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


TOC:    Go to bottom     Go to top
Count of DYK Hooks
Section # of Hooks # Verified
February 27 1
March 6 1
March 11 1
April 9 1
April 16 1
April 25 1
April 28 1 1
May 8 1
May 9 2
May 10 2
May 14 2 1
May 18 1
May 20 2
May 24 2
May 27 1 1
May 30 1
May 31 1 1
June 1 1
June 2 1
June 5 1
June 6 1
June 9 1 1
June 10 1
June 11 1
June 13 1
June 14 2
June 15 3 2
June 16 1
June 17 3 1
June 18 1 1
June 19 2 1
June 21 2 2
June 22 3 1
June 23 3 1
June 24 1
June 25 2 1
June 26 3 2
June 27 4 2
June 28 1 1
June 29 1 1
June 30 6
July 1 5 2
July 2 6 2
July 3 3 2
July 4 2 1
July 5 4 2
July 6 3 3
July 7 11 4
July 8 5 2
July 9 9 5
July 10 8 2
July 11 7
July 12 4 1
July 13 5 1
July 14 2 1
July 15 4 1
July 16 8 3
July 17 4 1
July 18 3 1
Total 161 55
Last updated 14:25, 18 July 2018 UTC
Current time is 14:36, 18 July 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.

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 February 27[]

Tribune East Tower

Tribune Tower property
Tribune Tower property

Created by TonyTheTiger (talk). Self-nominated at 23:06, 27 February 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Article is new and long enough. Sourced adequately. Within policy. QPQ done. Hook is within formatting guidelines, but not particularly "hooky". However, I think it's decent enough to pass unless another reviewer vehemently agrees that a different hook is necessary. This is my first DYK review so let me know if there are any problems with my review. I'm still learning. Skyes(BYU) (talk) 18:46, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg The hook facts are not made out in the article which does not mention politicians. Could we have a different hook please? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:54, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
  • The current article has a well sourced sentence that says: "...prospective buyers of the Tribune Tower property had redevelopment plans that were at odds with local interests to protect views of the Tower..." So I'll go with ALT1, which just removes the last three words of the original hook.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:49, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
I find the phrase "whose views are being protected" somewhat ambiguous. How about expressing it differently as in ALT2? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:40, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
Perhaps @Skyes(BYU): could consider the wording of ALT2 and give it a tick if appropriate. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 16:54, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg The article is pretty short, so I'm not sure there is any way to make it more "hooky". If anything, the hook is more clear now and not as overly wordy. It sounds great! Skyes(BYU) (talk) 17:45, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg The reason it's so hard to come up with a hook is because there's hardly any information in the article to work with. It reads like a bulletin in a business magazine. I do not think this article meets Rule D7 in its present form. Yoninah (talk) 00:25, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Thanks, TonyTheTiger, for your new hooks. ALT4 is great – short and snappy. ALT5 is okay, but the part about surpassing Trump Tower as the second-tallest building is not in the article. The article only cites the January 2018 plans where Tribune East Tower would be shorter than Trump Tower. I'll go ahead and approve ALT4, with the hook ref verified and cited inline. Yoninah (talk) 16:00, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

@TonyTheTiger, TheGridExe, Gatoclass, and Yoninah: Any updates? It has been almost a month since the last comment. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 04:14, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

I didn't know you provided an update, TonyTheTiger. My apologies. I still think it's presenting something that is still in the planning phase. I'm abstaining to vote since I simply don't know in this gray area. – TheGridExe (talk) 19:17, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 11[]

Sayyidat Nisa al-Alamin

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

  • Symbol question.svg New enough, long enough, well referenced, no close paraphrasing seen in online English-language sources. No QPQ needed for first-time nominator.
  • However, the article needs a copy for an English-language readership. It is unclear why the article begins with the section "Al-'Alamin" or what this section is coming to tell us. The rest of the writing is written in an unencyclopedic manner and is hard to understand, like:

Besides, it is quoted that Muhammad said “Fatimah is the leader of the ladies of paradise”, then it was asked of Imam Jafar al-Sadiq that “Is Fatimah the best lady of her time?” then he mentioned Mary as the best lady of her time, and Fatimah as the best lady of the paradise since start till end of the world. Meanwhile, many famous Shia scholars among Shaikh Tusi have quoted such high title(s) of Fatimah in their books.

  • I suggest you ask at WP:GOCE for help in bringing this article up to English-language standards. Yoninah (talk) 22:53, 7 April 2018 (UTC)
I reviewed the references a bit and it doesn't seem very satisfactory. Especially the Sunni section, it cherrypicks several opinions of individual Sunni scholars (who might not even use the exact term as far as I can see), and then use those to support the generic statement that "Sunni Islam considers Fatimah as Sayyidat Nisa al-Alamin". Many of the citation are primary (using primary texts from centuries ago) and might not necessarily reflect the opinion of the Sunni community as a whole. HaEr48 (talk) 07:04, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Yoninah, HaEr48, have subsequent s dealt with the issues you raised, or are there still issues that need to be addressed? BlueMoonset (talk) 04:59, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
  • @BlueMoonset: To be honest I'm still not satisfied with the Sunni section. The references seem to be cherrypicked and not very encyclopedic. There are a lot of WP:WEASEL wording such as "there are quotations from famous Sunni scholar" or " There are also similar narration(s) from Sunni sources", cited to either questionable source or very fringe books. If this is a title that mainstream Sunni use, surely the author should be able to find a more mainstream citation? Therefore, I doubt the suitability of including Sunni in the hook, or even in the article. No comment on the Shia part, because I'm not familiar with Shia sources. HaEr48 (talk) 04:41, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
I eliminated the section of "Al-'Alamin" from the mentioned article. Besides, I ed/removed some texts of it --in order to make it more appropriate in an encyclopedic manner. Additionally, hopefully I'll pay more attention to it --especially in "Sunni narrations" section in the next days/weeks. Finally, I appreciate profit mentioned recommendations. Ali Ahwazi (talk) 13:47, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Ali Ahwazi, your recent s have left the article below the minimum 1500 prose characters required for DYK; it is currently at 1402 prose characters. You will need to bring it back above this minimum, and since the nomination has been open for over three months now, I don't think we can wait "weeks" for that to happen; please try to make the necessary improvements in the next seven days or so. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:30, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • The article is now over 1500 characters. @HaEr48: are you satisfied with the Sunni section? Otherwise I will fail this nomination. Yoninah (talk) 21:34, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Sorry for the delay: I'm a bit occupied in real life, and don't currently have reliable internet access. I'm still very skeptical about this nomination. The main assertion in the Sunni section ("Sunni Islam considers Fatimah (Muhammad's daughter and Ali's wife) as Sayyidat Nisa al-Alamin") on which the hook also depends are cited to obscure items (books with no link/authorlink/ISBN/etc.) and a website of unclear authority. Surely if this is an accepted Sunni view, more mainstream sources can be found? I'll also drop a message in the WP:ISLAM talk page to see if other folks can provide info or more sources.
  • Just to provide context to other ors: the degree of reverence for the members of Muhammad family (such as Fatimah, the subject here) is sometimes a source of tension between Shia and Sunni Islam. Sunnis, while respecting the family, are typically wary of the excessive (according to Sunnis) reverence often given by Shias. This is why I'd like to be careful about the hook and the Sunni section. Without solid references this might appear controversial. HaEr48 (talk) 02:49, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Coming here from WT:ISLAM. I have a few concerns from a linguistic point of view. First, the Arabic-script name suggests the transliteration is Sayyidat al-Nisa al-'Alamin, so either the original Arabic or the transliteration is incorrect. Next the translation: as far as I am aware, sayyidah means "mistress" or "lady" (as in a female lord), nisa is simply "women" (see Surah an-Nisa), and al-'Alamin means "worlds" according to most translations of Surah 1:1; no "all the women", no "of all times". I do not know how they got to the current (too) elaborate translation, but it might have to do with the source being a book translated by Iranians, i.e. non-native speakers of Arabic/English. It would be nice if you could find a better source for its translation, preferably written by someone proficient in both Arabic and English. --HyperGaruda (talk) 14:56, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Actually, nevermind that anymore, I found a better and more neutral encyclopedic entry to address my concerns. --HyperGaruda (talk) 15:22, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
  • What I still find concerning though, is the synthesis of multiple sources to imply that the entirety of Shi'ism/Sunnism attributes this title to Fatimah, although only a select few literally say this in-text. Most other references only say that Fatimah is called sayyidat nisa' al-'alamin, while no explicit link is given between the reference being Shi'i/Sunni and it attributing the title to Fatimah. A case of WP:OVERCITE if you will. --HyperGaruda (talk) 15:57, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on April 9[]


Created by WhatamIdoing (talk). Self-nominated at 23:56, 16 April 2018 (UTC).

  • Starting the review.Zigzig20s (talk) 19:32, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
  • New enough.
  • Long enough.
  • Well-sourced, with one error in formatting (confusion with article title/work) that I've fixed.
  • No close paraphrasing detected.
  • Neutral tone.
  • The hook is properly formatted, short enough, neutral and interesting.
Symbol question.svg *User:WhatamIdoing: Do you have a QPQ please?Zigzig20s (talk) 23:14, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
I don't think that I have five DYK crs yet, but I reviewed Superfest International Disability Film Festival last year. WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:23, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg By "I don't think", I assume you mean "I am positive I don't." So it's fine.Zigzig20s (talk) 18:10, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
User:SteveMcCluskey: I removed it as undue. Wikipedia is a work in progress, everything could potentially be improved, but I don't see it as a pressing issue and if it's going to block the DYK, that's not good. The issue could potentially be addressed afterwards, although I don't see it as a problem frankly.Zigzig20s (talk) 07:26, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg It seems there are no more objections from SteveMcCluskey so I am restoring Zigzig20s' tick. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 14:47, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
Symbol delete vote.svg The hook is decidedly not neutral as there are sources (now cited in the article) that put history (and other humanistic disciplines) within the sciences. SteveMcCluskey (talk) 15:36, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
Not really. Archeology is not history, stricto sensu. History would be the interpretation (or commentary) of archaeological discoveries. Zigzig20s (talk) 02:00, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
@Zigzig20s: Do you have any suggestions for alternative hooks? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:07, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
I think the suggested hook works, as archeology is not history. It's a tool of history, like statistics or geography.Zigzig20s (talk) 02:09, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
@SteveMcCluskey: Thoughts? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:25, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
Hello, all, I understand that there's some legitimate disagreement about classifying archaeology in this concept (i.e., a concept that separates natural sciences and similar disciplines from other knowledge-generating activities, like religion and art), because archaeology contains both science and non-science aspects, and any given researcher's work might be best described as one label or the other. Steve added information about the OECD's bureaucratic numbering system, but archaeology isn't really the important example there. The OECD's list explicitly includes the whole of humanities as one of the six areas of science and technology. This means that the OECD believes that (for their funding and statistical purposes) art and religion are "sciences". Opera and religious ceremonies are all perfectly fine in their own way, and they are perfectly legitimate Wissenschaftlich subjects – but they are not Science (in what Steve calls the English sense of the word, i.e., the only sense that's actually relevant for this article). The point of the OECD classification is that when a government gives a grant to encourage religious participation, then that should be called "science and technology research". The point of this concept is that religion is not science.
Also, as a general point, I'd like to say that a bureaucratic classification system is a weak source for deciding how one ought to organize knowledge. Epistemiology is an ancient academic subject that is not constrained by the rules written 12 years ago about how governments ought to report their research and development spending to another government agency that they hope will give them money. But if Steve really believes that's the true definition, then I'd invite him to add that definition to Science and see if he can get a consensus for it. If ors agree to re-define Science as including all of these "non-science" subjects, such as the entire list of things called "Humanities" in the OECD list, then we could merge this article away and be done with it. But if they don't – if, as I suspect they will, they insist upon defining Science as being only and exclusively systematic knowledge of a particular kind, and therefore all other knowledge is not science – then we should set the subject of this article accordingly (and probably link to Wissenschaft in the article about the OECD's FOS categories, so readers don't get so confused about religion being considered "science and technology"). WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:47, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on April 16[]

Dafydd Gibbon

Dafydd Gibbon in Poznań, 2010
Dafydd Gibbon in Poznań, 2010
  • Comment: This is a website created on 16th April 2018.

