, long enough and fully cited. My only minor comment is that the word Landschaft has been translated in the hook as "environment" which these days tends to refer to the abstract notion of the wider world we live in viewed from a 'green' perspective (Umwelt), whereas I think in the article cited it just means the statues are watching over the local countryside. So I'd use "countryside" rather than "environment". That said, I realise the terrain is a former open cast, brown coal mine, so you may tell me there is a green angle. In which case, maybe "local environment" may be clearer to avoid thinking they're watching over environmental concerns in general. HTH. Bermicourt (talk) 14:09, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for looking. I think there's a "green" angle to the statues, at a site which was industrial before and returned to nature. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:30, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
In which case, could we add "local" before environment to make it clear. Bermicourt (talk) 18:38, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
ALT1: ... that policeman and artist Anatol created outdoor iron Wächter, a group of figures watching over the local environment (pictured), and one as a memorial to police officers killed in the line of duty?
The "outdoor iron" wording still feels strange to me. Why not "an outdoor group of iron figures"? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:58, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
The Wächter link needs to be preserved as a DYK requirement, does it not? We are talking about two separate outdoor installations, the group pictured here and a single figure elsewhere as a police memorial. See also the article lead, which uses "outdoor iron sculptures". I think the current wording is clear. What would be your full suggestion? Jmar67 (talk) 04:43, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
The wording I had in mind was over 200 characters so it might not have worked out. I don't have much problems with the hook itself or the groupings, it's really the "created outdoor iron" that sounds weird to me. Would "the outdoor iron sculpture series" work instead? It would reflect the wording used in the article. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 04:47, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
ALT3: ... that policeman and artist Anatol created the outdoor iron sculpture series Wächter, including a group guarding the environment (pictured) and a memorial to fallen police officers? Jmar67 (talk) 05:26, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
That sounds much better. Letting Gerda decide if she likes it or not. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 06:46, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for the offers. Always learning: can you say "fallen officers"? (Because in German, you could the equivalent of fallen soldiers, but no other "professions".) If yes, then fine. Someone requested "local" before environment. I'm travelling, and have no time to check it all. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:58, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
"Fallen police officers" seems to be a fairly common expression in English, so that's fine. I'd put a comma after series as, grammatically, that seems right. But it's not a 'biggie'. Bermicourt (talk) 12:21, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

─────────────────────────

No comma (Wächter defines series). Would be different with "an outdoor". Also, removed "local" because I view "environment" as general ("Umwelt") in this case. Jmar67 (talk) 16:49, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 17[]

Nanhaipotamon

Nanhaipotamon guangdongense from Zhuhai, Guangdong
Nanhaipotamon guangdongense from Zhuhai, Guangdong

Created by Bubbleleg96 (talk). Self-nominated at 03:08, 19 May 2019 (UTC).

QPQ: None required.

Overall: Symbol confirmed.svg The hooks aren't interesting, and the article is too short. QPQ still pending. Approved DannyS712 (talk) 20:34, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

@Bubbleleg96: see review above --DannyS712 (talk) 20:39, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
This is the nominator's first DYK nomination; as they have less than five noms, they are not yet required to do a QPQ. I agree though that the hooks are bland and should not run. I would have suggested a hook here, but at the moment the article is too short. If this can't be expanded in a reasonable amount of time, the nomination will probably have to be marked as failed. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:31, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Sorry to contradict, but I think the first hook is very interesting. Who would have expected a new species of crab to be detected in such a tourist hotspot? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:44, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
@Cwmhiraeth: I agree that they are now, but I reviewed Special:Permalink/897861222 --DannyS712 (talk) 05:47, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
OK. The original hooks should have been struck rather than replaced. They are better now. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:06, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
@DannyS712: The article now has over 1500 characters of readable prose and I changed the content of the hooks. Bubbleleg96 (talk) 11:45, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
@Bubbleleg96: approved --DannyS712 (talk) 04:17, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Bubbleleg96 how would you feel about this? It gets at the surprise of still making new discoveries of species, plus Macau?
Both points are already sourced within the article. --valereee (talk) 10:35, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
I'm also wondering if we can crop that image a little closer:
Nanhaipotamon guangdongense
Nanhaipotamon guangdongense

--valereee (talk) 10:42, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

@Valereee: Yeah, I am ok with that. Maybe rephrase it a little so that
The reason why I wrote the article and nominated it to DYK was mostly to raise awareness about this group of animals, and I thought the recent discovery in Macau was a interesting hook. People seem to disagree, so it doesn't have to mention Macau for my sake.
Bubbleleg96 (talk) 12:49, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • If ALT2b is used, the image doesn't apply, because it's not a picture of the genus per the hook. Yoninah (talk) 13:42, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
I'm repeating here my thoughts that I don't think the hook works well without the mention of Macau. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:32, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5: Alt1 also mentions Macau, as do both Alt2 and Alt2b. @Yoninah: As for the image, it shows another species of the genus, but since the article is not only about the new species only, but about the genus in general, I think that should be ok. Furthermore, I don´t have an image of N. macau, and to my knowledge, the only published one is in the article.
Bubbleleg96 (talk) 3:35, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 18[]

Rolf Riehm

  • Reviewed: Wildlife of Senegal
  • Comment: best on 15 June, his birthday. - I don't want to name the institution where he taught because it changed name during the long time.

Created by LouisAlain (talk) and Gerda Arendt (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 21:40, 24 May 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Discography and most of the works lack inline citation. RRD (talk) 06:15, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
Will do, but just returned from travelling, and at least 2 nominations need me before this one ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:20, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
@Gerda Arendt: OK, I would wait. RRD (talk) 06:23, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
RRD, I managed to reduce the compositions to (mostly) what the Academy of the Arts shows, and sourced all recordings. The most recent compositions that are not recorded still lack a ref, but I'm exhausted ;) - more patience needed. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:07, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
RRD, I added refs now to later works. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:21, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Leslie Leve

Moved to mainspace by Squirrel1847 (talk). Nominated by QuakerSquirrel (talk) at 19:38, 23 May 2019 (UTC).

  • This notion that children can inherit a behavior is not supported by evidence, and in the article is supported only by a press release. Abductive (reasoning) 06:12, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
@Abductive: I've changed the hook, which has an outside reference. In addition, within the article, I've added the original study as a reference for the first hook. QuakerSquirrel (talk) 10:32, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
I like it. Abductive (reasoning) 16:32, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
@Abductive: Great! Is it ready to be approved & ready for the green checkmark? Let me know if you need anything else from me. Thanks! QuakerSquirrel (talk) 22:27, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
I nominated an article for DYK last year, and the WP:OWNERS here have made the process far too arbitrary and capricious for me to continue to participate. I only comment on factual matters. Abductive (reasoning) 23:24, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
OK, thanks for your feedback. I'll wait for another reviewer to come and approve. QuakerSquirrel (talk) 14:32, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Tarzan of Manisa

Tarzan Heykeli ("the statue of Tarzan"), statue of Ahmet Bedevi in Manisa
Tarzan Heykeli ("the statue of Tarzan"), statue of Ahmet Bedevi in Manisa

Created by Alessandro57 (talk). Self-nominated at 11:28, 18 May 2019 (UTC).

  • Comment that image is pretty hard to see at that size. The ducks are nice, but maybe a crop on the statue? --valereee (talk) 22:47, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
Narutolovehinata5, I'm getting ready to get into the car and make an 8-hour drive, so I probably won't have a chunk of time today. Tomorrow I was planning to fill a set, if needed, but if it's not I could do a review then if no one else picks it up. --valereee (talk) 10:23, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Hi Narutolovehinata5. Sorry that your nomination has languished here. I like the alt2 better. I also would say that the crop still doesn't show much of the subject. Would you be ok with no posting the image for DYK? If you feel very strongly about putting it through with the photo, I would acquiesce. Killiondude (talk) 22:56, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 19[]

Heb Ik Ooit Gezegd

  • Comment: There is a request to merge the article, but I wanted to place this request in case the merge request fails.

Created by Big universe (talk). Self-nominated at 04:50, 26 May 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Nomination on hold until merge discussion finishes. Yoninah (talk) 21:35, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 20[]

Jew with a coin, Joanna Tokarska-Bakir, "Never Again" Association, Rafał Pankowski

Jew with a coin figurines on sale in Polańczyk
Jew with a coin figurines on sale in Polańczyk
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/2019–20 RFU Championship
  • Comment: I have a bunch of articles here, but the really-really hooky and cool one is Jew with a coin. Reviewer - you have an important job - I've listed many possible hooks - please convey your opinions on which hook (or hooks) are the hookiest (or in this case, convey a WTF moment). If we have an additional article in the hook (other than Jew with a coin) that's a bonus - but the main-main thing I want here is hookiness.

