Template talk:Did you know

For instructions on how to nominate an article, see below.
"Did you know...?"
Discussion WT:DYK
Rules WP:DYK
Supplementary rules WP:DYKSG
Noms (awaiting approval) WP:DYKN
Reviewing guide WP:DYKR
Noms (approved) WP:DYKNA
Preps & Queues T:DYK/Q
Currently on Main Page
Main Page errors WP:ERRORS
Archive of DYKs WP:DYKA
April 1 hooks WP:DYKAPRIL
April 1 talk  

This page is for nominations to appear in the "Did you know" section on the Main Page. For the discussion page see WT:DYK. Nominations that have been approved are moved to a staging area, from which the articles are promoted into the Queue.


TOC:    Go to bottom     Go to top
Count of DYK Hooks
Section # of Hooks # Verified
December 26 1
January 4 1
January 7 1
January 9 1
January 12 2 1
January 13 1
January 14 1
January 19 1
January 20 1
January 28 1
February 1 1
February 6 1
February 8 2
February 10 2
February 11 1
February 12 1
February 13 1 1
February 14 1
February 15 3 2
February 16 1
February 17 1 1
February 19 1 1
February 20 4 3
February 21 4 4
February 22 6 4
February 23 6 5
February 24 5 4
February 25 3 2
February 26 10 4
February 27 11 8
February 28 10 7
March 1 8 8
March 2 5 2
March 3 17 12
March 4 7 3
March 5 9 3
March 6 11 5
March 7 5 4
March 8 8 5
March 9 10 5
March 10 13 8
March 11 6 3
March 12 13 9
March 13 5 3
March 14 6 4
March 15 13 5
March 16 6 5
March 17 5
March 18 8 3
March 19 14 4
March 20 12 5
March 21 10 3
March 22 7 1
March 23 5 1
March 24 5
Total 294 148
Last updated 20:53, 24 March 2018 UTC
Current time is 21:35, 24 March 2018 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.
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.

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.

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.

  • At the top of that subsection (before other nominations already there, but below the section head and hidden comment) add {{Did you know nominations/YOUR ARTICLE TITLE}}.
  • Add an summary e.g. "Nominating YOUR ARTICLE TITLE for DYK" and click Save page.
  • Consider adding {{Did you know nominations/YOUR ARTICLE TITLE}} to the article's talk page (without a section heading‍—‌the template adds a section heading automatically).

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[]


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[]


Older nominations[]

Articles created/expanded on January 4[]

Internationales Sachsensymposion

Sutton Hoo helmet replica
Sutton Hoo helmet replica

5x expanded by Usernameunique (talk). Self-nominated at 03:16, 4 January 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg - Length, Date, QPQ, Cite, and Earwigs check. Image appears to be freely licensed. Mifter (talk) 04:16, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Gatoclass, added another source. I could pull together more sources if you like, but most are in German, or simply say "this paper was presented at the [year] Sachsensymposion." --Usernameunique (talk) 17:48, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
Usernameunique, the problem with your new source is that it really only constitutes a "trivial mention", per WP:GNG. I think what you need is one or two independent sources that give "significant coverage" per the guideline. Gatoclass (talk) 10:24, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Gatoclass, it looks like yet another source was added several hours after your above post, though Usernameunique did not mention that here, and no one else noticed because the nomination hadn't been retranscluded. I've added it back to the Nominations page, so it will be back on our radar, and was hoping you could take another look and see whether the new source offers "significant coverage". Thanks for taking another look. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:13, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
  • BlueMoonset, thanks for adding it back to the list. Gatoclass, I've also just added a book by Myres, which adds to the history of the organization (and verifies what is already there), and speaks to its importance. There's another book by Myres that also speaks about it, which I will add later this week (have to get the physical copy). Please let me know if you think it needs any more sourcing. --Usernameunique (talk) 21:03, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on January 7[]

Ancient Beringian

Created by IQ125 (talk). Self-nominated at 12:04, 7 January 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg New enough, long enough, neutral, cited (but see note after this line), no obvious copyvios (paraphrasing to be checked after cites are improved, again see note). Hook is on the border of being too long and should probably be cut down. There's about three distinct facts in there, if not more. A good interesting hook usually has at most two facts within it, usually one. The biggest problem here is the inline citations. Throwing seven inline cites on every sentence isn't particularly informative about where the information is coming from. Please improve the inline citations so that each sentence is cited only to the reference (or references) being used to support it. After that, I'll check for close paraphrasing and double-check that all of this is verified. ~ Rob13Talk 09:06, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Note: article has been proposed to be merged into another article; nomination is on hold until the merger proposal has been closed. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:44, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on January 9[]

Styling Garage

500 SGS Gullwing
500 SGS Gullwing

Created by Mr.choppers (talk). Self-nominated at 16:39, 9 January 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg @Mr.choppers: New enough and long enough. The hook, though very interesting, gives me a little pause. The source is some sort of fan site, so I'm not sure about the reliability of it, while in terms of tone, the way it's written seems not quite encyclopedic. Let me try this... Raymie (tc) 21:42, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
ALT1: ... that Styling Garage charged luxury car customers almost the cost of the vehicle to convert it to gullwing doors?
@Raymie: Yes, sure, but the reason I wrote "another direction" is that it sounds strange and thus operates to hook the reader to make them click through. "Gullwing doors" kind of explains the whole thing, thus making it less likely to be clicked. As for the cost of the conversion, it is also listed in various old magazines, I reckoned a clickable source would be optimal (as fan-like as it may be). Should I add another source?  Mr.choppers | ✎  04:04, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
User:Mr.choppers, suspense doesn't really work like this in DYK; that's not what will make people click on--it's the ridiculous price tag. Drmies (talk) 01:49, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
  • @Drmies: Sure, the website is not peer-reviewed - as I figured a clickable link would be best for the DYK process. To me a hook is something one uses to make a person want to click and read, from the DYK page: When you write the hook, please make it "hooky", that is, short, punchy, catchy, and likely to draw the readers in to wanting to read the article. Suspense and price both help making it interesting. The sources are all good and I bridle at the intimation that they are unreliable - I have no interest in spreading falsehood. I will be happy to provide scans of the original articles if someone would like to see. Lastly, how is notability only based on the Der Spiegel articles? I provided at least ten sources, many period ones.  Mr.choppers | ✎  16:05, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
  • User:Mr.choppers, what we need is reliable sources, which should be independent of the subject. I can go through every single one of them, but not right now. What I can say is that besides Der Spiegel you have a one-page article from a French magazine that apparently verifies only that they made this one particular car, and one from a German magazine that apparently mentions their brake pads. I can't see those, but what they supposedly verify gives me little reason to think that those are in-depth discussions of the subject of the article. Besides that, there's catalogs, websites (1000SEL), and the company website. Drmies (talk) 15:25, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
Maybe I can help here. Der Spiegel certainly seem to have had a bee in their bonnet about this company: here's another article from 2005? (I can't examine it, they are objecting to my ad blocker). And maybe this fansite passes muster. It and a rather odd source ultimately deriving from Baron Thyssen-Bornemissza, which I have just added to the article, give a 2007 date for the company being finally wound up, so I've gone ahead and made that change. I'm sure there was in fact extensive news coverage back in the day, but Der Spiegel appears to have by far the best online archive, is all. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:32, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
Brake pads? Are we looking at the same article? The printed sources are three issues of a German annual and one French, as well as an Indonesian source. They mention a variety of models, some specifications, and the royal customers of SGS, which imho help establish notability. At no point is there a discussion of brake pads - however, SGS became notorious for disconnecting ABS brakes on cars meant for the Arab world, and their successor company carried out a shooting brake version of the VW Corrado. Best,  Mr.choppers | ✎  21:43, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
If they are so notorious, surely there's sourcing for that. Drmies (talk) 02:19, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
The situation and SGS' admissal are both sourced from Der Spiegel (Mist Gebaut, p. 90). I was just trying to figure out what you meant when you were talking about brake pads.  Mr.choppers | ✎  15:37, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on January 12[]

McCallum Bagpipes

Created by Rey grschel (talk). Self-nominated at 08:44, 15 January 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Article is new enough, long enough and within policy regarding neutrality, sourcing and close paraphrasing (Earwig maxes out at 2.0%). The original hook is far more interesting than ALT1, but both are neutral, within length and properly sourced. This appears to be the nominator's first DYK, so no QPQ would be needed.
@Rey grschel: Before this can proceed, can you please add citations where there are "citation needed" tags in the article. Thanks. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:10, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
@Cwmhiraeth: I've removed the unreferenced claims, as I could not find sources to support them. {{u|Rey_grschel}} {Talk} 00:54, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Hi, I came by to promote this, gave it a quick copy, and formatted all the referencing. I have a question as to whether the company's logo is really public domain, or fair use. @The Rambling Man: could you enlighten us here? Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 15:52, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment – I moved this entry from the DYK approved page back to the DYK nomination page as per the concerns presented in the discussion. North America1000 14:44, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
  • AFAIK, the threshold of originality in the UK is much lower than the US. With the target design and font choice, I expect this to be copyrighted in the UK.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 03:13, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
  • In that case, Chris Woodrich, does this need a non-free license (UK-based) for the logo to be used in the article, or would it not be eligible for such a license? (If ineligible, would the logo image then need to be removed from the article?) BlueMoonset (talk) 05:20, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Current logos are generally eligible. It's also possible to upload as free in the US only (like File:EDGE magazine (logo).svg) on the English Wikipedia (and delete it form Commons).  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 07:09, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on January 13[]

Christ the Lord Is Risen Today

  • Reviewed: Psalm 149
  • Comment: For April Fools Day, which also happens to be Easter

5x expanded by The C of E (talk). Self-nominated at 11:05, 13 January 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article is almost ready to be accepted: meets expansion date requirements, as well as sourcing and image licensing requirements. A QPQ has been provided as well. However, I can see some run-on sentences and typos in the article, such as "the later unknown" which should be "a later unknown", or a lack of commas in many sentences. Once these issues are addressed, this will be approved. As a Catholic myself who just got confirmed today, this will be a wonderful hook for both April Fool's and Easter. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:05, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
@The C of E: You missed some, like how "1780 however" should be "1780, however", among others. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:46, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5: I have fixed it now. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 13:54, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
@The C of E: One last note: remember to add a comma or semi-colon before every "however", whichever fits. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 14:17, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5: Done. Can you add the tick now please? The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 14:42, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg Another user has copyed the article and fixed the remaining problems; as such, this is now passed. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 05:31, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

You shouldn't be restoring a tick over somebody's objections. This project operates by consensus, not fiat. Regardless, I think perhaps you are right that the quickest way of resolving this would be to take it to WT:DYK for further discussion, so I think I will do that. It might have to wait until tomorrow though because I will probably be logging off shortly. Gatoclass (talk) 13:37, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

And while I'm at it, I might as well propose a straight hook as indicated above which I think would be fine to run at Easter:

My suggestion: ... that the "Llanfair" tune commonly used for the Christian hymn Christ the Lord Is Risen Today is named after Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch? The Rambling Man (talk) 20:04, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

No thank you, that doesn't focus on the target article at all and what on earth is april fooly about it? Thanks to all for their input but I am happy to stick with the originals as passed according to policy. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 22:01, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
But the community is not happy with it so it won't run. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:11, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

I'm not sure that this nomination shouldn't just be failed outright The C of E, given that you've provided no explanation for why you thought it was fine to delete a large chunk of the previous article prior to expansion in violation of the rules. Care to explain how you justified that? Gatoclass (talk) 11:06, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

I seem to recall I did it because it was WP:UNSOURCED, so I removed it in line with the policy. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 12:21, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
Okay, I'm going to overlook it this time, but you are a veteran DYK participant and should know better than to make such a mistake. I think I should put you on notice though that I intend to fail the nomination if I see the same thing happen again.
Now with regard to this nomination, I don't believe either of your proposed alts will suit as they don't represent empirical facts sourced within the article. TRM's alt, however, does, so I still believe we should go with that one - assuming of course, that you are able to legitimately expand this article by another 2600 characters or so, which you haven't done yet. Gatoclass (talk) 12:46, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
I have made the required expansion now. As for the hooks (Which should still include an element of April fools), how about ALT5 ....that Christ the Lord Is Risen Today which is done on Easter? or ALT6 ....that Anglicans and Catholics start saying Alleluia again when Christ the Lord Is Risen Today? The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 09:20, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

ALT5 isn't even grammatical, and neither ALT5 or 6 qualify as April Fools hooks. Something along the following lines might work though:

@Gatoclass: I am fine with that. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 18:48, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
Thanks The C of E, I have struck the other hooks since we seem to have found one we agree on. I am still thinking about how we might tweak ALT7 to make it a little more interesting though, if I can't think of anything I'll ask for a review of it as is. Gatoclass (talk) 06:35, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on January 14[]


Created by 842U (talk). Self-nominated at 00:59, 16 January 2018 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on January 19[]

Fly Fishing: Memories of Angling Days

Created by The C of E (talk). Self-nominated at 20:38, 19 January 2018 (UTC).