Created by Jolanta Bachan (talk). Self-nominated at 17:16, 24 April 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol delete vote.svg Apart from the fact this was moved into the wrong template space. Created 16th April, nominated 24th April. this is outside the 7 day window thus is ineligible. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 12:26, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg We can certainly give one day leeway to a new DYK nominator. However, the article is tagged for primary sources. Can you improve the page with secondary sources? Yoninah (talk) 20:53, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
  • @Narutolovehinata5: This isn't an abandoned nomination; in fact, the nominator made those changes on May 22 and is waiting for me to respond. I will do so later. Yoninah (talk) 10:23, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
  • I also question the notability of this subject. The page is tagged for primary references. Yoninah (talk) 13:09, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Dear Yoninah and Narutolovehinata5, I added another external source for the article of Dafydd Gibbon. Now there are 5 primary sources and 9 external sources. I don't know what else I could do to removed the tag for primary references. Jolanta Bachan (talk) 10:03, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

  • There are so many primary references here that I'm ready to tag this for lack of notability per Wikipedia standards (please read that page). The lead says nothing about his notability, just facts about his academic career and publications, which many other professors share. Rather than cite facts to his CV, can't you cite them to independent sources? Has he been interviewed by newspapers? Has his work been written up in magazines or journals? I wonder if you have a personal interest in posting this page. I did some ing on the article. Yoninah (talk) 21:10, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Hi Yoninah! I am so surprised by the strick comments on English Wikipedia. I did the website in Polish and the experienced Wikipedists were content. The professor is well known in the field of linguistics, computational linguistics, and phonetics, was the or of 3 handbooks published by Walter de Gruyter, received the medal of Ivory Coast, the medal of Adam Mickiewicz University, and supervised over 20 PhD theses of people from all over the world. This means he is well known in the field and maybe someone else could evaluate his notability. Is Wikipedia only for celebrities who appear on "breakfast programs"? On ResearchGate he has over 1000 citations and over 7000 reads. And ResearchGate is much younger than his work and people who he educated. I looked for articles or interviews with him, but he lives in Germany and it was a bit difficult to find on German sites, not to mention I wouldn't find online articles which appered 30 years ago in newspapers. Greetings from Poland. --Jolanta Bachan (talk) 22:42, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg I'm sorry, I'm not seeing how he meets any of the criteria under WP:PROF. Most of the information here is sourced to his curriculum vitae. I don't see independent sources. I don't see significant awards. I'd like to call on another or to re-review this. Yoninah (talk) 21:55, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on April 25[]

Intel 5-level paging

A diagram of five levels of paging
A diagram of five levels of paging

Created by Bellezzasolo (talk). Self-nominated at 22:02, 26 April 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article is long enough and has been moved from the Draft namespace on the indicated day. Bellezzasolo has 2 DYK crs so far, no need for a QPQ. I'll still have to check for copyvios. For now I see the following issues:
    1. The article is currently an orphan. I guess this needs to be resolved before it can appear on the main page.
    2. I like the original hook. It is quirky but I'm not sure it is correct: As far as I can tell, it is not a processor walk but a page table walk. I'm not knowledgeable about this topic, and I haven't got access to the ACM DL source, but it seems to me (from an unreferenced section of Page table) that this process is not directly, or not always, handled by the processor. Could the article section be expanded to clarify this?
--Pgallert (talk) 16:29, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
@Pgallert: I've fixed the orphan issue, it was a natural addition to the IA32E page. Page table walks are performed by the MMU (Memory Management Unit), which is generally a part of the processor. (I mean, processors do a load of different things all at the same time). I'll clarify on the article. (Edit: I think done). Bellezzasolo Discuss 12:49, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
@Bellezzasolo: Ja, and someone undid your . I have re-inserted it in another form now. Doing the plagiarism check tomorrow morning, too much to download from my current connection. --Pgallert (talk) 17:32, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
I've added ALT2, which is the hook, but with a quirky tie in to the picture. Bellezzasolo Discuss 01:32, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
@Bellezzasolo: I have now done the copyvio check and detected no problems. All meticulously reworded. In fact, I couldn't find one statement in the source, details on the talk page. ALT2 is a good suggestion, but the word "fields" would have to appear in the article for this hook to be good. The picture is self-created by the nominator and can be used for the hook, although without the picture subscript. I have missed that this is now common. Pgallert (talk) 19:48, 1 May 2018 (UTC) Taking quirkiness a step further, how about ALT3 below? --Pgallert (talk) 09:47, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Symbol redirect vote 4.svg This nomination has been stalled a bit by side discussions, here, on the nomination talk page, and on the article talk page. Trying to sum up, and from my perspective, we have the following:

  1. Most typical formal DYK requirements have been checked by me and are fulfilled. No copyvio, image suitable, long enough, new enough, referenced, etc.
  2. There is a concern by Jeh that the hook statement is not interesting to a broad audience and that it thus violates 3a of the eligibility criteria. I'm not sure how to handle this, or if the various songs, fungi, sports results and low-level biographies fare any better.
  3. There is a further concern about the word "planned" in the various hooks. I'd like to solicit opinions and suggestions about how to make a more realistic statement, preferably keeping a somewhat quirky hook.

I'll weigh into the discussion but am currently uncomfortable to approve or disapprove the nomination in general, or a specific hook. --Pgallert (talk) 19:31, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Regarding planned, the fact that intel developers added the code required to handle this to the Linux kernel is very indicative. The impression given by the secondary sources is that this change is in the pipeline, so I don't see anything wrong with planned. Planned extensions may not come to pass, and still be planned - and notable (e.g. SSE5). I didn't say "upcoming" because of this uncertainty, and "proposed" may be accurate, and would work in the hook. However, "planned" does have a basis in our primary source - "This document describes planned extensions". From WP:CRYSTAL, "Wikipedia does not predict the future. All articles about anticipated events must be verifiable, and the subject matter must be of sufficiently wide interest that it would merit an article if the event had already occurred" (emphasis added). This would merit an article if it comes to pass or it doesn't, so shouldn't be a problem on that front. As for interest, support for lots more RAM is an important advance, and will have be significant in the future, even if very much behind the scenes. Bellezzasolo Discuss 21:45, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
Regarding interest, 3a applies to the hook. We don't want hooks to be dry and boring, but to rather entice people in. Obviously subjective, and I'll leave that to others. But it only applies to the hook. The purpose of the articles, stated as an aim of DYK, is

To present facts about a range of topics which may not necessarily otherwise receive Main Page exposure
To highlight the variety of information on Wikipedia, thereby providing an insight into the range of material that Wikipedia covers.

I'd say that this means we cover somewhat quirky, niche topics, not shun them. Bellezzasolo Discuss 21:53, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
I don't think we should say it's "planned" unless and until it appears on an Intel CPU roadmap.
"Support for lots more RAM is an important advance." But this isn't about RAM! 4-level paging already supports a 52-bit physical address space, and the 5-level paging hierarchy doesn't change that.
Even if it were about RAM, current processors can already address far more RAM than motherboards have places to plug it in, or that anybody outside of a supercomputer center could afford.
I do not agree that the extremely specialized nature of this topic is not a problem here. I know what you are saying in that rigorously interpreted, point 3A only applies to the hook. But the whole concept will still be completely opaque to the vast majority of readers. As in "no, I didn't know that, and even after reading the article I have no idea what it meant." What good will it do the general reader to attract them to an article that they're not going to understand? Heck, most developers aren't aware of or care about this stuff any more. Jeh (talk) 22:51, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
That's not the case. I assure you that the developers are aware of this stuff. I think that given the sort of readership we have, the article will do alright at DYK. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 12:18, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
@BlueMoonset: Of the three hooks, I think only ALT0 would really work and be interesting to a general audience (I don't find Pgallert's proposed ALT3 hooky), if only because readers may be curious as to what "walk further" means. It could work in the quirky slot. I'm also endorsing the previous technical review of the DYK requirements and I can see no more problems with the article. This should be good to go, but as a courtesy, I'll wait for responses from previous reviewers @Pgallert, Jeh, and Hawkeye7:. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 09:41, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
In my view the original hook would be best. I do have an issue with the usage of terabytes / petabytes, but that's clearly a minority view. --Pgallert (talk) 09:17, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
I still think it belongs nowhere on the front page with any of the hooks. Whatever happened to "Wikipedia is written for a general audience"? That should apply to the front page more than any other place! The "walk farther" (and if you use "walk" it should be "farther", not "further") hook will lead the general audience to just a puzzled expression (huh? what? what's "walking" mean here?). And all three are misleading as phrased in that the Intel whitepaper explicitly disclaims that there are any such "plans"; the whitepaper only describes a possible future development. Show me an Intel "future processors" roadmap that mentions this and I'll shut up about that point. Jeh (talk) 18:21, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, I can't really address the issues, certainly not currently. Bellezzasolo Discuss 09:12, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 8[]

2018–19 RFU Championship

Created by Steven a91 (talk) and The C of E (talk). Nominated by The C of E (talk) at 19:44, 8 May 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article checks out the requirements: it's new enough, long enough, adequately sourced, with appropriately-licensed images, and with a QPQ provided by the nominator. Earwigs gives a score of 2.0% confirming that it has no copyright infringing material or plagiarism. However, @Steven a91 and The C of E:, I have concerns about the hook: while rugby is a popular sport worldwide, I'm not sure if the hook is interesting to a broad audience since the British and Irish Cup may not be familiar to those who do not regularly follow rugby. Perhaps an alternate hook could be suggested here? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:52, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
@Yoninah, Cwmhiraeth, BlueMoonset, Gatoclass, and The Rambling Man: Thoughts? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 06:47, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

The original hook looks okay to me but you'd have to link British and Irish Cup. I'm not keen on the alts, I'm inclined to agree with the others that relegations up and down are pretty standard fare. Gatoclass (talk) 10:30, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man: I don't see what the error here is: if it's officially called the British and Irish Cup but it was English teams that withdrew, then I'm not sure how that's an error. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:23, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
Which blurb are you asserting is the one to post? The Rambling Man (talk) 11:28, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
@The Rambling Man: ALT0 since that appears to be the preference of both the nominator and Gatoclass. Personally I don't have a preferred hook at the moment. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:52, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, so see above. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:14, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Hi, I came by to try to help. I know nothing about rugby. The article doesn't seem to have much material to draw on for a hook; maybe it should be expanded? In the meantime, I wonder if you could do something hooky resembling a final score, like:
  • ALT3: ... that the teams playing in the 2018–19 RFU Championship are 11–1? Yoninah (talk) 19:31, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
  • I don't understand that one at all @Yoninah:, sorry (where is 11-1 in the article anyway?). Would you be able to look at the others originally proposed please? The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 23:47, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
  • @The C of E: I was trying to work something around the 11 English teams and 1 Jersey team in the championship. Like the other ors here, I don't find the other hooks particularly interesting. Yoninah (talk) 17:12, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
  • OK I get it now. Well I have no problems with it but I do suspect some may raise their eyebrows like I did but would be happy for it to go forward @Yoninah:. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 23:22, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg OK. New reviewer needed for ALT3. Yoninah (talk) 18:40, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 9[]

Unity of the intellect

Created by HaEr48 (talk). Self-nominated at 03:12, 8 May 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg The article currently focusses on the ideas of Averroes, cring him with the main thesis. But he was interpreting Aristotle and was not alone in this. When one searches for the phrase unity of the intellect, one finds this attributed to other earlier thinkers such as Avempace. For example, "Ibbn Bajja was known preeminently as the proponent of the theory of the unity of the intellect". So, there seems to be two ways that this can be resolved. If the article keeps its current title, then it should present the development of Aristotle's idea of the passive intellect as the work of many philosophers over time and not start with Averroes. If it is to focus specifically on Averroes' ideas then it needs a narrower title and some justification for being distinct from Averroism. Also, a QPQ is needed too, of course. Andrew D. (talk) 18:33, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
@Andrew Davidson: Thanks for your review. QPQ is added. As for your question. Yes he interpreted Aristotle, but that doesn't mean it's not a distinct idea. During his time, the scientific method wasn't commonly practiced and progress in thoughts was often made by exegesis and drawing new conclusion from previous texts (especially Aristotle). The background section had a little bit more about previous theses on a single intellect, and also how Averroes' idea is distinct. Basically the other thinkers hold that each individual human has their own intellect which somehow cooperates with the single, superhuman intellect, while Averroes' idea says this singe intellect is the human mind itself, and there is no individual intellect. The sources I cite clearly associate this thesis with Averroes, e.g. "Averroes' proposal was greeted with derision" or "Averroes' best known philosophical doctrine holds that there is only one intellect for all human beings" (see also surrounding texts in both sources). As for Ibn Bajjah, I haven't read about his thesis in detail, but Adamson p.190 says that "Averroes decided he could not accept Ibn Bajja's teaching", which indicate his idea is different from Averroes'? Does this make sense? HaEr48 (talk) 06:15, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
@Andrew Davidson: I'm waiting for your reply. HaEr48 (talk) 01:04, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Symbol redirect vote 4.svg My point has not been addressed and so I'm not willing to pass this. As we don't agree, I suggest getting another opinion to help establish a consensus. Andrew D. (talk) 06:33, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

