Did you know?
Introduction and rules
Introduction and rules	WP:DYK
General discussion	WT:DYK
Supplementary rules	WP:DYKSG
Reviewing guide	WP:DYKR
Nominations
Nominate an article	WP:DYKCNN
Awaiting approval	WP:DYKN
Approved	WP:DYKNA
April 1 hooks	WP:DYKAPRIL
Preparation
Preps and queues	T:DYK/Q
Admin instructions	WP:DYKAI
Main Page errors	WP:ERRORS
History
On the Main Page	T:DYK
Statistics	WP:DYKSTATS
Archived sets	WP:DYKA
Just for fun
Monthly wraps	WP:DYKW
Awards	WP:DYKAWARDS
Scripts and bots	WP:DYKSB
List of users ...
... by nominations	WP:DYKNC
... by promotions	WP:DYKPC
v t e

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.

Count of DYK Hooks
Section	# of Hooks	# Verified
October 29	1
November 2	1
November 4	1
November 12	1
November 14	1
November 16	1
November 17	3
November 26	1
November 27	4	2
November 28	1
December 3	1	1
December 4	1
December 5	1	1
December 7	1
December 8	1
December 9	1
December 10	3	1
December 11	2
December 17	1
December 22	2
December 25	1
December 26	1
December 27	1
December 28	1	1
December 31	3
January 1	1
January 2	2
January 3	2	1
January 4	1
January 5	4
January 7	3	1
January 8	1	1
January 9	2
January 11	5	2
January 12	4	2
January 13	4
January 14	8	4
January 15	7	3
January 16	5	3
January 17	6	4
January 18	6	2
January 19	7	4
January 20	8	4
January 21	7	4
January 22	8	4
January 23	8	5
January 24	8	5
January 25	6	1
January 26	8	3
January 27	9	3
January 28	9	2
January 29	12	5
January 30	7	2
January 31	13	2
February 1	10	4
February 2	2	2
February 3	1	1
February 4
February 5	2	2
Total	222	82
Last updated 22:36, 5 February 2023 UTC Current time is 22:37, 5 February 2023 UTC [refresh]

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.

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:

• Look through this page, Template talk:Did you know, to find a nomination you would like to comment on.
• Click the "Review or comment" link at the top of the nomination. You will be taken to the nomination subpage.
• The top of the page includes a list of the DYK criteria. Check the article to ensure it meets all the relevant criteria.
• To indicate the result of the review (i.e., whether the nomination passes, fails, or needs some minor changes), leave a signed comment on the page. Please begin with one of the 5 review symbols that appear at the top of the screen, and then indicate all aspects of the article that you have reviewed; your comment should look something like the following:

  Article length and age are fine, no copyvio or plagiarism concerns, reliable sources are used. But the hook needs to be shortened.

  If you are the first person to comment on the nomination, there will be a line :* <!-- REPLACE THIS LINE TO WRITE FIRST COMMENT, KEEPING  :* --> showing you where you should put the comment.
• Save the page.
• After the nomination is approved, a bot will automatically list the nomination page on Template talk:Did you know/Approved.

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.

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[]

• Open the DYK nomination subpage of the hook you would like to remove. (It's best to wait several days after a reviewer has rejected the hook, just in case someone contests or the article undergoes a large change.)
• In the window where the DYK nomination subpage is open, replace the line {{DYKsubpage with {{subst:DYKsubpage, and replace |passed= with |passed=no. Then save the page. This has the effect of wrapping up the discussion on the DYK nomination subpage in a blue archive box and stating that the nomination was unsuccessful, as well as adding the nomination to a category for archival purposes.

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

• Edit the prep area or queue where the hook is and remove the hook and the crs associated with it.
• Go to the hook's nomination subpage (there should have been a link to it in the crs section).
  • View the history for that page
  • Go back to the last version before the where the hook was promoted, and revert to that version to make the nomination active again.
  • Add a new icon on the nomination subpage to cancel the previous tick and leave a comment after it explaining that the hook was removed from the prep area or queue, and why, so that later reviewers are aware of this issue.
• Add a transclusion of the template back to this page so that reviewers can see it. It goes under the date that it was first created/expanded/listed as a GA. You may need to add back the day header for that date if it had been removed from this page.
• If you removed the hook from a queue, it is best to either replace it with another hook from one of the prep areas, or to leave a message at WT:DYK asking someone else to do so.

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

• Don't; it should not ever be necessary, and will break some links which will later need to be repaired. Even if you change the title of the article, you don't need to move the nomination page.

Nominations[]

Articles created/expanded on October 29[]

Northern Territories Alcohol Labels Study

• ... that when '"Alcohol can cause cancer" warning labels were attached to retail products in the Yukon, there were claims that the warnings infringed the copyrights and trademarks of alcohol producers? Source: "The government cited the fear of lawsuit by industry associations for defamation or copyright infringement. " --https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/yukon-alcohol-warning-labels-study-results-1.5556344
  Lobbying groups representing Canada’s breweries, wineries and distilleries, Mr. Streicker said, suggested that the labels might harm their brands and asked about the territory’s legal right to apply them. The industry also suggested that putting stickers on their bottles and cans infringed trademarks, he said." --https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/06/world/canada/yukon-liquor-alcohol-warnings.html
  • ALT1: ... that four weeks after '"Alcohol can cause cancer" warning labels were attached to retail products in the Yukon, the government removed them, citing a lack of consent from product producers? Source: ""Unfortunately, it didn't have the consent of label owners," said Patch Groenewegen, manager of social responsibility, policy and planning with the Yukon Liquor Corp. [a government entity]" https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/yukon-liquor-label-backlash-1.4466330
  • ALT2: ... that industry objections to '"Alcohol can cause cancer" warning labels on retail products may have produced a Streisand effect? Source: "Booze industry brouhaha over Yukon warning labels backfired... " https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/yukon-alcohol-warning-labels-study-results-1.5556344
    "By drawing attention to its own lobbying activities, the industry may have inadvertently increased public support for alcohol policies and helped to further broadcast the message that alcohol is a cause of cancer." https://www.jsad.com/doi/full/10.15288/jsad.2020.81.222
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Geology of Kimberley (Western Australia)
  • Comment: I'm still reading thru the academic and news coverage of this topic, and trying to write a balanced article from a decidedly non-neutral balance of reliable sources, in which many avoid speaking directly for fear of being sued. I will improve the article further and do a QPQ.

Created by HLHJ (talk). Self-nominated at 02:57, 5 November 2022 (UTC).Reply[reply]

• The QPQ for this nomination is now overdue. It should have completed within one week, as per the RfC on excessively late supply of QPQ crs. It would be a shame to see this nomination rejected. Please do the QPQ promptly. Thanks. Flibirigit (talk) 02:06, 16 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• NOTE: I will do a full review when a QPQ is complete. Flibirigit (talk) 18:21, 16 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you, Flibirigit! I wasn't aware of that RFC; I thought my nom would just be ignored until I'd done a QPQ. I've done one. I'll now get on with the article expansion, I've found a bunch more sources; I hope to be done within a day, or two if I do some more reviews. HLHJ (talk) 02:10, 17 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Great, I will check back here in a couple of days. Flibirigit (talk) 02:21, 17 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• According to WP:LOWERCASE, a good article title might be Northern Territories alcohol labels study, unless multiple reliable sources capitalize everything. Any thoughts on using the sentence case for the article's title? Flibirigit (talk) 22:29, 18 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • The most commen RS "title" seems to be "the Yukon study" which is a bit too vague, and inaccurate, as the control arm was not in the Yukon. The start-caps name seems to be what the researchers and lobbyists called it, including in research protocol descriptions; not exactly third-party independent sources, as they were written by researchers. No idea why journalists had an adversion to the term. I don't recall, nor with a quick skim can I find, another capitalization used in any source, and this capitalization is used in running text, as in "Northwestern University" and other multiword proper nouns. If a non-proper noun, the title would mean "study of alchohol labels in the Northern Territories", a broader scope, making it useful to havean indication that it is a proper noun. So on the whole I think this title best, faute de mieux. But I will keep my eye out for sources using other terms. HLHJ (talk) 00:56, 20 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• I notice there is a long list of external links. These might be better labelled as Wikipedia:Further reading, instead of Wikipedia:External links. Any thoughts? Flibirigit (talk) 22:34, 18 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I think you're right. I will convert it. Apologies for being behind my timetable, I got IRL issues, then sidetracked. I'll ping you when I've got it in order, which should be soon; I plan to get a fair amount of stuff out of notes and into article within a day. HLHJ (talk) 00:56, 20 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Thank you for doing the QPQ. I will look for a comment here, then do the full review of this nomination. Flibirigit (talk) 01:07, 20 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • @HLHJ: any thoughts on when this is ready for a review? I'd like to go ahead by the weekend (November 26–27) if possible. Flibirigit (talk) 17:45, 22 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
        • Sorry, I did in fact do extensive work on this over the last three days, but I realize I haven't posted any of it (I thought I'd posted at least a bit, but no, and you are right to nag). Getting MEDRS sourcing where appropriate, and finding yet more journal articles that are the product of it, and some more news sources, has lead to a fairly total rewrite. I should have written this complex article in draftspace, and maybe I should put my 2.0 verson there now. Thoughts? Finishing by this weekend should be doable. HLHJ (talk) 20:04, 22 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
          • Okay, will return on the weekend. Flibirigit (talk) 21:02, 22 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
            • I noticed many changes. Is the major update complete? Flibirigit (talk) 03:33, 28 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
              • Reviewing..., will post a more complete review by tomorrow. Flibirigit (talk) 02:28, 9 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New Enough: Y Long Enough: Y

Policy compliance:

• Adequate sourcing: N - ?
• Neutral: N - ?
• Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing: Y

Hook eligibility:

• Cited: N - ?
• Interesting: Y

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Y Used in article: Y Clear at 100px: Y

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Article created October 29 and nominated within seven days. Length is adequate. No plagiarism issues were detected. The earwig tool highlighted multiple areas, but those were quotes, and proper nouns which are not violations. The sourcing is mostly good, however some quotations are missing a citation. I have tagged the relevant places. Also, there are three images in the "Results" section which have unclear sources. I have several questions about neutrality. I notice that "Tim Stockwell" is mentioned three times within the "Label design", but it is unclear what position he holds, and if anything he says is relevant or important enough to quote verbatim. If he's not notable, perhaps paraphrasing is best. In the section "Threats", the following statement seems to be promotional towards a person with questionable notability; "Robert Solomon, a Canadian law professor with 40 years' experience specializing in drug and alcohol policy". The section "Lobbyist identities" contains a lengthy quote from Luke Harford, which might be best paraphrased since he has questionable notability. The hooks proposed are all reasonably interesting. I question whether ALT0 is properly cited in the article. The claims of copyright infringement are cited to here, but it fails verification since the cited source says "fear of lawsuit by industry associations for defamation or copyright infringement.", which is not the same. I am unsure where ALT1 is cited in the article. I cannot find it in the main body, but two sentences in the introdcution could be used to cite the hook. If cited in the introduction, both sentences need a citation. Currently just the second sentence is cited. I cannot locate a citation in the article for ALT2, and do not see Streisand effect mentioned. All images used in the article are in the public domain. The image for this nomination is clear at a low resolution, and used in the article. The QPQ requirement is in progress. Overall the article is a decent contribution and I hope to see it on the main page. Flibirigit (talk) 21:00, 9 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I entirely agree with Flibirigit's comments. The descrption of Solomon is paraphrased from the NYT (he also co-wrote a paper. later I think), and a better phrasing would be good; Tim Stockwell is a full professor and a lead researcher on the study, and I hadn't realized I hadn't mentioned it. I'll fix. A lot of the cns are wher I've cited two successive sentences to a ref at the end of the second one; I can duplicate. I also find the proportion of quotes exvessive; ot reflects the news sources, which avoid saying much in their own voice, presumably for fear of lawsuits. The balance, flow, coherence, hooks, and third-party assessments of results need work. I have been unavoidably and unexpectedly unable to spend much time on-wiki; I apologise for not watching this page and will work on this as soon as I can. (Redacted) 01:16, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment. I will look for the changes to appear on my watchlist. Flibirigit (talk) 16:42, 15 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Courtesy reminder posted on the nominator's talk page. Perhaps sending an e-mail will be the next step if no response. Flibirigit (talk) 14:00, 28 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'd say don't bother with an email, Flibirigit – if they don't respond to a talk page message in a timely manner, I'd say to just close it. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 10:13, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

HLHJ (talk · contribs), your progress on the article is noted. Please comment here when you're ready to continue the review. Flibirigit (talk) 17:31, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There are still three "citation needed" tags, and one "weasel words" tag. Flibirigit (talk) 14:04, 5 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@HLHJ:, I have not noticed any progress on this article since December 31. This nomination is now more than two months old, and it is increasingly likely that others will want to reject the nomination if not completed soon. It's close to the finish line, I hope you find the time for three citation needed tags and the one weasel tag. Thanks. Flibirigit (talk) 17:39, 11 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you both (Narutolovehinata5 too) for the talk page pings, I'm afraid I've never gotten into the habit of using my watchlist. You're quite right, I got distracted into writing about weaving and spinning mechanisms (our textile content is surprisingly weak, systemic bias, I guess). The weasel-words tag is hard to succinctly clarify without misrepresenting the situation; I've been thinking that a wordy specific explaination in a footnote might be adequate to remove it. I'll make this the next thing I work on on Wikipedia, and finish it off before doing anything else (except replying to people). HLHJ (talk) 00:28, 13 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So I've now at least gotten rid of the templates. Not integrated all my notes yet, nor toned down the quotes, but some progress. HLHJ (talk) 03:49, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I will have a look at the changes later today, or by tomorrow. Flibirigit (talk) 12:15, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am working through this today. Apologies for the delay. Flibirigit (talk) 14:39, 20 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@HLHJ:, in reviewing this today I notice that expansions to rectify sourcing issues have introduced other problems. I will continue to copy today, and tag some areas for clarification. Unfortunately none of my concerns on the hooks have been addressed. Please see the review above, as the hooks are the most important part of the nomination. Flibirigit (talk) 18:34, 20 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you. I think I've fixed the things you tagged, and made sure all non-attributed claims are third-party sourced (with exceptions for very unselfserving claims, like the "not statistically significant", which detail third-party review of the results ignored). I've also restructured a bit for clarity. I'll work on the rest, including the hooks. HLHJ (talk) 04:24, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Okay, will look for the changes on my watchlist. Flibirigit (talk) 21:03, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on November 2[]

Tree of life (biology)

• ... that Ernst Haeckel's 1866 tree of life model has been described as "the earliest 'tree of life' model of biodiversity"? Source: https://www.nature.com/articles/540038a
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/All Saints' Episcopal Church (Austin, Texas)

Improved to Good Article status by Chiswick Chap (talk). Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk) at 14:21, 5 November 2022 (UTC).Reply[reply]

• Reviewing... ‍ ‍ Your Power 🐍 ‍ ‍ ^{💬 "What did I tell you?"}
  _{📝 "Don't get complacent..."} 01:21, 6 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New Enough: Y Long Enough: Y

Policy compliance:

• Adequate sourcing: Y
• Neutral: Y
• Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing: N - ?

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Y Interesting: Y

QPQ: Done.

Overall: First thing first: Earwig is giving me an... interesting copyvio score. Rightfully so - we have a very large Darwin quote that takes up 60% of my screen. Since Origin is in the public domain, the article should indicate that it incorporates much of its text from public domain sources. Template:Source-attribution helps with this. With regards to neutrality, I am not seeing any WP:DUE or WP:FRINGE red flags, which is good for something closely related to a controversial topic like evolution. Would like to stress, however, that I don't have any expertise on biology, so anyone who does is welcome to provide their second opinion on the article here.

