Template talk:Did you know

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
"Did you know...?" template
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

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


List of DYK Hooks by Date
Date # of Hooks # Verified
July 31 1
August 5 1 1
August 6 1 1
August 11 1
August 13 1
August 15 3
August 16 2
August 19 1
August 20 1
August 21 4
August 22 3
August 23 2
August 24 1 1
August 26 1
August 27 1 1
August 28 1
August 29 1
August 31 1
September 2 3 1
September 3 2
September 5 4 2
September 6 3 1
September 7 1 1
September 8 5 2
September 9 5
September 10 3
September 11 7 2
September 12 6 1
September 13 3 2
September 14 10 2
September 15 2
September 16 5
September 17 4
September 18 7 2
September 19 11 1
September 20 7
September 21 7
September 22 9 1
September 23 4
September 24 2
September 25 5
September 26 8 1
September 27 6 1
September 28 5
September 29 9 1
September 30 5
October 1 8 1
October 2 6
October 3 7
October 4 8 1
October 5 12 2
October 6 9
October 7 9 3
October 8 11 1
October 9 11 1
October 10 9
October 11 13 1
October 12 6 2
October 13 10 1
October 14 12 1
October 15 10
October 16 14 6
October 17 15 2
October 18 7 3
October 19 7 1
October 20 2 1
October 21 2
Total 363 52
Last updated 09:35, October 21, 2014 (UTC)
Current time is 14:31, October 21, 2014 UTC (purge)

Instructions for nominators[edit]

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

To nominate an article[edit]

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

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

Write the nomination.

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

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

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

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

How to review a nomination[edit]

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 to which the hook applies so that the hook is supported and accurate. For a more detailed discussion of the DYK rules and review process see the supplementary guidelines and the WP:Did you know/Reviewing guide.

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

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

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

    If you are the first person to comment on the nomination, there will be a line :*<!--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.

Frequently asked questions[edit]


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).

Where is my hook?[edit]

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.

Search archived DYK nomination discussions[edit]

Instructions for other editors[edit]

How to promote an accepted hook[edit]

  • 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, and replace |passed= with |passed=yes. 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.

How to remove a rejected hook[edit]

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

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

  • 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

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

  • 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.


Older nominations[edit]

Articles created/expanded on July 31[edit]

Betty May

  • Reviewed: Self nomination, one of my first five.

Created by Philafrenzy (talk), Edwardx (talk). Nominated by Philafrenzy (talk) at 11:36, 7 August 2014 (UTC).

