Template talk:Did you know

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Current (main page) (T:DYK)
Queue (T:DYK/Q)
Nominations (T:TDYK)
Discussion (WT:DYK)
Rules (WP:DYK)
Supplementary rules (WP:DYKSG)
Reviewing guide (WP:DYKR)
Archive of DYKs (WP:DYKA)
Stats (WP:DYKSTATS)

This page is for nominations to appear in the "Did you know" section on the Main Page. For the discussion page see WT:DYK.

Contents


Purge

[edit] Instructions for nominators

Create a subpage for your new DYK suggestion and then list the page below under the date the article was created or the expansion began (not the date you submit it here), with the newest dates at the bottom. Any autoconfirmed registered user may nominate a DYK suggestion (if you are not a registered user, please leave a message at the bottom of the DYK project talk page with the details of the article you would like to nominate and the hook you would like to propose); self-nominations are permitted and encouraged. Thanks for participating and please remember to check back for comments on your nomination (consider watchlisting your nomination page).

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

[edit] How to post a new nomination

For a simplified version of these instructions, see User:Rjanag/Quick DYK 2.
For a step-by-step guide to filling out the
{{NewDYKnom}} template, see Template:NewDYKnomination/guide.


Please read the following instructions completely before nominating an article. A nomination is not considered complete until all 3 steps of the instructions below are completed.

I.
Create the nomination subpage.

In the box below, enter the name of the article you are nominating (replacing YOUR ARTICLE TITLE) and click the button to create your nomination page. (For nominations of multiple articles together, you can write any or all of the article titles here.)


II.
Write the nomination.

On that nomination page, fill out the relevant parts of the pre-loaded {{NewDYKnomination}} template. See Template:NewDYKnomination for further information about filling out the template.

  • Please be aware that you do not need to fill out every line of the template; only fill out the lines that are relevant to your nomination. (For instance, if you are not nominating an image to go with your hook, there is no need to enter anything in the |image= line or related lines.)
  • Please watchlist your nomination page or check back for comments on your nomination. Responding to reasonable objections will help ensure that your article is listed.

After filling out the template, save the page.

III.
Post at Template talk:Did you know.

After you have created the nomination page, list it at this page by finding the appropriate date and adding {{Did you know nominations/YOUR ARTICLE TITLE}} under that date at the top of the section (above all the other nominations, but below the section header and hidden comment).

  • The date to post your nomination under is the date when the article was created or the expansion of the article began, not necessarily today's date.
  • When saving your suggestion, please add the name of the suggested article to your edit summary.
  • You can also consider posting this same nomination to the article's talkpage, using the same code.

[edit] How to review a nomination

Any editor 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 editorial 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 edits to the article 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 comment on the page. Please 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 :*<!--Make first comment here--> showing you where you can put the comment.
  • Save the page.

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.

[edit] Frequently asked questions

[edit] Backlogged?

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

[edit] Where is my hook?

If you can't find the hook you submitted to this page, in most cases it means your article has been approved and is in the queue for display on the main page. You can check whether your hook has been moved to the queue by reviewing the queue listings.

If your hook is not in the queue or already on the main page, it has probably been deleted. Deletion occurs if the hook is more than about eight days old and has unresolved issues for which any discussion has gone stale. If you think your hook has been unfairly deleted, you can query its deletion on the discussion page, but as a general rule deleted hooks will only be restored in exceptional circumstances.

[edit] Instructions for other editors

[edit] How to promote an accepted hook

  • In one window, open the DYK nomination subpage of the hook you would like to promote. In a separate window, open the prep area you intend to add the hook to.
  • Paste the accepted hook and the credit information (the {{DYKmake}} and {{DYKnom}} templates) into the prep area. Make sure to follow the guidelines at Wikipedia:Did you know/Preparation areas.
  • In the window where the DYK nomination subpage is open, replace the line {{DYKsubpage with {{subst:DYKsubpage, replace |passed= with |passed=yes, and for the |monthyear= fill in the month and year under which the nomination was posted (not the current date)—the format for the month and year should be, e.g., March 2012. Then save the page. This has the effect of wrapping up the discussion on the DYK nomination subpage in a green archive box and stating that the nomination was successful, as well as adding the nomination to a category for archival purposes.
  • In your edit summary, please indicate which prep area you are moving the hook to.

[edit] 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, replace |passed= with |passed=no, and for the |monthyear= fill in the month and year under which the nomination was posted (not the current date)—the format for the month and year should be, e.g., March 2012. 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.

[edit] 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 credits associated with it.
  • Go to the hook's nomination subpage (there is usually a link to it in the credits section).
    • View the edit history for that page
    • Go back to the last version before the edit where the hook was promoted, and revert to that version to make the nomination active again.
    • Leave a comment explaining that the hook was removed from the queue, and why, so that later reviewers are aware of this issue.
    • If the day title for the section that contained the hook has been removed from this page, restore that section.
  • 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.
  • Add a link to the nomination subpage at Wikipedia:Did you know/Removed

[edit] 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.

[edit] Nominations

[edit] Older nominations

[edit] Articles created/expanded on January 22

Operation Septentrion

( Review or commentArticle history )

Created/expanded by Mathew5000 (talk). Self nom at 22:57, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Symbol possible vote.svg Since the article has not been reviewed for DYK nom since its original date of 25 Jan it seems to pass the "new" requirement, even with the original post on 22 Jan with a new article 3 days later it would pass. Length is good. Sourcing is up to par, including that of the hook. However, i just cleaned and reorganised the articleinto section but a few thing sneeds clarification so as not to POV/Synthesis. Also no barerefs , so thats a plus too.Lihaas (talk) 05:46, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
  • I find the article fairly neutral. Regarding the which, clarification, and other tags, none of the sources I've looked at have the information. Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:00, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
  • I don't see a problem with POV either. Moswento (talk | contribs) 13:05, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
  • About the tags in the article (two “which”es and one “clarification needed”), I have not come across any sources containing the requested information. I am nevertheless reluctant to remove the tags because it is certainly true that the article would be improved by adding this additional information if it were available in reliable sources. Wikipedia is a work in progress and even if the information is unavailable now, it might become available in the future. Mathew5000 (talk) 18:21, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on January 24

Salix richardsonii, Salix brachycarpa, Salix glauca, Salix hastata, Salix pulchra

( Review or comment )
( Article history links: Salix richardsoniiSalix brachycarpaSalix glaucaSalix hastataSalix pulchra )

The Halberd willow (Salix hastata)

NOTE: This page was moved or recreated from the page that is now Template:Did you know nominations/Salix arbusculoides. Some relevant history can be found on that page's history. --Orlady (talk) 14:37, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

  • I prefer Rcej's ALT2. --PFHLai (talk) 07:14, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Dates are OK, the hook fact in ALT2 is properly supported by sources (but see below), the articles are well-supplied with footnotes, and the content is appropriately original in its wording. However, I am not convinced that the articles qualify for DYK on the basis of length. Most of these six articles are only minimally longer than 1500 characters (one of them is only 1502 characters, according to DYKcheck) and barely exceed "stub" class. In reading the six articles, I had the sense that I was reading the same article six times. (Some of the content, such as "This species is dioecious, with male and female reproductive parts on separate individuals. The inflorescence is a catkin.", is true of all members of the genus Salix, and some of the other article content about topics such as use as wildlife food and use by indigenous people is pretty much the same for all species in this group.) I believe a person would be hard-pressed to discuss the differences between these species on the basis of the articles, which is largely due to the fact that the species are very similar in some respects, but also because many of the characteristics discussed in the cited references are not documented in the articles. Before this goes to main-page DYK, I'd like to see some additional "meat" in the articles -- at a minimum, the creation of some topical subsections similar to those found in the articles Salix arctica and Liriodendron tulipifera. Subsections would help the reader find specific topics and would help both readers and contributors see which topics are not effectively covered in these articles. Additionally, the list of articles in the hook should be rearranged so that the first article on the list is one of the better-developed ones in the group (currently the most extensive article is Salix arbusculoides, peachleaf willow).
I have some further suggestions and concerns regarding the hook. First is that, because these are largely species of the tundra and taiga, the "Native Americans" who used these species are not necessarily the people discussed in the linked article Native Americans in the United States, but also include some Alaska native and Canadian peoples that are not included in that article. I don't know if there is a better article to link to. A second suggestion is that the hook ought to indicate that these are all willow shrub species of tundra, taiga, and alpine habitats (or say they are found in the North American arctic and subarctic). For me, that kind of additional specificity would make the hook more interesting. --Orlady (talk) 18:27, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the review. I've notified the authors. Perhaps we can have 6 separate hooks? I have undone the striking off of the original hook for now. --PFHLai (talk) 19:38, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg The original hook, for S. arbusculoides only, checks out fine, and that article clearly meets the length criterion. --Orlady (talk) 19:54, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. "Salix arbusculoides" just got promoted. (So quick!) I'll see if I can make hooks for the remaining 5 willows. --PFHLai (talk) 01:58, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
Here's a modified hook without "Salix arbusculoides". It's up to the authors if "more meat" can be added to the articles.

Argh! When this page got moved or recreated, the old page remained as a ghost without a redirect. I reopened the old template on the notion that it could continue to be used, but because it had been renamed, it is no longer transcluded on the DYK noms page. I guess I could do a history merge, but that seems unnecessary for an ephemeral page like this one, particularly in view of the various changes that have occurred. Therefore, below this I'm copying in the comments that Rcej and I made on the old page, -- Orlady (talk) 14:32, 13 February 2012 (UTC) Symbol question.svg S. arbusculoides was promoted. Discussion continues below.

  • The DYK criterion for character length is 1500, not "I don't like 1500 today". Orlady, please specify which of the 6 articles do not meet that length. Rcej (Robert)talk 02:16, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
Take another look at Wikipedia:Did you know#Eligibility criteria, particularly: "In practice, articles longer than 1,500 characters may still be rejected as too short, at the discretion of the selecting reviewers." All of the articles exceeded 1500 characters at the time I reviewed them, including the one that was over the threshold by just two characters at 1502. Most are in the 1600 range and one is currently over 1900. I was bothered by the impression that I was reading the same article six times -- I had to pay close attention to note the differences between the species -- and my awareness that some of the content was boilerplate that is true of the entire genus Salix (and that in fact closely paraphrased the article about the genus). The articles seemed thin on content. I was asking only for a little more meat on the bones of the articles. There's plenty of additional species-specific information in the cited sources. Also, creation of topical subsections would help make the articles seem more substantial. --Orlady (talk) 03:46, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
I'll see if I can beef up the articles a bit and make a new hook over the weekend. --PFHLai (talk) 00:00, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
The Salix richardsonii article is more than 2k characters long.
  • Symbol confirmed.svg The above hook for S. richarsonii is good to go. If it is promoted, please record the promotion in the template and DO NOT close this template; please keep it open so the other articles can be considered. --Orlady (talk) 16:45, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
  • S. richarsonii has been moved to prep 1. Miyagawa (talk) 22:22, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg - Marker added for tracking purposes. --Orlady (talk) 06:04, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
The Salix glauca article is now more than 3k characters long. Here are a couple of proposed hooks. Perhaps ALT6 should be used before Women's History Month begins?
Salix glauca in East Greenland tundra
--PFHLai (talk) 06:19, 28 February 2012 (UTC)




[edit] Articles created/expanded on January 26

History of Currencies used in Brunei

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • Symbol possible vote.svg The page has a merge request on it. The article as is reads like a piece of the main article and lacks a proper lead. Yoninah (talk) 14:55, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
Symbol delete vote.svg Still has a merge discussion, still reads like it should be in the article on the Brunei Dollar or Currency of Brunei. Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:03, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on January 27

2000 UEFA Cup Final riots

( Review or commentArticle history )

Created/expanded by The C of E (talk). Self nom at 17:50, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol question.svg Expansion is OK, references are fine. But I see problems. The first hook is invalid, as I've explained in my edit summary here: the source doesn't bear it out. The second hook is problematic as well. The article right now says that the Herd and the Gooners made those calls, but the source says the Gooners called Leeds fans. The source certainly doesn't name the Herd, and it doesn't name the others as groups--it says "troublemakers who follow Leeds, Chelsea, Glasgow Rangers, Cardiff City and Swansea City". That sentence needs to be struck/changed in the article itself, and the hook as it is now cannot stand.

    I made a number of copyedits, and have another comment as well: the lead needs to be expanded to include the relevant points from the article, beyond just one sentence about the very basic facts such as teams and date. Drmies (talk) 05:35, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

OK How about this? The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 07:57, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
    • But none of the sources (AFAIK--I just looked through references 5 through 9) say that Leeds supporters were involved, only that there was a fear that they might become involved. My question about the lead also still stands. Drmies (talk) 17:27, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
OK, let's try a different tack. How about this one?
  • The source that should support that is this article, which says, "After a weekend of violence in Charleroi and Brussels..." but not Copenhagen, which is mentioned much later on: "Mr Johannson added: 'We cannot forget what happened in Heysel. We cannot ignore the incidents in Istanbul and Copenhagen and what has happened in Charleroi and Brussels.'" In other words, one cannot claim that the Copenhagen riot would have been the efficient cause for such expulsion. My question on the lead still stands, as does my comment about the other groups identified in the article but not in the references. Drmies (talk) 19:48, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
I'll be honest, I'm not that good on elaborating leads beyond the basic facts. Nevertheless, lets just do a basic hook here: The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 20:29, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
Is that really a reason to reject it just because the original reviewer pulled out? The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 08:09, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
  • No attempts have been made to fix the sourcing issues since before Drmies pulled out. Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:19, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
The sourcing was fine, it was just the wording of the hooks that was the problem which was attempted to be amended with some of the proposed hooks above. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 08:22, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
  • And as noted above that has not been dealt with. Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:39, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
The hooks just need review. The previous reviewer offered his hook so it sort of has been dealt with. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 11:56, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on February 1

Somewhere I Have Never Traveled

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • ... that on a small island in the Pacific Ocean, about 10% of the population is totally color blind? Created/expanded by Dcshank (talk). Self nom at 02:55, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol delete vote.svg This hook is more appropriate for Pingelap, which is ineligible for DYK. Please can you come up with a hook that is actually about the film itself (and also incorporates the film title?) Otherwise the article looks fine to me. Mabalu (talk) 12:17, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, Mabalu.  I was in a rush to get it online, then I found out about DYK and the time limit.  If I had finished the article, there would be several good hooks. :- ) DCS 22:58, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg If the hook is the only issue, this is the proper tag, Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:30, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Here's an alternative hook:
  • ALT1: ... that an actor in the film Somewhere I Have Never Traveled played two the roles of two different people, one with long hair and a beard and one with short hair and clean-shaven?
Symbol possible vote.svg Length and dates check out. I find, however, that the article has a shortage of footnotes. Reference citations are needed for the "Production" section, the second paragraph of "Release", "Home Media", and the first two items under "Awards". Also, it would be nice if the foreign-language reference citations were annotated to identify the languages. For references formatted with the "cite" templates, the "language=" parameter can be used to label the language. --Orlady (talk) 18:50, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
  • I have done a lot of repair following film review including language = .  I can now also suggest:
ALT2: ...Somewhere I Have Never Traveled was not only the director's first film, but also the acting debut for the three young stars.  :- ) DCS 02:39, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg The article sourcing is improved, but I still see problems. In particular, now that more sources are cited, I am getting the impression that several statements in the article are original research by the article's creator. These include:
  • The statement in "Production" that says the location of the Catholic church is "surprising." The cited source indicates where the Catholic religion is prominent in Taiwan; it does not say that the location of the church in this film is surprising. Is this the opinion of the article's creator, or can a different source be cited?
  • The statement in "Release" that: "One would assume that the producer and director attempted to negate the possibility of backlash..." The cited source does not mention this film. Is this the opinion of the article's creator? --Orlady (talk) 05:10, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on February 2

Independent Albania

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • Reviewed: Foucauldian discourse analysis diff
  • Comment: The article was created on 2 February, but since it has been nominated for deletion right after it was created I waited for the end of AfD discussion (yesterday) before nominating it here.

Created/expanded by Antidiskriminator (talk). Self nom at 10:23, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol delete vote.svg This clearly fails criterion 1. I realise this was because it had been nominated for deletion, but I don't see a compelling case to include it at DYK, especially since the debate was closed as no consensus. StAnselm (talk) 04:28, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Nosa Igiebor (journalist)

( Review or commentArticle history )

Created/expanded by Khazar (talk). Self nom at 15:12, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol question.svg Length, date ok. But the six months is not mentioned in article. Nor is the word 'incomunicado' used in the article. --Soman (talk) 17:41, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
Fixed. The IFEX and Amnesty sources explicitly describe him as held incommunicado. The length is slightly trickier; he was arrested 25 December and released 24 June, but I have no article that uses the specific phrase "six months". If you're not comfortable with my math, though, we can always just take "for six months" out of the hook. Thanks for reviewing! Khazar (talk) 17:52, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Close paraphrasing abounds; please review. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:04, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi SG, I'll be glad to try to address your concerns, but "abounds" doesn't give me much of a starting point. Could you give me a few examples of sentences or paragraphs you find of concern here? Khazar (talk) 18:09, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Since this problem is throughout your DYKs, see general response here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:23, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Symbol redirect vote4.png rephrased, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:19, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
ALT1:... that Nigerian journalist Nosa Igiebor was held incommunicado for months, because his magazine Tell criticised General Sani Abacha? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:37, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
  • I looked at this particular biography, not also at "problems ... throughout". Sources give the order of his studies and first 3 posts. I had a hard time not to use their wordings, and a different order doesn't make sense. Please check, to make another fighter for Human rights known. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:00, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on February 3

Eager (horse), Colt by Fidget

( Review or comment )
( Article history links: Eager (horse)Colt by Fidget )

  • Source 11 says that one of fidget's brothers was named Eager, if I understand correctly. I am not sure that the horse that raced in 1791 as brother to fidget is this brother. What source clarifies that the 91 racer is the one referred to in source 11.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:22, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
  • What source says the other horse was never given a name?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:22, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
How about this edit by Tigerboy1966, Tony? --PFHLai (talk) 15:07, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
I have struck my concern.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:59, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Is this ready? Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:11, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
    • I am not sure that Eager is the horse referred the brother of Fidget at issue.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:42, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
      • From the pedigrees in the articles for Eager and the colt by Fidget, Eager and Fidget are indeed brothers, and more specifically full brothers. Both were sired by Florizel, out of a Matchem mare born in 1777. Both pedigrees indicate that the dam of the "Matchem mare" is a "Syphon mare". A side note: In the Thoroughbred industry (and I believe horse breeding in general), "siblings" are from the same dam. "Full siblings" have the same sire and dam; "half-siblings" have the same dam. Although horses from the same sire are genetically half-siblings, the industry does not consider such horses to have a sibling relationship. — Dale Arnett (talk) 20:42, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
        • First of all, neither pedigree section uses references. Second, my concern is not whether they are brothers, but whether the horse described as brother of fidget is this one.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:13, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
I added some references to support the fact that Eager was running under the moniker "brother to Fidget" when he won the Derby and that in later references to the race, the horse is identified as being Eager by Florizel out of the 1777 Matchem Mare. The pedigree section appears to be referenced now. Froggerlaura (talk) 03:54, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

We Belong Together (Randy Newman song)

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Hook is properly formatted. Hook is interesting given the subject. Has reviewed another DYK. Article expanded 5 fold on February 3, nomination date. Article is reasonably neutral. Article has a inline citations supporting most of the text.Plagiarism check here, here, here, here, here. No concerns. Citation supports hook. No images for copyright concerns.
  • Symbol question.svg One paragraph is lacking a source. The section cannot be removed to fix the uncited problem with out the article going to short. Will comment to nominator asking for section to be sourced.

