Template talk:Did you know


Did you know?
Introduction and Rules
Introduction and rulesWP:DYK
Supplementary rulesWP:DYKSG
Reviewing guideWP:DYKR
General discussion
General discussionWT:DYK
Nominations
Awaiting approvalWP:DYKN
ApprovedWP:DYKNA
April 1 hooksWP:DYKAPRIL
Preparation
Preps and queuesT:DYK/Q
Main Page errorsWP:ERRORS
History
On the Main Page
StatisticsWP:DYKSTATS
Archived setsWP:DYKA
Just for fun
Monthly wrapsWP:DYKW
DYK AwardsWP:DYKAWARDS
List of users...
By nominationsWP:WBDYKN
By promotionsWP:WBDYKP


Skip to top
Skip to bottom

This page is to nominate fresh articles to appear in the "Did you know" section on the Main Page with a "hook" (an interesting note). Nominations that have been approved are moved to a staging area and then promoted into the Queue. To update this page, purge it.

TOC:    Go to bottom     Go to top
Count of DYK Hooks
Section # of Hooks # Verified
January 7 1
January 28 1
March 9 2
March 15 1
March 16 2
March 17 1
March 19 1
March 20 1
March 22 2 1
March 23 1
March 25 1
March 26 1
March 27 1
March 28 1
March 31 1
April 2 1
April 3 1
April 4 2
April 5 1
April 6 1
April 7 5
April 8 1
April 9 2
April 12 3
April 13 1
April 14 3
April 15 2 1
April 16 1 1
April 17 4 2
April 18 4 1
April 19 4 3
April 20 7 4
April 21 9 2
April 22 5 3
April 23 5 2
April 24 14 6
April 25 11 6
April 26 6 4
April 27 5 2
April 28 10 4
April 29 12 6
April 30 10 4
May 1 8 3
May 2 13 5
May 3 13 8
May 4 10 5
May 5 6 2
May 6 14 6
May 7 9 2
May 8 5 3
May 9 13 5
May 10 16 9
May 11 6 2
May 12 10 1
May 13 11 2
May 14 8 4
May 15 5 3
May 16 10
May 17 10
May 18
Total 315 112
Last updated 16:49, 18 May 2022 UTC
Current time is 17:02, 18 May 2022 UTC [refresh]

Instructions for nominators[]

If this is your first nomination, please read the DYK rules before continuing.

Further information: Official supplementary guidelines and unofficial guide

Nominate an article

Frequently asked questions[]

How do I write an interesting hook?

Successful hooks tend to have several traits. Most importantly, they share a surprising or intriguing fact. They give readers enough context to understand the hook, but leave enough out to make them want to learn more. They are written for a general audience who has no prior knowledge of or interest in the topic area. Lastly, they are concise, and do not attempt to cover multiple facts or present information about the subject beyond what's needed to understand the hook.

When will my nomination be reviewed?

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

Where is my hook?

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

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

Instructions for reviewers[]

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.

Instructions for project members[]

How to promote an accepted hook[]

At-a-glance instructions on how to promote an approved hook to a Prep area
Check list for nomination review completeness
1) Select a hook from the approved nominations page that has one of these ticks at the bottom post: Symbol confirmed.svg Symbol voting keep.svg.
2) Check to make sure basic review requirements were completed.
a. Any outstanding issue following Symbol confirmed.svg Symbol voting keep.svg needs to be addressed before promoting.
3) Check the article history for any substantive changes since it was nominated or reviewed.
4) Images for the lead slot must be freely licensed. Fair-use images are not permitted. Images loaded on Commons that appear on the Main Page are automatically protected by KrinkleBot.
5) Hook must be stated in both the article and source (which must be cited at the end of the article sentence where stated).
6) Hook should make sense grammatically.
7) Try to vary subject matters within each prep area.
8) Try to select a funny, quirky or otherwise upbeat hook for the last or bottom hook in the set.
Steps to add a hook to prep
  • In one tab, open the nomination page of the hook you want to promote.
  • In a second tab, open the prep set you intend to add the hook to.
1) For hooks held for specific dates, refer to "Local update times" section on DYK Queue.
a. Completed Prep area number sets will be promoted by an administrator to corresponding Queue number.
2) Copy and paste the hook into a chosen slot.
a. Make sure there's a space between ... and that, and a ? at the end.
b. Check that there's a bold link to the article.
3) If it's the lead (first) hook, paste the image where indicated at the top of the template.
4) Copy and paste ALL the cr information (the {{DYKmake}} and {{DYKnom}} templates) at the bottom
5) Check your work in the prep's Preview mode.
a. At the bottom under "Crs", to the right of each article should have the link "View nom subpage" ; if not, a subpage parameter will need to be added to the DYKmake.
6) Save the Prep page.
Closing the DYK nomination page
  1. At the upper left
    • Change {{DYKsubpage to {{subst:DYKsubpage
    • Change |passed= to |passed=yes
  2. At the bottom
    • Just above the line containing

      }}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.-->

      insert a new, separate line containing one of the following:
      To [[T:DYK/P1|Prep 1]]
      To [[T:DYK/P2|Prep 2]]
      To [[T:DYK/P3|Prep 3]]
      To [[T:DYK/P4|Prep 4]]
      To [[T:DYK/P5|Prep 5]]
      To [[T:DYK/P6|Prep 6]]
      To [[T:DYK/P7|Prep 7]]
    • Also paste the same thing into the summary.
  3. Check in Preview mode. Make sure everything is against a pale blue background (nothing outside) and there are no stray characters, like }}, at the top or bottom.
  4. Save.

For more information, please see T:TDYK#How to promote an accepted hook.

Handy copy sources: To [[T:DYK/P1|Prep 1]] To [[T:DYK/P2|Prep 2]] To [[T:DYK/P3|Prep 3]] To [[T:DYK/P4|Prep 4]] To [[T:DYK/P5|Prep 5]] To [[T:DYK/P6|Prep 6]] To [[T:DYK/P7|Prep 7]]

How to remove a rejected hook[]

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 January 7[]

Tek Fog

Created by Venkat TL (talk). Self-nominated at 12:07, 14 January 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • Firstly, several paragraphs in the article lack references or have a citation needed template.
  • Secondly, there is no clear description of exactly what the app even is, only what The Wire says about how it hacks. The article doesn't make it clear if Tek Fog is an app that is downloadable by App Stores and thus usable by an end-user, or a secret app that is not willingly or knowingly installed by users. It also doesn't state when it was first released or at least first known, as well as missing other basic app information.
  • Thirdly, the article doesn't seem to meet either WP:NPOV or WP:UNDUE. The article is almost entirely about criticisms about the app, which seems undue weight in my opinion. At the very least, apart from the aforementioned issue about a lack of descriptions about the app itself, there should be more inclusions about denials and statements (or lack thereof) by relevant people in the article. The article lede notes that The ruling BJP and the prime minister Narendra Modi were silent.; however, this statement is completely unreferenced and is not mentioned anywhere else in the body. The denials in the article (under the section "Reactions of BJYM, Persistent Systems and ShareChat") are limited to a single paragraph: are these really the only denials given thus far by people or companies involved? If that is all that is available then that would be acceptable, but this needs to be clarified, and in any case I think the article may need some trimming since it focuses too much about the reactions to the app rather than the app itself.
  • Fourthly, the article may need clarifications for non-Indian readers. For example, "BYJM" is mentioned in the article but is not defined anywhere in the text (the lede mentions a "BJP youth wing", but the connection must be made clear).
  • Fifthly, the article needs a copy. Mentions of media outlets, such as The Wire, The Hindu, or Washington Post, need to be italicized. The article text also needs revising for grammar and other issues.
  • Finally, multiple concerns have been raised on the article talk page, and as far as I can tell, most have not been addressed.
Right now the article needs a lot of work to be approved for DYK. Since I am largely unfamiliar with Indian politics, I would also appreciate any input from an uninvolved Indian or or someone else familiar with the topic, but right now, in its current state, I think the article is not ready for DYK. I would also suggest that the article be brought to WP:GOCE or otherwise be copyed by an uninvolved or. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:32, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Citation needed tags fixed.
  2. It is a PsyOps software whose access is limited to the operators and their Org. I have included the link in the lead.
  3. What is available has been added. WP:FALSEBALANCE. I will work to add refs, as asked
  4. Fixed
  5. GOCE copy requested
  6. All major / relevant concerns raised on talk page have already been resolved. While reviewing the talk page, Be advised that many users with political POV just want this article deleted/bowdlerized etc. Please refer to the AfD discussion to understand.
I will ping the reviewer when I am done with #3 and others. Venkat TL (talk) 11:50, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Your response to #2 needs to be clarified in the article itself, particularly in the lede and ideally in its own section. Rather than mentioning it in a section about The Wire's report, there should be a section about the app itself, perhaps using The Wire as a source. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:56, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I added it in the first line, I will flesh that part more as suggested.Venkat TL (talk) 12:04, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the s. I will do the rest of the review once the copy has been done. However, I am still unhappy with the tone of the article and would welcome any second opinions regarding how to handle it. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:34, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note that the nominator now has had five DYK nominations on the main page, so a QPQ will be required for this one. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:32, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5 and BlueMoonset: I just donated a QPQ to move this forward. --evrik (talk) 04:25, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on January 28[]

Beatriz Rico (neuroscientist)

Created by JuliaBrink (talk) and 199.111.226.78 (talk). Nominated by MrMeAndMrMe (talk) at 03:22, 31 January 2022 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: None required.