Symbol question.svg Article is new enough and long enough. It is neutral. First hook is fine but I doubt it will make much sense to anyone outside the UK or younger than a certain age. That may not matter for April Fools. Second hook doesn't work for me even as an April Fools. Did some copy ing on the article. It's pseudonymous not ghost written. Removed the Daily Mail reference. I was puzzled by ref 1 Organization Theory, Challenges and Perspectives. It seems unlikely and a text search on Amazon did not show the word Hartley. Can we improve on ref 5 "The Man In the Know" in the Daily Record which has a bye-line of "showbiz Sam". Is there a better source for it being a best-seller? I doubt that this should really be a separate article. It should probably be part of J. R. Hartley who as a fictional character is hardly likely to be notable for anything else. Philafrenzy (talk) 09:51, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
@Philafrenzy: The CTI source is here, I have added another source to suppliment the Record one. The book is separate from the ad beyond being inspired by it, no point in merging. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 08:22, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
I am ready to tick it but before I do, do you have a different wording for the alt as it doesn't work with "Did you know that" in front of it. I have warmed to it. Also, the first one isn't strictly speaking a factual statement about the article subject, Wikipedia does not have the book. Not sure whether that matters for April fool's. Perhaps other people have a view on the hooks, the other matters having been resolved. Philafrenzy (talk) 21:58, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
@Philafrenzy: Strictly speaking, under E1 of the Wikipedia:Did you know/Supplementary guidelines, "that" doesn't need to be the lead word. So if you read it as "Did you know if we have a copy....", it makes more sense (for an AFD hook of course!). If you're not happy with that, I will try to reword it. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 17:38, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
With the exception of a couple of April Fools' Day hooks, I've never seen a hook without "that" survive to make it to the main page, so you may have a chance here because of AFDay. I'm not sure it works, though, and it may get taken up by our friends of the DYK talk page if they don't think it does. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:27, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
  • The more I think on it, the more I agree. I've struck both hooks. The first is completely opaque to a non-Brit (and probably opaque to many Brits), and the second blathers on before we discover that it's apparently an author hoping that we have his book (though he or she is apparently part of that we, which is even more confusing). This needs something that's generally accessible to an April Fools' audience. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:30, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Waiting for agreement on a hook. Philafrenzy (talk) 14:36, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
Agreement with whom @Philafrenzy:? The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 20:45, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
Between you and the people who don't like your hooks. Philafrenzy (talk) 21:45, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

ALT3 is not completely accurate and is not really an April Fools hook IMO. Suggested alt:

I'm inclined to think that might diminish the curiosity factor somewhat, but if you want to add an alt with the full title The C of E, I have no objection to that. Gatoclass (talk) 08:47, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
ALT5... that Fly Fishing by J.R. Hartley was written by a fictional character from a TV advertisement? @Gatoclass: The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 08:58, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
Fine by me The C of E, we can leave the set builder to choose the version they prefer. I have struck the earlier hooks on the basis that there was no agreement on them. Thanks, Gatoclass (talk) 09:05, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
I thought Michael Russell wrote it? Philafrenzy (talk) 09:56, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
Yes, under the pseudonym of J. R. Hartley, a fictional character from a TV advertisement. Gatoclass (talk) 10:48, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Philafrenzy, Gatoclass, so far as I can see, this nomination is still not approved. Philafrenzy, this was originally your review; do you feel you can continue, or is a new reviewer needed. (Since ALT4 is Gatoclass's, and ALT5 a variant on it, Gatoclass can't approve either of the remaining hooks.) BlueMoonset (talk) 19:32, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
We still don't have an acceptable hook. Call me pedantic if you like but the book was not written by a fictional character as such a thing is impossible, it was written by Michael Russell. It needs some sort of rewording. Whether any humour will remain then is doubtful. Sorry C of E but this all proceeds from the article (which should not even exist) being based on a too-clever idea. Why don't you call for a new reviewer? Philafrenzy (talk) 10:45, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn was written by Mark Twain. Did Mark Twain actually exist? No, he was a fiction created by the real author, Samuel Langhorne Clemens. So in that sense, one could say the book was written by a fictional character. The same applies in this case.
Hooks appearing on April Fools day still have to be true in some way, but they don't have to be literally true, if they did, April Fools day at DYK would probably be unviable. Gatoclass (talk) 10:43, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
Mark Twain was a pseudonym, not a fictional character. Philafrenzy (talk) 10:59, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
Not a fictional character, no, but a fictitious identity. J. B. Hartley is likewise a fictitious identity, but in this case he also happens to be a fictional character in a TV advertisement. Gatoclass (talk) 11:42, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
This proves my point. It is all too complicated and metaphysical. You can't rely on our readers bothering with all that stuff. Philafrenzy (talk) 12:01, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
There's nothing to figure out Phil! It's right there in the article, sheesh. Gatoclass (talk) 13:31, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Fine I will leave it open for another reviewer for this April Fools Hook, but in doing so I am leaving the original open for consideration too. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 16:15, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Sorry, the original hook was not acceptable and has been struck again. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:52, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on January 20[]

Warwick Castle, Maida Vale

The Warwick Castle sign
The Warwick Castle sign

5x expanded by Edwardx (talk), Widefox (talk), and Philafrenzy (talk). Nominated by Edwardx (talk) at 13:11, 21 January 2018 (UTC).

  • Misleading as Warwick Castle is well known. Suggest disambiguate using "pub" and/or "London". Source is a primary, if that's relevant for DYK. Widefox; talk 14:24, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
  • DYK has a long tradition of hooks that can be somewhat misleading. In any event, the image clearly shows it is not a "real" castle. Edwardx (talk) 14:41, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg Article is new enough, was expanded more than enough to stop an AfD stone dead, the hook is interesting and cited to Howard Marks' biography. Obviously I register "Warwick Castle, Maida Vale" as a pub immediately, but if you put (pictured) next to "Warwick Castle" most people will get it. I had the pleasure of seeing Mr Marks do a lecture about 20 years ago and the auditorium absolutely reeked of marajuana with people blatantly skinning up in their seats (not me, I was just interested in hearing what he had to say!), so I can't see he would have had an issue with the facts presented here. Oh, and you'll need a QPQ before this gets queued. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 22:38, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
I'm bringing this back from queue as The Rambling Man has raised concerns about the hook - perhaps we could just go with ALT1 instead? Also QPQ needs to be done. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 22:50, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
Indeed, I'm sure Cwmhiraeth checked for the QPQ, but in any case, the main hook (while actually interesting) seems highly unlikely to be true at all. ALT1 seems reasonably okay to me. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:53, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
All we assert is that a convicted drug dealer did a drugs deal. The fact he was probably a bit vague about the size of the deal is not relevant unless we mention the size in the hook or article. Philafrenzy (talk) 22:05, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
No, you say "half the consignment" which equates to 1000 kilos. It is absolutely relevant because it's utterly impossible. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:18, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
There is absolutely no need to engage in OR about how much drugs can be fitted in a saloon car as you did elsewhere and no basis for rejecting the first hook. We write from the sources. Both the hook and the article are sound and already use a non-specific quantity. They just need a slight qualification that it was according to his reminiscences. Philafrenzy (talk) 22:25, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
Actually, I asked a simple question, how much can a "car" take fully loaded? The answer is much less than a ton. The fact that the article and hook decided to ignore the blatantly impossible task of shoving a ton of hash into a "car" doesn't make it right to create an obfuscated sentence and hook about it. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:30, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
Neither the article or the hook make any claim that the car contained any specific amount. Philafrenzy (talk) 22:45, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
Yet both are sourced to the claim that there was a 2000 kilo consignment, half of which Marks claimed went in his car. Are you not getting the problem here? The Rambling Man (talk) 22:47, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
Everyone knows that drug shipments get split up as they go through the pipeline. As a native English speaker you will also know that half does not necessarily mean exactly half, it's often a turn of phrase for a non specific quantity. There is also mention elsewhere in the source of a van. Perhaps by car he really meant van. We don't need to obsess about this. We have a convicted drug dealer saying he did a drug deal of some sort in a named place. It's fine. Philafrenzy (talk) 23:02, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
No, it's not fine. This is an encyclopedia, not a collection of "everyone knows" stories. The source says a car, the source says half a consignment, the source says the consignment was 2000 kilos. It's not fine. Find another hook. This is becoming tedious now. The Rambling Man (talk) 23:04, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
P.S. You accused me of OR about three sentences back. Review your last post here. OR in every single sentence. Amazing. The Rambling Man (talk) 23:11, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
But not in the hook or the article. That's the point, we write from the sources. Philafrenzy (talk) 23:22, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
What?! This is circular. Just find a more appropriate hook, not one which is patently fake. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:26, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
It is not patently fake. Convicted drug dealer writes in his memoirs that he did a deal with some drugs in a car outside a particular pub. The fact that the exact amount involved is questionable is irrelevant.
If a convicted bank robber writes in his memoirs that he robbed Barclays Bank of £1M but it more probably was £0.5m we can still say here "According to the memoirs of bank robber X, he stole money from Barclays Bank". We don't need to start doing calculations of how much money can fit in a Ford Mondeo. Philafrenzy (talk) 06:45, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
It was purely a demonstration of how utterly false the story was, and thus how utter bunkum the hook was. Sorry if that wasn't clear enough for you. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:21, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Alt 2... that according to his memoirs, Howard Marks concluded a drug deal at the Warwick Castle (pictured), with a consignment of Thai grass hidden in a car parked outside? Philafrenzy (talk) 07:39, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Symbol redirect vote 4.svg I like Alt 2, but think it would be fairer for a third party to sign off on this. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:40, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on February 1[]

Wang Bingzhang (general)

Wang Bingzhang
Wang Bingzhang

Created by Zanhe (talk). Self-nominated at 19:44, 2 February 2018 (UTC).

  • On it.

    Symbol question.svg New enough; long enough [~4.8k elig. chars.]; Earwig finds no copyvio; probably about as well-sourced as possible in English and well written without any of the POVy tone situations like this lend themselves to; I always prefer {{chinese}} infoboxes (allows Wade, &c., more easily and avoids the malformatted semicolons of {{zh}}) and have started adding External links to the Baidu Baike and Baike.com articles on Chinese topics, but I'll just leave that for Zanhe to consider since we were having some issues earlier. Apologies on my end, and happy Spring Festival. =) 

    QPQ still needed.

    As far as the hook, it all checks out except for the without being charged of a crime part. The People's Daily explicitly accuses him of involvement in the Lin Biao conspiracy; Phoenix News just says he was held, using his daughter as its source; China's Space Program similarly just says he was arrested, although not on the linked page, so I might be missing something there. Now, they didn't prosecute him when he got out (saw that) but is there one of the sources that explicitly says that he was never charged with a crime while being held? I'd imagine something like "sion", "treason", &c. related to Mao's fears about the clique around Lin Biao could easily have been made or mooted, even though they never got the evidence to finalize the sentence with a judge. If I didn't miss something (easily possible: just explain if I'm missing something from the Chinese sources) and no one came out and said that, you can probably still make this work with a little rephrasing about "declining to prosecute" or sth.

    The pic has a Chinese license but apparently (?) needs a separate American one to be used freely, since Wikipedia's based in the US. — LlywelynII 09:22, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks for pointing out the error in the hook. It should read "without being convicted of a crime", but I got careless after spending hours poring over the sources. So here's ALT1:
  • ALT1 ... that Lt. Gen. Wang Bingzhang (pictured), head of China's ballistic missile and satellite programs, was imprisoned for ten years without being convicted of a crime?
I've added the Chinese infobox module to the infobox. I prefer the Chinese infobox too, but sometimes get lazy :).
Regarding the image, there have been complex discussions about the URAA at the Commons, but the current situation is that URAA images are ok for the commons, which means ok for DYK (see official position of the Wikimedia Foundation and community decision).
QPQ has been added.
No worries about the past issues. New year, new beginning :) -Zanhe (talk) 20:59, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on February 6[]

Nobel Prize effect

Created by Anachronist (talk). Self-nominated at 22:31, 6 February 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Hmmm, moved to mainspace from draft on 26 Jan (prose portion around 500 characters excluding block quotes) and expanded to about 1300 characters (excluding block quotes) on 6 Feb. Based on this, I have to say it is ineligible for now since it's not new enough and not long enough. Manelolo (talk) 08:45, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
@Manelolo: Um, no, that isn't how it happened. If you look at my talk page User talk:Anachronist#Moved to Draft, you'll see that someone else (not me) unilaterally moved it from my userspace to draft on 1/26 and I moved it back to my user space immediately (mistakenly moving it to main space for less than 1 minute). It had been languishing in my userspace since 2014. Then I spent several days communicating with the publisher of one of the sources to get the citation right (because Google Books wasn't citing it properly), before moving it to main space on February 6. The article has resided in main space less than 1 day total so far. Here's the timeline from the move logs:
I hope that clears things up. It was in main space for less than 1 minute on 26 Feb. As for the length, I expanded it a bit more today and it now passes DYKcheck. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:40, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
@Anachronist: Ha, ok, interesting turns of events, never seen that before! Prose length now 1600, new enough (de facto move date to mainspace on 6 Feb), within policy. Hooks and QPQ ok. I favour ALT0 as the more interesting one. Maybe ALT1 might be more catchy like this: "... that Nobel laureates often are expected to be experts even outside their field of work?" Manelolo (talk) 23:45, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
I also favor ALT0 (which is why I put it first), but I like your ALT1 much better than mine, so I now prefer either one equally. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:19, 8 February 2018 (UTC)


I took a look at the article and notice that it is basically a series of 3 observations strung together. The article barely passes 1500 characters, and most of that is the introduction to the quotes. The main sources for the subject are a 2008 paper and a response to that paper. I'm wondering if this is WP:SYNTH or syllogism rather than an encyclopedic subject? Yoninah (talk) 09:06, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
A valid observation. IMHO it's not WP:SYNTH. It's a subcategory of Winner and loser effects and the different effects of the Nobel peace prize specifically are documented outside of the article's sources even by a quick search (The Winner Effect: How Power Affects Your Brain, pp. 141-143; How your life changes when you win a Nobel prize; Too big to fault? Effects of the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize on Norwegian exports to China and foreign policy). One ponders if it needs its own article per WP:GNG or if it could be within Winner and loser effects.
That being said, the article would benefit from more work. I passed it to encourage article building and since it met the technicalities. I'll let others weigh in now. Manelolo (talk) 09:24, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
@Manelolo: if you felt the article didn't meet GNG or could be merged, and additionally that "the article would benefit from more work", you shouldn't have passed it. As much as we try to encourage new ors, we don't encourage substandard work on the main page. I'm returning it to the noms page. Yoninah (talk) 15:13, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

@Yoninah: The Nobel Prize effect has nothing to do with winner and loser effects; I have no idea why that was even suggested. That article is about a biological phenomenon, and doesn't even mention human social interactions. The Nobel Prize effect is a social phenomenon that has had reliable source coverage. It wouldn't be appropriate to merge the two subjects. In my view, there are sufficient sources about the Nobel Prize effect to warrant a stand-alone article, which is why I wrote it (I had come across the term repeatedly while browsing one day, so I decided to dig further and write an article about it). Initially the information I was seeing (many trivial mentions which I didn't bother to cite) weren't about the Peace Prize, but then I came across those sources about the Peace Prize and because they went into such depth, I felt it would violate WP:UNDUE to leave them out.