Furthermore, the hook seems run-of-the-mill - I would suggest making the hook about Darwin's seminal work as his name is more well-known to a general audience. Something like ... that Charles Darwin conceptualized his theory of evolution using a "tree of life" model? would be good. Another optional suggestion would be to incorporate an image there and bam, more readers hooked. ‍ ‍ Your Power 🐍 ‍ ‍ ^{💬 "What did I tell you?"}
_{📝 "Don't get complacent..."} 13:15, 8 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Your Power: I mean, we could do Alt1 "... that Charles Darwin used a tree of life model to conceptualize his theory of evolution." Onegreatjoke (talk) 16:46, 9 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Onegreatjoke: that's broadly interesting enough. Just waiting for the copyvio issues to be addressed before we approve this ‍ ‍ Your Power 🐍 ‍ ‍ ^{💬 "What did I tell you?"}
    _{📝 "Don't get complacent..."} 08:41, 12 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Your Power: Got rid of the blockquote. Is that good enough? Onegreatjoke (talk) 22:34, 17 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Deletion of the material is not appropriate. Use the Source attribution template as advised above if it's thought really necessary - I can't see why it should be, as all Darwin text is PD as he died in 1882, so his writings have all been PD since 1 January 1953. Chiswick Chap (talk) 22:40, 17 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Chiswick Chap: WP:FREECOPY, a subsection of WP:PLAGIARISM, urges to use attribution templates when copying material from free sources (PD, CC licences compatible with enwiki, etc). I do agree that removing that long quotation was not the best, however. ‍ ‍ Your Power 🐍 ‍ ‍ ^{💬 "What did I tell you?"}
_{📝 "Don't get complacent..."} 04:18, 20 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Feel free to add it if it's troubling you. I was not consulted about starting this process and have no interest in its outcome. Chiswick Chap (talk) 05:28, 20 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Onegreatjoke and Your Power: There hasn't been any movement with this nomination since November, have any issues been sorted out yet? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:33, 4 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't exactly know how use an attribution template so someone will have to teach me or do it themselves. Onegreatjoke (talk) 17:33, 4 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've tried to address this. The usage instructions at Template:Source-attribution didn't cover how to use it with other referencing templates like {{sfnp}}. After looking at some other articles that use the template, I modified the instance of the quote to {{sfn}} and added it in the |loc= comment. Not sure if this is exactly what the reviewer wanted. – Reidgreg (talk) 15:45, 15 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Your Power: Is it good now? Onegreatjoke (talk) 15:26, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• New reviewer needed to finish this nomination; prior reviewer has not responded, and this nominations is three months old today. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:33, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on November 4[]

Charles Redd

• ... that Charles Redd (pictured), a rancher and member of the Utah State Legislature, moved to legalize horse racing and betting in 1925, only to make it illegal again two years later? Source: Arrington, Leonard J. (1995). Utah's audacious stockman, Charlie Redd. Logan, Utah: Utah State University Press. ISBN 0-87421-177-8. OCLC 31515461. pp 128-133
  • ALT1: ... that Charles Redd (pictured), a rancher and businessman from Utah, received the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire for his friendship with Lord Halifax? Source: Arrington, Leonard J. (1995). Utah's audacious stockman, Charlie Redd. Logan, Utah: Utah State University Press. ISBN 0-87421-177-8. OCLC 31515461. pp 165-168
  • Reviewed:

Created by Cjstirlbyu (talk). Self-nominated at 22:16, 4 November 2022 (UTC).Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New Enough: Y Long Enough: Y

Policy compliance:

• Adequate sourcing: N - Needs a greater diversity of sources.
• Neutral: N - Tagged as needing more perspectives, which I agree with.
• Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing: Y

Hook eligibility:

• Cited: N - ALT0 hook needs to be cited following the sentence, not just at the end of the paragraph. AGF on the offline source.
• Interesting: Y

Image eligibility:

• Freely licensed: N - Image does not have copyright information that matches its source.
• Used in article: Y
• Clear at 100px: Y

QPQ: N - Not done
Overall: The ALT0 hook is interesting and cited, but the article clearly needs a lot of work. SounderBruce 06:24, 6 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@SounderBruce: -- Thanks for the review; I've made some changes to the article to further improve it! I have added more information and corrected the copyright notice on the image page on Wikimedia Commons, and I've added citations immediately following the ALT0 hook, and have further clarified some of the information in that paragraph. I have also added additional citations to the rest of the article and changed some of the language to reflect a more neutral viewpoint. Since this article is within my first five DYK nominations, QPQ is not required. Let me know if any other changes need to be made! Cjstirlbyu (talk)

Well done on the improvements, but three's still some work to be done. The lack of outside perspectives is still an issue and would be bolstered by using coverage from out of the region (where the story of a quick repeal would have garnered some attention), while also looking at more critical commentary of his activities, both contemporary and modern. I don't think the picture fits very well, given it shows Redd long after the time of the bill's passing and repeal. SounderBruce 07:41, 12 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@SounderBruce: -- I've added a few more sources from outside of Utah on Redd and the bill's passing and repeal, as well as some more broad commentary on the rest of his life. There isn't a lot of modern commentary on his time in the legislature, given that he was only a member of the Utah House for a few years. I feel that the photo is appropriate for the article, however it's fine if we don't use it for the DYK. Let me know if I can change anything else!

Still has an outstanding tag for lack of viewpoints that I feel is a valid criticism. SounderBruce 08:33, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi SounderBruce, could you elaborate? The person who originally put the "may not include all significant viewpoints" tag on put in the summary "sourcing continues to be overwhelmingly reliant on BYU-affiliated publications." The Arrington source that has many citations is published by Utah State University, which is not affiliated with BYU. The Alexander essay collection was published by the BYU university press, and constitutes 7 citations. What viewpoints do you feel are lacking? Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 22:24, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pinging @SounderBruce: Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 20:34, 9 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In that case, the article is fine when it comes to independent viewpoints. I would like to see the citations cleaned up (currently the titles are just the paper name and page number, which is a jumbled mess) before giving final approval, Cjstirlbyu. SounderBruce 06:14, 13 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks SounderBruce. The last name, year, and page number style of citation is one called shortened footnotes style (sfn). It is used on today's featured article, CSS Baltic. It is very helpful for being able to reference the exact page number of a book that is used multiple times as a reference. This page uses sfn style for books and more regular citation templates for items with a URL. For DYK, a certain style of footnote is not required. Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 17:24, 13 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

To clarify, the newspaper citations are the ones that need cleanup. SounderBruce 20:42, 13 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

SounderBruce, I've cleaned up the newspaper citations—let me know if anything else needs to be done before the nomination can go through! Cjstirlbyu (talk) 22:57, 16 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Cjstirlbyu: The article is now in good shape, but upon a second look the hook needs to be shortened. By dropping some of the details, it would flow much better. SounderBruce 09:13, 19 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

ALT0a ... that Utah state representative Charles Redd (pictured) moved to legalize horse racing and betting in 1925, only to make it illegal again two years later?

@SounderBruce: How does this sound? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:28, 26 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

ALT0a works for me. SounderBruce 04:51, 28 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm sorry to have to reopen what's already a long discussion, but I don't believe this is in fit state for the main page. I happened to spot-check a random sentence, and found the sources didn't remotely support the content; I then did five more spot-checks of sources I could access, and only one of them was completely okay. I don't know if this is carelessness, too many people working on the article, or sources shoehorned in to address the lack of independent content raised above; but it needs to be fixed. Given the issues I've raised, I would not be comfortable featuring this until someone has done spot-checks and found no issues. Also: the hook is a bit of a problem. Redd didn't make racing illegal; he didn't have that authority. He proposed the bill which made it so, much as he proposed its legalization. Vanamonde (Talk) 01:08, 8 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Vanamonde, I did find some issues with text-source integrity. In the cases you found, the source was further down in the paragraph, but it wasn't clear that it applied to the earlier material. Cjstirlbyu and I went through the page to check for the accuracy of the material and make its sourcing clearer. I think I added a little information like Redd's introduction of crested wheatgrass and being voted one of 29 stockmen of the century by a cattle newspaper. I looked for information on the environmental impact of Redd's ranching, because I'm certain that it has affected the environment in the La Sals, but I haven't found anything that concretely connects Redd's ranching to ecological problems (although general articles on how grazing permits were freely given in Utah's early days and their impact on the ecology exist). As for the hook, how does this sound?

ALT0b ... that Utah state representative Charles Redd (pictured) successfully proposed the legalization of horse racing and betting in 1925, only to successfully propose making it illegal again two years later? Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 18:28, 11 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Rachel Helps (BYU): Thanks for doing that; I know it can be trick for a student who may be relatively new to Wikipedia. Regardless, though, I would like to see a spotcheck by someone else before passing this myself. I can do one, but it may be a few days before I have the time. Other reviewers can of course step in if they wish. Vanamonde (Talk) 22:51, 11 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on November 12[]

Caroline Ellison

• ... that 28 year old Caroline Ellison, a Stanford University graduate, was the CEO of the hedge fund that borrowed over $10 billion of user deposits from the collapsed crypto exchange FTX? Source: https://www.wsj.com/articles/ftx-tapped-into-customer-accounts-to-fund-risky-bets-setting-up-its-downfall-11668093732
  • Reviewed:
  • Comment: It is a timely topic with far-reaching consequences given that the collapse of FTX is being compared to the Enron collapse, and the total damage appears likely to be within an order of magnitude of the Enron collapse.

Created by Molochmates (talk). Self-nominated at 05:20, 21 November 2022 (UTC).Reply[reply]

• Comment: Not reviewing as I have worked on the article, but this hook is not supported by the article or by the cited source. The WSJ article cited only says that anonymous sources made the key claims here, so we cannot put them in wikivoice. (It also seems this article has passed the 7-day time limit for DYK nominations, unless I'm missing something.) —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 08:20, 21 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Comment agreed that this isn't a great DYK hook because of the BLP concerns. There's a big difference between reporting that sources claim X and putting it in wikivoice, especially when you're dealing with allegations of a crime. In any case, the article doesn't seem to be eligible for DYK-it needs to have been created or expanded 5x in the last 7 days. Blythwood (talk) 10:29, 21 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Comment I believe this is the first DYK nomination of Molochmates. We should give them a pass for the time limit. Thriley (talk) 14:15, 21 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Comment My bad wrt to the link. I meant to post this one: https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-caroline-ellison-found-herself-at-the-center-of-the-ftx-crypto-collapse-11668899604.--Molochmates (talk) 19:26, 21 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Still doesn't support the claim in the hook. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 19:58, 21 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Regarding the above concerns about the nomination time limit, WP:DYKSG#D9 addresses this very issue: The "seven days old" limit can be extended for a day or two upon request. If the nominator is new to DYK, a seven-day extension may be allowed. Since the article was created on 12 November and nominated early on 21 November, that's two days, so I think we can take the "upon request" as given; indeed, if this is their first nomination, we have more leeway than that. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:19, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Comment i picked this bio for a school project because it has a lot of problems and some of them are pretty bad so far. i dont think she should be featured on the home page until her bio is in better shape even if its not complete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WhaleNow (talk • contribs) 18:45, 25 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  also dont think sbf should be in there. there's other things about her that are interesting. she was in forbes 30 under 30. Forbes called her "a rare female leader in a male dominated industry". she was captain of the math team in high school and won 2nd place in Boston's math league. Took MIT math classes while in high school. gave her dad a statistical analysis of toy prices at 8. prize-winning math scholar. something like "that Caroline Ellison, ex-CEO of Alameda Research who plead guilty in the FTX fraud, earned top honors at the 2008 American Mathematics Competition?" even with the fraud stuff there's stuff like in Aug she told Bloomberg that Alameda didn't "get any different treatment from other market makers" but told law enforcement that she knew about the fraud since 2019. WhaleNow (talk) 21:41, 25 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Full review needed, though the BLP issues and hook sourcing will need to be addressed. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:19, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  The link is this: https://www.wsj.com/articles/ftx-tapped-into-customer-accounts-to-fund-risky-bets-setting-up-its-downfall-11668093732. From the article, "Alameda’s CEO is Caroline Ellison, a Stanford University graduate who like Mr. Bankman-Fried previously worked for quantitative trading firm Jane Street Capital", "FTX Chief Executive Sam Bankman-Fried said in investor meetings this week that Alameda owes FTX about $10 billion, people familiar with the matter said". The age part is from the rest of the sources in the biography, but happy to remove that. Would be more helpful to know which parts of the hook are being disputed instead of generic comments like "doesn't support the claim in the hook". --Molochmates (talk) 18:35, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  The key phrase here is "people familiar with the matter said". The WSJ is not actually saying that Alameda borrowed $10 billion from FTX, it is only saying that unspecified anonymous sources said Alameda owes FTX $10 billion. So we cannot say in wikivoice that Alameda borrowed $10 billion from FTX. Since this is a hook about a living person, we need to be especially careful, and WP:BLPGOSSIP specifically advises us: "Be wary of relying on sources [...] that attribute material to anonymous sources." —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 19:03, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Perhaps there is something she has actually stated, perhaps on video, that would be a good hook? Thriley (talk) 04:15, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• ALT1 that Caroline Ellison, the former CEO of Alameda Research and a close associate of Sam Bankman-Fried, believes that “a lot of crypto projects don’t have much real value”? from this NY Times article:[1] Thriley (talk) 17:06, 21 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• ALT2 that Caroline Ellison, ex-CEO of Alameda Research who plead guilty in the FTX fraud, was a National Merit scholarship recipient in 2012? Newtonite — Preceding unsigned comment added by WhaleNow (talk • contribs) 20:43, 28 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • A full review is still needed. The article has been greatly expanded and revised since the beginning of December. Issues noted above should be checked to see that they have been addressed. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:26, 1 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• I don’t think ALT2 is at all interesting. There are thousands of national Merit Scholars each year. Thriley (talk) 18:14, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on November 14[]

SailRail

• ... that a SailRail ticket lets you travel from any station in Britain to any in Ireland? Source: https://www.seat61.com/train-and-ferry-to-dublin.htm
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Henry Jackson (surveyor)
  • Comment: A genuine "Did you know" this one; when I've mentioned it to several people, they've said "'how cheap is that?"

Created by Ritchie333 (talk). Self-nominated at 23:39, 14 November 2022 (UTC).Reply[reply]

• New enough and long enough. Sources inline look reliable enough for what they're citing. Verified the hook citation to the best of my ability (not familiar with UK rail transport, but looks fine). Earwig is clean. QPQ done. Looks like it should be good to go. Hog Farm _Talk 03:27, 16 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Ritchie333 and Hog Farm: Forgive me, but I'm a little lost on the scope of the topic. Is SailRail the common name of the ticket? The name of the company that distributes them? Or is it multiple companies that sell this type of ticket? If it's a single organization or similar, I'm wondering if the hook and article are a little promotional... theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 18:56, 17 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • I'd assumed when reading the article that it was a single ticket made through an arrangement between several different companies. Hog Farm _Talk 19:08, 17 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's a type of ticket, that you can buy from any British station; you can use any train service or ferry you choose with it, provided it's relevant. Similar to a Travelcard. The only possible way this article could be promoting it is comparing it against flying. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:19, 17 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• I'm a little concerned that "SailRail" isn't actually what it's called. Looking through the sources, I see "SailRail", "Sail-Rail", "Sail Rail", "Rail / Sail", "Sail and Rail" and "Sail & Rail". We don't want to be taking a generic descriptive term and elevating one version of it as the officially wiki-sanctioned version. -- RoySmith (talk) 20:31, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think "SailRail" is the formal term, as that's what gets printed on the ticket, and what I think the common name should be. The fact that multiple sources refer to it slightly differently is an indication of its relative obscurity, which is why we haven't had an article on it until now. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:05, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

We really need something more concrete than "I think that's the formal term". Lots of things get printed on tickets, that doesn't make the ticket a WP:RS. Also, how is it being relatively obscure different from it being not notable?

@Ritchie333: Having thought about this more (and cogitated a bit on WP:COMMONNAME), let me propose that using SailRail as the article title and in the hook would be fine, as long as you add something to the article explaining that it's a generic term covering a number of similar services known by various similar names. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:33, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just seen the discussion on this at Talk. I have access to specialist sources and may be able to assist. Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 13:19, 4 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Theleekycauldron, Hog Farm, and RoySmith: Various additions/tweaks now made following on from the discussion at T:T/DYK, particularly by clarifying that SailRail is the brand used between Britain and Ireland and that other similar schemes are not directly linked. Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 15:25, 4 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• While I think the original hook wording is intriguing, doesn't it sound vaguely promotional? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:48, 10 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A promotional hook would be something like "Go far beyond your usual stop with a Rail and Sail ticket. Head for the wilderness of the Outer Hebrides, the history of Shetland or the buzz of Belfast – that one ticket holds the key to countless adventures." which is how the ScotRail website describe it. If you mean I want to "promote" SailRail in as much as I want more people to use it, showing it's a viable alternative for sitting in an uncomfortable departure lounge for 3 hours before being told your flight is 2 hours late ..... then I guess so. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:04, 10 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• I'm willing to review this. Target is next 24 hours. starship.paint (exalt) 16:04, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments by starship.paint (exalt)

• The source quoted in this DYK nomination should be put inline within the article.
• Article says: The ticket is a joint scheme between Transport for Wales Rail, Iarnród Éireann, Irish Ferries, Stena Line, Northern Ireland Railways and ScotRail. Source says: SailRail is an alliance of Iarnród Éireann, UK Train Operating Companies and Ferry Companies operating on the Irish Sea. Article seems to go further than the source.
• Article says: Unlike some international train routes, they are not connecting services. Don't think the bolded part is in the source.
• Article says: SailRail competes against budget airlines - don't think that is in the Belfast Telegraph source.
• Article says: ... following the 2010 eruptions of Eyjafjallajökull which grounded all European flights. Virgin Trains increased their London to Holyhead trains from five to ten cars in response. Don't think the source really says that Eyjafjallajökull was the specific cause, source just says Indeed, not so long ago just five cars of the 09:10 from Euston went all the way to Holyhead; now Virgin Trains send the whole 10-car train. - may have been due to general increased demand.
• Article says: Historically, SailRail (then known as BritRail) tickets - I'm not convinced that BritRail is SailRail. Source says: Stena SeaLink and BritRail offer rail travel to New Haven, ship passage to Dieppe, then a train to Paris. [...] BritRail service to Dover, a ship to Calais, a train to Paris. Presence of Stena SeaLink seems to indicate that BritRail is really just for the train ride.
• Article says" The Dover to Calais scheme was discontinued following the opening of the Channel Tunnel in 1994, though it is still possible to travel as a foot passenger. I really don't think this is backed up by the source, which says: The railway stations at Dover Western Docks and Calais Maritime closed when Eurostar started in 1994, so you can no longer simply walk off the train and onto the ferry as you used to. The journey now involves a taxi or long walk between the station and the ferry terminal in Dover and a bus or taxi in Calais, so a train-ferry-train journey that took only 7 or 8 hours in the 1930s (or for that matter, the 1980s) takes 11 hours today. You need to buy separate tickets for the British train, ferry & French train, because London to Paris through tickets ceased to exist in 2007.
• Don't have access to Journal of the Transport Ticket Society so I'll just AGF.

