Template talk:Did you know

"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
Stats WP:DYKSTATS

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

Contents

TOC:    Go to bottom     Go to top
Count of DYK Hooks
Section # of Hooks # Verified
October 4 1
October 6 1
October 9 1
October 22 1
October 28 1
November 2 2
November 3 1
November 4 1 1
November 5 1
November 6 1 1
November 7 2 1
November 8 3 3
November 9 1
November 11 4 3
November 13 3 3
November 14 4 3
November 15 7 4
November 16 5 5
November 17 4 3
November 18 11 8
November 19 2 1
November 20 9 6
November 21 6 6
November 22 6 6
November 23 9 8
November 24 8 4
November 25 8 4
November 26 7 4
November 27 11 10
November 28 15 9
November 29 6 4
November 30 20 13
December 1 5 3
December 2 10 8
December 3 10 7
December 4 6 4
December 5 10 7
December 6 8 8
December 7 6 4
December 8 10 5
December 9 8 5
December 10 8 5
December 11 9 6
December 12 4 3
December 13 3 1
December 14 6 5
December 15 1 1
Total 266 182
Last updated 22:25, 15 December 2017 UTC
Current time is 23:00, 15 December 2017 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 (not the date you submit it here), with the newest dates at the bottom. Any registered user may nominate a DYK suggestion (if you are not a registered user, please leave a message at the bottom of the DYK project talk page with the details of the article you would like to nominate and the hook you would like to propose); self-nominations are permitted and encouraged. Thanks for participating and please remember to check back for comments on your nomination (consider watchlisting your nomination page).

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

To nominate an article[]

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

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


II.
Write the nomination.

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

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

In the current nominations section find the subsection for the date on which the article was created or on which expansion began, not the date on which you make the nomination.

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

How to review a nomination[]

Any or who was not involved in writing/expanding or nominating an article may review it by checking to see that the article meets all the DYK criteria (long enough, new enough, no serious orial or content issues) and the hook is cited. Editors may also alter the suggested hook to improve it, suggest new hooks, or even lend a hand and make s to the article to which the hook applies so that the hook is supported and accurate. For a more detailed discussion of the DYK rules and review process see the supplementary guidelines and the WP:Did you know/Reviewing guide.

To post a comment or review on a DYK nomination, follow the steps outlined below:

If there is any problem or concern about a nomination, please consider notifying the nominator by placing {{subst:DYKproblem|Article|header=yes|sig=yes}} on the nominator's talk page.

Frequently asked questions[]

Backlogged?[]

This page is often backlogged. As long as your submission is still on the page, it will stay there until an or reviews it. Since ors are encouraged to review the oldest submissions first (so that those hooks don't grow stale), it may take several weeks until your submission is reviewed. In the meantime, please consider reviewing another submission (not your own) to help reduce the backlog (see instructions above).

Where is my hook?[]

If you can't find the nomination you submitted to this nominations page, it may have been approved and is on the approved nominations page waiting to be promoted. It could also have been added to one of the prep areas, promoted from prep to a queue, or is on the main page.

If the nominated hook is in none of those places, then the nomination has probably been rejected. Such a rejection usually only occurs if it was at least a couple of weeks old and had unresolved issues for which any discussion had gone stale. If you think your nomination was unfairly rejected, you can query this on the DYK discussion page, but as a general rule such nominations will only be restored in exceptional circumstances.

Search archived DYK nomination discussions[]

Instructions for other ors[]

How to promote an accepted hook[]

How to remove a rejected hook[]

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

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

Nominations[]

Older nominations[]

Articles created/expanded on October 6[]

Our Father, Thou in Heaven Above

Martin Luther
Martin Luther

Created/expanded by The C of E (talk). Self-nominated at 09:59, 6 October 2017 (UTC).

Comment: I don't understand how Luther wrote anything in English. Please clarify. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:10, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
Do you mean Vater unser im Himmelreich? I'd suggest you expand that article with what concerns Luther, and reserve the one in English for Winkworth's translation and others, and their position. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:13, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
It has been clarified now. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 17:15, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
You mean by saying that it was in German originally? Not enough. No original title, no link to the existing article, and no reason to say similar things in both articles. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:37, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
ps: the hook also doesn't work, because the the hymn was not even translated at the time of the Reformation. No English hymn was more or less aggressive then. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:41, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
IT is in the original that it is referencing which has now been mentioned in the hook as you requested. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 17:45, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
Sorry, I was not clear enough. The English (translated) hymn didn't exist until 1863. It was nothing at the time of the Reformation, 500 years ago. You cannot speak about it in historic context before that, - it's misleading. Expect a merge request. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:33, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
You can if its in relation to the original text which was translated. I have further clarified it for a future reviewer. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 20:40, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
Some may think they can, - I can't. I can't write Wagner composed The Flying Dutchman. If you look at our featured article about the composer, it's free from such a nonsense claim. You can imitate that quality. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:48, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
ALT1: ... that Catherine Winkworth wrote the hymn "Our Father, Thou in Heaven Above", translating "Vater unser im Himmelreich" by Martin Luther (pictured)? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:57, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Striking the original hook, which at 229 characters excluding "(pictured)" is far too long for DYK. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:43, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Symbol redirect vote 4.svg I am trying to get some form of Reformation reference in as that is why I requested for the 500th anniversary. I have reworded the original here and hope this is sufficient. ALT2... that "Our Father, Thou in Heaven Above" was translated from a German language hymn by Martin Luther (pictured), which was one of his hymns that challenged Catholic teaching in the Reformation? The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 20:45, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
I don't know why you want to focus on "aggressive" that day. My idea is the opposite. - I still think the article should be part of the one about Luther's hymn, or be about the translation. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:46, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
I wasn't trying to focus on aggressive, I wanted to focus more on the Reformation hence why I wanted the hook to include it. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 15:02, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Having read the merge discussion, which seems to have stalled a month and a half ago, short of merging the article outright, I've removed the bulk of the Luther history paragraph (a related suggestion was made by Gerda Arendt above), leaving the creation and publication information (the latter because it's the only place where the tune is mentioned), which is actually more than was proposed in the discussion. This leaves the article ineligible for DYK, at 1011 prose characters only. I'm assuming that if there had been more information specifically about Winkworth's hymn, it would have been added by now. I have struck ALT2 because the material that supported it was part of what was cut. We are also past the Reformation anniversary that seemed to be driving this nomination originally. The C of E, what are your thoughts? BlueMoonset (talk) 16:51, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on October 9[]

Nagtahan Interchange

The Nagtahan Interchange in 2014
The Nagtahan Interchange in 2014
  • Reviewed: Doing...