I also point out that all DYK articles "could benefit from more work." That's kind of the point, isn't it? ~Anachronist (talk) 16:39, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

@Anachronist: I agree with you that this is not a candidate for merger to winner and loser effects. But the sourcing does need to be improved. If you do have additional sources, please add them to show significance. Yoninah (talk) 18:01, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
@Yoninah: Huh. Well, I spent a whole week going back and forth with the publisher of one source before they found the actual citation for me (that's the Google Books source, and Google had it wrong). I thought the sources in there give pretty extensive coverage already, which is why I submitted this to DYK. I can look for more, but at the moment I'm in a crunch at work before leaving to settle some funeral affairs, so it may be a while before I can do more research. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:12, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
  • @Anachronist:, well, if you're willing to find more sources that specifically talk about this phenomenon, we can certainly wait for a few weeks. Yoninah (talk) 20:59, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on February 8[]

The Infinity Gauntlet

5x expanded by Argento Surfer (talk). Self-nominated at 18:34, 9 February 2018 (UTC).

Symbol possible vote.svg Apart from the lack of a QPQ, DYKcheck reckons that not enough has been done. Here is its report. Andrew D. (talk) 18:42, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

@Andrew Davidson: I've expanded the lead, but I'm not able to use the DYKcheck tool. Could you please specify exactly how much more work is needed? I was using Word to compare, and I'm seeing a comparison of 5,799 words/35,389 characters in its current state to 1,098 words/6,695 characters on February 7. Argento Surfer (talk) 18:57, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
  • DYKcheck still isn't satisfied but when I run it for the 2 Feb version, it gives a size of 5698 which is less than 20% of the current size that it reports -- 32,960. So, let's assume that's ok for now. As a QPQ has been done now, I'll start a more detailed review. Andrew D. (talk) 14:13, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
@Argento Surfer: Sorry to keep you; it's on my list but I've not gotten to it yet. What I did do was pick up a copy in Forbidden Planet the other day. I'm familiar with the story from other works but hadn't read through the original mini-series yet. More soon. Andrew D. (talk) 16:00, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
Cool. Just wanted to make sure it was still on your radar. I'm sure you'll enjoy the book! Argento Surfer (talk) 16:05, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
@Andrew Davidson:, I don't mean to rush you, but the film comes out 4/23/18. I'd like to have this on the main page prior to release. Argento Surfer (talk) 13:40, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
  • @Argento Surfer: Sorry to keep you. We've had some nasty weather in the UK ("the beast from the east") and I got a cold. But Spring is here now so I'll get on it. Maybe we can get this up on the release day...? Andrew D. (talk) 13:47, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
  • I'm glad Spring is happening somewhere. We just got some more snow here last night. Release day sounds good to me, and we even get two shots at it - April 23 is the world premiere, and the US release is April 27. Argento Surfer (talk) 14:04, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Sainte-Anne Hospital Center

Sainte-Anne hospital in a 1672 site plan
Sainte-Anne hospital in a 1672 site plan

Created by Robert K S (talk). Self-nominated at 07:26, 8 February 2018 (UTC).

Symbol question.svg Substantial article, but would need many more inline citations. The rule of thumb says one inline citation per paragraph. I also wonder about the name, which is a mixture of French and English. We should not invent names, - is there an English source for this name? If not, perhaps better stick with the French. Should Centre be capital? - I like the original hook much better, referring to the unique history. I delinked Paris, - current capitals and countries are typically not linked. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:17, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
There is no official English rendering of the name of this hospital. In most of the English-language literature it is referred to as "Sainte-Anne Hospital" but that is with reference to the institution as it existed in the 1950s, e.g., before it took on its modern name including the word "Center". In the French version of the name, Centre would not be capitalized unless at the start of a sentence (similar to rue, which is always rendered capitalized in English but never in French). To switch from "Sainte-Anne" to "Saint Anne" or "St. Anne" would I believe be one step too far as it would corrupt the proper-noun portion of the name of the institution. Given all of the above I believe that "Sainte-Anne Hospital Center" should be the preferred way to refer to the present-day incarnation of the institution in English. (Google shows many usages of this rendering of the name. [1]) Robert K S (talk) 19:32, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
Taken, now refs please ;) - The image is licensed but doesn't show too well in that size. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:12, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Robert K S, Gerda Arendt, it's been a month and a half since this was nominated and the above posts made. Where do the article and nomination currently stand? BlueMoonset (talk) 03:15, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on February 10[]

Ian Stephens (or)

  • Reviewed: Not yet done

Created by SlimVirgin (talk). Self-nominated at 03:57, 17 February 2018 (UTC).

QPQ: Red XN - Not done
Overall: Symbol question.svg Excellently written article about responsible and independent journalism. Article may have a minor neutrality issue, for example it does not describe any negative responses from the British, focusing instead on the praise Stephens received. Secondly, next time please add the source above yourself. Thirdly, don't forget to do a review (QPQ). Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 12:25, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Farang, there's a problem here. First you rejected the nomination on the grounds that it had previously been nominated for FA status, [2] then after I explained that you'd confused it for the other article linked in the entry, [3] you removed your post rather than striking it, [4] leaving my reply as a reply to nothing. Now you say that the article isn't neutral because it doesn't contain negative reaction to Stephens' publication, even though there wasn't any that I'm aware of. And you added the wrong source above. SarahSV (talk) 17:19, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
Sorry about yesterday. With regard to the wiki article, are you sure there were no negative responses? Stephens was more or less going against British policy. Above I had added one of the two sources you cited in the article, but today have removed. I cannot access the Times article, because I have no newspaper clippings subscription. I understand the Times article contains the original quote, so please write a note above in the hook to that effect. There must be a source mentioned in the hook (and preferably a quote from the source).--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 18:21, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
Okay, I'll add something above from The Times, but the lead contains the quote, so I didn't think it was necessary. Re: neutrality, I'm not aware of anything negative in secondary sources. He was widely hailed as a hero, and the British were finally forced to act. Whether they grumbled about him in private, I don't know. He has written a book with a couple of chapters about what happened, but it's hard to access. I do intend to develop the article eventually, but I thought this would be enough for a start article at DYK. SarahSV (talk) 18:27, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
I tried to search for some information about Stephens, but could not find much detail. Anyway, I understand that there is not much of an issue of neutrality, just a matter of an article which is still in process. Above I have included the source, which i take on good faith. I cannot access it, but have seen it quoted in The Telegraph. So once you have done the QPQ i can pass the hook on good faith.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 19:09, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
SlimVirgin, don't forget the QPQ thingie.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 20:36, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on February 11[]

Gavin Lowe (computer scientist)

  1. ^ Lowe, Gavin (1994). Probabilities and priorities in timed CSP (DPhil). University of Oxford. 
  2. ^ "Ex-Staff - University of Leicester". University of Leicester. Retrieved 10 February 2018. 
  3. ^ "Gavin Lowe". Department of Computer Science, University of Oxford. Retrieved 10 February 2018. 

Created by Bellezzasolo (talk). Self-nominated at 12:24, 11 February 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol delete vote.svgArticle is new enough and long enough. Regrettably this academic does not meet the notability standard of Wikipedia WP:PROF. I taged the article for notability however IMHO this is a candidate for CSD under A7.– Lionel(talk) 03:32, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
  • [5] - cited by 1865. I think the top result alone is enough for notability. Then, 883, 788, 688, 304... Bellezzasolo Discuss 04:22, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
  • We don't really use "precedents" (see WP:OTHERSTUFF). And your precedent is 12 years old. That said, it looks like Lowe is "highly cited" so I removed the notability tag. However that still leaves the article sourced almost exclusively to Primary sources, so it's been tagged for sourcing. You'll have to resolve the tag before proceeding with DYK. Now I'm not a DYK expert, so feel free to get a second opinion.– Lionel(talk) 11:45, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on February 14[]

Ach wie flüchtig, ach wie nichtig

Michael Franck
Michael Franck

Converted from a redirect by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 07:11, 21 February 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article long enough, referenced, and meets expansion criterion; hook short enough, interesting enough, and cited to online source. There are however a couple of issues in the article that I think need to be addressed before promotion... Firstly, I happened to notice when verifying the hook that the article phrase "first a baker, then a teacher, poet and musician" is taken directly from a source -- unless deliberately quoting, we need to paraphrase the information from our sources, and I'd recommend treating this as simply an example and going through the article to ensure no other passages have been copied. Secondly, the image in Commons is tagged as needing to demonstrate PD status in the US. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:21, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Thank you for the review, and for copy-ing. The sentence about the poet was not taken from a source, but from our article on him which I thought was "safe", - understand that it was hoping for too much but taken from our article and rephrased, which happens to have arrived - incidentally - at a source wording. Can you do that part, please? - We can do without image, but I don't see how a 17th century image could be under copyright. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:44, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Ian Rose, rephrased the part in question. The image should be fine, but Gerda Arendt, the source link is dead—could you find its source again? If it's that old it's probably in some out of copyright book. --Usernameunique (talk) 22:54, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for rephrasing. - Sorry, I have nothing to do with the image, so know nothing about where it comes from. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:20, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
Ian Rose, will you finish - without image if doubtful - or should we look for someone else? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:57, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on February 15[]

Romulea tortuosa

Romulea tortuosa subsp. aurea, photographed at Avontuur Estate, north-west of Nieuwoudtville
Romulea tortuosa subsp. aurea, photographed at Avontuur Estate, north-west of Nieuwoudtville

5x expanded by Dwergenpaartje (talk). Nominated by Casliber (talk) at 13:03, 16 February 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Page size and 5x expansion checked. QPQ done. Interesting hook, properly sourced. I'm taking on good faith that the technical terms of the hook source translate to the more non-technical "coiled like corkscrews" wording of the article. Earwig found no copyvio. Image looks usable at DYK size and is properly licensed. However, there are still two fixable issues: (1) because the lead paragraph makes claims that are not summarized in the rest of the article (the family membership, location, flower blotches, etc.) it needs a source, and (2) DYK rules require that the sentence of the article containing the hook claim have its own footnote, even if that would duplicate the next footnote. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:59, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
@Casliber:@David Eppstein:The hook contains a small mistake: it is not a shrub; one could call it a bulb although technically the organ is not a bulb but a corm; although less limiting, geophyte would do.
  • "Romulea tortuosa is readily recognized by its several twisted leaves which are channelled to the tips [...]"[1]
  • "Small plants rarely >5cm tall, with several twisted leaves and a corm with a very wide fan-shaped ridge at their base. The yellow flowers are about 20 mm in diameter and usually have dark brown markings in the center [...] It flowers in winter and early spring and is often locally abundant in moist sites in Apronveld and Arid Renosterveld in the western Klein Karoo and occurs westwards to Worcester and northwards to the Kamisberg Mountains."[2] Dwergenpaartje (talk) 10:01, 17 February 2018 (UTC)


  1. ^ Manning, J.C.; Goldblatt, P. (2001). "A synoptic review of Romulea (Iridaceae: Crocoideae) in sub-Saharan Africa, the Arabian Peninsula and Socotra including new species, biological notes, and a new infrageneric classification" (PDF). Adansonia. 3. 23 (1): 88. 
  2. ^ Vlok, Jan; Schutte-Vlok, Anne Lise (2015). Plants of the Klein Karoo (2 ed.). Hatfield, South Africa: Umdaus Press. p. 116. 
  • Symbol question.svg I was asked to look at this again now that the article has been revised. However the sentence containing the hook claim still has no footnote. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:38, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
You're right. cured! Dwergenpaartje (talk) 00:40, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
Ok, but that source (p.88, top of 2nd col.) says that the leaves are either "flexuose" (which apparently means sinusoidal) or "twisted" (which could mean like a corkscrew, or like a helicoid, or...). So where does the "like a corkscrew" come from? —David Eppstein (talk) 01:09, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
Would you accept "Leaves of this species in habitat are sometimes spirally twisted"? I hope so. It is a fine line between paraphrasing precisely (but not closely) and making the information accessible to the average reader. You are right that several meanings of "flexuose" and "twisted" exist. The images from the plant in its natural habitat support that the interpretation is viable that it often means "like a corkscrew". To me that is not OR, because anyone would draw the same conclusion, but you may have a different opinion. By the way, it is clear that in cultivation the leaves may well be straight, but many plants grown outside of their natural habitat may strongly differ from the scientific descriptions. Hence the "in habitat". I changed the citation again by adding the website cited above. Dwergenpaartje (talk) 11:06, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
There's no need to mention the type of plant - locating it in Sth Africa might be useful. Johnbod (talk) 19:04, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on February 16[]

All India Services Act, 1951

  • Comment: This is my first DYK nomination, hence, any and all critique would be welcome.