Overall: Symbol confirmed.svg The cited EurekAlert source does not contain the word "inhibitory", but I assume it's an accurate paraphrase of the article. You may want to link to this article from some other article to get rid of the orphan tag. feminist (talk) 10:40, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Symbol question.svg @MrMeAndMrMe, JuliaBrink, Feminist, and SL93: Per discussions at [3], I'm reopening this nomination as it there is some confusion about what the hook means, and it's not really accessible to a broad audience. I suggest it be reworded, or else another hook proposed in its place. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 11:09, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging Feminist for their opinion. SL93 (talk) 02:38, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The article does not contain the word "neuron" in its prose, while the hook does, but I get what the hook is referring to. The relevant sentence in the article is In 2019, the Rico Lab uncovered a developmental mechanism for specification of inhibitory connections within the brain. I'm fine with this, though other ors may have different opinions. Symbol confirmed.svg feminist🇺🇦 (talk) 11:35, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Feminist and MrMeAndMrMe: sorry, I'm drawing a blank on what this might mean. Reading the sourced article, would a hook like this be accurate?
  • ALT1: ... that neuroscientist Beatriz Rico and her team discovered a link between a protein and short-term spatial memory?
    • ALT1a: ... that neuroscientist Beatriz Rico and her team discovered a link between Brevican and short-term spatial memory?
    • ALT1b: ... that neuroscientist Beatriz Rico and her team discovered a link between a protein called Brevican and short-term spatial memory?
At the very least, people will think they understand at first glance. If we end up going with this, it'll have to be added into the article. theleekycauldron (talkcontribs) (she/they) 22:55, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Feminist and MrMeAndMrMe? theleekycauldron (talkcontribs) (she/they) 20:49, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps ALT1B. Just writing "a protein" is somewhat non-specific, writing "brevican" is also confusing, final one makes most sense in my opinion. MrMeAndMrMeLet's talk 20:51, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg reviewer needed for ALT1b- thanks! theleekycauldron (talkcontribs) (she/they) 06:51, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg back to DYKN until consensus for a hook is found theleekycauldron (talkcontribs) (she/they) 07:57, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I like ALT1b, and while I do find it interesting, I have some reservations if it's clear enough for readers who don't have much of a background in science. Linking to spatial memory might help, but I don't know if it could resolve the issue. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:01, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps also link neuroscientist. MrMeAndMrMeLet's talk 13:06, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Symbol possible vote.svg @JuliaBrink and MrMeAndMrMe: The hook seems to be coming from [4], which is a press release from King's College London posted uned by a third party. (It's sometimes hard to identify these, but they're written by university PR staff, aren't peer-reviewed, and are often scientifically unreliable.) For a discovery claim it would be preferable to cite an independent source like [5], or at least the actual peer-reviewed journal article [6]. Also, the hook fact needs to be in the Wikipedia article, but it doesn't mention Brevican or short-term spatial memory. Antony–22 (talkcontribs) 02:34, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, will do in a second. MrMeAndMrMeLet's talk 17:04, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5: you seem to need a paid subscription for the science.org thing, which I do not have. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov does not mention anything about brevican neurons or whatever. MrMeAndMrMeLet's talk 13:34, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 9[]

1917 Minsk City Duma election

Created by Soman (talk). Self-nominated at 12:06, 16 March 2022 (UTC).[reply]

The connection is not clear at all and does not meet the broad interest criterion. Readers will not immediately get the socialist or Jewish connection. Please propose a new hook with a completely different hook fact. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 16:15, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm - I think the Jewish connection is clear (and the socialist connection implied) from just the name General Jewish Labour Bund. Besides, it's wikilinked! I'm not sure a complete rejection of this hook fact is merited here, though I agree the hook needs some workshopping. How about these:
Pings for Soman and Narutolovehinata5. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 22:10, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Admittedly the direction still feels rather niche, but I think ALT1 is the best option among the hooks proposed so far. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:03, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
ALT1 looks good for me also. --Soman (talk) 12:28, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Erratus

A diagram reconstruction of Erratus sperare
A diagram reconstruction of Erratus sperare

Created by Fossiladder13 (talk). Self-nominated at 20:15, 9 March 2022 (UTC).[reply]

And in order to get this through at some point, I'd suggest to explore other hooks. @Fossiladder13: Can you think of any alternate hooks? Brainstorming might yield something fresh that others can more easily agree upon. --LordPeterII (talk) 19:16, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 15[]

Wings over Kabul: The First Airlift

Created by Whispyhistory (talk) and Philafrenzy (talk). Nominated by Whispyhistory (talk) at 18:55, 22 March 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 16[]

Avtar Singh Jouhl

Created by Davidjes601 (talk) and Zeromonk (talk). Nominated by Zeromonk (talk) at 09:02, 22 March 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Joofjoof I would say say so, but only on the topic of things relating to bars (pubs) and beers. SL93 (talk) 00:04, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg Good Beer Hunting is a reliable source for the topic per its orial staff and the awards won. However, there are multiple citation needed tags in the article and Eagwig is showing copyright violations. SL93 (talk) 00:15, 12 April 2022 (UTC) SL93 (talk) 00:15, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The citation needed tags were taken care of by someone else, but the copyright violations are still there. SL93 (talk) 15:15, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks folks - I did the CN tags but the article written after the Wiki article is causing the CopyVio - you'll see from the publication dates that the Wiki one came first, so it isn't actually CopyVio - the later article echoes this text rather than the other way around. Zeromonk (talk) 07:42, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Diff 1077118420 (March 14, 2022) has the same text that got flagged as copyvio with the article (published March 16, 2022), so this is a somewhat odd case of WP:BACKWARDSCOPY. Padgriffin Griffin's Nest 08:01, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I see, apologies Padgriffin, the author (of both the Wiki article and the GBH article) told me that the Wiki one published first. The text flagged as CV are all quotes within quotemarks and cited - I can't rewrite the quotes, would you suggest that I remove them? Zeromonk (talk) 12:48, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Zeromonk: It seems like most of the quotes are properly attributed and would pass MOS:QUOTE, so there's not really any real reason to remove them IMO.
@Zeromonk: There is non-quoted material that could be reworded such as "Under the guise of the IWA", "under the shade of trees", while white workers were paid", "had been living in Smethwick", "meetings once or twice in Wolverhampton", and some others per Earwig. SL93 (talk) 18:07, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@SL93: I've changed all of those now, thank you for the suggestions. Zeromonk (talk) 08:09, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg I am requesting a new reviewer. I suggest that someone goes through Earwig and reword all of the non-quoted material. SL93 (talk) 21:32, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bald's eyesalve

Recipe from Bald's Leechbook
Recipe from Bald's Leechbook

Moved to mainspace by Dumelow (talk). Self-nominated at 16:35, 16 March 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Symbol possible vote.svg Hi David notMD, thanks for your message here and at my talk page. As you surmise I write mainly on history and came at this from that angle. I have no medical knowledge and have never written in that field (nor intend to in the future). I must confess to not being familiar with the part of WP:MEDRS that generally prohibits the use of research such as this, many thanks for bringing this up. I think I will go through the article and remove the majority of the "Studies on efficacy" section because of this. Placing on hold for now, if you could bear with me, I would appreciate your input once I have made changes. All the best - Dumelow (talk) 07:48, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've made the first trim. How does it look now? Striking the original and suggesting an ALT hook below - Dumelow (talk) 08:13, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
ALT1: ... the Anglo-Saxons may have used a mixture of garlic, another Allium, wine and bovine bile to treat styes?
Thanks David notMD, I've amended the hook to "may have", deleted the passage you suggested and added in the source on corneal blindness. I've shifted Furner and Anonye to further reading - Dumelow (talk) 09:19, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I removed Furner and Anonye from Further reading. I recommend more effort to remove specifics about this having potential modern-day medicinal value. The Brennesssel ref should be upgraded to a reference. David notMD (talk) 11:46, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What is the rationale for removing the "further reading"? I have trimmed the description of some of the specifics. I don't have access to Brennessel but would welcome you adding content if you do? - Dumelow (talk) 07:03, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am back to Reject. As it exists on 24 March, the article still has too much medical/health content not supported by WP:MEDRS.

All in all, I see no redemption for this proposed DYK. David notMD (talk) 00:13, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Right, I've cut out all mention of styes and any mention of the ingredients performance against microbes. What remains is basically a description of the remedy and its preparation. Much reduced but still just above the minimum DYK length. Proposing another hook - Dumelow (talk) 09:47, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
ALT2: ... the Anglo-Saxons may have used a mixture of garlic, another Allium, wine and bovine bile as an eye medicine?

I will look at again, with a fresh eye. Would anything be gained by having a translation of the text? David notMD (talk) 14:03, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing, I've added a transcription of the original text and the British Library's translation - Dumelow (talk) 14:44, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize for the delay. With the transcription and translation this has become a historical article versus a medicinal one. I will mark this as possibly aceptable pending an evaluation of the copyright situation. David notMD (talk) 20:22, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Symbol question.svg Article is new, long enough, Alt2 hook is interesting and citation supported by ref #1, QPQ met. Outstanding issue: the facsimile, reproduction of the text and translation are from ref #1. That science journal article describes this content as copyright by British Library Board, Reproduced with permission. David notMD (talk) 20:24, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I consider the copyright issue unresolved and above my pay grade. Reference #1 has an image of the text, the same script copied, and the translation. All three are used in the Wikipedia article. That journal describes this content as copyright to the British Library Board, Reproduced with permission [in the journal article]. I question the use of same at Wikipedia. David notMD (talk) 15:10, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'll weigh in here since copyright is what I focus on. File:Balds-eyesalve-recipe.png is allegedly not in the public domain in the UK, but is in the United States because of different copyright standards. WMF legal counsel has previously weighed in and we take the side of the US regarding old public domain stuff - see commons:Commons:When to use the PD-Art tag if you want the gory details. So the license tag isn't quite right (and I'll work on that in a bit), but it is PD and certainly usable here. VernoWhitney (talk) 21:01, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The script copied is also fine, for the same reasons as above. The translation, however, is not completely free. Translations are derivative works, which means they're subject to the copyright claim of both the original text (PD, so not a problem) and the translator (appears to be the British Library). Now it looks like the British Library puts everything out under CC-BY-4.0, which isn't quite compatible with us, but there's certainly a strong argument to be made that the translation satisfies our non-free content requirements. I'll do some more research into the British Library angle for my own edification, but I'm not inclined to call the use in the article a copyvio. I just looked it up and I had remembered it wrong--we can use that license just fine. We can probably cite it a little better, but it's decently attributed as is. VernoWhitney (talk) 21:12, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 17[]

Pytest

Pytest logo
Pytest logo

Quote: In fact, projects all over the Internet have switched from unittest or nose to pytest, including Mozilla and Dropbox.[1]

References

  1. ^ Okken, Brian (September 2017). Python Testing with Pytest (1st ed.). The Pragmatic Bookshelf. ISBN 9781680502404. Retrieved 19 March 2022.