Created by Icewhiz (talk), Piotrus (talk), 92.3.3.67 (talk), Drmies (talk), E.M.Gregory (talk), MyMoloboaccount (talk), Kayteigh (talk), Xx236 (talk), Jpbowen (talk), and Slatersteven (talk). Nominated by Icewhiz (talk) at 08:59, 24 May 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Date, size, copyvio spotcheck, QCQ ok. Concern #1: the article is not stable yet, a few days may be needed for some tug of wars/reverts/etc. do die down; there's also a NPOV template at the top of the article, this needs to be removed and not challenged for the DYK to be stable for main page. (Ping me if you think this has happened and I'll rereview this). Concern #2. Hooks are interesting, but 1) first one - I don't think qualifier "many" is correct, per my comment on nom's talk page. 2) ok, but I'd add 'some', I don't think it's a custom for majority of them 3) ok but just one minor event, a bit boring 4) I like it, through perhaps a bit too technical for a casual reader 4) my favorite 5) interesting, but I'd rather go with 4 that attribute a single scholar opinion that may not be universally shared. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:16, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Note you are co-named as an author - you should not be reviewing. These are in 18% of around 10 million homes = many. If you have a better word - go ahead and suggest. There is a NPOV tag only on Pankowski, which is only relevant for one hook (ALT2) - the others should be good.Icewhiz (talk) 12:42, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Fair enough. I'll just note that neither Pankowski nor the Association seem to be linked in the hook, they probably should have stand-alone and separate DYK nominations and hooks. For what's it worth, I think the 'jew with the coin' article is neutral right now, but whether it is stable, I am unsure. The next reviewer will check on that anyway. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:35, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
Symbol delete vote.svgObject-Joannas Tokarska-Bakirs claims have been widely rejected by others up to the point of her being openly ridiculed by other scholars in this field[9]. Right now her claims are shown as valid and serious.Just one of the issues the article has.MyMoloboaccount (talk) 11:03, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
It is attributed analysis - and I don't quite see where the Polish language journal states that. Please note that BLPTALK applies vs. the chair of the ethnic and national relations study at the Polish Academy of Sciences's Institute of Slavic Studies who is a well respected and widely cited authority in the field.Icewhiz (talk) 11:34, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
Actually Tokarska herself mentions this and calls Sorbona professor Ludwik Stomma who ridiculed her "ancient lizard"(best translation to her insult "praszczur" I could think of)and mastodont[10]</ref>
All the source you have brought shows is that Stomma, who per plwiki is also a columnist in Hustler magazine, disagreed with Tokarska-Bakir - a chair ethnic and national relations study. Unsurprisingly, Tokarska-Bakir's analysis continues to be quoted and cited - usually without Stomma.Icewhiz (talk) 12:21, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
Stomma is reliable,and actually seems to have both longer and higher scholar status that Tokarska.Worked at University of Warsaw,Krakow Jagiellonian University, Institute of Arts PAN, University of Torun, published over 14 books on ethnology and worked at Sorbonna University.Has dozens of dozens of scholarly articles.MyMoloboaccount (talk) 12:28, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

TAI Aksungur

Created by CeeGee (talk). Self-nominated at 10:21, 22 May 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Not sure if I'll be able to give this a full review, but for now I'll leave a comment about the hook. I don't think it right now appeals to a broad audience since it seems to rely too much on technical words such as SATCOM. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:20, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
  • @Narutolovehinata5: Thanks. The reason why I used the term "SATCOM" was to draw reader's attention. Anyway, does your mind change if I replace "SATCOM" with "communications satellite" in the hook? CeeGee 05:00, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
I'm afraid not. To a reader who is not interested in aviation or military stuff, the hook has a big "so what?" factor. The typical reader probably won't appreciate how or why a UAV can carry that amount of load, it requires knowledge about UAVs and their context as a whole. A new direction is probably needed here. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:54, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Hmm! You must have known what the broad reader is thinking. Maybe someone can suggest a hook in the direction of your thinking. Besides, must I call you repearedly to get an answer from you? CeeGee 03:56, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
I read the DYK discussions I've participated in on an almost hourly basis, so I generally don't need to be pinged unless it's important. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 05:02, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
  • You may not categorize DYK noms into important or not important. If you start a review you better progress in due time please. The noninator, in this case me, cannot know that you have alread read the response to your input. CeeGee 18:43, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
In any case, a new hook is still probably needed here. The original hook remains too technical. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:31, 29 May 2019 (UTC)


Vera Blagojević

Created by Joseph2302 (talk). Self-nominated at 20:37, 20 May 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg While the hook is okay, I wonder if something better can be proposed here: isn't it a given that activists would organize events such as strikes? The mention of her posthumously winning an award might have more potential as a hook I think. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:19, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol delete vote.svg Nominator has been indefinitely blocked for vandalism, so this isn't going anywhere. – Teratix 01:52, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg I've left a request over at Discord to see if any or willing to adopt this nomination. If there's no response by Monday I'll close this. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 05:27, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
Symbol delete vote.svg An or messaged me saying that they were interested in picking this up, but hasn't been able to follow up. Probably time to close this if no one else will adopt this. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:45, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Daksha Pattani

  • Reviewed: pending

Created by Nizil Shah (talk). Self-nominated at 14:43, 20 May 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article was moved from draftspace on 20 May, is over the required prose size and has no copyvio concerns. The hook has an inline citation although, as it is a foreign language source, it is AGF. Just waiting on a QPQ review to finish this one. Kosack (talk) 05:57, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  • ☒N Barely 200 characters above the minimal requirements of 1500 and it's a stub, for all practical purposes. The hook is entirely non-interesting.
  • I am also doubtful about the notability of the subject. the volumes of Gujarati Sahityano Itihas contains bioraphies of hundreds of writers and is more of a catalog. It does not contribute to automatic-notability. WBGconverse 09:20, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
@Winged Blades of Godric:, Sorry for late reply. I missed the watchlist change. The article is 200 characters above "minimal requirement" so it should be a concern according to the DYK rules. For notability, Gujarati Sahityano Itihas (lit. History of Gujarati Literature) contains biographies of only selected writers of a period/era, not "hundreds of writers" and is not "a catalog" as you claimed. The book is carefully written and ed by scholars of Gujarati literature and is published by Gujarati Sahitya Parishad, a literary organisation. Have you checked the source book before claiming it contains "biographies of hundreds of writers"? I doubt. If you have not checked the book, you should not claim it. Due to lack of online sources, I have to rely on offline sources. Pattani was a respected scholar on Gandhi. For hook, it may not seem interesting to you but reviewer @Kosack: found it interesting enough. I am open to ALT hook if Kosack ask for it. Regards,-Nizil (talk) 07:45, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
It's obviously not a catalog (hyperbole) but I stand by my claim of hundreds; extrapolating from the volumes I've read. I don't believe that SYSTEMICBIAS affects someone who was producing works as late as 2000 and reject that she was a highly esteemed scholar. No book reviews, no obituaries ... WBGconverse 08:00, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
I thought the idea of an author publishing six books and dedicating a considerable portion of their career to a single person was relatively interesting, I'd never heard of anything similar I don't believe. If WBG does find it uninteresting, would there be any alternative hooks available perhaps? If the notability of the subject is in question, why not take it to AfD? Kosack (talk) 08:06, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
Kosack, the notability is not in question but the belief that every article which meets the objective criterion of DYK is automatically main-page stuff, is.
You might wish to note Ramachandra Guha, who has written:- Gandhi Before India, Gandhi: The Years That Changed the World and India After Gandhi. Yet another one about Gandhi's relevance in today's world, is in the making. Manikonda Chalapathi Rau has published a lot of works about Jawaharlal Nehru. WBGconverse 16:02, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
That's fine, if I'm mistaken about the interest then maybe we can look for something more interesting. Nizil Shah would there be any alternative hooks? Kosack (talk) 16:33, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
Interestingly, she had published her entire PhD thesis as those 6 books or so does Nizil claim -- which is quite weird. Nizil, I am not very comfortable in Gujarati but is "દક્ષા (વિજયશંકર) પટ્ટણી" a correct translation of the subject's name? On a side-note, what's this?WBGconverse 09:40, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
@Winged Blades of Godric:, she did PhD on Gandhi and each chapter of her thesis was published as a book with more information. Each chapter/book discusses one aspect of Gandhi and his philosophy. Gujarati is my native language and દક્ષા (વિજયશંકર) પટ્ટણી is correctly translated as Daksha (Vijayshankar) Pattani. That Nireekshak pdf file is a biweekly published in Gujarati since 1968. There is an obituary of Pattani written by Ajay Pathak on p. 13-14. It can be a helpful reference. I have also found another obituary published in Kumar (magazine) which I will be adding soon. -Nizil (talk) 12:21, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
Both (Nirikshak and Kumar) refs are added now with some new info. @Kosack: -Nizil (talk) 13:53, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
Just a drive-by comment, but I'm skeptical of ALT1 working out considering we don't even have an article on the award. Unless of course you could make an article on the award and make this a double hook. ALT2 is not a spectacular hook but it might be the best bet at this point, if only because readers might be curious exactly what "Gandhian philosophy" is. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:32, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Obligation to Negotiate Access to the Pacific Ocean

  • Reviewed: 5th DYK nom, QPQ not needed

Created/expanded by StudiesWorld (talk). Self-nominated at 11:25, 20 May 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg @StudiesWorld: Good job! New and long enough, within policy, Earwig detects no copyvios, this is the last DYK nom that will not require a QPQ. The hooks provide no context; it might be more interesting to include that Bolivia sued Chile in 2013 for territory it lost in 1884. Antony–22 (talkcontribs) 02:00, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
Antony-22, thanks for the review. How about?:
ALT3:... that Bolivia sued Chile in the International Court of Justice, claiming that it had an Obligation to Negotiate Access to the Pacific Ocean?
ALT4:... that Bolivia sued Chile in 2013 to reclaim land lost in 1884 during the War of the Pacific? StudiesWorld (talk) 09:49, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 21[]