  • Oh, come on. There's a libel suit, a sensational murder involving a diamond heiress, a mysterious disappearance, a Dickensian childhood... please let's have a really good hook. EEng (talk) 02:07, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Agreed, it was done in a hurry to meet the deadline. Philafrenzy (talk) 21:14, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
Well remember, DYK has the idiotic 7-day deadline to remind us all that slapdash work done in a hurry is valued over careful work done at leisure. EEng (talk) 21:43, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
I was referring to the hook, not the article. Not that I am saying the article is perfect of course. Philafrenzy (talk) 21:51, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
  • How about "That Betty May testified against Aleister Crowley, claiming her husband had ritually sacrificed a cat and drank its blood? It's more interesting. Too grim? *edited*Bali88 (talk) 13:31, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
  • I don't think we can say that he was forced exactly. He could have left at any time. Philafrenzy (talk) 13:52, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
  • How's that?
It's hard to choose with this one -- everywhere you turn there's something like 'Smokey Joe's, "a non-alcoholic speakeasy-cum-lesbian pub" '. Take your time. EEng (talk) 15:45, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
And I haven't even finished putting it all in yet! Philafrenzy (talk) 16:58, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
Let us know when you're done and we'll have an orgy of sensational hooks to choose from. EEng (talk) 19
33, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
It's an extraordinary tale isn't it? Not least that she was accused of attempted murder by her mother in law and put it in her book! Philafrenzy (talk) 20:32, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
I just noticed this again. Now I'm even more at sea. Though in a weird way it makes me ill to read. Give me a day. EEng (talk) 02:10, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
It's a fascinating but not very wholesome story indeed. And the last 30 or 40 years of her life are missing for lack of sources. One can only speculate how many more marriages there were and how many more deaths and what she did during the Second World War. The Nicholson book indicates at least one more marriage but without details. Philafrenzy (talk) 11:18, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:02, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Alt 1 for hook ... that Betty May learned one new thing while on her ­honeymoon – to take drugs?
  • Alt 2 for hook ... that Betty May escaped a "white slaver", joined the L'Apache criminal gang, and learned to use knives and fight bare knuckled? AtsmeConsult 18:28, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
  • I like Alt 1, it's pithy. Alt 2 is not so good because she may have exaggerated her adventures in France. Philafrenzy (talk) 20:00, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
  • To me, the drug angle is kind of "meh". I've done drugs too, it doesn't make me interesting. Also, the way that I look at it, the hook should include some clue as to who she was too. She's not exactly a household name. I can't be the only one who didn't know who Betty May was. Imagine looking at the front page and seeing a hook that says "John Smith did drugs on his honeymoon". I would be like, who is this person and why do I care? Bali88 (talk) 20:55, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
  • ALT 3 ... that Tiger Woman Betty May was described as a "savage" and a "wicked woman" by her own family? Philafrenzy (talk) 21:10, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
I really like Alt 3, it hooks deep. AtsmeConsult
  • I like the one I suggested earlier. Name dropping, sacrificing cats, definitely gets your attention! lol
  • Alt 4 ... that Betty May testified against Aleister Crowley, claiming her husband Raoul Loveday had ritually sacrificed a cat and drank its blood? Bali88 (talk) 22:41, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
I have added the Jack the Ripper material because why not? Philafrenzy (talk) 22:21, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg Alt4 is cited to the Daily Express, and the hook rightly says she just claimed it happened, not that it did. However, I would add Raoul Loveday by name, otherwise the reader might assume that Crowley was her husband. The sourcing, to me, seems a little weak - her own autobiography, if you believe what is written in the article, probably doesn't come across as being particularly trustworthy, other than just stating her own beliefs and views. There are also quite a few unsourced paragraphs. Just because all the major players are dead (although for May herself we can't even reliably prove that!), doesn't mean we shouldn't take a conservative view to what happened (and I like cats). Maybe EEng can pull a dramatic hook out of the bag that would put Agatha Christie to shame, but otherwise, I think this needs a bit more work first. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:36, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
Agree that the cat business may not be reliable. I don't see any unreferenced paras, though a few don't have a ref immediately at the end. If she's not dead she would be 121! Philafrenzy (talk) 13:12, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, I just meant end of paragraphs are unsourced. I think it's reasonable to assume she's dead and BLP does not apply, I'm just surprised we can't pin the year of death down more definitively. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:32, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
  • We know almost nothing after 1935 when she completely disappeared. Even her publishers lost track of her until 1955 when we have the Kent references. One, not reliable, source said that she had been "traced to 78" and a grave in Chatham had been found but I was unsure whether they meant age 78 or 1978, hence the vagueness in the article. One can only speculate what happened in the last 40 years of her life based on the first 40. I would particularly like to know what she did during World War II. She would probably have made a good Mata Hari type spy! Philafrenzy (talk) 13:56, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
Checked the source and the above should have read "lived until 86" which I have added to the article. Still not sure of the accuracy of the statement though. Philafrenzy (talk) 22:00, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
I read she was Eleanor Roosevelt's lesbian lover. BTW I believe WP policy allows us to treat as not-a-BLP anyone reliably known to have been born at least 115 years ago (WP:BDP). EEng (talk) 02:21, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
  • ALT5 ... that though the Tiger Woman did not testify at the book reviewer's trial for murder of the writer, in the occultist's suit against the Queen of Bohemia she said her husband drank a sacrificed cat's blood?

That's 199. EEng (talk) 02:21, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Can we simplify that one a bit? I think we may lose the reader with the length. Also, I prefer to name Crowley by name. I think more people would click on that. I wouldn't know who was being referred to by "the occultist". Bali88 (talk) 05:14, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
Well, the idea was to intrigue via the list of weird entanglements and incidents. (It's unfortunate that it's the reviewer who killed the writer, since the homicidal fantasies usually run in the opposite direction.) While there's plenty of raw material here, for some reason I'm having trouble really absorbing the gestalt of this article's subject (maybe some evil spirits or something) so I'm not sure I can do better. But feel free to modify as you want. EEng (talk) 07:05, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
And I think I like ALT3 better. EEng (talk) 05:34, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── So where does it stand? Is it ready for the que? I still like Alt 3 best.