Created by Sky Harbor (talk). Self-nominated at 15:50, 17 October 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg - review done. You get a pass on the newness. Please settle the other issues though. starship.paint ~ KO 04:24, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
Content check:
  • I don't see in the source #1 anything pertaining to Straddling the boundary between Sampaloc, San Miguel and Santa Mesa
  • rephrase the interchange was originally known as the Rotonda de Sampaloc to the interchange was originally the Rotonda de Sampaloc and you need to cite this with the "Disappearing history" The Freeman source.
  • expandin Quezon City to in Diliman, Quezon City per source #1.
  • In February 1990, the administration of President Corazon Aquino signed an agreement with Japan - don't see it in source #4.
  • doubling in the number of cars on Metro Manila roads in that same time frame -> suggest rephrase to doubling in the number of registered Metro Manila cars in that same time frame per the source #4
  • the stone foundations of the Nagtahan Interchange - need a source that the Nagtahan Bridge (per source #5) = Nagtahan Interchange.
  • Need a source for the whole lead/lede. The only source relevant is source #4 stating Nagtahan/R.M.Magsaysay road intersection three-level interchange facility but nothing more than that. starship.paint ~ KO 04:04, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Note: the article was created on 9 October but nominated on 17 October. That's more than 7 days, but I would be loathe to disqualify this based on that, given that several September articles are still being reviewed. BlueMoonset - could you comment or direct me to someone in charge of WP:DYK, I can't seem to find the list. starship.paint ~ KO 04:13, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Starship.paint, I generally wouldn't be too worried about a nomination that was less than 16 hours late, especially as it's been over a year since Sky Harbor nominated an article for DYK. Since the rules do allow a bit of leeway in this regard, I'd certainly be inclined to accept the nomination in terms of "newness". BlueMoonset (talk) 04:55, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Okay. I must have been half asleep when I thought it was a 12 day gap. Oops. This gets a pass on newness, yay. starship.paint ~ KO 09:52, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Article at >2000 characters is long enough
  • Sources are good.
  • Hook is short enough, passably interesting, but the sourcing is an issue: I can't see the words "stradding..." quoted in the source for the hook above. Does this have to do with zero images loading for that article?
  • Image is okay.
  • QPQ is not done. starship.paint ~ KO 04:22, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
Apologies, I've been busy the last couple of weeks. However, I did take the time to review the changes requested and I did make a few changes of my own.
  • If you check a map of Metro Manila, you'll see that the roads forming the interchange are the boundaries between those three districts. I don't see why there needs to be a source for this.
  • Fixed
  • Done
  • This is implied. One, the Aquino administration was the one that certified the package is urgent, and two, the government is the signatory for the loan (the DPWH does not have the authority to sign loan agreements on its own, if that's what you're going to ask).
  • There is a picture that is supposed to be with that article, and the pillars are the pillars for the interchange rather than the bridge, since they're accessible from street level.
I'm working on everything else, so I do appreciate your patience. --Sky Harbor (talk) 02:13, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Article looks good to me, and I think the two sources in the first sentence work together to support the hook. Not concerned about the "straddling" reference, which is sufficiently general (and using the coordinates in the article, true). Sky Harbor, how about that QPQ? --Usernameunique (talk) 01:35, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on October 22[]

Caroline Brady (philologist)

Created by Usernameunique (talk). Self-nominated at 18:12, 24 October 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg New enough, long enough, and thoroughly footnoted. But although this isn't an explicit DYK criterion, the article is problematic, in that it presents lots of little boring details about the subject's life (like the street addresses where she lived and who owned those pieces of property or the subsequent history of a ship she took a trip on as a child) but nowhere does it clearly state what she is notable for in a way that would clearly indicate a pass of our academic notability standards. It states what her scholarship was on, but not why it is significant (if it is). It lists what look like all her publications, rather than making any attempt to select the significant ones. It says she published "more than a dozen book" but lists no books. Much of the sourcing is non-secondary and of dubious reliability and fails to cover the subject in the depth that would be required to establish general notability (e.g. seven separate sources from FamilySearch; local newspaper listings of community college courses; entries in association membership directories). The subject appears never to have progressed past assistant professor in academic rank, a red flag for a failed academic career. I worry that, if an article in this state is linked on the main page, it would very quickly get sent to AfD. The parts of the article that look like they might be usable to establish notability are the Talbot Fellowship and (if she published any) book publications that might have associated book reviews. I think the article could use significant trimming of the uninteresting parts so that readers could focus more clearly on the interesting parts.
As for the rest of the criteria: QPQ done. Earwig found a copied direct quote but no problematic copying. The main hook needs disambiguation on the Pennsylvania link. I prefer hooks ALT1 or ALT2, but they're inadequately sourced for DYK: ALT1 is given only the subject's own publications as sources, ALT2 has no sources at all. —David Eppstein (talk) 02:58, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
  • David Eppstein, thanks for your review. I've added some more information on her publications that should help make her notability more clear. Please let me know if you would like more, although I'm not sure what exactly that would be; a Google Scholar citation count would perhaps be on point, but if you think that the torpedoing of a boat is a "boring detail", then saying that "this article has been cited 36 times" is perhaps hopeless.
Your other main criticism seems to be that the article is filled with minutiae. To the extent that it is necessary to defend this (cf. "this isn't an explicit DYK criterion"), it's worth remembering that little is known about Brady's life. She produced relevant and notable scholarship in the 1940s and 1950s, yet no mention of her appears between 1955 and 1979, when she published the first of two widely-cited articles after a decades-long hiatus. In the absence of a more comprehensive source of information on her such as an obituary, the amalgamation of many small details—whether or not one might term some "boring"—is a way to sketch a picture of Brady's life. Knowing that she lived at 132 S. Laurel Avenue in Los Angeles, for example, is relevant when one considers that it was her parents' address: it implies that between her stints at a community college and at Harvard, she moved back in with her parents. Meanwhile, knowing that she once lived in Cambridge reinforces the scant information on her time at Harvard. It's not ideal, and it would be particularly nice to figure out what she was up to from 1955 to 1979, but at the end of the day the sources that we have are the sources that we have.
Re: sources, I've added one (Frank 1987) to back up ALT1. ALT2 is harder to source as it is backed up by 'negative information,' i.e., the complete absence of anything showing that she published between 1955 and 1979. If in your opinion that's not enough to back up ALT2, then let's just go with another. --Usernameunique (talk) 22:11, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
The torpedoing of the boat is a particularly egregious example, but the same thing is true throughout the article. It's not so much that the torpedoing of a boat is a boring event – it isn't – but that the event has absolutely nothing to do with the subject. She rode on the boat once; as it involved an intercontinental move for Brady's family, that is significant enough to mention. But why would someone who comes to this article to find out about Brady's life be interested to find instead a description of what happened to a boat five years after Brady rode on it? That's not part of her life. A large fraction of the article appears to be filler of this type rather than actual informative content about Brady. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:17, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
David Eppstein, I've moved the torpedoing information to the notes section. Returning again to the DYK criteria, is there anything still holding back this nomination? Thanks, --Usernameunique (talk) 22:21, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
It still has all the appearance of an article about someone who is not notable. The lead makes no assertion of significance, and the sources that could be used to make a case for WP:GNG (the nontrivial reviews of her work) are buried under a mountain of redundant trivial sources that do not count towards notability (e.g. 21 different copies of the membership list of an association in which membership is not a significant honor). She may well actually be notable, but the article works very hard to make her appear not. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:24, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
I'm having significant problems with this article in terms of NOTE as well. According to the article, as it stands, this person did not win any notable awards for her work, was not elected to the chair of any notable organizations, and doesn't seem to be particularly widely quoted. There are some interesting quotes about her work, but I'm not clear if they are notable either. There are lots of academics who led interesting lives, what makes this one notable in Wiki terms? Maury Markowitz (talk) 18:53, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
Maury Markowitz, thanks for weighing in. I believe that Brady's notability is evidenced both by her Marion Talbot fellowship, and by the impact of her publications, a number of which—particularly her 1943 book, and her last two articles on Beowulf—are widely cited within her field. Minor figure that she was, having an article about her allows anyone wondering who she was to easily find out; that her page has been viewed 13 times per day on average suggests that I was not the only one with that question. At the same time, I don't think that a DYK nomination is the appropriate place to contest the notability of an article's subject. If you or David Eppstein believe that this is an AFD candidate, then being proactive by bringing it there would be more useful than simply weighing in here.
Also, to David Eppstein's earlier point about the membership lists that include Brady: these do not count towards Brady's notability, but they are not intended to, nor have they even been suggested to do that. They serve two purposes. First, they provide a 21 year chronology of Brady's academic appointments. Second, they demonstrate that Caroline Agnes Brady is the same person commonly (and probably incorrectly) referred to as "Caroline Agnes von Egmont Brady" (see, e.g., WorldCat). This was quite confusing when I was researching Brady—I thought at first that they were two separate people—but hopefully by providing hard evidence that the two names refer to one person, it will help others avoid similar confusion. --Usernameunique (talk) 22:55, 5 December 2017 (UTC)


Articles created/expanded on October 28[]

John Richardson (bishop of Car Nicobar)

John Richardson in 1952
John Richardson in 1952
  • Reviewed: pending

Created by Soman (talk). Self-nominated at 08:58, 29 October 2017 (UTC).

Will review, but am too tired now. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:15, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
Otherwise you are good to go.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 09:15, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
  • The hook should specify that the Parliament is India's, not another country's. One presumes that English or Canadian bishops were members of their national parliaments way before Mr Richardson had a similar record in India. Dahn (talk) 16:44, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol delete vote.svg Issues still unaddressed; marking for closure. Should the nominator return and begin work on the issues before this is closed, the review process can resume. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:50, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on November 5[]

Nicholas Exton

Improved to Good Article status by Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi (talk). Self-nominated at 15:48, 9 November 2017 (UTC).