Charles Stapley

Created by Edwardx (talk) and Philafrenzy (talk). Nominated by Edwardx (talk) at 22:52, 29 May 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article meets DYK article requirements, no close paraphrasing found, hook cited inline and verified. @Philafrenzy: Good to go once a QPQ has been done. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:24, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Asplenium fontanum

Created by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self-nominated at 06:21, 27 May 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Article is new enough and long enough, a QPQ has been completed, and I didn't need Earwig to be satisfied there were no copyright concerns. The article is well-sourced, but some statements are not supported: there is no reference for 2n = 72 or that the 1830s reports of the plant in Britain are dubious. The description section uses a lot of technical terminology which I recommend explaining or linking. As for the hook, it's odd to single out these specific areas which don't seem significant. I suggest reworking it to explain how it was reportedly found in Britain in the late 1830s but is now extinct there. – Teratix 10:29, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
@Teratix: What a dreadful description! I have rewritten it. How about ALT1, although I must admit to rather liking ALT0. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:28, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
I prefer this, although I would just cut the bit about its mountainous habitat to be concise, and replace 'continental' with 'Western' to be consistent with the article. Also, could you clarify how the nineteenth-century reports are dubious? – Teratix 09:51, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Karen Saywitz

Moved to mainspace by QuakerQuaker765 (talk). Nominated by QuakerSquirrel (talk) at 14:02, 21 May 2019 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on May 22[]

Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code

Created by Dharmadhyaksha (talk) and Rsrikanth05 (talk). Nominated by Dharmadhyaksha (talk) at 07:37, 29 May 2019 (UTC).

Die wundersame Schustersfrau

Udo Zimmermann in 2013
Udo Zimmermann in 2013

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 06:35, 29 May 2019 (UTC).

Paula R. Pietromonaco

Created by Squirrel1847 (talk). Nominated by QuakerSquirrel (talk) at 14:16, 23 May 2019 (UTC).

  • Ugh. I misspelled her name for the nomination. It's Pietromonaco not Pietromanco. Not sure how to change the nomination page name so leaving it for now. QuakerSquirrel (talk) 16:12, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
  • That AfD is on the fast track to a "keep" result. bd2412 T 18:30, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Murder of Senicha Lessman

Created by FiredanceThroughTheNight (talk). Self-nominated at 00:44, 23 May 2019 (UTC).

  • Length is long enough (2271 characters readable prose size), both hooks are in the article, does not need a QPQ (only has 1 DYK cr). Everything seems to be sourced, however, I have not done a full check. Article should be eligible. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 19:48, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Luys i Luso

Created by Dreamy Jazz (talk). Self-nominated at 18:07, 23 May 2019 (UTC).

  • I have also struck the first 3, as I feel the ones about God will get the page more pageviews, as it leaves more details out (and so leaving viewers wanting more). If a reviewer feels that the hooks about God are not good enough, then I will be open to the idea about using the striked ones. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 18:35, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Symbol redirect vote 4.svg the nomination still needs a proper DYK policy review. Flibirigit (talk) 13:56, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 23[]

Bramble Cay Melomys

Improved to Good Article status by The lorax (talk), Vanamonde, and User:Laterthanyouthink. Self-nominated at 21:17, 23 May 2019 (UTC).

  • I said this at the talk page, where you chose to ignore me; I'll say it again here. Nominating an article for GAN or DYK without pinging the other major contributors to the page or adding them as conominators is thoroughly discourteous. This is especially true when you did not do anything to actually fix issues raised during a GA review; I was the one to get it through the GA process. Please make the relevant fixes now. Vanamonde (Talk) 21:52, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
  • My apologies, @Vanamonde93:, I am additionally pinging @Laterthanyouthink: who contributed significantly to the article. I wanted to nominate this to bring attention to the hard work you all did to bring this to Good article status.The lorax (talk) 23:48, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the nominations, The lorax, and thanks for getting it up to scratch, Vanamonde93. (I'm not familiar with with these processes, so just an interested observer at this point.) Laterthanyouthink (talk) 05:59, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Symbol redirect vote 4.svg this nomination still needs a DYK policy review. Flibirigit (talk) 14:01, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Symbol question.svg Article was recently promoted to GA status, no close paraphrasing was found (Earwig's hit appears to be a false positive), nominator has only three DYK crs so QPQ is not yet required. Both hooks are approved as interesting and cited inline. @The lorax, Vanamonde93, and Laterthanyouthink: This will be good to go once clarification is given on whether or not the crs issue has been resolved. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:12, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Swedish Levant Company

Moved to mainspace by Bkissin (talk). Nominated by MJL (talk) at 02:04, 24 May 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg I'll do a full review soon, but right now I have concerns about both hooks: they're not exactly eye-catching or hooky. Like, instead of saying that the creation of the company was controversial, it might be a good idea to include the context for that in the hook. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:45, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
I also have to note that, while you have done a QPQ, as you have less than five DYK nominations, you are not required to do a QPQ (you can still do one of course if you want, it's just optional right now). Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:49, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
I figured it'd be the polite thing to do Face-smile.svgMJLTalk 02:52, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
@Valereee and Narutolovehinata5: Oh my gosh I love that one!!! Only correction would be to change the merchants to several Swedish merchants because according to the source the merchant elite supported the English model.MJLTalk 16:08, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
ALT2a is really good. I have however seen some typos in the article, for example "At major issue was" instead of "a major issue was". Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:11, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
Narutolovehinata5, I've done a quick copy --valereee (talk) 17:47, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 24[]

The Unsafe Asylum

Moved to mainspace by Satdeep Gill (talk). Self-nominated at 14:25, 31 May 2019 (UTC).


Hermin Esser

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk) and Grimes2 (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 08:38, 31 May 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg This article is new enough and long enough. The article is neutral and I detected no copyright or plagiarism issues. A QPQ has been done. The "almost all" in the hook is the only problem. If you can find a source that states that, or lists every Wagner tenor role, it would be fine, but if you are relying on your own knowledge of tenor roles in Wagner's operas, then its original research, and won't do. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:55, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
  • I wouldn't know where to find such a source, Wagner wasn't Rossini, the number of his stage works is small, and all have articles. We could go and count the roles and say how many he sang in Bayreuth (14)? Or say that he performed both David and Stolzing in Meistersinger? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:29, 13 June 2019 (UTC)


Korean National Youth Association

Created by Sunghokyoung (talk) and 95leegy (talk). Nominated by 166.104.240.105 (talk) at 07:20, 27 May 2019 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on May 26[]

Tomb of Isa Khan

Tomb of Isa Khan
Tomb of Isa Khan

Created by Royroydeb (talk). Self-nominated at 17:41, 26 May 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Unfortunately, I've had to strike the original hook as it's not exactly interesting to a broad audience: I don't think the Tomb of Sikandar Lodi is a household name, and I think those unfamiliar with it will be able to appreciate the hook. If possible, try proposing something that appeals even to those unfamiliar with Indian history. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:23, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5:
  • ALT1: ... that the inscription at the Tomb of Isa Khan claims that the tomb is an "asylum of peace"?
Of the two hooks, ALT2 probably is best for the history buffs, but ALT1 is the one that might catch the attention of most readers. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:06, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5: Whichever you feel good. RRD (talk) 15:08, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
ALT 2, please. WBGconverse 15:27, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 28[]

Kieth Engen

  • Reviewed: David Scott
  • Comment: He did many things well, - I trust wordsmiths will help to work on a hook, - this is more or less a placeholder

Created by LouisAlain (talk), Vocenore (talk), and Kablammo (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 07:11, 4 June 2019 (UTC).

Liu Xianjue

Created by Zanhe (talk). Self-nominated at 07:14, 1 June 2019 (UTC).

Binod Chaudhary

Binod Chaudhary
Binod Chaudhary

5x expanded by CAPTAIN MEDUSA (talk). Self-nominated at 20:56, 28 May 2019 (UTC).

Reviewed: Arab Serai

  • Symbol possible vote.svg According to the DYK tool, the expansion done to the article has not reached 5x. This will still require some work before it can be approved for DYK. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:08, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment: the DYKcheck tool reports that there were 2441 prose characters prior to expansion, 12283 afterward. Since a 5x expansion would be to 12205, it has made it. Previous incarnations of the article did go higher than 2441 (I found one pretty close to 4000), which is why DYKcheck says the 5x expansion dates back to 2013, but those were far enough in the past that they aren't relevant now for the current expansion—the article had been stable at 2441 since March. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:17, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 29[]

Lilian Benningsen

  • Reviewed: Mandy Moore (choreographer)
  • Comment: The original hook is professional, the second for those who can't imagine what "create a role" means, and the third adding Eboli which must have been quite sensational, according to sources. If a date connection is wanted: DOD 12 June.