I don't think it has actually been reviewed. Given the length of the article and the number of offline or subscription only sources, I do not envy the reviewer who might be well advised to buy the book! Philafrenzy (talk) 22:02, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Looking...SpinningSpark 17:59, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
We have paramedics standing by. If you open any exquisite teak tobacco boxes and a sharp little spring like a viper's tooth pops out and draws blood GET HELP! YOU'VE BEEN POISONED! EEng (talk) 18:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
If you feel ill reviewing it, just put your head between your knees and take deep breaths. Philafrenzy (talk) 19:11, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Symbol possible vote.svg Date and length OK. No POV or copyvios found. I find it strange that QPQ is not required for an editor with so many DYK credits. I presume you think you are exempt because most of your credits were nominated by Edwardx not you as creator. This could be viewed as gaming the system, but in any case, a strict reading of the exemption rule is "fewer than five DYK credits" not "fewer than five DYK nominations". I think given your experience here the spirit of the rule is that you should comply with QPQ whatever the wikilawyers make of the rules.

All hooks are OK for length and cites, ALT3 agf on offline source. I'm not going to say too much on hook preference, that has already been talked to death above, except I do not think ALT3 should be approved. It combines two comments from two different people, one when the subject was a small child, one as a grown woman. It is a bad case of WP:SYNTH to put them together, and to boot they put the subject in negative light without actually containing a fact. SpinningSpark 20:52, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

This is way overboard as an application of SYNTH. Nothing is being synthesized. If anything it might be WP:UNDUE, but hooks by their very nature are supposed to shine the spotlight on one tiny aspect. It's fine. I'd like you to reconsider, and please others should weigh in. EEng (talk) 21:31, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
If this were in a BLP we wouldn't give it the time of day so I don't see why we should have it on the front page. Your "one tiny aspect" comment is not relevant, the hook is a synthesis of two elements. So no, I'm not going to reconsider, but it is not a show stopper, there are plenty of other hooks to choose from. SpinningSpark 00:34, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
Please review SYNTH, and then explain, in terms of what it says there, what conclusion is being synthesized in ALT3. EEng (talk) 02:52, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
"do not combine different parts of one source to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by the source". Someone said something nasty about her when she was a child PLUS someone else said something nasty (but different) about her decades later IMPLIES she is a nasty person. Two gossips don't make a fact. SpinningSpark 07:27, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
So, by your logic, if the hook just said one of these two things, then it wouldn't be SYNTH and it would be OK? That's ridiculous. EEng (talk) 15:21, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
That's exactly my logic, but I still wouldn't like it if it said just one thing and would prefer another hook was used. SpinningSpark 17:19, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, but that really is ridiculous. EEng (talk) 21:20, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
The objective of that one was simply to intrigue, but perhaps we can think of another hook. On gaming the system, I was unaware that there could be any possible suggestion of that. I have nominated a few of my own but mostly Edwardx does that and the reviewing. If that's not right somebody will need to explain how it should be done as I thought that was fine. Philafrenzy (talk) 21:08, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Since EEng has collapsed the above discussion, let me say again outside it what I said inside. Failure to do a QPQ is the essence of my failing the nom, not the hook issue since another hook can be chosen. I have never said I was not going to worry about the QPQ issue despite EEng twice making that claim, and again in the edit summary hiding the thread. Please do not make that claim again unless accompanied by a diff of where I said it. SpinningSpark 17:52, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
(a) Why didn't you just uncollapse rather than recapitulating
(b) If I (mistakenly) misstated your position TWICE, why didn't you say so before?
Again, can we have BlueMoonset or Crisco 1492 resolve the QPQ issue, and maybe another reviewer for the rest? This is a ridiculous waste of time. EEng (talk) 21:20, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
According to WP:DYKHN it doesn't say anything about not combining facts from the article, only that the fact must be mentioned and cited with an inline citation to a reliable source. The "Did you know?" fact must be mentioned in the article and cited with an inline citation to a reliable source since inline citations are used to support specific statements in an article. It also states When you write the DYK item (or "hook") please make it "hooky", that is, short, punchy, catchy, and likely to draw the readers in to wanting to read the article. An interesting hook is more likely to draw in a variety of readers. Shorter hooks are preferred to longer ones, as long as they don't misstate the article content. Alt 3 meets the requirements. The fact doesn't have to be stated verbatim in the hook. AtsmeConsult 05:27, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
It's fine to combine facts, but not in such a way as to imply a conclusion not found in the source. SpinningSpark 07:27, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
The point of that hook is to cause people to ask "was she really a savage and a wicked woman?" and want to read the article to find out. Incidentally, her own autobiography was the source for both quotes. Philafrenzy (talk) 10:08, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
Perhaps you can help me understand how you've concluded the Alt3 hook does not include a fact mentioned in the article? Her aunt described her as "a regular little savage" and ...her mother-in-law who said "Oh you foul, wicked woman, you're killing my son". No ambiguity there. The Alt 3 hook does indeed mention a fact from the article which is reliably sourced. The fact is that "Betty May was described as....", not that she actually fit the description. In fact, the Alt 3 hook is what enticed me into a closer review of the article. AtsmeConsult 14:11, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Spinningspark, please review the essay WP:SYNTHNOT. I'm pinging some of the big guns: BlueMoonset, Crisco 1492 and (seat belts fastened!) The Rambling Man. Oh, and Belle, since she'll liven the proceedings. EEng (talk) 15:21, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