Once a citation is added for the one fact, DYK should be ready to go. --LauraHale (talk) 06:42, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

  • If the uncited fact is not relevant to the hook, is it required that I find a source. I remain unable to find one at this time.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 07:42, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
  • My understanding of DYKs is they all need to be completely cited. If alternative text to make up the length is found and supported by the text, I'm okay with that... but it needs to be completely cited and 1500 characters. --LauraHale (talk) 08:05, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg DYK stipulates minimum one reference per paragraph. Hook facts need to be cited at the end of the sentence, which may be an additional ref in the paragraph. Sometimes, you can combine paragraphs if you're unable to find a specific reference to establish something you know to be true, but of course, the reference is preferred. The template asking for a citation should be used when a statement is being disputed, not just to indicate a paragraph has no citations. I have tweaked the hook to add a missing article and a comma before "but". —Marrante (talk) 13:34, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
  • I added that {{cn}} tag 10 days ago to see if Tony would actually deal with it. If we are saying that an article charted, we should reference that. Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:56, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
  • I am not sure what your point is, but I just don't know how to find a ref for that sentence. In order to meet DYK requirements, I will track down a ref for one of the first two sentences in that paragraph.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:12, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
  • I removed all the uncited text in the article. The length is now "1187 characters (210 words)", which means it does not meet DYK length. I'm okay with adding text back in that is cited to get it back up to length since at the time of the nomination, it was the length. If this not done quickly and since the nominator indicates problems with finding sources, it might be worth considering removing to the no pile. : / --LauraHale (talk) 19:31, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
  • I find that decision to be quite abnormal. I think everyone believes that the ranking was factually correct. If you want to understand my problem, put "Randy Newman" in this search bar. It is not like I am just being lazy. I go to the source and something is wrong with their database. What am I suppose to do?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:47, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
  • The article needs to be 1) of length, 2) supported by sources. When the unsourced material is removed, the article is too short. If the unsourced material is added in, then it fails to be fully sourced. Your option that I'd still pass on is this: Find a reference that allows you to add facts to the article that will get you back up to length. (And keep the unsourced material out, at least until the article appears as DYK.) If you can do that with new material, I'll pass it. One of the people who moves things to prep can over rule this and send it anyway if they want. --LauraHale (talk) 20:23, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
  • I'll see if I can scrounge some other content, but there is not really that much out there. However, if the unsourced content is suitable for return to the article later (presumably because it is not really disputed), why isn't it O.K. to include as a DYK?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:10, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Criteria says: "cites sources with inline citations ". The article does not do this. Thus, it does not meet the guidelines. It can be put back in with a [citation needed] tag because Wikipedia has a lot of tags. It is far from ideal, and really needs a source whether it is a DYK or not because facts on Wikipedia should be verifiable. --LauraHale (talk) 21:45, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Symbol delete vote.svg Article is not long enough when uncited material is removed. When uncited material left in, "cites sources with inline citations" is not met. No indication this can be fixed because of source availability and time of the nominator. --LauraHale (talk) 21:45, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

I added a paragraph. Even if you remove the final paragraph, it is now 1558 characters.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:55, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
P.S. I have well over 500 DYK credits and have never seen anyone remove every uncited sentence before passing an article.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:57, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Symbol redirect vote4.png Time for a re-review? --PFHLai (talk) 06:53, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on February 5

Reverie Sound Revue

( Review or commentArticle history )

5x expanded by What a pro. (talk). Self nom at 07:34, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol delete vote.svg Article does not pass five fold expansion test. Article expanded on February 5. As of January 30, article was 538 B (93 words). As of February 5 after expansion, article was 2733 B (450 words). The bytes is over the line but just barely and I think only because the counting tool is counting pre-existing prose that was not counted the first time. The words is not. The DYK expanding tool tells me it was not expanded five fold.
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Hook is properly formatted. Article is supported by inline citations. Nominator has reviewed other DYK. No images for copyright issues. Plagiarism check: here, here, here, here, here, here, here. No major concerns. Hook is supported by sources in the text.

Symbol possible vote.svg Article has not been expanded five fold as I understand it. If some one wants to ignore all rules and move to prep, that is their prerogative as the article is close in some ways and otherwise meets all the criteria. --LauraHale (talk) 08:34, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

I think the bytes you're referring to are actually the characters of prose, which in my opinion matter more than the number of words. Also, the article could possibly qualify for a 2x expanded BLP. What a pro (talk) is on fire. 08:52, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
As a completely uncited WP:BLP, it could be given a go. (I thought WP:BLP specifically applied to individuals, not groups of people.) My inclination is to give a Symbol confirmed.svg to go, but leaving it up to the people who move things to the prep area to decide. --LauraHale (talk) 10:57, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
  • This version (here) was close to 800 characters, which is why the tool is saying it wasn't a 5x expansion. I wouldn't call it a 2x BLP as the FFWD Article and official website in the old article could be construed as sources. Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:06, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on February 6

Didelot (horse)

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • ... that after winning the 1796 Derby Stakes, the Thoroughbred Didelot failed to win again the rest of his racing career, and was subsequently sent to Russia? Created/expanded by Tigerboy1966 (talk). Nominated by PFHLai (talk) at 15:36, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Article newness and length check out. Article is compliant with all policies. However, the proposed hook is not cited by a single reference, but rather is a summary of most the article. It would be best to pick a single fact for the hook. --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:27, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
While I very much disagree that "It would be best to pick a single fact for the hook", I can look into the article and see if I can come up with another hook. --PFHLai (talk) 03:11, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on February 7

Abbas Kazmi

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • Comment: I had created the Page in my user space on Jan 30 2012 and moved it to main space on 7 Feb 2012

Created/expanded by Ratnakar Kulkarni (talk). Nominated by Ratnakar.kulkarni (talk) at 13:36, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Symbol question.svg The article is New (moved from User space). Long enough with more than 1500 characters. Hook is interesting and understandable and suitably referenced. But the article doesnt through much light on the hook. That section of the article should write more about this. In fact, that part confuses you from what you read in the hook. Please improve that. -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 13:23, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
I have made few changes to the article and also to the section that you mentioned, can you please review it once. - Ratnakar Kulkarni (talk)
Symbol question.svg I still wasnt very happy with it. Hence made some changes. And hence i would also want some other editor to review it. -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 15:41, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on February 8

Open range

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • ... that if your car hits a cow on a road in the open range, in many of the Western United States, then most likely you cannot claim damages from the cattle owner, but if you hit a bull, then quite likely you can? Created/expanded by Last Lost (talk). Self nom at 02:50, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg Length, reference and history verified. Amended wording slightly to make it clear where we're talking about. Daniel Case (talk) 18:56, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Alt1:

  • ... that in many parts of the Western United States, livestock owners are generally not liable for damages caused by their animals if they are kept on land designated as open range?
    Symbol question.svg This hook does not appear to be an accurate reflection of the facts provided in the article. The article provides the "exception" for bulls only in relation to property damage from breaking through a "legal fence", and states that though at one time ranchers were generally not liable for cow-car collisions, their liability has increased since the 1980s. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:01, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
Actually, you are mistaken about bulls and "legal fence": the article does not say this. In fact, it says that bulls are exempt from the privilege of free wandering, i.e., they must be restricted by the owner. As for liability for cows, let's not be too legal here. The hook is just a hook: to hook the reader's attention. If you want legal advice about cows, be it known that federal highways are excluded from the "free range" and "free range" not is not as vast as it used to be, and so on. So for all practical purposes, if you are in an open range, watch out. When you hit a cow, it is too late to read wikipedia :-) Last Lost (talk) 00:07, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
LOL. Last Lost has a good point, but the hook actually doesn't work as written because there is so much more nuance to open range law than this. (federal hwy, state hwy, time of year -- sometimes bulls CAN be loose, but never stallions-- etc.) I propose the following alt hook (moved above): Montanabw(talk) 00:32, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on February 12

Raichle Flexon

( Review or commentArticle history )

Raichle Flexon Comp ski boots

Created/expanded by Maury Markowitz (talk). Self nom at 12:55, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg New enough and long enough based on the date nominated. Nominator has reviewed an article. Hook is interesting enough, neutral and properly formatted. Hook is supported by an inline reference in the article.
  • Symbol question.svg article is not fully supported with inline citations. These can probably be removed with the article being long enough. (Lots of the sources rely on the manufacturer's website.)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Symbol possible vote.svg I checked the images. They say imported and creative commons, but a check of the source page shows no copyright listed on the images. :( Page image found on has a copyright that is not creative commons.
  • Symbol question.svg Mild concerns about paraphrasing: See about page. Would like a second opinion in case I am being overly cautious. None of the other sources that are publicly available really gave my much concern. --LauraHale (talk) 00:27, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Symbol question.svg Second opinion sought. Needs images addressed and uncited material removed OR fully cited. --LauraHale (talk) 00:27, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

  • I received releases on all of these images from the people that took them, and as you can see in the thread they were posted in (which I started) I clearly asked and only accepted images taken of their own boots. ORTS tags were filed some time ago, but the ORTS system is backed up by weeks, in some cases months (11 months in one case). I have raised this issue several times here and on the Commons, but it doesn't seem to be widely known yet. (NOTE: I have since added the OTRS-pending tags, I didn't realize it didn't have them yet).
  • As to the uncited issues, I believe you may be taking a restrictive view here, but I'll open that on your talk page. Maury Markowitz (talk) 12:42, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
    • Until the images have verification from OTRS, the article does not, as I understand it, qualify for DYK and the image cannot be used. As for the the unsourced material, should be easy enough to source. If some one wants to give the article a good to go tick with {{fact}} tags in it, they certainly can but given the repeated discussions on Wikipedia talk:Did you know‎, I am uncomfortable doing so myself. (ESPECIALLY when there are close paraphrasing concerns and the uncited text cannot be checked.) Have you addressed the close paraphrasing issue? --LauraHale (talk) 23:54, 27 February 2012 (UTC)


Volunia

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • ... that Volunia, a potential competitor to Google, has been reported to be the "search engine of the future"? Created/expanded by Pikks (talk), Nearlymiddling (talk). Nominated by Pikks (talk) at 18:24, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol delete vote.svg The hook is blatantly promotional, and not neutral. --SupernovaExplosion (talk) 13:36, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your review. What part is non neutral? Please propose an alternative hook with the same meaning but neutral. Thank you --★ Pikks ★ MsG 13:44, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
Volunia "is known as the search engine of the future" it is an opinion with prediction and judgmental language. Being a opinionated judgmental prediction, this statement is not a fact and not neutral, and is promotional in tone. --SupernovaExplosion (talk) 14:17, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for your opinion. I think that "is the search engine of the future" is non neutral, however "is known as the search engine of the future" is neutral, but I agree with you that it can be understood in a different way. So I would change the hook as follows:
  • Alt1 that Volunia is considered a potential competitor to Google and somebody thinks it will be the search engine of the future?
  • Alt2 that Volunia is considered a potential competitor to Google but it's different than normal search engines?

Which alternative you think is the best? Thanks --★ Pikks ★ MsG 14:31, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

I think the alternate hooks suffer from the same problem. Requesting third opinion. --SupernovaExplosion (talk) 14:36, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks good idea. From my experience and from what is in the WP:DYK rules I can see that the hook should be ""hooky", that is, short, punchy, catchy, and likely to draw the readers in to wanting to read the article." So I can suggest also a 3 alternative which is supported by the biggest Italian national newspaper:
Searchtool-80%.png Response to third opinion request ( Suitability of hook for DYK ):
I am responding to a third opinion request for this page. I have made no previous edits on Did you know nominations/Volunia and have no known association with the editors involved in this discussion. The third opinion process is informal and I have no special powers or authority apart from being a fresh pair of eyes.

I am experienced with the DYK process (both as an article nominator, and a hook reviewer, but I haven't visited DYK in several weeks and I have no interest or previous involvement in this particular nomination.

If the translation of the Polish article is literally that it is "the search engine of the future" then I think it makes a great hook. However I know zero Polish, so I'm not qualified to translate the original article, and Google's translation does not seem to support this literal translation. If this can be proven, then I would keep the original hook, but tweak it slightly for grammar:

  • Alt4 that Volunia, a potential competitor to Google, has been reported to be the "search engine of the future"?

I think that enclosing the quote in quotation marks, and using the term "reported to be" makes it clear that a WP:RS is making this claim, not Wikipedia, and I think it is not blatantly promotional. I stress that this hook is only valid if it is confirmed that the source is accurately being quoted, something that I can not confirm, but that User:Pikks might be able to do. If the accuracy of the quote is not able to be confirmed, then I would suggest searching the article for another fact to hook, none of the alternatives are particularly good and/or "hooky". LivitEh?/What? 16:42, 16 February 2012 (UTC)—LivitEh?/What? 16:42, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your exhaustive and detailed 3O. I can confirm that - as it appears in the article references, as a quotation - the phrase "jak mogłaby wyglądać wyszukiwarka przyszłości" means "how would look like the search engine of the future".

For this reason I go ahead and change the hook with the neutral one you have proposed. --★ Pikks ★ MsG 16:49, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Hook changed. Good to go. --★ Pikks ★ MsG 16:51, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Comment. As a native Polish speaker who did not work on the article, I confirm the above translation. Here's a more complete quotation from the source article: Volunia jest silnikiem wyszukiwania opartym w dużej mierze na interakcjach społecznościowych. Według Marchiori, jest to próba pokazania, jak mogłaby wyglądać wyszukiwarka przyszłości. Translation: "Volunia is a search engine based to a great extent on social interactions. According to Marchiori, it is an attempt to show what a search engine of the future may look like." — Kpalion(talk) 20:53, 22 February 2012 (UTC)




Feeder of lice

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • Symbol question.svg Article is not completely supported by inline citations. Fact tags have been added to show where. The citation needed text either 1) needs to be removed while keeping article at length, or 2) needs to be supported with inline citations.
  • Pictogram voting keep.svg Article reads as neutral enough to me. Not well versed on the subject though so could be reading it that way. The Polish language and book sources support text. I've read and reread the paragraph about this. The entire section isn't referenced properly and the wording is not entirely clear. The hook text is not explicitly stated in the article, but the text when read in total for what is cited does appear to support the text.
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Article is long enough and passes newness test based on date nominated. images have fair use rationale or are public domain. Not seeing anything here or here that concerns me. --LauraHale (talk) 00:52, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Symbol question.svg Needs inline citations to be there or unreferenced text to be removed. --LauraHale (talk) 00:52, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Laura,
The demand for in-line citations for every fact is good for GAN and FAN, but not required here. What is essential is that the article be generally well referenced and that the hook have an in-line citation.
I agree that the article would be improved by citations where you requested them, of course, and thank you for the good suggestions.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 08:00, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
If some one wants to move it to the holding area knowing it is not fully sourced, they can. I'm personally not going to tick off on on it as my understanding is for DYK, the article needs to be completely sourced. You may tick off on it if you feel comfortable with the sourcing passing the criteria. --LauraHale (talk) 09:53, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
In my experience, we don't require cites for every sentence, but each paragraph is necessary, and currently there are two cites needed in the article. They should be addressed before the article is promoted. I hope this will happen soon, it would be a shame to see this fail. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 18:00, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

ALT1: "... that the Polish mathematician Stefan Banach and the poet Zbigniew Herbert (pictured) survived World War II by being employed as feeders of lice?" Image to go with that:

Zbigniew Herbert

. I think that hook reflects the text of the article more accurately.

or more explicitly:

ALT1b: "...the Polish mathematician Stefan Banach and the poet Zbigniew Herbert survived World War II by being employed as feeders of lice (pictured), which were used to produce anti-typhus vaccines?" with image:

Body lice.jpg

.

I'll try to address the above concerns shortly.VolunteerMarek 02:12, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on February 13

Roger Bresnahan

( Review or commentArticle history )

Roger Bresnahan

... that Roger Bresnahan pioneered the use of shin guards in baseball, debuting them on Opening Day in 1907?