@Ritchie333: - see above. Also as a courtesy - notify Hassocks5489. starship.paint (exalt) 14:11, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

- right now, based on the above. Please ping me if there is any update. starship.paint (exalt) 14:12, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on November 16[]

Chris Lewis (Usenet)

• ... that... in 1998, Chris Lewis and forty other anti-spam volunteers started an unsuccessful boycott with the goal of crashing computer servers with unfiltered spam? Source: Wired
  • Reviewed:
  • Comment: Expanded fivefold

Created by Vortex3427 (talk). Self-nominated at 10:49, 16 November 2022 (UTC).Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New Enough: Y Long Enough: Y

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Y Neutral: Y Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing: Y

Hook eligibility:

• Cited: ?
• Interesting: Y

QPQ: ?
Overall: Meets eligibility criteria. Recently expanded to 5x by the nominator. Article is well sourced. WP:AGF on offline sources. Article is well sourced and is neutral in tone. Earwig does not show any issues. Hook is interesting. I was not able to see the reference to forty other volunteers at the Wired link. Requesting the nominator Vortex3427 to take a look and point that to me in case I missed it. The hook itself is interesting. Can the nominator take one pass at rewording the hook if they can? Reading the source it appeared that the boycott was primarily them stopping their actions of spam filtering pressuring the ISPs and usenet admins to install their own spam filtering tools. The hook seems to be missing that nuance. Happy to hear the nominator's views. QPQ pending. passing this back to the nominator. Ktin (talk) 16:22, 20 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Ktin: This is the nominator's second nomination so a QPQ is not required. Sending another ping to Vortex3427 in case they missed the above review. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:42, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The part about there being forty volunteers is mentioned in this article. Will try to reword this hook shortly—in retrospect, the "crashing computer servers with unfiltered spam" was more of a predicted side effect then a goal.— VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 01:02, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Probably needs another reviewer. BorgQueen (talk) 17:15, 13 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• With due respect, I do not see why a new reviewer is needed. I have been waiting for a revised hook from @Vortex3427:. I noticed the QPQ comment from Narutolovehinata earlier. Ktin (talk) 16:52, 15 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oh ok sorry. I thought you had lost interest lol. BorgQueen (talk) 00:29, 16 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No worries. Happy ing. Ktin (talk) 04:21, 16 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• I'm striking the proposed hook as it is inaccurate and confusing. The goal was not to crash servers, the goal was to get ISPs to filter spam instead of relying on volunteers to do the work. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 15:56, 15 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• ... ALT1... that in 1998, Chris Lewis and forty other anti-spam volunteers started an unsuccessful boycott with the goal of convincing internet service providers to filter spam? Source: Wired

• This is accurate. But, does this one read too verbose? Any chance at precis-ing a bit? Ktin (talk) 16:54, 15 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Ktin: ... ALT1a... that in 1998, Chris Lewis led an unsuccessful boycott with the goal of convincing internet service providers to filter spam?

Like this? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:20, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Narutolovehinata5: -- does not read right. Unsuccessful boycott of "what"? Ktin (talk) 17:12, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on November 17[]

Serie A Player of the Month

• ... that no player has won the Serie A Player of the Month award on two consecutive months or in the same season but Papu Gómez and Cristiano Ronaldo are the only players to win two in one calendar year? Source: https://www.legaseriea.it/it/award/ea-sports-player-of-the-month
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Gene Cipriano
  • Comment:

5x expanded by Dr Salvus (talk). Self-nominated at 21:50, 18 November 2022 (UTC).Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New Enough: Y Long Enough: Y

Policy compliance:

• Adequate sourcing: N - see comments
• Neutral: Y
• Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing: Y

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Y Interesting: Y

QPQ: N - Not done
Overall: @Dr Salvus: Good article. However, i feel as if there needs to be more citations before this proceeds. The end of the second paragraph and third paragraph needs a citation. Multiple winners, awards won by club, and awards won by nationality also need citations. Onegreatjoke (talk) 15:15, 22 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Onegreatjoke, does it go well now? Source 3 is for the whole lead. Dr Salvus 14:15, 23 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dr Salvus I still need citations for multiple winners, awards won by nationality, and awards won by club. Onegreatjoke (talk) 00:32, 25 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Onegreatjoke WP:CALC. Dr Salvus 05:59, 25 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dr Salvus Assuming that, I will approve this now. Onegreatjoke (talk) 17:09, 25 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Dr Salvus: The cited source doesn't actually say anything that supports the facts asserted in the hook. Can you provide a more specific citation?

-- RoySmith (talk) 17:28, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

RoySmith, WP:CALC 2.0. You can see the source and notice only those two won the trophy. If you see the source, you can make four calculations and obtain the info. Couldn't find anything that says the textual words. Dr Salvus 17:47, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Perhaps we're not looking at the same source? I'm looking at https://www.legaseriea.it/it/award/ea-sports-player-of-the-month. I don't see where it even mentions either of those names. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:12, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You need to search for the previous seasons (2019–20 and 2020–21)! Dr Salvus 09:04, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm sorry, that's not a good enough citation. Even with your hints I can't find the information to support the stated fact. If you can't come up with a better citation for this, you'll need to write a different hook. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:08, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The source does say who won the trophies and in what month they did. If you read the entire list of winners, you'll see my hook is supported. Dr Salvus 16:41, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Here from WT:DYK – I understand the dispute is about the veracity of the source, but something else jumped out at me while I was reading this. Even if the sources say what Dr Salvus says they do, it'd still be SYNTH to arbitrarily group the winners into various time periods. It's a form of interpretation – it makes some of the awards seem more special than they are, but it's doing that based off of primary sources. For that kind of analysis, I'd argue that secondary sources are needed, and WP:CALC wouldn't cover it. Off to investigate the sources now, will return shortly. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 20:08, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I also just noticed this still needs QPQ. -- RoySmith (talk) 20:11, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm seeing Gene Cipriano (nom) in the comment field? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 20:13, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK, now I see it. -- RoySmith (talk) 20:14, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Okay, so it does seem like the table checks out – Gómez and Ronaldo both have two MVP wins in 2020 (I'm not sure why the sub-awards aren't listed), one under the 2019–2020 season and one under the 2020–2021 season. I assume that's what Dr Salvus was driving for? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 20:17, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Some thoughts. Firstly, the date sorting in the table is set up wrong; it needs to be based on Template:Date table sorting to produce meaningful output. Secondly, and more importantly, I believe that the sourcing for the hook is good enough. The first table is sourced and whilst sourcing is indirect, everything can be traced back to a reference and beyond that, WP:CALC is a reasonable argument. That said, thirdly I need to point out that the article currently fails rule D2 of the supplementary guidelines. We cannot have unsourced sections. The sources need to be repeated for the bottom three tables. Schwede66 01:34, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

it looks like to have been fixed. Dr Salvus 11:54, 9 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Right, I might just have found a solution for the source problems, or at least a partial one. On Serie A's own YouTube channel, there are several playlists containing a video for each Player of the Month from each season, including the 2019-20 campaign (which first introduced the prize). I'll provide all the links right here, hopefully all of you can access them. 2019-20 (actually, I could only find this round-up video); 2020-21; 2021-22; 2022-23. Please let me know if they're useful! Oltrepier (talk) 18:40, 4 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Casey Newton

• ... that Casey Newton's reporting of Elon Musk's acquisition of Twitter led to at least two employees learning through Newton's tweets that they were laid off? Source: https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/trends/twitter-contract-workers-learn-they-have-been-fired-by-reading-tweets-of-others-9520001.html
  • ALT1: ... that through Casey Newton's reporting of the acquisition of Twitter by Elon Musk, at least two employees had learned that they had been laid off from his tweets?
  • ALT2: ... that Casey Newton had informed at least two Twitter employees that they had been laid off by tweets through his reporting of Elon Musk's acquisition of Twitter?
  • Reviewed:
  • Comment: First DYK nomination! I'm proud of the article. The intention in the hook is to say that the tweets by Newton were the tipoff to the employees learning that they were laid off, not just his reporting.

Moved to mainspace by SWinxy (talk). Self-nominated at 01:58, 20 November 2022 (UTC).Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New Enough: Y Long Enough: Y

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Y Neutral: Y Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing: Y

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Y Interesting: Y

QPQ: Done.

Overall: @SWinxy: Good article. Hook is interesting, sources seem good, and no QPQ is required. Onegreatjoke (talk) 00:55, 23 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@SWinxy, Mandarax, Paul2520, Onegreatjoke, Theleekycauldron, and Cwmhiraeth: - I am reopening this nom per issues raised at WP:ERRORS (see [2]). The previously approved hook appears to be based on unreliable sourcing. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 17:05, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In theory, Money Control could have verified the stories independently, but I would expect a line like "We independently verified that these were former Twitter employees who first heard about their being fired this way."

How would a slight hook change be?

ALT2: ... that Casey Newton's reporting of Elon Musk's acquisition of Twitter may have been the first way some ex-Twitter employees learned they were laid off?

OR

ALT3: ... that Casey Newton's reporting on the effects of content moderation on workers has led to a contracting company cutting ties with Facebook? Source: I assume good faith on the Hertz book source.

@SWinxy and Amakuru: = paul2520 💬 19:39, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Paul2520: Hi Paul. I have been spending less time on Wikipedia and so I forgot to reply. I'd be okay with either of those, with ALT2 > ALT3. SWinxy (talk) 23:03, 18 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Onegreatjoke: or @Amakuru:, would you re-review with ALT2 or ALT3? = paul2520 💬 19:29, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Comment. Like others, I'm not that comfortable with the fact that we're citing Moneycontrol (sketchy reputation per WP:RS Noticeboard) and BGR (owned by Penske Media Corp, says it likes accurate reporting, but article essentially sourced to anonymous "company sources" and a random tweet reply) for the hook and in the article. It's also a shame because in fact... There is quite a bit of other secondary coverage (in sources considered reliable enough by WP standards) about Casey Newton's reporting of the ongoing employee-related drama at Twitter! So I think a hook similar to ALT2 might work, or you could have a hook stating that all these other news outlets relied heavily on what Casey Newton is reporting (without getting bogged down in having to vouch for the accuracy of what he was reporting). Regardless, I think in order to do justice to Casey Newton, a bit more additional research, content, and sourcing is required in the article. (I was starting to paste some article links, but a quick Wikipedia Library search yields 139 hits, so there is a lot to choose from.) Cielquiparle (talk) 23:40, 12 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Drag Den

• ... that auditions for the first season of Philippine reality series Drag Den were held over TikTok? Source: https://news.abs-cbn.com/entertainment/11/17/22/nicole-cordoves-sassa-gurl-join-drag-den-ph-judges-panel https://entertainment.inquirer.net/472747/watch-drag-den-philippines-introduces-full-cast-in-official-trailer
  • Reviewed:

5x expanded by JuanGLP (talk). Self-nominated at 14:07, 18 November 2022 (UTC).Reply[reply]

---

• Original: "... that Manila Luzon is set to host and judge her upcoming Philippine reality competition television series on Amazon Prime Video, containing eight contestants competing for the crown, named Drag Den?"
• ALT 1: "... that RuPaul's Drag Race alumna, Manila Luzon, announced the premiere date for her upcoming reality series, Drag Den, containing eight contestants competing for the crown?"
• ALT 2: "... that upcoming reality show named, Drag Den, is set to premiere on 8 December 2022 with RuPaul's Drag Race alumna, Manila Luzon, hosting and judging the reality show?"
• ALT 3: "... that Drag Den is the second reality competition series to contain Filipino drag queens competing for the crown and title in the Philippines, the first series being Drag Race Philippines?"
• ALT 4: "... that Drag Den is the second reality competition series set in the Philippines, containing Filipino drag queens competing for the crown, with the first series being Drag Race Philippines?"
• ALT 5: "... that reality competition series, Drag Den, is the second franchise set in the Philippines, containing Filipino drag queens competing for a prize, with the first series being Drag Race Philippines?"
• ALT 6: "... that auditions for the first season of Drag Den were held over TikTok?"
• ALT 6a: "... that auditions for the first season of Philippine reality series Drag Den were held over TikTok?"
• ALT 6b: "... that auditions for the first season of Drag Den were held over TikTok with RuPaul's Drag Race alumna, Manila Luzon, as the host and judge?"

---

• Comment: It may look wordy but if there are any ALTs, please suggest them so it can be less wordy. — JuanGLP (talk) 14:20, 18 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article is new enough and long enough and I didn't find any close paraphrasing. No QPQ needed as the nominator has only one prior DYK nomination. However, I have reservations about the hook. It doesn't really read like a hook, more like a news item or a promo. In addition, it seems to be reliant on the reader knowing who Manila Luzon is. Perhaps a different direction can be used here? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 06:22, 19 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Narutolovehinata5: I tried to reworded it sound it a bit less promotional. If there's any advice to help the hook, please tell me. — JuanGLP (talk) 14:43, 19 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@JuanGLP: I think a completely different direction in hook fact is needed here since I don't think the hook is going to interest people unfamiliar with the names involved. Given that this is about Filipino entertainment, I'll ask help from Pseud 14 to see what other hook options are possible. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:16, 20 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Narutolovehinata5: Okay, thank you for getting help. I did reworded the hook again. I will try to type it better. — JuanGLP (talk) 15:13, 20 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I really don't think these angles about Manila Luzon or the premiere is working out. Since this is about a television series, maybe I can also ask Theleekycauldron for ideas about a hook. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:15, 21 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Narutolovehinata5: Here are three more alternative hooks. What do you think? I removed the mention of Manila Luzon. Any thoughts on those hooks? Also, did you manage to get a response for the help on the hook? — JuanGLP (talk) 13:10, 21 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm still waiting for Theleekycauldron's response before responding further. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:26, 22 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Comment: While we're here, I'd suggest making some more thorough prose and sourcing checks on the article; looks a bit promotional to me, and some sources aren't fantastic. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 04:14, 22 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well ALT 5 doesn’t really sound promotional, and doesn’t ALT 6 needs to have at least 200 characters? Please check the ALTs I placed. Now with the sources, we have plenty of sources in the article, you can check that out. I will write more ALTs to sound less promotional. — JuanGLP (talk) 12:18, 22 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

At most 200 hundred characters. Please keep them as short as possible :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 12:27, 22 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Okay, well I believe ALT 5 sounds like a possible hook, though your hook sounds good, it should have more context about Drag Den. — JuanGLP (talk) 14:26, 22 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I suggested an ALT 6a. Does it sound good? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:52, 23 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ehhh... I guess since there is a little bit more of wording. I support for ALT 6A. — JuanGLP (talk) 14:38, 24 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I suppose this article should first go through WP:GOCE/R to fix the awkward wording before it can be given final approval. Per the above discussion, I've struck all hook proposals except for ALT6a (which is direct to the point, cited inline and verified, and gives context about the series that would clarify it to those who are unfamiliar with it). Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 03:13, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well okie dokie, thank you for your help, please let me know if the DYK? hook went through. — JuanGLP (talk) 13:48, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@JuanGLP: Just to clarify: this is still in need of a GOCE copy. I noticed that a request has yet to be made, so I am reiterating that I will not be approving this until such a copy has been completed. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:14, 13 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Narutolovehinata5:, I do not know what that means… — JuanGLP (talk) 23:20, 13 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@JuanGLP: Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests has some instructions you can follow. Actually I've gone ahead and requested a copy myself. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:36, 13 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Narutolovehinata5, it isn't going to be feasible to wait for GOCE; your request still has 50 articles ahead of it even after waiting over a month, and probably won't be taken for copying until sometime in March at this point. If someone can't the article to improve the prose sufficiently soon, the nomination should be considered for closure. (I don't think we can offer GOCE as a solution at DYK any more, given its long backlog and the slow movement of the requests list.) BlueMoonset (talk) 17:35, 14 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Given the existing article issues and the lack of progress the nomination probably has to be closed as unsuccessful. It can resume if the issues are addressed before the nomination is closed. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 22:38, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What issues needs to be addressed? — JuanGLP (talk) 04:38, 19 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article is still in need of a major copy. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 05:46, 19 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on November 26[]