Created by Thomas Meng (talk). Self-nominated at 01:29, 19 March 2022 (UTC).[reply]

@Joseph2302: Thank you for your feedback. In the past few days, I took up an effor to fix those issues you mentioned. Now I think the article is in better shape. Please let me know how far it is now from DYK's standard. Thank you. Thomas Meng (talk) 01:54, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies, this slipped my mind. Reviewing properly now:
The article still has multiple paragraphs without citations. The minimum amount of sourcing I'd expect is one source per paragraph- if the sources already in the article support the text where I've added citation needed tags, then that should be quick to fix
The text is better, but it still very technical (which does seem to be the case for a lots of computing articles I've noticed). I understand that it's a technical topic, but there's almost nothing in the article that an average reader would understand. Some articles like Node.js for example has a "History" section, which would be beneficial to a less technical reader. There's still so much code in this article that it's too technical and confusing, and still feels to me like it's a manual on how to use it. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:56, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Joseph2302: Here's what I've done to address the problems you pointed out:
  • Modified every section so that each section's first paragraph(s) would only include pytest concepts, and implementation details are saved for the end. Additionally, wording/explanations are improved where possible.
  • Added a History section for less technical users to read. The lead section should also be understandble for them.
  • Added ~20 wikilinks for programming related concepts.
  • The citations problem is also fixed.
  • Unecessary code templates (e.g. for file, project names) that hinder readability are removed.
Thank you for your time and I look forward to hearing back from you. Thomas Meng (talk) 02:19, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 19[]

When Jews Were Funny, Being Canadian

10× expanded (When Jews Were Funny) and new article (Being Canadian) by Reidgreg (talk). Self-nominated at 02:27, 19 March 2022 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol question.svg TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 11:50, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol question.svg TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 11:50, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@TonyTheTiger: Thanks for the review! I've done some additional paraphrasing. For WJWF, one source still has over 10% Earwig score due to proper names and the quote from the TIFF jury, which I'd prefer to keep. For BC, the 13 and 14% scores are from proper names; the 17% score is from an illustrative review quote which I'd prefer to keep. As for citations, I feel it's up to DYK standards. The Synopsis sections are essentially the same as Plot sections for a non-documentary, using the work itself as the source. Are there any specific places you would like to be cited? (or in general if you feel there's a lot) – Reidgreg (talk) 07:08, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
O.K.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:21, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@TonyTheTiger: There may need to be additional citations for the hook fact(s), depending on which hooks we go with. We can eliminate the hooks you feel are problematic and concentrate on what's left. What do you think? What should I be working on? – 23:17, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I approve the first hook and 2a and 2b.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:44, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@TonyTheTiger: I've struck ALT1 and ALT2. Could you give it a tick so it can be moved to the approved page? Thanks! – Reidgreg (talk) 23:04, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I still see uncited paragraphs in each article.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:15, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@TonyTheTiger: Whoops! Sorry, I saw "approved" and got excited. I went over the articles for uncited material:
  • The Synopsis sections are verifiable to the work itself, like plot sections. I tried to add RSS where I could.
  • The interview lists are also verifiable to the work itself, with on-screen text when they first appear and also in the crs. I have some RSS which give partial lists (usually the more famous names) if you'd like me to add those.
  • I am inclined to let the interview lists slide as WP:PRIMARY sourced when you don't have WP:RSs. These are very objective facts so there is no room for interpretation in this regard. Those subjects that you can source, you should use RSs.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:27, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • There was a line in Financing of Being Canadian which had in-text attribution to the Indiegogo fundraising website. I literally couldn't cite this because the or wouldn't save it – Indiegogo is blacklisted – so I removed it. It's too bad, because this provided contextual information for the delay of the film's release.
  • Also in BC, I removed some uncited film festival appearances.
  • In the Inverviews section of WJWF is an uncited line: among the last filmed interviews or appearances by Shelley Berman, Jack Carter, and David Brenner. I believe that these are their last filmed interviews before their deaths (Berman died in 2017, Carter in 2015 and Brenner in 2014). I wasn't able to find anything else, but didn't have a source to specifically state that and so I put among. Let me know and I'll remove it if you feel it isn't good enough.
I believe those are the only problem areas. – Reidgreg (talk) 15:54, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@TonyTheTiger: I've cited the interviewees where I had secondary sources, cited quotations, and removed the 'last filmed appearances' line from the lead of WJWF (but kept it in the body for now). BTW, I found this at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Film § Documentaries: Documentary films require a modified approach for their articles. Instead of a plot summary, a documentary article should have a synopsis that serves as an overview of the documentary. The synopsis should describe the on-screen events of the film without interpretation, following the same guidelines that apply to a plot summary (see WP:FILMPLOT). – Reidgreg (talk) 14:22, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't just concerned about the last filmed appearances in the WP:LEAD. I don't know how relevant the "among the last filmed interviews or appearances" content is for people who went on to live for a couple of years after this was filmed and aired.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:43, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I feel it's important on a couple points: It's the last known interview with a couple, and likely several, of these legendary comedians. In some cases, their last filmed performances (ie: telling a joke). That they have died also underlines how this older generation of Jews is disappearing. I feel like this gives the film a place in the history of comedy, as well as discussing it. Not every in-depth source mentions this, but a couple do, and I feel it's worth including even if it might not be of interest to every reader. – Reidgreg (talk) 05:32, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If what you are saying is relevant to a particular individual the phrase "among the last filmed interviews or appearances by Shelley Berman, Jack Carter, and David Brenner" should have some sort of WP:RS should it not?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 08:41, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I concede. Removed. – Reidgreg (talk) 15:41, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I was thinking of using Template:Cite AV media, which has a "time" (as in timestamp) parameter. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 06:59, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't believe the hook fact is dependent on the synopsis. The question, I believe, was about uncited paragraphs in the synopsis. That's done, I think, and I don't believe citation formatting is a reason to hold up the nomination.
If {{rp}} is acceptable/understandable for book pages, I don't know why it would be unacceptable/confusing for time in a video. I'm sure I've seen formatting like this used somewhere, though I may not have executed it the proper way (it's not the easiest thing to search for). I'd rather not clutter the references with a separate cite AV media template for each of the 8 uses (especially when most of them aren't necessary per MOS:FILM). – Reidgreg (talk) 19:08, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If an independent source confirms the hook fact, it could just be added to another section and have that be used as the hook fact cite. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:50, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
User:Reidgreg, the reason that I feel that {{rp}} is a suboptimal solution is that when one looks at the inline citation, one would miss the timestamp. The less expert reader might get confused with a separate timestamp not embedded in the WP:IC. User:Narutolovehinata5 responded above with the clarification that Template:Cite AV media was his intended suggestion. That is a specialized template for this exact use. Let's use it so that the formatting comes out right.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:22, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, added a half-dozen cite AV media templates for that. – Reidgreg (talk) 16:07, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
TonyTheTiger, have your concerns been addressed? BlueMoonset (talk) 15:19, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 20[]

Electricity sector in Turkey

Improved to Good Article status by Chidgk1 (talk). Self-nominated at 12:29, 20 March 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Made an ALT1 a bit more precise with a more up to date source Chidgk1 (talk) 14:09, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Any other possible suggestions? ALT1 is not really that interesting of a hook in my opinion. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 07:24, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you can let me know which are interesting I will cite them.Chidgk1 (talk) 09:23, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think the best option is ALT6; however, all the hooks and the article itself may need some copying. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:07, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cited ALT6 and requested copy. Chidgk1 (talk) 05:49, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 22[]

Judiciary of Poland

5x expanded by Szmenderowiecki (talk). Self-nominated at 00:53, 22 March 2022 (UTC).[reply]

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

Hook eligibility:

QPQ: Red XN - You need to link the specific review that you're claiming cr for
Overall: Symbol question.svg I don't think that ALT0 checks out because you don't have figures for the "average (median?) court judge", but are just dividing the cases by the number of judges. I don't consider ALT4 to be interesting because due to the small number of top politicians, it doesn't make sense for the court to convene a lot. For ALT2, the precise findings were that these courts were not "established by law", mainly because of irregular appointments. See here for an explanation of the exact provision and how it's applied by the ECHR. See below for another version. For ALT3, I think it could be reworded but is confusing as it stands (it would be clearer with "itself", but still confusing). (t · c) buidhe 06:12, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As for ALT0/ALT1, the quote being verified is translated from Polish as: "Polish judges (there are about 10,000 of them) process approx. 15 million cases, which means that an average [mean, not median] judge processes about 1,500 cases per year," which was verified using 2018 data. I've used 2020 data and the same methodology. It was fact-checked as true back in 2020. Yes, it is a number of cases divided by judges (with all the problems that appear with measuring mean not median values, but this does not invalidate the hook as such, as I properly state that I calculate an average. I do have that data.
I don't see what's confusing about ALT3. Granted, it is apparently contradictory, but that's the point of DYKs (be short, punchy, catchy, and likely to draw the readers in to wanting to read the article – as long as they don't misstate the article content). Additionally, I don't actually see how I can reword it using "itself". Will you propose the rewording for this one, considering the article to which this is sourced?
ALT2a is OK, but I'd consider other options first.
ALT4 is at the low end of my priorities, so I'll drop this one to expe the process.
Re QPQ requirement, that's not my reading of the QPQ rules. It merely says that I must review one other nomination (unrelated to you)‍ and provide proof of that for examination. The full registry is available there, with my submissions reviewed (6) and my reviews (18). How is that not sufficient? Besides, I don't want to accidentally duplicate the QPQ claims, which AFAIK are not logged anywhere (unlike crs for reviews). If the newest review must be claimed for QPQ and I'm misreading the policy (not you), take my Template:Did you know nominations/Vitamin A review. Szmenderowiecki (talk) 13:12, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I do not know about Polish, but in English many people are going to see "average" and think it means "median" in this context. It would be clearer to talk about the mean number of cases handled per judge. Not to mention, each day is unclear whether we're talking about all days or working days...
Looking at ALT3 and not knowing the details of this case, I wouldn't know "what is it". Admittedly, right now I can't think of a good rewrite.
The reason most DYK participants link which DYK hook they are counting for QPQ is because otherwise it's impossible to tell if they claim the same review twice (I've done this by accident). (t · c) buidhe 21:05, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
OK, got it. The relevant ruling (summary) for ALT3 is here. In Polish (see full case here). The funny thing is, the English version says that the trial must happen in a tribunal established by law, while the Polish version talks of sąd ustanowiony ustawą. The ruling heavily relies on the technical distinction between what the Constitution calls a "court" and a "tribunal". The ruling basically says that the ECHR did not properly analyse the legal position of the Tribunal, and, since the Constitutional Tribunal is only a judicial organ but does not determine the outcome of cases like most courts do, it does not administer justice and therefore is not a tribunal/court within Article 6, which they argue only applies to the courts which administer justice. Szmenderowiecki (talk) 08:55, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Second opinion requested as this review has stalled for a month and there have been some changes by Micga to the article in the meantime, which might impact the new assessment. Consider him as a co-nom to this nomination due to these changes.Szmenderowiecki (talk) 14:28, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 23[]

Normandy massacres

Private Charles Doucette, who was one of the first victims of the Normandy massacres
Private Charles Doucette, who was one of the first victims of the Normandy massacres

Created by CplKlinger (talk). Self-nominated at 20:11, 26 March 2022 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation

Image eligibility:

QPQ: None required.

Overall: Symbol question.svg Though many aspects of this DYK? nom are good - interesting hook/no copyvios/length is fine/QPQ is NA for this or/etc - the article in its present state is ineligible for DYK? as it now has a single source maintenance template (placed on April 4th). The template is valid/appropriate — out of the article's 98 inline citations, 95 are to a single source. Shearonink (talk) 06:57, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking the time to respond. I have one last final due this week, and after I submit it I'll work on the citations. The book provides extensive footnotes, so it shouldn't be too difficult for me to track down alternative sources. CplKlinger (talk) 23:58, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Margolian, Howard (1998). Conduct unbecoming : the story of the murder of Canadian prisoners of war in Normandy. Toronto [Ont.]: University of Toronto Press. p. 123. ISBN 978-1-4426-7321-2. OCLC 431557826.