Created/expanded by Muboshgu (talk). Self nom at 21:23, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol question.svg Great article! Expansion is technically less than 5X (2200 to 10400), but given the length and quality of the article that should not be an issue. I am quite sure that the offline reference does indeed state Bresnahan was the first. However, it apparently is not technically true: [1]. Evens so, the original hook is OK because "pioneered" does not necessarily mean was the first ever - and Bresnahan's adaptation was the even that made shin guard use spread. ("baseball" should be changed to "Major League Baseball" though).
Having said all that, I would prefer to get the snow throwing in there because to me that is the most interesting part:
ALT2: ... that when Roger Bresnahan adopted the use of shin guards in Major League Baseball on Opening Day in 1907 angry fans threw snow onto the field, causing the New York Giants to forfeit the game?
Downside is that the new hook is 187 characters, so I'll ask for other opinions. I do support holding the article until Opening Day. --ThaddeusB (talk) 21:30, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the review. I'm open to suggestions on the hook. I'm not sure what is best. I will add some more to the article to clarify his place in the use of shin guards, as mentioned on the article's talk page, and that should make it a clean 5x. Also, I added a picture here, I should've included it with the initial nomination. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:38, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
I changed the "New York Giants" link to direct to History of the New York Giants (NL). IMHO, that article is more relevant to Bresnahan than the article on today's franchise in San Francisco. — Dale Arnett (talk) 20:51, 24 February 2012 (UTC)


Migratory Sharks MoU

( Review or commentArticle history )

Created/expanded by Hirziluqman (talk). Nominated by Chipmunkdavis (talk) at 16:07, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol possible vote.svg I have concerns about the subject's notability. All sources about the document are primary. Is there a particular reason why this can't be handled under the Bonn Convention main article?
Length and newness technically check out. However, a significant portion of the article is background information. This reinforces the idea that the content would be better handled as a section of (the very short) Bonn Convention rather than as an independent article, barring possible explanation to the contrary. --ThaddeusB (talk) 04:14, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
I had a similar concern when I first came upon the article, however I looked around on google and thought it had enough coverage to be deemed notable, and more from some secondary sources could definitely be added.
Just as a fun note, if this was merged, it would make up all the sourced information in the Bonn Convention article! CMD (talk) 07:27, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
I am seeing only one reliable source which covers the subject in depth, an that is technically an editorial. The article would probably have a somewhat better than 50% chance of surviving AfD, if challenged, but certainly less than 100%. As such, I will wait for another opinion. BTW, the hook is referenced inline and verified by the (primary) source. --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:02, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

John Blackadder (preacher)

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • Reviewed: Elan SCX
  • Comment: I was a bit lazy on paraphrasing in a couple of places. The most recent source is 1887, so there are no copyright issues.

Created/expanded by Aymatth2 (talk). Self nom at 13:59, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Article was made on February 12th and nominated one day later, so we're good there. The length of the article is very clearly above the requirement. The article also appears neutral, is cited properly, and while I do see some of the close paraphrasing issues as noted by the nominator above, the out of date copyright should make that mostly irrelevant. If there is any amount of direct copying though, you might want to put a note in the references that that was done. Hook length is within required limits and is fairly interesting. This looks good to go. SilverserenC 21:21, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg In addition to the near-verbatim paraphrasing, there is direct copying and no notice that this was done. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:39, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on February 14

Thomas Lavy

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • Reviewed: Have yet to review an article but will do so soon.IvoShandor (talk) 13:51, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Created/expanded by MajickJonson (talk). Nominated by IvoShandor (talk) at 13:51, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

alt1: ... that while awaiting prosecution under the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act Thomas Lavy committed suicide in his jail cell?
alt2: ... that Thomas Lavy was arrested by the FBI for possession of ricin two years after declaring he had 130 grams of the poison at the U.S.-Canadian border?

IvoShandor (talk) 13:51, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Article has a number of sources asking "who". The inclusion of these whos and ambiguity over who said it mean the article has POV issues. The who tags need to be fixed before this article can go further. Has not edited to say what he has subsequently reviewed.
  • Symbol question.svg Article has complete inline sources, but the who tags imply some sourcing issues.
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Article passes newness and length text. Hooks are properly formatted. All images have an appropriate copyright tag or fair use rational. Spot check for plagiarism: here, here, here, here show no concerns.
  • Pictogram voting keep.svg That there is no plagiarism of offline sources and that they support hook. Support for propose hook, alt1 and alt 2. --LauraHale (talk) 04:18, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Symbol question.svg POV problems need resolving and tags need to be removed by addressing the issues. --LauraHale (talk) 04:18, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on February 15

Runic insignia of the Schutzstaffel

( Review or commentArticle history )

SS runes

Created/expanded by Prioryman (talk). Self nom at 22:29, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting keep.svg (Without image) Length and date of creation both check out fine. Hook claim is referenced inline to offline sources which are AGF. Paraphrasing checks carried out on the two online sources, both are fine. Image copyright status checks out okay, but given that the use of Nazi images is illegal in Germany and a number of other European countries, I would strongly advise against using them on the main page. Harrias talk 20:57, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
    How far-reaching are the laws against this? The article contains a lot of images that I'd never seen before (and I lived with a collector of WWII memorabilia for a while!), so I'm wondering if the most esoteric or uncommon runes listed might work for a good image—something plain and striking would be an eye-catching choice for the main page provided it wasn't covered by the ban on Nazi insignia. For instance, beyond the doings of those who used it, File:Runic letter hagall.svg has no strong associations with the regime. Just a thought, really. GRAPPLE X 01:46, 28 February 2012 (UTC)


Michael Roth (baseball), Jason Krizan, Cody Martin (baseball)

( Review or comment )
( Article history links: Michael Roth (baseball)Jason KrizanCody Martin (baseball) )

Created/expanded by Muboshgu (talk). Self nom at 22:03, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Well all three articles pass for length and age. The hook is sourced. If the discussion results in these being Notable, the nomination can go forward.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:19, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Is that really necessary? GNG supercedes NSPORT, and these articles meet GNG. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:13, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
  • I think you misunderstand GNG. It does not include routine mentions in articles about the team. It is for biographical features and such. Game summaries that document that so and so had a hit streak or a stat page saying they had so many of a given stat does not pass GNG. Every college AA has the kind of coverage mentioned in these articles. I am not convinced that they would survive AFD.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:03, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Palacegarden Malachy

( Review or commentArticle history )

Created/expanded by Miyagawa (talk). Self nom at 20:28, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Comment – with a hook specifically about the dog's appearance, it would be infinitely better if a usable photo could be included. Jrcla2 (talk) 21:18, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
  • I agree, but at the moment there isn't any free use ones available and we can't really justify a fair use one until it becomes evident that one isn't going to appear. It took a few months for an image to become available of the last Westminster winner. 23:37, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Portsmouth FC Basketball Club

( Review or commentArticle history )

*Symbol delete vote.svg Unfortunately, the article was moved from a sandbox into the main namespace on 17 January 2012 and then steadily worked on until it was nominated for DYK on 15 February 2012. Thus it was not created within the past five days. Furthermore, on 8 February 2012 it was 27528 characters long (there were no edits on 10 February), and on 15 February it was 22085 characters long, according to DYK Check, so it was not expanded at least fivefold within the past five days either. Otherwise, the hook is interesting, of the right length, and appears to be properly referenced (offline reference accepted in good faith). The article could also do with more references (the "Cunningham and Irish's Coastal Tour" section is entirely unreferenced), and copyediting and wikification (en dashes should be used in scores, e.g., "99–89"; external links should be in a bulleted list). — SMUconlaw (talk) 18:07, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote4.png The article was moved to the mainspace on 16 February (see here). --Hallows AG (talk) 18:16, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, I just worked out the rather complicated history of the article. It might help if in the future you leave comments for reviewers for similar articles.
Symbol question.svg Article. The article was worked on in W53dr4xi76a2jc1z39's user space and then at Articles for Creation before being moved into the main namespace on 16 February, so it can be regarded as a new article. On 16 February it was 22,085 characters long, according to DYK Check, so it is of an appropriate length. However, it could do with more references (the "Cunningham and Irish's Coastal Tour" section is entirely unreferenced), and a thorough copyediting and wikification (en dashes should be used in scores, e.g., "99–89"; external links should be in a bulleted list).
Hook. The hook is of the right length, and appears to be properly referenced (offline reference accepted in good faith). However, I think there are two issues with it:
  • "Manchester United" is a redirect to "Manchester United F.C.". I note from the article that the football club owned a basketball team, but as it is the link is rather confusing.
  • Not knowing anything about basketball, I can't tell what is interesting or unusual about it. Was "99–89" an unusual score, or was Manchester United a particularly strong team? I think more details might be needed.
SMUconlaw (talk) 18:07, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
The hook would be interesting to those who have a minimal knowledge of football as most have never heard of Portsmouth FC Basketball Club, if they see the hook, they would assume that it is Portsmouth F.C.. Also, football games almost always never end with a more than double-digit score--Hallows AG (talk) 18:43, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Ah, sorry, I just realized that the hook simply shows "Portsmouth FC", making it a sort of easter egg. — SMUconlaw (talk) 18:51, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on February 16

Falk Harnack

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • ... that German film director Falk Harnack's brother, sister-in-law, three cousins and friends were all executed by the Nazis, yet in 1951, he was accused of making a movie sympathetic to Nazism?

Created/expanded by Marrante (talk). Self nom at 18:13, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Freycinet Map of 1811

( Review or commentArticle history )

The 1811 Freycinet Map - The first full map of Australia to be published.

  • Comment: I've left a note on the authors' respective usertalkpages and asked for more footnotes in the article. --PFHLai (talk) 04:47, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Created/expanded by Robert.johnson27453 (talk), Peter Reynders (talk). Nominated by PFHLai (talk) at 04:37, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol possible vote.svg The nominator has submitted more than 5 DYKs. They need to review an article before this goes further. --LauraHale (talk) 22:01, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
Please be reminded that the QPQ requirement is meant for self-noms. I am not nominating an article written by me. Thanks. --PFHLai (talk) 04:05, 21 February 2012 (UTC)


Religious language

( Review or commentArticle history )

William Bloomfield Douglas

( Review or commentArticle history )

Nasturtiums (E. Phillips Fox)

( Review or commentArticle history )

Nasturtiums

  • ... that the 1912 painting Nasturtiums (pictured) only came into public possession in 2011?

Created/expanded by Whiteghost.ink (talk). Nominated by Casliber (talk) at 00:58, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Symbol possible vote.svg Please fill out the references with proper citations which give the publisher. Is the reference used to support the hook a reliable source?♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:36, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
  • All publishers there as far as I know.
  • Suggested alternate hook

... that Nasturtiums, a painting by E. Phillips Fox, was purchased as a memorial to Margaret Olley? Whiteghost.ink 13:45, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

I like your hook better, mine was a bit vague and bland. THe way you've done the referencing is different to how I'd have done it I guess. So for FN 20 I'd have slotted in St Georges one from the references. Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:54, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
I think I see what you mean about the refs. I did a lot more work on them. Thanks for the nomination. Whiteghost.ink 00:36, 20 February 2012 (UTC)


DiDia 150

( Review or commentArticle history )

1960 DiDia 150 in the National Museum of Transportation in St. Louis, Mo

Symbol confirmed.svg
  • The article was initially created 30 May 2011 as a stub - substantially changes were then made on 16 February 2012, whereby it was expanded just over fivefold.
  • The article contains over 27,500 characters (550 words).
  • The reference citations need to be expanded as several are just bare citations - one of which is a blog site & another is a dead link.
  • The hook states the car took seven years to build yet an external link cited in the article (Houston News Article) states it took eight years to build. Of the two references used one states it took seven years while the other states it was constructed between 1953 and 1960. The article also states it cost over $150,000 to build however the Houston News Article states that Bobby Darin paid $150,000 for the vehicle, whilst the cited reference sates it cost over $150,000 to build.
Thanks for follow up - just saw it now, will make necessary changes in the a.m. As an ex-journalist the Houston news article looks to be slapped together from someone's news release, it's splashy, vague and repetitive among other things, tho' wiki rates news above blogs. Seven years should do it since '53-60 counts as seven as well. Nowhere have I seen eight years apart from this ref, and nowhere is there anything saying what Darin paid for it than there. Besides, if he paid the same as it cost to build, why would they cancel each other out? Just sayin'. Am on it. Manytexts (talk) 13:39, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Cites needed & deadlinks all fixed - have added thumbnail for DiDia if you want to use it: but don't know the way to avoid the frame/size artifact. Manytexts (talk) 11:28, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
  • The reference citations still need to be expanded. Dan arndt (talk) 08:09, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Please explain, they look okay to me for this type of article. It's only start class. And thanks to who fixed the image parameters. Manytexts (talk) 00:50, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, I don't get it even with an explanation - but welcome anyone who can to help the article towards DYK. Manytexts (talk) 02:38, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Reference citation issues have been addressed - however as I have undertaken work expanding the article. It will need to be reviewed by another editor.Dan arndt (talk) 07:42, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Chandramukhi (character)

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • Comment: Article created in February 16 by myself and expanded by myself.

Created by Ason27 (talk). Self nom at 09:43, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Regarding the new hook suggested by Mandarax, I'm happy with the shorter version and would like to go with it.(Ason27 (talk) 01:32, 21 February 2012 (UTC))

Unionoida

( Review or commentArticle history )

Unionoida shell used in button manufacturing.

  • Comment: Article recently expanded in scope and detail, interesting information on freshwater pearls, button manufacturing industry, and conservation status.

Created/expanded by Shellnut (talk). Self nom at 04:27, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol possible vote.svg 5X expansion started on 16 February (will accept addition a day late due to trouble transferring to the nom page and Shellnut is new to DYK). Image is under GNU 1.2 license on Commons, which is acceptable. QPQ not needed. There is a problem with close-paraphrasing in two of the online sources picked up with duplication checker. Similarities are here and here in sources 14 and 15. These sentences will have to be rewritten in a way that has different phrasing from the source or direct quotes can be used (mostly concerned with prose and not lists of states and species). The references also include bare urls which is not permitted (can reformat easily with the cite toolbar). Froggerlaura (talk) 22:18, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for getting back to me so quickly. I will work on the paraphrasing to make it more distinct. However, what is a "bare URL" for us less knowledgeable people? Shellnut (talk) 04:39, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
A bare url is seeing the web address link on the page, such as this http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations instead of it being hidden like this Did You Know?. Froggerlaura (talk) 04:52, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks! I have hidden the bare URLs now. The other re-paraphrasing will take a longer block of time today or tomorrow. Shellnut (talk) 15:52, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on February 17

Zendegi

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • ... that science fiction author Greg Egan has been praised for taking Zendegi "into the street demos and sitting rooms of near-future Tehran"?

Created/expanded by Bruce1ee (talk). Self nom at 14:54, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Glasser v. United States

( Review or commentArticle history )

Siah Bishe Pumped Storage Power Plant

( Review or commentArticle history )

Le Sommeil

( Review or commentArticle history )

Le Sommeil, painting by Gustave Courbet

  • Symbol question.svg 5x expansion confirmed, hook verified. References good, although it'd be good to get an inline ref for para 3, particularly the last sentence, and I was wondering if there was another way to say " soften the taboos" to distance it from the source without changing meaning.....Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:54, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Done. Removed the last sentence of the 3rd paragraph, added references for the rest of the 3rd paragraph. Changed "soften the taboos" to "lower the taboos". --SupernovaExplosion Talk 02:18, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Fixed a spelling error and a couple of style concerns, especially that paintings are usually described as being "in the collection of ..." and not as "collected in ..." The latter makes it sound like they somehow swept it up. :) Also, "extreme joy" is a bit energetic a description isn't it? Wouldn't "exhaustion" be better? The source uses "post-coital bliss" and this is the usual expression for this kind of lassitude. Whiteghost.ink 14:06, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Thanks for your changes and suggestion. Changed "extreme joy" > exhaustion. --SupernovaExplosion Talk 15:39, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg Now definitely good to go Moswento (talk | contribs) 13:23, 29 February 2012 (UTC)


Battle of El Herri

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • ... that the loss of a French column at the Battle of El Herri was blamed on the commander's disobedience of orders?

Created/expanded by Dumelow (talk). Self nom at 13:36, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on February 18

A Young Man's World

( Review or commentArticle history )

Jane McNeill

( Review or commentArticle history )

Created/expanded by Scanlan (talk). Self nom at 22:35, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

  • opening sentence needs to be reworded "McNeill may to best known..." I think you meant "may be best known..." But, in addition to changing "to" to "be" I think you might want to change "may" to "is" as the latter implies a point of view. Actually you might want to say "is known for...".
    • Symbol question.svg new enough and long enough, but I would like a second opinion about the number of sources. There are only 4 and it looks like the article is overly dependent on just one. Has inline citations, appears to have no copyright violations and appears neutral.--Ishtar456 (talk) 03:22, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

History of Baldwin-Wallace College

( Review or commentArticle history )

Berea-First Congregational Church Conservatory of Music Annex (OHPTC).jpg
BW conservatory of music

  • Did you know that Baldwin-Wallace College Conservatory is home to the Baldwin-Wallace Bach Festival, the oldest collegiate Bach Festival and the second oldest bach festival in the United States?
  • Comment: Berea-First Congregational Church Conservatory of Music Annex (OHPTC) in 2009 the church became part of Baldwin-Wallace College Conservatory of music

Created/expanded by Pwojdacz (talk). Self nom at 04:18, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Amine El Khalifi

( Review or commentArticle history )

Created/expanded by ThaddeusB (talk). Self nom at 17:32, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

St. James' School, Dudley

( Review or commentArticle history )

St James' School

  • I don't see the picture in the article. Did you intend to supply this one? --Orlady (talk) 05:48, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
St. James' School, Dudley
Oops made the correction - thanks Victuallers (talk) 22:40, 24 February 2012 (UTC)




[edit] Articles created/expanded on February 19

Bentworth Hall, Hall Place (Bentworth)

( Review or comment )
( Article history links: Bentworth HallHall Place (Bentworth) )

Looks okey.Pictogram voting keep.svg©Geni 21:28, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Charlotte Zeepvat

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • ... that historian Charlotte Zeepvat's 2000 work Romanov Autumn has been described as "like leafing through a Victorian lady's scrapbook"?