Charles Grobe

• ... that Charles Grobe (pictured) wrote over a thousand musical pieces in his lifetime, and had reached an opus number of 1998 when he died? Source: Kuhn, Laura; McIntire, Dennis (2001). "Grobe, Charles". Baker's Biographical Dictionary of Musicians. Gale. Retrieved November 26, 2022 – via Encyclopedia.com. Grobe was a prolific composer of piano music, producing a grand total of 1,998 opus numbers. He was particularly adept at creating "variations brillantes" on themes by the great German masters and on popular songs.
  • ALT1: ... that Charles Grobe (pictured) composed over a thousand musical pieces in his lifetime? Source: Kuhn, Laura; McIntire, Dennis (2001). "Grobe, Charles". Baker's Biographical Dictionary of Musicians. Gale. Retrieved November 26, 2022 – via Encyclopedia.com. Grobe was a prolific composer of piano music, producing a grand total of 1,998 opus numbers. He was particularly adept at creating "variations brillantes" on themes by the great German masters and on popular songs.
  • ALT2: ... that Charles Grobe (pictured) reached an opus number of 1998 during his lifetime by composing vast numbers of variations on popular songs? Source: Kuhn, Laura; McIntire, Dennis (2001). "Grobe, Charles". Baker's Biographical Dictionary of Musicians. Gale. Retrieved November 26, 2022 – via Encyclopedia.com. Grobe was a prolific composer of piano music, producing a grand total of 1,998 opus numbers. He was particularly adept at creating "variations brillantes" on themes by the great German masters and on popular songs.
  • ALT3: ... that Charles Grobe (pictured) wrote the "Old Rough and Ready Quickstep" in honor of Zachary Taylor? Source: Kirk, Elise K. (September 1980). "Sheet Music Related to the United States War with Mexico (1846-1848) in the Jenkins Garrett Library, University of Texas at Arlington". Notes. 2. 37 (1): 16–18. JSTOR 940246. Of the many pieces which bore the great soldier's name, one of the most popular was Charles Grobe's Old Rough and Ready Quickstep, "arranged for the Piano Forte and respectfully dedicated to General Zachary Taylor" in 1846.
  • ALT4: ... that Charles Grobe (pictured) wrote the "Lincoln Quickstep" in honor of Abraham Lincoln? Source: Hancock, Harold Bell (1961). Delaware During the Civil War: A Political History (PDF) (2011 digital ed.). Delaware Heritage Press. pp. 29–30. ISBN 978-0-924117-43-5. In honor of the presidential candidate, Harry Tatnall, of Wilmington, composed the "Railsplitter's Polka," and Charles Grobe, also of Wilmington, wrote the "Lincoln Quickstep."
  • ALT5: ... that Charles Grobe (pictured), an American composer, contributed money to support Albert Newsam, a lithographer who had been stricken by paralysis? Source: Stauffer, David McNeely (1900). "Lithographic Portraits of Albert Newsam". The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography. 24 (3): 273. JSTOR 20085920. ...and as a result of this meeting a fund was raised, to which the chief subscribers were Francis H. Duffee, Ferdinand J. Dreer, Edwin Greble, Julius Lee, John A. McAllister, and Charles Grobe. With the money thus obtained Mr. Newsam was placed in the Living Home, near Wilmington, Delaware, a pleasantly situated and thoroughly respectable institution, founded by Dr. John A. Browne, of New England.
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Patty Loveless

Created by RexSueciae (talk). Self-nominated at 02:00, 3 December 2022 (UTC).Reply[reply]

• Article was created just on time (seven days before the nomination) and is free from close paraphrasing. A QPQ has been done and the image is suitable. While I have a soft spot for the Lincoln hook, I think the first hook is still the most intriguing option here. However, I do have some questions about it. I noticed that the source used is Encyclopedia.com: is it just a hosting site for the Baker's Encyclopedia, or it is the actual source? If it's the latter, is the cite reliable? Secondly, the hook gives the 1998 number as fact, while the article instead suggests that it was a reported number and thus is not sure. In addition, the sentence if accurate, it would make Grobe one of the most prolific composers in history lacks a reference: could it be synthesis or original research? And finally, is there no information about his personal life? The article seems to be a bit barren when it comes to his personal information: it doesn't even mention if he married, had a family, or even how he died. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 03:27, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Narutolovehinata5: It's a hosting site for Baker's, which should be reliable -- I don't have a hard copy of the original on hand, but Gale owns both Baker's and Encyclopedia.com and used the latter to host at least part of the former -- I think an article in *The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians* also cites the 1998 number, although I don't have a copy of that one either (I could probably find it if I tried, I think it's available on the Wikipedia Library). So I've dug a little deeper, and here's the thing -- according to a user on the IMSLP wiki, the *Grove Dictionary* entry even gives the name for Grobe's last published work (Op. 1998) which...probably existed? But which certainly isn't digitized anywhere, and the IMSLP user seems to doubt that it exists (although that's clearly not a reliable source). Complicating matters is that Grobe published some pieces with very high opus numbers that are available online -- and a lot of sources sorta punt on the question by saying he had "nearly two thousand" works, or by mentioning one of his high-numbered pieces that they'd come across while leaving open the question of how many more existed (and again, the only sources that bother to state an exact number say 1998). And I sorta figured that the last bit of the article was something for WP:BLUE -- the outlier of Telemann aside, most composers don't even hit 1000 lifetime works. Finally, personal life -- aaagh. Most secondary sources don't even touch on it. I found one hobbyist's site of uncertain provenance which contains some info on his wife, his cause of death, and his burial place, but no bibliography, so I'm assuming that was all from research into primary sources like census records -- just to put a cap on everything, I looked up the cemetery where he was buried and apparently the place was demolished and built over, so we don't even have a gravestone.

Anyways, to make a long reply short -- I'm also fond of the Lincoln hook, Charles Grobe and his quicksteps would be an amusing thought. I can't think of more sources (although there has to be more in unsearchable print somewhere) -- maybe these liner notes? But if you'd like me to harmonize things, I'll go take another look. RexSueciae (talk) 04:25, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How about a version of ALT0 that omits the 1998 part and just says he composed over a thousand works in his lifetime? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:24, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Narutolovehinata5: This better? (I added it in as a new ALT1 and shifted everything else down.) RexSueciae (talk) 11:49, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That sounds good. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:06, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @RexSueciae: Do you think anything else with the article can still be improved? For the personal stuff thing I may have to ask for a second opinion on it since I'm not sure if the source is usable; if it isn't it can be left out, can't be helped. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:16, 29 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Narutolovehinata5: Honestly I'm drawing a blank. I'd be down for a second opinion as well. RexSueciae (talk) 11:33, 29 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Per the above discussion I'm asking for a second opinion from another reviewer regarding the usability of the composers-classical-music.com source. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:58, 30 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm against using that source. It's a personal website and I can't find evidence of the author being an established expert in the field. SL93 (talk) 01:13, 5 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In that case, I don't know of anything else to add. If there are any other sources on the life of Charles Grobe, I have been unable to find them digitized. Meanwhile, just to confirm, there's no problems with the hooks? RexSueciae (talk) 03:43, 7 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'll leave the final approval to another or, but my pick for a hook would be either ALT1 or ALT4 (with a slight preference for ALT1). Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:31, 8 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on November 27[]

Benjamin Tompson

• ... that in 1676 Benjamin Tompson was the first poet in the American colonies to have his poems printed and published?  Sources:  Hall, 1924, p. 22;  Wroth, 1938, p. 258;  Fussell, 1953, p. 494
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/María Elva Pinckert
  • Comment: Statements and sources supporting hook can be found in the 'Vocations' section

Created by Gwillhickers (talk). Self-nominated at 00:10, 27 November 2022 (UTC).Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New Enough: Y Long Enough: Y

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Y Neutral: Y Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing: Y

Hook eligibility:

• Cited: Y
• Interesting: Y
• Other problems: N - Other problems

QPQ: Done.

Overall: @Gwillhickers: Good article. However, the hook and what's in the article don't exactly seem to match up in a way that bothers me. For example, in the article it says "the first collection of American poems to be printed in what is the American colonies" while the hook says "was the first poet in the American colonies to have his poems printed and published". I feel like the hook should be a bit more specific here because of that. I'm being picky here because of how DYK is with "First" hooks. Onegreatjoke (talk) 15:53, 28 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Onegreatjoke: — Thanks for your thorough review. Sorry about the delay - was under the weather for a few days there. I added the following statement to the lede, and it already occurs in the Vocation section. Hope this works for all concerned. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 20:27, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

ALT1  ...Benjamin Tompson (pictured) is cred for being the first native born poet to emerge in North-America?   < Hall, 1924, pp. 1, 22 >< Fussell, 1953, p. 494 >

Approving Alt1. Onegreatjoke (talk) 20:10, 3 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Gwillhickers and Onegreatjoke: the first published native born poet, though, right? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 04:07, 7 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Yes, in order to establish the idea of 'first poet' you have to establish the idea in terms of tangible evidence -- published works. Otherwise, all historians would have is a speculation or an assumption that Tompson was the first at anything. See: <Wroth, 1938, p. 258> <Hall, 1924, p. 13> <Fussell, 1953, p. 500> -- Gwillhickers (talk) 22:40, 7 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Pinging @Theleekycauldron, Gwillhickers, and Onegreatjoke: Need clarity on hooks and agreement of those involved, I am not seeing that all issues have been resolved. Bruxton (talk) 20:29, 23 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• How about an ALT1a: ... that Benjamin Tompson (pictured) is cred as the first native born published poet to emerge in North America? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 22:45, 23 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  theleekycauldron The end of ALT1a gets wordy with the alliteration. Also the hook leads me to believe he is a Native American; but he's not a native in the way many would refer to natives. Bruxton (talk) 01:55, 24 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  I see nothing wrong with ALT1, which reads "native born poet", and is well sourced. Most Indians, then and now, didn't/don't consider themselves as an American of any kind. "Native-American" was a term invented by white politicians to placate their critics and other constituents, and more than suggests that the generations of settlers and their descendants who were born and raised in America are native to no country. If this causes anyone to get confused all they have to do is read the lede to the article, which makes it perfectly clear that Tompson wasn't an Indian. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 02:18, 24 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  I mean, that's not wrong, but "native born" does give the wrong connotation. I think using American colonies from the ALT0 would work well. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 22:52, 24 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• This is the term the sources use, and used in the proper context doesn't imply anything wrong, imo. Again, the lede, not to mention the article, makes things clear. Also, I have to say, it's wrong that the term "native" has been reserved, by some people, for only one race of people, as if other lives don't matter. We could always use the original hook if someone is going to make a big issue over matters of opinion. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 23:36, 24 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Removed my objection and placed leeky sig in correct place. Promoting ALT1 Bruxton (talk) 18:40, 30 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Article contains too-close paraphrasing. Compare for example "Like other poets, Tompson developed his writing by patient practice during hours not involved with his teaching responsibilities" with "Tompson, like other early poets, developed his craft by patient practice during hours unoccupied by his classroom responsibilities", or "definitive example of cultivated standard of achievement in verse in New England in the late seventeenth century" with "represents the cultivated standard of achievement in verse in New England in the late seventeenth century". Nikkimaria (talk) 17:41, 31 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Nikkimaria: I was not aware of this - you have moved this from the prep but you did not ping any of the involved parties (@Theleekycauldron, Gwillhickers, and Onegreatjoke:. You have placed the close paraphrasing banner on the article but it would be far more helpful to help fix the issue. Bruxton (talk) 00:43, 2 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Bruxton: this appears to be a recurring problem on Gwillhickers' DYK noms – fixing it is probably not a reasonable ask for an admin copypatroller (my bad, i could've sworn!) with lots more to do. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 03:01, 2 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Theleekycauldron: they are not an admin. But I guess this one is kaput now. Bruxton (talk) 03:05, 2 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Nikkimaria, Bruxton, Onegreatjoke, and Theleekycauldron: — The phrases in question have been reworded. Bearing in mind
CLOP: "Limited close paraphrasing is also appropriate if there are only a limited number of ways to say the same thing."
It would seem the phrase, "cultivated standard of achievement in verse" is one such example. I had always thought that some similarities were allowed in such cases when used in the context of one's own words, which has always been the case. In any event, I've gone through the article and checked for other issues. If anyone sees something I may have missed please bring it to my attention. If there are no more issues I'm hoping to get this Nom back on track. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 20:25, 2 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It is always possible to directly quote unique turns of phrase like that one. But again, direct copying is not the only problem to avoid. Consider this example: "Tompson lived to the age of seventy-two, during which time he had the opportunity to produce a good deal of poetry over a period of fifty-five years. From the 1658 poem on Samuel Arnold to his last work in 1713, Tompson wrote at least twenty-nine poems" vs the source's "Because he lived to the age of seventy-two, Tompson had the opportunity to produce a good deal of poetry over a long period of time. In the fifty-five years of his productivity, from the 1658 poem on Samuel Arnold to his "last lines" of 1713, Tompson wrote at least twenty-nine poems". There are pieces of this that are truly limited - but placed in the context of others that are only slightly altered, the whole still consists of close paraphrasing. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:30, 3 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The statement has been reworded and simplified. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 00:52, 3 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Onegreatjoke: Would you give the article another review so we can wrap this up? -- Gwillhickers (talk) 21:29, 4 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Honestly, I think I'm going to give this review to someone else as I lack confidence in reviewing this. Onegreatjoke (talk) 21:35, 4 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Arun gas field

• ... that atrocities committed at the Arun gas field led to a lawsuit against ExxonMobil that the energy company has stalled for over twenty years? Source: ExxonMobil bid to end Indonesia lawsuit found ‘meritless’ Aljazeera 5-Aug-2022
  • Reviewed: QPQ not required (3rd nom)

5x expanded by Larataguera (talk). Self-nominated at 03:01, 28 November 2022 (UTC).Reply[reply]

• Reviewing. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 07:05, 17 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New Enough: Y Long Enough: Y

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Y Neutral: Y Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing: Y

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Y Interesting: Y

QPQ: None required.

Overall: @Larataguera: Based on the NPOV criteria, I feel the hook should be revised to say "alleged atrocities" since this involves an ongoing court case that has not rendered a verdict on ExxonMobil's complicity in the atrocities. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 17:37, 17 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Arsonal, it's true there's a subtle difference between "not denying" and "acknowledging." I missed that, and I'll fix that sentence. As for the hook, the source says that Since the end of the civil war in 2005, the government-backed Truth and Reconciliation Commission (KKR) and the Commission for Disappeared and Victims of Violence (KontraS) have extensively documented abuses committed by the Indonesian military both around Arun field and across Aceh. I don't think there's any question that the atrocities occurred, and so it would be misleading to say "alleged atrocities". (That is, we would not be misrepresenting the source if the hook read "... that extensively documented atrocities ...!)

So to be clear, what is "alleged" (and yet to be ruled in the lawsuit) is Exxon's responsibility for the atrocities (under US law). Not the atrocities themselves.

Larataguera (talk) 20:16, 17 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks, Larataguera. I agree that the sources point to atrocities being committed, but a reader with no knowledge of the context (which is the point of DYK) and just reading the hook without any antecedent of who committed the atrocities would imply the atrocities were committed by ExxonMobil, resulting in the lawsuit. But, as your source states, the atrocities were in fact committed by the military. I propose the following:

• ALT1: ... that atrocities committed by the Indonesian military at the Arun gas field operated by ExxonMobil led to a lawsuit against the oil company that has stalled for over twenty years?

Let me know what you think. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 23:23, 17 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks Arsonal for this suggestion. It seems like anyone who reads much of anything into the hook will just click on it and find all the information they need. The point is to create interest. I think Alt0 is factual and would get more clicks than Alt1, which I think is a little too long and gives too much information.

If you strongly feel Alt0 is unacceptable, how about

• Alt2: ... that victims of atrocities committed at Arun gas field allege ExxonMobil's responsibility in a lawsuit that the energy company has stalled for 20 years? Larataguera (talk) 00:54, 18 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That works for me. Approve ALT2. Thanks for working with me, Larataguera. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 06:35, 18 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Per Wikipedia talk:Did you know#Prep 1: Arun gas field (nom). SL93 (talk) 16:43, 22 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I suppose that if people are insistent that the atrocities be "alleged" (per concerns at Wikipedia talk:Did you know#Prep 1: Arun gas field (nom)), then the hook could read:

• Alt3:... that alleged atrocities at the Arun gas field are extensively documented and the subject of a lawsuit against ExxonMobil that has stalled for over 20 years?