@Atsme. I don't dispute these passages are in the book. It is running them together that I find objectionable. I might be persuaded that the source was making the same implication if they were close together in the book, but they are not, they are hundreds of pages apart. My comment on them not being facts was not meant to imply that it is not a fact that someone said them. What I meant was someone saying something nasty or insulting about a person does not amount to a substantive encyclopaedic fact about the person. How many parents have said to their child "you little devil" or something similar? It's a commonplace amounting to a whole heap of nothing. SpinningSpark 17:39, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
Yes, but its an intriguing hook! It's obvious to the reader that we are not saying that they are encyclopedic facts. They are separate statements in quotes and readers will understand that they will likely get a more nuanced story when they read the article. Philafrenzy (talk) 18:08, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
He doesn't get it. Wait for others to arrive. EEng (talk) 21:20, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
Who doesn't get it? Philafrenzy (talk) 22:03, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
S.S., with his nonsense about SYNTH. EEng (talk) 23:39, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
[Puff of purple smoke. A smell of exotic spices fills the air] What!? What? I was sleeping in my bottle and now I am summoned to grant wishes? Very well. Alacazam! Yes, I must agree it is not synthesis and also it is harmless as a hook; it isn't inaccurate and the reader won't feel outraged when they learn the details. I'd expand the quotes to "regular little savage" and "foul wicked woman" myself, but I actually prefer ALT2 (maybe that's because it almost mirrors my own life; I learned to use knives with forks and none of the other stuff, but aside from that it's identical). A slightly modified ALT2 as...
ALT6 ... that Betty May claimed she had escaped a "white slaver", joined the L'Apache criminal gang and learned to fight with knives? Belle (talk) 22:59, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
Sounds good to me, though I doubt the truthfulness of all three of those claims! But that can be dealt with in the article. Philafrenzy (talk) 23:07, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