Articles created/expanded on March 26[]

Handstand (song)

Created by Infsai (talk). Self-nominated at 01:11, 26 March 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 27[]

Whistleblower Aid

Source: "The Facebook whistleblower whose disclosures have shaken the world’s largest social network has drawn behind-the-scenes help from a big player in the online world: Pierre Omidyar, the billionaire tech critic who founded eBay."

"Omidyar’s financial support, which was previously unreported, offers one of the most striking examples yet of how Frances Haugen’s disclosures have generated enthusiasm among critics of U.S. tech giants — offering a potentially crucial boost as she takes on one of the world’s most powerful companies. This gives her an edge that many corporate whistleblowers lack as she warns lawmakers, regulators and media organizations on both sides of the Atlantic that Facebook is endangering society by putting “profits before people.”"

"Omidyar’s global philanthropic organization Luminate is handling Haugen’s press and government relations in Europe, and his foundation last year gave $150,000 to Whistleblower Aid, the nonprofit organization that is providing Haugen’s legal representation and advice."

Politico

Moved to mainspace by Thriley (talk) and Jaredscribe (talk). Nominated by Thriley (talk) at 04:16, 31 March 2022 (UTC). Symbol question.svg[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol question.svg Eligibility looks good - long enough and hook is sourced. The article feels a little promotional, especially the second paragraph of 'History.' I would also the article to make it more clear how Haugen's actions and Omidyar are related, since that's what the hook focuses on. Once those things are fixed, we should be good to go! Ganesha811 (talk) 16:12, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I’ll add a bit more and perhaps make a second hook. Thriley (talk) 01:50, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 28[]

Hydroelectricity in Turkey

Improved to Good Article status by Chidgk1 (talk). Self-nominated at 16:34, 28 March 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Unlike Wikipedia the cite uses a hyphen so search for "Kiss-lip himri". Page 73 of the cite says "hydropower hazard high". But as the hook says not enough is known - fish could be just fine I guess - I hope someone will read it and give some money to scientists to find out. Whether dams would have been built just for irrigation if there was no possibility of hydropower I don't know - certainly proponents say it is the hydropower which has repaid cost. Chidgk1 (talk) 06:13, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Chidgk1: (a) Buddy's making a point about English grammar. Hydroelectricity is an abstract principle and a subset of electricity when differentiated by source. Dams are walls thrown across rivers. It's impossible that the fish are being hurt by the concept. (b) Similarly, I don't know if it's the result of a typo or mistaken by someone else but the current hook makes no sense. It has the abstract form of "the dinner needs to be found, because of the guests coming over." The verb needs to be changed to something on topic and a more logical connection established.

On the other hand, you just need a new hook. "We should go check and see if these fish are OK because maybe they aren't" isn't an actual statement. The provided cite above needs some info from p. 43 to work as support, but you're really trying to say something about the Turkish hydropower authorities shirking their duty to check on the consquences of their actions.

Relatedly, before this can be approved, you'll need to go to somewhere on the community portal and get some copy ing done. Sentences like "Large hydropower may be bad..." and "...dammed hydro can be dispatched within 3 to 5 minutes..." will need reworking. — LlywelynII 18:48, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@LlywelynII: I have requested copy at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Guild_of_Copy_Editors/Requests#Hydroelectricity_in_Turkey If you or anyone else have a better hook suggestion I will be happy to hear it. Chidgk1 (talk) 06:28, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Really focused on the fish, huh? — LlywelynII 01:21, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Seemed an amusing name - the rest of the article (most of which I wrote) looks rather boring - maybe you or someone else can spot something else hooky? Chidgk1 (talk) 05:10, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 31[]

Dun dun duuun!

The Walter variation.

Created by Maury Markowitz (talk). Self-nominated at 13:13, 31 March 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Added free version of the sound. Maury Markowitz (talk) 13:29, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Policy compliance:

Hook eligibility:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg This article is a great idea and it will be awesome to have the sound on the frontpage (which appears to be licensed fine) but "Does the article contain at least one citation to a reliable source for each paragraph and direct quote?" - right now it doesn't, although there are primary sources which are all youtube links. Maybe these sites can help 1, 2, 3. Also the claim "no one knows where it came from" is not mentioned and cited in the article presently. On the !? thing, I think ALT0a works fine. Mujinga (talk) 11:02, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Narutolovehinata5: Sorry, I did not see this review. A quick look shows every para does indeed have a cite, and I'm not sure I understand the bit about direct quotes (there are none) or primary sources (its a sound). The three links provided in the review are (1) a blog post, (2) talking about the famous Jaws theme (duuuh dun, duuuuuh dun...), and (3) an article about rebuilding a bridge (???). Not sure what to make of this, but seems good as is to me. Maury Markowitz (talk) 13:30, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 2[]

Zionism as settler colonialism

Created by Buidhe (talk). Self-nominated at 07:33, 2 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • @Buidhe: As I said, the phrasing attributes the views on success to the study, treating the idea of settler colonialism happening there as a given and just something to be assessed. It would be like saying "that, according to one source, Russia's denazification of Ukraine has been successful, but only in the south and east" - this statement is true (Kremlin as the source), and it sounds like the source is just weighing in on the places of success, with "Russia's denazification of Ukraine" basically in wikivoice. I'm not comparing the two situations, but hope this analogy gets across how the "settler colonialism in Israel" statement does not seem to be coming from the study mentioned. I'm also not saying it's bad or wrong or anything, but that the article doesn't, at the moment, seem to support such certainty. Perhaps a little more expansion would make all well. Kingsif (talk) 20:28, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Otherwise; new enough, long enough, QPQ done. The ref section looks a little unusual, and again concerned about overall coverage. Sectioning also doesn't seem standard for history/ideology article? I presume the article will improve with expanding. Kingsif (talk) 13:30, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OK, article has now been expanded and reorganized. If you don't like the original hook, how about:

(t · c) buidhe 04:43, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Thank you for the update, I think there are still some article issues, but, you know, better quality than a lot out there. Ideally, hooks shouldn't just be X says "quote", so alt3 is the best from that standpoint, but all of them are a little unwieldy. I acknowledge you're trying to work around my comments of stating as fact, so thanks for that. It is for these issues, though (lack of article quality and a suitable hook), that I would, personally, fail this nom. I don't want you to think that I'm out to stop your noms, though, because I'm not, so I'll offer this up for someone else to review. Sorry about that. Kingsif (talk) 10:24, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks for your opinion and pushing me to improve the article. When dealing with an abstract topic, I've found quotes to be a successful way of building hooks. (t · c) buidhe 17:03, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
From cursory look I have found at least three sources written by academic or printed in academic press that oppose the notion that presnted in the article [13],[14],[15](p46-47) I think important to include them per WP:NPOV . I am willing to send full text version to anyone intersted --Shrike (talk) 12:09, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't add the first source because it's a news not academic source. Colonialism isn't the same thing as settler colonialism and the second source is about the former rather than the latter, not mentioning settler colonialism at all. The third source is about campus debates on Israel and does not discuss settler colonialism either, only mentioning it in a few quotes from other sources. Of course relevant criticism can be added (in fact it already exists in the article), but in order to avoid cherrypicking, I would only cite sources that are about settler colonialism of which there are many. (t · c) buidhe 16:22, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 3[]

Conrad Bangkok

5x expanded by Cunard (talk). Self-nominated at 08:57, 3 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Symbol question.svg hi @Cunard, Narutolovehinata5, and Theleekycauldron: I'm reopening this nom following an issue raised at ERRORS, in particular that the source for the Merc limos and the Thai mythology limos are not from the same year (2008/2006) and are both very old. From an anecdotal search, it seems that by 2011 the hotel was introducing BMW limos instead of Mercs,[16][17] (and from this picture I'm not even sure if that qualifies as a limo anyway, it looks more like just a high-spec saloon car!) Their current website says "Airport Shuttle: Not available". Anyway, it seems some reworking will be necessary as it's WP:SYNTH and of dubious accuracy at present. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 10:22, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Amakuru: I see. I'm proposing a totally different hook, would this be okay?
ALT1... that on the day the Conrad Bangkok hotel opened in 2003, 10 people climbed up its walls dressed as Spider-Man?
I checked the The Nation source used to verify it and it's there. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:29, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Courtesy ping to Fram as the one who raised the issue at WP:ERRORS. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:30, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5: that sounds like a good hooky fact to me. If someone approves it then I can re-promote. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 10:33, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 4[]

U.S. support for Saudi-led operations in Yemen

Created by Mhhossein (talk). Self-nominated at 05:05, 10 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook eligibility:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg This is an inherently controversial article, as nearly every paragraph talks about really large quantities of human suffering caused by other humans. So we need to be careful to get it right; especially if we link to it from the front page. Right now, it doesn't.