I think this is a bit wordy, but could meet people's concerns that we not describe the atrocities to have occurred in wikivoice, while not mis-representing the situation as being more uncertain than it actually is? Larataguera (talk) 18:37, 22 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Reviewer needed to check Alt3. Referenced discussion that caused this to be pulled from prep is now at Wikipedia talk:Did you know/Archive 188#Prep 1: Arun gas field (nom). Striking prior hooks. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:49, 14 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on November 28[]

Pyotr Masherov

• ... that Pyotr Masherov pursued a rapid modernisation of Minsk that resulted in the destruction of much of the original town that survived WW2? Source: Ioffe, Emmanuel (2008). From Myasnikov to Malofeyev: the Rulers of the BSSR. Minsk. p. 138.
  • ALT1: ... that under Pyotr Masherov the Belarusian agricultural industry expanded their grain harvest from 2.3 million to 7.3 million, over the 3x the original amount? Source: Dzyemyantsyey, Mikalay. Respect for Business. p. 116. , Vecherko, G. N. He Did Not Show Himself, and Did Not Utter Incantations. p. 240.
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Iowa Cow War

Improved to Good Article status by Mupper-san (talk). Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk) at 20:24, 1 December 2022 (UTC).Reply[reply]

• I made a very minor to directly source the sentence from which your first hook derives; I learned that was a requirement just a couple weeks ago. Otherwise, the article is an outstanding little work of biography and I was happy to see the GA review process was similarly painless. All requirements done (I have AGF on offline source) and both hooks are sufficiently interesting, though I think Masherov's regret would be an enhancing addition to the first hook. Great job to both nominator and improver! Hope to see more from both. ~ Pbritti (talk) 18:00, 5 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Onegreatjoke and Pbritti: I'm happy to assume good faith on a book source i can't access – I'm less happy to assume good faith on a book I can't prove... exists? Searches for the title of Respect for Business, in both English and Google Translated-Belarussian, turn up nothing, and the book citations don't come with dates or links. Also, Mikalay Dzyemyantsyey wasn't a scholar, he was the chairman of the Belarusian Supreme Soviet. Is his word reliable? And who was Vecherko? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 11:33, 15 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

pinging @Mupper-san: since he knows the sources better than I do. Onegreatjoke (talk) 18:31, 15 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Theleekycauldron:: You (unfortunately) won't find it in Belarusian - it's part of a collection of texts titled Pyotr Masherov: Epoch and Fate. On the 100th Anniversary of his Birth, a Collection of Articles and Texts (Russian: Петр Машеров. Эпоха и судьба. К 100-летию со дня рождения. Сборник статей и воспоминаний.), and to my knowledge hasn't been published on its own. Additionally, I would call Dzyemyantsyey reliable given he was a witness to events occurring under Masherov's rule. Lastly, Vecherko is (I believe) Valentin Vechyorko [ru], a Belarusian historian and opposition politician. Mupper-san (talk) 19:00, 15 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Mupper-san: I see – not sure why it would be G. N., then. Who published Dzyemyantsyey's book? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 23:58, 16 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Theleekycauldron:: There is also the possibility (which is more likely now, looking at it) that it was Valentin Vechyorko's father, Grigory Nikolayevich Vechyorko (Russian: Григорий Николаевич Вечёрко) - himself an advisor to Masherov, deputy head of Gosplan in Belarus, and a member of the KGB. Dzyemyantsyey's text (Which is actually in a separate collection, a mistake on my part as the two are similarly anthologies of first-hand accounts and historical analysis) was published by the League for the Assistance to Enterprises Association (Russian: Ассоциация "Лига содействия оборонным предприятиям) The collection which Dzyemyantsyey's memoirs are actually part of is Pyotr Masherov, Son of the Belarusian Nation: Memoirs and Articles on his 95th Birth Anniversary (Russian: Сын белорусского народа Петр Машеров. К 95-летию со дня рождения. воспоминания и статьи. Mupper-san (talk) 00:26, 17 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Mupper-san: Aha, gotcha. Is the publisher reputable for historical content? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 00:28, 17 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Theleekycauldron: I can't really testify as to any knowledge of the publisher, but I can say that many of the authors included in it were people who had some experience with his leadership, among them various social, academic, and cultural figures during the period. Additionally is the fact that sizeable portions of content (for example, Masherov being referred to as a "genuine communist" or similarly described as being a genuine adherent of communism compared to his equivalents during the Era of Stagnation). As an addendum, Dzyemyantsyey would likely have expertise in regards to agriculture as he was head of the agricultural department of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Byelorussia from 1977 (see here). And my sincerest apologies for not replying earlier - it must have completely slipped my mind! Mupper-san (talk) 07:24, 7 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hmm. I know that public officials have a lot of first hand experience, but that doesn't make them reliable for the content they produce – public officials still have agendas and alliances, even after leaving office. If the publisher doesn't have a reputation for historical content, I'm not entirely convinced that we're dealing with a reliable source for the figures. No worries on the response time :) I'm rather swamped and bonked myself. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 00:16, 11 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on December 4[]

WCPN

• ... that one listener was shocked to hear "Erotic City" instead of contemporary Christian music on an Ohio radio station? Source: "Christian radio station changes format: WZLE now belts out pop, rock". May 22, 1999. The Morning Journal. Lorain, Ohio. p. D1.
  • ALT1: ... that readers of The Plain Dealer disagreed with a favorable 2002 review of the Tivoli Audio PAL as it could not reliably tune in an Ohio radio station? Source: "More tales of Tivoli tuners". October 10, 2002. The Plain Dealer. Cleveland, Ohio. p. E10.
  • Reviewed: QPQ exempt

Improved to Good Article status by Nathan Obral (talk). Self-nominated at 06:19, 10 December 2022 (UTC).Reply[reply]

• Reviewing... Onegreatjoke (talk) 18:16, 10 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• @Nathan Obral: Good article but I feel as if you could choose a better hook. These hooks are ok but I feel as if better ones could be made. Onegreatjoke (talk) 21:55, 10 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Onegreatjoke: I wrote ALT0 while trying to help Nathan figure out a good hook (I didn't do any substantive s on the actual article). A lot of the options here are wordy and boring. I have experience with hooks like this and how to avoid them. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 05:52, 11 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• @Nathan Obral: Well, it's certainly a shame this has languished so – let's take look. New enough, positively massive, neutral, and plagiarism-free; a little concerned about the use of Fybush.com as a source, it looks like a selfpubbed blog. Not a big fan of either of the hooks; the first is a listener complain, I imagine those aren't uncommon, even if this does get a few clicks by bringing up sexuality and religion. The second seems to fall a little flat. QPQ is not required, so it seems we've got a few small issues to work out. Great job so far! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 10:03, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Theleekycauldron: Scott Fybush is a subject matter expert who has been published in several notable broadcast publications (Radio World, Current). One of the handful of people I'd trust as an SMX in American broadcasting. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 21:15, 21 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on December 7[]

Gother Mann

• ... that Gother Mann (pictured) commanded a small body of militia on Dominica during the French invasion in 1778?
• ALT1 ... that several of Gother Mann's plans for fortifying Canada are preserved in the British Library and the Canadian archives?

1778? Source: (1) https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Dictionary_of_National_Biography,_1885-1900/Mann,_Gother (2) https://www.oxforddnb.com/view/10.1093/ref:odnb/9780198614128.001.0001/odnb-9780198614128-e-17944

• • Reviewed: N/A
  • Comment: I've only nominated 3 articles for DYK without doing a QPQ, so this is my last freebie

Created by Ficaia (talk). Self-nominated at 03:29, 7 December 2022 (UTC).Reply[reply]

• Article long enough, new enough, and generally appropriately referenced. QPQ is indeed not needed yet. Reliable sources are used properly throughout the article, and the hook is cited and mentioned in the article. Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px. Can't seem to notice any significant copyvio, so good to go. Taung Tan (talk) 16:19, 7 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• @Ficaia and Taung Tan: As text copied from the public domain does not count for DYK prose purposes, this article fails DYK's 1500-character length minimum. Could the article be rephrased or expanded? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 13:20, 6 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Theleekycauldron: I'll work on expanding the article. 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 00:16, 7 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Ficaia: Any progress? BorgQueen (talk) 21:48, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@BorgQueen: Yes, by my count I've added 1736 characters of text based on other sources. 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 07:14, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• I'd like another reviewer to take a look. BorgQueen (talk) 07:34, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on December 8[]

The Virgin in Prayer

• ... that the blue garment in The Virgin in Prayer (pictured) is colorised by an ultramarine made from lapis lazuli, which was a highly cost pigment to be painted in such this art? Source: "The bright lighting combined with the impenetrable dark background makes the blue of the her robes especially brilliant. Sassferrato has used ultramarine for these. Made from lapis lazuli, a semi-precious stone mined in north-eastern Afghanistan, ultramarine was the most expensive of blue pigments, and highly prized for its intense colour." National Gallery
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Axial parallelism

Created by JeBonSer (talk). Self-nominated at 01:00, 8 December 2022 (UTC).Reply[reply]

• @JeBonSer: It's new and long enough, each paragraph has a citation, but watch your wording, there's a 26% similarity on EarWig for use of the same phrases like coloured robes and sculpted facial features, Reformers of the Roman Catholic Church advocated a more personal approach to worship, made from lapis lazuli, a semi-precious stone mined.
• The article could also use some light copy-ing and toning down of the the descriptions in Wikipedia's voice; the description is very flowery at times. her flawless porcelain-like skin lends a sculptural quality to the painting and makes the audience feel to be in her real presence; radiant, luminous, more brilliant, brilliantly elegant etc.
• My main concern is that isn't this true for most medieval and renaissance paintings of the Virgin Mary? I'm not sure it's particularly "hooky" to say that this painting of Mary uses Marian blue like so many others?
• I think also I'd like to see a few more reliable, independent sources (i.e., not just on museum websites) to confirm that this painting is WP:NOTABLE. Is newliturgicalmovement.org a reliable source about art history? I see that an article in The Burlington Magazine talks about the painting: (JSTOR 882464), perhaps this can be incorporated into the article.
• The hook is properly formatted (although I might reword it if this is the final angle we end up on; the syntax is a bit off to me, e.g., which was a highly cost pigment to be painted in such this art, and this use of colorised also doesn't seem like the most obvious verb)., 164 characters, and there are no issues with the image.
• Can you try to come up with any alternative hooks? Umimmak (talk) 23:56, 9 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• ALT1: ... that in the 17th-century, The Virgin in Prayer (pictured) by Sassoferrato was one of the most common subject in religious painting in Christian Europe? Source: "Sixteenth-century reformers of the Roman Catholic Church advocated a more personal approach to worship, placing great emphasis on individual contemplation. By the seventeenth century, the subject of the Virgin alone and at prayer had become very common." National Gallery. JeBonSer ^{(talk | sign)} 05:30, 10 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @JeBonSer: Again, the issue I’m having is that this isn’t particularly unique to this painting. It’s not particularly surprising to read that the Virgin Mary was a common subject Italian art in the Baroque era given the strong relation of Roman Catholicism to all three of these topics, and that hook says nothing particularly exciting about this painting. Do you have responses to the other issues I raised? Umimmak (talk) 05:43, 10 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@JeBonSer: Hi there, sorry to interrupt; how about that ultramarine is made of a stone from Afghanistan? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paradise Chronicle (talk • contribs) 03:52, 19 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@JeBonSer and Paradise Chronicle: as Umimmak points out, ultramarine was a pretty common colour for paintings of the time. If a hook can't be agreed upon in a week, I'd say that this nom should probably be marked for closure. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 10:18, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry for the inconvenience as I have my wikibreak for these past days. I have my other suggested hook which you can agree:
* ALT2: ... that The Virgin in Prayer (pictured) was acquired by the National Gallery in the mid-19th-century as the London art world had a renewed interest of its artist? Source: "This picture and The Virgin in Prayer were both acquired by the National Gallery in the mid-nineteenth century, when Sassoferrato’s star was high in the London art world." National Gallery. JeBonSer ^{(talk | sign)} 04:51, 2 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• New reviewer needed to check the new hook, but also the issues raised by the original reviewer. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:25, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on December 9[]

Beezer Brothers

• ... that American architect Michael J. Beezer, designer of the Larabie Brothers Bank in Deer Lodge, Montana, was honored by making its first deposit on opening day in 1912? Source: "The honor of making the first deposit went to the architect supervisor of the building construction, M.J. Beezer of Seattle, Washington." from ref 8, the NRHP nom form for Deer Creek Historic District.

• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Geneva official chestnut tree

Created by MB (talk) and Doncram (talk). Nominated by MB (talk) at 19:18, 11 December 2022 (UTC).Reply[reply]

• Review in progress — Voice of Clam 17:11, 14 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New Enough: Y Long Enough: Y

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Y Neutral: Y Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing: Y

Hook eligibility:

• Cited: Y
• Interesting: N - maybe

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Not sure if hook can be considered interesting enough (I very rarely look at DYK), so would prefer another reviewer to comment. — Voice of Clam 17:23, 14 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @MB and Voice of Clam: I would say that asking for a new hook is probably best. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 10:16, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  theleekycauldron Voice of Clam MB ALT1 ... that the Beezer Brothers built Baker Boyer Bank as Walla Walla, Washington's first skyscraper? SL93 (talk) 23:13, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• ALT2 ... that the Beezer Brothers designed buildings with clay tile in place of steel for better performance during fires?

  I'm OK with any of these. MB 23:25, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Approve ALT2 as cited and interesting :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 03:00, 2 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• @Theleekycauldron, Aoidh, MB, and Voice of Clam: This has major copyright issues. I'm amazed that it got as far as a queue (when I yanked it) without somebody noticing. Earwig gives it a 43.5%, which itself is a pretty high number, so worthy of looking deeper. What I found was that it's much worse than just the literal copy-pastes. Take a look at these two passages:
  • (article) The pair frequently acted as construction managers in addition to architects on their projects where they oversaw daily, on-site, work activities, work that is usually performed by construction firms.
  • (source}The Beezer Brothers actively supervised building sites, acting as construction managers as well as architects for their far flung commissions. At their firm’s height, these commissions extended as far north as Alaska, and as far south as Hollywood, California. As construction managers, the Beezer Brothers oversaw daily, on-site, work activities. Usually this work is contracted to construction firms..

  Earwig only picked up on oversaw daily, on-site, work activities but the rest of the paragraph is almost as bad, just changing a few words here or there, i.e. close paraphrasing. There's a lot of other example of close paraphrasing, but this one looks like the worst. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:24, 8 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  - Just so that this isn't moved back to the approved nominations. SL93 (talk) 21:16, 8 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  It has been over three weeks, and the close paraphrasing issues remain. MB hasn't ed in the interim. If they return before this closes, or someone else wants to work on the nomination and posts here, the nomination can continue. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:24, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on December 10[]

Ludwig's subathon

• ... that Ludwig Ahgren livestreamed for 31 days instead of 24 hours due to his appendectomy? Source: https://legacy.upcomer.com/video-shattering-records-in-his-sleep-how-ludwigs-subathon-broke-twitch/
  • ALT1: ... that "thousands of viewers" watched Ludwig Ahgren shower during his 31-day continuous livestream? Source: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-03-19/twitch-streamer-ludwig-never-ending-stream/100017600
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Starbucks Red Cup

Improved to Good Article status by PerfectSoundWhatever (talk). Self-nominated at 01:22, 10 December 2022 (UTC).Reply[reply]

• Reviewing... Onegreatjoke (talk) 01:55, 10 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New Enough: Y Long Enough: Y

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Y Neutral: Y Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing: Y

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Y Interesting: Y

QPQ: N - Not done
Overall: @PerfectSoundWhatever: Good article. Article is sourced and the hook is interesting. Just waiting on a QPQ now. Onegreatjoke (talk) 05:19, 11 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Redoing the @PerfectSoundWhatever:. Note to Onegreatjoke — pings don't work if you don't sign the post in the same . Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 05:18, 11 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can't believe I forgot to sign my post. Onegreatjoke (talk) 05:19, 11 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• I'm watching this page so no worries, still saw the review! Thank you for the ping anyways. Will get the QPQ done soon. — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 05:20, 11 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• @Onegreatjoke: QPQ done. — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 16:30, 15 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Alright, approving. Onegreatjoke (talk) 17:40, 15 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Comment: I have checked this one out and it is ready to be promoted. Presently prep 3 has 4 male hooks, so it will have to wait. Bruxton (talk) 01:42, 25 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• @PerfectSoundWhatever, Bruxton, and RoySmith: I've pulled this from prep following a discussion at WT:DYK that identified a sourcing question – also, consensus on a hook should be achieved before repromotion. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 11:07, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Alright, I'll make a list of the current proposed hooks:
• ALT0 ... that Ludwig Ahgren's planned 24-hour livestream was postponed – so he continuously livestreamed for 31 days instead? source
• ALT1 ... that Ludwig Ahgren livestreamed for 31 days after his 24-hour livestream was postponed by his appendectomy? source
• ALT2 ... that Ludwig Ahgren grossed US$1,434,850 for continuously livestreaming his life for 31 days? source
• ALT3 ... that Ludwig Ahgren showered on camera during his 31-day continuous livestream? source
  • ALT0 and 1 are similar. They are sourced on Upcomer, which is reliable based on the weak consensus at WP:VG/S, but ALT1 was objected since RoySmith beleived Upcomer isn't good enough for a BLP's medical history. ALT0 omits the medical aspect. Note that a video made by Ahgren confirms the appendectomy and that it was why he postponed the stream, which is complaint with WP:ABOUTSELF. The objection to ALT2 is that it is sourced on ScreenRant which, per WP:RSP, is considered reliable for entertainment-related topics, but should not be used for controversial statements related to living persons. I disagree what it sources (the amount of money he grossed) is controversial, especially since he shared the figure in a video. If a third party checks these hooks and finds that all of the sourcing issues are justified, I will look for new hooks afterwards. — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 18:20, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Kanzuri

• ... that in order to make kanzuri, a Japanese chili paste, pickled peppers need to be laid out on snow to dry during the coldest part of the year? Source: Source: [3] (かんずりの仕込みは、大寒（1月20日前後）に、塩漬けにした唐辛子を一度雪の上にさらして天日干しにする「寒ざらし」からおこなわれる。別名「雪さらし」ともいわれ、真っ白な雪の上にあざやかな赤色の唐辛子がきれいに並べられる。)
  • ALT1: ... that kanzuri is often used as a "great supporting actor" and even "secret ingredient" by Japanese chefs and restaurateurs? Source: Source: [4] (「香辛料は必ずしもなければならないものではないけれど、使うことで料理がより深い味になります。つまり『かんずり』は、料理をさりげなく引き立てる“名バイプレイヤー（脇役）”。特に、脂っぽい料理は中和されてさっぱりと食べられると評判ですし、料理の隠し味としても使われています」と邦昭さん。とある高級料理店からは「うちで隠し味に使っているので、近隣の料理店には卸さないでほしい」と直談判されたエピソードもあるとか。)
  • ALT2: ... that the traditional method of drying out peppers used in the making of kanzuri in the snow is a popular tourist attraction in Niigata Prefecture? Source: Source: [5] (有限会社かんずりでは、毎年1月20日前後の大寒の日を「雪さらし（仕事）はじめ」とし、3月上旬まで15回ほど「雪さらし」が行われます。雪の白と唐辛子の赤、そして晴れた日の青空のコントラストが美しいと、いつ頃からかアマチュアカメラマンをはじめとする見学者が集まるようになり、今ではこの地の冬の風物詩として多くの人に親しまれています)
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Star Control
  • Comment: QPQ coming soon... Done!