  • @Narutolovehinata5: Thanks for the review. As for why most internet search result had Aquinas, it's because Aquinas wrote a book trying to reject the theory, the book is called On the Unity of the Intellect against Averroists I suspect most of your search result mentioning Aquinas is actually an e-book or an e-commerce site selling this book. Aquinas himself reject the theory (see paragraph 3 of "Legacy" section in the article, where Aquinas' rejection is discussed with citation). Since Aquinas is not a proponent of this theory, but a denier, it makes sense that he's not discussed in the "Theory" section where we discuss the theory itself, but only in "Legacy" section where we discuss various responses to the theory. Does that make sense? HaEr48 (talk) 04:36, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
@HaEr48: If that's the case, perhaps some more detail could be added to the article? Considering Aquinas' treatise doesn't appear to have its own article, and how retrospective coverage gives a lot of attention to said treatise, it probably needs at the very least its own section as opposed to just one paragraph. It doesn't even elaborate Aquinas' critiques other than the sentence "He used the philosophical and theological oppositions mentioned above, and used his own reading of Aristotle to show that Averroes misinterpreted what Aristotle said". And as I previously mentioned, the article still feels incomplete with regards to discussion by other supporters of the theory. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:56, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5: Thanks for the response. The paragraph before the paragraph you cited detailed the criticism from Aquinas—which he shares with other Scholastics. I feel it unnecessary to repeat it in the next paragraph. I updated the article to make it clear that the preceding paragraph includes Aquinas' criticism [1]. "Criticism" now has its own section. As for the other supporters of the theory, the "Latin Averroists" section names multiple supporters of the theory as well as their contributions. Let me know if there's more I can do. HaEr48 (talk) 02:09, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg @HaEr48: The sectioning is a lot better now and I'm almost ready to pass this. With that said, Andrew Davidson's concern about other proponents of the concept (such as Avempace) are not even mentioned in the article remains unaddressed. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:08, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5: added a passage about avempace or Ibn Bajjah. HaEr48 (talk) 02:59, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
Symbol possible vote.svg No, my objection has not been sufficiently addressed. One can see this in the opening sentence and lead which still crs the concept to Averroes alone. Andrew D. (talk) 07:24, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
Expanded the lead to note the influence and contributions from other thinkers. HaEr48 (talk) 09:25, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 10[]


Campanino apples (National Fruit Collection, UK)
Campanino apples (National Fruit Collection, UK)

Created by Holapaco77 (talk). Self-nominated at 10:02, 11 May 2018 (UTC).


Policy compliance:

Hook eligiblity:

QPQ: None required.

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg Andrew D. (talk) 21:06, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

@Andrew Davidson:@Narutolovehinata5:  Done, all paragraph have citations now. Thanks you. --Holapaco77 (talk) 11:57, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
Noted. While I'm almost ready to approve this, Andrew has some suggestions for the hook and it might be needed to take them into account. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:27, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
Ok, actually the area of origin of this apple is Modena, Italy, where there is a humid merranean climate (see: Modena#Climate), so there is not any "natural cold" in this area. Campanino apple lasts so long (120-180 days, instead of 60-90 days of "normal" average apples) because the flesh is very hard (they say "like the marble") and the harvesting is in middle october, while normal apples are harvested in september. Anyway, the hook can be changed as "...that Campanino apples can be easily preserved for six months after harvesting, since their flesh is hard like marble?" (or something like that). --Holapaco77 (talk) 21:03, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Mimi Mondal

  • Reviewed: QPQ To Come Alfred Eteson
  • Comment: Both hooks are supported by several other sources already cited in the article

Created by Draken122 (talk), DESiegel (talk), TheOneWorkingAccount (talk), and Ymblanter (talk). Nominated by DESiegel (talk) at 09:02, 17 May 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg New enough, long enough, neutrally written, well referenced, no close paraphrasing seen. ALT0 is more hooky IMO; hook ref verified and cited inline. QPQ done. ALT0 good to go. Yoninah (talk) 20:32, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Still waiting on a QPQ. Yoninah (talk) 20:36, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Nope. QPQ done. Good to go. Yoninah (talk) 19:05, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Narutolovehinata5. She does not list a year of birth in the biography section of her own web site, nor in her online resume. None of the cited sources list one, nor did any source I found, and I looked for one. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 12:59, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
Bibliographies are generally self-citing,and do not need footnotes, as a published work is a valid source about itself, if proper bibliographic info has been listed. However I see the info about several of the works is incomplete. I will attempt to fill it out and/or provide additional souring, and ping you when I have done so. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 12:59, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 18[]

Railway surgery

Moved to mainspace by Spinningspark (talk). Self-nominated at 21:30, 18 May 2018 (UTC).

  • reviewing, long enough, interesting, well written Whispyhistory (talk) 05:19, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
  • General eligiblity:

Policy compliance:

Hook eligiblity:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol question.svg Really a very well written, thorough article. copyvio ok. Pleasure to read. Sampled some references, most I do not have access to, but appear very well thought out. Did you want links to general practitioner (links to modern version) or physician? AGF on most references. Everything is cited. The hook is correct but should it be in the article? Article says "There was some opposition to first aid through fear that it eroded the professional status of doctors and that local contract railway surgeons would lose the fees they would otherwise have accrued for the work". In addition, a hook centred around the attempt to remove an accidentally appointed female railway surgeon might be considered. Whispyhistory (talk) 04:57, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

I'm not sure I entirely understand why you think that the hook is not cited. Do you think that the article does not say that doctors should be rendering first aid rather than other railway workers? I would maintain that that is what the article says through the device of enumerating the reasons that railway surgeons argued this. In any case, the source cited is perfectly clear on this:

Yet if some railway physicians embraced first aid, to many others it was anathema. In the discussion of a paper by Dickson presented to the Association of Railway Surgeons in 1902, W. B. Outten of the Missouri Pacific claimed that “it is very difficult to teach these ignorant men very much about rendering First Aid as it ought to be rendered.” Yet the real complaint of those who opposed first aid training was not that the men were uneducable, but just the reverse: that rather than becoming an extension of the surgeon, as Jonas saw them, they would be a substitute. Thus, Outten went on to claim that “those who have no hospital department in connection with their railroads are naturally friends of first aid.” Another physician, Dr. James H. Ford, worried that “we should not permit them to have the idea enter their heads that they are to displace the local surgeons.” Dr. W. A. McCandless also worried about economics: “I believe much of the work entrusted to railway employees in rendering First Aid should be assigned to physicians. They are poor and they need the money for rendering such service,” he candidly observed.

— Aldrich, 2001
I don't think that general practitioner or physician should be linked. The doctors they had especially in mind were other railway surgeons or local doctors under contract fulfilling the duties of railway surgeon. On Sofie Herzog, I think the first aid issue is more directly relevant to the article and is thus a better hook. Although her case is astonishing to modern sensibilities, I rather think the company would have reacted in exactly the same way on discovering a female train driver had been appointed. The fact that the post was for railway surgeon is almost incidental. But put that article up for GA if you like and get it in DYK that way. As far as I can tell, it's never been to DYK before. SpinningSpark 14:29, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Ok to hook wording. Will let you decide about your GP links. The hook fact in the article still needs an inline citation at the end of the sentence(s) offering that fact. Citations at the end of the paragraph are not sufficient. Whispyhistory (talk) 17:31, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Oh good grief, I thought we were supposed to be WP:NOTBUREAUCRACY. The cite is a dozen words away and those twelve words are still talking about first aid kits. Maybe I'll do it in a couple of weeks time if I happen to be overcome with the urge to do something utterly pointless. SpinningSpark 17:55, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
  • @Spinningspark: IMO What Whispyhistory asked is a simple and reasonable request in good faith. Please just address it without snarky comments. HaEr48 (talk) 22:14, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
  • @HaEr48: What you are all forgetting is the actual purpose of that rule. It is there so that reviewers do not have to trawl through the refs to find the cite, they can go straight there and verify the fact. There is little doubt what the relevant cite is in this instance, but in any case, I went to the trouble of transcribing a lengthy passage from the ref so the need is now moot (and it's behind a paywall anyway so you can't verify it directly). That took some effort on my part, but I did it with good grace and without any "snarky comments". So sorry if I have now run out of good grace, but I have a long list of articles to write and I'd rather be doing that than servicing useless bureaucracy. You can wait your turn – I'm a volunteer, I'll do it when I feel like it, if ever. SpinningSpark 23:29, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Symbol question.svg Query: there may be a QPQ issue. Template:Did you know nominations/Workplace robotics safety has already been claimed by Old School WWC Fan for Anarchism in Puerto Rico. It looks like OSWF did the full review. – Reidgreg (talk) 15:17, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

My review was a full review of all DYK requirements and I clearly stated that I thought all requirements had been met. @BlueMoonset: can we have a ruling on whether or not second reviews are valid for QPQ? I will happily do another QPQ review if that is what is required. SpinningSpark 10:54, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Spinningspark, Reidgreg, since the nomination had been pulled back from prep, a new review was clearly in order and should be cred. It is always possible for one nomination to end up having more than one review getting QPQ cr in any number of circumstances; for example, the initial complete review may uncover significant issues with the nomination, and if the reviewer also suggests an alternate hook, they cannot review the nomination further since someone else must check the newly proposed hook (and also that the issues raised earlier have been addressed). BlueMoonset (talk) 03:59, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 20[]

Wally Schirra

  • Comment: The source of the hook is on page 221-223

Improved to Good Article status by Balon Greyjoy (talk). Self-nominated at 02:58, 21 May 2018 (UTC).

  • Reviewing... Chris857 (talk) 04:42, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Article was promoted to GA status recently enough, I took the liberty of adding some needed formatting to the hook, hook is short enough and sourced and pretty interesting (though he's got a lot of other interesting stuff).
  • Minor issues:
    • "co-authored the book 1962 We Seven" - I assumed this should say "co-authored the 1962 book We Seven"? Done
    • Per rule 3b, the citation for working with Cronkite has to be no later than the end of that sentence, and it's currently one sentence too far away. Done
    • Is this your first DYK submission? If so, you don't need to do a QPQ review.
    • IMDb seems less than ideal for the portrayal crs. Not a big deal to me or this review, but do we have better options available?
  • Symbol question.svg Chris857 (talk) 04:56, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi Chris857. I am dropping by to try and tidy this up for Balon Greyjoy. My preference would be to keep it simple and move it on. This is the nominator's first DYK so QPQ does not apply. I am inclined to leave the IMDb issue unless you insist. Relevant two sentences in the article tweaked to meet 3b.
Anything else? Gog the Mild (talk) 17:06, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol voting keep.svg Thank you Gog, this is good to go (AGF on offline sources). I'm not going to hold this up over the IMDb sources. Chris857 (talk) 02:48, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Hi, I came by to promote this, but there is a significant amount of close paraphrasing from this source [2] which is not public domain. I also think it would be easy to cite the films he appeared in by referencing a cast list or movie book. Yoninah (talk) 19:09, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 24[]

Duck netting

Created by Chetsford (talk). Self-nominated at 22:13, 24 May 2018 (UTC).

  • reviewing, new article, interesting, earwig's copyvio 2%, long enough >1800 characters, will complete soon Whispyhistory (talk) 03:10, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
  • General eligiblity:

Policy compliance:

Hook eligiblity:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol confirmed.svg Glad to see ducks are free at end. I trust isbn/dates of reference will be double-checked. Thanks. Nice article. Whispyhistory (talk) 14:40, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

I apologize for this inconvenience and error on my part, Gatoclass. I nominated this mid-writing and never got back around to finishing off the references, which was my oversight. I've updated the article and also copied the citation and refs here as they appear in it. Chetsford (talk) 07:45, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
In modern times, it is believed to be peculiar to Japan generally, and to the Imperial Household specifically.[1][2][3][4]


  1. ^ We Japanese. Routledge. 2002. p. 88. ISBN 978-0-7103-0719-4. The netting of ducks, a pastime in the olden days of the Tokugawa shoguns, is believed to be peculiar to Japan. 
  2. ^ "Duck Netting in Japan". Daily Racing Form. March 25, 1920. Retrieved June 9, 2018. This has been a pastime of Emperors for ages and, as far as known, is confined to imperial domains. 
  3. ^ Zakarian, Zabelle (2016). Medic: The Mission of an American Military Doctor in Occupied Japan and Wartorn Korea. Routledge. ISBN 1315503719. I have hunted duck in a number of parts of the world, but the method of hunting ducks in Japan, besides the unique imperial pastime of duck netting, was also unique so far as I was concerned. 
  4. ^ Vernaci, Richard L. (2010). Within the System: My Half Century in Social Security. ACTEX. p. 167. ISBN 1566987660. Duck netting was not a popular sport and it's easy to see why the Japanese have since taken up baseball and golf. 