Created by LouisAlain (talk) and Gerda Arendt (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 10:39, 5 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg I'm going to suggest a new hook here, letting another reviewer decide if it's good enough for DYK or not. I've also struck ALT0 and ALT2 as being too long and too complicated (and ALT0 uses the "created the role" terminology which consensus has determined is not appropriate for DYK purposes), keeping ALT1 as a hook that is direct to the point and explaining the main hook fact in a concise manner.
ALT3... that Austrian opera singer Lilian Benningsen was awarded the title Kammersängerin, and was given the Bavarian Order of Merit in 1970?
I am aware that you are not fond of hooks that mention the Kammersängerin term, but you have to understand that this is a mostly-unfamiliar term to non-opera audiences, and a mention of it in this form would be a good idea to introduce it to new readers. In addition, the statement "Her grave is in the Waldfriedhof in Gauting" lacks a footnote. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 15:25, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
I added a re for the grave. I wouldn't mind mention Kammersängerin before her name, but please don't make it the ONLY thing we say about her, while first Carolina is something unique. Has been called demonic in a review. In the plot, she could have saved the lives of two young people by speaking, and remains silent in obedience to her Master. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:58, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Sarjun ibn Mansur

  • Reviewed: not yet

Created by Cplakidas (talk). Self-nominated at 13:30, 3 June 2019 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on May 30[]

Patrick Francheterre

5x expanded by Flibirigit (talk). Self-nominated at 14:13, 31 May 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg This is eligible as a 5x expansion. I like the hook and am accepting the foreign-language source as AGF because the English link no longer works. I wonder about focusing on the bakruptcy and the fact that he was never reimbursed. Might that be more interesting, Flibirigit? Once the link is fixed in the article, this will be good to go. StudiesWorld (talk) 17:59, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
  • I have updated the first citation with a web.archive.org link, and added a second bilingual source to summarize his career. The bankruptcy information is only in French. I added the word "some" before expenses in the hook to be more accurate. I considered your suggestion, but not stating "never reimbursed" is not completely accurate since he did recuperate some costs, and I am not sure if saying partially reimbursed is very hooky. Flibirigit (talk) 20:14, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 31[]

Gao Xiaoxia

Created by Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk). Nominated by Zanhe (talk) at 18:45, 7 June 2019 (UTC).

Joanne Berger-Sweeney

Created by Jerilyn98 (talk). Nominated by QuakerSquirrel (talk) at 15:28, 3 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg First thing, you need to specify Trinity College (Connecticut), given all the dozens of options at Trinity College, at least three of which are far better known. Long and new enough, seems neutral. Is a qpq needed? Oh, oh Earwig is 75% confident of copyvio from her college bio - see here. Considerable rewriting will be needed. Johnbod (talk) 19:54, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
  • @Johnbod: I changed the hook to Trinity College (Connecticut). In addition, within the article, I added that link the first time it was mentioned in each section. (With the exception of the first sentence -- it links to the correct Trinity, but it says "Hartford, Connecticut" right after it, so adding "(Connecticut)" seemed redundant.) I've also rewritten the portions of concern. Copyvio now shows "violation unlikely". Finally, I think I already did the QPQ, unless that's something different from what I understand. Above, you'll see I reviewed Al-Muhallab ibn Abi Sufra. Let me know if there are any other concerns. Thanks for reviewing! QuakerSquirrel (talk) 13:30, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
  • You should only link it once in the article (and not use the form with parentheses in text). Here, I'd use "Trinity College in Connecticut" or "Trinity College, Connecticut". Earwig now I think ok, although still picking up on this passage:
"These demands include that she retract the club's approval, release a statement denouncing white supremacy and change the two-step process to approve clubs.
The Churchill Club is a 10-member group that describes itself as “dedicated to the preservation, dissemination and extension of the Western moral and philosophical tradition." The club is the first campus chapter of the Churchill Institute, which was started by Gregory B. Smith, a Professor of Political Science at Trinity College. Smith drew criticism for referring to African-American, Asian-American, Latino, Muslim and Jewish culture houses on campus as “tribal enclaves.”".

Johnbod (talk) 02:48, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

@Johnbod: I think I've addressed the issues. Thanks for your feedback! Let me know if I've missed anything or if there are other issues. QuakerSquirrel (talk) 16:37, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Mrinalini Devi

Mrinalini Devi with Rabindranath Tagore, 1883
Mrinalini Devi with Rabindranath Tagore, 1883

Created by Royroydeb (talk). Self-nominated at 05:22, 1 June 2019 (UTC).

Policy compliance:

Hook eligiblity:

QPQ: ????
Overall: Symbol question.svg Excellent article and addition to women in wikipedia. Could you bring at least one English language source? As to the hook, it seems to me that it's more interesting that she was just nine years old when they married. QPQ still to do. Onceinawhile (talk) 09:40, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

@Onceinawhile: Frankly, Tagore is not hardly celebrated outside the Bengal region, so hardly is there any other language source with much information. I could only find these (1 2 3). Also during those days, marrying at 9 was not uncommon. RRD (talk) 15:35, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
How about: Sahu, Monideepa (15 May 2013). "Chapter 7: Marriage". Rabindranath Tagore: Puffin Lives. Penguin Books Limited. ISBN 978-81-8475-991-4.
Onceinawhile (talk) 15:49, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
How about a hook relating to Mrinalini’s views on Kadambari Devi. That is sure to get some clicks! Onceinawhile (talk) 15:54, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
ALT1 ... that Rabindranath Tagore married his wife Mrinalini Devi when she was nine years old and he was twenty-two?
ALT1a ... that the Indian writer and Nobel laureate Rabindranath Tagore married his wife Mrinalini Devi when she was nine years old and he was twenty-two?
Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 15:34, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
Agree to ALT2. RRD (talk) 10:56, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Arvind Sawant

  • Reviewed: Soon

5x expanded by Royroydeb (talk). Self-nominated at 16:04, 31 May 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg A better hook might be needed here as I don't think the company is well-known outside of India, and it would not be clear to our non-Indian readers how working for them is important. If anything, at the very least, additional context is needed. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 20:30, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5:, that is what I wanted to mean - a person who started his career at an unknown company is now the union minister of India. RRD (talk) 10:52, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
It doesn't change the fact that the hook fact is simply uninteresting to non-Indian readers, and ministers having non-government jobs isn't very hooky to begin with. Can something else be proposed here? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:19, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Dad Behavior

Improved to Good Article status by Jonie148 (talk). Self-nominated at 15:45, 31 May 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg New hooks are needed as both fail WP:DYKSG#C6, which require that hooks about works of fiction need to be connected to the real world in some way. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:55, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
Okay. I hadn't noticed (and don't like) this rule, but I'm obviously going to have to play along. The hooks suggested above are the most interesting aspect of the article in my opinion, so although bringing in "real world context" makes the phrasing more awkward, I want to adapt them, rather than redo them. How about the following alternative?

Jonie148 (talk) 13:31, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

It still focuses on a plot point, so it wouldn't meet the rule either. It doesn't matter if it's the most interesting aspect of the article, if it does not meet that rule, it can't be used. I see this is your first DYK nomination so it's understandable if you weren't aware of this rule. For reference, here's an example of a possible hook that does follow the requirement of a real-world connection:
ALT3 ... that "Dad Behavior" was the first episode of The Simpsons to be written by series co-executive producer Ryan Koh?
Granted, I'm not sure if it will appeal to non-Simpsons fans, but perhaps another reviewer could chime in here. Another possibility, if you still wish to use the couch gag as a source for hook facts, could be to use the reviews used in the Reception section (i.e. try writing a hook about how the couch gag was received, using the quotes given by reviewers as a basis). If you're having difficulty, you're free to leave a request at WT:DYK for help. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:12, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
There is no rule which says that a hook can't focus on a plot point. The rule simply says that such a hook "must involve the real world in some way", which ALT2 definitely does. MANdARAX  XAЯAbИAM 01:37, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
At the very least, it's discouraged in most cases, unless additional context is required. And even if that were not the case, the other issue with ALT2 is that it seems to combine two very different hook facts, which makes the hook lack focus. Does it want to focus on the couch gag, or the writer? It would probably be better to stick to only one or the other, but not both. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:54, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks both for your input and suggestions. In my opinion, a simple reordering of ALT2 makes it seem more focused. I also like the idea of a hook about how the couch gag was received, as represented in ALT4.
ALT2 ... that "Dad Behavior" was the first episode of The Simpsons to be written by series co-executive producer Ryan Koh, and all but one of the Simpsons die prior to its couch gag?
ALT4 ... that critics found the couch gag of The Simpsons episode "Dad Behavior" remarkably grim, as all but one of the Simpsons die during its otherwise familiar title sequence? Source: [35][36][37]
I prefer ALT4 personally. Jonie148 (talk) 07:21, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
Yeah, I think ALT4 is the best option thus far. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:35, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 2[]

Rugg/Feldman benchmarks

Created by Maury Markowitz (talk). Self-nominated at 11:02, 3 June 2019 (UTC).

Reviewed Hells Bells.

I think of the various hooks, ALT1 is the most "hooky" and likely the best? Maury Markowitz (talk) 11:02, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Eunice Parsons

  • Comment: ALT1 is a better paraphrase than the original.