Created by SshibumXZ (talk). Self-nominated at 00:49, 18 February 2018 (UTC).

  • @Gfosankar: oh, ok. How can I improve the article? I can make the body of the article to be more than 1,500 characters long, excluding the copied history section. Is there anything else which can be done?
    Regards, SshibumXZ (Talk) (Contributions). 15:01, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
  • COMMENT: The ALTs also have to include All India Services Act, 1951 If you cannot make those relate, strike out with like this. You can paraphrase the history content rather than remove it entirely. If you want to submit an image with your DYK then need to include (pictured) in the DYK. David notMD (talk) 19:22, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
  • @David notMD: will do that, then. Also, I have striked out Alts 1-3 and have changed the image.
  • I inserted "(pictured)" Be aware that the DYK may be approved, but when advanced to the Prep/Queue stage, an Administrator may decide to not use the photo, as it does not directly pertain to the DYK article. I am sure that someone will start the review process soon. I feel that I am not qualified as I know very little about India. David notMD (talk) 16:47, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
  • @David notMD: no worries. I'm eagerly waiting for an admin to review this one, though.
    Regards, SshibumXZ (Talk) (Contributions). 19:19, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Note that the original hook is too long at 256 characters; I'm condensing it below as ALT4 so it's below the maximum 200 characters at 186 (175 excluding "(pictured)":

Articles created/expanded on February 20[]

Airliner Number 4

Created by Philafrenzy (talk) and Whispyhistory (talk). Self-nominated at 22:58, 26 February 2018 (UTC).

  • I'll give this a preliminary review, but first I'm proposing my own hook below since I'm not sure if the hook given is interesting enough:
ALT1: ... that Norman Bel Geddes's proposed Airliner Number 4 (1932) may have influenced the design of Howard Hughes's Spruce Goose?
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg As for the review itself, the nomination meets the 10-day requirement, and the article is of an adequate length. Earwigs detects no copyright problems. The article is adequately sourced: book sources are accepted in good faith. Philafrenzy has provided a QPQ; not sure if Whispyhistory needs one too. The article checks out the requirements, but as I've provided my own hook, I'm leaving the final approval to another reviewer. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:21, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
Thanks Narutolovehinata5, I tweaked your Alt a little. I didn't originally use the Spruce Goose because, although two books mention the possibility, they both say there is no proof. (It's one review per nomination)
Alt2... that in 1932, Norman Bel Geddes claimed that his proposed Airliner Number 4 would be able to fly from Chicago to England in 42 hours using in-air refueling? Philafrenzy (talk) 07:38, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Note: as Philafrenzy notes, only one QPQ is required for this nomination because only one article is nominated. It is up to the nominator (in this case Philafrenzy) to supply it, though someone else could do so if they wanted to. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:49, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
Thanks, the co-author has. Philafrenzy (talk) 09:11, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on February 22[]

Leon Tomșa

5x expanded by Dahn (talk). Self-nominated at 21:12, 28 February 2018 (UTC).

Military Engineering Experimental Establishment

Moved to mainspace by Dumelow (talk). Self-nominated at 03:09, 22 February 2018 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on February 23[]

Phomoxanthone A

Mitochondrial fragmentation caused by phomoxanthone A

Created by Shinryuu (talk). Self-nominated at 10:01, 23 February 2018 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on February 24[]

An Wasserflüssen Babylon

Copy of Reincken's work by Bach
Copy of Reincken's work by Bach
  • Reviewed: to come Hans Klumbach
  • Comment: ..., which is one of two of his oldest manuscripts, found again in 2005/06[7] - there's plenty of news. We don't see a thing on the image but is RARE ;) - We just had Innocent Victims where we also didn't see a thing.

Converted from a redirect by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 15:22, 3 March 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Most everything looks good (long enough, timing fits, no copyvio, neutral, interesting hook--and cool image to go with!), just needs a QPQ and then(ETA: done!) ideally an update of the references in the entry to confirm the hook? Given image, it seems like they almost certainly exist; but at the moment that specific sentence has a "not in citation given" flag that's probably worth reconciling before moving the DYK forward. Innisfree987 (talk) 19:20, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
It took me a while to read the article ;) - When I nominated, it was a short little thing. I managed to review. What's not in the citation seems to be the exact year, but "as a boy" should be sourced. Perhaps you can tell the two experts what you like and what not, better than I could? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:48, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for having a look Gerda Arendt! Indeed this is well outside my own expertise; I just clicked through to the link to check, and as best I can tell, I don't see the bit about copying the manuscript in those Programme Notes? I mean obviously he did or you wouldn't have an image of it, but would you mind either pointing out to me the part that says that, which I'm just misunderstanding/overlooking (highly likely), or suggest a different source we can use as the reference, just so we can remove that flag? I wouldn't be concerned except for it being the hook. Thanks! Innisfree987 (talk) 22:06, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
I found this but don't know what the experts will think. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:13, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
I've just found a book ref as well. Mathsci and Francis Schonken, does one or both of these seem reliable to you? Any other comments before the DYK goes forward? Thanks for having a look! Innisfree987 (talk) 22:32, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for your feedback; yes by all means, focus on the entry as you wish! WP:VOLUNTEER and whatnot. Innisfree987 (talk) 18:23, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
Francis Schonken's decision to remove any mention of Gerda's DYK hook in the lead was not helpful. Mathsci (talk) 22:09, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
Never mind, the hook doesn't have to be in the lead. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:13, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
It was not in the main body. I have all the source material in the reference. Mathsci (talk) 22:57, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
Re. "It was not in the main body" – incorrect, it has always been in the main body, in every version I've seen. --Francis Schonken (talk) 17:30, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
Re. "... Francis Schonken's decision to remove any mention of Gerda's DYK hook in the lead ..." – incorrect, I didn't remove any mention of the hook from the lead. I take offence of Gerda Arendt's "Never mind" in their response to the false accusation: sort of shows they didn't check, though their "the hook doesn't have to be in the lead" is of course correct. --Francis Schonken (talk) 17:30, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
The source proposed above for the hook (www.thescrollensemble.com) doesn't really cover the hook. I discussed a better source on the article's talk page. For me, this confirms once more that people write here without really checking. Over-all the situation has hardly improved. Again, I could write a lot about aspects where the current version of the article fails, but prefer to improve rather than to write reams of text here. As for this DYK, with all these problems: hardly a good idea, so I continue to oppose until problems are really addressed. --Francis Schonken (talk) 17:30, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
Noted and agreed again that spending your time improving the entry sounds like a wise choice. Innisfree987 (talk) 18:25, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
The suggestions here seem to be purely procedural. Consensus so far indicates that the article is fair at the moment. There will always be new perspectives on the content: since the topic concerns the Reformation—a very wide-ranging topic—that will always be the case. Looking at other Lutheran Hymns, the article here seems to be in a much better state than most articles of this kind. Vater unser im Himmelreich is comparable. Only a few articles on Lutheran articles to have been created at the moment to judge by Category:Lutheran_hymns. Mathsci (talk) 21:33, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
The hook seems fine. There is a problem, however, for the DYK image. The high resolution image from commons was uploaded a number of years back (2015), but the source is no longer available: it returns an error and I have been unable to locate the link. It is possible to give some kind of documentation for the source, but not necessarily on-line. The official documentation of Michael Maul and Peter Wollny, which needs to be verified, is a reference section available in a music library (in that case I used the Anderson Room in the University Library, Cambridge) but is not available on-line. The bare link to the 2006 publication of Bärenreiter Verlag is available, but that does not seem to be enough at the moment. Mathsci (talk) 06:52, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
Thank you, both. I suggest that we focus on the hymn and its creation, and mention only what is certain about Reincken and Bach? We need to work on the Bucer thing then, but can move details on Reincken to his bio, and details on Bach to Orgelbüchlein? Sorry that I was not more helpful, but in March, I focus on women, Passion and Easter. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:24, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
I agree with Gerda. Bucer is not relevant here, nor any wikipedia "hack work", nor any of the original organ works by Bach, such as Great Eighteen Chorale Preludes (BWV 653 from "An Wasserflüssen Babylon"). Only the copying of Reincken's chorale prelude when Bach was a teenager are important for this DYK hook. The image, however, has not been properly sourced on Commons: I know how to rectify that but it will take a day or so. Mathsci (talk) 19:01, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
Excellent, that all sounds completely appropriate to me, and the effort is much appreciated! Just drop me a ping when I should have another look. Thank you all! Innisfree987 (talk) 19:04, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
I have found a properly sourced image on Commons now available on Bärenreiter Verlag. The image was in the "extras" section of the facsimile. See File:ReinckenAnWasser.jpg for the links there. Mathsci (talk) 20:42, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
In the hook, perhaps we should say "young man" or "teenager", instead of boy? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:28, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
"young musician" seems like the best description, given the context. Mathsci (talk) 20:07, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on February 26[]

Peter Newton (winemaker)

  • Reviewed: not yet done

Created by Edwardx (talk). Self-nominated at 00:07, 6 March 2018 (UTC).

Symbol question.svg Interesting life, on few but good sources, subscription source accepted AGF, no copyvio obvious. - I wouldn't mind a bit more about his winemaking, - perhaps you can find some. The Potter part would be more interesting if you could say that he was proud of it, and that she was eight. Perhaps drop the son's founding? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:23, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Isabelle Druet

  • Reviewed: Stanley Gelbier
  • Comment: a bit of a rush job, trimming to only sourced, and I didn't get to the recordings.

Created by LouisAlain (talk) and Gerda Arendt (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 15:54, 2 March 2018 (UTC).

I'm nor sure what you mean about "I didn't get to the recordings." Did you refer to the discography of the artists (like those provided by Discogs, AllMusic and their ilk or other links to YouTube or Dailymotion, which I thought should be used with parcimony?LouisAlain (talk) 22:24, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
I was rushing to rehearsal. For DYK, inline citations are needed, - a match/connection of what disdcogs says and the list, for example. Will do, but not now. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:19, 2 March 2018 (UTC)


Created by MB (talk). Self-nominated at 23:45, 27 February 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Article needs general wikifying and copying: in particular, the article needs to be split into at least two sections. The part about jute should probably be in the article body as opposed to being in the first paragraph. The external link mention needs to be modified per WP:MOS. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 14:34, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Narutolovehinata5, I don't see what is wrong with the External link (unless you meant it should be a bullet list - which I just did and you could have done yourself). I don't agree that the article should be split - it is too short to have a summarizing lead section (adding one would repeat information the reader would find on the same screen). Neither of these concerns are part of DYK review either. MB 14:51, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
@MB: I meant "CISBOT in operation (youtube video)" might need to be rephrased somehow. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 15:03, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
That seems to briefly summarize the website's contents and why the website is relevant to the article to me. Do you have any DYK issues? MB 15:17, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
At the very least, "youtube" should be "YouTube". How about "YouTube demonstration of CISBOT"? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 15:54, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
I fixed the capitalization in "YouTube". It don't know that the video is a "demonstration"; some shots appear to be taken in a test environment while other appear to be from the onboard cameras and may be from inside a pipeline under some city street. Saying "CISBOT in operation" is vague enough to be accurate. Again, this is a minor item that should be part of the normal ing process in the article and/or its talk page. Are there any DYK issues? MB 02:10, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Many cast-iron pipes installed over a century ago have joints of jute sealed with lead which deteriorate over time and are often the causes of cast-iron pipe failure. Jute was an effective joint sealant when the pipes carried coal-based town gas, but natural gas, used since the 1950s in New York[2] and the 1970s in the UK, drys out the jute.