Created/expanded by Ruby2010 (talk). Self nom at 02:21, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

    • ALT 2 ... that reading historian Charlotte Zeepvat's 2000 work Romanov Autumn has been described as being "like leafing through a Victorian lady's scrapbook"? The current wording is not grammatical. --Ishtar456 (talk) 00:31, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Not sure about the "reading" part, but otherwise it works for me. Thanks, Ruby 2010/2013 02:36, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
      • I assumed the work was of writing, therefore the verb "reading". In any case, there needs to be a verb: _____ is like "leafing....etc". --Ishtar456 (talk) 21:06, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Yeah, I guess that works then. Thanks for the copy edit! Ruby 2010/2013 04:43, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Just observed the International Women's Day category at the bottom of the nom page. I think this article would be a good candidate for March 8, but I'll leave that judgment up to others. Ruby 2010/2013 19:44, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Doctors Medical Center

  • Symbol possible vote.svg The nominated article is new enough, just long enough, but is not sufficiently referenced to meet DYK requirements. Please review rule D2. Beyond that, the article is thinly sourced, with only one reference and I'm unsure whether that reference would even meet the test of a reliable source (I'm not saying that it does not, but I'm saying that I'm not sure without having looked at it too closely). But that is a moot point anyway, as I would really like to see more than one source being used for this article anyway. There is no requirement for you to review another nomination, as you appear to have only one DYK credit as yet (this requirement starts when you have five). I have left the review of the hook fact for now, as there are some steep hurdles to get over first. The hook length just comes under the 200 character (including spaces) limit. Schwede66 17:59, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Having now looked more closely, the reference is self-published and thus does not meet the requirement of a reliable source. The following statement appears under the reference: "This article is part of ChronicleJobs, a weekly advertising feature produced by the Marketing Department of the San Francisco Chronicle, and does not involve the editorial staff." You will have to find some reliable sources before this can go anywhere. Schwede66 18:03, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol delete vote.svg The above concerns have not been addressed within a week. The article is still too short, and the only reference is self-published. The only action by the nominator was to remove the self-published source template within hours of me placing it. I have reinstated that template and explained the situation in more detail on the article's talk page. With no progress, we will unfortunately have to reject the article. Schwede66 00:48, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
I've been busy but I can improve it still.LuciferWildCat (talk) 01:38, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
I have addressed the length and added additional references. Let me know what else needs to be done. I am sorry it took me so long but I am a student taking 20 units and simply did not want to do a half assed job. I can continue adding more content. If you look at the talk page there are more sources that could be used to add.LuciferWildCat (talk) 22:09, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Symbol possible vote.svg The article has been expanded and is no longer a stub - great! It has more references now, but still does not meet the DYK referencing requirements (please do review rule D2). Duplication Detector does not identify anything of concern. The hook has several issues: a) It's not a proper sentence (the word 'in' may be missing), b) it lists numerous facts, which makes it hard to comprehend and appear dull; I suggest that less is more, c) where in the article does it talk about the 'state legislature'?, d) each little fact in the hook needs to have a direct reference in the article where the fact is mentioned (after each sentence mentioning the fact); this DYK requirement is not met. So overall, whilst this is a lot better now, we are not quite there yet. Schwede66 09:34, 28 February 2012 (UTC)


[edit] Seton Medical Center

  • Symbol possible vote.svg The hook is not referenced in the article. There are some other problems with references - it seems that the fact indicated by the hook is tied to another statement, except the link does not work, so that makes two references which need to be sorted. The article is new and it looks like it is off to a good start. Fix the references and if possible try to find another third-party source talking about the place. Good job. Blue Rasberry (talk) 18:16, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Okay. Working on it.?LuciferWildCat (talk) 01:38, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
I added an additional source, and fixed the link mix up. Let me know.LuciferWildCat (talk) 21:56, 27 February 2012 (UTC)


Butler Blue II

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • Reviewed: Didelot (horse) and Justin Pope
  • Comment: Article existed as a redirect only since 2009. Before that, there was text but I discovered it was a copyright violation and deleted it, as per policy. Thus, this should be considered a new article for DYK purposes.

Created/expanded by ThaddeusB (talk). Self nom at 18:38, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Comment: I am attempting to get a picture re-licensed so it can be added to article. --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:42, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on February 20

Pencil test (South Africa)

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • ... that Sandra Laing was legally declared "coloured" largely on the basis of a pencil test, despite being born of two "white" parents?

Created/expanded by ThaddeusB (talk), Rio 001 (talk). Nominated by ThaddeusB (talk) at 18:04, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Due to the serious nature of the subject, I am hesitant to suggest it but this could go on April Fools' Day with
ALT1: "... that the pencil test has been known to tear families apart?"
which is probably seem bizarre to readers more familiar with other pencil tests. --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:04, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Chandler Robbins

( Review or commentArticle history )

TechSmith

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • ... that Clintondale High School in Michigan successfully flipped its education structure to raise failing grades using TechSmith products? Created/expanded by Nageljac09 (talk). Self nom at 20:50, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Meyer Kestnbaum

( Review or commentArticle history )

Created/expanded by Orlady (talk). Self nom at 05:42, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Discipline Global Mobile

( Review or commentArticle history )

Roger Fripp plays guitar.

Created/expanded by Kiefer.Wolfowitz (talk). Self nom at 16:45, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

A "crib sheet" to help reviewers, from Kiefer.Wolfowitz (nominator):
  • Article
    New Fivefold expansion of unsourced stub (beginning 20 February 2012).
    Long enough: 1877 characters (287 words) "readable prose size".
    Within policy: Hook fact has 2 in-line citations. A related quote (from the DGM "statement of aims") has 4 in-line citations. The links allow easy verification of the hook, using open websites.
  • Hook:
    200 textual characters (counting spaces and including " (pictured)"); the phrase "King Crimson guitarist and" could be sacrificed.
  • Other
    Formatting of hook: Hook was copy-edited by Mandarax, so its format should be correct. :)
    Picture The picture (from Flikr) has a Creative Commons 2.0 license and so it is free for WP's main-page.
Respectfully submitted to help a reviewer by  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 12:19, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on February 21

Flip teaching

( Review or commentArticle history )

Video lectures like this are the starting point for flip teaching


Gilles (stock character)

( Review or commentArticle history )

Antoine Watteau: Gilles (or Pierrot) and Four Other Characters of the Commedia dell'arte, c. 1718.  Musée du Louvre, Paris.

  • ... that the Gilles who was identified for nearly two centuries with the poignant subject of Watteau's famous portrait was a lewd and credulous clown of French farce, taking starring roles in such comedies as The Shit Merchant? Created/expanded by Beebuk (talk). Self nom at 00:43, 22 February 2012 (UTC)


Lybia tessellata, Lybia edmondsoni, Triactis

( Review or comment )
( Article history links: Lybia tessellataLybia edmondsoniTriactis )

Created/expanded by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self nom at 09:23, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Petre P. Carp

( Review or commentArticle history )

Photograph of P. P. Carp

ALT 1: ... that, in summer 1917, a plan existed to make septuagenarian Petre P. Carp (pictured) the dictator of German-occupied Romania?

Caricature of P. P. Carp

ALT 2: ... that unpopular Romanian statesman Petre P. Carp (cartoon pictured), who publicly supported the Central Powers, once explained himself as "not a Germanophile, [but] a Russophobe"?

Pictogram voting keep.svg Date and 5x (more like 30x) expansion verified. Offline references accepted on good faith for first hook and half of ALT 1; Romanian-language online references checked for other half of ALT 1 and for ALT 2. Personally, I think ALT 1 featured with the cartoon would be the most striking choice. - Biruitorul Talk 16:23, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Thanks! I for one am okay with your combined version. Therefore:
ALT 3: ... that, in summer 1917, a plan existed to make septuagenarian Petre P. Carp (cartoon pictured) the dictator of German-occupied Romania? Dahn (talk) 17:44, 21 February 2012 (UTC)



Copyright transfer agreement

( Review or commentArticle history )

Created/expanded by Daniel Mietchen (talk). Nominated by Bluerasberry (talk) at 18:17, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Symbol redirect vote4.png Time for a re-review? --PFHLai (talk) 07:01, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on February 22

Burton Court

( Review or commentArticle history )

Reviewed Council of Churches of the City of New York Symbol possible vote.svg Not sure the ref says whats in the hook precisely. Ive changed the article too. The ref says that his trrops were stationed at this manor, not this manor house. I suggest the hook below. If you are very quick. Its St Davids day today. Victuallers (talk) 00:30, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Bellville Sassoon

( Review or commentArticle history )

Reviewed Conradina grandiflora

Arthur Gilchrist Brodeur

( Review or commentArticle history )

ALT2 ... that Arthur Gilchrist Brodeur, future head of Scandinavian studies at Berkeley, published a translation of the Prose Edda with The American-Scandinavian Foundation the same year he received his PhD? Yngvadottir (talk) 06:07, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
--and I have now reviewed Pat Hawkins. Yngvadottir (talk) 04:53, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

St Mary Magdalene's Church, Bolney

( Review or commentArticle history )

The 16th-century tower of St Mary Magdalene's Church in Bolney, West Sussex

  • ... that in "an inspired community effort involving the whole village", 16th-century residents of Bolney, West Sussex, built their church's 66-foot (20 m) tower (pictured)?
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Frank Noel
  • Comment: This photo of the tower itself, although rather tall and narrow, is probably more appropriate than a pic of the whole church. The quote is a direct cite from the book The Kent & Sussex Weald.

Created/expanded by Hassocks5489 (talk). Self nom at 21:42, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

    • how about a rejig to "... that 16th-century parishioners of St Mary Magdalene's Church, Bolney built the church's 66-foot (20 m) tower (pictured) in "an inspired community effort involving the whole village"."? A bit longer because it has the church name, but flows more naturally. Circéus (talk) 03:33, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
Yep, that sounds reasonable; let's go with that. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 08:29, 24 February 2012 (UTC)


Players of color in the NBA

( Review or commentArticle history )

Created by Bagumba (talk). Self nom at 18:05, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

The Great Otis Redding Sings Soul Ballads

( Review or commentArticle history )

Created/expanded by GreatOrangePumpkin (talk). Self nom at 13:56, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

  • I'm a bit confused about this Isaac Hayes thing. Is there actually a dispute about whether or not Hayes is on this album? The source you are using, Bowman's Soulville, says right out "By year's end, Otis had cut his second LP, most of the tracks featuring Isaac Hayes on piano or organ." You can note the lack of primary sources indicating Hayes' participation, but there must be a citation for the dispute, otherwise it is original research. Also, there needs to be an inline citation for the hook, but this is a minor issue and easily fixed. Gamaliel (talk) 18:02, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Michael Crouse, Marcus Knecht, Chris Bisson (baseball), Andrew Albers, Jamie Romak, Tim Smith (baseball), Kyle Lotzkar, Mark Hardy (baseball), Nick Bucci, Jonathan Malo

( Review or comment )
( Article history links: Michael CrouseMarcus KnechtChris Bisson (baseball)Andrew AlbersJamie RomakTim Smith (baseball)Kyle LotzkarMark Hardy (baseball) )

Michael Crouse

Created/expanded by Muboshgu (talk). Self nom at 05:31, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Note that, although the template only displays article history links for eight articles, there are actually ten nominated. MANdARAX  XAЯAbИAM 11:49, 27 February 2012 (UTC)


Council of Churches of the City of New York

( Review or commentArticle history )

Created/expanded by Leszek Jańczuk (talk). Self nom at 12:03, 22 February 2012 (UTC) Symbol confirmed.svg Looks good to go, but you should fill out the references properly with publisher information.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:04, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg I'm concerned that some of the phrasing used in this article may be too close to that of this source. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:14, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

They are not the same (because of my English. Leszek Jańczuk (talk) 18:14, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
  • I've flagged the first hook suggestion as unacceptable. That's an extraordinary claim, and the organization's own website is not sufficient sourcing for it. --Orlady (talk) 16:23, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
  • I propose ALT3. Leszek Jańczuk (talk) 18:14, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on February 23

Gligor Sokolović

( Review or commentArticle history )

Gligor Sokolović while fighting for the Chetniks in Macedonia (between 1904-1908)

  • I'm not reviewing the hook, but I would like to point out that the phrasing "did you that x was famous" is unwittingly funny. Isn't there an actual factoid on Sokolović that could be made into a hook? Dahn (talk) 14:25, 29 February 2012 (UTC)


Fort Widley

( Review or commentArticle history )

Created/expanded by Geni (talk). Self nom at 21:37, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Thomas Horne (politician)

( Review or commentArticle history )

Photograph of Thomas Horne

Created/expanded by StAnselm (talk). Self nom at 04:35, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Date, length (1583 characters), citations all check out. No close paraphrasing to online sources. The image is public domain. The hook is 191 characters. Good to go. PKM (talk) 02:56, 1 March 2012 (UTC)


William Carter (Tasmanian politician)

( Review or commentArticle history )

Photograph of William Carter, 1860.

Created/expanded by StAnselm (talk). Self nom at 04:00, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Length and date verified. Online reference checks out. - Biruitorul Talk 15:20, 27 February 2012 (UTC)


Mundo Perdido, Tikal

( Review or commentArticle history )

The Lost World Pyramid dominates the complex

Created/expanded by Simon Burchell (talk). Self nom at 12:23, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

  • ALT1 ... that the Lost World at the ancient Maya city of Tikal may have served as a royal necropolis for over a hundred years?
  • ALT2 ... that the Lost World at the ancient Maya city of Tikal contains the earliest known example of giant deity masks being placed inside a Maya building?
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Good to go. Pretty nice article too, well written, and well organized. The hook is better than the alts, might as well use it as is. History2007 (talk) 03:43, 27 February 2012 (UTC)


Scroogle‎

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • ... that Scroogle‎ founder Daniel Brandt once intentionally sought to be sued by Google?
  • Reviewed: Migratory Sharks MoU
  • Comment: Article was deleted in 2009 via AfD, but has gained notability since. Was undeleted and expanded 5X starting 2/23

Created/expanded by ThaddeusB (talk). Self nom at 03:53, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting keep.svg Expansion and date good, quality good; hook sourced offline, well under 200 and interesting. Aboutmovies (talk) 18:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Original hook was removed from the mainpage due to previous encounters with Daniel Brandt. Orlady has suggested the following hooks: Froggerlaura (talk) 23:52, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
  • ALT1 ...that Scroogle ranked among the top 4,000 sites worldwide in web traffic before it was shut down last month?
  • ALT2 ...that in 2007 it was reported that Scroogle was becoming the preferred search engine of civil libertarians?
  • Would running the original hook minus, Brandt's name be satisfactory? (I.E. "... that Scroogle‎ once intentionally sought to be sued by Google?"
I feel this is the most interesting fact. If that isn't good I'm fine with ALT1 or
ALT3: ...that Scroogle, which handled roughly 350,000 search requests a day, was supported entirely by user donations?
A combination of two facts, but both are referenced. --ThaddeusB (talk) 02:44, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

List of international cricket five-wicket hauls by Kapil Dev

( Review or commentArticle history )

Created/expanded by Vensatry (talk). Self nom at 18:17, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Anarchism and Occupy Wall Street

( Review or commentArticle history )

[edit] Articles created/expanded on February 24

Brussels tapestry

( Review or commentArticle history )

The Miraculous Draught of Fishes tapestry detail.png
  • Comment: We can crop an image to accompany this.

Created/expanded by Wetman (talk), PKM (talk), Johnbod (talk). Nominated by PKM (talk) at 18:47, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Image added; caption should be "Detail of The Miraculous Draught of Fishes tapestry." - PKM (talk) 02:18, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
  • Reviewed: Thomas Horne (politician) - PKM (talk) 03:03, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Neuer Marstall

( Review or commentArticle history )

The Neuer Marstall from the Spree River

  • Symbol possible vote.svg D1/H5: No inline citations directly after one of the hook facts (i.e.: that the stables once housed the Imperial horses). D2:"Current Use" section is uncited. H2/Q1: Hook is 204 characters long, above the 200 character limit. These need to be addressed. Seems O.K. otherwise, but this is my first review. Sincerely, SamBlob (talk) 14:02, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
  • ALT: ... that the New Stables (pictured), a building complex in central Berlin, Germany that had housed the Imperial horses and carriages, later housed revolutionaries in the Christmas Crisis of 1918? Sincerely, SamBlob (talk) 14:02, 29 February 2012 (UTC)


Limestone Corner

( Review or commentArticle history )

Wall ditch in Limestone Corner area of Hadrian's Wall

  • Symbol question.svg The claim in the second sentence of the lead section ("most northerly point of the Roman Empire") is significant enough that it needs its own inline citation. Does the book that was used for the only citation noted in that paragraph also support that earlier sentence? The article is sourced almost entirely to that one book, but the book appears to meet RS, and I am trusting that the article's creator worked to avoid close paraphrasing. The "trig point" section needs references that are more precise (a specific page, not just a website), but more importantly it is sourced entirely to what appears to be someone's personal website, which does not meet RS criteria. However, that's just one section, so this concern doesn't disqualify the article for DYK. Otherwise, I see no real problems. The article is new enough, long enough, has references from at least two reliable sources. The hook is short enough and is "hooky", the hook fact is properly cited (offline source accepted in good faith), and there are no issues with the image. SJ Morg (talk) 10:54, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote4.png I added sources in the lead for the items that SJ Morg questioned. --Orlady (talk) 03:57, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting keep.svg Looks good to go now. Although I am unable to check for close paraphrasing, and the article's creator hasn't commented, I am assuming he/she adhered to that editing rule. Thanks, Orlady, for the prompt response to my question about the lead, and for providing an additional reliable source. SJ Morg (talk) 09:22, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the nomination and help with this. Further to your additions, I've padded out the Trig Point section citations to individual pages (though Wikipedia would benefit from some more detailed content in the area of UK Trig Points and associated surveying). That isn't really my area of expertise, so hopefully someone with access to more detail will fill in. I've actively avoided close paraphrasing as best as I can. I have a number of sources I can use, but 'Handbook to the Roman Wall' is seen as a fairly definitive source, and so is the 'go to' book of choice.Sammy_r (talk) 10:51, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Thanks for commenting and giving reassurance that you avoided close paraphrasing. SJ Morg (talk) 11:50, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

The End of All Things

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • ... that while one reviewer called the recent Fringe episode "The End of All Things" the best of the season, another remarked that it "failed to make my dinger hum"?