Policy compliance:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol question.svg Article is easily long enough and was newly promoted to GA when nominated. It's in excellent shape generally and well-sourced (not a surprise, since it's just come through the GA process). A few requests for clarification: in the section "Merchant and alderman," one sentence asserts that "... he was also a Surveyor of Murage Mayor of the Westminster staple." I'm unable to parse that line, and it sounds like there's an "and" missing between Murage and Mayor, but I'm not clear enough on what any of those terms means to be sure; perhaps the nominator can clear up that sentence? Another sentence in the same section tells that Exton was "... imprisoned for a year ... and forced to leave the city, albeit temporarily. Only a month later, though, in September 1382, he was arguing the same points in parliament." If he was imprisoned for a year, then how was he in parliament a month later? AGF on the offline hook source, if these two spots can be cleared up, the article will be good to go. The review is now on hold until the article reaches a stable version. The article now appears to be stable and well-sourced, and unclear points have been improved. There are currently three "Citation needed" templates in the article (one of which I added for an unattributed quotation); all three claims need to be given citations or else removed, and then the article will be ready to go. Bryanrutherford0 (talk) 16:48, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

@Bryanrutherford0: I wish you had pinged me. This might have got resolved sooner than it has. Those points have now been clarified, with wikilinks and further info. — fortunavelut lunaRarely receiving (many) pings. Bizarre. 13:27, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
My mistake! It didn't occur to me that you might have nominated the article but not bothered to watchlist the review. Since the article is now tagged with a "major " template, I'll review it afresh whenever the rewrite is completed.-Bryanrutherford0 (talk) 14:29, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
After the FAC, you mean? Surely, by then, it will no longer be eligible, surely? @Bryanrutherford0: btw — fortunavelut lunaRarely receiving (many) pings. Bizarre. 15:00, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you mean; I don't know anything about any Featured Article nomination. The article we're presently discussing for Did You Know, Nicholas Exton, currently has the "In use" template at the top, and the language is broken and incomplete (e.g., the "London" section ends with "This made the"), presumably because you are in the midst of rewriting and expanding it. You have now substantially changed the article since I reviewed it the first time, making my previous review pointless. I cannot review the article until it reaches a stable version; please indicate here (or by pinging me, if you prefer) when you are done making large changes to the article, and I will be happy to review it again at that point.-Bryanrutherford0 (talk) 15:19, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
Bryanrutherford0 & Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi, looks like this article is now stable enough to be fully reviewed? --Usernameunique (talk) 07:33, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
Ah! Thank you for the heads-up, I'll review it again in the next couple of hours.-Bryanrutherford0 (talk) 14:04, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
@Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi:: I have re-reviewed the article; if you can cite the three points carrying "Citation needed" templates, then it will be ready for approval.-Bryanrutherford0 (talk) 16:48, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on November 7[]

BV Centauri

Created/expanded by Jolielegal (talk) and Lithopsian (talk). Nominated by The Bushranger (talk) at 22:59, 12 November 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Long enough. New enough. Citations throughout. But citations could be more precise by giving more specific pages, rather than broad ranges. Fairly technical article, at least to this lay person. Hook is interesting enough. But I couldn't find the source for the 1600 light year figure in citation 4. I found it in citation 6, on page 309 as 500 parsecs ± 100 parsecs, which I believe translates to 1630 ± 326 light years. So two things: the citations need to get more specific pages, and the hook needs to be more accurate. Hybernator (talk) 02:21, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
Yes, citation 6 at the moment, although citation 2 mentions the same figure. I've added a convert template to format the distance, but it ends up looking much the same: the convert template and similar conversions include automatic rounding to the last significant figure, so 1,630 (or 1,626) becomes 1,600. The distance is very uncertain (± 326 ly from that source, 400 light years nearer from a Gaia parallax), so it might be best to be more vague in the hook; "over 1,000 light years?" I don't know if that makes it more or less verifiable. Could mention table 4 in the citation. Lithopsian (talk) 14:25, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
A good idea, I've amended the hook accordingly. - The Bushranger One ping only 20:09, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
The new hook is fine. Thank you. References are still overly broad: i.e. citations 2, 3, 4, 6, 10. It's difficult to figure out which page(s) I should check up on. (They're not exactly easy reading either.) Hybernator (talk) 23:33, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on November 9[]

Dual systems model

Created by Stash85 (talk). Self-nominated at 20:30, 27 November 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg New, late but see Rule D9 (also first DYK nomination), long enough, sourced, inline hook citation checks out, neutral, no apparent copyvios, DYK not needed. Stash85, a but of a nitpick, but the standalone sentence beginning with "The term socioemotional brain network or system..." should be cited. Also, it intuitively feels like an article theorizing why young people do stupid things could have a much more captivating hook. --Usernameunique (talk)


Articles created/expanded on November 11[]

Andrew David Urshan

Andrew David Urshan, photographed in 1911.
Andrew David Urshan, photographed in 1911.

Created by LouisAragon (talk). Self-nominated at 16:38, 11 November 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Article created new by Louis Aragon on November 11. The main source, Encyclopedia Iranica, is here (and might as well be linked from the article). Really the Wikipedia article should follow the Iranica article a little less closely, direct quotations notwithstanding. "Sporting an anglicized name" and "took him throughout the Midwest" for example are paraphrased a little too closely for comfort. The best way to improve this situation would be to add information from other sources if they can be found. (Here's a direct link to the page from other source, by the way.)
The author has already completed a quid-pro-quo review.
I have also a small question regarding the image, which the author-nominator uploaded to commons a few days ago. I don't doubt that the image is public domain. But the source is given as the Encyclopedia Iranica article—yet I don't see the image there. Can it be found in the print ion? Simply clarify where it came from, if you would.
The hooks are good, but maybe you would consider some alternatives? Such as
Well done and thank you for creating an interesting article. groupuscule (talk) 04:23, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
Hi Groupuscule, thanks for having taken the courtesy to review this one. I just fixed the second sentence you mentioned, by adding quotation marks.
Both images are viewable on the site by clicking on the "images / tables" button, located on the right. Clicking on the pics, which enlargens them, sadly doesn't create a new url link that directly leads to the pic. Nevertheless, both pics are "part" of the article, of the same page.
Sure, lets go with ALT2! I think its a bit more appealing than the ones I proposed. - LouisAragon (talk) 17:49, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello LouisAragon, the quotation marks are an improvement but I really think the whole article should not follow the Encyclopedia Iranica so closely? Can you find some other sources? (To discover, for example, more details about Urshan's tour of the Midwest.) If you are having trouble I will try to help out. Best, groupuscule (talk) 18:44, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
@Groupuscule:, sorry, been a long time I know. Completely forgot about it. Thanks for your response. Yes, there are sources in Russian and Persian, but I really don't feel the urge to do that anytime soon (i.e. translating material from those languages), just for a small DYK article. I'll do that sometime in the future, when I want to raise the article to GA. - LouisAragon (talk) 17:16, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on November 15[]

My Journey into the Heart of Terror: Ten Days in the Islamic State

Created by Saff V. (talk). Self-nominated at 09:02, 18 November 2017 (UTC).