Created by CurryTime7-24 (talk). Self-nominated at 01:35, 10 December 2022 (UTC).Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New Enough: Y Long Enough: Y

Policy compliance:

• Adequate sourcing: N - this source mentions that kanzarashi and yukisarashi are the same process, yet the ==Production== section describes them as two different processes.
• Neutral: Y
• Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing: Y

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Y Interesting: Y

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Interesting article and subject. A few sources are blog-like in nature, but they appear reliable based on the credentials of the author or the fact that the publisher is reliable, and the information used have been written in a neutral manner. In this oldid, citation 10 is a press release, and citation 12 is an anonymous blog, but their usage for referencing is minimal. If WP:RS is an issue, the two citations could be removed, and it would not impact the reliability of the article. @CurryTime7-24: Note that there are instances where "kanzuri" is misspelled as "kanzari". —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 04:53, 19 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Thank you for reviewing my DYK! Please give me until tomorrow to fix the shortcomings you pointed out. I've been short on free time the last week since it's Christmastide. But will have more time starting tomorrow (PST). —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 04:37, 22 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • No worries with the additional time needed! —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 15:29, 22 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @CurryTime7-24: how's this going? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 10:20, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry. Been short on time on account of Christmastide/New Year's. What little time I've had available for ing was spent tripling the size of the article for Galina Pisarenko in order to salvage its attendant DYK nomination. Will get back to work on kanzuri later today or tomorrow—promise! —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 18:12, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @CurryTime7-24: Well... any progress? BorgQueen (talk) 17:22, 5 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Been a busy month so far. Working on this right now finally. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 20:15, 12 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@CurryTime7-24:, any progress? —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 06:45, 21 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Thank you very kindly for your patience. It's been a very busy month for me and have not had any time to work on this DYK. I've amended the article according to your requests. I've not yet removed the two sources you listed as I'm still looking for better replacements. However, please feel free to drop them if you like. Please let me know if any further changes are needed. Again, thank you very much for waiting. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 23:00, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the updates, CurryTime7-24. I think the MAFF source also needs to be used to cite "traditional process known as kanzarashi or yukisarashi" so that the statement doesn't violate WP:SYNTH since neither the Satoyama Library nor the Yukiguni citation after that sentence specifically mentions kanzarashi. Also, looking at the hooks again, I think ALT1 needs be struck since it's directly based on a statement by the president of the product's maker. It's fine within the article, but using it as a hook doesn't meet WP:NOTADVERT in my opinion. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 04:53, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@CurryTime7-24: Making sure you didn't miss my comments. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 23:53, 30 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on December 11[]

Elizabeth Mary Wells

• ... that Elizabeth Mary Wells fitted a girl for a prosthetic arm for Christmas, having cut it off six years earlier?
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Joseph Stephen Paduano
  • Comment: for Christmas

Moved to mainspace by Lauraosull (talk). Nominated by Kingsif (talk) at 23:54, 20 December 2022 (UTC).Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New Enough: Y Long Enough: Y

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Y Neutral: Y Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing: Y

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Y Interesting: Y

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Article is new enough and long enough, is neutral and is plagiarism free. Hook is cited and interesting. QPQ is done. However, in terms of sourcing - the majority of those mentioned seem to be primary sources from the Church Missionary Society (which I can't access), and one secondary source Europeans in East Africa (which is about her husband). I'm concerned that although the article is well-written and detailed, it depends too much on primary material which does not necessarily establish her own notability. (I am loathe to say this, as most of the pages I start are for women!) I think to approve it, I'd need to hear which of the Church Missionary Society sources contribute to her notability, not just background to her life. Also, the page needs to be de-orphaned, there's two citations missing, the quotes need attributions, and it needs some categories adding. Lajmmoore (talk) 10:10, 22 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Lajmmoore: While I looked over the article and am confident of two independent sources for GNG, I don't have any knowledge of the sources you ask about. The article is a WikiEd product that the student is still working on, and I don't want to mess with their "work" until their class is over. It is a stupid system, but at least we have a well-written article in this case. I, separately, don't think being an orphan or uncategorised is a barrier to DYK. But if there are outstanding issues, I probably can't address them. Happy for this to be closed if that's the case, and I'll either find another article to nom or ask to use another of mine for the Christmas set. Kingsif (talk) 18:42, 22 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Kingsif - which were the two sources you'd identifed for GNG? (In hope I can change my mind!) I just looked at the toolkit the new ors are given, and they don't get told about article categories or de-orphaning, so I can see better why that's not been done. The course page says the final week ended 10 December, so I think we can help and it be OK - @Helaine (Wiki Ed):, @Brianda (Wiki Ed):, @Ian (Wiki Ed):, @Breamk: what do you think? Lajmmoore (talk) 10:09, 23 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just leaving a tag for @Lauraosull: & the message I left on their talk page here. If you could leave a note on the sources that prove notability here, that would be great! Lajmmoore (talk) 14:10, 23 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Lajmmoore: In this I note which sources I thought fit, but also that the urls are all student-user log-ins, and are time-restricted. Needs work, there, too. Kingsif (talk) 00:27, 24 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Kingsif I can now approve the hook - Laurosull explained (on the talk page & on her usertalk) that three of the sources supported notability, so I am much more confident in the sourcing of the article now. Good to go. Lajmmoore (talk) 08:08, 24 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Reopened due to incomplete sourcing and notability concerns.[6] Gatoclass (talk) 13:50, 25 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• I have given it a very thorough copy. The only outstanding issue is the same thing I mentioned the first time, @Lauraosull:; that many of the refs point to urls that are student-login blocked (i.e. if you used school access and just copied the url, nobody else can see it). Is it possible for you to re-access the sources and change the refs to have general bibliographic detail (how you would cite it in a term paper) - preferably including page numbers where the sources are long or detailed. Kingsif (talk) 05:29, 15 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Isaac Hill

• ... that newspaper or Isaac Hill (pictured) regarded the federalist opposition to the War of 1812 as treasonous? Source: Bradley, 1835, pp. 33-34
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Chekri Ganem
  • Comment: Statement and source supporting hook are found in the last sentence of the 'Journalist and or' section

5x expanded by Gwillhickers (talk). Self-nominated at 01:12, 19 December 2022 (UTC).Reply[reply]

• Reviewing. - Aoidh (talk) 06:36, 26 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New Enough: Y Long Enough: Y

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Y Neutral: Y Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing: Y

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Y - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith Interesting: Y

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Y Used in article: Y Clear at 100px: Y

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Expansion of the article began on Decemner 11. The article was 2037 characters of prose before the article was expanded, and was 10906 on December 18, which is slightly more than a 5x expansion of prose. No copyvio detected, hook is interesting and AGF on source. No concerns here; good to go. - Aoidh (talk) 06:49, 26 December 2022 (UTC) - Aoidh (talk) 06:49, 26 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Article contains too-close paraphrasing. Compare for example "Hill became an active participant in the Dartmouth College case, involving Constitutional amendments which would effect corporate law lending his support to the action taken by the state, and did all he could to keep the controversy alive until it assumed proportions which would continued to effect local politics for nearly a half century" with "he became an active participant in the Dartmouth College case, supporting the action of the state and fanning the flames of controversy until it assumed proportions which affected local politics for almost half a century". Nikkimaria (talk) 17:50, 31 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Nikkimaria: Oh no, thanks for catching that, I think I over-relied on Earwig here and didn't think to check the sources with that level of scrutiny. - Aoidh (talk) 18:01, 31 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Aoidh and Nikkimaria: — Actually, while there are a couple of phrases that are similar, one involving only a general statement, much has been quoted here that doesn't involve close-paraphrasing,. Here is what was quoted, with the similar text in bold. All else does not involve close-paraphrasing.

"Hill became an active participant in the Dartmouth College case, involving Constitutional amendments which would effect corporate law lending his support to the action taken by the state, and did all he could to keep the controversy alive until it assumed proportions which would continued to effect local politics for nearly a half century".

It should be noted also that the source involved is in the public domain and offered as a free download from archive.org, so there are no copyright issues involved here. I double checked the article with Earwig's Copyvio Detector which shows no more issues. I will correct the couple of incidents involving close paraphrasing. Apologies, and thanks for looking out. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 20:32, 31 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The portion you've bolded is essentially identical, but close paraphrasing involves more than just identical text - see WP:CLOP more information. Keep in mind that Earwig will catch only identical text, and only for materials which it is able to index. Even material copied from public domain texts needs to be properly attributed, but what leads you to believe this source is PD? Multiple ions of the work appear to have had their copyright renewed. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:59, 31 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Aoidh and Nikkimaria: — As I said, the portion I bolded, a couple short general phrases, was identical, all the other text quoted was not. In any case, the source is available for download at archive.org. There is nothing there that indicates that the particular source I used is copyrighted. If it still had a copyright archive.org would not offer it up for a free unrestricted download, or they would be facing legal issues. Is the text in question okay in your opinion now? -- Gwillhickers (talk) 22:53, 31 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

IA is indeed facing legal issues, and even if it were not, being freely available on the web does not mean the text is suitably licensed for inclusion here. Thus it is necessary to ensure adequate paraphrasing, beyond the single example presented above. Here is an additional example: "a lengthy and energetic political commentary on the current trend of national affairs, and gave his support to a strict construction of state reforms, favored rotation in office, economy, and advocated democratic simplicity" vs "a lengthy and vigorous commentary on the trend of national affairs in support of strict construction, rotation in office, economy, and democratic simplicity". While this is not the word-for-word copying that would be caught by Earwig, it does constitute close paraphrasing per WP:CLOP. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:46, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Nikkimaria: — Virtually every large institution faces legal issues at one time or another, including Wikipedia, Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc, which by itself doesn't conclude anything in terms of whether a given publication is copyrighted. For any copyright issue to stand, the material in question has to have an appreciable amount of actual copying involved, not just a general phrase here or there. However, I appreciate your concern and will not contend matters any further, and will make efforts to remedy issues here. I'm only hoping that 'some' general phrases are allowed, esp when they involve simple points. Once again, thanks for your efforts in keeping Wikipedia above board. Happy New Year. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 20:19, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Close paraphrasing has been fixed. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 22:39, 5 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Unfortunately it has not. Here is another example of closely paraphrased content: "but as a faithful supporter of Jackson he instead received a recess appointment as second comptroller of the treasury in 1829, serving until April 1830, when the Senate refused confirmation of his appointment, much to the disappointment of President Jackson, but to the satisfaction of former President Adams, who considered him to be a profligate libeler" vs "but as an ardent supporter of Jackson he received in 1829 a recess appointment as second comptroller of the treasury. Closing out his interests in the Patriot, he served until April 1830, when the Senate refused confirmation of his appointment, greatly to the indignation of President Jackson and the satisfaction of former President Adams, who classed him as a profligate libeler". But I want to emphasize that this is an example only: there is a need here for a more comprehensive revision to address issues throughout the article. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:49, 6 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Then how would one say that Hill was a strong supporter of Jackson who received a recess appointment, and later the Senate refused confirmation of his appointment, which disappointed President Jackson? These are all simple yet important points that make the overall statement comprehensive. If there is anyway to mention Hill's strong/ardent/faithful support of Jackson, "recess appointment", "Jackson's subsequent disappointment", Senate refusal, etc, without "too close paraphrasing" I'd like to see it, to get a better idea of relating these basic points. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 01:31, 6 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Nikkimaria and Gwillhickers: how would something like this go re: CLOP? "In 1829, Hill received a recess appointment to serve as comptroller of the treasury. He remained in the position until April 1830, leaving the position following the Senate's refusal to confirm him to the position when he was nominated. The decision not to confirm Hill, a strong supporter of Andrew Jackson, drew Jackson's ire." — Preceding unsigned comment added by theleekycauldron (talk • contribs)

@Theleekycauldron and Nikkimaria: — Theleekycauldron, thanks for your help. It looks okay to me, but we should also mention an important point of context, somewhere in your last sentence, that Hill was a strong/ardent/faithful/passionate (take your pick) supporter of Jackson. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 18:22, 6 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I would imagine that the phrase "a strong supporter of Andrew Jackson" accomplishes that quite nicely :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 00:00, 7 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Theleekycauldron: — As per the rest of the article, I'm seeing no issues that go beyond the usage of general phrases of basic points found in sources, used in the context of my own wording, and no copyright issues. Yours and other opinions on that note would be most welcomed. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 21:50, 7 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on December 17[]

Woman to Woman (campaign)

• ... that Harriet Harman's Pink Bus was originally said to have been magenta or fuchsia? Source: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/election-2015-32498961
  • ALT1: ... that there was some debate whether or not Harriet Harman's campaign bus was pink, magenta or fuchsia? Source: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/election-2015-32498961
  • Reviewed:
  • Comment: This is my first ever nomination. I thought I should try it out.

Created by Moondragon21 (talk). Self-nominated at 11:44, 18 December 2022 (UTC).Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New Enough: Y Long Enough: Y

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Y Neutral: Y Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing: Y

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Y Interesting: Y

QPQ: None required.

Overall: Article covers all the necessary criteria for DYK. Confirmed QPQ not required (user has 4 previous crs but first time nominating themselves). Happy to pass this one. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 19:30, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Moondragon21 and Sims2aholic8: the article doesn't really make it clear what the debate actually is, or who said it to be magenta or fuchsia. Could more context be added? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 10:18, 30 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  theleekycauldron ALT2 ... that Harriet Harman's Pink Bus was mocked by critics for resembling a Barbie bus, which was thought to be sexist and patronizing? SL93 (talk) 08:34, 12 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  @SL93: hmmm... possibly a gen4a violation against Harman? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 02:17, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  theleekycauldron Possibly, but that is the context. There seems to be nothing much to work with beyond the controversy so I suggest closing the nomination if nothing else can be found soon. SL93 (talk) 02:19, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Hmm, I guess we could just leave out her name... theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 02:23, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • ALT3 ... that the 2015 "Woman to Woman" campaign included a "Pink Bus" that was mocked by critics as sexist and patronizing?

    SL93, theleekycauldron, I was surprised how little there was to the article beyond the critics; not even an examination of whether it was effective in the constituencies that the bus visited. (Is there a reason that ALT3 has "Pink Bus" in quotes, rather than just a regular lowercase pink bus? (Harmon acknowledged that it was pink, according to the article.) If you think that any of the hooks can fly, then a reviewer should be requested. If not, then this should probably be closed; the original nominator has not posted here in a month and a half. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:55, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on December 22[]

Chauncey Yellow Robe

• ... that Native American activist Chauncey Yellow Robe (pictured) denounced Wild West shows, and later starred in a 1930 film consisting solely of Native American actors? Source: Source for denouncing Wild West shows: [7]
• ALT1: ... that Rosebud Yellow Robe convinced her father, Native American activist Chauncey Yellow Robe (both pictured), to star in 1930 historical drama The Silent Enemy? Source: Page 264 [8]
• ALT2: ... that Native American activist Chauncey Yellow Robe (pictured) was forced into a Pennsylvanian boarding school at 16, wearing "full Indian costume" and not knowing a word of English? Source: In his own words: [9]
  Same thing written on a form given to the school (Carlisle Indian Academy in PA): [10]
• ALT3: ... that in 1927, Native American activist Chauncey Yellow Robe (pictured) "adopted" President Calvin Coolidge into the Sioux tribe? Source [11] [12]
  • Reviewed:
  • Comment: Hello and thank you for reviewing.

I am still quite new at submitting DYKs so I would appreciate constructive feedback.

I hope that the article has received enough expansion to qualify, and if not, I will happily research more to expand the article.

Yellow Robe's life is quite long and contains many anecdotes so I am also able to rephrase sentences or alter as needed. Created by Evedawn99 (talk). Self-nominated at 02:45, 22 December 2022 (UTC).Reply[reply]

• Initial review. Hello and thank you for your hard work on an interesting article! Article is new enough and long enough (per DYK tool confirming 5x expansion since December 19). Reads well, neutral in tone, looks well sourced. QPQ is not required. Taking some extra time now to review each ALT hook. Cielquiparle (talk) 16:12, 23 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• @Evedawn99: My questions and comments about the hooks are as follows:

• Re: ALT0, I think the article needs to explain a bit more (could be as little as 1–2 sentences) about why CYR denounced Wild West shows. (It's well explained in his essay, the full text of which I wasn't able to access through your link, but easily found elsewhere online.)
• Re: ALT1, it's ok but probably the weakest in the set (and it will likely drive more traffic to Rosebud rather than Chauncey).
• Re: ALT2, I'm not so sure about the use of the word "forced" – is that the right word? Also, could you add one or two reliable secondary sources to back up the claim, in addition to the primary source?
• Re: ALT3, I see that there's a "clarification needed" tag on this claim within the article. But it's definitely interesting, so would it be possible to add another source and/or fix this in the article as needed...?

Hope that all makes sense. Very excited to see this article, so really it's just a matter of fine-tuning the hooks (as well as how the information appears in the article). Cielquiparle (talk) 23:13, 23 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @Cielquiparle:! Thank you so much for your thorough and constructive review as well as the kind words! I am glad the article is of interest, is neutral, and has more than enough sources. Here are the revisions that I hope reflect your requests. Apologies for my possibly clunky ing as I have grown used to the visual ing tool. Thanks again! The Fonz (talk) 18:28, 25 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• ALT0a: ... that Native American activist Chauncey Yellow Robe (pictured) denounced Native American stereotypes in Wild West shows, and later starred in a 1930 film consisting solely of Native actors? Source: Source for denouncing Wild West shows: [13] There is also an image that would work for this.
• ALT1: Deleted; I agree, it seems to put Rosebud in the spotlight.
• ALT2a: ... that Native American activist Chauncey Yellow Robe (pictured) was abducted into a Pennsylvanian boarding school at 16, wearing "full Indian costume" and not knowing a word of English? Source: In his own words: [14]
  Same thing written on a form given to the school (Carlisle Indian Academy in PA): [15] ^{[1] [2]} *Added two secondary sources.*

• ALT3a: ...that in 1927, Native American activist Chauncey Yellow Robe (pictured) "adopted" President Calvin Coolidge into the Lakota Sioux tribe to thank him for the 1924 Indian Citizenship Act? Source [16] [17] "Calvin Coolidge and Native Americans". WHHA (en-US). Retrieved 2022-12-25. *I have read more about this and finally understood why this ceremony occurred! It's more multifaceted than I thought and seems to be one of the most fast-moving times of Yellow Robe's life and an interesting illustration of how he expressed his activism.*

@Evedawn99: Thanks for your response. ALT3a is better; personally I think it would be even better with the word "supporting" so it reads "thank him for supporting the 1924 Indian Citizenship Act" (or perhaps "thank him for signing the 1924 Indian Citizenship Act into law").