Created/expanded by Ruby2010 (talk). Self nom at 04:31, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Willys-Overland Building, St. Louis Auto Show

( Review or comment )
( Article history links: Willys-Overland BuildingSt. Louis Auto Show )

Created/expanded by Poroubalous (talk). Self nom at 17:38, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Gustav Morelli

( Review or commentArticle history )

Looks good to innumerate me. New, well-referenced, interesting. Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 14:15, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

John C. Osgood

( Review or commentArticle history )

John C. Osgood, Colorado Coal Baron

Created/expanded by Mgreason (talk). Self nom at 01:51, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

STRAT-X

( Review or commentArticle history )

Looks good (and it is already a Good article so it should be) and it is only 4 days old and long enough, only the hook is a bit misleading. The documents were written from the perspective of the Soviet leaders, as to be a study into the thinking of the "enemy". The hook makes it seem that the authors of the report disapproved of capitalism and glorified socialism themselves, but they were playing a sort of "devil's advocate" role. Maybe you can tweak it a bit to relect that. SpeakFree (talk)(contribs) 17:53, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
Alt "... that a document from the 1960s STRAT-X US nuclear deterrent study was composed from a Soviet perspective, disapproving capitalism and glorifying socialism?" --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 06:49, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

King Gong of Chu, King Kang of Chu

( Review or comment )
( Article history links: King Gong of ChuKing Kang of Chu )

Created/expanded by Zanhe (talk). Self nom at 01:08, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Pevely Dairy Company Plant

( Review or commentArticle history )

Created/expanded by Poroubalous (talk). Self nom at 21:20, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Dinesh trivedi.jpg

Dinesh Trivedi

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • Article on living person has been made 2x. Hope it does not need a 5x like asked for earlier!

Symbol delete vote.svg Quoting "within the past five days, the article has had its prose portion expanded at least twofold (only applies to BLPs that were completely unreferenced before expansion)". Trivedi had references. -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 15:51, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol question.svg This needs fewer than 200 characters to pass the length threshold. It's doable. Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:47, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
The double criteria is for BLPs which are completely unreferenced. Here the article was referenced. Hence 5x would be needed. I really loved this original Hook. Hence if other reviewers want to approve this, I have no problem. (I havent gone through the article tough.) -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 09:51, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
  • I know the rules. However, the version I looked at was approximately 3800 characters. The version before expansion was 782 characters. Hence, 5x was almost reached. Now it most definitely is. Crisco 1492 (talk) 17:08, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
  • The article has been expanded. Does it pass? --Tinpisa (talk) 10:17, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote4.png The article length is fine now, as it has been almost eight and a half times expanded. (Note: I haven't looked at anything other than the expansion.) MANdARAX  XAЯAbИAM 11:22, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Went through the article now. Have few "citation needed" and "When" tags added to it. Please take care of them. One point. We dont make a seperate section of controversy. We blend it in the rest story. Especially when its just one incidence. Also the expansion seems to have been done just for the sake of it. Many quotes, huge dialogues, have been added. Are they for character count? We dont write subject's speeches. We dont write his opinions on all things he has on. We just write a jist of it in a line and use quotations only for main stuff that should be credited only to the speaker and not be paraphrased to avoid misrepresentation. -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 08:54, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
Strongly disagree. When there are three facts all supported by a single source, does one refer to the source after each sentence, or at the end of all the three (the para)? Adding 'cn' tags after each sentence, when the source is mentioned after three sentences (all supported by the same source) is meaningless. Second, adding 'when' tags, with the source indicated (Which mentions the year) is not required. If a man has changed four parties, its not important, in which years he changed the parties, but only the fact that he changed four parties seems encyclopedic. The quotes have only been added to give the viewpoint of the person. The gentleman is the first rail minister with a diametrically opposite viewpoint compared to all his predecessors. This is why his viewpoint is important. e.g. restructuring the Railway Board or introducing a rail regulator. Note that only his viewpoint on important things have been mentioned, not all his viewpoints. And if a gentleman calls up the Prime Minister to intervene on petty issues, it shows his (party's) position of strength. Or lambasting the PM for not providing funds. No other minister has done this in the past. Surely then, his point of view can be mentioned. Also, there are no dialogues (which is always between two or more people) in the article. And I also do not agree with your comment that the expansion seems to have been done just for the sake of it. You seem to have a grudge against the article. Please note that this article meets the 5x criteria, even without most of the quotes in the 'railway minister' section. I don't care one way or the other if this DYK is accepted or not, as I have no ego. But I certainly feel that the article can be improved further, and would appreciate if you could chip in. --Tinpisa (talk) 12:19, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
Have nevertheless added sources after every sentence and removed the controversy section, per your objection.--Tinpisa (talk) 12:58, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
I didnt put CN tag after every line. I did only where it seemed that it was his actual quote. Quotes need citation. The year in which a politician changes party is important as his change is usually due to some party's action or the change usually triggers something else in future. And if the info is available in the source there is no harm in adding it in the article, as you did now. I dont see why you have to go all bold and strongly disagree with it. And with your reasoning why do we even write these articles then? Just give links to references and readers will go there. Lets be a search engine. But i still stand my comment on his quotes. In a year's career as Rail minister if we see 5-6 quotes like these on what he feels about government's policies, the article will be mess as he goes ahead in his career. Had they been any important ones i wouldnt have objected. For eg, why do we have to write a quote like this one; “When I came to the ministry, I found they [Railway Board and so on] were working in silos. I changed that, made the working more democratic and created greater synergy among different departments.” ? -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 13:41, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote4.png And as you feel that i have grudge against this article, i will ask someone else to review it. -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 13:41, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
It wasn't his quote. Clarified the issue. You have the right to hold your POV, while I can have mine. Differing POVs are important to make Wikipedia articles better, and that is why I invited you to improve the article. The particular quote that you have mentioned was provided to highlight that the minister believed each department in the railways was functioning as a separate entity/company (which he correctly identified as the malaise with the railways). Anyway, I would be extremely glad if you could help with the article. Even after taking away all the quotes from the 'railway minister' section, the article measures 4200+ characters. If you think removing the quotes would enhance the article, just go ahead. I'm not writing the article to please myself - am trying to help improve Wikipedia.--Tinpisa (talk) 14:32, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
I have removed all quotes in the referred section. Thanks.--Tinpisa (talk) 17:52, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Werner Schuster (politician)

( Review or commentArticle history )

Moshi, Tanzania, with Mount Kilimanjaro in the background

  • Comment: at 213 characters, the hook is too long. How about:
  • Symbol question.svg Length, date and picture are all fine. The hook (which is too long, see above) is in the citation given, but not clearly stated in the article. That is, it says he founded an organisation in Idstein, with the aim of achieving development projects in Moshi, but it does not say (as the source and hook do) that he established partnership between Idstein and Moshi. ALSO, I would avoid the phrase "civil partnership". StAnselm (talk) 03:05, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
  • This is a bad habit I must cure myself of. I caused the length problem by tweaking the hook to add the picture, editing it to try to keep within 200 characters, but not enough. (Sorry, Gerda!) Gerda's original hook was under the 200, as follows
    ... that Werner Schuster, who was concerned with health policy, Africa and the fight against AIDS as a member of the Bundestag, founded civil partnership between Idstein and Moshi in 1985?
    I have now edited the relevant paragraph in the article to bring it into line with all of the hooks suggested above, including Alt1, which is quite neat. I agree that "civic partnership" is a better translation of Bürgerpartnerschaft and have used that. Moonraker (talk) 05:49, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the above, including the word "civic"! Please let's try not to tweak hooks, rather provide alternatives, to keep the discussion transparent. Here is what I remember as the original which I prefer because it shows his standing as a member of parliament and his topics. Whoever doesn't know which mountain is on the pic can click. Much more could be said about him, for example "...that German politician Werner Schuster proposed that 10% of the gross national product of rich countries be spent on combatting poverty in the Third World?"
The original hook tweaked + pictured: ... that Werner Schuster, who in the Bundestag was concerned with health policy, Africa and the fight against AIDS, founded a civic partnership between Idstein in Germany and Moshi (pictured)? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:20, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Revolt (network), Aspire (network), El Rey (network)

( Review or comment )
( Article history links: Revolt (network)Aspire (network)El Rey (network) )

Eddie's House

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • Comment: This might be one to save for April Fools if reviewers think it would work better for that.

Created/expanded by Found5dollar (talk). Self nom at 05:08, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

*Reviewed: Super Hornio Brothers at April Fools DYK
Didnt review it fully yet. Either i am not well or this article definitely needs simplification. Opening sentence...complicated. Who are these Bergers? If you know, please add that. Who are these Jim and Eric Berger "who rebuilt the Eddie's house" in the lead para? Is Robert Berger, who was to built the house, also owner of the house? Or is he another Berger? It says that "In 1973 Eddies House was discarded." Discarded as in demolished, stopped to put to use? And you dont need to use Mr. Frank Llyod Wright's full name everytime. -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 16:14, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
I have gone in and reworked the Lead some. I would assume that Robert is the owner of the house as he is the father in this story, but I can not find anything saying explicitly who owned it. I know that Robert built it and lived in it, but can only assume that he owned it.--Found5dollar (talk) 14:07, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote4.png Okay! The lead looks okay now. Few more fixes required. The ref 1 of Architizer cant be used. Its a blog. 2 other refs of Huffington Post & Mercury News are good and probably sufficient too. So please replace that. The hook in itself is otherwise well referenced. As to your phrasing of the hook i am not sure. I dont mind it for April Fool's day. But would request some other editor to go through it. I am also not sure about it as the article of Wright itself doesnt say anything about the usual leakings in his architecture which are talked about in these sources. Also we dont know that this was his "best effort". Maybe he designed something that leaks just to ditch this kid Jim who would keep writing letters to him. Who knows?! -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 19:40, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Ok replying to your issues...Architizer's blog is a carefully curated architectural news blog with postings from architecture reporters and reviewers, and it is not true to say that "all blogs are not reliable sources." In my understanding of Wikipedia:Reliable_source_examples#Are_weblogs_reliable_sources.3F a blog like this would be considered reliable in this instance. I have added two references to Frank Lloyd Wrights leaky roof problem. to solve the "best effort problem howabout an alt like:

ALT1... that much like many of his other buildings, Frank Lloyd Wright designed a dog house with a leaky roof?--Found5dollar (talk) 03:10, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Symbol confirmed.svg Okay! Dont wanna go in those details of blog or what for sake of this DYK. Later even if the blog reference is removed i am sure all things that depend on it are covered by other two references of HP & MN. They almost have the full story covered. Your new references to leaky business are good and sufficient. I would also approve the Alt1 you suggested. But just as you wanted it to be for Fool's day how about this Alt2, combining both? Will leave it for the one who picks it.

ALT2 ... that much like many of his other buildings, Frank Lloyd Wright couldn't even design a dog house that didn't leak? --Animeshkulkarni (talk) 09:40, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

I like ALT2, and i am fine with saving it for fools day, but I'll leave that chouce up to reviewers, or the people that make the queues.--Found5dollar (talk) 13:46, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Dead Letters (Millennium)

( Review or commentArticle history )

Created/expanded by Grapple X (talk). Self nom at 04:47, 24 February 2012 (UTC) Symbol confirmed.svg Good to go.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:51, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Kelsey Wakefield

( Review or commentArticle history )

Kelsey Wakefield

  • Reviewed: Destruction of Stocking Frames, etc. Act 1812
  • Comment: Article created in user space. Expanded credited for helping copy edit. Bidgee credited for taking a picture specifically for article. Picture would be nice, but given the volume of DYK submissions, not required.

Created/expanded by LauraHale (talk), Bidgee (talk). Nominated by LauraHale (talk) at 01:03, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Good to go. Addition of photo is at admin's discretion.--Hallows AG (talk) 01:37, 24 February 2012 (UTC)


Ashleigh Southern, Nicola Zagame, Rowena Webster, Zoe Arancini, Glencora Ralph

( Review or comment )
( Article history links: Ashleigh SouthernNicola ZagameRowena WebsterZoe AranciniGlencora Ralph )

Nicola Zagame

  • Reviewed: 1933 Michigan Wolverines football team, Swedish Forn Sed Assembly, Walter D'Arcy Ryan, Serjeant (horse) & Saltram (horse)
  • Comment: Article created in user space. Expanded credited for helping copy edit. Bidgee credited for taking a picture specifically for article. Picture would be nice, but given the volume of DYK submissions, not required.

Created/expanded by LauraHale (talk), Bidgee (talk), Sp33dyphil (talk), and Hawkeye7 (talk). Nominated by LauraHale (talk) at 01:07, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg These 5 articles all qualify for DYK being long enough, new enough and within policy. The image is suitably licensed and the hook is suitably referenced. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:58, 28 February 2012 (UTC)


Hannah Buckling

( Review or commentArticle history )

Hannah Buckling

  • Reviewed: Pope (horse)
  • Comment: Article created in user space. Expanded credited for helping copy edit. Bidgee credited for taking a picture specifically for article. Picture would be nice, but given the volume of DYK submissions, not required.

Created/expanded by LauraHale (talk), Bidgee (talk). Nominated by LauraHale (talk) at 01:08, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol question.svg I think that you have the wrong link for ref 3. If not, then this reference has no mention of the fact in the hook.--Lionratz (talk) 10:53, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Erk. :( This may have been a bad URL and subsequently fixed. :( The version I have viewed says:
Coach helps pair break on through
Manly Daily (Sydney, Australia) - Wednesday, June 11, 2008
NEARLY two years ago Kayle Leathem and Hannah Buckling were simply going through the routine at Sydney Northern Beaches Breakers Water Polo Club. …. Ryan now believes the girls have the ability to keep improving, keep raising their standards. ``They have gone from non-water polo players to playing in the Australian 17s' team in 20 months of training, he said. That is what the text is referencing. --LauraHale (talk) 12:39, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting keep.svg AGF on offline sources.--Lionratz (talk) 12:24, 29 February 2012 (UTC)


Victoria Brown (water polo)

( Review or commentArticle history )

Victoria Brown

  • Reviewed: Cuyopsis
  • Comment: Article created in user space. Expanded credited for helping copy edit. Bidgee credited for taking a picture specifically for article. Picture would be nice, but given the volume of DYK submissions, not required.

Created/expanded by LauraHale (talk), Bidgee (talk), Hawkeye7 (talk). Nominated by LauraHale (talk) at 01:09, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Jane Moran

( Review or commentArticle history )

Jane Moran

  • Reviewed: Double Fine Adventure
  • Comment: Article created in user space. Expanded credited for helping copy edit. Bidgee credited for taking a picture specifically for article. Picture would be nice, but given the volume of DYK submissions, not required.

Created/expanded by LauraHale (talk), Bidgee (talk). Nominated by LauraHale (talk) at 01:10, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Holly Lincoln-Smith

( Review or commentArticle history )

Holly Lincoln-Smith

  • Reviewed: Hook and Ladder No. 4
  • Comment: Article created in user space. Expanded credited for helping copy edit. Bidgee credited for taking a picture specifically for article. Picture would be nice, but given the volume of DYK submissions, not required.

Created/expanded by LauraHale (talk), Bidgee (talk). Nominated by LauraHale (talk) at 01:11, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Alicia McCormack

( Review or commentArticle history )

Alicia McCormack

  • Reviewed: Aimwell
  • Comment: Alicia McCormack was expanded five fold. Expanded credited for helping copy edit. Bidgee credited for taking a picture specifically for article. Picture would be nice, but given the volume of DYK submissions, not required.

Created/expanded by LauraHale (talk), Bidgee (talk), Hawkeye7 (talk). Nominated by LauraHale (talk) at 01:12, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Charles Turner (water polo)

( Review or commentArticle history )

Created/expanded by LauraHale (talk), Hawkeye7 (talk). Nominated by LauraHale (talk) at 01:13, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Bronwen Knox

( Review or commentArticle history )

Bronwen Knox

  • Reviewed: Sadhana Shivdasani
  • Comment: Article expanded five gold. Expanded credited for helping copy edit (visible on user space draft). Bidgee credited for taking a picture specifically for article. Picture would be nice, but given the volume of DYK submissions, not required.

Created/expanded by LauraHale (talk), Bidgee (talk), Sp33dyphil (talk). Nominated by LauraHale (talk) at 01:16, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Kate Gynther, Rebecca Rippon, Melissa Rippon

( Review or comment )
( Article history links: Kate GyntherRebecca RipponMelissa Rippon )

Melissa Rippon

  • Reviewed: Needing/Getting, Jordy Mercer, Matt Hague
  • Comment: Articles expanded five gold. Expanded credited for helping copy edit (visible on user space draft). Bidgee credited for taking a picture specifically for article. Picture would be nice, but given the volume of DYK submissions, not required.

Created/expanded by LauraHale (talk), Bidgee (talk), Hawkeye7 (talk). Nominated by LauraHale (talk) at 01:18, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Isobel Bishop

( Review or commentArticle history )

Isobel Bishop

  • Reviewed: Piyale Pasha Mosque
  • Comment: Article expanded five gold. Expanded credited for helping copy edit (visible on user space draft). Bidgee credited for taking a picture specifically for article. Picture would be nice, but given the volume of DYK submissions, not required.

Created/expanded by LauraHale (talk), Bidgee (talk). Nominated by LauraHale (talk) at 01:18, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Teigan Van Roosmalen

( Review or commentArticle history )

Teigan Van Roosmalen

  • Reviewed: Berkeley Robotics and Human Engineering Laboratory
  • Comment: Article created in user space. Expanded credited for helping copy edit. Bidgee credited for taking a picture specifically for article. Picture would be nice, but given the volume of DYK submissions, not required.