  •  :REVIEW COMPLETED - The following review was completed by Esemono
Green tickY QPQ for Template:Did you know nominations/Hassan Ahmed (Ghanaian diplomat)
Green tickY Article created by Saff V. on November 15, 2017 and has 2580 characters (447 words) "readable prose size"
Red XN Article needs to be rewritten with and translated into natural English.
Red XN Hook needs to be rewritten in more natural English
Green tickY ALT0 and ALT1 is sourced to :In October 2014 I was the first western journalist to spend time with Isis and return safely.
Green tickY Every paragraph sourced
Green tickY Earwig @ Toolserver Copyvio Detector found no copyvio
Symbol possible vote.svg Article needs some copy ing -- Esemono (talk) 07:54, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
  • @Esemono: please do not use the DYK icons to indicate approval or disapproval, as it confuses the bot. I've replaced your checkmarks with acceptable marks. Yoninah (talk) 00:20, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
@Esemono: Thanks for review! @Baffle gab1978:, I wonder if you do the copy of article. Regards. Saff V. (talk) 07:05, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Kwaku Kwarteng

Created by Crosstemplejay (talk). Self-nominated at 15:58, 15 November 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article was new enough when it was nominated, and it meets the length requirements. Earwigs detects no possible copyright violations. Article is stable and properly sourced, and as there is no image, there are no problems with licensing/fair use. QPQ provided. However, I'm not exactly sure if being a deputy minister being a civil engineer is that interesting, perhaps if Kwarteng was the Minister of Finance as opposed to a mere deputy. The article itself is good to go for DYK, but I'm not approving any of the hooks and I'm suggesting that additional ones be suggested. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:06, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5: Thanks for the review. I have suggested another hook. Hope it is ok.
Thanks and God bless. CrossTemple Jay 12:36, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
@Crosstemplejay: Probably a little too long. Could you give a more concise hook? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:40, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5: Thanks for the review. I have shortened the hook. CrossTemple Jay 14:42, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on November 17[]

Paddy Mahon

Created/expanded by Nigej (talk). Self-nominated at 22:17, 19 November 2017 (UTC).

  • I bolded the subject, but don't know to shorten and format the long thing. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:12, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
  • I have trimmed it. Nigej (talk) 08:27, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Article was created within the required time and is well over the requirement for size. Does not appear to have copyplag issues after checking a few Gnews Archive pages. However - and given the unfortunate delay in this being gotten to, I hate not to be able to just tick it, but them's the rules - there is no QPQ, and the creator-nominator has five DYK crs, meaning QPQ is required. @Nigej:, if you don't mind fixing that up, this will be good to go. - The Bushranger One ping only 11:49, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
  • Thanks for that. Sorry to say that I've never heard of the QPQ so will have to look into it. Nigej (talk) 13:11, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
  • @Nigej: Quid pro quo; if you have five or more DYK crs, you have to review one DYK nomination for each nomination that you make. You then mention it here, it's checked, and the review proceeds. Face-smile.svg - The Bushranger One ping only 13:16, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on November 18[]

Hadean zircon

Electron probe microanalyser
Electron probe microanalyser

Moved to mainspace by Karaclc (talk). Nominated by Graeme Bartlett (talk) at 05:58, 18 November 2017 (UTC).

Going to review. Preliminary request: can we avoid "we" in the prose? I moved the question mark in ALT1, but find little relation between "can tell" and the image, as equipment tells me nothing ;) - I'd need an explanation for ALT2. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:21, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
The explanation for alt2 is that it is a bit of a joke. The name "Hadean" is derived from Hades, another term for Hell. It is used for the time period because it was believed that the surface of the Earth was covered in molten rock, and blasted by a bombardment of falling asteroids, so the conditions were hellish. The Hadean zircons survived these conditions. Also I will remove that use of second person in the article. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:14, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for explaining, but I am afraid the joke might be lost an the average reader. - Can you work a bit on the lead? It needs a few lines further up, to be accessible by someone like me, such as "The characteristics of Hadean zircons show early Earth history and the mechanism of Earth's processes in the past." I linked Archean, as I would medieval. I think that instead of "Other articles: Hadean, zircon & zirconium", - these terms should simply be linked. Can the orphan tag go? More later. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:02, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
I have boosted the lead. And I am scrapping that other articles bit. Someone else got to take off the orphan tag within 2 hours of your request. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:47, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
Thank you! Next: prose. English is not my native language, so may be wrong. In "That the plate recycling mechanism has melted almost all pieces of Earth crust is commonly accepted by most scientists. However, some rare Hadean zircon grains included in much younger host rock were discovered.", I dislike two things: beginning with "That" when it's not a preposition, and the use of "However". Could you check for those two? I see some abbreviations without an explanation, - our readers are no scientists. Examples: ">4Ga zircons", "U-Pb analysis", "U/Yb versus Y plot", "Pu/U". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:57, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
The "That ... is ..." is valid grammar. It is confusing because it is potentially ambiguous where the first part of the sentence ends. Anyway, I have rearranged this to get rid of the passive. Also hopefully I have made it clearer why its a "however". (0.00...001 tiny% of crust was not melted). I will expand the abbreviations. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:00, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
Learning, thank you. Next: "Since there was no evidence showing the palo-environment was like in the past" - something seems to be missing. "Isotope Geochemistry" - is that a term that needs capitalisation? Is it "circons is" or "circons are"? - Could you go over it for terms that the average reader will not know, but could have a link? Next step will be good faith ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:30, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
One more: the image is licensed but not too easy to understand that size. If you want it to be used it needs a much shorter caption because it will actually go to the Main page, with links, - I use it usually to expand a hook past the 200 chars limit. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:33, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
I fixed that paleo-environment missing word, and Vsmith fixed decapitalization and some missing links. I will look for more missing wikilinks to add. On the picture topic, I would have preferred a big zoomed in microscopic picture of a Hadean zircon grain, but there is not such a picture. I have simplified the caption. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 05:03, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
Thank you again. Looking at the hooks now, I don't understand "produced by Earth", so strike the first. ALT2 hints too little at anything scientific, so same. In the second, you don't need to say the same thing in the brackets AND the caption. Suggestion:
ALT3:... that the oldest mineral grains can tell the Earth's history (scientific equipment pictured)? with a caption of just "Electron probe microanalyser"
I'd like that polished, and Australia included, because I think that's attractive. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:11, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
ALT4:... that the Earth's history is revealed in the oldest mineral grains which are found in Australia (scientific equipment pictured)?
ALT5:... that Australia has the earliest piece of Earth's history in the form of zircon mineral grains (scientific equipment pictured)?
I also trimmed the caption. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:15, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
Thank you. I'd like a better wording than "has the ... piece" - can't say piece is grains, no? Something like "earliest evidence ... was found in Australia?" - I suggest to unpipe for clarity, "Hadean zircon mineral grains" or "Hadean zircon mineral grains. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:40, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Gravity of Mars

Mars Bouguer gravity map, produced along with the GMM-3 gravity solution in 2016
Mars Bouguer gravity map, produced along with the GMM-3 gravity solution in 2016
Mars crustal thickness histogram
Mars crustal thickness histogram
  • Reviewed: Hubertus Leteng
  • Comment: part of University of Hong Kong/Regional Geology (Fall Semester 2017)

Moved to mainspace by Xaviertang (talk). Nominated by Graeme Bartlett (talk) at 05:11, 18 November 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg This is an incredible article and insightful article. @Xaviertang: has most certainly proven his dedication to the subject at hand. I'm sure some users may be able to point out a minor flaw with the article here or there, but I cannot see any major problems that would prevent this from being approved for Did you know...?. I would suggest a better hook, though. Evidently, the main nominated hook is definitely more interesting than the alternate proposal in my opinion, though it can definitely be worded better.
Firstly the way the wikilink is presented is weird. One would expect "Martian basins" would link to an article about basins on Mars. It would make more sense if the wikilink was wrapped with a text that directly refers to the "Gravity of Mars". Secondly, the parentheses phrase to denote an illustrated subject is way too long for a Did you know...? section. Thirdly, the caption for the image is too long as well. Normally image captions rarely go into any detail other than the strict subject of the image. You'll find many examples of this in recent additions to the Did you know...? section. My proposals are:
ALT2:... that Mars' gravity (illustrated) is affected by many negative free air gravity anomalies on its surface?
Image caption: Gravity map of Mars unsigned by user talk:PhilipTerryGraham
I am happy with that ALT2. But we still need an itemised review to pass DYK! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:05, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg This is almost ready: article was nominated within the required timeframe. Length requirements have been met. Hooks are interesting, particularly ALT2 (which I prefer). Article is stable, and image uses are proper (free license and fair use). Article is mostly sourced to journals, some of which are offline or paywalled, so hooks are accepted good faith. No QPQ is necessary for the creator; the nominator has provided a QPQ. However, there are still two issues with the article: the lead has some grammatical errors (like how "Study of surface gravity of Mars provides beneficial information for current mapping and future landing project." should be "The study of surface gravity of Mars provides beneficial information for current mapping and future landing projects.". In addition, the lead feels inadequate and doesn't really adequately summarize the contents of the article. Some statements in the article, like "subsequent gravity models are developed from the radio tracking data." and "Combination of Doppler shift and range observation promotes higher tracking accuracy of the spacecraft." lack footnotes. Other ending sentences read awkwardly (like "Otherwise, it would result in considerable errors.") and may need to be rewritten. Once these issues are fixed this should be good to go. As an astronomy buff myself, this is an interesting article that would make a great DYK hook; I would even request that it be the picture hook if it goes up. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:27, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
I have fixed the three sentences highlighted. Expanind the lead will await tomorrow, as will the referencing, though I suspect reference :4 is the one. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:46, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on November 20[]