Created by Grand'mere Eugene (talk). Self-nominated at 20:51, 3 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Thanks, Felixkrater. I did complete another QPQ, Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Jack_Gatecliff shortly after nominating this article, seeing the backlog. I like ALT2 better, too. A question, though: I was under the impression that for DYK, new articles were dated from the time a draft was moved to article space, in this case on June 2 with this diff. But as you pointed out, it also meets the 5x criterion, so not a problem, I'd just like to understand the rule. Cheers! — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 15:30, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
Comment: Parsons will be 103 years old on August 4, so her age in ALT2 may need to be updated if this DYK is queued on that date or after. — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 15:45, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 3[]

Susan Beschta

Created by Andrew Davidson (talk). Self-nominated at 22:36, 10 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Full review to follow, but for now I have to say that the stub templates in the article have to be removed before this can qualify for DYK. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:47, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg @Andrew Davidson: This article is new enough and long enough. The hook facts are cited inline, the article is neutral and I detected no copyright or plagiarism issues. A QPQ has been done. At the moment I think the article fails DYK supplementary rule D7. It appears to be incomplete, has an unexpanded empty section and fails to deal with her second career as a lawyer (except briefly in the lead) or mention her death. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:20, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Some others started ing the article and I stepped away to avoid conflict. I shall resume now; more anon. Andrew D. (talk) 09:25, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Kang Woo Kyu

Created by Won96 (talk). Self-nominated at 08:45, 3 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg @Won96: Hey, I've given a bit of polish to the hook. The article is a strong start but it needs a bit of copying. (I've also done some to the hook, adding a link.) I don't think I'm the right person for the job, though, since I'm not a topic expert and I don't speak Korean. While the article is new enough out of mainspace, long enough and has a good density of citations, I strongly advise you to take it to WP:GOCE and have someone with more familiarity with Korean copy this for you. Raymie (tc) 18:28, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Sean Sherman

Sherman foraging ramps
Sherman foraging ramps

Created by Valereee (talk). Self-nominated at 16:32, 5 June 2019 (UTC).

Günther Schneider-Siemssen

Günther Schneider-Siemssen
Günther Schneider-Siemssen

Moved to mainspace by LiamRowe (talk) and Gerda Arendt (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 10:14, 3 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Right now there's an unreferenced paragraph that needs to be cited (the one that starts "As a guest..."), so this will need to be resolved before it gets promoted. The hook is okay, but there seem to be other aspects about his career that are more eye-catching. How about:
ALT1 !-- ... that the stage designs of Günther Schneider-Siemssen were used in opera houses such as the Metropolitan Opera in New York City and the Teatro Colón in Buenos Aires?
ALT2 ... that Günther Schneider-Siemssen pioneered and developed a symbolic style of using hand-painted projections and sophisticated special effects for opera set designs?
Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:21, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
Narutolovehinata5, thank you for looking and suggesting. I looked for a reference for Teatro Colon, but can't find any but his website, and something is so wrong with it that I won't even link to it. (Google finds it, but then you end somewhere else ...) Instead, I have now the more general (and more impressive) list from the obituaries. I wish we had a short way to name the Austrian Bundestheater as the Germans can do. ALT2 is a good idea, but doesn't suggest the worldwide impact. I picked the Ring cycle because its significance (20 hours of music, many scenes to design) is rather well known, and to keep one production that long is unusual and tells a lot about its quality, + he received a price for it. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:40, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
I added a ref for the grave group and number. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:44, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Thanks, ready for a new reviewer to choose between ALT0 and ALT2. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:12, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Henry Meintjes

  • Reviewed: Did you know nominations/Teisha Shadwell
  • Comment: Expanded 5x by me, self nominating

5x expanded by Gbawden (talk). Self-nominated at 09:39, 3 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Full review to follow, but before that, the stub template in the article has to be deleted. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:51, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
  • @Narutolovehinata5:, I removed it and upgraded the article to start class for the nominator. SL93 (talk) 03:51, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 4[]

String Quartet in A major (Bliss)

Arthur Bliss
Arthur Bliss

Created by Graham1973 (talk). Nominated by Cwmhiraeth (talk) at 06:04, 10 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg — Several sentences and an entire paragraph lack citations. Second sentence in lede, pertaining to the hook, is not cited. Also, anything summarized in the lede should be covered in the body of text. i.e. The word "suppressed" occurs in the lede, but the body of text only mentions "withdrawn", making it a bit unclear that this is the "suppressed" referred to in the lede. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 21:00, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
Well, some citations seem to be in the middle of the sentence rather than at the end, and I could move those, but we really need @Graham1973: to deal with the uncited paragraph, and whether "suppressed" is the best word to use. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:58, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Carlton le Willows Academy

Improved to Good Article status by Curlymanjaro (talk). Self-nominated at 21:22, 6 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg recently promoted to GA, no copyvio, long enough, well cited, no plagiarism concerns. May not need QPQ? Primary hook is awkwardly worded and not cited in the article; ALT1 is not especially interesting.Kenirwin/(talk) 23:30, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Guess you're right, although I did quite like ALT1. How about this:

Psalm 150 (Franck)

César Franck
César Franck

Expanded by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 14:15, 4 June 2019 (UTC).

Thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:50, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Robyn Benincasa

Created by Kenirwin (talk). Nominated by Kenirwin (talk) at 03:40, 5 June 2019 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on June 5[]

Abdullah's entry into Transjordan, Interregnum (Transjordan)

Proclamation of Abdullah as leader of Transjordan, 1921
Proclamation of Abdullah as leader of Transjordan, 1921

Created by Onceinawhile (talk). Self-nominated at 21:52, 5 June 2019 (UTC).

William Barnes (entomologist)

Created by Pvmoutside (talk). Self-nominated at 17:59, 5 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Hi Pvmoutside. Unfortunately the article is not currently well enough referenced to qualify to DYK - there needs to be an inline citation at the end of each paragraph as a minimum. If you can improve this, drop me a line and I will pop back to complete the review. Thanks - Dumelow (talk) 06:55, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

2019 Tripoli shooting

Tripoli is northern city in Lebanon
Tripoli is northern city in Lebanon
  • Comment: I hope accept my new DYK, I worked a lot for creating article

Created by Forest90 (talk). Self-nominated at 18:16, 7 June 2019 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on June 6[]

Damiano Michieletto

  • Reviewed: 1st Canadian Comedy Awards
  • Comment: sorry, I was travelling and missed it by a day. I reviewed the 3rd article in the multi.

5x expanded by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 22:38, 14 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg In the hook-related portion of the article, I do not understand the sentence "It was the first production by the company that had produced the world premiere in 1912." Is that the sentence that is supposed to be supporting the proposed hook's claim that the 2019 performance of Der ferne Klang was the first performance of that opera at Oper Frankfurt since its premiere there 107 years earlier? If so, that's not at all clear to me. Also, neither of the two sources cited after that (confusing to me) sentence, the April 2019 article in Neue Musikzeitung and 29 March 2019 article in Franfurter Rundschau, support that claim as far as I can determine.
  • Other points: The 5x expansion is confirmed, and I feel that its being spread across 8 days instead of 7 or fewer, due to travel, is acceptable. Article is neutral, well-referenced with inline citations. QPQ done. SJ Morg (talk) 09:39, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for the review. While it's true - pointed out in the program book and the introduction before every performance - it's not crucial to the director, - just a bit more of an honour.
ALT1: ... that Damiano Michieletto, known for directing Rossini's operas, staged Schreker's Der ferne Klang at the Oper Frankfurt, where the world premiere had been performed in 1912? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:55, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Can you add a citation that more clearly states that Der ferne Klang had its world premiere at Oper Frankfurt in 1912? The wording of the 1 April Neue Musikzeitung article seems unclear (much too vague, at best) on that point, and the Frankfurter Rundschau article does not mention that historical point at all. I imagine this is well-documented, but if it's going to be used in the DYK hook, it needs a supporting source right after the sentence stating it in the article. (Also, I hope you are planning to try rephrasing that sentence that I said I do not understand.) SJ Morg (talk) 10:13, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

NS Line

A streetcar on the NS Line
A streetcar on the NS Line

Created/expanded by Truflip99 (talk) and SJ Morg (talk). Nominated by Truflip99 (talk) at 17:58, 11 June 2019 (UTC).

I have added an image for possible inclusion. A similar, alternative image can be seen via this link. SJ Morg (talk) 17:54, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

WQQW (Connecticut)

Created by Raymie (talk). Self-nominated at 19:51, 7 June 2019 (UTC).

Paradise Airlines Flight 901A

Created by RecycledPixels (talk). Self-nominated at 06:31, 7 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg For the first hook, perhaps a link for FAA? Shuipzv3 (talk) 16:36, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 7[]

Asthall barrow

Created by Usernameunique (talk). Self-nominated at 23:58, 15 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Page is uncategorised. A talk page must be created and relevant wikiproject templates must be added. RRD (talk) 05:26, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Royroydeb, thanks for taking on this review. Categories added, talk page created, and wikiprojects assigned. --Usernameunique (talk) 12:05, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Psalm 150

5x expanded by Gerda Arendt (talk) and Yoninah (talk). Nominated by Yoninah (talk) at 22:51, 12 June 2019 (UTC).

Yusuf Gowon

Created by Applodion (talk). Self-nominated at 22:12, 12 June 2019 (UTC).