In short, even besides a new hook, this article needs work. I know this is only DYK, not FA or GA, but as it is, the article is neither comprehensive nor neutral, and needs to be more of each before we can link to it from the front page. If you need chapter and verse, that's WP:DYKCRIT 3a, Neutral point of view, and Wikipedia:Did you know/Supplementary guidelines D7, the bits about " should appear to be complete and not ... fail to deal adequately with the topic ... rejected as insufficiently comprehensive." Not impossible to fix, but not a trivial tweak either, I'm afraid, noticeable work is required here. Good luck. GRuban (talk) 15:53, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@GRuban: Thanks for the review. Wow it's the longest DYK review I have ever seen, thanks for your interest and time! Anyway, here I have tried to give a due response to your review:
  • The fact is that there's no wikivoicing here. Hook1 explicitly says "the humanitarian situation of Yemen has reportedly worsened". This attribution should be enough to stay on the safe side. If it is not making you happy, we may add something like "according to the intercept". Also, I don't agree with you that the original hook implies US has made humanitarian crisis in Yemen. Why not assuming the Intercept meant US decision has nothing to do with the crisis in Yemen? Furthermore, as opposed to what you tried to imply, "The United States is far from an innocent bystander in the Yemen war. It has supplied tens of billions of dollars-worth of bombs, missiles, combat aircraft, and attack helicopters to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), weapons that have been the backbone of the Saudi/UAE war effort."Forbes See the differences?
  • I agree with you over Alt1 (hook2). Not because of the differentiation you explained, but because on the second look I realized the hook is not explicitly supported by the source. Striking Alt1.
  • I have added a background section to the page as per your third bullet point saying that there are more info to be added. Although this is not actually following the reviewer's guide. I noticed your reference to Wikipedia:Did you know/Supplementary guidelines D7. I think more than the minimum level is satisfied in this article.
  • I have changed the links from the names of the US presidents. The body already uses "administration" in the section topics as of the presidents. Plus I don't know much about the ranking you just stated, though I think that is irrelevant to this article and the DYK review.
  • In the fifth bullet point, you're actually referring to this change. You are right, that should be added to the body, but before that, it should be backed by a RS. I have now added the required materials to the body along with the backing sources.
  • I have inserted some of the dates into the article. Please let me know if there's more to be done.
  • In the analysis section, 'just a paragraph' is from Brookings (which is still reliable enough).
You say "noticeable work is required here". Please let me know if there is something specific to be resolved, I'd like to do them. Otherwise I'd like to remind you that DYK is not FA, as you just mentioned. --Mhhossein talk 06:29, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@GRuban: --Mhhossein talk 06:44, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Much better, thank you! A few minor points, but the article is mostly good enough for DYK.
  • "adminstration" needs an additional "i" in three section headings. Also there's a double period in the middle of the Trump section.
  • "Hadi" needs a qualifier before first introduction - President, or Yemeni President, or something like that?
  • "Human rights records" should just be "Human rights record" - it's almost never plural.
  • Not sure what the sentence about the Nitze is doing in that section - move to Obama administration?
I'm basically ready to approve, but I still don't like either hook, I'm afraid. For the first hook, it's writing "Although Fact A happened Fact B still happened", and that, to me, is too much like writing "Although Macron won in France, Orban won in Hungary", without a clear statement of linkage. Yes, that is the exact way The Intercept is putting it, but I would be much more confident if our sources actually said "Due to Fact A happening, Fact B is happening", and they really don't. Can we go for a hook with more straightforward backing from our sources? It doesn't even have to be weaker, it can be a stronger statement, just with explicit source backing; how about something like "... that due to (US support for SA-led ops in Yemen), both have been accused of war crimes?" with backing from the Human Rights Watch article and the Nation article? (By the way, the link to The Nation article backing that is dead, I found it at https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/war-crimes-united-states-saudi-arabia-yemen/ or even https://web.archive.org/web/20201107231028/https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/war-crimes-united-states-saudi-arabia-yemen/ ; the HRW article is still up at https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/03/21/yemen-embargo-arms-saudi-arabia but an archive wouldn't hurt). That's a clear "due to" statement from our sources. Or something else; the article is good now, but the proposed hooks are weak. --GRuban (talk) 17:06, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hey GRuban: Sorry for the delay. I have done some of the changes covering your concerns. As for the hooks, I am OK with your suggestion. I checked the source and found a portion saying "US participation in specific military operations, such as providing advice on targeting decisions and aerial refueling during bombing raids, may make US forces jointly responsible for laws-of-war violations by coalition forces." How about going with the following hook:
ALT2: ... that due to U.S. support for Saudi-led operations in Yemen both Saudi Arabia and United States may be hold responsible for laws-of-war violations?
--Mhhossein talk 18:06, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the ping. So looking at it, there are still balance issues. Also more minor things.
  • the lead says "In 2021, Joe Biden vowed to halt U.S. support for the war, though U.S. arms sales to the coalition have continued." Where is that stated in the body? And cited?
  • it also says "According to the Human Rights Watch 2016 assessment, U.S. aid to Saudi Arabia in the Yemen war "may make U.S. forces jointly responsible for laws-of-war violations by coalition forces." - that's cited, but I don't think it should be in the lead, it's one small detail, and the key word is "may". That statement is OK for the DYK, which is supposed to be about small details, but the lead is supposed to be a summary of the body.
  • I still think the Analysis and Human Rights sections devote too much coverage to opinions in general. That's a matter of orial decision, of course, but exacerbates help the next point.
  • I don't see a single opinion that supports the US position here, while there are plenty that criticize it. That seems unbalanced.
  • Another matter of orial decision is the large number of long direct quotes from sources. Can't we summarize the meaning? We quote when the specific wording is important, on most of these cases rephrasing seems like it would be very possible.
  • Still two periods in Trump section. --GRuban (talk) 21:54, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
GRuban:
  • The continuation of US support was inserted here. I think the sources [18] and [19] would back the mentioned phrase.
  • The detailed portion was removed.
  • Thanks for the insight, but I don't think the opinions are payed too much weight in the Human rights record. Actually it was tried to make proper attributions whenever needed. That is what WP:NPOV demands. Also, you don't see a single opinion that supports the actions because I could not find one. Let me know if there's any.
  • The concern with the quotes are not really necessary for the sake of DYK !!! not a GA or FA.
I hope the article is now ready for the main page. --Mhhossein talk 18:01, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah Sayifwanda

It was alleged that Ms Sayifwanda was the one who forcefully grabbed the microphone from the ECZ official and strongly opposed the creation of a central constituency which the majority voted in favor of. Ms Sayifwanda’s behaviour was said to be what triggered the throwing of chairs at each other by the lundas and luvales as she accused the electoral commission of Zambia officials of siding with the luvales."

https://www.lusakatimes.com/2020/12/31/former-zambezi-east-mp-sara-sayifwanda-has-died/

Created by 19jshi (talk). Self-nominated at 00:50, 5 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

For what it's worth, the nom appears to be a student or and hasn't responded to a talk page message. Perhaps someone more familiar with African topics can help out here? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:33, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Without additional context that hook doesn't really say much. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:31, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 5[]

Imam Reza shrine stabbings

Created by Kelhuri (talk) and Mhhossein (talk). Nominated by Mhhossein (talk) at 06:13, 11 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • Thanks for the suggestions, but I still stand with the original hook. Your Alts are too simple I believe. The incident was apparently a move against the Sunni-Shia unity (it happened after the killing of a sunni scholar in a mosque in northern Iran). That's why Sunni scholars unanimously condemned the attack. --Mhhossein talk 05:16, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also the page has not been featured on the main page. --Mhhossein talk 05:20, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mhossein, I'm looking at this, and at the article--but I'm stuck already in the second sentence of the description. "A second cleric who had died" needs a lot of ... well it needs some ing. Drmies (talk) 01:15, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Drmies: Hey, I was not notified due to the misspell. I have nominated the page at GOCE. --Mhhossein talk 11:45, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
User:Mhhossein, I apologize, my friend--I should have checked better. Drmies (talk) 16:12, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No worries Drmies. Will the DYK nomination be reviewed by you after the GOCE job is finished?--Mhhossein talk 17:46, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sure thing, Mhhossein--please just ping me when you're done. Drmies (talk) 19:56, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 6[]

Esau Chulu

Created by 19jshi (talk). Self-nominated at 01:37, 6 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • @19jshi: Are there any other ways of wording it? If someone isn't familiar whatsoever with Zambian politics (which, to be honest, is going to be most cases), that wouldn't sound to interesting. In Indonesia, for example, the government coalition has 7 parties, so 4 would if anything sound small. Maybe contrast it with his predecessors, if supported by sources? Juxlos (talk) 13:48, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 7[]

2022 Birmingham Stallions season

Created by PCN02WPS (talk). Self-nominated at 05:29, 15 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Symbol possible vote.svg I notice that this nomination is now more than three weeks old, but the nominator has not provided a QPQ. As per RfC on excessively late supply of QPQ crs, the QPQ should be done within one week. Please provide a QPQ promptly. Flibirigit (talk) 14:55, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kim E. Nielsen

Moved to mainspace by Thriley (talk), Penny Richards (talk), and Dodger67 (talk). Nominated by Thriley (talk) at 15:47, 10 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Callaway Gardens

5x expanded by Mgreason (talk). Self-nominated at 21:00, 8 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

* I've revised the hooks as suggested and trimmed details from the article. Please advise. Mgrē@sŏn (Talk) 00:20, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Mgreason: - There's still a lot of uncited text in the article. You're going to need to have pretty much everything in there cited to a reliable source. Hog Farm Talk 04:52, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ a b c Rice, Mark (April 6, 2022). "Ownership changing at Callaway Resort & Gardens, largest employer in Harris County". Columbus Ledger-Enquirer. Retrieved 6 April 2022.
  2. ^ a b Caldwell, Carla (Nov 10, 2015). "Online petition seeks to stop Thursday closing of Callaway Gardens attraction". Atlanta Business Chronicle. Retrieved 6 April 2022.

Nicholas Jakubovics

Created by Nangaf (talk). Self-nominated at 19:13, 8 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Life Speaks to Me

Created by Eurohunter (talk). Self-nominated at 10:19, 7 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]


General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

@Legoktm: I paraphrased it a little but I don't have idea how to write "Basshunter flex his artistry in different synthy and softer electronic-pop directions" and "The track replicates the boundary-pushing signature style" in different way and not change the meaning so for now it is "since "Home" and "Angels Ain't Listening" Basshunter developed his music style in different synthy and softer electronic-pop directions" and "track recreates the boundary-pushing style of the late Avicii music". Eurohunter (talk) 07:31, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Legoktm: There are listed a few additional sources on article talk page but I did not find the way to use them in article. Eurohunter (talk) 07:31, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I reviewed all the sources on the talk page and they're all trivial mentions or just inclusion in a list of new music. I also spent some time looking for more sources and couldn't find any. My inclination is to decline this on the ground that the article is not notable, but I'm going to ask for a second opinion, please stay tuned. Legoktm (talk) 04:35, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Legoktm: I will look for more sources but there are also pages like NetFan.pl which seems to be quite serious with partners such as Polskie Radio, Agora or distributor pl:e-Muzyka and it exist since 2003. They are also a patrons for such festiwals - for example Festiwal Piosenki "O wolności" organised by Institute of National Remembrance. DJ Raport is a news site published by DJ Promotion (since 1990) and since 1995 they organised courses for profesional DJ-s. DJ Promotion has also own chart Top w dyskotekach - which was published by Polish Society of the Phonographic Industry Eurohunter (talk) 11:15, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hook eligibility:

@Legoktm: I added the names to quote and article. Should last "his" be ommitted? Eurohunter (talk) 07:31, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
QPQ: None required.