Cherry Marshall

  • Reviewed: not yet done

Created by Edwardx (talk) and Philafrenzy (talk). Nominated by Edwardx (talk) at 14:26, 27 November 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Edwardx, QPQ needed, and while the hook says "last woman to be hanged," the source says last woman to be hanged for murder. Otherwise new, in time, long enough, sourced, neutral, and no apparent copyvios. --Usernameunique (talk) 06:04, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

The Last Day of Pompeii

Karl Brullov, The Last Day of Pompeii (detail)
Karl Brullov, The Last Day of Pompeii (detail)
Karl Brullov (centre) in The Last Day of Pompeii
Karl Brullov (centre) in The Last Day of Pompeii
  • Reviewed: To be done
  • Comment: 5 x expanded from 20 Nov. Using details as images as the whole painting does not display well at small size.

5x expanded by Philafrenzy (talk). Self-nominated at 12:29, 26 November 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article meets length requirements, and was nominated within 10 days of the start of expansion. All images are in the public domain. Article is stable, neutral, and adequately references. Hooks are cited to offline sources so they are accepted in good faith. Only two requirements are needed: a QPQ, and some grammar corrections in the article. There should probably be a comma before citation 11, and "cancel its commission but when it" should probably read "cancel its commission, but when it", and "works of history but most of his attempts" should read "works of history, but most of his attempts". Once these issues are resolved, the article will be approved. Of the two hooks, I think ALT1 is the best as an article about a painting of the Vesuvius eruption is not that "hooky", but an artist self-inserting in their work is interesting. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:40, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Tom Cox (highwayman)

Tyburn gallows, 1680.
Tyburn gallows, 1680.
  • Reviewed: To be done

5x expanded 20/21st Nov by Philafrenzy (talk) and Edwardx (talk). Nominated by Philafrenzy (talk) at 10:56, 21 November 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Technically, this is a (more than) 5x expansion (or it was so on November 21, rather than 20), to some 3,000 characters. Earwig's give about 14% similarity with one source, which is fine. Hook and ALT (both are the same fact) are within policy, interesting, and verified by the source. Waiting on QPQ. Dahn (talk) 09:14, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment: Earwig is effectively useless here, since it can't check in the Google books sources, and that 13.8% only refers to the book's blurb/description within Google books, not the actual text of the book. In this case, a manual check of the referenced book pages is in order to see whether there is copyvio/close paraphrasing, and the review isn't complete without such a check. (Note that a 14% score is not of itself "fine"; copyvios have been found below 10%, so the Earwig number and "unlikely" score are not definitive.) BlueMoonset (talk) 23:59, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
  • Thank you, I was not aware of that. That said, I verified again and the sources are quite clearly different in tone, with the text having been seriously rephrased, toned down, modernized, for the article; everything in there was basically rewritten and, though this apparently was left out by the author of the article, uses two sources rather than one for most of what it says (the second source is only quoted here and there). I would take some issue with the fact that it fails to give page by page references, but the page range it gives is very small. Overall, I see no issue of either sourcing or close paraphrasing; some of the writing was inexplicably lazy, but I don't think that would disqualify it from DYK. Dahn (talk) 08:29, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
The second source was derivative of the first. I should be interested to know which wording you found "inexplicably lazy"? Philafrenzy (talk) 10:30, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
It's not the wording, the wording is just fine as far as I can ascertain. The problem is that you gave page ranges, all in one note, instead of page-by-page, in several notes, and that you only cited the "derivative" source for random things, when you could have easily cited it as well, for all that it verifies. That looks lazy to me, and it takes some liberties with DYK rules, as these require inline citations, and wikipedia's guide defines such as: "A full citation fully identifies a reliable source and, where applicable, the place in that source (such as a page number) where the information in question can be found". But I won't hold it against the article, as stated; the only issue to address, IMO, is the QPQ: you haven't yet reviewed an article. Dahn (talk) 10:51, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
There was no point citing a derivative source side by side with the main source. It is only used where it seems to add something new which is the correct practice. The page range is short and to have given particular pages for each reference would have greatly complicated the referencing. Your accusations of laziness are gratuitous and offensive. Please strike them. A lot of careful work went into the article. You added that comment after your original reply and it seems to me that you added it in pique at being called back to do more work on the review. Philafrenzy (talk) 11:10, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
Or maybe you could take the time to note that I'm not accusing you of anything, that I have gladly looked over the sources again, that the only thing I find issue with is that you haven't yet done the QPQ, and that using page ranges (yes, short ones: I had already said the same myself; had they been longer ones, I would quite certainly not given you as positive a review) is in any case lazier than the alternative, and that I am cutting you more slack than another reviewer who might simply take issue with the fact that you failed to produce exact page numbers, which would have been the orthodox way. I don't feel I should strike anything out, but if you take issue with lazy, I can use "neglectful"or "slackened". Regards, Dahn (talk) 17:26, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
"It is only used where it seems to add something new which is the correct practice" -- I don't think there's anything correct or incorrect about that practice, it is just your personal preference. Personally, I find it whimsical, because to do so is to tell readers that you have made a judgment call regarding sources, and that they should accept it. But either way. Dahn (talk) 17:33, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on November 23[]

Silvia Correale

Created by The C of E (talk). Self-nominated at 11:14, 27 November 2017 (UTC).

Symbol question.svg Nice facts I didn't know, on good sources, Italian accepted AGF, no copyvio obvious. - Article: just long enough, but I miss a bit about her as a person, and would enjoy a bit more lead. How do you feel about an infobox? - Hook: don't you think that this "saint-making" thing is more interesting than longest-time Argentinian? Don't expect people to know what Postulator is, - I didn't ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:37, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on November 24[]

Amusement

5x expanded by Galenmcneil (talk). Self-nominated at 23:06, 1 December 2017 (UTC).

  • Not new but expanded on November 21-24.
  • Long enough.
  • Is neutral.
  • Some in-line citations are needed.
  • No close paraphrasing found.
  • The hook is short enough.
  • I don't see a citation for the hook.Zigzig20s (talk) 10:30, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Symbol possible vote.svg This is a challenging topic and I reckon the current draft falls too far short. The OED defines its current meaning as "The pleasurable occupation of the attention, or diversion of the mind (from serious duties, etc.)" and explains that this has evolved from being an "Idle time-wasting diversion" to "Anything which lightly and pleasantly diverts the attention, or beguiles the time; a pastime, play, game, means of recreation". It is therefore a very broad category covering not just humour but many kinds of pastime and play. The article entertainment does this much better and we should be considering merger with that page. Andrew D. (talk) 18:57, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Magnificat and Nunc dimittis (Gloucester)

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 12:00, 1 December 2017 (UTC).

  • Except that "articled pupil" isn't the same as "chorister", so the hook is factually incorrect. BencherliteTalk 21:54, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Benjamin Asante

Created/expanded by Crosstemplejay (talk). Self-nominated at 13:01, 24 November 2017 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on November 25[]

Perspective-taking

5x expanded by Kdmhd (talk). Self-nominated at 09:43, 2 December 2017 (UTC).

Robin Ling

Created/expanded by Whispyhistory (talk), Philafrenzy (talk). Nominated by Whispyhistory (talk) at 15:54, 26 November 2017 (UTC).