Unfortunately, I doubt the new image for ALT0/ALT0a is clear enough to run on the main page. Other issues related to ALT0/ALT0a: Article lacks a citation for casting "solely Native actors" and the Chief Buffalo Child Long Lance controversy; this is now tagged within the article and needs to be fixed. If it's important to attribute Atalie Unkalunt, where did she say it? (Or maybe it's not important to attribute the indirect quote to her, and you could modify the claim and choose another source.) ALT0a also repeats "Native/Native American" too much. What do you think of this:

ALT0b: ... that Lakota Sioux activist Chauncey Yellow Robe (pictured) denounced Wild West shows, but later starred in a 1930 film playing an Ojibwe chief?

Further comment is that regarding his objection to Wild West shows, my advice is to cite at least one or two secondary sources within the article that interpret "The Menace of the Wild West Show", rather than trying to interpret brief excerpts of the primary source yourself; the speech/essay is so famous, you have a lot of solid sources to choose from. A quick scan of other sources suggests that his objections had to do with the "demeaning portrayal" of Native Americans (e.g. "portrayal as savages" etc.), but also the fact that he was blaming the "Wild West schemes" themselves for perpetuating "drunkenness" (e.g., see Popular Culture Review).

Regarding ALT2/2a, I still think the hooks are not quite right. Just so we're clear, Chauncey Yellow Robe's father gave his permission to have his two sons sent to Carlisle, even if it was against young Chauncey's will. (See the NYT obituary already cited within the article, or page 12 of this biography of Rosebud.) This is quite different from abduction, and in any case, in his writings as an adult, Chauncey was actually positive about the education he received. Looking at this fresh, maybe you could make a case for keeping the word "forced" as you had it in ALT2, but the way it is phrased it also sounds like someone forced him to wear the full Indian dress, whereas if you read the sources it sounds like he just didn't have any other clothes *at first*. Anyway, regardless of whether or not we use this hook, this still needs to be fixed within the article and I also think you should go ahead and delete one of the two block quotes about his schooling, because they are redundant (and a lot of Wikipedia ors frown on too much blockquoting).

Hope this is clear enough. If you don't want to bother too much with the other hooks, we could probably go with ALT3a (or an ALT3b with minor tweaks), but regardless, there are still 3–4 issues that need to be resolved within the article, per my comments above. Cielquiparle (talk) 12:51, 26 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Update. Proposing slight tweak to ALT3a hook below:

• ALT3b: ... that in 1927, Native American activist Chauncey Yellow Robe (pictured) "adopted" President Calvin Coolidge into the Lakota Sioux tribe to thank him for supporting the 1924 Indian Citizenship Act?

I've struck the hooks that don't work (because they aren't accurate), and have made further s to the article to address at least one of my own previous comments as the initial reviewer (about the repetitive block quotes and the mischaracterization of the reason he went to Carlisle).

Could someone else now review the remaining hooks (ALT0b and ALT3b), as I have proposed some hook modifications and have ed the article? Thanks! Cielquiparle (talk) 18:40, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Judith Marquet-Krause

• ... that archaeologist Judith Marquet-Krause (pictured) disproved that the Book of Joshua was a factual account of the city of Ai? Source: ^[1]
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Elizabeth Mary Wells

Created by Lajmmoore (talk). Self-nominated at 10:27, 22 December 2022 (UTC).Reply[reply]

• Awesome article that is both new and long enuf for DYK. QPQ done. No evidence of copyvio. Hook fact is verifiable, although I'm wondering if it's worthwhile to tweak the hook a little (it seems to imply that she actively set out to disprove Joshua's accuracy, which is quite the contrary to the intent of the expion!). AGF on some sources I can't view. Cheers, KINGofLETTUCE 👑 🥬 17:58, 22 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Image also seems like it complies with guidelines. KINGofLETTUCE 👑 🥬 17:59, 22 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Thanks Kingoflettuce - what about:

ALT1 ... that excavations led by archaeologist Judith Marquet-Krause (pictured) disproved that the Book of Joshua was a factual account of the city of Ai?

Does that move the emphasis enough? Lajmmoore (talk) 10:33, 23 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

ALT1 is definitely better. Striking ALT0. Interesting article. Cielquiparle (talk) 08:27, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• I have unpromoted this. Please see Special:Diff/1135318350 for a discussion of the WP:PARAPHRASE problems. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:57, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @97198, Lajmmoore, Cielquiparle, and Kingoflettuce: -- RoySmith (talk) 23:58, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

hello RoySmith, thanks for flagging this - I wonder if the issue was caused by the fact I used a translation from NL? Either way, I'll fix it in the next 48 hours. Thanks again Lajmmoore (talk) 07:43, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

hello @RoySmith: I've taken another look and weeded out, I think the worst paraphrasing. I'm not sure what to do about the structure - whether that too is considered COPYVIO? Lajmmoore (talk) 18:39, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Nikkimaria: could I impose on you to take a look at the latest version? -- RoySmith (talk) 18:58, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Certainly better, although the Career section in particular could do with a bit more reworking. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:23, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've done a bit more reworking, but I'm also at a bit of a loss with the structure since the JWA article is written quite like a Wikipedia article, I'm finding it challenging to see how to structure it differently. If someone could offer some advice that would be very much appreciated. Lajmmoore (talk) 16:24, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on December 25[]

Phylogenetic reconciliation

• ... that evolution can be studied across many levels of biological organisation—from nucleotides to organisms, holobionts and ecosystems—using a common method, phylogenetic reconciliation? Source: "Unifying Parsimonious Tree Reconciliation" (2013) by Nicolas Wieseke, Matthias Bernt, Martin Middendorf: "This opens up new possibilities for solving reconciliation problems for a variety of applications. Biogeography, gene tree/species tree, and host-parasite systems can be reconciled with the same algorithms while only the cost model γ differs. Beside that, further cases of application exists, e.g., general symbiotic systems or interactions of genes or gene products, where both association partners are equitable and a reconciliation can not be produced by simply embedding one tree into the other."
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Janet Sorg Stoltzfus
  • Comment: This article is a wikified version of the open-access article Menet H, Daubin V, Tannier E (2022) Phylogenetic reconciliation. PLoS Comput Biol 18(11): e1010621. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1010621 that is available under CC BY 4.0.

Moved to mainspace by Daniel Mietchen (talk). Nominated by Daniel Mietchen (talk) at 18:09, 25 December 2022 (UTC).Reply[reply]

• @Daniel Mietchen: Hi there! Couple things: first, unless the authors have verified wikipedia accounts, no need to give them DYK cr (it actually wouldn't work out technologically). Second, make sure your article has at least 1500 prose characters that are not copied from a freely licensed source, as work that isn't your own doesn't count towards DYK's length requirement. Thanks! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 07:30, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on December 26[]

Mimi Kilgore

• ... that Mimi Kilgore gifted Willem de Kooning a frog that had been run over by a car? Source: “ At one house Ms. Kilgore came upon a frog that had been flattened by a car tire. Finding that it reminded her of an abstract shape from one of his paintings, she presented it to de Kooning as a quirky gift. But he saw it as something more. He kept the frog for the rest of his life, a symbol of his devotion to a friend, lover and muse who would remain a source of inspiration for years and who would, by many accounts, help reinvigorate his career.” NY Times
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Fox Hill Prison

Created by Thriley (talk). Self-nominated at 02:32, 2 January 2023 (UTC).Reply[reply]

• Hi Thriley (talk), review follows: article created 26 December and exceeds minimum length; article is well written; although the bulk of the article is cited to a single source (New York Times), it is eminently reliable (I would recommend broadening the sources anyway, if possible); I don't have access to the NYT (subscription only) but happy to AGF there has been no copying from it (Earwig check picks up only a few common phrases which I think are acceptable); hook fact is certainly interesting and mentioned in the article, AGF on sourcing; a QPQ has been carried out. Looks fine to me - Dumelow (talk) 10:26, 3 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Can she be considered notable with only one independent source? SL93 (talk) 16:43, 10 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I’ll add some more today. Thriley (talk) 17:02, 10 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • @Thriley, SL93, and Dumelow: More sources have been added (I hope to SL93's satisfaction), but the article has a ton of bare URLs that need to be cleaned up first. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 07:26, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A NYT obit is fairly persuasive and a Google search showed other reliable sources covering her life. Happy to reinstate the tick once the bare URLs are dealt with - Dumelow (talk) 12:45, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on December 27[]

Caffoy

• ... that caffoy was a 16th-century furnishing fabric made of wool that was also used to decorate Houghton Hall? Source: https://archive.org/details/houghtonhallprim0000unse/page/30/mode/2up?q=Caffoy Page31,34,39
  • ALT1 ... that Erddig 1726's inventory includes seven walnut chairs, four of which were originally covered in caffoy, a cut-wool velvet? Source: https://archive.org/details/erdiggwrexham0000unse/page/69/mode/2up?q=Caffoy Page69
• ALT2 ... that Caffoy, a luxurious wool velvet cloth imitating silk, was popular in the 16th century? Source: https://archive.org/details/nationaltrustboo0000clab/page/241/mode/1up^: 241
• ALT3 ... that in 1579, Caffoy was also featured in a pageant honouring the queen's visit to Norwich? Source:https://archive.org/details/nationaltrustboo0000clab/page/241/mode/1up^: 241
• ALT4 ... that caffoy was a fabric similar to cut silk velvet, made from wool, and often used for decorations, such as hangings and draperies? Source: https://archive.org/details/textilesinameric00mont/page/183/mode/1up?q=Caffoy^: 183
• ALT5 ... that caffoy was a furnishing material patterned with wool pile designs, imitating silk velvets and damasks? Source: https://archive.org/details/textilesinameric00mont/page/183/mode/1up?q=Caffoy^: 183
• ALT6 ... that caffoy was a decorative wool velvet material that imitated silk for use as a furnishing fabric? Source: https://archive.org/details/textilesinameric00mont/page/183/mode/1up?q=Caffoy^: 183
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Exeter Theatre Royal fire
  • Comment: Assuming article is at 5x now, expansion began 59 s ago on December 26, 2022

Created by RAJIVVASUDEV (talk). Self-nominated at 18:02, 27 December 2022 (UTC).Reply[reply]

• Full review to follow, but can alternate hooks be proposed here? Both hooks seem to be reliant on specialist knowledge (the first hook mentions a building readers may not necessarily be familiar with, while ALT1's context may not be clear to non-specialists). DYK rules require that hooks appeal to readers that don't have special knowledge or interests and I don't think either hook meets that criterion. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:46, 4 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Narutolovehinata5 Hi! Kindly check. Thanks RV (talk) 14:22, 4 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@RAJIVVASUDEV: Apologies for the delay in replying. I'll need a few days first to think about if ALT2 or ALT3 are okay (I think ALT2 is probably the one that meets the criterion here best, albeit marginally). My main concern is that the article writing seems rather non-standard, with lots of '[' and ']' symbols along with an inconsistent use of quotation marks. I would probably suggest that the article be given a copy before the nomination can proceed further. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:54, 8 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Narutolovehinata5 Made the necessary changes. Please have a look. Thanks RV (talk) 08:32, 10 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Really really sorry about the delay in replying! I got caught up in a lot of real-life matters and I forgot to get back to this. In any case, I've struck all hooks as I think those other options are either not very intriguing or require specialist knowledge. I do think ALT2's hook fact has the most potential, and reading through the article again, I think one possible option would be a slight revision of it: rather than focusing on when it was popular, the focus could be on it being used as an imitation of silk. My article spot-check and paraphrase check also showed that the article does appear to meet requirements and a QPQ has been done, although the sentences that exactly mention it being used as a substitute for silk do need footnotes. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 22:51, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No problem! Let me rework and ping you then. Thanks RV (talk) 09:05, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Narutolovehinata5: Kindly check ALT5. Thanks RV (talk) 08:17, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The hook suggestions seem a bit complicated. Maybe simplifying it a bit? There's also maybe a few too many links, which might distract people away from checking out the article and instead direct them to those other articles. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:29, 1 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Narutolovehinata5: Kindly check ALT6, it is simplified, and I have fixed overlinking. Thanks RV (talk) 04:34, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on December 31[]

Braxton Cook

• ... that Braxton Cook's vocals were sampled in Taylor Swift's 2022 song "Lavender Haze"? Source: https://districtfray.com/articles/dc-jazz-musician-taylor-swift-new-album/
  • Reviewed: first DYK submission

Created by BanjoZebra (talk). Self-nominated at 20:00, 5 January 2023 (UTC).Reply[reply]

• Hello and welcome to DYK. The article meets DYK requirements for length and creation time, and is free from close paraphrasing. The hook fact is cited inline, but per WP:DYKCRIT the exact sentence mentioning the Taylor Swift part needs a footnote. No QPQ is required as this is the nominator's first nomination. However, I'm not a fan of the hook. In recent months there have been reservations about hooks about or that mention Swift, and such hooks tend to underperform in terms of DYK readership interest. Theleekycauldron could perhaps elaborate more on this point, but in the meantime, could you perhaps propose a different hook about Cook that doesn't involve Swift? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:57, 10 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Narutolovehinata5 is correct, but i won't bore you with the details :) welcome to DYK, BanjoZebra! If you'd like any assistance drafting a hook, I'm around. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 01:59, 10 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Narutolovehinata5 ... that Braxton Cook performed alongside Jon Batiste on the soundtrack for Pixar's Soul, which won the Academy Award for Best Original Score? SL93 (talk) 08:42, 12 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I see that my hook suggestion isn't in the source. SL93 (talk) 08:49, 12 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My mistake, I fixed the source on the page. SL93 I think that hook works! BanjoZebra (talk) 16:40, 12 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• ALT1: ... that Braxton Cook performed alongside Jon Batiste on the Oscar-winning soundtrack for Pixar's Soul? Source: https://nettwerk.com/new-signing-braxton-cook-shares-the-same-feat-marquis-hill-%E2%81%9F BanjoZebra (talk) 18:22, 13 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I wonder if it could be revised further. There's probably an okay core there but I'm not really a fan of the mention of Batiste. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:50, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Del Riley (clerk)

• ... that Linn County clerk Del Riley pioneered Oregon's vote-by-mail system, now used as the only voting method in the state? Source: https://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/2018/09/opinion_rememberingoregons_tru.html
  • Reviewed:
  • Comment: Just moved this out of my userspace into mainspace, think there's a DYK in it.

Created by 127(point)0(point)0(point)1 (talk). Self-nominated at 08:11, 31 December 2022 (UTC).Reply[reply]

• @127(point)0(point)0(point)1: I see two issues. The first is what exactly it means to "pioneer" a system, and the second is that the source provided is an opinion piece. I'll see if something else is a possible hook here. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 02:33, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'd be happy to welcome any alt hooks you could suggest! --(loopback) ping/whereis 07:10, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Niwar (cotton tape)

• ... that Niwar is a cotton tape that is used to make beds in India? Source: https://www.google.co.in/books/ion/Punjabi_Century_1857_1947/p6zTk-ibjTwC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22Niwar%22+cotton+tape+-wikipedia&pg=PA20&printsec=frontcover
• ALT2 ... that in Sikhism, Niwar Bed is superior and attributes life's injustices to man's acts, not God's caprice? Source: https://archive.org/details/bhagats_202106/page/n250/mode/1up?q=Niwar^{: XVI, XVII}
• ALT3...that Saint Kabir expresses a niwar bed as superior while equating life's inequity to man's actions and not God's caprice?Source: https://www.google.co.in/books/ion/Sikhism_Its_Philosophy_and_History/FbnXAAAAMAAJhl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=sant+kabir+niwar&dq=sant+kabir+niwar&printsec=frontcover^: 277
• ALT4...that Kabir, a 15th-century Indian saint, symbolically expresses the niwar bed as an illustrative example while equating life's inequity to man's actions and not God's caprice?Source: https://www.google.co.in/books/ion/Sikhism_Its_Philosophy_and_History/FbnXAAAAMAAJhl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=sant+kabir+niwar&dq=sant+kabir+niwar&printsec=frontcover^: 277
• ALT5... that niwar, a type of tape made from coarse yarn, was produced all over India and helped support handspun yarn manufacturers?Source:https://archive.org/details/cottageandsmalls029850mbp/page/n131/mode/2up^{: 115, 129}
• ALT6... that niwar, a hand-spun yarn tape, fueled the rural Indian textile industry in the 20th century?"Source:https://archive.org/details/cottageandsmalls029850mbp/page/n131/mode/2up^{: 115, 129}
• ALT7... that niwar, a hand-spun yarn tape, also contributed to the hand spinners and the rural Indian textile industry in the 20th century?"Source:https://archive.org/details/cottageandsmalls029850mbp/page/n131/mode/2up^: 129
• ALT8... that niwar, a hand-spun yarn tape, contributed to the rural Indian textile industry in the 20th century?"Source:https://archive.org/details/cottageandsmalls029850mbp/page/n131/mode/2up^: 129
• ALT9...that niwar, a material used for weaving cots, was once produced in Indian jails? Source:https://www.google.co.in/books/ion/Hand_book_of_the_Manufactures_Arts_of_th/gg_JAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1^: 12
• ALT10...that niwar was also used to carry zinc water bottles, locally referred to as badla? Source:https://www.google.co.in/books/ion/Census_of_India_1961_Rajasthan/O7fUAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1^: 6

• • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Qiangtie
  • Comment: Assuming article is at 5x now, expansion began 50 s ago on December 28, 2022

Created by RAJIVVASUDEV (talk). Self-nominated at 13:37, 31 December 2022 (UTC).Reply[reply]

• General eligibility:
• New Enough: N - The article was not expanded 5x; it looks like it's just under 4x
• Long Enough: Y

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Y Neutral: Y Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing: Y

Hook eligibility:

• Cited: Y
• Interesting: N - As is, the hook doesn't sound particularly interesting. I would rewrite the hook to generate interest.