Clifford Braimah

Created by Crosstemplejay (talk). Self-nominated at 10:26, 24 May 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg The article meets the newness and length requirements, is free from plagiarism, and the article and hooks are adequately sourced. QPQ provided. However, I'm concerned about Braimah's notability: I made a search and from what I can tell, coverage about him appeared to either be routine coverage or more about Ghana Water itself than him. As such, I'm not sure if the coverage specifically about him that does exist is enough to meet the notability guidelines. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 22:09, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
Narutolovehinata5 For anyone who is interested. — Maile (talk) 12:33, 13 June 2018 (UTC) Find sources: "Clifford Braimah" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference
Narutolovehinata5 and Maile66 Thanks for your reviews. I will leave the dyk above and its concerns to be addressed by other ors. CrossTempleJay 10:25, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 30[]

Ivan the Terrible and His Son Ivan

Damage to the painting in 1913
Damage to the painting in 1913

Created by Violetriga (talk). Self-nominated at 20:46, 30 May 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg The article was nominated the day it was created. It is long enough and well-sourced. It does not seem to be biased. The hook is concise, precise and interesting. QPQ done. It seems ready to go! I would appreciate if the article could be further expanded, however, as the topic is very interesting. Surtsicna (talk) 13:10, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
2018 vandalism damage
And there is plenty of source materiel in the very good articles on the painting in (inter alia) the Russian and French Wikipedias. Including, as an alternative image, this photo of the 2018 damage. (talk) 11:30, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
No, it's right there on the nominations page violetriga. It's just that nobody has responded to the issues raised yet. Gatoclass (talk) 02:22, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 1[]

Mining in Sweden

Created/expanded by Newroderick895 (talk). Self-nominated at 11:01, 10 June 2018 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on June 2[]

Spygate (conspiracy theory)

Created/expanded by Starship.paint (talk) [9] and A loose noose (talk) [10]. Self-nominated at 02:14, 2 June 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg A full review may follow, but at the moment, I think the hook is too sensitive due to the political claims in it (this is both due to WP:BLP as well as the discretionary sanctions on US politics-related articles). Alternate hooks may need to be proposed here. @Starship.paint and A loose noose: Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:39, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

How about maybe this one? (a bit more neutral in its wording):

(Anyone who clicks on the article link can read for themselves about how true or false the theory is.) A loose noose (talk) 16:43, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

That's way above the 200 character limit. Please try to make it shorter. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 21:19, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

I like it! (@Narutolovehinata5: Are there any steps that need to be taken to "re-initiate" this process, or is it still considered to be active at this point?) A loose noose (talk) 18:22, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Just wait, reviewers can get busy. It's considered active unless weeks have passed without replies from either the nominator or the reviewer (the previous reply here was just two days ago). Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 21:22, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 5[]

Sega Technical Institute

  • Comment: Article created from redirect on February 19, 2018 and promoted to GA on June 5. First DYK nomination for author.

Improved to Good Article status by Red Phoenix (talk). Self-nominated at 21:15, 5 June 2018 (UTC).

Hook eligiblity:

QPQ: None required.

Overall: Symbol question.svg See above. I prefer the original hook. Philroc (c) 23:16, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

@Philroc: Cited. Had not been cited before because I felt it was redundant, but inserted for the sake of DYK now. Red Phoenix talk 01:32, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

@Red Phoenix: Symbol confirmed.svg Good to go. Philroc (c) 11:36, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
  • I don't like this suggested hook, personally. It just feels full of WP:EASTEREGG, and I don't think a hook should be full of Easter eggs - that just feels cheap. I really don't see what was wrong with the one selected; it's a common misconception that all of the Sonic games were developed in Japan by Sonic Team, when that isn't the case, and it's STI's most interesting fact. I mean, you guys tell me what's wrong with it since I've never had a DYK before, but I would find it an interesting hook. I seriously doubt anyone not interested in video games would click it either way. Red Phoenix talk 00:39, 20 June 2018 (UTC)


ALT2: ... that Mark Cerny's aim in establishing Sega Technical Institute was to create an elite game studio that would combine American and Japanese influences? Source: Day, Ashley (2007). "Company Profile: Sega Technical Institute". Retro Gamer. No. 36. Imagine Publishing. pp. 28–33. Philroc (c) 17:16, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Not bad, but it still feels more bland to me than ALT1. As it pertains to The Rambling Man's suggestion, I can fix the articles with issues if needed since my research has turned up some things about both games, but my opinion remains on the subject of it as a hook and what's "hooky". Red Phoenix talk 22:11, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 6[]

Grace Macurdy

Grace Macurdy in her classroom
Grace Macurdy in her classroom

Improved to Good Article status by KateCook (talk). Nominated by Claire 75 (talk) at 12:55, 6 June 2018 (UTC).

Symbol question.svg Interesting life, good article on good sources, offline sources accepted AGF, no copyvio obvious. The image is licensed, but doesn't show anything in small size, - can it be cut? - The hook is ok, but doesn't say anything about her themes of research, so could be said about many persons in the condition, no? I took the liberty to link Vassar. - Suggestions for the article: Find a way to not repeat a book title, if you have several references to different pages. I use Harvard refs, but you can achieve it with named references as well. "bought into conflict"? "bought her into conflict"? "bought conflict"? I find the lead extremely short for a GA, can you summarize a bit? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:51, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for the crop, Froggerlaura, that's much better! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:30, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
Kate. Claire, are you interested in improving? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:08, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 10[]

Jack Kirby

Jack Kirby by Susan Skaar
Jack Kirby by Susan Skaar

Improved to Good Article status by Tenebrae (talk) and Hiding (talk). Nominated by Hawkeye7 (talk) at 03:29, 10 June 2018 (UTC).


Policy compliance:

Hook eligiblity:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol question.svg The article was very readable – well done! But the hook needs more of that pizzazz. I suggest ALT1, which follows. Andrew D. (talk) 21:04, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

@Hawkeye7: There is no doubt that Kirby would regard Captain America as his greatest creation. I know that -- that's why if you read my comment carefully, Cap is the only one whose inclusion I didn't question -- I just said it was redundant with "the Avengers" if we are going by characters who are well known to the general non-comics-reading public in 2018. and co-created all the characters in the original line up including Iron Man Your mentioning Iron Man here highlights the problem -- why is he not listed, when he's probably more famous now than the entire rest of the original Avengers roster plus Black Panther combined? Yes, his role in the creation of Iron Man is more "dubious" than most others (he probably did little more than design the original in-costumed look of the character, which has hardly ever been used since except as a kind of rough preliminary costume designed by Stark while in captivity and quickly replaced after he escaped, as in the 2008 film), but even with Captain America and Black Panther he wasn't the sole creator of those characters (for whom cr is also conventionally given to Simon and Lee, respectively). As for I hadn't considered the Avengers roster in the movies; I was thinking of the original Avengers in the comic books and He was very proud of the Black Panther, and returned to the character in the 1970s, those contradict your explanation for not including the Fantastic Four, which is that they may not be as well-known today (relative to other characters) as they were when Kirby was still alive, which is due primarily to the very recent IP dispute between Fox and Disney-Marvel, with the former pumping out relatively cheap, underwhelming and severely undermarketed films for the sole purpose of keeping the rights from automatically reverting to the latter, and the latter deliberately cancelling the book so as not to promote a rival studio's films. Anyway, if the purpose of this DYK is to highlight our Jack Kirby article, and Kirby himself was really more associated with BP than FF, the latter would not be named 19 times in the article (excluding refs) while the former is only named three times. Hijiri 88 (やや) 00:18, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
BTW: The source's Kirby’s comics became superhero showcases, introducing a veritable who’s-who of characters on cinema screens today: Hulk, Thor, Iron Man, Ant-Man, the collective Avengers, Silver Surfer and the X-Men is actually totally wrong: Kirby was involved with the original X-Men, which was never popular and has little to do with the reason the characters are popular in film and television now (different roster, and he had apparently nothing to do with the creation of either Wolverine or Deadpool), Silver Surfer is not a popular film character, and claiming he created "the collective Avengers" is both redundant with the claim that he created Hulk, Thor, Iron Man and Ant-Man and not accurate if one considers "the collective Avengers" to be the ones who constitute "who’s-who of characters on cinema screens today" (the four named characters were clearly selected based on a cross-section of the "canon" Avengers roster in the films with the original Avengers from issue #1 in the comics), and the "Ant-Man" he created is not the one who is a popular film character today, having only appeared in one major motion picture released to date. Hijiri 88 (やや) 00:26, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 11[]

Serge Blanc (violinist)

Created by LouisAlain (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 12:43, 18 June 2018 (UTC).

  • Hmmm... little did I know "someone" noticed that article. Thanks Gerda, LouisAlain (talk) 18:52, 18 June 2018 (UTC) -->
Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 06:59, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for the review. I am only the nominator, but will do what I can, but have several things on my to-do-list before I can turn to him. I noticed that a different site had translated the same French to English, but to my knowledge LouisAlain didn't even know that. No surprise they often arrived at similar wording. For many of thesee historic musicians, we don't know much about personal life and reception, and they are remembered for their achievements. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:22, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
@Gerda Arendt: Yes, I understand. If you'd like me to hold the nomination for some time, I'll be happy to do it. Let me know. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 16:20, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for your patience. Instead of working on this (and another one waiting, and writing the article I had planned for today), I faced a load of tags for a BLP I watch, and another load for an article featured on the Main page, sigh. Also had to nominate a venerated woman for DYK today or never, which I managed to do, but the article is not yet in the shape I want it to be. Tomorrow will be busy RL, so it will be later today or on Thursday (unless we have new problems). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:37, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
Hopefully tomorrow, - at least I managed adding refs for another nom. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:03, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
Making progress: ibox, more lead, more trimming, no bare url seen anymore. Will look for cite for death, must be somewhere. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:03, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
More tricky than I thought: while several sources have him still living, his website and IMSLP have the date. What should we do, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:19, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 13[]


Speaker iconFragment of a popular gosos

Created by Dk1919 Franking (talk) and Sam Sailor (talk). Nominated by Sam Sailor (talk) at 12:48, 15 June 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Interesting subject, on good sources, offline and Italian sources accepted AGF, no copyvio obvious. The hook is nothing spectacular, sorry. How about something about the many bans? - I would love more lead, answering some questions still open after reading: Are these songs still sung today (and if yes when, where, by whom), or just history? Where does drama come in? - I confess that I find (any) sound examples unattractive, even if licensed. - I understand gosos s a plural term, so would you say a gosos? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:23, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Thank you for your always positive feedback, Gerda Arendt.
    The ultimate question you ask in regards to the word's use in English is best answered by looking at anglophone sources, of which there aren't a whole lot, but the this thesis by Kathleen Boyle uses a gosos, i.e. plurale tantum. In Catalan and Castilian singular forms exist. In Italian, the singular form would appear not to be in use, whereas this paper and this paper both use un gosos, i.e. plurale tantum. Perhaps Dk1919 Franking can comment on the use in Italian?
    I will expand the lead and get back here with an alternative hook; and your suggestions to an ALT would be warmly welcomed, needless to say. Sam Sailor 11:34, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
Thank you, helped. - I can give you directions for a hook, but if I word one, we need another reviewer. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:45, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 14[]

Hassan Tampuli

* ... that prior to heading the National Petroleum Authority, Hassan Tampuli once secured the release of a Lebanese-Ghanaian journalist from wrongful detention? Source: [15] and [16] Comment

Created by Crosstemplejay (talk). Self-nominated at 13:36, 14 June 2018 (UTC).