Tóc Tiên

Tóc Tiên
Tóc Tiên

5x expanded by Beyoncetan (talk). Self-nominated at 18:36, 25 November 2017 (UTC).


Articles created/expanded on November 26[]

Eugénie Henderson

  • Reviewed: to come

Created by Gaia Octavia Agrippa (talk). Self-nominated at 19:09, 30 November 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article is new enough, long enough, neutral wording and good sourcing. The hook works out with inline sources. Review has yet to come so as of yet this nomination is not ready. In addition, I would recommend wikilinking terms like World War II, Far Eastern languages, etc. Jgefd (talk) 04:14, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for the review. I have linked Far Eastern but I think WW2 is a bit too obvious to be linked in a hook. I will complete the QPQ when I have the time; I'm very busy right nowGaia Octavia Agrippa Talk 18:16, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Caroline Lenferna de Laresle

  • Reviewed: To follow

Moved to mainspace by Dumelow (talk). Self-nominated at 21:55, 26 November 2017 (UTC).

Ivone Soares

  • Reviewed: To follow

Moved to mainspace by Dumelow (talk). Nominated by Dumelow (talk) at 10:51, 26 November 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg New, long enough (some 2,000 character w/o references), within policy and unplagiarized. Both hooks are interesting, and both verified by the sources (I can read Portuguese), which are reliable; none of the hooks seems to violate BLP rules, and neither does anything in the article. Would have liked a longer lead paragraph. Taken the liberty of removing "was" in "was escaped death" for ALT1, because it seems redundant. Waiting on QPQ, otherwise good to go. Dahn (talk) 07:17, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
Please make sure to ping me in some way if you've addressed this, or for anything else requiring my attention/involvement. Thanks, Dahn (talk) 10:42, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on November 27[]

Edward Dodding

Kalicho (left).
Kalicho (left).
  • Reviewed: To be done
Caption on pic can be adjusted if the Alt is selected.

Created by Philafrenzy (talk) and Whispyhistory (talk). Nominated by Philafrenzy (talk) at 13:27, 29 November 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg All the basics are here, new, length, cites and image license. However, I have concerns about WP:EVENT - isn't this article really about the Inuit? Dodding seems to be entirely unnotable otherwise. Maury Markowitz (talk)
I take your point. It could and should be expanded with material about the rest of his career. The sources do talk very much about how Dodding approached the Inuit, his attitudes and assumptions so they are very much about him, albeit principally in respect of this one episode as you say. Philafrenzy (talk) 19:01, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
@Maury Markowitz: I don't think we will be able to expand the biographical content of the article further without visiting specialist libraries to extract the information which I can't do right now. Do you approve the article in its current form Maury? Philafrenzy (talk) 10:35, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
Well I'd like to get someone else to weigh in, I don't feel qualified to make a call at this point. Maury Markowitz (talk) 12:26, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
Had a chance to speak to a history professor. The fact that he’s in Munk's Roll ought to be enough. He is important to historical anthropology. Does that help? Whispyhistory (talk) 09:28, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on November 28[]

Catherine Foster

Converted from a redirect by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 20:17, 5 December 2017 (UTC).

  • Hello, Gerda Arendt Do you think it might be good to mention Wagner's name in the hook? — Maile (talk) 20:33, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
  • Good for whom? I try to avoid distracting other links. Readers to whom Wagner means something will recognise Bayreuth if not Brünnhilde already, and the others will ignore the whole thing. There are also people who just hate Wagner ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:20, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
  • Although he doesn't have to be linked, "the composer's" should certainly be changed to "Wagner's"; we owe main page readers that much context, since far more people will have heard of Wagner than would make the connection with Bayreuth or Brünnhilde. Knowledge and connection is very different outside of Germany than in it when it comes to Wagner and the festival and character; this hook doesn't work without that necessary connection of Wagner to Bayreuth. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:08, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
ALT1: ... that the dramatic soprano Catherine Foster, a former midwife, appeared as Brünnhilde at the Bayreuth Festival celebrating the composer's bicentenary?
I still think it's not a good idea, because is not about him and his work, but about a woman who made it from a no-name hospital to a famous place. Any such place, why him again? - I made many hooks around Wagner, intentionally so, remember? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:13, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
  • That isn't at all what I asked for. Here's ALT2, which is what I hoped to see:
The hook isn't about Wagner, but including his name (note I don't think a link is necessary, but you can add one if you want) gives context and a touchstone for people reading the hook. The ideal is to have people understand without having to click on a non-bold link: the hook highlights a woman who went from one career to the top of a completely different one, and mentioning character, venue, and composer by name makes the achievement that much more interesting—if the bicentenary is mentioned at all, then you really need to say whose it is—and gives the reader more context. I've struck the hooks with "the composer", since it's like an anchor dragging those hooks down. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:27, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Victoria Hughes

  • Reviewed: not yet done

Created by Edwardx (talk) and Philafrenzy (talk). Nominated by Edwardx (talk) at 22:47, 3 December 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Still waiting for QPQ, otherwise long enough, well cited, hook cited, no obvious copyvios. Robvanvee 16:46, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Chad Finchum

Created by Willsome429 (talk). Nominated by The Bushranger (talk) at 23:44, 30 November 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg New enough, long enough, neutrally written, well referenced, no close paraphrasing seen. Could you please add a reference to the chart under "Xfinity Series"? Also, the source doesn't say he was a second-grader; it says he was 7. Maybe he skipped a grade? QPQ done. Yoninah (talk) 22:02, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
  • @Yoninah: I added the ref; as for the grade, I found a source that said "after the second grade", so I've changed the hook to age. - The Bushranger One ping only 22:44, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
  • @Yoninah: It has become more prevalant in the last couple decades what with everyone looking for "the next Jeff Gordon" and then (even as others had their careers murdered left and right in said search) "the next Tony Stewart" (which the only person whose career survived that was Juan Pablo Montoya who wasn't quite up to snuff, but I digress-). Anyway, ALT3, I think, would be the best bet here, and thanks for coming up with that. Sometimes I can overlook very obvious things! - The Bushranger One ping only 21:20, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Thank you. But since I wrote the hook, I'm calling on another reviewer to approve it. Yoninah (talk) 22:03, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Azamat Arapbayev

Created by My name is not dave (talk). Self-nominated at 14:12, 29 November 2017 (UTC).

Kofi Koduah Sarpong

Created by Crosstemplejay (talk). Self-nominated at 12:13, 28 November 2017 (UTC).

Ana Teresa Diego

  • Comment: This is my third DYK. The original article was translated from the es-wiki for The World Contest.

Created by Vami IV (talk). Self-nominated at 06:14, 27 November 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol delete vote.svg The article has only 1,130 characters of prose and is not long enough. - PM800 (talk) 02:14, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Vami IV, can you add another 400 characters of prose to make this article eligible for DYK? --Usernameunique (talk) 07:27, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
Can do, just lemme finish up work on one of my projects. –Vami_IV✠ 07:46, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
Alright, it's done. –Vami_IV✠ 22:46, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on November 29[]

Idiogramma elbakyanae

Female I. elbakyanae
Female I. elbakyanae
Female I. elbakyanae (head)
Female I. elbakyanae (head)

Created by Umimmak (talk). Self-nominated at 03:52, 29 November 2017 (UTC).

Santa Ana Heritage Zone

Created by Seav (talk). Self-nominated at 18:23, 5 December 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Pass on these criteria: recent 5x expansion, long enough, within policy, all paragraphs properly referenced, hook is good and accurate. QPQ done as stated above. @Seav: I have 1 issue with reference 3 which points to Wikisource. This is a wiki and should be avoided as a reference. It was easy to find an official source for the same material. Otherwise, good job Seav! -- P 1 9 9   16:45, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
  • I disagree that Wikisource is user-generated content. By its very nature, Wikisource is intended to be a repository for source texts (and not user-generated content), that just happens to use MediaWiki as an engine. But anyway, I changed the reference to point to the NHCP index page. —seav (talk) 07:32, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on November 30[]

Jie Zhitui

  • Reviewed: Will do "Pickle Rick"
  • Comment: Note to potential reviewers: Don't worry—you just need to review the hook(s) that are most interesting to you.
    Also, pending some improvement in his ability to process DYK entries, User:Zanhe should just choose another entry to review.