QPQ: Done.

Overall: As it stands, the article is not eligible for DYK. To qualify for DYK, the article should be at least 15,215 bytes in size (using the article's size based on the before expansion, 3,043 bytes, as the basis for this computation); the article is currently at 11,942 bytes. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 15:00, 13 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Sky Harbor, DYK measures prose characters, not bytes. According to DYK check, which is the gold standard for DYK size checks, this article had 3810 prose characters as of when you reviewed it, and Assuming article is at 5x now, expansion began 65 s ago on December 28, 2022, which was three days before. Indeed, the nominator notes this in their nomination. (Prior to the expansion, it had 530 prose characters, so only 2650 prose characters were needed to qualify.) It appears that RAJIVVASUDEV needs to create a new hook; what they don't need to do, although it is welcome, is to further expand the article for DYK purposes. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:24, 14 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I used DYKcheck and the tool flagged it as being ineligible for DYK because of the size, which led me to turn down this nomination in the meantime. Now if expanding the article isn't necessary in your view, that's fine and we can proceed with RAJIVVASUDEV just providing a new hook, but I would recommend that the tool spell that out clearer for myself and other reviewers. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 23:28, 14 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • ALT1 ... that Niwar is a cotton tape produced by prisoners in various jails in India? Source: https://www.google.co.in/books/ion/Punjabi_Century_1857_1947/p6zTk-ibjTwC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22Niwar%22+cotton+tape+-wikipedia&pg=PA20&printsec=frontcover

BlueMoonset, Sky Harbor, thanks for your reconsideration. Kindly check the ALT1 if it suits. Regards RV (talk) 05:30, 15 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The hook does seem better, so I think this is good to go with ALT1. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 18:35, 16 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sky Harbor, RAJIVVASUDEV, I have some concerns about ALT1. The first is the "cotton tape" assertion, as the article makes it clear that Niwar is a type of tape or ribbon that is now manufactured using materials such as cotton, polyester, and nylon, not just cotton alone as the hook states, even if it may originally have only been made from cotton. Further, while some Niwar has historically been produced by prisoners, the article says was produced in various parts of India by cottage industries and also in jail industries, so not ever only by prisoners. The hook needs to be more accurate if it's to run. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:58, 16 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Sky Harbor, BlueMoonset, ALT2 added. Thanks RV (talk) 08:34, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

RV, I'm afraid that ALT2 is also problematic: it is saying that the niwar bed, according to Sikhism, is both superior and the bed itself "attributes life's injustices to man's acts, not God's caprice", which seems unlikely. The words in quotes are nearly identical to the header immediately before XVI in Macauliffe's The Sikh Religion, and might be better as a direct quote and a better attribution, as these are from the writings of Kabir—based on what I'm seeing in the entire section, each header before the subsection numbers seems to be a brief explanation of what the section is conveying to the reader. The connection in the article is also not obvious between the niwar bed and the rest of it, just that the bed is used, along with silk and satin, as an example of luxuries that the gods might give to someone while others have not even a ragged coat or any bed, with the underlying thought that it all goes away when one dies. I'm not clear where those pre-number header lines come from: are these Macauliffe's summation, or a summary or header in the original Kabir? Finally, "niwar" is not a proper noun as best I can determine from the sources, and should not be capitalized in the hooks or in the text of the article, except as the first word in a sentence; I have adjusted the article accordingly, lowercasing a number of non-proper nouns. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:31, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@BlueMoonset Thanks, Kindly check ALT3 and ALT4. Regards RV (talk) 09:17, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@RAJIVVASUDEV and BlueMoonset: I've removed the bit about life's inequality and God's caprice from the article, so I've struck ALT3 and ALT4 as no longer usable. Also, some parts of the article are poorly sourced, eg. the "Present" section is sourced to raw export data and the third paragraph of the "Applications" section is sourced to invitations to tender. There may be close paraphrasing issues; compare the passage beginning "In 1956, approximately 215 units..." with this source (p. 147, 2nd paragraph). I'm not sure if this is a problem – the source may be public domain, or this may be a permissible WP:LIMITED exeption – but flagging it just in case. Sojourner in the earth (talk) 17:54, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Sojourner in the earth and BlueMoonset: After copy ing as per the given comments, ALT5 has been added. Please advise. Thanks RV (talk) 19:12, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Note that there are two bare URLs (currently references 11 and 26) that will have to be filled in before the article can be approved. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:43, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@BlueMoonset: It is sorted. Thanks RV (talk) 04:18, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @RAJIVVASUDEV: I like ALT5. Could you please add citations to the end of each sentence with the information cited in the hook, even if it breaks your article's citation style? It's required under DYK rule #3b: Each fact in the hook must be supported in the article by at least one inline citation to a reliable source, appearing no later than the end of the sentence(s) offering that fact. Citations at the end of the paragraph are not sufficient. This rule applies even when a citation would not be required for the purposes of the article. (I like ALT6 a bit less, mainly because the use of the world "fueled", while attention-getting, sounds odd in wikivoice, plus it could be read the wrong way (i.e., was someone burning niwar in the 20th century?). Cielquiparle (talk) 08:09, 30 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Cielquiparle: Hi! Inline citation is there, and page 129 of the source [Survey report: Cottage And Small Scale Industries of India] reads Niwar Weaving: It is another allied industry of weaving. Practically in all cities manufacture of Niwar is very common. Coloured and plain Niwar is prepared and sold almost everywhere. Coarse yarn is mostly used for this article and this industry may, therefore, be a help in the production of hand-spun yarn. During the War this industry was given a good impetus and we hope it will pay if an enquiry be made as to the purpose this article can serve in the foreign market. There seems to be thus a possibility of establishing an export market. To improvise AL6, I have tweaked it [ALT7, ALT8]. Kindly have a look. Thanks 02:49, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@RAJIVVASUDEV: Sorry if it wasn't clear...what the rule is saying is that every single sentence in that paragraph has to have an individual footnote at the end of the sentence. You can't just tack it on at the end of the paragraph, even if that is the citation style you have chosen for the page. (I found this very unclear as well but apparently that is what rule #3b means.) Cielquiparle (talk) 20:09, 1 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Cielquiparle: I have fixed it. Have a look. Thanks RV (talk) 03:43, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@RAJIVVASUDEV: This is a nice article topic by the way. I have one more request regarding sourcing for the hook: Is there an additional source you can find that is more recent, which supports the part of the statement that says it helped support handspun yarn manufacturers? The issue I'm having is that the source you are quoting says "the industry may...be a help in the production of hand-spun yarn" (so it's like it hasn't happened yet). Cielquiparle (talk) 05:15, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Cielquiparle: I couldn't find another source, so I'm adding ALT9 and ALT10 if they can work. Thank you RV (talk) 06:41, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on January 1[]

Millennial pause

• ...   that millennials pause? Source: https://archive.today/20220916215908/https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2022/08/tiktok-gen-z-millennial-pause-parody/671069/
  • Reviewed: Translation Bureau
  • Comment:
    promoters, i am aiming for the quirky slot with this hook, in case it isn't clear. i'd prefer if the hook immediately before it is a bit shorter to make the unusual spacing more noticeable, but don't worry if you can't make that happen. (if you are confused as to why i am playing with the spacing, please read the article, or at least its lead.)
    reviewers, i am open to suggestions regarding where best to put the extraneous spacing, and how lengthy it should be. i decided to use three spaces because i know that many readers will not notice one extra space, and the point was to make readers notice the superfluous spacing, since that is the subject of the article. one alternative is to use a couple of extra dots in the ellipsis. one much more radical alternative (though also possibly less noticeable) would be to drop the ellipsis altogether, interpreting the other hooks as having been drafted by millennials. below is an approximation of how the hook may look in comparison with the one immediately above, shown at roughly the width it would appear on the main page.

Created by dying (talk). Self-nominated at 22:59, 8 January 2023 (UTC). [added alt1. dying (talk) 04:15, 5 February 2023 (UTC)]Reply[reply]

• @Dying: Fun idea! Meets new and length requirements. Neutral and very cited, but I do have some suggestions to improve the article:
  • Dates would be very helpful – when was the term coined (and on what platform), when and how was it popularized?

    haha! oh, wow, i can't believe i didn't mention any dates at all. anyway, added. i think kathryn lindsay of the atlantic may have popularized the term, but i don't remember any reliable sources explicitly stating this, although many do reference her. dying (talk) 04:15, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Clarify in the body what "some videos" means – mostly in social media posts? Is the pause largely noticed on TikTok/Instagram?

    my assumption is that the phenomenon shows up in a wide range of videos, as sources don't seem to state that it is restricted to social media (even though some state that awareness of it is going viral on social media). i'd conjecture that it is being more clearly noticed now because videos with such pauses, when uploaded to social media, can be more closely compared to videos without them. the source i provided above states that "as short-form video comes to Instagram (Reels), YouTube (Shorts), and Snapchat (Spotlight), the Millennial pause is becoming easier to spot", suggesting that it exists outside these videos as well. i've now added that observation to the article body to try to help clarify that it doesn't seem to be restricted to social media. dying (talk) 04:15, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Also, and this is speculation by me, but lack of video ing seems to be a crucial but unstated element

    i agree that the lack of ing of many short-form videos posted on social media platforms may have been a contributing factor to the rise of the millennial pause, but i don't recall it being explicitly mentioned in any of the sources, so i didn't mention it myself. plenty of users of social media now state that, since they have become aware of it, they have been ing the pause out. i have found a recent source mentioning that the pause could be ed out, but it isn't, so i have added that to the article. (i am somewhat conflicted about adding this, since the source doesn't qualify the statement, e.g., only assert that it is often not ed out, but i attributed the statement in the article, so am assuming that mentioning this is okay.) dying (talk) 04:15, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • JC Chasez's pause is mentioned almost incidentally in the source, so the photo seems undue. Also, would be good to find a source that explicitly says the pause is not exclusively a millennial phenomenon if that's the case

    that's a valid point. thankfully, after some searching, i've now found another celebrity mentioned in a reliable source, and not only incidentially: jennifer coolidge! i have now substituted chasez for coolidge in the featured photos. dying (talk) 04:15, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Helpful to mention in the photo caption that the term was coined in reference to TS

    i have added a footnote, as i think the caption is already longer than usual. dying (talk) 04:15, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Referring to millennials as "older users" is pretty funny to me, maybe replace that phrase with "millennial users"? Or "users of the millennial generation and older" if that's what sources indicate

    at the time, i couldn't find any reliable sources that explicitly mentioned older generations exhibiting the pause, but it seems to be implied, which is why i tended to use the phrase "older users" instead of explicitly mentioning millennials whenever i was discussing people that exhibited the pause. (i think using the phrase "old users" might have been inappropriate, but when comparing millennials to zoomers, i assume using the phrase "older users" isn't too unusual.) however, i have now found a recent source referring to "'older than Gen Z' creators", so i've replaced one of the instances of "older users" with "people older than zoomers", and simply dropped the other instance. (i haven't used the term "millennial generation" in the article, so i didn't want to complicate the terminology used.) dying (talk) 04:15, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Some sentences are difficult to follow. #Theory is particularly verbose/redundant, try saying the sentences out loud. Also, "cause some millennials to question whether they are becoming too old" could become something like "made some millennials notice that they are 'getting old'" (to introduce the point of view of the source)

    i tried making the theory section easier to understand. please let me know if i was successful.

    also, i'm not sure if i'm understanding the second part of your comment correctly, but i think most millennials noticed a long time ago that they were getting old. (presumably, many zoomers have too.) i think the issue is whether or not millennials are getting older than what they are comfortable identifying with. the wired article states that "[m]illennials, the first generation to be online as kids, are starting to feel like [they]'ve aged out", which seems to focus on the heart of the matter: many millennials identify as the first digital natives, so when it is clear that they may no longer be as native in the digital world as they had previously seen themselves, the cognitive dissonance is stressful and uncomfortable, and makes them wonder if they have become too old.^{[original research]} (i don't think this experience applies to all millennials, but those that don't feel the cognitive dissonance aren't the ones complaining about it in reliable sources.) dying (talk) 04:15, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Other recs: Include definition of millennial years in body of the article. Add publication dates to citations. Remove all uses of the word "celebrity"

    i had actually tried to avoid explicitly defining what a millennial is in the article lead or body, because definitions of the term vary widely and i thought mentioning the details would break the flow of the article. (i added a partial definition in a footnote to allow readers to synth for themselves that chasez is not a millennial.) after reading your comment, i can now see that the article can be confusing for someone wholly unfamiliar with the term, so i have tried to add a practical but noncommittal definition in the lead. please let me know if you think that doesn't work. dying (talk) 04:15, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Hope that's not too much to ask in a DYK review! Not all the changes are necessary, but the first two bullets are kind of important context that's missing, otherwise almost ready to go. QPQ present. As for the hooks, I like alt0b but it also kind of looks like a typo. Added alt0f above, favorite I've thought of so far. Hameltion (talk, contribs) 04:52, 10 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  thanks for the thorough review, Hameltion! apologies for taking so long and for being so verbose in my reply; i fall down a rabbit hole whenever i try to do research for this article.

  admittedly, i think i had been playing around with alt0f too, but had been worried that it might look too much like a copy-paste error. of course, they all look like errors, though. i had preferred using either alt0 or alt0b for months (yes, it took me a while to get around to writing the article), but i thought of alt0d about a day before the nomination, and it has been growing on me, so i don't know what to think. i've also now added alt1, based on the idea in alt0e and the recently described gen z shake, now mentioned in the article. i only thought of it recently, but it might be my favourite one now. what are your thoughts on alt1? dying (talk) 04:15, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Most s look great! Article is much improved. Besides resolving the coatrack discussion below, just a few more thoughts: Jennifer Coolidge's TikTok is amazing, but it's still a random one-off use of the millennial pause – fine in the body, but suggest you use just one image (Taylor Swift). The Theory section is much better (much clearer), but still sort of wordy. Also, my suggestion to rewrite this sentence – "Becoming aware of the phenomenon has caused some millennials to question whether they are becoming too old" – wasn't about the content, it's just kind of stilted diction. As for the Millennials online section, it seems sort of arbitrary what's been included but I think it's mostly fine; it works to give context situating this particular generational behavior.

  For hooks, my preference is still the one I suggested (alt0f) but would not object to either alt0b or alt0d. Like the idea behind alt1 but it's pretty confusing without having read the article all the way to the bottom, and it first seemed to me like that SpongeBob meme which is not the connotation you're going for. Simple is better I think. Hameltion (talk, contribs) 17:15, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Also, and this is speculation by me, but lack of video ing seems to be a crucial but unstated element Couldn't agree more. Instructing actors to pause for a few seconds at the beginning of each take is one of the first things people learn to do when making any sort of ed content. I know the Atlantic article is only talking about off-the-cuff TikTok smartphone selfie cam stuff which usually doesn't get ed, but it seems like a glaring omission. The lead of this article reads to me like it's telling the reader "if you don't immediately start talking when hitting the record button you're oooold" which flies in the face of decades of conventional wisdom in film-making. DigitalIceAge (talk) 18:37, 10 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  DigitalIceAge, i actually didn't get the impression that lindsay's article in the atlantic was only talking about short-form videos on tiktok, so i didn't qualify the definition in the article. i mentioned a bit more about lack of ing in my response to Hameltion above, which i hope will address your concerns.

  your take on the lead is really interesting, as i personally don't think that someone is "oooold" if they exhibit a millennial pause, so am admittedly rather surprised that the lead comes off that way to you. (i actually thought the reason you stated could be a more relevant factor, so am glad you brought it up, but i have yet to find any reliable sources that posit this theory.) what about the lead gives you that impression, and how do you think it should be changed?

  by the way, i noticed that you removed the digital divide article from the see also section, stating in your summary that it "does not apply, the camcorders/older smartphones millennials used which incurred a lag between the record button and start of the take were digital". before i had added that article to the see also section, i had checked to see if the term "digital divide", as it is used in wikipedia, was used to only refer to the divide between people with access to digital devices and those that did not, or if it was a broader term, also used to describe the divide between people familiar with different types of digital technology. looking through the digital divide article, i got the sense that the latter was the case, so i had felt that it was appropriate to include the article in the see also section. my reading of your summary leads me to believe that you think the former is the case. did you have a chance to look over the article? dying (talk) 04:15, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  It might just be a kneejerk reaction on my part (done a lot of shooting and ing video in the past) but the first two sentences paint too broad of a brush. The Atlantic article does specify short-form content as where it is most discernible ("Which is why, as short-form video comes to Instagram (Reels), YouTube (Shorts), and Snapchat (Spotlight), th