  • Doing...-Nizil (talk) 12:53, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • @Crosstemplejay:First, thank you for contributing to Wikipedia and taking interest in DYK. Your article is New, long enough and QPQ done. Few questions and issues: Why article is named Hassan when references states Alhassan? Article also uses Alhassan in the lead. Use his official/most common name as title and add 'also known as' in the lead to avoid confusion. Hook needs a verifiable reference. Ghana Gardian reference only says that "Hassan Tampuli was a Lawyer for Ghanaian-Lebanese journalist and author Fadi Daboussi, and a known NPP loyalist who was invited by the BNI for a defamatory comment made about former President, John Mahama." which does not imply wrongful detention. You need to add precise reference stating it was wrongful detention. In article, you have provided details about the case but it uses the same reference and the other reference is just "Google search result" which can not used as a reference when we can locate the precise information. So please provide the reference in the article so hook can be verified. ALT1 hook should have a reference clearly saying what is said in the hook. So it also needs a new reference. Article has some complex lines like: "As a lawyer, Tampuli took on many cases in which people's fundamental human rights have been infringed upon." which can be simply written like "As a lawyer, Tampuli took on many cases of the human rights violations." This line is not neutral, "As head of NPA, he has been leading the crusade for proper regulation of the petroleum industry in Ghana". Simply write what he is doing at NPA as in the reference, not "leading crusade". Some words like "spent time", "embarked" can be substituted with simple words like "worked at", "took". Check for small grammatical errors. Article can be better divided in following sections: Early life and education, Career/Legal career/Political and administrative career. Link alma mater in the infobox. Everything else looks good. Please ping me after you have addressed these issues. Thank you again for contributing to Wikipedia. Regards,-Nizil (talk) 14:29, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
@Nizil Shah: Thanks for the review. Very happy with the painstaking search you made. I have made major changes so please go through the article and let me know what you think. Thanks once again. CrossTempleJay 11:41, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg@Crosstemplejay:, thank you for improvements. I have also copyed a little bit, changed section titles and removed repeated info on his education. Now article looks OK. Now suggest a new hook or change in hook with precise reference because suggested hooks are not clear from references you have provided. "Wrongful detention" is not mentioned in the reference you provided so reword appropriately. There is no other case of human right violation is mentioned and he was working in his capacity as a lawyer, I have to think about that label. Is there any source which mention him as a human rights activist? We can use it and make a new hook from ALT1. Regards,-Nizil (talk) 12:55, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
@Nizil Shah: Thanks for your review. I dont know whether you have a problem with the word wrongful because according to the article holding someone in cells for more than 48 hours is indeed wrongful and unconstitutional anyway I will suggest a new hook below. Thanks. CrossTempleJay 11:19, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
* ALT2: ... that Hassan Tampuli prior to heading the National Petroleum Authority, once secured the release of a Lebanese-Ghanaian pilot and author from unconstitutional detention? Source: [19] and [20] Comment
@Crosstemplejay:, I don't have problem with word 'wrongful' or 'unconstitutional' but these words are not mentioned in any reference so I have asked for such references. Even one ref said that it was not politically motivated. So we should not judge it as wrongful if we do not have such reference. Please add references which says he worked for cases of human rights violations because only one case is mentioned and no refs mention him as human rights lawyer. ALT2 should drop nationality of author to make it shorter. I am suggesting a new one below. Regards, -Nizil (talk) 14:24, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
@Nizil Shah: Thanks for your review. I have taken the bit about human rights activist out. I am cool with your ALT3 but I am modifying it a bit. Thanks once again. Now all that is left is for another review/reviewer. God bless.CrossTempleJay 13:09, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg I am OK with your ALT3a. Now good to go. Thank you for solving out issues patiently and carefully. I appreciate your cooperation. Someone else should have a look and approval of hook. Regards, -Nizil (talk) 14:27, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 15[]

Telfair Hodgson

Telfair Hodgson
Telfair Hodgson

Created by Zigzig20s (talk). Self-nominated at 01:59, 17 June 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol voting keep.svg The article is new enough and long enough. It is neutral, uses inline citations, and does not appear to violate copyright. The facts in the hook are cited, assuming good faith for the sources that require registration, and the QPQ is done. Gulumeemee (talk) 07:52, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
It's now a start, isn't it? If it's good enough for DYK, surely it's a start.Zigzig20s (talk) 10:41, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
@Zigzig20s: Per the discussion at WT:DYK, it seems that among possible suggestions for a hook were that he served as a chaplain or a priest after the Civil War. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:37, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
  1. ALTBLURB1: ...that Telfair Hodgson was the co-founder of The Sewanee Review?Zigzig20s (talk) 09:03, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

He wasn't the co-founder according to the supplied source. Allow me to suggest a tweak:

- Please note that the relevant facts will have to be added to the article. Also, the reference to Hodgson in the supplied source needs to point to the appropriate page, not to the entire article. Gatoclass (talk) 00:29, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Done and done.Zigzig20s (talk) 13:43, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Reviewer needed for ALT2 hook, including the new additions to the article. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:22, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Note: The Sewanee Review is tagged for COI. It probably should not be linked on the main page until that's cleared up. Yoninah (talk) 23:33, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
I don't see a COI in the history, do you? Shouldn't the tag be simply removed? The article is factual, could do with more RS but it is not the target article.Zigzig20s (talk) 10:51, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
It reads like a not-very-interesting resume. I suppose we could go with something like that if nobody can be bothered cleaning up the Sewanee Review article, but if so I'd like to see something a little more succinct. Gatoclass (talk) 23:16, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 16[]

Patliputra University

  • Comment: QPQ is under process. Alternate hook suggestions are welcome.

Created by Ivecos (talk) and PratyushSinha101 (talk). Nominated by PratyushSinha101 (talk) at 10:10, 21 June 2018 (UTC).

  • @Narutolovehinata5: I thought bifurcation of university is unusual for rest of the world, or is it a common practice? Pratyush (talk) 15:00, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
It's relatively common, if not at least routine. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:00, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
ALT2:... that Patliputra University consists of more than 125 colleges including two engineering colleges, and a dozen pharmacy colleges? Source:[23]
@Narutolovehinata5:. Pratyush (talk) 16:42, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Hook eligiblity:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol redirect vote 4.svg The technical requirements are met, but a second review (ideally from someone with an interest in academics) is needed to check the hook interest for ALT2. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:29, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 17[]


5x expanded by Bermicourt (talk). Self-nominated at 09:33, 22 June 2018 (UTC).

  • Doing... review in progress... Flibirigit (talk) 03:21, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol confirmed.svg Review completed as per discussion below. Flibirigit (talk) 14:27, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Will continue review and plagiarism check tomorrow morning. Several citation concerns have been noted above below. Flibirigit (talk) 04:02, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Citation concerns
  1. Section > Background – List of items with an unclear source.
  2. Section > Emergence and development – Several paragraphs without a citation.
  3. Section > Transition to modern Königrufen – No citations.
  4. Section > Development of the Birds – Fourth and fifth paragraphs without a citation.
  5. Section > Austria Final – No citations. Table needs a citation.
  6. Section > Prominent players – Fourth and fifth paragraphs without a citation.
  7. Section > Literary accounts – Direct quote is cited, but should use a citation template. No citation on third paragraph.
  8. Section > Terminology – No citations.
  9. Section > Cards – First paragraph without a citation.
  10. Section > Tarocks – Only one citation in four paragraphs.
  11. Section > Suit cards – No citations.
  12. Section > Basic rules – No citations.
  13. Section > Bonuses – Only one citation in nine paragraphs and two charts.
  14. Section > Games by groups – No citations.
  15. Section > Scoring – Only one citation in four paragraphs.
  16. Section > Breaches of the rules – No citations.
  17. Section > Game scoring – Only one citation. Unclear if it applies to the whole section.
  18. Section > Less common variants – Only one citation. Needs more references.

Thanks for making progress on this. I will be away for the weekend, and may not respond quickly. Please don't feel a need to rush. Flibirigit (talk) 14:04, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
I have checked for plagiarism and paraphrasing issues on the Earwig tool, and found no concerns. The tool does highlight several areas that are either attributed as exact quotes, book titles, or terminology in the rules of play, none of which violate copyright. Flibirigit (talk) 14:48, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
I see you have made a lot of progress on the article. I'm catching up on the review today. Flibirigit (talk) 18:40, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
No worries. Bermicourt (talk) 19:47, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

I have reviewed the references again, and have three questions:

  1. I think the table in the Austria Final should include a reference to this PDF file as the source, if that's where it came from?
  2. Are you able to change "— Friedrich Torberg (1975). Die Tante Jolesch. Langen Müller. p. 217." into a citation with <ref></ref> tags? Do you have access to that book and ISBN?
  3. In the section "Scoring in the Austrian Final", I believe that Cite-29 applies to all three of the charts?

Thanks again, Flibirigit (talk) 20:08, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Flibirigit thanks.

  1. I've added that pdf (thanks for finding it) but it only lists the winners. To find the names of the runners-up and third-placed you have to click on the individual year links on the existing reference. I could add those individually to each line of the table, but for now I've included a footnote to guide readers to the individual year links if they want to view them.
  2. I'm not quite sure what format you're looking for, but I've changed it to a short reference and added the full reference, including ISBN, as a <ref></ref>. Have I got that right?
  3. Yes, that's right. I added a second cite at the bottom of the last table to try and indicate that. Is there a better way of doing this?

Anyway, thanks for all you work in reviewing this. It's a long article, but we're getting there! Bermicourt (talk) 06:31, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Everything looks good now to pass the review. When you have a chance, add the 2018 Austrian final results. Cheers! Flibirigit (talk) 14:26, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Trump administration family separation policy

Children separated from family members detained in cages
Children separated from family members detained in cages
  • Comment: Note that there are a few other ors who've improved the article who maybe should be given DYK cr

Created/expanded by Carwil (talk), Pharos (talk), and Gandydancer (talk). Nominated by Volunteer Marek (talk) at 20:12, 18 June 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg All other issues aside (overlap with news and "proposal to split" tags are the most stringent) this article strikes me like it makes absolutely no effort to be NPOV or even to step out of the bubble. It's like none of the ors even bothered finding commentary from authors on the other side, like they did not even glance at a news or commentary source that will not endorse the "Trump is a monster" meme -- it appears largely modeled on the usual spiel from CNN and Vox. This even though conservative commentators have explained their POV at length and have openly expressed criticism of exactly the issues presented as facts in the articles -- for instance here, here or here (there are also conservative critiques of Trump's policy, btw: here or here or here). Under "Support", what we get are reactions from surrogates and cherrypicked, partly misquoted through partisan sources, statements made by the likes of Brian Kilmeade (who is apparently much more relevant than any other conservative who had stuff to say on the subject). Also note he WP:WEASEL in "[Kilmeade] tried to defend" -- you see, you can't defend Trump's policies, you can only "try to defend them, but we know better".
And incidentally: for this article to pass, it needs a fix in the footnotes, where various citations fail to identify the publisher. Dahn (talk) 05:22, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Also, the original hook is a highly contentious claim made during litigation. Are we really basing hooks on stuff said by lawyers defending their clients? (As for the ALT: I personally find it manipulative, since it implies that the policy of arresting adult illegal immigrants is necessarily wrong, and also because it won't tell us what 2,000 is compared to a standard -- the immigrant population, for instance. It's nothing but a poor attempt at sensationalism.) Dahn (talk) 05:28, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Lastly, the "cages" in the picture appear to be standard fixtures of any detention facility. Implying that those are "cages" is simply mendacious. Dahn (talk) 05:30, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
@Carwil, Pharos, Gandydancer, and Volunteer Marek: Thoughts? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 21:37, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
This was a WP:IJUSTDONTLIKEIT non-constructive review. Fuck it.Volunteer Marek (talk) 01:55, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
(I mean, the major complaint appears to be that the article does not include a couple OPINION pieces from National Review and The Spectator that he happens to fancy. WTF?) Volunteer Marek (talk) 02:37, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
Apparently this reviewer and the references that s/he offered know better than over 200 activists groups, every major religious and medical group, 17 states who have begun lawsuits, a Federal Judge, the ACLU, several international organizations, all four former first ladies, people who donated to a facebook page in an amount that topped anything previously, and such. BTW, this reviewer needs to refresh their knowledge regarding RS sites. Gandydancer (talk) 03:15, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
This reviewer has not asked for you to rewrite the article or to remove references, he has asked for you to include all relevant viewpoints, which is a cornerstone wikipedia policy, and to change the tone of the claims the article makes (per WP:WEASEL). He has also asked you to stop misrepresenting facts in hooks, and has suggested that using one side of a litigation issue as a source for DYK is an absurd precedent. And incidentally, yes: activist groups are always poor sources to use. It is also telling that the users think National Review should not be used as an RS (as opposed to Vox), and then they bring up IDONTLIKEIT -- they don't use sources they disagree with politically, but think my demand for toning down blatantly partisan claims, and citing more viewpoints in a dispute, should be treated as a matter of my personal bias. Dahn (talk) 04:27, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
The "tone" is from the sources - you just WP:IJUSTDONTLIKEIT what the sources say. The "relevant viewpoints" are represented in proportion to how they're represented in reliable sources - you just WP:IJUSTDONTLIKEIT what the sources say. And no, I didn't say that NR should not be used - it depends on the contexts and the nature of the piece. Yes, Vox (and it is indeed a higher quality source than NR) is used in the article, but not for opinion pieces and mostly just to cite non-controversial things, like quotes from Trump himself. On the other hand, you basically want us to include some rant somebody wrote for the NR. Sorry man, not how this works.Volunteer Marek (talk) 06:17, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
I'm sorry to inform you so late in your career as a wikipedian, but wikipedia is not journalism, and therefore does not parrot partisan positions taken by the sources; wikipedia has its own rules on how content should be written and structured, which means that it either tones down to a neutral or attributes positions, quoted in full. Beyond that, the proportion of opinions and content you dislike is now 100/0, and you consider this encyclopedic; again, I do not ask you to remove sources, I ask you to add, in proportion to its relevancy (i. e. not zero), from the other side of the argument, and to stop manipulating readers by introducing weasel words in how you render opinions you favor. Incidentally, everything on Vox is an opinion piece, since the organization proudly announces that it "explains the news" -- you can see opinion clearly in essays currently used as sources by the article, such as this one. That in itself is not a problem, as long as at least some commentary from the opposing side, including as just one example the prestigious (much more prestigious than Vox) NR, is at least given some exposure. The POV here is entrenched and glaring. Dahn (talk) 06:45, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 19[]