Created by LlywelynII (talk). Self-nominated at 18:41, 7 December 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg LlywelynII, new, in time, long enough, sourced, neutral. Needs QPQ. Also, inline citations are needed for the hooks, and ALT2 does not seem to appear in the article. Not related to this review, I would also add the story about the burning of the forest to the body of the article, not just the lead, and correct footnotes 22, 23, and 52. --Usernameunique (talk) 08:07, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
  • Thank you. I had provided the legendary part of the story at Cold Food Festival and some related pages but apparently not here (oops); also thought the QPQ was done, but if I forgot to note it here, I'll just do another one. Back in a bit.. — LlywelynII 01:48, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

    QPQ done. — LlywelynII 11:33, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Ilona Durigo

Ilona Durigo
Ilona Durigo
  • Reviewed: Regina Barzilay
  • Comment: I filled a red link, and then found the one thing to say about her is this legendary recording. Please hold until after 6 January, if not for Good Friday ;)

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 10:51, 7 December 2017 (UTC).

Chris Whitecross

ALT1: ... that Canadian Army Lieutenant-General Chris Whitecross has fostered 33 children? Whitecross’s parents had been foster parents, and she and her husband loved kids and wanted to “pay it forward.” Over the years, they took in 33 foster children, most of them babies.
  • Reviewed: To follow

Moved to mainspace by Dumelow (talk). Self-nominated at 00:26, 6 December 2017 (UTC).

Jennie Carignan

  • Reviewed: To follow

Moved to mainspace by Dumelow (talk). Self-nominated at 00:22, 6 December 2017 (UTC).

QPQ: Red XN - ?
Overall: Symbol question.svg Aside from QPQ, everything looks great to me. Nice work, Dumelow! Michael Barera (talk) 02:01, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Chase Winovich, Khaleke Hudson, Lavert Hill

Created by TonyTheTiger (talk). Self-nominated at 01:30, 30 November 2017 (UTC).

Regina Barzilay

"'Because diagnostic tools are so inexact, there is an understandable tendency for doctors to over-screen for breast cancer,' says Regina Barzilay, MIT’s Delta Electronics Professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science and a breast cancer survivor herself."

Created/expanded by Fionaz6954 (talk). Self-nominated at 04:03, 4 December 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Interesting life, with a "genius grant"! That doesn't show in the hook, nor in the article, - could it? - "computer scientist" is too broad. - Good sources, no copyvio obvious. You have an attractive licensed image, get it here, please. - The source you source speaks of screening, not treatment, btw. "MIT" is short and tells volumes about her scientific standard. Summary: word a hook. (I can't, or can't review it.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:38, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Tatar Cavalry Regiment

Сavalrymеn of Tatar (Azerbaijani) regiment in reconnaissance, July 1917
Сavalrymеn of Tatar (Azerbaijani) regiment in reconnaissance, July 1917

Created by Baskervill (talk). Nominated by Grandmaster (talk) at 01:13, 15 December 2017 (UTC).

  • Note: struck ALT1, which at 309 characters is far too long for DYK, where the maximum is 200. (The original hook, at 198 characters, just squeaks by.) BlueMoonset (talk) 04:43, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 1[]

Der Morgenstern ist aufgedrungen

  • Reviewed: Hampi
  • Comment: before Christmas, or we need a different hook

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 12:44, 8 December 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg New enough, long enough, well referenced. As all sources are foreign-language or offline, unable to check for close paraphrasing. Foreign-language hook ref AGF and cited inline. I tweaked the grammar in the hook. The only thing missing is a cite for the Text section. QPQ done. Yoninah (talk) 21:46, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
Thank you, a duplicated a ref. The hymnal could be another, if you like. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:25, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Harold Basil Christian

Created/expanded by Jgefd (talk). Self-nominated at 04:39, 2 December 2017 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on December 2[]

Wolfgang Kläsener

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 12:00, 9 December 2017 (UTC).

Yaa Ntiamoah Badu

Created by Crosstemplejay (talk). Self-nominated at 13:12, 2 December 2017 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on December 3[]

Wie soll ich dich empfangen

  • Reviewed: Marcu Cercel
  • Comment: Advent preferred, but could go to Christmas if there's a shortage

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 15:27, 10 December 2017 (UTC).

If you look at my many DYK noms for German language titles: I supply a translation if it helps understanding. In this case, it doesn't because it's only the beginning of a sentence which contains an undefined "you". The reader can trust that there will be a translation in the article. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:22, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
Sorry, I didn't mean in the hook, I meant a translation of the verses in the article. The whole thing is in German. Gatoclass (talk) 16:33, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Gay Kindersley

  • Reviewed: not yet done

Created by Edwardx (talk). Self-nominated at 11:53, 10 December 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Edwardx, new, in time, long enough, sourced (even though largely from one obit), inline hook citation checks out, neutral. Needs QPQ, and this one line should be rephrased: "He retired as a National Hunt jockey in the same year." --Usernameunique (talk) 07:21, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Jingchu Suishiji

  • Reviewed: Will do Mishmar HaEmek.
  • Comment: Note to reviewers: Don't worry, you only need to check the cites on the hook(s) most interesting to you.

Created by LlywelynII (talk). Self-nominated at 09:23, 3 December 2017 (UTC).

Symbol question.svg Substantial article, on good sources, Chinese and offline sources accepted AGF, no copyvio obvious. I like the original hook best, but suggest a link to the dynasties. What do you think of unpiping the subject? Festkalender would translate to "calendar of feasts", instead of "Record of the year and seasons", - when several translation are possible, I tend to stick with the original. You don't have to bold the items in the note list, even if they are redirects. ALT8 works for me, but is a little bland. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:37, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 4[]

Cabaret du Ciel

Cabaret du Ciel
Cabaret du Ciel

Created by Dr.K. (talk). Self-nominated at 01:27, 5 December 2017 (UTC).

Apple Maggot Quarantine Area

  • Reviewed: forthcoming

Created by Chetsford (talk). Self-nominated at 18:23, 4 December 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article newness, length, copyvio-freedom, policy-compliance, verified. The "longstanding" attribute of the quarantine was not verified. Both sources in the article do not specify explicitly when quarantine was established, so calling it "longstanding" is unsourced. Also QpQ not done yet. Dr. K. 00:24, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 5[]

Resistance to diversity efforts in organizations

Created by Makotanaka (talk). Self-nominated at 22:22, 10 December 2017 (UTC).

Dewan Rabindranath Soni

Created by Wolfman1606 (talk), Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk), and Adamgerber80 (talk). Nominated by Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk) at 02:35, 5 December 2017 (UTC).

  • Begin review. Article is new enough and long enough. Philafrenzy (talk) 22:59, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 7[]

Wolfgang Helbich

  • Reviewed: Jingchu Suishiji
  • Comment: if mentioning the specific cantata, it could be for Christmas

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 15:43, 14 December 2017 (UTC).