Created/expanded by LauraHale (talk), Bidgee (talk), Hawkeye7 (talk). Nominated by LauraHale (talk) at 01:19, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Good to go – I can't see any problems.... --TIAYN (talk) 23:05, 24 February 2012 (UTC)


Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party – Syria Region

( Review or commentArticle history )

Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party – Syria Region logo

[edit] Current nominations

[edit] Articles created/expanded on February 25

St Margaret's Church, West Hoathly

( Review or commentArticle history )

View across the churchyard of St Margaret's Church, West Hoathly, West Sussex

Created/expanded by Hassocks5489 (talk). Self nom at 20:36, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg New enough, long enough, nuetral, inline citations, hook formatted okay, but I don't like the wording.
  • ALT:...that in the past every landowner in the parish of St Margaret's Church in West Hoathly, West Sussex, was responsible for maintaining a specific section of the churchyard wall (pictured)?
    • none of the beautiful images is fair use.
      • I would not quibble about the wording. It is up to you.--Ishtar456 (talk) 01:21, 1 March 2012 (UTC)


Great Wheal Fortune

( Review or commentArticle history )

Created/expanded by Jowaninpensans (talk), Zangar (talk). Nominated by Zangar (talk) at 18:48, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg long enough, new enough, nuetral, citations, no fair use, BUT Symbol question.svg Why does the lead say "spoil tips" when the article says "waste tips"? I think they should agree.--Ishtar456 (talk) 01:38, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Supercomputer operating systems

( Review or commentArticle history )

Cray-1

  • Comment 1: Here is the G-books link, to verify the hook. It is also in article.History2007 (talk) 03:27, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Comment 2: The hook is interesting because one does not usually hear of a computer getting shipped without an operating system. A somewhat advanced topic, but I think it is good to DYK it to note on the front page that Wikipedia does have scholarly content, and is not just about pop-culture items. History2007 (talk) 03:27, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
  • This new article is long enough and well cited. Checking for possible close paraphrasing and copyvios will take some time... Mgrē@sŏn 15:57, 29 February 2012 (UTC)


John King (racing driver)

( Review or commentArticle history )

Created/expanded by The Bushranger (talk). Self nom at 07:10, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol question.svg This article was actually started on Feb. 24, does that disqualify it? Can anyone say?
  • The article is cited, but I question the reliability of the source for the hook (I'm just not familiar that type of publication). I also wonder if the lead is interesting. Is it rare for that event to be won by someone who has only won twice before? (I really don't know) It seems to me that you have to start somewhere.--Ishtar456 (talk) 01:52, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
    • The first edit was at 03:28, 25 February 2012‎ (UTC). SPEED Channel is the cable, auto-racing division of Fox Sports, which, as part of a major network, is a very reliable source; note that the hook is also sourced to the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel. And to only have won twice at any level of racing, then win a race in a NASCAR national touring series (Sprint Cup Series, Nationwide Series, or Camping World Truck Series) is absolutely unheard of. - The Bushranger One ping only 02:48, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
      • Maybe our timezones are drastically different or some weird thing, but I see the fist edit as 22:28, February 24, 2012‎. No big deal, just one day. It is the only issue I have so if no one else has an issue. Symbol confirmed.svg good to go. --Ishtar456 (talk) 02:57, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Isinglass (horse)

( Review or commentArticle history )

Isinglass (1890–1911)

Created/expanded by Tigerboy1966 (talk). Nominated by PFHLai (talk) at 01:20, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol possible vote.svg There appears to be a copyright issue with the Epsom Derby image.
  • I took great pains to find that your expansion is almost 7 fold. (hee hee). I will continue the review if the image thing is not an issue. I love the topic and both hooks, especially #2. --Ishtar456 (talk) 02:15, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
  • The image has been there since 2007 and it's one of the few things left from the article before I expanded it. I'm going to take it out and put in a non-copyright pic of the horse's owner, Harry McCalmont. I think the second hook is better as it's more unusual: could I suggest that you add "...which stood for more than thirty twenty years"? (although admittedly that bit comes from an off-line print source).  Tigerboy1966  02:32, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
  • Another issue: The wording in the first sentences of the Background section: "Isinglass was powerfully-built bay horse standing 16 hands high,[2] bred by his owner Harry McCalmont. He was sired by the double Ascot Gold Cup winner Isonomy out of a mare named Deadlock."
  • Should be: "Isinglass was powerfully-built bay horse standing 16 hands high.[2] Bred by his owner Harry McCalmont, he was sired by the double Ascot Gold Cup winner Isonomy out of a mare named Deadlock." Don't you think?


Battle of Burton Bridge (1643)

( Review or commentArticle history )

Thomas Tyldesley in an 1831 illustration

Created/expanded by Dumelow (talk). Self nom at 23:24, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Hook: Short enough, interesting, cited. AGF as I am not in Britain and am not a subscriber.
Article: New enough, long enough. AGF on offline sources. What makes this a reliable source?
Symbol question.svg Hold pending clarification of source reliability. Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:41, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Hello. Nice work, looks to be sheer laziness on my part! That website is the work of a local amateur historian. He is not, as far as I know, a published author so I have replaced the parts sourced to his website with a better RS (the online version of a book on the history of the town). Cheers - Dumelow (talk) 11:30, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Well, it's still cited to the article for the plaque's date. Shouldn't the plaque itself be enough? Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:54, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Fair enough, have switched the ref over - Dumelow (talk) 13:12, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting keep.svg Good to go. AGF on offline and subscription sources. Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:00, 26 February 2012 (UTC)


Charles Cruft (showman)

( Review or commentArticle history )

Charles Cruft, pictured in 1902

  • Reviewed: 522666
  • Comment: Would be good for 11th March, as it'll be Crufts best in show day. Failing that, any point between the 8th and 11th as those are this year's show days.

Created/expanded by Miyagawa (talk). Self nom at 15:54, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Couple of alts:
    • I am going to start the review, but if you want it moved to March 8 for the reason stated why not:

... that Charles Cruft, the founder of the Cruft dog show, (pictured) invented special train carriages to carry dogs to his shows?--Ishtar456 (talk) 02:49, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Balinese literature

( Review or commentArticle history )

Created/expanded by Crisco 1492 (talk). Self nom at 15:13, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Estelle Manville

( Review or commentArticle history )

Estelle Bernadotte in 1949

  • Pictogram voting keep.svg New and long enough; sources look good except for the genealogy site (seems a little sketchy, but I'm not a professional there) -- I checked the NYT obituary and it listed the same information though, so it's good. AGF sourcing; I prefer the second hook (less speculative and more interesting to me at least); the image is sourced and public domain (Commons). Good to go. poroubalous (talk) 17:52, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Unfortunately, I don't think that it's true that she was "the first person ever to be married to a member of a European royal family on American soil" -- see previous comment at Talk:Estelle Bernadotte. AnonMoos (talk) 03:23, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
  • I see your point after reading over the Bonaparte article; AGF, the hook source probably does say the fact, it's just that the author of that source might not have known about Bonaparte or not considered her a true royal. As for the alternate hooks, the link citing the unmarked burial didn't work for me, but the cerebral palsy foundation hook is cited and works properly. Would that work for everyone? poroubalous (talk) 15:38, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
  • I agree, all blurbs should be rock solid. So I suggest that the cerebral palsy foundation hook be picked. As her name was Bernadotte at the time, I changed the name and image. --Bruzaholm (talk) 10:04, 29 February 2012 (UTC)


Melithaea ochracea

( Review or commentArticle history )

Knotted fan coral

Created/expanded by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self nom at 09:26, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Lots that's good, but it seems a pity to be promoting coral jewellery. Indeed, of the references, one is a blog, one a trade magazine, and the last a completely unacceptable dealer that also sells looted (or fake) Gandharan art, 77.96.78.61 (talk) 09:55, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
  • What you say may be true but my suggested hook only states that the coral is used in jewellery. Another, not very interesting, hook could be


Dulje

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • ... that one can almost see the whole of Metohija (1,290 sq mi) from the heights of Dulje? Created/expanded by Zoupan (talk). Self nom at 07:38, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
  • I disagree. Radovanovic is not cited in the article. Nusic's involvement in the Black Hand does not discredit him as a source, his work on Kosovo (which Dulje is situated in) is cited by Oliver Schmitt (professor of South-East European history) and Robert Elsie (an expert in Albanian studies, Kosovo region), and Todor Stankovic (quoted above) is a primary source (he wrote a diary of his 27 years travelling southern Sebria, Kosovo, Macedonia). In what way is the officer's account unreliable? I will add Nusic original publication year.--Zoupan (talk) 10:00, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Specialized Criminal Court

( Review or commentArticle history )

Created/expanded by Boud (talk). Self nom at 04:15, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on February 26

W. B. Thompson Mansion

( Review or commentArticle history )

Front of mansion, 2009

Created/expanded by Daniel Case (talk). Self nom at 01:00, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

R Force

( Review or commentArticle history )

R Force insignia

Created/expanded by Hawkeye7 (talk). Self nom at 20:59, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Pictogram voting keep.svg Length and history verified; ref accepted GF. But the hook is kind of a dull ... a unit named "X Force" would have to have been some kind of force. How about:
  • ALT1: ... that the 'R' in the World War II British deception unit R Force (unit patch pictured) was meant to make the Germans believe it was a reconnaissance unit?
    • Sure! Let's go with ALT1. Hawkeye7 (talk) 01:46, 1 March 2012 (UTC)


Siegfried Rapp

( Review or commentArticle history )

AYUSH-ISHA Organic Health Systems

( Review or commentArticle history )

Map showing location of Kolli Hills

Created/expanded by Regstuff (talk). Self nom at 03:36, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Humboldt Box

( Review or commentArticle history )

The "Humboldt-Box" opening on June, 2011

  • ... that the Humboldt Box (pictured) is a new, futuristic 5-story museum in Berlin, Germany that is slated to be dismantled in a few years? Created/expanded by Ultracobalt (talk). Self nom at 22:19, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Not long enough. Currently has 1190 prose characters of the 1500 required. MANdARAX  XAЯAbИAM 08:00, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Thanks for input - article updated.--- Ultracobalt (talk) 09:57, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote4.png Length is fine now. This appears to be the user's first DYK, so no reciprocal review is required. (Welcome to DYK!) I've changed "will be" to "is slated to be" in the hook, because one never knows what will happen – the Eiffel Tower was supposed to be dismantled after 20 years! Everything looks fine to me, but most of the references are in German, so I'll leave it to someone who understands German to verify the hook's refs and complete the review. MANdARAX  XAЯAbИAM 20:45, 28 February 2012 (UTC)


Dudley Doust

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • ... that American sports-writer Dudley Doust once moved, along with his wife and daughter, to a mud-hut in Mexico to attempt to write a novel?

Created/expanded by Harrias (talk). Self nom at 21:00, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Marinens Flyvebaatfabrikk M.F.5

( Review or commentArticle history )

Created/expanded by Manxruler (talk). Self nom at 00:45, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Trypauchen vagina

( Review or commentArticle history )

Created/expanded by Obsidian Soul (talk). Self nom at 23:42, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Article is fine and cited, hook is fine, short enough, and cited. I do suggest you tweak the wording a bit and nominate it for April Fools. What a pro (talk, contribs) is on fire. 08:19, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Stratiotosuchus

( Review or commentArticle history )

Stratiotosuchus maxhechti

Created/expanded by Smokeybjb (talk). Self nom at 21:38, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Well sourced, hook good and confirmed on source, strongly recommend that the picture be used. Good to go.-- OBSIDIANSOUL 23:40, 26 February 2012 (UTC)


Dead Man Walking (Body of Proof)

( Review or commentArticle history )

Actress Christina Hendricks

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Article meets all requirements, however a fair use image cannot be used in DYK, so I've taken the liberty of replacing it with the other image from the article. Miyagawa (talk) 17:57, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I agree, I do prefer ALT1. Thanks, MayhemMario 17:57, 27 February 2012 (UTC)


The Bells Sketch, CMYK (EP), Klavierwerke

( Review or comment )
( Article history links: The Bells SketchCMYK (EP)Klavierwerke )

A man sings to a microphone in front of a blue green background.


Nemoe Karma, I Wayan Gobiah

( Review or comment )
( Article history links: Nemoe KarmaI Wayan Gobiah )

Homaxinella balfourensis

( Review or commentArticle history )

Created/expanded by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self nom at 09:21, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol question.svg The hook, source, length, and date of creation are all good, but right now the article doesn't specifically say that the sponge uses its antifreeze to prevent crystal formation (it says that crystal formation can damage the sponge in the Biology section, and that the sponge produces antifreeze in the Research section). Smokeybjb (talk) 21:30, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
  • I have rewritten these 2 sections to clarify that anchor ice is a quite different phenomenon to ice forming inside the sponge's cells. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:29, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

The Source (Ingres)

( Review or commentArticle history )

The Source by Ingres

I reviewed Template:Did you know nominations/Itō Chūta --SupernovaExplosion Talk 04:36, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
  • ALT2... that Ingres's 1856 painting The Source (pictured), depicting a nude woman holding a pitcher, is described as "the most beautiful figure in French painting"? --SupernovaExplosion Talk 04:55, 26 February 2012 (UTC)


Ginkgo dissecta

( Review or commentArticle history )

Ginkgo dissecta leaf

  • ... that the name Ginkgo dissecta was first coined in 1974 but not formalized until 2002?
  • Reviewed: Pictetia
  • Comment: 5x expansion, see page 1082 of Mustoe

Created/expanded by Kevmin (talk). Self nom at 03:07, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting keep.svg A 5x expansion that is both long enough and new enough. The hook reference is offline but accepted in good faith. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:40, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Image added!Symbol redirect vote4.png --Kevmin § 15:04, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Palestinian Civil Police Force

( Review or commentArticle history )

[edit] Articles created/expanded on February 27

Chardon High School shooting

( Review or commentArticle history )

Reviewed Woodford, Wiltshire --Ishtar456 (talk) 01:45, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Rhinecanthus verrucosus, Acanthurus guttatus, Zebrasoma scopas, Pomacanthus xanthometopon, Pomacanthus semicirculatus

( Review or comment )
( Article history links: Rhinecanthus verrucosusAcanthurus guttatusZebrasoma scopasPomacanthus xanthometoponPomacanthus semicirculatus )

Juvenile Pomacanthus semicirculatus

Created/expanded by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self nom at 20:28, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Quintuple hook verified online, articles ready, img good, all articles variously confirmed to be above 1500 prose or 5x expanded by DYKcheck! Rcej (Robert)talk 12:05, 29 February 2012 (UTC)


Great Dismal Swamp maroons

( Review or commentArticle history )

Great Dismal Swamp Maroon 1856

  • ... that thousands of escaped slaves, the Great Dismal Swamp maroons (pictured), settled in the marshlands of today's Virginia and North Carolina between the 17th century and 1865?
  • Reviewed: Nosa Igiebor (journalist)
  • Comment: I rescued this article from the sandbox of PumpkinSky who is blocked, did you know? I thought it's too precious to wait there for an unblock. The CCI was completed, 719 of 729 articles in half a year found with no problems. Please also look at a pumpkin-coloured sky, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:30, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Created/expanded by PumpkinSky (talk), Gerda Arendt (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 13:30, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

  • A very nice article; thank you. Alarbus (talk) 14:02, 28 February 2012 (UTC)


Journey into Space (book)

( Review or commentArticle history )

Created/expanded by SpeakFree (talk). Self nom at 02:25, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting keep.svg The article relies on only two sources. There are plenty of sources available [3], could you please add some more sources? Otherwise the article is long-enough, and the hook is referenced. --SupernovaExplosion Talk 09:49, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
  • I just added a few sources. Hope it passes muster now. Thanks for your input!SpeakFree (talk)(contribs) 16:56, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Kugelbake

( Review or commentArticle history )

The Kugelbake

  • ... that Kugelbake is the name of a series of tall wooden structures (current structure pictured) built at the mouth of the River Elbe for over 300 years to aid mariners? Created/expanded by Ultracobalt (talk). Self nom at 03:47, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svgMost intriguing work! I've tweaked the hook a bit for better grammar. Date and size are OK< however there are several unreferenced paragraphs in the article - these need referencing before the article can appear on DYK. - The Bushranger One ping only 18:25, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Thanks! Hook is definitely better. I adjusted the article - I realized there were 2 references I had placed the external links section which should've been inlines, added new info on the radio experiments, and deleted the small paragraph on the first Kugelbake vessel because I couldn't verify it. I think it's fixed as much as it can be...

- Ultracobalt (talk) 23:39, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Engaña Tunnel

( Review or commentArticle history )

A picture of the southern entrance to the Engaña Tunnel.

Created by Drunt (talk), Anna Frodesiak (talk). Nominated by Drunt (talk) at 20:20, 27 February 2012 (UTC)


Crissi Cochrane

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • ... that Crissi Cochrane reached the #5 in the Canada national folk chart for campus/community radio? Created/expanded by Ceigareit (talk). Nominated by Pikks (talk) at 13:05, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Loin Like a Hunting Flame

( Review or commentArticle history )

Created/expanded by Grapple X (talk). Self nom at 04:19, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Le Pouce

( Review or commentArticle history )

The summit of Le Pouce

  • Symbol question.svg The reference used to support the hook is a weak source. Mauritius Attractions is a commercial travel company, and should not be used to support such an important historical claim. There is no evidence that the website has an editorial board or fact-checking mechanism. Could you cite a scholarly book or mainstream newspaper article for the claim? --SupernovaExplosion Talk 03:37, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
I can only find a bunch of weak sources like [link removed due to being on a blacklisted website], this, and this. In Google Books, I found books that say "he climbed it on the 2nd of May" and leave it at that. The tricky part is that I keep getting French books about thumbs instead of what I want. Maybe an alternate hook? BCS (Talk) 00:06, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Neither of the sources, which you linked above, is reliable source. Suggest an alternate hook. --SupernovaExplosion Talk 01:46, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

ALT1: ... that Le Pouce is named after its thumb-like peak (pictured)? BCS (Talk) 02:45, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Francis Verney

( Review or commentArticle history )

Did you know that this oil painting of English adventurer Sir Francis Verney has been displayed at the Verney family estate, Claydon House, for over 400 years?