Joan Does Dynasty

Created by Juanitavid (talk) and Sam Sailor (talk). Nominated by Sam Sailor (talk) at 21:11, 24 June 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg New enough, long enough, neutrally written, well referenced, no close paraphrasing seen. QPQ done. I linked this article in Joan Braderman so it wouldn't be an orphan. I think the image is incorrectly licensed; shouldn't it be fair use? Please check on that. Regarding the hook, it's okay but it has a lot of blue links in it. It's also to be expected that a feminist commentator would give a feminist quote. I'm wondering if you could write something a little funnier in the spirit of Braderman's send-up of Dynasty? Yoninah (talk) 21:58, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
  • @Yoninah: In preparation for the DYK nomination, I contacted article creator and uploader of the image on Commons on June 22 in c:Special:Permalink/307583809#Joan Does Dynasty, two days before nominating. I have not heard from them, but have posted on their talk page here. Looking at their contributions my assumption is that the image is correctly licensed. I'll try to think of a hookier hook. Sam Sailor 19:53, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 22[]

Captain Cook State Recreation Area

  • Comment: I’m not completely sold on the hook. I mean, it’s “hooky” and properly sourced and all but somehow I’m not finding it all that satisfying so if anyone has any other suggestions I’m all ears. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:31, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Created/expanded by Beeblebrox (talk). Self-nominated at 22:31, 22 June 2018 (UTC).

Yeah, things get named after people all the time. Daniel Case (talk) 02:18, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Take a Knee, My Ass (I Won't Take a Knee)

Created by Kingoflettuce (talk). Self-nominated at 14:48, 22 June 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Full review to follow, but I don't think ALT0 is interesting to a broad audience. Perhaps more hooks could be suggested here? One suggestion could be one that plays on the song's title, another suggestion would tie it to it being written as a response to the anthem kneelings. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 04:41, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
  • On the contrary, the hook is humorous and interesting if you understand the context (NFL players protesting the American national anthem), which has received worldwide coverage. SounderBruce 07:05, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
I know, but while the NFL anthem protests are big news over in the United States, I'm not sure if it's the case elsewhere. Most people are vaguely aware of it I suppose, but I suppose that even as someone who follows the NFL, I don't really see how the "bringing people together" part is interesting, since I don't know if people can get the connection immediately. Like I said, I think one possible suggestion here is an alternate hook that makes the connection to the anthem protests explicit. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:07, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
Would respectfully request that you review the article instead. As Bruce notes, the humour and 'hookiness' is obvious. I would like to see this being run. Kingoflettuce (talk) 15:57, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Policy compliance:

Hook eligiblity:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg I have struck ALT0 per my previous comnments in this discussion. As my suggestion, I think the article title is itself very hooky and one suggestion I have is to work on a hook that ties in to that. Other possibilites include linking the song to the anthem protests (i.e. "DYK that the song TAKMY(IWTAK) was written in response to the NFL anthem protests?" or something to that effect), or even a hook that references the song's negative reception (this quote "(it) sounds, to the casual listener, like McCoy is ordering his own buttocks to drop to the ground and pay their ass-y respects" sounds funnier, actually). Or possibly even a hook saying that while McCoy wrote the song, he was sympathetic to the protests? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:09, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

  • Directly calling out its connection to the protests makes the hook lose its luster. Concealing it within the link could work:
  • As for the second bit, there is coverage of the grammatical failings of the title and it could be made into a hook like so:
The top option is somewhat better, but again I'm not really sure on it. Anti-protest songs do generally attempt to "bring people together" so it's not unusual. The second one is somewhat interesting, but the hook fact is not mentioned in the article.
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg We'll need to have a second review here on the appropriateness of the two new ALTs. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:25, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
The link to "unforeseen manner" is totally irrelevant IMO, and I don't find the hook very compelling even without it. The other hook looks okay to me. EEng, do you see any possibilities with this one? Gatoclass (talk) 08:08, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 23[]

Banat Republic

5x expanded by Dahn (talk). Self-nominated at 06:13, 1 July 2018 (UTC).

  • Question Does anyone know how to fix the ISBN templates in "References"? Dahn (talk) 13:50, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Pransukh Nayak

Created by Nizil Shah (talk). Self-nominated at 14:01, 23 June 2018 (UTC).

  • Review under process. Pratyush (talk) 18:55, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg @Nizil Shah: The article was moved from draftspace to mainspace on 23rd June and was nominated at the same date. Prose size is more than 1500 characters. Article is neutral, cites sources with inline citations and does not have any copyvio issues according to Earwig's detector. Hook is less than 200 characters and meets the formatting guidelines. Hook is interesting, neutral and is cited with inline citation in the article. QPQ pending. Pratyush (talk) 02:38, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 25[]

Embassy chapel

Created/expanded by Eccekevin (talk). Self-nominated at 19:01, 29 June 2018 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on June 26[]

Biblical criticism

  • Reviewed: Winchell's kingfisher
  • Comment: The reviewer, Farang Rak Tham, did an excellent job shaping the article, deserves cr.

Improved to Good Article status by Jenhawk777 (talk) and Farang Rak Tham (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 12:15, 27 June 2018 (UTC).

  • I usually try to make a reviewer's life easier by proposing ony one. This one is what we (author and nominator) agreed upon. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:31, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
Honestly, I'm not really sure about this hook: biblical criticism is a very interesting field of study that I'm personally interested in: surely there are other things that can be said about it too, right? The reason I'm asking about the hook is because, while it's fine, there's plenty more that can be said on the subject. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:40, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
Yes, but DYK is not about saying plenty. - Just look at Druet: a great helper worded plenty (which was a good compromise after arguing since February), and while on the Main page, they reduced it to one a little quirky aspect (and I wasn't around, so noticed only afterwards, but you were around). DYK is to make curious, with something that is correct. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:48, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
Hi Narutolovehinata5! I was concerned about the whole "white guy" thing--but it is one of the many things about biblical criticism that most people don't realize--it started out among Protestants and stayed predominantly Protestant until recently. As far as I am concerned you can pick anything you'd like to say, but how about one of these for an alternate?
Do you like any of these better? I am okay with whatever the rest of you agree on. Jenhawk777 (talk) 15:10, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5, Gerda Arendt, and Farang Rak Tham: Sorry--I realized after the fact I should have pinged you all. Jenhawk777 (talk) 16:20, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
@Jenhawk777: I actually feel that the original hook is on the right track, but the description doesn't really give the field justice. These days biblical criticism (and indeed Christianity studies as a whole) now has input from varying fields, such as the various Christian denominations, and even from scholars who are Jewish, Muslim, and even irreligious. Describing that simply as "globalization and multiple new perspectives of the late 20th century" seems too simple and not really that attention-grabbing. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 20:49, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
That was actually Gerda's first response--she wanted more as well. What she ended up with--what's here--was Gerda doing her best to summarize the summary in the lead and make it usable. What you refer to is in the article--in more than one place--and as a DYK hook would be representative of the article. The problem--as I explained to Gerda then and explain to you now--is that it is more information than there is any possibility of including in a DYK hook. This is the third paragraph from the lead which is a summary of information in the article remember.
That could easily become the longest hook of all time. :-) But if you can figure out a way to pick and choose in a way that satisfies what you would like to see included, we will all listen to any suggestions you might have for accomplishing your goal. Jenhawk777 (talk) 02:42, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Being an outsider and not Christian, but having read the Gospels once, I thought it was interesting to read that they may be based on an older source text called "Q":

ALT4: ... that many scholars of Biblical criticism argue the gospels partly originate from an older text called "Q"?
Just my two cents.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 04:55, 13 July 2018 (UTC) Removed second instance of that.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 07:55, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
While an interesting hook to non-Christians, that hook is slightly inaccurate: only Matthew and Luke are argued to have used the hypothetical Q source. Mark (which most scholars believe came first) did not (and was argued to have been used as an additional source for both Matthew and Luke, hence the so-called "two-source hypothesis"), while John is believed to not have used Q at all due to having a vastly different Christology. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 08:46, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
I knew that, but I thought that the word partly covered that ...--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 12:19, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 27[]

Val Gagné, Ontario

Created/expanded by Magnolia677 (talk). Self-nominated at 10:57, 1 July 2018 (UTC).

Symbol question.svg Interesting, on good sources, no copyvio obvious. - I don't need more than three refs for on fact ;) - I think ALT1 works better. - As I see five DYK crs for you, you need to complete a review of another nomination before this can be approved. Let me know if you need help with it. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:12, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for reviewing. Please check the hook for spelling. (I see 2 things.) Facts being scattered are no problem, but uncited paragraphs are, and each part of the hook needs a citation right after the fact. - I believe that being a member of an organisation - without financial interests - such as a school, a choir, a charity organization is unproblematic. (I am a member of several choirs and dared to write about them, and their conductor and soloists, - where's conflict there?) - Generally: a review could be a bit more personal especially when missing things, - the other or is a human being ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:45, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
I reviewed the other article myself now (in my mind), see nothing promotional, but several bare urls. Ref formatting should look different. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:48, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Novara-class cruiser

Moved to mainspace by Parsecboy (talk). 5x expanded by White Shadows (talk). Self-nominated at 03:30, 29 June 2018 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on June 30[]

Stuart W. Jamieson

Created by Whispyhistory (talk) and Philafrenzy (talk). Nominated by Philafrenzy (talk) at 16:31, 6 July 2018 (UTC).

Franz Schubert

Franz Schubert, 1825 watercolour
Franz Schubert, 1825 watercolour

Improved to Good Article status by Zingarese (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 18:50, 5 July 2018 (UTC).

Puss in Boots (Shrek)

Converted from a redirect by Flowerpiep (talk). Self-nominated at 16:44, 4 July 2018 (UTC).

Jean-François Bony

Created by Redfiona99 (talk). Self-nominated at 16:23, 30 June 2018 (UTC).

The True Confessions of Charlotte Doyle

  • Reviewed Ninjala I believe I have less than 5 main page DYKs so no QPQ was strictly necessary

Improved to Good Article status by Barkeep49 (talk). Self-nominated at 15:32, 30 June 2018 (UTC).