@MB: Considering the article is about CISBOT and not jute, these sentences should probably be moved elsewhere or rephrased, as it seems to give undue weight to jute. Also, most articles of the article's length that I have encountered do have sectioning, so while it's not exactly mandatory, it is encouraged. The lede doesn't have to be too long: in fact, merely separating the first sentence from the rest of the first paragraph should work. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:28, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

The entire purpose of this machine (CISBOT) is to repair jute sealed joints in pipelines. There are two sentences about jute which help explain why the machine was created. I don't agree this is undue. If other ors disagree with me, they are certainly able to the article and/or discuss on the article talk page. In the meantime, are you going to move forward with the DYK review? MB 03:04, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg I will. Here are some preliminary checks: QPQ provided, newly created, meets length requirements, adequately sourced, free of plagiarism. I could approve this now, but I'll have to ask first for second opinions over at WT:DYK first regarding the content and possible sectioning. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:43, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Second opinions requested regarding the issues raised above, since no response was made at WT:DYK and the request has since been archived. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:45, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Slovenia at the 2018 Winter Olympics

Jakov Fak
Jakov Fak
  • Reviewed: Embassy of Portugal, Bangkok
  • Comment: Summary written anew which is essentially all the prose in the article, other are the tables. Sources for individual events are in the event articles and there is a cover source for results of Slovenian athletes.

5x expanded by Tone (talk). Self-nominated at 18:17, 26 February 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg The hook is pretty run of the mill. Here is an alt:
  • ALT1: ... that just before Slovenia's playoff game against Norway in men's ice hockey at the 2018 Winter Olympics, one of its players tested positive for doping and was suspended?
  • All those charts under "Alpine skiing", "Cross country skiing", "Freestyle skiing", "Ice hockey", "Nordic combined", "Ski jumping", and "Snowboarding" need at least one cite. Yoninah (talk) 20:22, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
  • ALT2 (as I used the photo of one of the medallists in the original blurb): ... that biathlete Jakov Fak won a silver medal for Slovenia at the 2018 Winter Olympics, having previously won a bronze medal for Croatia in Vancouver?

Yoninah: I guess it would be the most convenient to use a general reference with all 2018 results for those tables, I am just not sure where to add it. This looks just fine. Any suggestions? Tone 15:26, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

You add a small line after the chart with the URL: Source: [ ]. Yoninah (talk) 15:29, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
I guess that is the easiest way indeed. Added. Tone 15:35, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Thank you. Here is a full review: 5x expansion verified. New enough, long enough, neutrally written, well referenced. There is some close paraphrasing that needs to be rewritten in your own words:
  • Source: said Tuesday he tested positive for an asthma drug that he took under doctor's orders and he had forgotten to seek approval for its use.
  • Article: Jeglič stated that he tested positive for an asthma drug that he took under doctor's orders and he had forgotten to seek approval for its use.
  • Numerous refs are bare URLs; per Rule D3 these need to be formatted.
  • ALT2 hook refs verified and cited inline. Image in article is freely licensed. However, the image of the biathlete does not appear in the article. QPQ done. Yoninah (talk) 15:51, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
Good point, I added the medallist photos. Refs fixed. The doping part rewritten as well. Some extra sources added. Tone 16:25, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
Thank you. A bunch of PDFs are still not formatted in the references section. Yoninah (talk) 16:58, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Nicholas Muellner

5x expanded by Armadillopteryx (talk). Self-nominated at 01:06, 26 February 2018 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on February 27[]

Clarinet Sonata (Ries)

Created/expanded by Graham1973 (talk). Nominated by Cwmhiraeth (talk) at 07:08, 4 March 2018 (UTC).

Symbol question.svg Interesting, on good sources, no copyvio obvious. Why is Hill 1982 not used? - I did some formatting, please check. - The hook is not the most interesting, and the fact should be stated in the lead, where "violin" is not even mentioned, and/or and infobox, compare Clarinet Sonatas (Brahms). Other ideas? Cadenza, which is unusual for a sonata? - Side note: the navbox is called Duo Sonatas, and while I know that there are others, "Duo" seems to be the default for Sonatas. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:41, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Alfred White Franklin

Created by Philafrenzy (talk) and Whispyhistory (talk). Nominated by Whispyhistory (talk) at 20:35, 3 March 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg This is my first QPQ, but as far as I can tell, the following: The article was definitely long enough by about five times. I added the missing source and citation to the hook, and the source is correctly cited inline. Article is neutral. The hook is borderline too negative, but trying to make it a bit more positive ends up making the hook too long. Ran Earwig. One of the sources needs a touch of ing for close paraphrasing: [11]. A small copy might be in order, but not sure about doing it myself since it's my first QPQ. Editing suggestions: Obtain ISBNs for the books in Authored and Edited sections. Worldcat is great for that. https://www.worldcat.org/. The Later life and Family sections are very short. Suggest combining and renaming to Personal life or similar heading. Also, they completed their QPQ. Another or might review due to this being my first QPQ.
  • Additional comment. I was mistakenly under the impression that one needed to add the bit that I added to the hook in the template. The source text and citation URL. However, further reviewing led me to this comment in a new, unused template. "Source: "You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)". I concur with the template that it is strongly advised and helps the reviewer, but it is not a requirement. I will also add that the reviewer must still be able to verify in the article that the source content is present, distinctly supports the hook, and is cited by the source with an inline citation. This DYK clearly does. My bad, first QPQ. dawnleelynn(talk) 03:56, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the detailed review. One section merged. Last seems to fulfill a useful function in concluding the article. Working on the paraphrasing. I think the ISBNs might have to wait. The hook is a little provocative it's true but it accurately states his views that child abusers were themselves suffering from some sort of disorder that required treatment. More on the rest soon. Philafrenzy (talk) 09:02, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
  • I just helped my mentor with adding some ISBNs to her article so it was on my mind. However, looking at policy, I find it takes some consideration to decide if to add an ISBN to a book and which one if so; it's not just a simple case of adding them. See WP:MOS-BIBLIO the section titled ISBNs. So yes, it can wait, it was just a suggestion. Regarding the hook, it accurately states that Franklin compared child abusers to the sufferers of two illnesses. Anything else is conjecture. The means of comparison and the hope for stopping child abusers by letting them into the open is not in the hook. I will consider this a bit more or ask a more experienced reviewer as part of the DYK criteria is the hook not be too negative. Thanks for your input. dawnleelynn(talk) 17:31, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

@Cwmhiraeth: Hi, what's up. I'm in my first QPQ, and I could use an opinion from such an expert reviewer as yourself on the hook. It's pretty much explained in the above comments what the deal is. In light of the comments above, let me know if you feel the hook needs a little bit of lightening up, and if so, how that might be done. I haven't been able to come up with a change to the original hook or an alternate that isn't too long. Your help much appreciated. dawnleelynn(talk) 21:22, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

  • Could you explain please in what way you feel it is too negative? It is eye-catching certainly but was not intended to criticise anyone. He did make exactly that comparison and it is not intended as any criticism of him that he did so. It's also sourced. Philafrenzy (talk) 21:49, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Sure. As stated above, the hook only states a comparison between child abusers and sufferers of two illnesses. Child abusers are like lepers and those with VD. We don't know what the comparison is. The rest is left out, the hope for stopping the abuse by letting them out in the open. As you said, the article states his comparison is based on his views that they were all suffering from a disorder that required treatment. But that is not in the hook. How are they like them? Why do I care? What does this comparison accomplish? Being able to add in a bit about how the comparison makes a difference could lighten it up. At least explain what is being compared. Otherwise, it sounds slightly negative because it's just a statement that three negative things all compare together, with no solution or hope or end game. Does that help? dawnleelynn(talk) 22:25, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
  • I understand your points. But I had already said I was turning this over to someone with experience who is listed as DYK personnel. I think we should let Cwmhiraeth take a look now. I am not going to weigh in on this anymore. It is my first QPQ, I did make that clear. Also, my mentor agreed with me. Thank you though. dawnleelynn(talk) 22:39, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Mary E. Woolley Chamberlain

Created by Skyes(BYU) (talk). Self-nominated at 19:16, 1 March 2018 (UTC).

  • This article contains factual errors such as her being the first elected mayor in the USA see List of first female mayors and a large amount of trivia. I am in the process of cleaning up. Dom from Paris (talk) 16:01, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Thank you for taking a look at the page. I sincerely apologize for the error in citing her as the first female mayor in the United States. One of the news articles I was citing had unclear wording that lead me to think that she was. I do believe that was the only gross source of confusion in the article, as everything else was cited and sourced and I am unaware of any other factual errors. I did use some print sources which I understand can cause some difficultly for reviewers. If you would like me to provide any direct quotes, please feel free to ask. Thank you for your time and your help Skyes(BYU) (talk) 21:59, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on February 28[]

Psalm 84

Title page of Kempff's setting
Title page of Kempff's setting

5x expanded by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 16:40, 7 March 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg 5x expanded, in time, long enough, no apparent copyvios, QPQ done, image is appropriately tagged. Gerda Arendt, which source says that it is Luther's translation? Also, the line about Hubert Parry should have a citation. --Usernameunique (talk) 23:11, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for looking! Luther's translation was The translation, for centuries, as Schütz, Brahms, and Kempff all used the same. It's what KJV is for English. look: a 1951 differs a lot, but is sort of respectful to the incipit. We can drop it, of course. The Parry: all I have is the sound file which - I thought - shouldn't stand unconnected. It's the lead file for Anglican chant. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:40, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

David Frühwirth

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 13:26, 7 March 2018 (UTC).

Chief Management Officer of the Department of Defense

Created by Antony-22 (talk). Self-nominated at 07:07, 28 February 2018 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on March 2[]

Ukrainian decommunization laws

Created by Piotrus (talk). Self-nominated at 12:49, 6 March 2018 (UTC).


Created by AjaxSmack (talk). Self-nominated at 22:10, 2 March 2018 (UTC).

Miloš Havel

Created by Chetsford (talk). Self-nominated at 20:42, 2 March 2018 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on March 3[]

Endsleigh Gardens

Hannah Dobbs
Hannah Dobbs

Created by Edwardx (talk) and Philafrenzy (talk). Nominated by Edwardx (talk) at 23:35, 11 March 2018 (UTC).

COMMENT: @Philafrenzy: the hook is ambiguous, maybe even to the point of being misleading. It was named following the murder, not named after as in given the same name as. Umimmak (talk) 23:34, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
Thank you, Umimmak. Agreed, hook reworded accordingly. Edwardx (talk) 23:54, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
Gruesome murder put in quotes as it is. Philafrenzy (talk) 10:36, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Macrobiotus shonaicus

Created by Umimmak (talk). Self-nominated at 21:47, 10 March 2018 (UTC).

Laboratory experiments of speciation

Created/expanded by Azcolvin429 (talk). Self-nominated at 10:04, 10 March 2018 (UTC).

Evidence for speciation by reinforcement

Created by Chiswick Chap (talk) and Azcolvin429 (talk). Nominated by Azcolvin429 (talk) at 01:19, 10 March 2018 (UTC).

Parable of the Polygons

  • Comment: I was thinking about appending ", which lowering anti-diversity bias does not" to the hook, sourcing it to Star Tribune, but the source didn't really support it; also there is the Scientific American blog which I wouldn't really call a reliable source.

Created by Wumbolo (talk). Self-nominated at 16:42, 8 March 2018 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on March 4[]

Alex Raisbeck

5x expanded by Kosack (talk). Self-nominated at 21:37, 6 March 2018 (UTC).

Tosun (construction equipment)

Source: "Yeldan, Yüksekova, Nusaybin ve Sur'da yaşanan olaylardan sonra böyle bir araca ihtiyaç duyulduğunu belirterek, "Ortaya çıkan hendek ve barikatların aşılmasında çok büyük zorluklar yaşandı ve bundan kaynaklanan bir taleple biz bu aracı tasarladık. ", "Zırhladık bu seferde RPG roketatar tehdidine maruz kaldılar. Bunu da engellemek için biz aracımızı operatörsüz göndermeye karar verdik." [16] (in Turkish)

Created by CeeGee (talk). Self-nominated at 10:11, 6 March 2018 (UTC).

Scott G. Borg

Created by Chetsford (talk). Self-nominated at 08:13, 4 March 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article is long enough and new enough. First source does not work but I see that the first sentence is supported by source #2 which however does not contain the dates 1992 and 2003. Hook is supported by source which looks reliable and moderately interesting. No copyvio or plagiarism that I can see. Sources seem reliable, do we know if this is a BLP seeing as I don't see any dates? I see that the QPQ is done (further comment on circularity there). Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:28, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Jo-Jo Eumerus - thanks for the review. My sources got mixed around so I've fixed them in the article. Also, I've put forth a slightly reworded ALT-1 (on review of the source it seems that the Nunataks were named after the Sagehens as a moniker for Pomona's athletic teams generally, and not the mascot Cecil specifically). Chetsford (talk) 22:55, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Source #6 talks about " Sagehen, mascot of Pomona College" which isn't the same statement as what is currently in the article. Other issue is fixed. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:01, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 5[]

Group testing

Improved to Good Article status by CheChe (talk). Self-nominated at 18:08, 9 March 2018 (UTC).

Yao Xian (general)

Created by Zanhe (talk). Self-nominated at 06:48, 8 March 2018 (UTC).

  • Nearly there! Long enough, fits the timeframe, clears Earwig's Copyvio, neutral AFAICT, definitely an interesting hook--just a smidge too long. Would the following be accurate? (I'm not a military historian so I want to be sure I haven't mischaracterized.) Innisfree987 (talk) 17:15, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
ALT1: ... that PLAAF generals Yao Xian and Lin Hu, who shared the same birth year, alma mater, combat experience and rank, also died on the same day?