I don't know why this hook issue has become so controversial and why others are being called in. It is perfectly normal, even expected, for reviewers to say which hook they think should be used when there is a choice. I have not even been that explicit, declining only one. For the record, I agree with Belle that ALT2 is a good choice. SpinningSpark 23:20, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Controversial because you've raised a nonsense SYNTH objection to the hook most favor. Having said that, I might even like A2 more at this point, but the hook will need to be converted to make it clear these are only by her own reports since (I recall, though no time to look now) they're from her own writings or others quoting her without independent attribution. We can't make this kind of statement as flat fact, even in the hook. 23:39, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
That's why I added "she claimed" in ALT6 (that's what I am claiming anyway, and you can't disprove it without getting inside my mind; get out of my mind!) Belle (talk) 00:06, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
I was in too much of a hurry. ALT6 is fine. EEng (talk) 16:00, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
On the QPQ point, as far as I can recall I have not done more than five nominations. All the others where I have been a contributor have been nominated by someone else and they have done the review. I don't want to be seen to be trying to circumvent any rules so I won't do any more self-noms in future. Hope that's OK. Philafrenzy (talk) 13:38, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
You could always do a review, then you couldn't possibly be accused of trying to circumvent the rules and all the DYK regulars would gather round and give you big hugs/sloppy kisses/firm handshakes/nods of appreciation (please select one; offer can not be redeemed in conjunction with any other promotions; terms and conditions apply). Belle (talk) 14:08, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
"You could always do a review" -- Belle, that's like a vampire saying, "Hey, come be a vampire! It's fun!" just before biting the neck. Do you think it's right to condemn yet another innocent to our hell-on-earth of endless roaming among the noms and hooks and pulls and debates over how many sets per day? A stake through your heart, Belle! EEng (talk) 16:05, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
On the other hand, vampires do live forever so there would be a chance of clearing the backlog. Philafrenzy (talk) 16:29, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
I just read this again and I think it's sooo amusing! I think I scared the reviewer off. EEng (talk) 05:37, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Reviewing does keep you forever young and beautiful though (What? Really? That's just me? Wow!) although the drawback of never seeing the sun is much the same as being a vampire, and, of course, needing to bathe in the blood of virgins (What? Really? That's just me again? Wow!) You can't kill a DYK reviewer with a stake through the heart though; it's a strike through the ALT that does for us. Belle (talk) 16:31, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
I have no experience of reviewing, Belle. Having met plenty of Wikipedians I am sorry to say I wouldn't go further than a friendly nod in most cases, and I am sure the feeling is mutual. Philafrenzy (talk) 14:13, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
There are currently two tags on the article. One about the lead which is easy to fix (I will try later) and another requesting third party sources. Do these have to be fixed before it can go ahead? (assuming there is any chance that will happen) Based on my research, I think it very unlikely that any significant new sources will be found. People simply didn't write long pieces about people like her. In fact, after Tiger Woman, the next longest piece about her is probably our article. Philafrenzy (talk) 16:29, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
This bring us to one of my favorite hot buttons, which is the idea that DYK articles are supposed to be blemish-free. As far as I'm concerned it's fine for those banners to be there -- of the 1000s who click during the main-page appearance, maybe one will say, "Hey! I remember reading about her in such-and-such obscure journal, and I can add the needed refs!" By just removing the banner, or (worse) shoring up appearances by throwing in some half-baked weak sources (and then removing the banner) we're throwing away that opportunity. So I say let that one stay (but fix the lead thing, please).
ALT6A ... that the Tiger Woman claimed she had escaped a "white slaver", then joined the L'Apache criminal gang and learned to fight with knives?
EEng (talk) 19:39, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Good one EEng, got my attention. I also agree with what you stated about bringing collaboration to the article. I think it has already begun. AtsmeConsult 21:21, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg New reviewer needed. Have struck ALT2 and ALT6 in favor of ALT6A, and the original hook as not very interesting. Reviewer should specify which hooks are okay and strike the others. As over 50 edits have been made since the most recent review, quite significant in aggregate, some general checks should be made as well as specific hook-related checks. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:53, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Okay, I will take one for the team and attempt a review. The article was new enough when this saga began. It is well and truly long enough. I'll waive QPQ, as I don't believe the nominator's prowess at attracting nominations should be held against them. All the hooks that have not been struck are acceptable, though I like ALT5 best. (I tweaked a couple slightly.) I am concerned about how much of the article is sourced to May's autobiography. Entire paragraphs and near-entire sections stated in Wikipedia's voice are sourced only to the subject's say-so. Primary sources are fine here and there, but the relevant policy makes clear that this level of reliance is inappropriate. Compounding the issue, many of the autobiography's claims are sensational, and the article itself calls the autobiography's reliability as a source into question. If you can't convince me that I'm totally off base here, much of what's currently sourced to the autobiography will have to be removed or re-sourced. I can't support this appearing on the main page otherwise. Lagrange613 03:06, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
I understand your point and sorry about the length. I am not sure that it is as hyped up as you suggest. She really did have quite a sensational life and there is much for which there is independent verification from newspapers or court cases. Where I did not have that verification I minimised, excluded or worded accordingly. (The biography is over 200 pages long, our article 2-3 printed) I agree the biography is a primary source but one of the surprising points about it in fact was how much of it I was able to independently verify. I think a few of the sections could do with a good dose of "according to" and "for which there is no independent verification" etc and I will do that. Philafrenzy (talk) 14:16, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
From what you say it sounds like a lot more stuff like "According to May herself..." and so on may need to be added (or maybe some more general disclaimer for certain sections). But I think we can hold that in abeyance for now. EEng (talk) 03:47, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on August 5[edit]


  • ... that two Americans who had been infected with Ebola appeared to have had positive results after being administered ZMapp serum?

Created by Prokaryotes (talk), Johndheathcote (talk), Sammyj (talk) and Jytdog (talk). Nominated by Skr15081997 (talk) at 11:31, 12 August 2014 (UTC).