  • ... that following a legal dispute with his stepmother over his inheritance English adventurer Sir Francis Verney left England to become a Barbary corsair?

Created/expanded by 71.184.38.227 (talk). Self nom at 00:30, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Richard Jasek

( Review or commentArticle history )

[edit] Articles created/expanded on February 28

Malcolm X (1972 film)

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • ... that the 1972 documentary film Malcolm X was originally supposed to be a drama?

Created/expanded by Malik Shabazz (talk). Self nom at 04:36, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Organic dust toxic syndrome

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • ... that Organic dust toxic syndrome is a flu-like illness caused by inhaling organic dust particles such as grain kernel fragments, bits of insects, bacteria, fungal spores, molds or chemical residues?

Created/expanded by Casliber (talk). Self nom at 20:10, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Tree Hill Nature Center

( Review or commentArticle history )

Created/expanded by Mgreason (talk). Self nom at 15:23, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Wilsonville Public Library

( Review or commentArticle history )

Created/expanded by Aboutmovies (talk). Self nom at 07:53, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

The Well-Worn Lock

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • ... that Paul Dooley's portrayal of a child molester in "The Well-Worn Lock" "eventually stops being horrifying and becomes preposterous" by the end of the episode?

Created/expanded by Grapple X (talk). Self nom at 22:34, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg all good to go; hook, length, date, etc. all pass. Aboutmovies (talk) 07:37, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Society Hill (Body of Proof)

( Review or commentArticle history )

Joanna Cassidy


Teaserama

( Review or commentArticle history )

Film poster for Teaserama

  • ... that Teaserama (poster pictured) featured a man in drag dancing in a manner erotic to heterosexual men?
  • ALT1:... that the 1955 film Teaserama (poster pictured) featured a man in drag as "gender sabotage" against the prevailing sexual norms of the time?

Created/expanded by Crisco 1492 (talk). Self nom at 12:55, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Montecristo

( Review or commentArticle history )

Montecristo seen from a boat

  • ... that the Italian island of Montecristo (pictured), although 10.39 km2 (4.01 sq mi) in area, is almost deserted, having only two stable inhabitants?

Created/expanded by Alessandro57 (talk). Self nom at 10:39, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

And I Thank You

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • Comment: Is the hyphen in "Newmarket, Ontario-based" correct? It looks odd. In addition, the "!?" at the end is kind of awkward, maybe the exclamation mark should be taken out? Although technically it is part of the title. Also, maybe we could wikilink Canadian albums to Music of Canada, or is that too much of a stretch?

Created/expanded by Mr. Absurd (talk). Self nom at 06:12, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Carmen Balcells

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • ... that literary agent Carmen Balcells represents six Nobel Prize winners?
  • Comment: Article created in my userspace on February 27, 2012 moved to mainspace on February 28, 2012

Created/expanded by GroveGuy (talk). Self nom at 03:43, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Nudes-A-Poppin'

( Review or commentArticle history )

Created/expanded by SupernovaExplosion (talk). Self nom at 03:46, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Suggesting that pic to go on main page you really want a Supernova Explosion do you? :) -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 10:05, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
Full-frontal nudity is not allowed in the main page (except for art work). Which is why I chose this image out of other photos of the festival all of which depict fill-frontal nudity. --SupernovaExplosion Talk 10:19, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
On a second thought, I searched the archive from previous discussions, and found Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know/Archive_47#Appropriate_for_the_main_page.3F. Images showing nudity creates a lot of controversy, and I don't want to get entangled in such a controversy. So removing the image. --SupernovaExplosion Talk 11:15, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
WOW, after going through all the discussions (here, (here, here) I am afraid hook like this may cause controversy. I don't want to see any stir. Should have asked in the discussion page before making the suggestion. Withdrawing nomination. --SupernovaExplosion Talk 11:39, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
Symbol delete vote.svg Nomination withdrawn. Please archive this discussion. --SupernovaExplosion Talk 11:40, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
Reopening nomination per this discussion. --SupernovaExplosion Talk 05:44, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg Had a look when this first went up (of course I did); and it looks good (of course it does). However, the website citations will require |accessdate= parameters to be filled in, and publication dates where possible. Looks grand otherwise, should be an interesting entry alright. Any of the suggested hooks should do grand. GRAPPLE X 06:51, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg Done. --SupernovaExplosion Talk 08:24, 29 February 2012 (UTC)


The Judge (Millennium)

( Review or commentArticle history )

Created/expanded by Grapple X (talk). Self nom at 02:42, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on February 29

Public Security Forces

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • Comment: This article had CV issue before and it has been resolved. I have less than 5 DYK credit.

Created/expanded by Bahraini Activist (talk). Self nom at 18:49, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

7.2-Inch Demolition Rocket

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • ... that the T37 rocket could be fired by "Cowcatcher", "Woofus", "Whiz Bang" and "Grand Slam"?

Created/expanded by The Bushranger (talk). Self nom at 18:27, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Illegality in Singapore administrative law

( Review or commentArticle history )

Created/expanded by Alex.ng.2009 (talk), Claire.lopez (talk), Glen.chiang.2009 (talk), Pradeepconstiadmin (talk), Quekjieying (talk), and Yokteng.sim.2009 (talk). Nominated by Smuconlaw (talk) at 17:41, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Arthur Keily

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • ... that Arthur Keily ran over 130 miles (210 km) a week as part of his regimen to train for marathons?

Created/expanded by Canadian Paul (talk). Self nom at 17:32, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

American Peace Crusade

( Review or commentArticle history )

Weeds (Millennium)

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • ... that the setting of the Millennium episode "Weeds" "simmers with recrimination and vigilantism"?

Created/expanded by Grapple X (talk). Self nom at 06:59, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Walter Diesendorf

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • ... that Walter Diesendorf was employed to perform abstruse technical calculations which could not be done by an ordinary engineer in Australia or anywhere else? Created/expanded by Amandajm (talk). Self nom at 01:52, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Length, date, format, hook's references are all GO. Nice to read an article about a fellow Engineer! Alex2006 (talk) 06:33, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on March 1

[edit] Special occasion holding area

Please do not nominate new articles for a special time in this section. Instead, nominate them in the nominations section above, under the date the article was created or the expansion began, and indicate your request for a specially timed appearance on the main page.
Note: Articles nominated for a special occasion should be nominated (i) within five days of creation or expansion, as usual, and (ii) between five days and six weeks before the occasion, to give reviewers time to check the nomination. April Fools' Day is an exception to these requirements; see Wikipedia:April Fool's Main Page/Did You Know'.

[edit] Month of March (Women's History Month in U.S. and U.K.)

Use these any time during the month. Women's History Month is related to, but different from, International Women's Day on March 8.

Charleston Female Seminary, Charlestown Female Seminary, Female seminary

( Review or comment )
( Article history links: Charleston Female SeminaryCharlestown Female SeminaryFemale seminary )

Charleston Female Seminary, building by John Henry Devereux

  • Looks like a candidate for Women's History Day in March! --Orlady (talk) 19:36, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
  • An interesting set of articles, as indicated by my note about saving the hook for Women's History Day -- and the fact that I've now added several additional articles to Category:Female seminaries in the United States. All three are new enough and long enough.
  • My face is red. Women's History Month is in October. March 8 is International Women's Day, which isn't such a good match for this article. --Orlady (talk) 19:36, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
  • No, you were right the first time. In India, it's in October, but in the US (relevant here) and UK, it's in March. LadyofShalott 19:58, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Thank you for sorting that out for me. Sigh! --Orlady (talk) 04:56, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg However, I find myself with a bunch of questions and concerns about the articles and the hook. Let's start with the hook: It's clear from the articles that both of these schools were "female seminaries" in the 19th century, but I don't see anything in the articles or sources that indicates that these particular schools were "spawned" by the "cultural phenomenon". For that matter, the idea of "cultural phenomenon" seems a bit overblown. The story here is that, over a period of 5 decades in different parts of the U.S., a small number of schools were established to provide women with the kind of education that had previously been reserved for men. An important movement, yes -- but a "phenomenon"?!?
In the articles, I am struck by the large number of quotations in such short articles. Female seminary has nine quotations, none of which is identified as to the speaker. Some of the quotations indicate some sort of judgment, but most are statements of fact. I looked to see who was being quoted, and I find that several of the quotations are from this webpage, which is hosted at a reputable educational institution, but seems to be anonymously authored. This strikes me as excessive -- and sloppy -- use of direct quotations. Additionally, when I looked up the sources of some statements that struck me as oddly worded (for example, that Emma Willard's school "is hailed as the first institute..."), I found that the sources cited did not support the statements. (I've long thought that Emma Willard's school was the first of its kind, but "hailed" seemed like an odd way to describe that, and the source cited doesn't even say her school was first, much less "hailed." Additionally, this other webpage suggests that someone else's school came first.)
Charleston Female Seminary has 7 direct quotations. I was particularly bothered by a statement that also appears in Female seminary -- that southern seminaries were "among the most advanced in the country". That's a judgment, so I want to know who said it, but it's that same largely anonymous website. Further, since that quotation (and the entire paragraph) is about female seminaries in the South before the Civil War, it's not clear that it's relevant to a seminary that opened in 1870.
Finally, Charleston Female Seminary (Massachusetts) seems choppy and disjointed -- and I am wondering if the school was truly named "Charleston," since it was in the place known primarily as "Charlestown" and one source calls the school "Charlestown Female Seminary."
Bottom line: Both the articles and the hook need some further development -- but if we hold this until March 8, there will be time to do things right. --Orlady (talk) 04:06, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks Orlady. I'm going to have to ponder this. One quick note: Female seminary certainly needs developing: I wrote it quickly to make a blue link, and it needs to be much bigger, that's for sure. Now, I don't agree that every quote needs to be attributed in-text; many of them are general historical observations rather than interpretations or opinions. I'll get on it. I hope the Lady is watching this also--the two seminaries are her (and 13's) brainchild more then mine. Drmies (talk) 05:17, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
Moved the Charleston Female Seminary (Massachusetts) to Charlestown Female Seminary (Massachusetts). Even though internet archive lists the primary source as "Charleston" the book itself used "Charlestown". I would call the former a typographical error which we ought not repeat. 7&6=thirteen () 09:52, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
Added text to Charlestown Female Seminary (Massachusetts) concerning the predecessor to it, which had been founded 2 years before, educated both Catholic and Protestant girls (had a sterling reputation) and was burnt by an angry intolerant mob in 1834. Fully referenced. 7&6=thirteen () 10:15, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Alt1 Symbol question.svg ... that development of female seminaries in nineteenth-century America spawned similarly named institutions in Charleston, South Carolina (pictured), and Charlestown, Massachusetts?

  • Symbol question.svg Almost there. Between recent efforts by the creators and editing I did within the last few hours, the concerns I had with the articles are mostly resolved. My only remaining concern is that I have not seen any sources (neither in the article nor anywhere else) that connect the Charleston (South Carolina) Female Seminary to the "female seminary" movement described in the articles. The name certainly is suggestive of a relationship, but similarity of names doesn't constitute reliable sourcing for a hook fact.
PS - There seem to be a lot of good sources on the general topic of "female seminaries" cited in the various articles in the "Female seminaries in the United States" category. --Orlady (talk) 04:56, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
Added the citations per your suggestion. Rewrote couple of paragraphs on female seminaries generally. These new sources, however, don't mention the Charleston Female Seminary by name. 7&6=thirteen () 09:08, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I knew those sources didn't mention Charleston Female Seminary. I did manage to find one source that had more information about CFS; that makes me feel better about the article. Apparently the South Carolina Encyclopedia (not available electronically) has content about it, too.
The only remaining issue is the hook fact. We need a hook that doesn't indicate a cause-and-effect relationship that can't be supported by sources. Here's one idea:
  • Symbol confirmed.svg I think this one is ready (but other eyes are always welcome). IMO, it should run during the month of March -- Women's History Month in the U.S. --Orlady (talk) 04:06, 12 February 2012 (UTC)


Ladies Memorial Association

( Review or commentArticle history )

Confederate Memorial Monument in Montgomery, Alabama

  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Elma Yerburgh. Also, I'd like File:Confederate Memorial at Alabama State Capitol Apr2009.jpg in there (pictured: Confederate Memorial in Montgomery, Alabama) but I had already filled out the template; I don't know how to stick it in. Your help is appreciated! Created/expanded by Drmies (talk). Self nom at 19:06, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Done, but your requested "pictured" would have been way over the length limit. The one I inserted just barely fits. MANdARAX  XAЯAbИAM 21:06, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Well done, Mandarax--thank you so much. Drmies (talk) 22:13, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg It looks mostly OK apart from the referencing format. Please prefix the bare page numbers with "p." and where you reference multiple sources by the same author you should be using the format name (year), page number rather than adding a book title in quotation marks. For instance, Janney, "Burying the Dead" 39 should be rendered as Janney (2008), p. 39. Prioryman (talk) 20:22, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
  • My formatting follows MLA guidelines as closely as possible, thank you. Drmies (talk) 20:26, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Hmmm, I generally do that (i.e. use p. and pp. to prefix pages and page ranges respectively for books (but not journals), and stick a date in parentheses for the two Janney thingies), but have not seen any hard-and-fast rules on it, nor have I reviewed Drmies work before (or have I ....can't recall...). I guess if it were me in this position, I'd just tweak all the referencing as Prioryman suggests as it will only take a few minutes, especially given as that is what I have seen almost everywhere else, but technically if we have a page with a legitimate alternative notation then theoretically it can be left I guess......? Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:01, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
  • I use this system for everything I write that stands a decent chance of being expanded significantly, especially if it's an article that relies on scholarly publications for references. The most recent example that was W. R. van Hoëvell, a DYK in December, and now a GA. Likewise with two other GAs, Battle of Brunanburh (poem) and Guillaume de Dole. My style uses strict MLA formatting with footnoted references and a bibliography; what's not MLA is the date in the bibliographical entry but that's because our citation template dictates it. I'm in English, and MLA is what we use; moreover, Help:Citation Style 1 is very clear on the matter: "Editors may choose any style they want." I don't wish to change it. I do, however, wish to make a request--that the article is saved for 8 March, International Women's Day. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 05:28, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
  • I have to agree with Drmies here, there is no "one style to rule them all" for citations. As long as it is consistent in an article. Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:47, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg The citation style was not always consistent, and the lack of "page" before the numbers confused me. I went ahead and reformatted the references, including the full name of the books (not including subtitles). Hook ref is verified. Good to go. Yoninah (talk) 19:07, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Thanks, I guess. The format was consistent, though, and millions of MLA users have no problems with it. If two or more books or articles by the same author are used, they are distinguished by the title or a clear abbreviation thereof. Drmies (talk) 22:50, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Octavia Walton Le Vert

( Review or commentArticle history )

1833 oil painting by Thomas Sully of Octavia Celestia Valentine Walton, later known as Madame Le Vert

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Looks like it all checks out to me (picture's grand too); but if I was reviewing this for GA I'd suggest removing some of the inserts (one picture and one quote box probably), so that might be something to bear in mind for the future. Should this be held for IWD or just left to run any time in Women's History Month? GRAPPLE X 19:01, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the review. I am happy with March 8th, or any time in March, particularly March 17th (her name means "Mrs Green") or March 12th (the 135th anniversary of her death).
BTW, I also have an alt.hook:
  • ALT1... that Edgar Allan Poe once wrote a poem to Octavia Walton, better known as the Alabama writer Madame Le Vert (pictured), with a line that says, "But Octavia, do not strive to rob my heart..."?
--PFHLai (talk) 11:41, 25 February 2012 (UTC)


[edit] March 1 (St David's Day)

Cardiff town walls

( Review or commentArticle history )

Medieval town wall Cardiff 002.jpg

  • ... that only two sections of the medieval Cardiff town walls survive, one of which supports a flower bed (pictured)? Created/expanded by Seth Whales (talk). Self nom at 23:59, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
  • I have no objection to this going into the Special occasion holding area under March 1st (St David's Day). Note: Cardiff is the capital city of Wales (St David is the patron saint of Wales). SethWhales talk 20:52, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Article is long enough, appropriately dated, and well sourced, with no apparent policy issues. The hook is suitable, and properly cited. The image is in the public domain. The only stumbling block is the QPQ requirement. --Stemonitis (talk) 16:07, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg All criteria now satisfied. --Stemonitis (talk) 19:20, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Moving to St David's Day holding area. Miyagawa (talk) 10:31, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Symbol delete vote.svg This article uses phrasings quite close at places to those used by its sources. Compare for example "From the 18th century, the deterioration of the town wall progressed rapidly. It collapsed in sections due to neglect, and stones were then used as building material for other structures. It had become common practice for sections of the the wall to be leased to burgesses (freemen of the town), which increased the rate of decline of the wall still further. Some of the wall was used to support the Glamorganshire Canal embankment" in the article with "From the 18th century onward the decline of Cardiff’s town wall progressed rapidly. It collapsed in sections due to neglect and its stones were used as building material for other purposes in the town...it had become fair practice by then to lease sections of the wall to burgesses, thus speeding up the disappearance of the structure. Some of the wall material was used quite legitimately to support the Glamorganshire Canal embankment". Nikkimaria (talk) 16:21, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Morgraig Castle

( Review or commentArticle history )

Morgraig Castle

  • ... that there is no evidence to suggest that the 13th-century Morgraig Castle (pictured) in Wales was ever completed or occupied? Created/expanded by Seth Whales (talk). Self nom at 13:24, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Comment: Can I suggest if approved that this should be selected for St David's Day holding area.
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Article (created yesterday) is long enough, neutral and well-cited. Hook is interesting and cited. Copyvio check finds none, and image has CCA Share-alike license 2.0 so can be used. Ready to go. Moonraker (talk) 04:27, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
Agree with the move to future holding area, though there are already some 2-3 articles there. also would reword the blurb to say something like "it is unlikly that the 13th0century..." or that there is currently no evidence...Lihaas (talk) 06:35, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
Okay, how about:
  • ALT1:... that it is unlikely that the 13th-century Morgraig Castle (pictured) in Wales was ever completed or occupied?
  • ALT2:... that there is currently no evidence that the 13th-century Morgraig Castle (pictured) in Wales was ever completed or occupied?
Symbol possible vote.svg I am uneasy about ALT1, as "it is unlikely that" gets us into probability. We don't seem to have the evidence to go that far. Moonraker (talk) 18:00, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg ALT2 is an improvement on the first hook. Happy to approve that. Moonraker (talk) 18:00, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Symbol possible vote.svg I am concerned that some of the phrasings used in this article may be too close to those of this source. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:05, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Symbol redirect vote4.png I did some rewriting - please could this be re-reviewed in hopes of again making it into a prep for 1 March, St David's Day? Yngvadottir (talk) 16:05, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg Good rewrite - that's fixed it. I don't see any paraphrasing issues now (not including direct quotes). The ALT2 hook is good to go. Cheers, Zangar (talk) 18:57, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Symbol possible vote.svg Er, no, it hasn't, there's still close paraphrasing from the source I pointed out. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:58, 29 February 2012 (UTC)


[edit] March 5 (St Piran's Day)

Penhale Sands

( Review or commentArticle history )

Sand dunes and beach at Penhale Sands

Created/expanded by Jowaninpensans (talk), Zangar (talk). Nominated by Zangar (talk) at 10:53, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Pictogram voting keep.svg Good to go. Reccomend holding it until March 5 as per the nominator's suggestion. Óðinn (talk) 03:37, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
As reviewer agrees, I'll move this to the holding area. Zangar (talk) 14:11, 21 January 2012 (UTC)


Ventongimps Moor

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • Reviewed: Monmouthshire Beacon
  • Comment: Another DYK that might be eligible for 5 March special occasion holding area.