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg I'm going to make a few minor copy s to the article as well. Legoktm (talk) 05:39, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 8[]

Ich will den Kreuzstab gerne tragen, BWV 56 discography

5* expanded by Gerda Arendt (talk), Mathsci (talk) and Thoughtfortheday (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 21:09, 15 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

This is at least accurate. Mathsci (talk) 23:38, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Mathsci (talk) 06:07, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for helping. I wanted to add you as author but hit submit too soon, sorry, and now corrected. My hook: I picked the first thing obvious, because it was the last day to nominate, and I was tired. The recordings you mention are not yet in the article (unless it happened overnight), so could not yet be used. Discogs is not regarded as a reliable source, so when adding them please use other references. The hook is not "completely inaccurate" because it nowhere says that these were the only ones. We could add "among others" if that helps. I am no friend of ALT2 because it provides no hint at how many singers were attracted to this particular piece, and the pretty image is not picturing "recording". It's "quirky", though, that this very German piece was first recorded by an American in the Netherlands (an then not again for decade) The teacher-son relationship could also be used for DFD and Goerne, btw. I also find interesting that these two both did it again a decade or two later. Just DYK has this limit of 200 chars and I don't now how to say so without mentioning only quantities and years. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:39, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Potential recordings for the Kreuzstab cantata can be hunted down off-wiki on "authority control" links, bach-cantatas.com, Allmusic, Muziekweb, discogs, google, spotify, archive.org, etc; after that, refs in gramophone, diapason, jstor, etc, can be pinned down. But the list so for is inadequate. On archive.org, it was easy to find Harrell's recording with Robert Shaw; Harrell was one of the greatest singers of his generation. The events of 1939 are fairly well known. Nowadays, Bach's music is regarded as universal, not "German music". You write: I am no friend of ALT2 because it provides no hint at how many singers were attracted to this particular piece, and the pretty image is not picturing "recording". The so-called "pretty image" is a routine photograph of the Concertgebouw, prior to Nazi occupation. The interior of the main hall of the Concertgebouw is unaltered; the performance can be heard on archive.org, YouTube, etc.
For the 1939 recording, the citation is already in the article.[21] For the second recording of Harrell in 1958, Jonathan Woolf writes: "Mack was seemingly the most instinctively noble of singers. There is an unselfconscious gravity in his singing but never one that elides into the statuesque. He is careful to ensure clarity and rigorous attention to the text and his noble seriousness works outstandingly in the recitatives."
The recording of Barry McDaniel is already cited.[22] John Quinn writes: "Mention must also be made of Barry McDaniel’s splendid performance of the solo cantata, Ich will den Kreuzstab gerne tragen, BWV 56. He offers a dignified and elevated account of this moving cantata, as does Werner. McDaniel’s tone is even and full throughout the compass of his voice and he sings with sensitivity and intelligence, making the most of the words. In the great aria 'Endlich, endlich wird mein Joch' he has the inestimable benefit of a partnership with Pierre Pierlot. Pierlot’s playing is sprightly and stylish while McDaniel’s divisions are excellently clean. The performance of this cantata is one of the highlights of the collection." Mathsci (talk) 13:33, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I wonder why you don't say so on the article talk, or in the article. We know it's a work in progress, and we should admit that it will not be complete. - This template is for a reviewer to check. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:06, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's already happened in the article; that affected the choice of external link for BWV 56. There are more than 70 recordings but only 22 in the table. Schreier and Bär are missing. According to Jonathan Freeman-Attwood on Gramophone, Barry McDaniel and Fritz Werner are still rated as being in a league of its own. The first recording of Goerne and Norrington receives high praise; but the later one with Goerne, not so. The Peter Wollny's pdf commentary, however, is useful and new. Mathsci (talk) 15:49, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 9[]

John A. Sibley Horticultural Center

Created by Mgreason (talk). Self-nominated at 18:40, 9 April 2022 (UTC). QPQ=[23][reply]

References

  1. ^ a b Adams, Tony (30 October 2015). "Callaway Gardens closing Sibley Horticultural Center, with Mr. Cason's Vegetable Garden being relocated". Columbus Ledger-Enquirer. Retrieved 27 March 2022.
  2. ^ a b c Caldwell, Carla (Nov 2, 2015). "Callaway Gardens shutters large attractions". Atlanta Business Chronicle. Retrieved 9 April 2022.
  3. ^ Rice, Mark (April 6, 2022). "Ownership changing at Callaway Resort & Gardens, largest employer in Harris County". Columbus Ledger-Enquirer. Retrieved 6 April 2022.

Viaud Ridge

Created by EpicPupper (talk). Self-nominated at 04:22, 9 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 12[]

Wayne Cooper (basketball)

5x expanded by Bloom6132 (talk). Self-nominated at 00:30, 19 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Charles Turzak

Created by JohnPomeranz (talk). Self-nominated at 19:14, 18 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Key Underwood Coon Dog Memorial Graveyard

Thanks for the reply. Northwest Alabama is a very long way from home for me. The restaurant looks like fun, and I will add it to my itinerary if and when I am in the area. But the likelihood is very slim, unless I can serendipitously land work in the area, and that too is unlikely. This is way off my beat. 7&6=thirteen () 16:01, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, I have been told in a phone converation that better photographs will be uploaded in the next few days to Wikimedia commons. I hope so. 7&6=thirteen () 16:26, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The cemetery caretakers sent me excellent pictures today. Since they are the copyright holders/creators, I have asked them to please upload them Wikimedia Commons, since I can't waive their copyright. They sent them from their phone; and doing the upload process is probably best done from a computer. I've told them all that. I expect this will be resolved this evening. 7&6=thirteen () 12:56, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Drmies A sidetrip while there Hames, Melea (July 9, 2017). "CARLEY'S ADVENTURES: RATTLESNAKE SALOON & COON DOG CEMETERY". Rattlesnake saloon. Not worth putting in this article, but interesting nonetheless. 7&6=thirteen () 14:28, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
So that place is kind of cool--you get to ride in the bed of a pick up truck down from the parking lot, and the kids love that. Underneath that ledge it's nice and cool. But the music is that old-timey country, and the food, well, it's OK I guess, sort of mediocre standard bar food. Not bad but not great. But the setting of the place is of course spectacular, and it's a pretty well-known here; I'm sure there's enough coverage to write a short article. Drmies (talk) 15:07, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 13[]

Frequency modulation encoding

Created by Maury Markowitz (talk). Self-nominated at 20:27, 13 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

@David Eppstein: FM is a specific implementation of DME in the same fashion that MFM is a different specific implementation of DME. FM referrs to both the encoding of the individual data bits as well as the disk format and the header timing signals. I believe this is well explained in the article. Maury Markowitz (talk) 21:45, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The lead sentence of the article says that it is about the code 0 → 01, 1 → 10, and mentions its usage in multiple applications. If it is intended to be only about the way floppy disks were formatted using this code, and not about the code itself, I think it needs significant rewriting to make that clear. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:51, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@David Eppstein: The lead sentence of the article is "Frequency Modulation encoding, or simply FM, is a simple type of run length limited code that saw widespread use in early floppy disk drives and hard disk drives." I see nothing like "it is about the code 0 → 01, 1 → 10" and I think it clearly indicates the field is disk storage. I have added a link to DME in the appropriate location and I assume from the wording of your reply that the merge tag can now be removed? Maury Markowitz (talk) 23:09, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"is a simple type of run length limited code". That describes it as a code. It is the same code as the one described in differential Manchester encoding. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:18, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"That describes it as a code" ... in a specific setting. I have added words to this effect. Maury Markowitz (talk) 14:27, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
But it's the same code, used for the same basic purpose (maintaining synch). How is it notable for two articles rather than just one? —David Eppstein (talk) 18:03, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As I am now stating for the third time, this article is not about the code, it is about the entire system of which DFE is used for one part. I have made several changes to the text to make this distinction clear and you haven't commented on any of them. Maury Markowitz (talk) 18:40, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
While we're repeating stuff we've already said, maybe I should repeat that the first sentence of Frequency modulation encoding states that FM encoding "is a type of run length limited code". If you don't want to think the article is about a type of code, maybe you shouldn't say in the first sentence that it is about a type of code? —David Eppstein (talk) 19:46, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

By all means, suggest alternative phrasing. Maury Markowitz (talk) 16:48, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 14[]

Environmental impact of the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine

Source: “ The Black Sea Biosphere Reserve, on the southern coast of Ukraine, is a haven for migrating birds. More than 120,000 birds spend the winter flitting about its shores, and a multicolored spectrum of rare species — the white-tailed eagle, red-breasted merganser and black-winged stilt, to name just a few — nest among its protected waters and wetlands.

The reserve is also home to the endangered sandy blind mole rat, the Black Sea bottlenose dolphin, rare flowers, countless mollusks, dozens of species of fish — and, in recent weeks, an invading military.

“Today the territory of the reserve is occupied by the Russian troops,” Oleksandr Krasnolutskyi, a deputy minister of environmental protection and natural resources in Ukraine, said in an email last month. “Currently there is no information on environmental losses.”

But military activity in the area sparked fires large enough to be seen from space, prompting concerns about the destruction of critical bird breeding habitats.”

The New York Times

Created by Thriley (talk), MaitreyaVaruna (talk), and Matthiaspaul (talk). Nominated by Thriley (talk) at 04:12, 20 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

@LordPeterII: Thank you. I fixed it. Thriley (talk) 17:07, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Helen Hadsell