  • Would "travelogue" fit better than "travel log"? Raymie (tc) 21:51, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks, Raymie, I made the change in the hook. Here's a review:
  • Symbol question.svg GA icon received same day as DYK nomination. New enough, long enough, neutrally written, well referenced, no close paraphrasing seen. I question the use of publisher's websites as sources, as they are WP:PRIMARY; please remove Goodreads, Scholastic, HarperCollins Childrens, and any other promotional pages you're using as sources. Please tell me what kind of a source you're using for the second hook fact about the travelogue. QPQ done; thank you for that. Yoninah (talk) 01:01, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
@Yoninah: thanks for the review and copy. The hook is sourced from Jones, Douglas A. "The True Confessions of Charlotte Doyle." I have removed the goodreads sentence as non-essential and replaced the Scholastic source with School Library Journal. The remaining change is going to be more time intensive to do and given that no part of the hook is cited to to it (with ALA and the above source the citations for the two pieces ofinformation), can I ask under what DYK criteria these changes are requested? Thanks again and Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:20, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
  • @Barkeep49: well, first, if this is a GA, it should meet all Wikipedia standards, or it should be returned for reassessment. Similarly, since DYK hooks appear on the main page, we want them to meet the Wikipedia criteria, even if they are start-class articles. Thank you for removing the publisher's websites. If the remaining sources have no information cited to them, why can't you just remove them? In a DYK, not everything has to be cited; there just has to be a minimum of one citation per paragraph. Yoninah (talk) 19:27, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
@Yoninah: Sorry I wasn't clear about your request. What is left from your request for change in sources are citation for several less prominent awards (mainly children's statewide readers awards) which are nicely collected at the publisher's page. I am not willing to just take the information out of the article especially because it doesn't relate to the DYK hook. As both the reviewer of the article and I have around 25 GA reviews to our names neither of us are unfamiliar with GA criteria which is why I asked about the DYK criteria justification which I'm admittedly not as familiar with. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 20:12, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
  • @Barkeep49: oh, now I see what you're citing. Usually when I write an article and find a list of awards in a primary cite, I just search for them on Google with the winner's name and then I can provide an independent source for them. Are you able to do that for at least some of them? Yoninah (talk) 20:19, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Biggs jasper

A piece of Biggs jasper
A piece of Biggs jasper
  • Reviewed: Bombing of Wieluń
  • Comment: Thanks to Shrike for making the full source available to me via the library exchange.

Created/expanded by Sandstein (talk). Self-nominated at 13:26, 30 June 2018 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on July 1[]

Harendra Singh

Created by Dee03 (talk). Self-nominated at 16:46, 5 July 2018 (UTC).

  • Doing...-Nizil (talk) 05:51, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Thank you @Dee03: for contributing and nominating article for DYK. Comments: New article. Article is just 1562 characters long. Neutral. Hook is long enough and cited. If you can find more catchy hook, it would be better. Else I will approve this hook. There is unnecessary quote of Rani Rampal in the article which should not be there (I believe that it would be shorten the article below 1500 so please add some additional info from his early life, education and playing career. Expand lead with summary of the article. Article chiefly focuses on coaching career but provides not much on his playing career. If possible, add some info about it.) Dronacharya Award needs citation and it can be a hook too. QPQ pending. Regards,-Nizil (talk) 06:16, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Hi, I have expanded the article a bit and resolved other issues. QPQ is also done now. I couldn't think of a catchier hook than this, so we may go with this. ALT hook suggestions are welcome. Dee03 15:03, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
  • @Nizil Shah: Can you complete the review? Dee03 13:40, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Cuitláhuac García Jiménez

Created by Raymie (talk). Self-nominated at 02:16, 3 July 2018 (UTC).

Pharmacist-to-pharmacy technician ratio

Created by Biochemistry&Love (talk). Self-nominated at 16:28, 1 July 2018 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on July 2[]

Kelly M. Quintanilla

" (source)

" (source)

Created by Originalmess (talk). Self-nominated at 04:24, 8 July 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg @Originalmess: Full review to follow, but a new hook may need to be proposed here, since many people (such as myself) probably don't know what "first-generation college student" means. Perhaps we can just focus on her being the first female president of Texas A&M Corpus Christi? That by itself is pretty hooky if you ask me. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:44, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I created an alt hook to clarify. Thanks, originalmesshow u doin that busta rhyme? 15:39, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
Unfortunately I don't think ALT1 is really that interesting either: remember that in the United States, as most people don't go to college, statistically being the first in the family to go to college is not really that unusual. Even within the United States and elsewhere, it's probably not uncommon. With that said, the suggestion, again, is to simply focus on her being the first female president of that university. That by itself seems attention-grabbing, more than her being the first in her family to go to college. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 20:51, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
Hmmm I think the context makes it more interesting - it brings contrast. The combination is what makes it unusual; academia is hard to break into, especially for first-generation students who are 14% more likely not to graduate at all compared to traditional students. First-generation college students in the United States also are less likely to obtain postgrad degrees (as stated in the article) which are usually required for academia and administrative positions. This is relatively common knowledge in the US, so I apologize if it's not global enough, but I'm surprised it's not similar in other countries! Although our tuition rates are ... unique. Tl;dr First generation students often don't feel comfortable at universities; now she's running one. originalmesshow u doin that busta rhyme? 05:22, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
Still. It may be interesting to U.S. readers (who, to be fair, make up a significant portion of Wikipedia's readership), but it's less so for people from other countries, particularly developing ones. Remember that the U.S. is not the world, and what is common or rare in the U.S. may not be so elsewhere. As such, I'm afraid I have to reject ALT0. Please suggest other hooks here. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:47, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Gowanus Canal

A barge on the Gowanus Canal
A barge on the Gowanus Canal
  • Reviewed: Did you know nominations/Fanjingshan
  • Comment: This article was previously a Good Article, but was later demoted. It was re-listed as a GA just yesterday. According to this discussion, the article should be eligible. Also, the picture is optional.

Improved to Good Article status by Epicgenius (talk) and Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk). Nominated by Epicgenius (talk) at 16:36, 2 July 2018 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on July 3[]

Hailey Dawson

Dawson at Oriole Park in 2015
Dawson at Oriole Park in 2015

Created by Yoninah (talk). Self-nominated at 21:06, 3 July 2018 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on July 4[]

Sea Trader: Rise of Taipan

Created by Nomader (talk). Self-nominated at 02:36, 4 July 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg The article is neutral, meets the required length, and is sufficiently referenced. Article created on 4 July, the same day as this nomination. Hooks are all interesting and sourced; I prefer the main hook, but all are fine. QPQ done. This is good to go! – Rhain 13:26, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Returned from prep for further work on the hook. Yoninah (talk) 21:38, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on July 5[]

Solid (web decentralization)

Created by Anachronist (talk). Self-nominated at 22:37, 5 July 2018 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on July 7[]

Michael Peter Kaye

  • Reviewed: To be done

Created by Whispyhistory (talk) and Philafrenzy (talk). Nominated by Philafrenzy (talk) at 18:04, 14 July 2018 (UTC).

Konstantin Petrovich Nechaev

Created by Applodion (talk). Self-nominated at 19:53, 12 July 2018 (UTC).

Stanwood station, H and H Railroad

5x expanded by SounderBruce (talk). Second article written by NearEMPTiness (talk). Nominated by SounderBruce (talk) at 23:09, 7 July 2018 (UTC).

  • long enough (N.B. was still marked as stub in Talk page), new enough, neutral in tone.
  • All non lede paragraphs have references, images in article have appropriate licencing. No apparently copyright violations.
  • QPQ done.
  • I personally find the first hook more interesting than the second one, although I wonder if it's an issue if the "Stanwood station" the title refers to is the one build in 2009 and hence isn't the depot in Stanwood which was serviced by "Dinky". Is this possibly misleading to conflate the two as this hook seems to do?
  • second opinion requested, if possible
  • Same location, thus same article (which can cover both as "a" [train station] in Stanwood). If the depot building was still around, it would likely have been incorporated into this new station's design.
  • Ref 9 refers to it as "the dinky" not "Dinky"; ref 10 also refers to it as the Dinky. Perhaps the wording in the hook should be changed with the addition of the definite article. I don't have access to Ref 8.
  • Added article.
  • Second hook is cited in article and backed up by refs, but I don't find it super interesting. Plenty of construction projects get delayed over things like this, no?
  • Usually, things like platform height are set in stone by some kind of standard ages before a new station is built. It's a bit of an unusual situation.
  • Symbol question.svg @SounderBruce: I'd just like the first hook to be clearer, or to have a second opinion that it's actually all right. Umimmak (talk) 03:05, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  • @Umimmak: See my replies above. I have also added a second article about the railroad, which was recently created by another or. SounderBruce 06:30, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  • @SounderBruce: Okay I'm satisfied with those responses. If you are to bold-link Dinky as well (which is long, new, neutral, etc. enough although I have some issues with prose esp. MOS:CURRENT w.r.t. describing its location and I have doubts about the notability; although I will take it on good faith the sources I don't have access to sufficiently demonstrate that, but a second opinion would be nice for the article H and H Railroad. Also NB that its talk page still marks it as a stub.), then we just need a second QPQ. Umimmak (talk) 07:35, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  • @Umimmak: The second QPQ has been linked above. As for the notability of a standalone article, it clearly qualifies with its coverage by secondary sources (including the more regional Seattle Times well after the fact). SounderBruce 07:18, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Cloud Kingdoms

Improved to Good Article status by Canadian Paul (talk). Self-nominated at 16:58, 7 July 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg @Canadian Paul: An explanation might be need to be added to the hook, to explain what "Manukas" are. That, or an alternate hook may need to be proposed here. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:02, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
  • @Narutolovehinata5:, my idea with the hook was that people would want to click the article to find out what a Manuka was, but I can see how that might be problematic given the way the hook is worded currently. Perhaps ALT 1: ... that the time limit in the puzzle game Cloud Kingdoms is calculated in a fictional measurement referred to as Manukas?" would be an improvement? Canadian Paul 13:18, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Abraham Hatfield

5x expanded by Rising*From*Ashes (talk). Self-nominated at 07:11, 7 July 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg The article has been sufficiently expanded, is well referenced, copyvio is unlikely. No QPQ necessary, as the nominator has less than five DYKs so far. The hooks are interesting, but the sources and the article itself do not describe the case Hatfield solved as "mystery"; you either have to reword the article, provide another source, or reword the hooks. Applodion (talk) 19:42, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Feng Timo

  • ... that Feng Timo's song 《佛系少女》 has been so popular that it had been the Top 20 Hottest songs?

Created by Omega68537 (talk). Self-nominated at 03:05, 7 July 2018 (UTC).

  • Hostesses, plural.Moriori (talk) 00:45, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on July 8[]

Iase Tushi

Created by LouisAragon (talk). Self-nominated at 01:09, 16 July 2018 (UTC).

Brett Cantor

  • Reviewed: Butyrolactol A
  • Comment: As the hook suggests, I have an anniversary date in mind for this one again: July 30, the 25th anniversary of the killing.

Created by Daniel Case (talk). Self-nominated at 02:29, 12 July 2018 (UTC).

@Narutolovehinata5: I don't know how you could get much better than the New York Times article I used. (And the point of the hook was that the defense was allowed to review the case file, not that they used it during trial). Daniel Case (talk) 15:04, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Such is Life: The Troubled Times of Ben Cousins

Created by HappyWaldo (talk). Self-nominated at 03:15, 8 July 2018 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on July 9[]

Enrique Alfaro Ramírez

5x expanded by Raymie (talk). Self-nominated at 00:52, 11 July 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg @Raymie: Do you have any suggestions for alternate hooks? Because quitting a party shortly after being elected, while interesting, is fairly commonplace. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:10, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
  • True, party switching is common in Mexico, but this was within days after the election. One half of the hook might still work on its own: Raymie (tc) 18:54, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
ALT1: ... that Governor-elect of Jalisco Enrique Alfaro Ramírez was the first winning gubernatorial candidate to come from the Movimiento Ciudadano party?

William Chong Wong

Created by Zanhe (talk). Self-nominated at 23:55, 9 July 2018 (UTC).

Carlos Hermosillo Arteaga

Created by Raymie (talk). Self-nominated at 18:53, 9 July 2018 (UTC).

Beautiful in White

Converted from a redirect by Beyoncetan 2 (talk). Self-nominated at 12:22, 9 July 2018 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on July 10[]

Harold Spitznagel

Created by Runner1928 (talk). Nominated by Paul2520 (talk) at 02:58, 17 July 2018 (UTC).


Improved to Good Article status by Katolophyromai (talk). Self-nominated at 00:03, 17 July 2018 (UTC).

John Davy Rolleston

5x expansion from 10 July. Philafrenzy (talk) 17:02, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Created by Whispyhistory (talk) and Philafrenzy (talk). Nominated by Philafrenzy (talk) at 16:58, 12 July 2018 (UTC).