Business process outsourcing in China

  • Reviewed: National first-grade museum of China

Created by Muzzleflash (talk). Self-nominated at 19:10, 13 December 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg The article is new enough. It is neutral and uses inline citations, and there do not appear to be copyright violations. The hook fact is cited to this source in the article. The QPQ is done. But the article doesn't seem to be long enough. DYKcheck counts 1442 characters of prose. Gulumeemee (talk) 10:04, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
  • Muzzleflash, looks like the article is currently at about 1,442 characters, so needs at least 58 more. --Usernameunique (talk) 16:28, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks to both of your for letting me know. When I have more time tomorrow I will add more content. Muzzleflash (talk) 17:46, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Current nominations[]

Articles created/expanded on December 8[]

Hatto Ständer

  • Reviewed: T-tubule
  • Comment: an image may come, and an article on the church is planned

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 17:49, 15 December 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg as it stands, no from me. Firstly it's grammatically clunky (we'd say "a professor for three decades" not the other way round, and we have "organ" repeated), but secondly, and here's the clincher, there's a redlink in the hook, we don't do that. A quick look at the article reveals that he was somewhat of a prodigy, playing church services aged nine, that could be interesting to a general audience (it has to be said that even if the current hook is grammatically and no-redlinked, it's still not particularly appealing to a broad audience). So, if you could conjure up an alt blurb which was something along the lines of "...that Hatto Ständer, who was professor of music at the Technical University of Dortmund, played organ at his church at aged nine?" or similar? I'll do a quick once-over for minor issues in the article, but sorry, the current hook fails I'm afraid. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:23, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
Did you see my comment about the red link. I wasn't sure I'd get to a computer again today, so had to nominate. Make the first organ church music. - I won't go for a sensational age nine thing which he has in common with other early mature people. - When I google for his name to find more refs I find all these pupils who mention that he was their teacher. I'll look into his compositions, He's quite unusual in filling several red links here for compositions. Patience please. I'll go and write that church article now. - How about "died over the conceot for the organ for the Konzerthaus Dortmund"? The place where Cecilia Bartoli sang her first Norma. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:05, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Lilac Fire

Created/expanded by Missvain (talk) and Bardic Wizard (talk). Nominated by Bardic Wizard (talk) at 19:40, 13 December 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg New, in time, long enough, sourced, inline citation checks out, no apparent copyvios. Missvain, QPQ needed. --Usernameunique (talk) 01:40, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Ramize Erer

Source: "German: Als sie ein junges Mädchen beim Masturbieren zeichnete, war die Empörung groß." [36], "German: Ich zeichnete als erste ein masturbierendes Mädchen. Da war die Hölle los." [37]

Created by CeeGee (talk). Self-nominated at 11:18, 12 December 2017 (UTC).

Armchair Detectives (TV series)

5x expanded by Coin945 (talk). Self-nominated at 01:09, 7 December 2017 (UTC).

IFF Mark II

Source: Shayler, 2016, p 278

Created by Maury Markowitz (talk). Self-nominated at 15:21, 8 December 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Hi Maury Markowitz, review follows: Article created 8 December; article is of good length; artricle is well written; article has a minimum of one reference for each paragraph; sources used are reliable; hook is compliant and interesting; I could not access the page of the source used for the hook but am happy to AGF that it backs it up; just awaiting the QPQ from nominator - Dumelow (talk) 09:27, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 9[]

James Raymond Lawson

Created by Zigzig20s (talk). Self-nominated at 20:09, 15 December 2017 (UTC).

Walter J. Leonard

Created by Zigzig20s (talk). Self-nominated at 19:51, 15 December 2017 (UTC).

Ram Khamhaeng Inscription

Ram Khamhaeng Inscription
Ram Khamhaeng Inscription

Converted from a redirect by Paul 012 (talk). Self-nominated at 03:47, 15 December 2017 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on December 10[]

Costea Bucioc

Created by Dahn (talk). Self-nominated at 14:12, 15 December 2017 (UTC).

Construction 2025

Moved to mainspace by Dumelow (talk). Self-nominated at 16:17, 10 December 2017 (UTC).

Louis de Roll, Roll's Regiment

Roll's Regiment on campaign in Egypt
Roll's Regiment on campaign in Egypt
  • Reviewed: To follow (x2)

Moved to mainspace by Dumelow (talk). Self-nominated at 09:56, 10 December 2017 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on December 11[]

Hu Yan

  • Reviewed: Will do Heinz Wunderlich.
  • Comment: Note to potential reviewers: Don't worry—you just need to review the hook(s) that are most interesting to you.
    Also, pending some improvement in his ability to process DYK entries, User:Zanhe should just choose another entry to review.

Created by LlywelynII (talk). Self-nominated at 04:51, 14 December 2017 (UTC).

Inabanga River

Inabanga River
Inabanga River

Created by P199 (talk). Self-nominated at 16:49, 13 December 2017 (UTC).

Baseball cheering culture in South Korea

Created by Louise Kang (talk). Self-nominated at 05:48, 11 December 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg The article was moved from a sandbox to the mainspace and is long enough. It has numerous references, although I'll have to assume good faith on them because they are all in Korean. However, the page is tagged for an unencyclopedic tone, and I agree with the user who tagged it. There are many places where the writing is not yet encyclopedic, and many grammar glitches exist in the prose. For example, one sentence in Cheering Zones says, "The seat consists of seat for four and six people and it enables family audiences to seat at the table and comfortably watch the game." The whole article needs a thorough copy- by a native English speaker. While on an interesting subject, I don't think this is in condition to be placed on the Main Page. Giants2008 (Talk) 01:27, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
  • @Giants2008: I think we are too picky here. I don't see any serious grammar or tone issues here. It is not up to FA prose standards, but I think it is well within DYK ones. If you disagree, please point out more examples - the one you did point out has been fixed, so it if we can pinpoint more, the author(s) may fix them as well. --Hanyangprofessor2 (talk) 06:16, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
  • Unfortunately, I don't think I'm being overly picky. If there were only a few minor tweaks to do here and there, I'd make the fixes myself so as to not hold this up. However, I'm seeing issues in most of the sentences I'm looking at. Here are some (not all) examples of what I'm talking about, from early in the article:
  • Fight Songs: "The fight song is a key element of the Korea's baseball cheering culture." Should be either "of Korea's" or "of the Korean", but not the current wording.
  • "The melody of the fight songs is from the famous pop song or the K-pop song...". Since there a plural "songs" at the start, this should be "from famous pop songs or K-pop songs".
  • "There is also an mobile application...". "an mobile application" → "a mobile application".
  • "Cheering Tools: "In the early days of baseball professional league". I'd imagine this was intended as "In the early days of Korea's professional baseball league".
  • Are the tools later in this sentence, along with Balloon Stick, meant to be capitalized? I don't think they should be, but could be wrong.
  • "They were the first in the world to use balloon stick as a cheering tool." Needs "a" before "balloon stick".
  • "They wear this to feel a sense of belonging, solidarity, and proud." "proud" → "pride".
  • "Symbolic accessories and cheering tools play the similar role." "the" → "a".
  • Cheer Leaders: "there wasn't a standardized cheering method for a while." The contraction "wasn't" should be the longer "was not", and "for a while" is vague. Is it possible to give a more specific time period?
  • "and the ways of cheering was the clapping and instant singing." "was" should be "were", since the ways it refers to is a plural element. Giants2008 (Talk) 02:50, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
  • I'll second that we're not talking about WP:GA status but simple competency here. Even the hook isn't using proper grammar [fixed]. Thank you for having your students practice by adding things to Wikipedia, but you either need to bring the quality review up or start them off with shorter sentences and easier vocab over at Simple Wikipedia. It needs work on articles they'll be more interested in, anyway. — LlywelynII 11:40, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 12[]

Nana Otuo Siriboe II

Created by Crosstemplejay (talk). Self-nominated at 15:54, 12 December 2017 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on December 13[]

Angel of the Winds Casino Resort

  • Reviewed: TBD

Created by SounderBruce (talk). Self-nominated at 04:34, 15 December 2017 (UTC).

Nana Kofi Obiri Egyir II

Created by Crosstemplejay (talk). Self-nominated at 13:45, 13 December 2017 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on December 14[]

Shorwell helmet

Sources:
Shorwell, Hood et al. 2012, p. 83: "When the single identifiable grave was excavated by members of the Isle of Wight Archaeology and Historic Environment Service in November 2004 it was found to contain what was provisionally identified as a fragmentary iron 'vessel'."
Pioneer, Read 2006, p. 38: "A large iron object, provisionally identified as a 'bucket', was found adjacent to the body's left hip. ... The 'bucket' was X-radiographed immediately and the first results showed it to be a helmet in profile with a boar straddling its apex."
Coppergate, Tweddle 1992, pp. 851–853: "At about 2:40pm the bucket of his machine struck a solid object. Chris Wade, the foreman of that part of the site, believing the object was a stone, stopped the work to see how large it was. He ran his fingers over the object, exposing a golden-looking band on which lettering was clearly visible, and recognised that the object was not a stone but a helmet."

5x expanded by Usernameunique (talk). Self-nominated at 01:49, 15 December 2017 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on December 15[]

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.