Tsunekazu Ishihara

  • Reviewed: James J. Connell
  • Comment: ALT1 can probably use a rewording - though original alt is probably more interesting.

Moved to mainspace by Juxlos (talk). Self-nominated at 07:56, 7 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Good article, well-cited, and the hook's right in there and cited. I think we're good to go! Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.7% of all FPs 12:12, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 8[]

WBOW (1230 AM)

  • Reviewed: Kang Woo Kyu
  • Comment: I do worry about a potential BLP violation with ALT1, but it's much, much more interesting.

Created by Raymie (talk). Self-nominated at 02:30, 11 June 2019 (UTC).

2007 Terengganu Riot

Created by Bejinhan (talk). Self-nominated at 00:38, 9 June 2019 (UTC).

Nanoinformatics

Created by Egon Willighagen (talk), John P. Sadowski (NIOSH) (talk), ARECCfan (talk), and Room309 (talk). Nominated by ARECCfan (talk) at 19:11, 8 June 2019 (UTC).

JFK Express

Improved to Good Article status by Kew Gardens 613 (talk). Nominated by Epicgenius (talk) at 17:27, 8 June 2019 (UTC).

  • ALT0 sounds clear to me actually. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:02, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
  • An alternate way of wording ALT1: ... that New York City's cancelled JFK Express train was popular among commuters despite being intended for use by airport passengers? SounderBruce 03:08, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
Personally I think we should just stick to ALT0: it sounds catchier and less technical than ALT1 or ALT1a. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:03, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Trust Exercise (novel)

Created by CAPTAIN MEDUSA (talk). Self-nominated at 12:28, 8 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg A new hook is probably needed: it is not uncommon for authors to be mad while writing, and the hook lacks context as to how her case is special. In addition, the article needs a copy due to grammatical errors and typos. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:03, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
Narutolovehinata5 How is this hook?___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 11:03, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
It sounds like a rather bland hook sadly, even if it was reworded into a more succinct form of English. Give me a day or two and I'll try to help out with possible alternative hooks. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:15, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Rose Hollermann

Rose Hollermann at the 2016 Rio Paralympics
Rose Hollermann at the 2016 Rio Paralympics

Created by Hawkeye7 (talk). Self-nominated at 08:19, 8 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg New enough. Long enough. AGF on the hook source, as I get "451: Unavailable for legal reasons", not being based in the US. The "youngest" hook is a bit dull, not really "interesting" in my opinion. There are only five people on a basketball team, as I recall. Perhaps something about how she survived a car accident that killed two of her brothers? Article is well-cited. NPOV observed. Earwig and spot-checking reveal no close paraphrasing, copyright violations or plagiarism issues. Image is suitably licenced for main page. QPQ done. Edwardx (talk) 10:45, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
    • There are twelve players on a Paralympic basketball team. Only five are on the court at any time. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:45, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Thanks, Hawkeye7. Youngest of 12 is better, but is it really "interesting"? Edwardx (talk) 12:22, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Climate system

Converted from a redirect by Femkemilene (talk). Self-nominated at 16:06, 9 June 2019 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on June 9[]

Ivan Golunov

Created by Kirill Samredny (talk) and Alexander Davronov (talk). Nominated by Anomalous+0 (talk) at 14:45, 15 June 2019 (UTC).

Lophira lanceolata

Created/expanded by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self-nominated at 13:15, 13 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg @Cwmhiraeth:, New enough, no copyvio issues, long enough, QPQ done, sourced and cited, hook interesting and followed by a reference. Quick question...source says "on the tree"...hook says "on the leaves"...Is that ok? Whispyhistory (talk) 09:39, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Xia Da

Created by Kamakou (talk). Self-nominated at 02:43, 10 June 2019 (UTC).

Albert W. Hicks

5x expanded by GreenC (talk). Self-nominated at 16:25, 11 June 2019 (UTC).

  • I rewrote most of the article's previous text and added new text, pictures and sources. -- GreenC

Weebill

Weebill, Victoria
Weebill, Victoria

5x expanded by Casliber (talk) and StephanieMartin272 (talk). Nominated by Casliber (talk) at 13:00, 11 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Expanded five-fold in the past seven days; long enough and within policy; hook size is fine, hook is interesting, cited (offline, but AGF) and neutral; QPQ done; image ok, but a crop wouldn't hurt, caption should be Weebill, not weebill. Otherwise GTG. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:12, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
Okay, I capitalised the caption. If I get some uninterrupted time I can crop. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:01, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

1963 Freedom Ballot

Created by MalachiReschke (talk). Nominated by MalachiReschke (talk) at 19:49, 10 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Comment to reviewer: I've offered to help this very new or through this process. I've got the review on my watchlist, but feel free to ping me at any point. --valereee (talk) 10:48, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
@Valereee: Hello @MalachiReschke:, and welcome to Wikipedia - excellent first article! Basic DYK criterion have been met, and the hook sounds good, but I'm going to nitpick the article's contents a bit:
  • Article says that COFO is 4 organizations and is dominated by SNCC - can you quote the relevant passage from the JSTOR source, because I can't seem to find it? Generally, might be useful to use the rp template for that source.
  • "first integrated ticket for state leadership of Mississippi since the Reconstruction" - if I'm interpreting the source correctly, it says that it's the first "black and white" integrated ticket, not just any integrated ticket?
  • "from October 14 to November 4" - can't seem to find it in the source.
Otherwise, it would be good to go once these are resolved! Juxlos (talk) 14:35, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
Juxlos, thank you! MalachiReschke and I will take the discussion to the talk page. Feel free to look in there if you like, and thank you for starting the review! --valereee (talk) 16:50, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Francis Joseph Bigger

Created/expanded by Uncle G (talk). Nominated by Drmies (talk) at 22:16, 9 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Mandarax, I am more or less used to including such dates, because I believe they provide context. If you like it better without, go for it: I trust your judgment. Drmies (talk) 02:15, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Doesn't matter to me. My personal preference doesn't override yours. I trust your judgement more than my own, except, of course, in the preferred spelling of "judgement". MANdARAX  XAЯAbИAM 02:33, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Policy compliance:

Hook eligiblity:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol confirmed.svg epicgenius (talk) 00:13, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Han Yu (pool player)

Moved to mainspace by Lee Vilenski (talk). Self-nominated at 15:24, 9 June 2019 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on June 10[]

May Hollinworth

Created by RebeccaGreen (talk). Self-nominated at 14:19, 11 June 2019 (UTC).

Solstice (1990 video game)

Improved to Good Article status by Cat's Tuxedo (talk). Self-nominated at 19:32, 10 June 2019 (UTC).

  • I wonder if alternative hooks can be proposed here: the first hook seems okay but it sounds a bit self-promotional. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 14:00, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
Added another one. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 16:35, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Vicky Knight

Created/expanded by CAPTAIN MEDUSA (talk). Self-nominated at 23:40, 10 June 2019 (UTC).

Battle of Semarang

Created by Juxlos (talk). Self-nominated at 21:55, 10 June 2019 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on June 11[]

Cozzi porcelain

Cozzi figure of a dwarf
Cozzi figure of a dwarf

Created by Johnbod (talk) and Zigzig20s (talk). Nominated by Johnbod (talk) at 02:43, 20 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Prefer ALT2 195.7.32.142 (talk) 12:29, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Article needs a copy , but it's interesting and I'll give it a full review when work has been done. Kingsif (talk) 16:40, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
  • What makes you think that? Johnbod (talk) 17:11, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
@Johnbod: The sheer lack of correct grammar, mostly. Kingsif (talk) 17:43, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
Oh, really. You'd better point to some examples. Johnbod (talk) 18:01, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
I did this — as you can see there are still issues where the grammar is so poor I don't know what it's trying to say to correct it. Kingsif (talk) 18:06, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
None of these changes have anything to do with "grammar", or the DYK criteria. Any further discussion should be on article talk. I must admit that I hadn't anticipated that anyone could get 2/3 of the way through an article on 18th-century porcelain, which had already linked to and mentioned the Republic of Venice, and them declare themselves confused as to whether a further mention of "the republic" meant that or the Republic of Italy (established in 1946), but I suppose it shows you have to be ready for all eventualities. Johnbod (talk) 18:01, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

─────────────────────────The number of commas I moved sure were grammar, but you're right, there was a lot of poor syntax, too. Be prepared for people who perhaps click on the link from DYK and don't know about the history of Italy! Enjoy working on it, it is interesting, you can ping me when tags addressed or reply here :) Kingsif (talk) 18:14, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Public Health Emergency of International Concern

5x expanded by Whispyhistory (talk). Self-nominated at 19:58, 19 June 2019 (UTC).

Ernst Gerold Schramm

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 07:21, 18 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg I think the reason no one has commented is that your source doesn't say he was the voice of Christ, but just that he was a baritone in those performances. How do we know that aspect? Killiondude (talk) 01:17, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
I think the reason is that I only nominated just now, with several other nominations waiting longer. T am travelling, asking for patience. No decent source will say baritone because it's his voice type, but that wasn't in use at Bach's ime who would assign the words of Jesus (vox Christi) to a bass, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:09, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
I reviewed #4 of the multi-article nom. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:52, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Pranesh Gautam

  • Reviewed: soon

Created/expanded by CAPTAIN MEDUSA (talk). Self-nominated at 11:33, 14 June 2019 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on June 12[]

Assam Petro-Chemicals Limited

Moved to mainspace by Dharmadhyaksha (talk). Self-nominated at 04:41, 18 June 2019 (UTC).