Matthias Rauchmiller

Matthias Rauchmiller's clay model (1681) for the statue of St John of Nepomuk which was placed Charles Bridge in Prague in 1683. Its iconography (bearded priest leaning to one side, wearing biretta, holding crucifix, haloed by five stars) became the archetype for later representations of this saint.
Matthias Rauchmiller's clay model (1681) for the statue of St John of Nepomuk which was placed Charles Bridge in Prague in 1683. Its iconography (bearded priest leaning to one side, wearing biretta, holding crucifix, haloed by five stars) became the archetype for later representations of this saint.

Created by HouseOfChange (talk). Self-nominated at 11:37, 11 July 2018 (UTC).

Old North Building

Created by Ergo Sum (talk). Self-nominated at 18:24, 11 July 2018 (UTC).

Ybor Stadium

  • Reviewed: IOU

Created by Blackguard SF (talk) and Muboshgu (talk). Nominated by Muboshgu (talk) at 17:46, 11 July 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg File was created within the last seven days, is over the required prose length and has no copyvio issues. Hook is supported by a reliable, inline source. Once the user adds a QPQ review, this will be good to go. Kosack (talk) 13:59, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Current nominations[]

Articles created/expanded on July 11[]

Hull and East Riding Museum

Part of Petuaria "Romans go home""
Part of Petuaria "Romans go home""

Created by Chemical Engineer (talk). Self-nominated at 18:54, 16 July 2018 (UTC).

John Joseph Merlin

John Joseph Merlin, 1781
John Joseph Merlin, 1781

5x expanded by Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk). Self-nominated at 23:24, 15 July 2018 (UTC).

Leander Dendoncker

5x expanded by Harambe Walks (talk). Self-nominated at 23:45, 11 July 2018 (UTC).

Paper car wheel

Allen Paper Car Wheel Company
Allen Paper Car Wheel Company

Created by NearEMPTiness (talk). Self-nominated at 08:33, 12 July 2018 (UTC).

Scott Smith (ice hockey)

Created by Flibirigit (talk). Self-nominated at 02:21, 12 July 2018 (UTC).

Prague uprising

Expanded to GA by Catrìona (talk). Self-nominated at 01:04, 11 July 2018 (UTC).

Dharma Bum Temple

Dharma Bum Temple Service with guest speaker Thanissaro Bhikkhu
Dharma Bum Temple Service with guest speaker Thanissaro Bhikkhu
Pledge class of Delta Beta Tau at SDSU sitting in mation
Pledge class of Delta Beta Tau at SDSU sitting in mation
  • ALT1:... that Dharma Bum Temple helped organize the first Buddhist college fraternity in the United States, Delta Beta Tau, at San Diego State University? Source: "Jeff Zlotnik, co-founder of the Dharma Bum Temple, which leads the weekly mation, thought why not start a fraternity at San Diego State - Delta Beta Tau." (Source: Country's first Buddhist fraternity sits at SDSU, ABC 10 News)
  • Reviewed: While I am cred on several articles with DYK cr according to the DYK bot, per [42] these were merely articles I contributed to. This is my first actual DYK nomination.
  • Comment: I'd like to note that the images added to the page (except for the logo) were all added after the article was promoted to GA status because there wasn't any free images available until a few days ago. Not sure if that effects anything for DYK but just disclosing this. Also, if the ALT is preferred then the bottom photo to go with it is preferred.

Improved to Good Article status by Wikiman5676 (talk). Self-nominated at 17:25, 14 July 2018 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on July 12[]

Flag of Sioux Falls, South Dakota

Flag of Sioux Falls, South Dakota
Flag of Sioux Falls, South Dakota

  • Reviewed: I have less than 5 main page DYKs so no QPQ is necessary

Created by Strafpeloton2 (talk). Self-nominated at 00:33, 18 July 2018 (UTC).

Benjamin Steinberg (conductor)

Created by JGHowes (talk). Self-nominated at 14:36, 14 July 2018 (UTC).

Symbol question.svg Interesting life, on good sources, no copyvio obvious. Article and hook: I don't like "under" for the player-conductor relationship, how about "with" or "conducted by". I understand "first violin" as all playing in the section (vs. "second violin", while "principal violin" is the section leader, no? You could also say "concert master". Hook: please remove "legendary" (won't make a reader click) but add "racially", - simly "integrated" told me nothing, and I may not be the only one. How about a (piped) link to the orchestra? - Article:
  • A header for a one-sentence paragraph seems too much of a good thing.
  • Please reduce adjectives such as "famed".
  • Please have one ref minimum per paragraph.
  • How do you feel about an infobox?
You will have to supply a qpq review. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:48, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
 DYK hook revised  JGHowes  talk 02:59, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
Fine. Waiting for more ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:37, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
 Done Have gone thru article and modified/expanded.  JGHowes  talk 03:00, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the expansion. Getting closer, but we still have unreferenced paragraphs, and you'll need to review another article from the nominations. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:00, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Elizabeth Kekaʻaniau

Elizabeth Kekaʻaniau, c. 1859
Elizabeth Kekaʻaniau, c. 1859
Elizabeth Kekaʻaniau, c. 1870
Elizabeth Kekaʻaniau, c. 1870

Source: Elizabeth Keka'ani'au [sic] recognized her role as an Ali'i and cared for her people.29 Because she was the last survivor of of the Ali'i who attended the Royal School, [43]

Improved to Good Article status by KAVEBEAR (talk). Self-nominated at 15:18, 12 July 2018 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on July 13[]

Donald Trump baby balloon

At Parliament Square on 13 July 2018
At Parliament Square on 13 July 2018

Converted from a redirect by Pigsonthewing (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 10:00, 18 July 2018 (UTC).

Sara Hershkowitz

  • Reviewed: Safavid Georgia
  • Comment: We can say it more precisely, of course.

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 21:44, 13 July 2018 (UTC).

Colin Hudson

  • Reviewed: Pending

Created by Kosack (talk). Self-nominated at 19:32, 13 July 2018 (UTC).

Plato (spider)

P. ferriferus egg sac
P. ferriferus egg sac

5x expanded by Umimmak (talk). Self-nominated at 02:45, 13 July 2018 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on July 14[]

Farouk Topan

Created by Philafrenzy (talk) and Whispyhistory (talk). Nominated by Philafrenzy (talk) at 19:55, 15 July 2018 (UTC).

  • Article: good for newness, length, sourcing, neutrality with no BLP problems, no plagiarism or copyright problems.
  • Hook: cited, format OK, could be revised
  • QPQ: done
  • Issues to address: Mostly, these are just simple issues of writing.
For the hook, I think it would scan better as:
ALT 1:
  • ... that Farouk Topan described the English language as "the elephant in the room" for the spread of Kiswahili in East Africa?
In the article, it seems to me that the second and third paragraphs of the Career section do not follow chronological order, and really should do so. For example, it describes his chairmanship of Swahili and his future students before it describes what he did just after completing his PhD. Please put the content of these two paragraphs into chronological order.
  • Overall: Symbol question.svg
--Tryptofish (talk) 00:52, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on July 15[]

Jack Sumner

Moved to mainspace by Tryptofish (talk). Self-nominated at 23:44, 17 July 2018 (UTC).

Djajadiningrat family

Created by [[User:|User:]] ([[User talk:|talk]]). Nominated by AnakPejuangIndonesia (talk) at 03:34, 16 July 2018 (UTC).


King Kamehameha V in 1850
King Kamehameha V in 1850

Created by KAVEBEAR (talk). Self-nominated at 06:15, 16 July 2018 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on July 16[]



Created by Maury Markowitz (talk). Self-nominated at 18:17, 16 July 2018 (UTC).

Wu Zhonghua

Bust of Wu Zhonghua
Bust of Wu Zhonghua

Moved to mainspace by Zanhe (talk). Self-nominated at 07:30, 18 July 2018 (UTC).


Improved to Good Article status by Enwebb (talk). Self-nominated at 22:22, 17 July 2018 (UTC).

Minna Lammert

1876 stage machinery for Das Rheingold
1876 stage machinery for Das Rheingold
  • Reviewed: Benjamin Steinberg (conductor)
  • Comment: I suggest to use it on 25 July, the opening of the 2018 festival. They don't play the work this year, or we could go for that day.

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 12:19, 16 July 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg The article is long enough and was nominated on the day it was created. The book and German sources are accepted in good faith. I wasn't able to detect any close paraphrasing. A QPQ has been provided. There are some minor issues with the hook and the article though: in the article, I'd recommend mentioning and linking to Richard Wagner during the first mention. Also, the hook could probably be rephrased somewhat since it seems to lack focus: is the focus of the hook Lammert, or the "'swimming' apparatus"? If it's Lammert, the hook could probably be written to emphasize this. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:54, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
The most interesting thing about her is that she sang that role in that performance, but I find it adds interest that Wagner thanked the three (kissing and hugging, but I didn't go that far), and for what? not for singing but being brave enough to be elevated by an apparatus he wanted and everybody else thought was impossible. There are photos of the 3 "swimming" in the external links: it was a sensation. The diary is in English. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:31, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
As for a link to Wagner in the article: when a piece has an article, the composer doesn't need one, to avoid a sea of blue. The hook won't be interesting to people not knowing who Wagner is ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:45, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
Precisely, which is why a link to Wagner is needed even more. Not everyone is familiar with Wagner and classical music. Hooks are intended to be interesting for a broad audience, not just music buffs, so the idea is to broaden hook interest, not to limit it. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 14:52, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
Sorry, I don't get it. Wagner is linked in the hook, and I will not link him in the article, per a convention by projects Classical music and Opera. Composers get a link when the work has no article, but for a composition with an article, you can be sure to find the composer there, if you don't know who Mozart is. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:06, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
You will have to introduce Rheingold first, or swimming makes no sense. It makes sense for Rhine maidens. - I agree that Das Rheingold is the best article to link to, because it's under major expansion. I intentionally didn't mention kissing and hugging, but am close to giving up relying on my English. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:58, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
Drop swimming, let readers find out in the article why tears?
1876 Rhinemaidens
1876 Rhinemaidens
ALT2: ... that when Minna Lammert, Lilli Lehmann and her sister Marie rehearsed as the Rhinemaidens for the first performance of Das Rheingold in Bayreuth (singers pictured, Lammert right), Wagner thanked them "with tears in his eyes"? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:12, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
ALT2 sounds better and is on the right track, but it's 217 characters when including "(stage design pictured)"; WP:DYKSG however is vague on whether or not that counts as part of the hook, so I'll let it pass. I'm ready to approve this, I'm just waiting for feedback from Khajidha. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew
When I learned DYK the pictured-clause was not counted, but I didn't follow every rule change. We could say Lilly and Marie Lehmann, but tricky to link, - one the greatest singer of all times, the other not even an article. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:07, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
I just realised that the article is Rhinemaidens, and a FA, so better link to that one, also or instead. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:52, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
Learning further: we do have an image of the "apparatus" called "machinery", - I adapted. image and hooks. As the creatures appear in both Das Rheingold and Götterdämmerung, it's also fairer. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:05, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
I think the two of you have pretty well covered any issues I had with the original. ALT2 is fine.--Khajidha (talk) 13:40, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
Symbol voting keep.svg Thanks, giving this the tick. Special date request for July 25 is approved. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 14:35, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Rie Murakawa

5x expanded by Narutolovehinata5 (talk). Self-nominated at 03:30, 16 July 2018 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on July 17[]

Technological University Dublin

Created by Bogger (talk). Self-nominated at 17:13, 17 July 2018 (UTC).

Brugada syndrome

Improved to Good Article status by PeaBrainC (talk). Self-nominated at 15:11, 17 July 2018 (UTC).

Aya Hirano

  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Hinulugang Taktak
  • Comment: If possible, I would like to request a special occasion hook for her birthday on October 8, but if this is not accepted, I would instead request for an alternative special date request on August 31, the date of an important plot point in the Endless Eight arc of the Haruhi Suzumiya series.

Improved to Good Article status by Juhachi (talk), Narutolovehinata5 (talk), and AngusWOOF (talk). Nominated by Narutolovehinata5 (talk) at 13:30, 17 July 2018 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on July 18[]

Interstate 86 (Idaho)

  • Reviewed: TBD

Improved to Good Article status by SounderBruce (talk). Self-nominated at 07:24, 18 July 2018 (UTC).

History of the Jews in Atlanta

Created by Zchai72 (talk). Nominated by WikiDan61 (talk) at 14:07, 18 July 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.