Gregor and the Prophecy of Bane

Improved to Good Article status by 2ReinreB2 (talk) and Mike Christie (talk). Nominated by 2ReinreB2 (talk) at 04:29, 7 March 2018 (UTC).


Maudgalyāyana and Śāriputra requesting ordination from the Buddha
Maudgalyāyana and Śāriputra requesting ordination from the Buddha

Improved to Good Article status by Farang Rak Tham (talk) and Samahita (talk). Nominated by Farang Rak Tham (talk) at 20:02, 5 March 2018 (UTC).

Rector v. MLB

Created by The C of E (talk). Self-nominated at 10:41, 5 March 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg While a very interesting article, I'm not exactly sure about the reliability of some of the sources in the article. In particular, ALT1 (The C of E's preferred hook) links uses The Daily Beast as a source; in additoon, the article also uses the NY Daily News, and the New York Post as sources. Might need second opinions about this. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:53, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
Symbol possible vote.svg As interesting as ALT1 is, the hook uses The Daily Beast as a source, the site being of questionable reliability. Since no other source has said the same thing, ALT1 is struck. In addition, I find both hooks question could fall afoul of WP:BLP. As such, if this nomination is to pass: 1. the questionable sources I mentioned in my previous comment should either be removed or replaced, and 2. more BLP-compliant hooks should be proposed. NY Daily News is an acceptable source per RSN, and the NY Post articles seems fine in this context, but the nomination still needs work for reasons I've mentioned. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:35, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5: Actually The Daily Beast is considered RS. I fail to see how there is a BLP violation as there is no personal mention of anyone in the hook beyond the case title and it is discussing the lawsuit, not the person and any mention or insinuation of the person is made simply by stating the facts that are reliably reported with no opinions given negatively towards them. I have unstruck ALT1 as I believe you were not aware of the RSN decision (please correct me if I am wrong). I don't see a need to change either, did you ask for that second opinion. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 07:33, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
@The C of E: The same discussion said: "I would rather we source items in BLPs to it as little as possible"; this implies that using it to source information about BLPs is discouraged. Also, that discussion was from 2009, and based on subsequent discussions in more recent years, the use of TDB has become less and less encouraged (a search for "The Daily Beast" in the RSN archives shows this). Also, please do not unstrike ALT1: it's already been struck for a reason, and only reviewers can unstrike rejected hooks. As for the hooks themselves, them focusing too much on the sleeping does sound vaguely WP:BLPish, I would suggest you provide other hooks just to keep on the safe side. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 08:17, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
I do not see a reason to change it as the sleeping is what the lawsuit was about. BLP requires that content be NPOV, verifiable and NOR as well as not focussing on unduly negative things under WP:DYKHOOK. I do not believe that this can be considered unduly negative as all it says was that a lawsuit came about because someone was broadcast sleeping at baseball. The hook makes no assertions beyond the verified facts of the case. I would suggest we get that second opinion @Narutolovehinata5:.
I've started a discussion at WT:DYK, see Wikipedia talk:Did you know#Template:Did you know nominations/Rector v. MLB. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 08:59, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Haint blue

Moved to mainspace by Boomur (talk). Self-nominated at 01:37, 6 March 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg New enough and (barely) long enough. Earwig found no copyvio. Interesting hook, adequately sourced. QPQ done. However, the article (especially in its infobox) appears to imply that there was one specific shade of blue that could be called "haint blue", and gives it a specific encoding in the sRGB and HSV color spaces. The article explicitly tags this claim as being unsourced, and the article sources (particularly the use of plural in the title of reference 6) instead suggest that any light blue used for this purpose would have this name. This citation-needed tag needs to be resolved before this can appear in DYK. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:38, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 6[]

Crawford family of the White Mountains

Created by FloridaArmy (talk) and Sitush (talk). Nominated by Sitush (talk) at 10:01, 13 March 2018 (UTC).

Ayahs' Home

Inside the Ayahs' Home
Inside the Ayahs' Home
Inside the Ayahs' Home
Inside the Ayahs' Home
Alternative image shown.

Created by Whispyhistory (talk) and Philafrenzy (talk). Nominated by Philafrenzy (talk) at 10:37, 11 March 2018 (UTC).

Policy compliance:

Hook eligiblity:

Image eligibility:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol question.svg epicgenius (talk) 19:38, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your review Epicgenius, to take your points in order:

Philafrenzy (talk) 21:56, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, if you are inclined you could tick both just let the person compiling the set decide. It's not a biggie. Philafrenzy (talk) 22:17, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  • thank you both. If helps..Ayahs were “more than just domestic help” [18]. “nannies’ would be more acceptable if necessary to explain. The link should be adequate. If problem then it is also in English dictionary [19]. Whispyhistory (talk) 22:39, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
I understand that ayah's are regarded as more than simply domestic servants in India. We don't want to cause offence, so how about:
Alt 2 ... that the Ayahs' Home in London provided a refuge for Indian and Chinese nannies who were "ill-treated, dismissed from service or simply abandoned"? Does lose the link to ayah however. Philafrenzy (talk) 23:11, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
Sure, that could work as well. epicgenius (talk) 00:04, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
Struck the first two hooks. Philafrenzy (talk) 09:15, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
@Whispyhistory and Philafrenzy: have you finished your copys of this article yet? epicgenius (talk) 13:28, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

William Ruck-Keene

HMS Cochrane
HMS Cochrane

Created by Moonraker (talk). Self-nominated at 10:24, 10 March 2018 (UTC).

Mindy Alper

Created by Ringbang (talk) and Girona7 (talk). Nominated by Ringbang (talk) at 17:41, 8 March 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Comment I realize to be subjective: reading the article, I found myself wondering what Alper’s art itself is actually like. Entry has loads of great stuff about her training, places she’s exhibited, teaching she’s done, the film about her (well done!)—but just a handful of sentences about what art she’s produced. (This is also reflected in the lead, which indicates she’s known as a painter and sculptor, but doesn’t say what materials she works with, what school she belongs to if any, what themes she’s known for engaging, or other major identifying qualities for summarizing an artist’s work.) If secondary sources for this just aren’t available, I understand and will be happy to check this off as I think it meets the letter of the DYK criteria; but if it’s possible to add more about the substance of her artistic output before it goes out to DYK readers, I think that would make it much more useful. Let me know! Innisfree987 (talk) 21:17, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
Related: noticing lead says her media are painting and sculpture but infobox says drawing and sculpture—adding at least enough about the work to nail this down one way or another would be great. I’ll look for refs too. Innisfree987 (talk) 21:48, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Flushing–Co-op City buses

Improved to Good Article status by Epicgenius (talk) and Tdorante10 (talk). Nominated by Epicgenius (talk) at 21:19, 6 March 2018 (UTC).

Mary A. Monroe

Created by Jwrosenzweig (talk). Self-nominated at 04:08, 13 March 2018 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on March 7[]

Lilongwe University of Agriculture and Natural Resources

Created by Iselilja (talk). Self-nominated at 23:53, 13 March 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Long enough. New enough. Neutral. Well written. (I've made a few minor copy-s.) Reliable citations throughout, and most check out. It does need a citation for the arrest of 46 students. Hook is sourced, and fine. Hybernator (talk) 00:18, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 8[]

Double Concerto (Henze)

Hans Werner Henze in 1960
Hans Werner Henze in 1960

Created by Ron Oliver (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 15:49, 13 March 2018 (UTC).

Duan Yihe

5x expanded by Zanhe (talk). Self-nominated at 06:32, 11 March 2018 (UTC).

Peter van Geersdaele

5x expanded by Usernameunique (talk). Self-nominated at 22:45, 8 March 2018 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on March 9[]

Patricia Lovett

Book of Hours
Book of Hours
  • Reviewed: Mehmet Çekiç
  • Comment: Slight delay waiting for OTRS from copyright holder, now sorted

Created by Mramoeba (talk). Self-nominated at 01:37, 16 March 2018 (UTC).

List of Mexican-American War monuments and memorials

Created by Zigzig20s (talk), Doncram (talk), and Carptrash (talk). Nominated by Zigzig20s (talk) at 22:02, 15 March 2018 (UTC).

  • Comment - Please see citation # 11 for "Escobedo p. 158". It's a sfn template that is not pointing to anything. I notice on the the talk page that it is from "Helen Escobedo in the book Mexican Monuments: Strange Encounters". Could you make a Bibliography section and list the book? Thanks. — Maile (talk) 22:36, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Parvulastra vivipara

5x expanded by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self-nominated at 07:04, 14 March 2018 (UTC).


Created by Gazal world (talk). Self-nominated at 10:52, 10 March 2018 (UTC).

Oak at the Gate of the Dead

The Oak at the Gate of the Dead
The Oak at the Gate of the Dead
  • Reviewed: To follow

Moved to mainspace by Dumelow (talk). Self-nominated at 21:13, 9 March 2018 (UTC).

Symbol question.svg Interesting, on few but good sources, no copyvio obvious. The image is licensed, a bit hard to see but raising attention. - Thanks for offering alternatives, - what do think about mine (which says the same as ALT3, but unpiped, because I believe we shouldn't hide the lovely name:
ALT4:... that the Oak at the Gate of the Dead (pictured) is the only living witness to the Battle of Crogen of 1165? - How do you feel about an infobox, and about a larger image? - Waiting for qpq also. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:33, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
Hi Gerda Arendt, thanks for your review. Sorry for delay in replying, I forgot to watchlist the nomination. I didn't realize we had an individual tree infobox but I have now added one. Unfortunately that was the best free image I could find (some more impressive copyrighted ones exist) and I couldn't find one of the tree before it split in two, which would have been more impressive. I am happy to run without an image anyhow. I proposed ALT3 as a bit of a quirky hook intending to mislead people into thinking the subject was a person ("the only living witness" to a 12th century battle). I am happy with your ALT3 also. I will sort out a QPQ as soon as possible - Dumelow (talk) 20:10, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 10[]

Konstantin Sellheim

  • Reviewed: Doreen Simmons
  • Comment: it's amazing how many pieces are red links, even by Schumann and Beethoven, - hope to do something about by the time this appears

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 09:29, 17 March 2018 (UTC).

Anarchism in Puerto Rico

Created by Old School WWC Fan (talk). Self-nominated at 03:51, 17 March 2018 (UTC).

Comment: Since both hooks are referenced by books, I will be providing an external link to images of the relevant pages shortly. The ALT1 hook may require some tweaking of the prose, since the current copy only references the contempt of a particular author for the use of taverns, but not their generalized criticism of alcohol consumption. Old School WWC Fan (talk) 03:51, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Link to reference for main hook (its in Spanish, but should be easy to Google translate): [22]
Link to reference for ALT1: [23]
Old School WWC Fan (talk) 04:46, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Ameiurus platycephalus

5x expanded by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self-nominated at 20:29, 16 March 2018 (UTC).

Saw Ganesan

5x expanded by Gfosankar (talk). Self-nominated at 05:04, 11 March 2018 (UTC).

Dhammakaya mation

The nine pairs of bodies (kāyas) in Dhammakaya mation.
The nine pairs of bodies (kāyas) in Dhammakaya mation.

Improved to Good Article status by Farang Rak Tham (talk) and Wikiman5676 (talk). Nominated by Farang Rak Tham (talk) at 22:28, 10 March 2018 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on March 11[]

Both Lives Matter

Created by Birtig (talk) and Lionelt (talk). Nominated by Lionelt (talk) at 06:55, 18 March 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol delete vote.svg While this is new enough and (just barely) long enough, when I have a look at some of the available sources not yet included in the entry, I became concerned this page may not yet treat the subject in a sufficiently neutral way (meaning, neutrally represents the balance of reliable sources) as to meet that DYK criterion. Other neutrality concerns have also been raised on the talk page. I would advise revision/expansion to settle these issues before pursuing DYK. (You may also wish to consider an alternative hook to be sure of clearing NPOV as well; perhaps instead something about their winning an award for the campaign, so as[Please see my follow-up below] to avoid reiterating a disputed claim in a space too small to allow contextualization.) Innisfree987 (talk) 07:04, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Don't know what you're talking about. The article mentions that (1) 14 complaints were lodged, and (2) that the name is a ripoff of Black Lives Matter. Sounds like the article was written in a NPOV manner to me. The "concern" you refer to on talk is no longer an issue. It was resolved via consensus. Anyway, this is a DYK afterall, and the article is a step above a stub. I'm sure there's no end to the amount of "available sources." But we're only given 7 days to put this thing together. Pinging the article creator @Birtig:Lionel(talk) 07:23, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Sure, it can be a stub but it also has to be neutral. So if a neutral treatment of a topic can’t be accomplished in the space of a stub, to me it doesn’t qualify. (As for timing the instructions do advise to create in sandbox if you’re not sure you’ll be able to do enough in time allotted.) Just for instance on missing pieces, I was quite surprised when I searched (the link in the ref is broken...) and learned the BLM criticism was about a good deal more than just the appropriation of the name. My concern regards whether relevant perspectives are sufficiently accounted for to qualify as a neutral report, given extent of controversy on the subject. But I don’t mind a bit if you request a fresh review; I’m just one or. Cheers! Innisfree987 (talk) 07:42, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
  • ALT1: ... that Belfast pro-life group Both Lives Matter won the Northern Ireland Public Affairs Campaign of the Year for the "100,000" billboard campaign in its first year of operations?" Source:s "A Belfast-based pro-life group... won the Northern Ireland Public Affairs Campaign of the Year... We are stunned and delighted to have won best campaign in our first year." [25]
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Ready for a new reviewer. – Lionel(talk) 06:27, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
Comment I’m sorry, I realize this hook was my suggestion but now reading a bit more into sources, I learned that actually there wasn’t any other campaign competing for the award... Had I known, I'm not sure I would have suggested the win as a good option for a fact not needing additional contextualization. The discovery also reinforces my concern the entry is not yet developed sufficiently to be confident it neutrally represents the "controversial" (source) subject. I've now added a couple things to address absences I've noticed so far, but there are a lot more sources I haven't examined.
I look forward to hearing what another/other ors think. Innisfree987 (talk) 22:55, 23 March 2018 (UTC)


Created by Gfosankar (talk). Self-nominated at 09:13, 11 March 2018 (UTC).