Nozomi Nishida

Created by Narutolovehinata5 (talk). Self-nominated at 04:04, 12 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Date, size, refs, copyvio, neutrality, all ok. But the hook is totally boring (nothing out of the ordinary), and neither is ALT1. I'd propose something less common, like that she became fluent in Danish because of her interest in European children literature, or that she worked as an idol in Akihabara, or that she was one of the voices of the Macross' Walkure fictional music group. Please ping me when alt hooks are ready for a review. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:10, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
I don't know, I don't think it's common for Japanese to know Danish right? And I don't know if a hook specifically focusing on Walkure would work for readers who are unfamiliar with Macross or anime ingeneral. Anyway, here are the requested ALTs (I'd still rather focus on the Denmark part, but if you don't think it's good enough for DYK, I'll try to propose new ALTs about other aspects of her life):
  • ALT2 ... that Japanese voice actress and singer Nozomi Nishida went on a study program in Denmark due to an interest in European children's literature?
  • ALT3 ... that Japanese voice actress and singer Nozomi Nishida initially wanted to pursue a study program in Germany, but ended up studying in Denmark due to a lack of slots?
Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew
  • @Narutolovehinata5: It's a bit of cultural clash - it's not common for an Asian person, but not particularly interesting to a European leader, and we want hooks that will be interesting to all of our readers. So what makes for a uprising hook on JPN wiki may be less useful for English. I will propose ALT4 and ALT5 below, which I find more interesting for a global audience, and let's have another reviewer chose the ones they like the best. In particular, it seems that the Walküre music group both existed in anime and in real life, but I have trouble finding sources for that, hence ALT6 is provisional as it is based on my quick glance through at Macross wikia, not a RS. I think that a hook about this would be quite interesting, much more so than which language she mastered, or where she went as an exchange student. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:58, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
I don't really like ALT5 and ALT6, they're both basically "voice actress voices a role" hooks, which aren't really great in my opinion. I'm more open to ALT4. Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Yeah, it might be a good idea to get another set of eyes here since you proposed new hooks. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:03, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Desmond Barker

Created by Gbawden (talk). Self-nominated at 09:56, 12 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svgArticle is new enough and long enough. The first and the third paragraphs have a bit of a close paraphrase of the source. Is "attache" mentioned in the first source? I am not sure about the last two paragraphs either. The birthdate in the infobox needs a reference. I prefer the first hook, which is sourced inline and reasonably sourced and interesting. QPQ is rather basic. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:15, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. I reworded the first 2 paragraphs and added a ref for DOB and air attache, although one source calls it air advisor Gbawden (talk) 08:29, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
The last two paragraphs are not entirely supported by the sources - where is "retirement" or "2003" for example? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:39, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
Oy, forgot about this one. @Gbawden: Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:44, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 13[]

Roman Neumayer

Created by Flibirigit (talk). Self-nominated at 15:38, 17 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article meets requirements, hook is interesting to a broad audience, free of close paraphrasing, QPQ done. @Flibirigit: The only issue is that the reference supporting the hook fact is not at the actual sentence supporting it, but in the sentence that comes after. Please duplicate the reference, and this will be good to go. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:14, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. However, now the paragraph is now a single very long sentence; I don't think combining them was a good idea, either revert to the previous version with the reference in the correct position, or rewrite the paragraph so as to not make it so long. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:24, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Ulster Literary Theatre

Created by Uncle G (talk). Nominated by Drmies (talk) at 20:33, 15 June 2019 (UTC).

The national petition of South Korea

Moved to mainspace by Dina Park (talk) and Wnghksdl (talk). Nominated by Dina Park (talk) at 20:10, 13 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg At the moment the article has two large maintenance tags on it. The article would also likely need some copying. Finally, the hook is fairly bland and not very eye catching. The article will need much work before it is ready for DYK; @Dina Park and Wnghksdl: I've give it two weeks to resolve all the issues. If this can't be done, the nomination will be marked as unsuccessful. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:50, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 14[]

William Pope (naturalist)

William Pope
William Pope

Created by Almostds (talk). Self-nominated at 13:10, 17 June 2019 (UTC).

Nanjing Golden Dragon Bus

Created by Ominae (talk). Self-nominated at 11:44, 14 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Both hooks seem to be BLP violations and thus I'm comfortable with either being used on the main page. Maybe something else could be used that doesn't have to do with the chairman's criminal record? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:11, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
** ALT2:... that Nanjing Golden Dragon Bus has established a joint research laboratory with San Diego State University in 2015 to jointly develop batteries and other electric technologies? Ominae (talk) 03:29, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 15[]

JJ Levine

Created by Antony-22 (talk). Self-nominated at 01:32, 24 June 2019 (UTC).

Xifeng Wu

Created by Abductive (talk), David Eppstein (talk), and Zanhe (talk). Nominated by Zanhe (talk) at 22:12, 19 June 2019 (UTC).

Charles Clarke (RAF officer)

Created by Gaia Octavia Agrippa (talk). Self-nominated at 00:08, 19 June 2019 (UTC).

On Her Shoulders (film)

Murad in 2015
Murad in 2015
  • Reviewed: soon

Created/expanded by CAPTAIN MEDUSA (talk). Self-nominated at 11:47, 16 June 2019 (UTC).

Perla Farías

5x expanded by Kingsif (talk). Self-nominated at 20:25, 15 June 2019 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on June 16[]

Chang Liyi

Wreckage of the U-2 piloted by Chang Liyi
Wreckage of the U-2 piloted by Chang Liyi
  • Reviewed: Ethiopian forest brush-furred rat (second of two QPQs)
  • Comment: Source uses the name "Jack Chang", and explains in the footnotes that it's the English nickname of Chang Liyi.

Created by Zanhe (talk). Self-nominated at 20:38, 21 June 2019 (UTC).

Continental Currency dollar coin

Obverse of the Continental Currency dollar coin
Obverse of the Continental Currency dollar coin

Created by ZLEA (talk). Self-nominated at 16:30, 18 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article is new enough and long enough. Hook facts are cited inline and verified. No close paraphrasing was found. This is the nominator's first nomination so no QPQ is required. However, there are a number of unreferenced statements in the article, such as "The reverse features thirteen chain links representing the Thirteen Colonies." and "As there is no evidence that the Continental Congress had authorized the production of dollar coins for the Continental Currency, it is unknown exactly who made the coins or where they were made. The exact mintage numbers are also unknown." Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:20, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
Fixed Narutolovehinata5, I found a few sources that make the statements you mentioned incorrect. I've changed those statements and properly cited them. - ZLEA T\C 15:39, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Kurds'komu bratovi

Created by Ahmedo Semsurî (talk). Self-nominated at 19:44, 16 June 2019 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on June 17[]

Meers Fault

Moved to mainspace by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk). Self-nominated at 09:34, 23 June 2019 (UTC).

Bookworm (insect)

5x expanded by LizzieMack (talk), 7&6=thirteen (talk), Arjayay (talk), Clovermoss (talk), Plantdrew (talk), BabbaQ (talk), Escape Orbit (talk), Northamerica1000 (talk), AmericanAir88 (talk), and AuthorAuthor (talk). Nominated by 7&6=thirteen () 16:52, 20 June 2019 (UTC) at 16:23, 20 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Comment I included all of the recent contributors. It takes a village to raise a child. Cred those who helped to improve it in the recent campaign! WP:DYK is not a Zero sum game. 7&6=thirteen () 17:01, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
    • Comment Okay, I'm okay with your explanation. I usually try to improve the TAFI if I'm around and I can, but I take no issue with recognizing every recent contributer; gradual improvements by numerous ors is one of the reasons I like TAFI so much. Clovermoss (talk) 17:21, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
I totally agree. WP:TAFI Having the community get together and collaborate! It's a Barn raising in the finest sense. 7&6=thirteen () 17:30, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Le Nove porcelain

Le Nove porcelain bowl, 1765-70
Le Nove porcelain bowl, 1765-70

Created by Johnbod (talk). Self-nominated at 16:22, 20 June 2019 (UTC).

Karski's reports

Created by Piotrus (talk). Self-nominated at 11:22, 19 June 2019 (UTC).

Isabelle Story

Created by Enwebb (talk). Self-nominated at 17:25, 18 June 2019 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on June 18[]

Deepak Fertilisers and Petrochemicals Corporation Limited

Created by Dharmadhyaksha (talk). Self-nominated at 06:08, 25 June 2019 (UTC).

Raja ibn Haywa

  • Reviewed: Pending

5x expanded by Al Ameer son (talk). Self-nominated at 17:46, 23 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article is new enough (recent 5x expansion), long enough, neutral, and well referenced. Hook is interesting and supported by offline sources, accepted AGF. No copyvio detected. Awaiting QPQ. -Zanhe (talk) 04:29, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Robert Michaelis

Michaelis as Prince Danilo in The Merry Widow
Michaelis as Prince Danilo in The Merry Widow

Created by Moonraker (talk). Self-nominated at 05:46, 19 June 2019 (UTC).