Created/expanded by Zangar (talk). Self nom at 16:52, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Date and length check out, spotchecks show no evidence of copyvio, hook is interesting enough and cited in article. Good to go. Khazar (talk) 11:47, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Ictis

( Review or commentArticle history )

St Michael's Mount, favoured by some scholars as the location of Ictis

Created/expanded by Moonraker (talk). Self nom at 14:24, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg An interesting article. New enough, long enough and within policy in that it fairly states several points of view. Hook is suitably supported. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:31, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
Moved to St Piran's Day holding area, as hook is Cornish related. Zangar (talk) 16:48, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
If it helps to relate this hook to others saved for St Piran's Day, we could add to the end of it "in Cornwall". Moonraker (talk) 20:35, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
Good idea - I've added it. Cheers, Zangar (talk) 15:56, 20 February 2012 (UTC)


[edit] March 8 (International Women's Day)

Articles about women's history, in general, may be appropriate at other times of the month of March, which is Women's History Month in several countries.

Eliza Barchus

( Review or commentArticle history )

Eliza Barchus

  • Comment: This could be good for International Women's Day on March 8.

Created/expanded by Finetooth (talk). Nominated by Orlady (talk) at 15:32, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Oops, I didn't realize that you, Orlady, were actually the nominator. Sorry! Jsayre64 (talk) 02:00, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting keep.svg Date and size fine. Hook facts are cited in the article. AGF offline reference. Picture license seems good. Oceanh (talk) 00:28, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Christa Reinig

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • ... that the lesbian German writer Christa Reinig stated in a poem, "Sometimes the gay shirt is closer to me than the feminist skirt"?
  • Comment: I'm intending this one for International Women's Day on March 8

Created/expanded by Yngvadottir (talk). Self nom at 05:57, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Nice hook, citations check out, article checks out, no copyright violation although the wording in places could be arguably more different (I suggest a thorough copyedit for this purpose). - Jarry1250 [Deliberation needed] 17:44, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks! I have now reviewed Anne Fogarty for the quid pro quo. I'll go ahead and move this one into the special holding section for International Women's Day. I'm sorry you found overly close wording - please feel free to tweak it; I presume you mean in translations, since almost all the sources for this article are in German. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:13, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I was appreciative of the fact that it is sometimes very difficult to get away from the wording, but I do think the article would benefit from a copyedit anyway, which I shall leave to a more experienced editor. Review now done, so good to go :) - Jarry1250 [Deliberation needed] 00:16, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Anne Fogarty

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • ... that after winning the 1957 Cotton Fashion Award, designer Anne Fogarty showed off dresses in goldfish colours?
  • Reviewed: Brigitte (dog)
  • Comment: A whimsical little hook - there are several other options, but I couldn't resist the goldfish...

Created/expanded by Mabalu (talk). Self nom at 04:04, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg New enough, long enough, cute hook, supported. The article is clearly written, well organized, neutral, and seems to cover the topic adequately (I am no fashion expert). I checked about half the references (I was able to find all the newspaper reports I looked for online, one syndicated in a different paper under a different headline) and found no copyvio. I do wonder what the source was for the information on her last, freelance collection, I couldn't find the sheath dresses in the cited source, and I would render "less serious" as "fun" fabrics rather than "practical," but these are small quibbles; the article is well referenced overall. Might it not be a good idea to convert to US spelling/usage given the topic?
Would you like this one to go up on International Women's Day on March 8, or would you prefer not? Yngvadottir (talk) 21:08, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Good point re the US spelling! I'll get onto that. Also thanks for the catch on the high waisted sheath dress reference - I think that was from a page that was decided not to be a reliable source and the references got a bit mixed up. The last freelance collection ref was also from that page, so I think I will just remove it if I can't find anything online - she died in January '80 so I don't think she had much time to do any designing that year. International Women's Day would be good if you think this is appropriate. Thank you for the feedback. Mabalu (talk) 21:52, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
I have made the revisions and tried to de-British English my copy, let me know if I missed anything. Also added some references (and a bit more info) from New York Fashion to support the missing references you noted. Mabalu (talk) 23:33, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Good deal, I see the new refs and that you did find one for both the last collection and the sheath dresses after all. I further Americanized it - and I'll move this to the special occasions holding area. Yngvadottir (talk) 00:05, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
I further Americanized it and localized it. It's not the Pratt Institute, it's just Pratt Institute. But it's The New York Times. Also fixed two instances of single quotes where US usage is for double. Marrante (talk) 21:41, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Ellen Gallagher

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • ... that American artist Ellen Gallagher created artworks which included images carved into the surface of thick sheets of paper?

Created/expanded by Mandarax (talk), GogoW24 (talk). Nominated by Mandarax (talk) at 09:22, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Length, date, format, hook's ref all ok. --Rosiestep (talk) 21:50, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Esther Hill

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • ... that in 1925, Esther Hill became the first woman to be registered as an architect in Canada?

Created/expanded by SarahStierch (talk). Nominated by PFHLai (talk) at 23:57, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

  • The original hook may be good for March 8th. --PFHLai (talk) 00:12, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
  • The ALT1 hook is 239 characters including spaces, and thus ineligible. (Note: not planning to review, but happened to notice the length issue.) BlueMoonset (talk) 03:27, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Ooops... I can't count.... Pls disregard ALT1. --PFHLai (talk) 19:58, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg Article is new. Prose is long enough. Hook is interesting. Hook is verified through various books. Original hook is good to go!! Have commented on its talk page for other scope of improvements. Please do those. But the hook is ready. -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 10:20, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Sybil Plumlee

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • Comment: If this DYK hook is not applicable to International Women's Day, please move to the February 8 expansion section. Thanks! --Another Believer (Talk) 18:40, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Created/expanded by Another Believer (talk). Self nom at 18:40, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Nominator has at least five DYK credits and therefore needs to do a quid pro quo review - or indicate here what they reviewed.
    Article is new enough (created February 7) and long enough. In my opinion all the paragraphs of the intro after the first are superfluous; they summarize the article in detail; removing them would not take the article prose below the minimum length. The article is adequately referenced, clearly and neutrally written; I modified two sentences that seemed misleading or slightly inaccurate in detail. However, there was some close paraphrasing; I edited to take the article wording further from the source. And I am unable to find the sentence quoted from Plumlee about the Women's Protective Service in the cited book, A Municipal Mother using GoogleBooks; has a word been changed without bracketing, or an ellipsis been omitted? No deal-breakers here, and I agree with this going in the special section for International Women's Day - the only hold-up from my perspective is the QPQ. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:07, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Thank you for your improvements to the article. No changes were made to Plumlee's quote in the book you mentioned, though I agree it does read strangely. I am not sure why the quote cannot be read at this time... does Google Books change which pages are shown in snippet views? I am quite certain I copied the quote correctly at the time I constructed the article. Please let me know if this needs to be addressed further. --Another Believer (Talk) 19:23, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
You're welcome :-) I didn't mean that the wording was odd, just that I was surprised I couldn't find it; your link just goes to the cover. It may be on a page that is not viewable in the preview, but usually in such cases I can get GoogleBooks to admit the wording exists in the book by typing in a part of the quote; here I get no hits even going back and googling the title of the book plus a keyword from the quote. Probably just them being stroppy, but if you have a URL for a snippet view that has part of the quote visible in the window, it would be nice if you substituted in that as the URL. However, as I said, there are no issues holding this one up other than the quid pro quo review. It's quite all right to do that after nominating the article, but you will need to note here what you've reviewed when you've done it. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:08, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Giulietta Guicciardi

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • How is this:
ALT1: ... that Ludwig van Beethoven dedicated his second Sonata quasi una fantasia for piano, later known as the Moonlight Sonata, to his pupil, Countess Giulietta Guicciardi? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:47, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Or more precise but long:
ALT2: ... that Ludwig van Beethoven dedicated his first Sonata quasi una fantasia to Josephine von Liechtenstein, his second ("Moonlight") to his pupil, Countess Giulietta Guicciardi? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:56, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting keep.svg Date and length OK. I would prefer the original hook and consider if not to wikify Moonlight Sonata instead of the factual name.Aloysius (talk) 15:31, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
  • For International Women's Day on March 8? That's more than 6 weeks ahead of time. Is 6 weeks still the maximum delay these days? IAR? --PFHLai (talk) 15:54, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Corrected the credit to JohnSpecialK, sorry, many editors were interested in her! It can appear anytime, but would make sense that day. But this hook is meant to make known that the sonata was called Sonata quasi una fantasia (!) by the composer (!) at the time of the dedication (!), and only some 35 years later, in a completely different musical period, became known as "Moonlight". I hope this hook will either see the Sonata already moved or broaden the discussion to do so, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:07, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
  • The first hook with an unambiguous link:
ALT3:... that Ludwig van Beethoven dedicated his Sonata quasi una fantasia for piano, later known as the Moonlight Sonata, to his pupil, Countess Giulietta Guicciardi? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:34, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
  • The name "Sonata quasi una fantasia" is a) obscure, b) ambiguous (Beethoven named two piano sonatas this way). The work in question is known as Beethoven's Piano Sonata No. 14 or the Moonlight Sonata. I don't understand how its dedication would hook anyone. Nominating it for DYK while a Requested Move discussion is raging at the article seems unwise. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 02:19, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
  • I recommended to wait until Women's day, hoping it would be resolved by then. ALT2 clearly says there are two of the name. Something saying that for a while she was believed to be the "Immortal Beloved" would hook more but as she isn't ... Same for the picture which may show her or not. Adjusting to formality but loosing fantasy:
ALT4:... that Ludwig van Beethoven dedicated his Piano Sonata No. 14, later known as the Moonlight Sonata, to his pupil, Countess Giulietta Guicciardi?
ALT5: ... that Ludwig van Beethoven dedicated his second Sonata quasi una fantasia for piano, later known as the Moonlight Sonata, to his pupil, Countess Giulietta Guicciardi?
The move discussion is closed. The article can be shown now or later, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:06, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
The move discussion seemed closed, it was reverted. Please hold. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:03, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
It was moved (again). The article can be shown now or later.
ALT6: ... that Ludwig van Beethoven dedicated his second piano sonata quasi una fantasia, later known as the Moonlight Sonata, to his pupil, Countess Giulietta Guicciardi? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:50, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Beethoven Piano Sonata 14 - title page 1802.jpg
  • We have a picture now, the title page for the first edition of the score, published in 1802 in Vienna by Gio. Cappi e Compwhich, which can be used (possibly cropped to show her name) for all ALTs, for example:
ALT7: ... that Luigi van Beethoven dedicated his second piano sonata quasi una fantasia (1802 title page pictured), later known as the Moonlight Sonata, to his pupil, Countess Giulietta Guicciardi? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:00, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Countess Giulietta Guicciardi2.jpg
ALT8: ... that Ludwig van Beethoven dedicated his second piano sonata quasi una fantasia, later known as the Moonlight Sonata, to his pupil, Countess Giulietta Guicciardi (possible portrait pictured)? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:06, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Lest the long discussion cause uncertainty, I'm adding another ticked to clarify that this has been reviewed and approved. I recommend that the sonata be linked as "Moonlight Sonata" (not only is it clearer and more concise, but otherwise many of the click-throughs will go to the sonata article instead of the article about Giulietta) and that the "possible portrait" of Giulietta should be used with this hook. Additionally, considering that it has now been sitting on the noms page for a month, I think it deserves to be highlighted on Women's Day, which is now just one more month away. --Orlady (talk) 17:08, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
  • PLEASE do not link Moonlight Sonata!!! We had a discussion over this for a week, finally the Sonata got again a decent name in the 21st century. It took 3 decades from the time of the dedication until that nick name was invented, it has nothing to do with the lady. The sonata and its name is what this hook is about, the most important word LATER, may GG forgive us, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:12, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Clare Smyth

( Review or commentArticle history )

Created/expanded by Miyagawa (talk). Self nom at 12:37, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Age, length, sources, QPQ check out. Good to go.--Tomobe03 (talk) 20:59, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Madeline Rogero

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • Comment: I've also made significant edits to the article, but Bms4880 deserves sole credit (at least as things stand right now).

Created/expanded by Bms4880 (talk). Nominated by Orlady (talk) at 05:12, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Length and timeliness checks: Prose size (text only): 7222 characters (1130 words) "readable prose size". Article created by Bms4880 on January 5, 2012. Hook formatting and length checks. No images for a copyright issue. Used plagiarism checker. No problems. The only bit of duplication found is clearly a quote.
  • Pictogram voting keep.svg Article reads neutral enough to me, and doesn't set off any big red flags.
  • Symbol question.svg Hook source does not mention Cesar Chavez at all, just United Farm Workers. I might leave it out as I think it could give the perception of bias given the source. With out it, I would pass. --LauraHale (talk) 10:41, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
    • Rogero has mentioned Chavez several times, including on her campaign website [5] and in a Metro Pulse interview [6], but if it creates bias, I have no problem changing it. Bms4880 (talk) 14:31, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
      • Symbol redirect vote4.png I've added three more sources to the article. The name César Chávez gets far more recognition than the bland-sounding "United Farm Workers," and Rogero actually seems to mention his name more often than she mentions the union. She is proud of saying she's the only person who has worked for César Chávez, Dolly Parton, and Colin Powell. --Orlady (talk) 15:04, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg I see no problem with the phrasing--the genitive is appropriate, methinks, and the connection between her and the union is verified. Please give Orlady credit also: they've done significant work on the article, and 64 DYKs is a bit paltry, of course. Congrats to Ms. Rogero, BTW--I say this as a former Old North Knoxvillian. Drmies (talk) 16:05, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
  • I've changed Orlady's credit from nom to make per Drmies' suggestion. And I've also got a suggestion. I think this should be saved for March 8, International Women's Day. MANdARAX  XAЯAbИAM 21:01, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
So moved. --PFHLai (talk) 02:08, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

We Can Do It!

( Review or commentArticle history )

Wartime poster portraying a woman wearing a red bandana to hold her hair, looking at the viewer, the right arm extended with the hand raised high and clenched, the left hand rolling up the right sleeve of a worker's coverall. Words at the top read, "We Can Do It!"

Created/expanded by Binksternet (talk). Self nom at 10:00, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Another article of yours that I can't believe didn't exist before. Everything checks out, well done. –Roscelese (talkcontribs) 06:33, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Thanks! There's room in the wiki for you to do another popular and widely seen Norman Rockwell painting article if you wish: Rosie the Riveter (painting). Take it away, maestro... Binksternet (talk) 13:26, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Eh, I feel like it would have to be mostly a split from the section in the main article, which would disqualify it. –Roscelese (talkcontribs) 16:06, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
  • That kind of thinking stopped everyone else except me from making the new article called "We Can Do It!". Just sayin'. <grin> Binksternet (talk) 16:33, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
  • That's fine with me. However, there will likely be other suitable DYKs brought forward between now and then. Whatever works. Binksternet (talk) 15:15, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
  • I love the idea of having this for March 8th. Smallbones (talk) 04:46, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
The entire month of March is Women's History Month, so I hope we don't limit ourselves to just one day :) SarahStierch (talk) 16:13, 29 January 2012 (UTC)


Women's Cricket World Cup

( Review or commentArticle history )

Created/expanded by Harrias (talk). Self nom at 15:58, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

  • Possible hook for March 8 (International Women's Day)? Harrias talk 09:53, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg All checks out. I removed the stub tag from the article page.Miyagawa (talk) 12:43, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Lori Greiner

( Review or commentArticle history )

Created/expanded by Dtrebbien (talk). Self nom at 22:13, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Good to go. Mangoe (talk) 14:25, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] March 17 (Saint Patrick's Day)

Llantwit Major

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • Symbol confirmed.svg A comprehensive article on the town. Five-fold expansion, new enough, long enough and well sourced. Hook reference verified. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:13, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Save for use on March 17th? This will give the nominator lots of time to perform a peer review of another user's nomination. --PFHLai (talk) 22:28, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] April 5 (April the Fifth)

April the Fifth

( Review or commentArticle history )

  • Comment: Can this hook be used on MainPage on April the fifth, please? Thanks in advance. --PFHLai (talk) 23:18, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Created/expanded by Tigerboy1966 (talk). Nominated by PFHLai (talk) at 23:18, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Everything seems solid enough to me, should be good to go. Also suggest holding this for the suggested date, not often something like that comes along. GRAPPLE X 03:55, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the review. I'll move this nom template to the Special date request section on my next edit. --PFHLai (talk) 05:10, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Interaction
Toolbox