Created by Bruxton (talk). Self-nominated at 02:15, 15 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Symbol redirect vote 4.svg this one still needs a full review. Bruxton (talk) 23:57, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Symbol possible vote.svg The problem with this nomination extends beyond the hooks, since the article itself is way too credulous. I read the article and looked at the newspaper stories in footnotes 3 through 6 and there's not a shred of proof presented in any of them that Helene Hadsell won even one contest, much less every one she ever entered. Each of these stories is of the mushy, back-of-the-paper soft news variety (so much for the good old days of pre-Internet local journalism ...). We need Snopes to go back in a time machine and do a fact check on this lady. Until that can happen, sentences in the article like She entered and won many contests for items and for all-expense paid trips. and She also won a house at the 1964 New York World's Fair. and After reading the book she began entering and winning contests. and Her first win was an outboard motor in a contest sponsored by Coca Cola. and Next she won a bicycle for her daughter, and then trips to Europe, Disneyland and New York. and Hadsell won the home. cannot stand as they are. Each of them need to be modified with "She claimed" or equivalent words. Wasted Time R (talk) 01:17, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Wasted Time R: Hey, thanks for checking out the article. I was extremely interested in the subject and the metaphysical/positivity angle. FYI: I think her actual claim was she never failed to win something that she wanted, but some reporters took that to mean she never lost a contest. And I used those references for the hooks, so now I have tainted the nomination. Bruxton (talk) 03:52, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Bruxton: To dig a little deeper: Back then, there was a hobby/activity/obsession called "contesting", in which people would increase their chance of winning contests, by submitting tons of entries to random drawings or becoming creative at submitting entries to contests that wanted inspirational words or marketing phrases or limericks or whatever. There are newspaper stories about contesting and its contestors, such as this UPI story about a different woman, Joan Seltzer, that ran in a lot of papers, or this Cincinnati Enquirer story about an Ohio man, Wesley Hurley, who after 15 years of compulsive sweepstakes entering was apparently involved in setting up the American Contest Association, which issued bulletins listing every active contests at a given time. Like Helen Hadsell, these people all have instructional help they are trying to sell, as does Joanne Allison, who ran this ad in a Wyoming paper. Perhaps the best profile is that of Chuck Brucks of Florida, in this Orlando Sentinel story, who has spent five years contesting and has won a lot of things but never, apparently, anything he wanted much. Now if you look at the continuation, this last story does mention Helen Hadsell, who is cred by this American Contest Association as being the biggest winner of all of these contestors ... and the American Contest Association is marketing her The Name It & Claim It Game book.
What to take from all this? Are these people are winning some things in sweepstakes and other contests? Yes. Are they exaggerating their accomplishments in order to sell their instructional wares? Maybe. But to the extent they do win, it is by what the Orlando Sentinel describes as "the contester's three-pronged credo: 'persistence, patience and postage.'" Seltzer describes entering thousands of contests with hundreds of wins. Brucks describes spending $6000 on thousands of entries and winning 230 times for a total value of $6000, meaning he's only breaking even.
So Helen Hadsell did not win every contest she entered, nor did she win everything she wanted to win. It's impossible. Nor were her wins due to psychic techniques or positive thinking. If she won, it was by the same methods that the others contestors used. Wasted Time R (talk) 13:02, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Wasted Time R: Did she enter many contests? yes. I do not think she ever denied that. And I am just learning that she entered many contests under her husband's name Pat Hadsell - in the 60's they called her Mrs. Pat Hadsell. When she won the outboard motor from Coca Cola she entered as Pat Hadsell - probably thinking why would they let a woman win an outboard motor, (the contest was won with an essay). Last night I added another news article of her family posing with a model of the house her family won. Did she win a house? You made a very strong statement above which I think is argumentative. Does positivity work? The answer is I don't know, and neither do you. However, the statements about her positivity are all qualified in the article with "She claimed". So focusing on that aspect is sidetracking. Regarding winning everything she ever wanted - it is not in the article... so again not something to focus on in a DYK. I erased the claim of her winning every contest. I followed the news articles reporting her many wins - and some of it was also her own self promotion. Helen Hadsell promoted herself well with speeches and books and courses. Finally you can give a red tick, or you can tag the article as a wp:hoax if you like. Bruxton (talk) 15:04, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Bruxton: I didn't mean to sound argumentative towards you, apologies if I did. And I don't want to fail the nomination; it's an interesting subject. But I do want to get the article in the fairest shape possible. So some more digging. Look at this Daily News Tex story from early 1964, before the Formica house win, in which she sounds just like every other contestor from that era – indeed she is head of a local contesting club. Her family submitted lots of entries, didn't win anything for a long time, then she took a correspondence course in contesting and got a better idea of what kinds of phrases contest judges were looking for. At that point she starts winning, but she still hadn't won anything big. No mention of the power of positive thinking whatsoever, no mention of how reading Norman Vincent Peale turned things around for her. Now look again at the December 1965 Fort Worth Star Telegram story you added recently, which is after she won the Formica house contest. Again, no mention whatsoever of Peale, positive thinking, auric energy, or anything like it. Now jump ahead half a decade and go to this Irving Daily News story from early 1972. Her Name It and Claim It book had just been published in 1971 and she's full of her positive thinking/she-wins-every-contest stuff. It's completely different. So as I see it, the article needs to present that she was originally a contestor, and was the head of a contesting club, and she used contesting techniques to get some wins; and then later she became an author and instructional sales person, and pitched a different source for her wins. Wasted Time R (talk) 23:42, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Wasted Time R: thanks, you have done a considerable amount of research for this nom. I wonder if you might consider ing the article and adding the verbiage and research. It will be much appreciated. Bruxton (talk) 02:21, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Wasted Time R: Please let me know what s I should make to advance for the nomination to proceed. Bruxton (talk) 02:07, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Bruxton: I took your invitation to add to the article and ran with it (and maybe I went overboard? hopefully not). I'm now finished with my additions and changes; see what you think of them. Wasted Time R (talk) 11:07, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Wasted Time R: It is a more thorough and comprehensive article after the s. I think the "contestors" part provides context and neutrality to for the metaphysical claims. I also think you have enough to start work on a contestor article. If you start one I will participate. Thanks for making Wikipedia better. Bruxton (talk) 13:28, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Okay good. At this point I'm obviously a contributor to the article and can no longer be a reviewer, so I'm marking it as such and flagging it for a fresh look by someone else. Wasted Time R (talk) 13:53, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Anna October

Created by Trillfendi (talk). Self-nominated at 21:41, 14 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

@Sammi Brie: I now realize it was the Vogue source for ALT0, not Marie Claire UK, so I now replaced it. For ALT1, The Guardian source inline (in the same sentence as sustainable) talked about bureaucracy and reuse of materials; in that source it’s all in the same paragraph. Although in the article someone else user:Victuallers claims the ethical reuse of material is not sustainable fashion, despite what Vogue' said in their description, and they changed it. Trillfendi (talk) 16:24, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"claims the ethical reuse of material is not sustainable fashion" umm citation required I think. I don't think I said that or even typed it. Sustainable Fashion means being sustainable. Using deadstock is not sustainable ... you run out of deadstock! If you are convinced that Vogue are not greenwashing (I reckon they have blinkers on) then change it back ... but are you sure Vogue are not just saying that using deadstock isnt quite as bad as what is uually done? Victuallers (talk) 17:01, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You said here that using last years material doesnt make you sustainable. Its a contradiction. In this, Vogue described a Ukrainian designer being sustainable by using deadstock (although October is focused on in the second half of the article), Marie Claire Ukraine said that Anna October's collection using deadstock (Ukrainian: дедсток) makes it more ethical and ecological. That's what makes her a sustainable fashion brand. Trillfendi (talk) 18:44, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The contradiction is that being "sustainable" is not a graduated scale. You are either sustainable or you are not. So when your quote above says that using dead stock "makes it more ethical and ecological" then it confirms that they are becoming "more" .... ie they are not there yet. i.e. "sustainable". This marketing stuff about being "more ethical and ecological" can be said of a coal mine than now uses recyclable plastic cups on Tuesdays. It sounds great ... but the coal mine is not sustainable. ..... the same applies to using deadstock. Imagine a designer goes to the store and chooses a material to use for this years collection. "Oh" says the marketing guy.... "just before you chose the material it was deadstock"... wooo ! I think we can claim we are becoming "more ethical and ecological" ... why I bet some may be convinced that we are now "sustainable". Victuallers (talk) 22:51, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Sammi Brie: The comments seem to have distracted the review... I made my point and its not important. Victuallers (talk) 09:44, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 15[]

Kasymaly Jantöshev

Created by Curbon7 (talk). Self-nominated at 10:46, 15 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 17[]

Lettergate

Created by Hindustani.Hulk and Bookku. Nominated by Bookku (talk) at 06:12, 24 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • I don't think either hook can run under the current wording per the "unduly focuses on one side of an issue" criterion. They also don't sound very neutral. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:02, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please let us know when that is done. ALt1 is better, but are there any other hook ideas? --evrik (talk) 13:07, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
IMO, there is reasonable scope and opportunity for User:Hindustani.Hulk to expand the article further and also make it neutral. And such expansion likely to open more hook ideas.
I got interested in DyK for this article because it brings forth how politicians play politics and a political process (in Pakistan or else where) takes shape.
Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 16:43, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm willing to give this a limited time to get ed into shape. --evrik (talk) 18:54, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

William West (botanist), William West Jr, George Stephen West

5x expanded by Storye book (talk). Self-nominated at 17:38, 19 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 18[]

Brassey's

Converted from a redirect by Wasted Time R (talk). Self-nominated at 09:48, 19 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

How about any of these?
  • ALT0b: ... that Brassey's, a prominent name in the publishing of books on military topics, had a divergent corporate history between Britain and the United States?
  • ALT1: ... that Brassey's, a prominent name in the publishing of books on military topics, eventually underwent separate acquisitions in Britain and in the United States?
  • ALT2: ... that Brassey's, a prominent British name in the publishing of books on military topics, has a history that goes back to 1886?
As for the boldings, that is per MOS:BOLDREDIRECT; each is a target of a redirect and several of them are already linked from existing articles. Wasted Time R (talk) 21:41, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • ALT3: ... that Brassey's Defence Publishing, acquired by Robert Maxwell in 1980, could trace its history back to 1886?
  • ALT4: ... that Brassey's, "the oldest name in defence publishing" in the UK, branched into sports titles in the US?
  • ALT4a: ... that Brassey's, "the oldest established name in defence publishing" in the UK, branched into sports titles in the US?
  • ALT5: ... that Brassey's own history spans The Naval Annual in the UK to "military blunders" in the US? Note: Could even highlight some titles that are attention-getting; of course would require some corresponding s to the article. Happy to help if needed. Cielquiparle (talk) 11:40, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Cielquiparle: Thanks for doing the review. I think ALT3a is better than ALT3, because it uses the simpler form of the name. ALT4 leaves the word 'established' out of the quote from the article; if this is intentional, it would need an ellipsis. Regarding ALT5, how is Brassey's Book of Military Blunders specific to the US? It covers mistakes throughout history and per this WorldCat listing, was published by Batsford Brassey in the UK before it was published by Brasseys Inc. in the US. Wasted Time R (talk) 12:40, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tapuae-o-Uenuku / Hector Mountains

Created by Turnagra (talk). Self-nominated at 22:11, 18 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Kathleen Freeman (classicist)

Created by Srsval (talk). Self-nominated at 13:58, 18 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook eligibility:

Image eligibility:

QPQ: None required.