Chief Commission for the Prosecution of Crimes against the Polish Nation

Created by Piotrus (talk). Self-nominated at 12:41, 19 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svgArticle is new enough and long enough. One reference seems to be formatted as if it needs an URL but has no URL. AGFing on most sources as they are not accessible and/or in Polish. By 1989 the number of German war criminals sentenced in Poland was close to 20,000 needs a bit of rewriting as in its current state it raised WP:CLOP concerns. I see the hook is supported by the readable source and is so-so interesting. Is the "since 1991" in the lead supposed to be sourced to the bulleted list in the first paragraph? I am not sure about the last sentence there either. QPQ seems OK to me. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:33, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
  • @Piotrus:Almost all; the last sentence of the lead does not seem to be supported by the article text. Also, when a ping doesn't work you need to make a new one; ing the broken ping doesn't make it work. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:01, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Arizona Miner

Created by MB (talk). Self-nominated at 00:41, 19 June 2019 (UTC).

Naoyuki Ōi

Moved to mainspace by Lee Vilenski (talk). Self-nominated at 12:23, 18 June 2019 (UTC).

Current nominations[]

Articles created/expanded on June 19[]

Wildlife of Uganda, Ugandan kob

Female and calf
Female and calf

5x expanded by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self-nominated at 12:48, 25 June 2019 (UTC).

Atascadero Printery

Created by Killiondude (talk). Self-nominated at 22:44, 24 June 2019 (UTC).

1924–25 Cardiff City F.C. season

  • Reviewed: Pending

Created by Kosack (talk). Self-nominated at 21:22, 23 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Will be claiming for review. May take a day or two to fully review, but so far so good: hook fact is cited inline and verified. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:37, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Reel (poetry collection)

  • Reviewed: I'm on it.

Created by Dr Aaij (talk). Self-nominated at 02:03, 23 June 2019 (UTC).

Ranga Yogeshwar

German TV host Ranga Yogeshwar at the 2017 Frankfurt Book Fair
German TV host Ranga Yogeshwar at the 2017 Frankfurt Book Fair

Created by MikeLynch (talk). Self-nominated at 18:38, 22 June 2019 (UTC).

William F. Turner

5x expanded by MB (talk) and Allen3 (talk). Nominated by MB (talk) at 19:59, 19 June 2019 (UTC).

Lesbian erasure

“DIVA, Curve, Autostraddle, LOTL, Tagg, Lez Spread The Word, DapperQ and GO Magazine believe that trans women are women and that trans people belong in our community,” the statement reads. “We do not think supporting trans women erases our lesbian identities; rather we are enriched by trans friends and lovers, parents, children, colleagues and siblings.”

“We strongly condemn writers and ors who seek to foster division and hate within the LGBTQI community with trans misogynistic content, and who believe ‘lesbian’ is an identity for them alone to define,” the statement continues. “We also strongly condemn the current narrative peddled by some feminists, painting trans people as bullies and aggressors — one which reinforces transphobia and which must be challenged so that feminism can move forward.”" [79]

Created by StudiesWorld (talk). Self-nominated at 15:30, 19 June 2019 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on June 20[]

Johann Schwarzhuber

Schwarzhuber during the Ravensbrück trial
Schwarzhuber during the Ravensbrück trial
  • Comment: Coming up with a "catchy hook" for war criminals is hard, so I am of course open for suggestions and improvements.

Created by Dead Mary (talk). Self-nominated at 09:06, 26 June 2019 (UTC).

Rook (bird)

Improved to Good Article status by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self-nominated at 09:50, 25 June 2019 (UTC).

Eliakim Doolittle

Created by Uncle G (talk). Nominated by Drmies (talk) at 01:51, 20 June 2019 (UTC).

We Come in Peace

Created by StudiesWorld (talk). Self-nominated at 12:09, 20 June 2019 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on June 21[]

National Peasants' Party

1933 logo of the National Peasants' Party
1933 logo of the National Peasants' Party
  • Reviewed: Samuel Adalberg
  • Comment: Please consider keeping this for July 29, the day of the party's banning.

5x expanded by Dahn (talk). Self-nominated at 13:40, 24 June 2019 (UTC).

Oregon House Bill 2020

  • Reviewed: TBD
  • Comment: The situation isn't resolved yet, so this count may change and there might be new hooks added at a later date.

Created by SounderBruce (talk). Self-nominated at 07:29, 23 June 2019 (UTC).

SEP-363856

Created/expanded by Biochemistry&Love (talk). Self-nominated at 23:39, 21 June 2019 (UTC).

Parapivot

Created by StudiesWorld (talk). Self-nominated at 14:10, 21 June 2019 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on June 22[]

Unfathomable Ruination

Created/expanded by Thrashbandicoot01 (talk). Self-nominated at 23:12, 24 June 2019 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on June 23[]

Willard H. George

  • Reviewed: not yet done

Created by Edwardx (talk) and Philafrenzy (talk). Nominated by Edwardx (talk) at 10:28, 26 June 2019 (UTC).

Catherine Despard

Created by AIowA (talk). Nominated by SL93 (talk) at 04:01, 24 June 2019 (UTC).

"Away with the learning of clerks, away with it!"

Created by Serial Number 54129 (talk). Self-nominated at 19:52, 23 June 2019 (UTC).

Chiitan

Created by Ferox Seneca (talk). Self-nominated at 17:32, 23 June 2019 (UTC).

Policy compliance:

Hook eligiblity:

QPQ: Red XN - Not done
Overall: Symbol question.svg --- Coffeeandcrumbs 12:33, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

  • Symbol question.svg Why cite Mental Floss when The New York Times is available? Mental Floss is just regurgitating the NYTimes. This article appears to be very weak in citations to reliable sources when there is no lack of coverage.[86][87][88] Instead it relies too much on blogs. There are also possible reasons offered for why the Twitter accounts may have been block which the article fails to note.[89][90] --- Coffeeandcrumbs 12:33, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

2003 24 Hours of Le Mans

5x expanded by MWright96 (talk). Self-nominated at 10:18, 23 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Full review to follow, for now would just like to point out that in the article, ALT1's citation comes not in the sentence discussing it, but the one after. All the other requirements seem to check out and a QPQ has been done. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:27, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Being Impossible, Patricia Ortega

Ortega in 2017
Ortega in 2017

Created by Kingsif (talk). Self-nominated at 08:00, 23 June 2019 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on June 24[]

San Francisco Historic Trolley Festival

A trolley from Portugal in the San Francisco Historic Trolley Festival
A trolley from Portugal in the San Francisco Historic Trolley Festival
or
Three trolleys in the San Francisco Historic Trolley Festival
Three trolleys in the San Francisco Historic Trolley Festival
  • Reviewed: Damiano Michieletto
  • Comment: The hook fact appears in the first section after the lead, the "Overview" section. The terms trolley and streetcar are essentially synonymous (which I have also stated in the article, with source). I almost did not include "the United States" in the list of countries in the hook, because it's likely that it would be inferred; for that reason, I would not object to its omission.

Created by SJ Morg (talk). Self-nominated at 10:00, 25 June 2019 (UTC).

Zhang Xu (neuroscientist)

Created by Zanhe (talk). Self-nominated at 06:02, 25 June 2019 (UTC).

Zhang Xu (engineer)

Created by Zanhe (talk). Self-nominated at 04:33, 25 June 2019 (UTC).

Equestrian Portrait of Cornelis and Michiel Pompe van Meerdervoort with Their Tutor and Coachman

the painting
the painting

Created by StudiesWorld (talk). Nominated by CAPTAIN MEDUSA (talk) at 17:54, 24 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Thanks for nominating this, CAPTAIN MEDUSA. I was just in the process and would be happy to provide the QPQ, if you would like. StudiesWorld (talk) 18:02, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
StudiesWorld, it's up to you. I don't mind.___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 18:05, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
CAPTAIN MEDUSA, I already did one, so I've added it. Thanks for writing a nice hook! StudiesWorld (talk) 18:07, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Patricia Mayorga

Created by Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk). Nominated by HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) at 07:14, 24 June 2019 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on June 25[]

Durant-Dort Factory One

Durant-Dort Factory One
Durant-Dort Factory One

Moved to mainspace by Michael Barera (talk). Self-nominated at 18:43, 25 June 2019 (UTC).

Félicette

Improved to Good Article status by Kees08 (talk). Nominated by Coffeeandcrumbs (talk) at 11:07, 25 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Your call, but maybe have a hook about the surgical implants? Kees08 (Talk) 16:25, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
Sure, Alt 1:
Kees08, how is that? --- Coffeeandcrumbs 16:38, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 26[]

Special occasion holding area[]

The holding area has moved to its new location at the bottom of the Approved page. Please only place approved templates there; do not place them below.

Do not nominate articles in this section—nominate all articles in the nominations section above, under the date on which the article was created or moved to mainspace, or the expansion began; indicate in the nomination any request for a specially timed appearance on the main page.
Note: Articles nominated for a special occasion should be nominated (i) within seven days of creation or expansion (as usual) and (ii) between five days and six weeks before the occasion, to give reviewers time to check the nomination. April Fools' Day is an exception to these requirements; see Wikipedia:April Fool's Main Page/Did You Know.