Sayyidat Nisa al-Alamin

Created/expanded by Ali Ahwazi (talk). Self-nominated at 10:27, 11 March 2018 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on March 12[]

Zavier Simpson

Zavier Simpson in 2018
Zavier Simpson in 2018
Zavier Simpson in 2018
Zavier Simpson in 2018
Zavier Simpson in 2017
Zavier Simpson in 2017

Created by TonyTheTiger (talk). Self-nominated at 03:26, 14 March 2018 (UTC).

  • It would not be wrong to say ALT1 ... that point guard Zavier Simpson (pictured) had many of his highest scoring games as a sophomore against top-ten ranked opponents, including his four highest scoring games, which were against top-five opponents?
  • TonyTheTiger, that shouldn't be an issue: the nomination page was created in plenty of time on March 14, the day after the article was created. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:40, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Liam Millar

Millar playing for Liverpool U18s
Millar playing for Liverpool U18s

Created by Jith12 (talk) and Sixtrap (talk). Nominated by Jith12 (talk) at 21:04, 18 March 2018 (UTC).

Glen Nelson

5x expanded by Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk). Self-nominated at 17:06, 15 March 2018 (UTC).

Slavic speakers in Ottoman Macedonia

The guerilla band of Gonos Yotas.
The guerilla band of Gonos Yotas.

Created by Ashmedai 119 (talk). Self-nominated at 17:47, 12 March 2018 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on March 13[]

Trogus (wasp)

T. lapidator emerging from Papilio machaon pupa
T. lapidator emerging from Papilio machaon pupa
  • Reviewed: TBD
  • Comment: Image can probably also be cropped to be just one image (Fig. 4?) if this hook gets used.

Created by Umimmak (talk). Self-nominated at 23:20, 20 March 2018 (UTC).


5x expanded by Tisanophile (talk). Self-nominated at 12:08, 12 March 2018 (UTC).

  • Date, size, hook, refs, neutrality, copyvio spotcheck, all pass. Would be nice to get a picture, but that's not required. I may be able to take a picture of a bottle in Korean supermarket if I don't forget :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:40, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 14[]

Birgit Remmert

  • Reviewed: Shalimar Sharbatly
  • Comment: in Iokaste, it's also the only role, but that would probably too long to mention? It tells the story of Oedipus from her point of view, - in March if possible

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 13:24, 21 March 2018 (UTC).

The Bible and humor

5x expanded by Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk). Self-nominated at 19:25, 18 March 2018 (UTC).

  • Interesting article. I will review this. It is new enough and long enough: Went from 2k on 14 March to 22k on 18 March (10x) Onceinawhile (talk) 09:08, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg@Gråbergs Gråa Sång and Jenhawk777: I am not comfortable with the hook because “largely ignored” is not the same as saying “the majority didn’t” detect. In addition, there are a few 19th century sources covering the topic:
Onceinawhile (talk) 13:52, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
Hi Onceinawhile, and thanks for reviewing!
  • On the hook. Here's what I'm working with: "The subject [biblical humor] has recieved short shrift from scholarship which has scanned the bible so diligently for everything else. For the last 1500 years the majority of biblical scholars, in the seriousness of their resarch, have not detected the slightest touch of humour in the bible." I don't think "largely ignored" is a horrible paraphrase, but would something like "... that The Bible and humor is a topic that has recieved little attention in biblical scholarship during the last 1500 years?" be better? Or something completely different, I'm open to suggestions.
  • On the old stuff. We have discussed this a little at [27] (sadly, Aleph hasn't been around lately) and [28]. WP warns against it at WP:AGE MATTERS etc. Consider though, that this is (to a great extent) an old and dusty religous topic (not much disagreement that I have seen), and age may not be as great a problem as it may be in other areas. the Jewish Encyclopedia (1906) is still well regarded and often used on WP in certain areas[29]. A review of Shutters work published by The University of Chicago Press called it a "bright book"[30]. Anyway, what would you "demand"? No 1800 sources at all? Less? If so, how much less? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:52, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
Onceinawhile, I have understood your comment differently than Gråbergs apparently. I do not take that you object to the inclusion of the old material, but that you object to the statement in the lead that humor is "a topic that has been largely ignored by biblical scholars during the last 1500 years" because it is contradicted by the existence of those older sources. Removing that statement--or moving it to a short discussion paragraph about missing seeing the humor in the Bible--would satisfy your concerns then--I think. Have I understood you correctly? We can and will certainly change the lead to better reflect all the sources if that will do. Jenhawk777 (talk) 17:12, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
Hi Jenhawk, yes that’s correct. Onceinawhile (talk) 21:07, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
Sorry, I think I get it now. There are sources on the topic = true. But this does not contradict the quote from Radday/largely ignored, he doesn't say there's nothing, just very little. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:16, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
Have written a hook, and rewritten the sentence in a new paragraph, segueing into the rest of the body more smoothly and clearly. If you agree, we are good to go. Also added and moved pic per other comment. We might add theological discussions as an additional section, but mostly we are hoping for others to come along and add more examples, etc. Thank you so very much for your time and knowledge and help. We both genuinely appreciate it. Jenhawk777 (talk) 16:56, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
Onceinawhile (also pinging Jenhawk777), where are we on this? Did my argument/revised hook sway you, or do you still need a better hook? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:30, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 15[]

SS Lakeland

SS Lakeland
SS Lakeland

Created/expanded by GreatLakesShips (talk). Self-nominated at 16:08, 22 March 2018 (UTC).

Body horror

  • Reviewed: This is my first nomination.
  • Comment: Article created in my userspace on March 1, moved to mainspace on March 15.

Created by Itherina (talk). Self-nominated at 02:34, 21 March 2018 (UTC).

Castillo de Coca

The Coca Castle at night
The Coca Castle at night
  • Reviewed: First DYK

Created by 2Joules (talk). Self-nominated at 07:11, 19 March 2018 (UTC).

National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra

5x expanded by Lionelt (talk) and Masem (talk). Nominated by Lionelt (talk) at 02:35, 16 March 2018 (UTC).

  • Comment: for the record @Masem: expanded – Lionel(talk) 02:37, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

History of Wat Phra Dhammakaya

City pilgrimage organized by Wat Phra Dhammakaya
City pilgrimage organized by Wat Phra Dhammakaya

Improved to Good Article status by Farang Rak Tham (talk) and Wikiman5676 (talk). Nominated by Farang Rak Tham (talk) at 12:52, 8 February 2018 (UTC).

  • Article is newly promoted, long enough, and with no outstanding issues. QPQ done. Hooks verified, and original hook is Symbol confirmed.svg good to go. Symbol question.svg Alt1, at 206 characters, is too long. (Feel free to revise, but I think the Guinness records bit is quite interesting enough.) --Paul_012 (talk) 12:16, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 21:50, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Alt2 good to go. --Paul_012 (talk) 03:03, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Yoninah, Paul 012, isn't the grammar is a little off here? History is the subject, yet we add "a giant ... temple". Needs a little tweaking, but I am not certain how.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 20:19, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
  • I like it without tweak, seems clear enough. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:56, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
  • I also like ALT3. I changed "which" to "that". I'd like to remind the nominator that if text was copied from the mother article, Wat Phra Dhammakaya, it needs to be noted on the talk page using this template. Yoninah (talk) 23:00, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Is the template that is currently used, {{copied|from=Wat Phra Dhammakaya|to=History of Wat Phra Dhammakaya}}, okay as well? Just asking.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 22:32, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────* I just received a message from a bot saying that I need to do something about this nomination. I presume that means that the Copied From template currently used on the page does not suffice. Replacing it now.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 12:24, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Workplace robotics safety

Drawing of a 1984 industrial robot accident
Drawing of a 1984 industrial robot accident
  • Reviewed: For first nomination, no review required.

Created by JC429618c (talk). Self-nominated at 19:26, 15 March 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg @JC429618c: I had begun a review for this hook, however... Before completing it, I consider it fair to note that the current hook may face quite a bit of trouble getting over the "interesting to a broad audience" aspect of the elegibility criteria. It seems, at least to me, that these injury types are fairly common in industry and happen even when there is no automated system involved.
I still think that there is potential in this topic. For example, take the case of the failsafe protocols that are applied to military robots and how the role of humans has decreased as the technology advanced (a piece about that can be seen here, but there are many others in relation to the purportedly probable "singularity"). Of course, this is just a suggestion; there might be other applications of these measures that could also serve to create an ALT hook, that don't involve the military or "killer robots". Once an adequate alternative is presented, I will review it accordingly. Old School WWC Fan (talk) 21:42, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment: Also of note is the broad definition of "workplace", the current revision emphasizes an industrial setting, but the title implies that the scope of the topic can include anything from that to the International Space Station. If the piece is only meant to discuss the risks of employing industrial robots, the article is in need of a new title. Old School WWC Fan (talk) 21:50, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Robert Sexé

Drawing of Robert Sexé in Moscow
Drawing of Robert Sexé in Moscow

Created by Meanderingbartender (talk). Self-nominated at 07:09, 16 March 2018 (UTC).

Chinese characters for transcribing Slavonic

Chinese character representing an abbreviation of the word Christ
Chinese character representing an abbreviation of the word Christ

Created by Sfjyu (talk). Self-nominated at 10:16, 18 March 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol delete vote.svg Article does not meet the length requirements for DYK and fails 2a in the criteria. Currently it has 1,305 characters, but DYK requires there to be a minimum of 1,500 characters. The article also fails 4, because it does not have any in-line citations. I'd recommend that if you're still interested in having a DYK for this article, re-nominate after those basic concerns are addressed. Nomader (talk) 04:38, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
Could be easily done - for example the article currently contains no dates. Were the characters used much? Johnbod (talk) 12:33, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
Sure, it could easily be done but right now the article has no sources at all. It should be fixed and then re-nominated. Nomader (talk) 14:24, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
It can't be re-nominated because then it would not be new enough. It should be fixed, period. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:43, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 16[]

Fresno Yosemite International Airport

Replica sequoia forest inside the Fresno Yosemite International Airport terminal
Replica sequoia forest inside the Fresno Yosemite International Airport terminal

Improved to Good Article status by RickyCourtney (talk). Self-nominated at 18:40, 19 March 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Full review to follow, but I can see some typos in the article. For example: "it was already clear that small runway at Chandler". In addition, some of the routes and destinations in the destination section are unreferenced. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:19, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Current nominations[]

Articles created/expanded on March 17[]


5x expanded by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self-nominated at 19:48, 22 March 2018 (UTC).


Kaiten Type 1 on display at the Yūshūkan.
Kaiten Type 1 on display at the Yūshūkan.

Improved to Good Article status by Nihonjoe (talk), Centipede92 (talk), MChew (talk), Dendrite1 (talk), Daniel0816 (talk), and Hoary (talk). Nominated by Nihonjoe (talk) at 21:16, 19 March 2018 (UTC).

  • Will be doing the full review within the next few days, but so far so good: it meets the newness requirements (promoted to GA in the required timeframe). Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:16, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg Article meets all the requirements of newness, length (both GA), sourcing, copyright, being interesting, images licensing, and QPQ. However, the proposed image in this nomination is not used at all in the article; this might need to be fixed. In addition, while the hook is interesting, there are many other facts in the article that could work as hooks as well: for example, hooks about Ulysses Grant visiting the island and Hachijo Royal Resort (among others) might prove to be interesting as well. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 17:04, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Jamil Smith (journalist)

Smith in February 2018
Smith in February 2018

Created/expanded by Innisfree987 (talk) and (talk). Nominated by Innisfree987 (talk) at 00:45, 19 March 2018 (UTC).

Andrea Galer

Created by Ruby2010 (talk). Self-nominated at 22:46, 17 March 2018 (UTC).

Minkhaung Medaw

Created by Hybernator (talk). Self-nominated at 00:32, 19 March 2018 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on March 18[]


Created by MB (talk) and Doncram (talk). Nominated by MB (talk) at 14:15, 19 March 2018 (UTC).

Leucospermum cuneiforme

Leucospermum cuneiforme, Potberg
Leucospermum cuneiforme, Potberg

5x expanded by Dwergenpaartje (talk). Nominated by Casliber (talk) at 12:20, 19 March 2018 (UTC).