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg Thank you for an interesting article, which needs a few tweaks for DYK. It is new enough as a WP:GA, long enough and neutrally written. It is mostly cited inline and I have assumed good faith where I could not access sources. However the paragraph beginning "Freeman is best known for her works" needs to be cited. Do sources say "Freeman was gay" or leave it for readers to work out for themselves? Also I couldn't verify the paragraph beginning "In recent years Freeman's work has been re-assessed" in the sources provided. Earwig's tool shows some overlap with sources, which is mostly due to names of books and University College... However "writing 27 books ... Mallett" seems to be a quote From Ancilla to the Pre-Socratic Philosophers and should be reworded. The hook facts are stated in the article, but are currently not immediately followed by an inline citation to a reliable source. Also could you possibly provide an alternative hook based on detective fiction? The picture in the article is fair use and cannot be used on this nomination page. You are QPQ exempt as this is your fourth nomination. TSventon (talk) 23:59, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks TSventon for your time and effort reviewing this. I've added a citation for the paragraph beginning 'Freeman is best known for her works...'. I've reworded the sentence about 27 books to avoid overlap, and I've added a citation to the sentence about Freeman's work being reassessed. I removed then re-added the bit about her short stories being republished as I found a reliable source. I've also added in a reliable source for the hook. Srsval (talk) 20:05, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Srsval, thank you for your answers and s. I regret that I haven't been able to suggest any obvious improvements to the article, which I suppose will always be more difficult for a new good article. I still have some questions below, which I have numbered for convenience.
1 You didn't answer whether sources say "Freeman was gay" or leave it for readers to work out for themselves?
2 I have found some close paraphrasing of An Unconventional Classicist, some may be unavoidable, but could you have another look at the wording?
  • "It is not ... Greek, or from whom"
  • "Freeman had a working ... Greek"
  • "Except for French, ... languages"
  • "the University ... charter granted in 1893"
  • "A picture of the faculty ... had a doctorate"
3 Could reference 4 be merged with reference 2 as both are ions of An Unconventional Classicist?
4 The citation for the paragraph beginning 'Freeman is best known for her works...' only mentions the Ancilla, do you have a reference for the Companion?
5 The Queer Square Mile reference says Freeman is the subject of research, I don't think that that shows that her "work has been re-assessed, especially in the light of queer traditions in Welsh women's writings", could you reword based on the references?
6 "From early in her career, Freeman worked to bring Greek texts to the general public through her work in translating texts and presenting her ideas to general audiences" still needs to be directly followed by a citation, as it supports part of the hook
7 "During the Second World War Freeman delivered lectures on Greece for the Ministry of Information and in the National Scheme of Education for HM Forces in South Wales and Monmouthshire" you didn't give a page number for the reference, however it is supported by An Unconventional Classicist, page 323.
8 You uploaded File:Kathleen_Freeman_-_Obituary.jpg as your own work, however it is not your own work if you just scanned it and as a 1959 newspaper article it is probably still copyright protected, see Commons:Commons:Copyright rules.
9 Should Ministry of Information be wikilinked in the hook?
10 I don't find the hook particularly surprising, could you provide an alternative, possibly mentioning the detective stories? TSventon (talk) 07:26, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to strike throuhg points above as I address them Lajmmoore (talk) 17:11, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have nominated the 1959 newspaper clipping for deletion on Commons and have struck question 8. TSventon (talk) 17:26, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Point 8 I'm not a Commons expert, but I think it's a bit more complicated - this says the file was originally uploaded under Fair Use as a "historic portrait" by @Jason.nlw:, but I agree there might need to be an update of the non-free use rationale Lajmmoore (talk) 17:30, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
For Point 1 - I added whose opinions are in the cited sources to be clear where the evidence is coming from Lajmmoore (talk) 17:52, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
For Point 5 (& apologies this is out of order, I'm addressing things by ease :D ) - I think I've clarified the text so it aligns more closely with the sources Lajmmoore (talk) 18:02, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
For Point 2, I've copy ed the sentences picked out Lajmmoore (talk) 18:09, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've also struck Points 6, 9, 10 now there's and ALT1 hook suggested. On the subject of the image, Fair Use images can't be used in the DYK, but I don't see an issue with it being used on the page under Fair Use as its a "historic portrait of someone no longer alive". Please let me know if there are any further changes or clarifications to make Lajmmoore (talk) 18:28, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Image deletion - it just dawned it was the newspaper clipping - I missed that detail, so struck my comments on it out. I'm a bit over-tired I think, so please forgive that oversight. Lajmmoore (talk) 18:33, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lajmmoore, thank you for stepping into the breach. I am now happy with points 2 to 10. As to 1, I would incline to remove the phrase "Freeman was gay" or now "According to classicist Edith Hall, Freeman was gay". TSventon (talk) 22:54, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 19[]

N. Sankar

Created by Ktin (talk). Self-nominated at 02:42, 19 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • Open to other suggestions. Though not a doorbuster, I think this would appeal to the cricket following populace, which is a reasonable bit of the english speaking populace. But, I am open. Cheers. Ktin (talk) 04:15, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 20[]

Josh Hudson

Converted from a redirect by Soaper1234 (talk). Self-nominated at 20:14, 20 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Climate change in Uganda

Created by Micheal Kaluba (talk). Self-nominated at 17:53, 20 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Micheal Kaluba I added a hook but it is not great - if you would like a different hook please fill in ALT1 above Chidgk1 (talk) 07:01, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArsenalGhanaPartey I am not reviewing but I can suggest more hooks if needed as I think this is Micheal Kaluba's first submission for DYK - was not sure if you are reviewing as you wrote below comment line - would you like to continue review? Chidgk1 (talk) 07:11, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ahichchhatra Jain temples

Ahichchhatra Jain temple
Ahichchhatra Jain temple

Created by Pratyk321 (talk). Self-nominated at 07:07, 20 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 21[]

Yi Jeonggyu

Created by Jirangmoon (talk). Self-nominated at 10:44, 26 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook eligibility:

QPQ: None required.

Overall: Symbol question.svg The article needs some work and a new hook. SounderBruce 22:21, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the review. I fixed the grammatical error in the hook and in the article (using Grammarly). As for neutrality and the hook, I don't see any problems - aren't those subjective assessments? If you tell me what is non-neutral, I'll take another look. As for interesting or not, I think this hook is interesting. Do we need a third opinion? --Jirangmoon (talk)
Third opinion: Yeah, I don't think it's a particularly interesting hook either. It's also not particularly notable by itself, given that the crossover between Korean anarchism and nationalism are very well documented. On this issue, Yi Jeonggyu was far from unique. --Grnrchst (talk) 16:44, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've added alts based on items sourced in the lede but they need page numbers for verification. czar 18:53, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
User:Czar Thank you very much! For Alt1, the page number is 12 : "Undoubtedly, the goal of Korean independence movement was to regain independence from Japanese colonialism, to which Yi had devoted himself with anarchism."
For Alt2, the page number is 25 : "Yi Jeonggyu (1897–1984), one of the most active Korean anarchists in 1920s China, just like other Korean exiles, began his career as an independence activist and converted later to anarchism." --Jirangmoon (talk) 19:26, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, @Jirangmoon! Those sources do not quite confirm the language used in the alts and the article, if you can rephrase both to match their sources? I.e., they do not say he was a "pioneer" or "key", unless there is another section that says so. czar 19:36, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
User:Czar Thank you. Can you review the following quote which contains the word pioneer? It's from page 11.

Echoes to Sim’s description of his complex life as both an anarchist and a nationalist can be found in Yi Jeonggyu’s recall. Yi, a prominent anarchist active in various educational and rural movements before and after 1945, too poses his life as one with such a tension but, in his case, shifting further toward anarchism that offered him a vision of social revolution, rather than simply a nationalism-driven political revolution that aimed merely at national independence. Yi explains the shift that occurred in his life as follows: The first half of my life had gone through a life for struggle for independence movement, and [then in the second half] turned for a movement for social revolution of an ideological idea [sic] that has been viewed in this world, without any good reason, as too extreme. [The second half has been] a life as one of the pioneers, who has been indulged in anarchism, that is, no-government movement.

Will this be ok for ALT2? --Jirangmoon (talk) 13:15, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Jirangmoon, it looks like that quotes Yi as saying that he himself is a pioneer. Since that is an exceptional claim, it requires an exceptional, secondary source. We could say "Yi thought of himself as a pioneer" for ALT2. I've updated both ALTs to match the source but the article text will need to be corrected for both as well. czar 13:47, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
User:Czar Sorry for a late reply.
Regarding the ALT2 matter, I am a bit confused in ing things on Wikipedia as a Wiki beginner. I do not remember why I wrote the sentence with the word, “pioneer” for Yi Jeonggyu because I started the article more than 6 months ago. Anyhow, I have tried not to move or copy source sentences to the Wikipedia articles as they are except for quotations. In that process, even though the source articles does not have the word “pioneer” for Yi Jeonggyu, I thought that Yi Jeonggyu could be one of the pioneers of Korean anarchist movement because Yi Jeonggyu influenced Yi Hoeyeong who was called “the pioneer of Korean anarchism” in the source. So if someone was doing something before the “pioneer”, isn’t he even more of a pioneer?
See the quotations below:
Page 23: In addition, Shin’s friendship with Yi Hoeyeong (1867–1932), often called “the pioneer of Korean anarchism,” must have been a factor as well for his acceptance of anarchism.
Page 27-28: It seems that Yi Hoeyeong surely was impressed with Yi Jeonggyu’s project and anarchist ideas with regard to the proposed ideal farming villages in Hunan. Indeed, it is said that Yi Jeonggyu’s role was decisive in converting Yi Hoeyeong, who was persuaded by the former about the goal of anarchism and thus accepted it in later 1923.38 Discussing with many kinds of independence activists and radicals, including Chinese and Taiwanese, Yi Hoeyeong finally chose anarchism for his own answer. The national goal, of course, was the key that drew him to anarchism.
Page 28: In this sense, to call Yi Hoeyeong “the pioneer of Korean anarchism” is an interesting indication of the coming trajectory and transnational character of Korean anarchism in China in the 1930s and ’40s.
Also, from a Korean article at http://m.kyeongin.com/view.php?key=20190501010000158: “우당 이회영을 아나키즘 사상가로 인도한 이가 바로 이정규다 “ It was Yi Jeonggyu who led Yi Hoeyeong to become an anarchist.
--Jirangmoon (talk) 14:49, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good to me! I've updated ALT2. @SounderBruce, want to take another peek? czar 01:26, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Clingers

The Clingers in 1969.
The Clingers in 1969.

Created by Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk). Self-nominated at 18:08, 25 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Divya Saxena

Created by Bahnfrend (talk). Self-nominated at 08:01, 22 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Thank you. A full DYK review is still needed. Flibirigit (talk) 14:38, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Divertimento No. 15 (ballet)

Created by Corachow (talk). Self-nominated at 00:20, 22 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Detention of Pavel Pernikaŭ

Moved to mainspace by Homoatrox (talk) and Levivich (talk). Nominated by Levivich and Homoatrox (talk) at 18:40, 21 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

2021 ban of Palestinian human rights organizations

Created by Buidhe (talk). Self-nominated at 09:54, 21 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Princeton–Deepwater District

Created by Antony-22 (talk). Self-nominated at 03:48, 21 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

@Kingoflettuce: I added that a 2% grade is very steep to the article text. Given the topic, I think that a blog post from someone who specializes in railroad photography is reasonably reliable enough. I could try to find a more reliable source if you really want one. Antony–22 (talkcontribs) 19:10, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 22[]

Drane Scrivener

Created by Cbl62 (talk) and BeanieFan11 (talk). Nominated by Cbl62 (talk) at 22:41, 29 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Babi Yar. Context

Babi Yar in 1941
Babi Yar in 1941

Created by Coretheapple (talk). Self-nominated at 18:48, 24 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 23[]

Friedrich Oberschelp

5* expanded by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 11:44, 29 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Crisis of the late 16th century in Russia

Created by