NB: reviewed Template:Did you know nominations/Eliezer Gruenbaum

University of North Texas at Dallas College of Law

5x expanded by ErieSwiftByrd (talk). Self-nominated at 06:49, 19 March 2018 (UTC).


Created by Slightlymad (talk). Self-nominated at 04:07, 19 March 2018 (UTC).

Sampa the Great

  • Comment: Made article in my sandbox then moved it, but wrote all content in the span of a few hours, so essentially new.

Created by StewdioMACK (talk). Self-nominated at 04:36, 18 March 2018 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on March 19[]

Disappearance of Jamie Fraley

  • Reviewed: Feng Yidai
  • Comment: Another one timed to an anniversary, in this case April 8.

Created by Daniel Case (talk). Self-nominated at 05:32, 24 March 2018 (UTC).

Marlon Bundo's: A Day in the Life of the Vice President, A Day in the Life of Marlon Bundo

Pence Family's rabbit
Pence Family's rabbit
  • Reviewed: Excempt. This is my first nomination

Created by Dalsegnoalfine (talk) and IronGargoyle (talk). Nominated by Coffeeandcrumbs (talk) at 00:48, 24 March 2018 (UTC).

Margarete Luise Schick

Bust of Margarete Luise Schick
Bust of Margarete Luise Schick

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 17:07, 23 March 2018 (UTC).

Essex County Executive

Created by Alansohn (talk). Self-nominated at 03:10, 22 March 2018 (UTC).

Radiologically isolated syndrome

  • Comment: With help from WhatamIdoing

Created by Calaka (talk). Self-nominated at 10:43, 21 March 2018 (UTC).

Sushil Siddharth

  • Reviewed: A Voz do Brasil
  • Comment: Also nominated for RD. Let's see what happens.

5x expanded by Skr15081997 (talk). Self-nominated at 15:30, 21 March 2018 (UTC).

Biblical Researches in Palestine

First ion cover
First ion cover

Created by Onceinawhile (talk). Self-nominated at 01:02, 21 March 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg The hook isn't in the article, nor the reference either from Adler (as cited in the DYK nom above) or from Brown, where the quote originated from. Article appears to be only 1221 characters too. First time reviewing a DYK so happy to be corrected. Meanderingbartender (talk) 14:11, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Patrick Mayrhofer

  • Reviewed: QPQ pending

Created by OwenBlacker (talk). Self-nominated at 22:37, 20 March 2018 (UTC).

  • Review:

Hook eligiblity:

QPQ: Red XN - Pending
Overall: The original hook is my preferred option but at least needs rewording ("that is controlled to his nerve impulses"). Both ALT hooks are fine but less interesting violet/riga [talk] 18:07, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

MV Butiraoi

Created by Acebulf (talk). Self-nominated at 23:53, 19 March 2018 (UTC).

Halcyon 6

Created/expanded by Zxcvbnm (talk). Self-nominated at 05:55, 19 March 2018 (UTC).

  • Note: As the nominator has less than 5 DYK crs, no QPQ needed. The QPQ submitted with this nomination was not a complete review. Aside from suggesting a better hook, your future reviews should explicitly confirm that the five main DYK criteria have been met. A convenient Reviewer's Template is located above the window. Yoninah (talk) 19:47, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 20[]


A sculpture of Graoully in Château du Haut-Kœnigsbourg
A sculpture of Graoully in Château du Haut-Kœnigsbourg
  • Reviewed: None. Not enough DYK crs

Created by 2Joules (talk). Self-nominated at 06:22, 24 March 2018 (UTC).

Villa Albergoni

Villa Albergoni
Villa Albergoni

Created by Gryffindor (talk). Self-nominated at 17:14, 20 March 2018 (UTC).

Sulagitti Narasamma

Created by NaveenNkadalaveni (talk). Self-nominated at 18:12, 23 March 2018 (UTC).

Raymond Crews

Created by P Moyne (talk) and Lionelt (talk). Nominated by Lionelt (talk) at 06:49, 23 March 2018 (UTC).

François de Vendôme, Vidame de Chartres

Created by Johnbod (talk). Self-nominated at 19:25, 22 March 2018 (UTC).

Jan Grabowski (historian)

Jan Grabowski
Jan Grabowski

5x expanded by Icewhiz, MyMoloboaccount, Nihil novi (talk). Self-nominated at 13:15, 22 March 2018 (UTC).

  • STRONGLY oppose, the estimate has been highly contested and rejected by several historians. Criticism of Grabowski in question has been removed from the article by user Icewhiz. Also misleading is the claim I have expanded the article-my s were deleted by Icewhiz. This nomination is highly contentious.MyMoloboaccount (talk) 13:25, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
  • The work was generally positively received - in reviews in peer reviewed settings, including winning a major award for Holocaust studies. Clearly it did not go over so well in some Polish circles - leading to death threats, calls for his sacking, a boycott, and even some linking this research to the new Polish "Holocaust Law". The criticism is present in the article. MyMoloboaccount did add information published in an op-ed by Grzegorz Berendt which is in the article at the moment, and I believe in cr where cr is due - however if MyMoloboaccount objects to being name a contributor - he could be struck from contrib list, no? That Grabowski published a 200,000 estimate and received death threats should not be contentious.Icewhiz (talk) 13:44, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
  • It wasn't well received as you try to show, for example Grzegorz Berendt professor of the University of Gdańsk and member of The Jewish Historical Institute critized Grabowski's statements, stating that Prof. Grabowski alleges that Poles may have killed more than 200,000 Jews who escaped from the ghettos and camps. He knows full well that this number is “hot air.” The knowledge we possess allows us to estimate that at least 50,000 Jews escaped in the entire territory of occupied Poland. No other number has yet been proved by research. There are other historians who also sharply disagree with Grabowski and they should be included.And presenting this higly controversial claim as of hand statement of fact isn't neutral.In general the did you know nomination shouldn't be used to spread false or highly contested information as statement of fact--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 13:50, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Several praising reviews by historians. A major Holocaust studies prize. And yes - some very strong criticism from Poland (historians in op-eds, and the general public). The DYK hook makes it clear that this is an estimate, not fact, and that it is contentious in some circles.Icewhiz (talk) 13:55, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
  • And criticized by historians in articles including scientific journals.Your hook presents Grabowski's claim as a matter of fact, not as a highly controversial claim that was strongly contested by historians, including ones in The Jewish Historical Institute.Anyway the matter is so controversial and requires so much analysis that I don't believe it is a suitable hook materialMyMoloboaccount (talk) 14:09, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
  • "that it is contentious in some circles" nice, but the hook states death threats, while we are talking about critical reception of his claims.Obviously the two are not the same and it wouldn't be neutral to allege otherwise.MyMoloboaccount (talk) 14:16, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
  • This is better, but I am still unsure whether putting a very strong and controversial claim like this on the Main Page is both a good idea, and allowed by the DYK neutrality rules. Let's hear about this from some other DYK reviewers. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:12, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
  • A possibly overly sanitized and less hooky shortet version would be:
  • ALT3 ... that Jan Grabowski received death threats after publishing research on the Polish role in the Holocaust? Source: see [43][44][45]
  • Icewhiz (talk) 13:42, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
Hmmm. You maybe on to something Here's my version: --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 14:14, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
Symbol delete vote.svg Article is completely ineligible. It is a Wikipedia:NPOV nightmare with neutrality disputed at the top of the target page. Not a single academic reference is used for a professional academician; but only the publicity stunts orchestrated by the subject himself, claiming to have received death threats. This nomination is a means for furthering the "Polish death camp" controversy ing wars, at your expense. Poeticbent talk 17:02, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Fleurs de Marécage

  • Reviewed: I'm on it.

Created by Drmies (talk). Self-nominated at 01:47, 21 March 2018 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on March 21[]

Elisabeth Speiser

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 22:59, 23 March 2018 (UTC).

Vidame de Chartres

Chateau of La Ferté-Vidame, tied to the title
Chateau of La Ferté-Vidame, tied to the title

Created by Johnbod (talk). Self-nominated at 18:45, 22 March 2018 (UTC).

Heiwadai Park

Peace Tower at Heiwadai Park
Peace Tower at Heiwadai Park
  • Reviewed: Groom Mine
  • Comment: moved from draft to mainspace 21:58, March 21.

Created by 78.26 (talk). Self-nominated at 16:47, 22 March 2018 (UTC).

Symbol question.svg Interesting, on good sources, no copyvio obvious. What do you think about either a hook about the clay figures with an image of them, or one about the peace tower, with an image of it. - I'd like the term "clay figures" mentioned, - instead of asking readers to click on something unknown. In the article, I confess to not have an idea where in Japan the town is. The French have the easiest way: a map. I confess further that I am no friend of images left, nor of an image coming before it (here the Peace Tower) shows in the text. Consider to drop one, make it smaller, have a gallery, - whatever, don't squeeze the text between images, please. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:10, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Aami Ashbo Phirey

Created by Titodutta (talk). Nominated by Lahariyaniyathi (talk) at 04:35, 22 March 2018 (UTC).

Jordan Poole

Jordan Poole in 2018
Jordan Poole in 2018

Created by TonyTheTiger (talk). Self-nominated at 01:13, 22 March 2018 (UTC).

Laura Barney Harding

ALT1: ... that Laura Barney Harding once declared she was "Miss Hepburn's husband"? Source: "Setting tongues wagging, Laura had once answered an RKO official’s demand to know who she was by declaring curtly, “Miss Hepburn’s husband" Mann, William J. (2007). Kate: The Woman Who Was Hepburn. Henry Holt and Co. ISBN 978-1-429-92197-8. p. 7
ALT2: ... that Laura Barney Harding's house at Mantoloking, New Jersey was often mistook as being owned by Katherine Hepburn due to her frequent visits? Source: "Beside the farm, Miss Harding has a house in Mantoloking and an apartment on Beekman Place in New York. "Katharine visited my home in Mantoloking once 20 years ago, but people still point it out and say it's Hepburn's," Miss Harding said. "Well, if they wish to, let them"." [49]

Created by Elisa.rolle (talk) and Ritchie333 (talk). Nominated by Ritchie333 (talk) at 23:48, 21 March 2018 (UTC).

181st Street (IND Eighth Avenue Line)

  • Reviewed: I will do one later

Improved to Good Article status by Kew Gardens 613 (talk) and Epicgenius (talk). Nominated by Epicgenius (talk) at 14:14, 21 March 2018 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on March 22[]

Marlon Bundo

Created by GreenMeansGo (talk). Self-nominated at 16:46, 22 March 2018 (UTC).

Surrey Dispensary

Surrey Dispensary, c. 1840
Surrey Dispensary, c. 1840

Created by Philafrenzy (talk) and Whispyhistory (talk). Nominated by Whispyhistory (talk) at 13:37, 24 March 2018 (UTC).

Edmonds station (Washington)

5x expanded by SounderBruce (talk). Self-nominated at 04:52, 23 March 2018 (UTC).

John A. Kenney Jr.

Created by Everymorning (talk). Self-nominated at 02:52, 23 March 2018 (UTC).

Brooklyn–Battery Tunnel

  • Reviewed: I will do one later.

5x expanded by Epicgenius (talk). Self-nominated at 01:36, 23 March 2018 (UTC).

Mudéjar theme park

  • Reviewed: None. No DYK crs yet

Created by 2Joules (talk). Self-nominated at 08:04, 22 March 2018 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on March 23[]

Alleged Libyan influence in the 2007 French elections

Andries van Eertvelt
Andries van Eertvelt
  • Reviewed: forthcoming
  • Comment: This article deals entirely with unproved allegations against BLPs so there are a very finite number of possible hooks which would be appropriate for the front page.

Created by Chetsford (talk). Self-nominated at 10:21, 23 March 2018 (UTC).

I'm A Good Ol' Rebel

Confederate Flag
Confederate Flag

Created by The C of E (talk). Self-nominated at 09:42, 23 March 2018 (UTC).

Natsu Dragneel

Improved to Good Article status by Flowerpiep (talk). Nominated by Narutolovehinata5 (talk) at 03:15, 23 March 2018 (UTC).

Episode 1068

Moved to mainspace by Soaper1234 (talk) and ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk). Nominated by Soaper1234 (talk) at 21:08, 23 March 2018 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on March 24[]

Christopher Little Literary Agency

5x expanded by Violetriga (talk). Self-nominated at 17:46, 24 March 2018 (UTC).

Sword Art Online

Improved to Good Article status by Juhachi (talk), Zero2001 (talk), Narutolovehinata5 (talk), C933103 (talk), Helmut von Moltke (talk), and KirtZJ (talk). Nominated by Narutolovehinata5 (talk) at 17:00, 24 March 2018 (UTC).

Breaking the Habit (film)

5x expanded by Skr15081997 (talk). Self-nominated at 14:49, 24 March 2018 (UTC).

Murder of Simon Dale

Created by Violetriga (talk). Self-nominated at 13:21, 24 March 2018 (UTC).

  • I'm unsure if "might have" is redundant in the original hook. violet/riga [talk] 13:22, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Drum Major backbend

The Michigan State University drum major performs a backbend.
The Michigan State University drum major performs a backbend.

Created by Chetsford (talk). Self-nominated at 05:10, 24 March 2018 (UTC).

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.