  • May I propose ALT1?: ... that two Americans with Ebola virus improved after receiving ZMapp serum? (In medical contexts, "positive results" makes me think of a test that indicated the presence of something, like a positive HIV test. Also, the body of the article doesn't reflect that both Americans received ZMapp. EricEnfermero HOWDY! 09:16, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
Eric, i have made some changes to better reflect that both were treated. prokaryotes (talk) 10:22, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Complete review needed.--Skr15081997 (talk) 12:09, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
I would wait for the results, before publishing this. --prokaryotes (talk) 19:11, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
  • prokaryotes, is the article ready now? It seems to have been greatly expanded, and would need a complete review in any event. As one of the major contributors to the article, I've been reluctant to call again for a new reviewer based on your last comment, but it's been almost three weeks; if I don't hear one way or another soon, we'll look for that new reviewer. Also, does the hook still hold, or should a new one be proposed? BlueMoonset (talk) 18:36, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review still needed; no response from prokaryotes. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:16, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Green plant being injected by a needle

  •  :REVIEW COMPLETED - The following has been checked in this review by Esemono
Green check.svg QPQ by Prokaryotes
Green check.svg Article created by Prokaryotes on Aug 5, 2014 and has 8726 characters of readable prose
Green check.svg NPOV
Green check.svg ALT3 or ALT4 Hooks are interesting, short enough and sourced with Refs 4 and 15
Green check.svg Every paragraph sourced
Symbol confirmed.svg GTG -- Esemono (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 23:56, 22 September 2014‎ (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg While the article has improved immeasurably from its original state, that original version created in a series of edits by Johndheathcote on August 5 contained a great deal of close paraphrasing, if not outright copyvio. Not all of it is gone: I removed one copyvio phrase from the article a short while ago, which contained useful information probably available elsewhere; having just found another, I'm putting this article on hold while someone deals with the problem. The current problem is the article's "The antibody work came out of research projects funded by the U.S. Army more than a decade ago", which is far to close to the source's "The antibody work came out of research projects funded more than a decade ago by the U.S. Army"—all the words are the same, with "by the U.S. army" moved slightly earlier. Oddly, in the Johndheathcote edits, the word "funded" was omitted, and there wasn't a source; whoever found the source and added it made things worse by adding "funded". BlueMoonset (talk) 03:03, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Looks like that sentence has been changed. How is it now? -- Esemono (talk) 06:27, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

* Don't know how this works, but I oppose this DYK. The Ebola virus epidemic in West Africa is a serious problem with thousands dead and dying. Picking out from this disaster, some one-off results from a drug that may or may not turn out to be effective and safe, is to me both foolish and well, ugly. How about having a DYK on Ebola virus epidemic in West Africa with "On 3 September, the International president of Médecins Sans Frontières spoke out concerning the lack of assistance from the United Nations member countries in the Ebola virus epidemic in West Africa, saying, "Six months into the worst Ebola epidemic in history, the world is losing the battle to contain it."? Jytdog (talk) 11:39, 26 September 2014 (UTC) (striking ignorant comment, sorry for the trouble. Jytdog (talk) 00:37, 27 September 2014 (UTC))

  • if you do go forward with this, please do not call it a "serum" like it is some magical potion or like its components are undefined or unknown. Chemically it is a very well-defined drug candidate - a combination of 3 specific monoclonal antibodies. To beat a dead horse, it fits none of the definitions of Serum and calling it a "serum" would be an embarrassment. thanks Jytdog (talk) 11:48, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
oy looks like you intend to go forward. instead of drug candidate which is redirected to the drug discovery article, i made the wikilink go to Biopharmaceutical... Jytdog (talk) 16:29, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Jytdog, we have to work with the new or newly expanded articles that are submitted. This nomination is about ZMapp. We don't do "support" and "oppose" here; the question is whether the nomination meets the DYK guidelines per WP:DYK. The epidemic article you're in favor of substituting is currently on the main page in the In The News section, and has appeared twice before there, in March and June. Once an article has appeared in In The News, it is no longer eligible for DYK, so not only can't it be used here, it can't be nominated on its own. I see that you've done a great deal of work on this article, and removed the text that was causing the issue I noted above. I have struck the two proposed hooks that contained "serum" (a word no longer in the article, though used in a couple of headlines from cited sources). BlueMoonset (talk) 18:13, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
thank you for explaining i am quite ignorant of DYK. sorry for spouting. as you will! Jytdog (talk) 00:36, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Jytdog fixed the copyright issues. Was that the last thing holding this nom back -- Esemono (talk) 00:30, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Esemono, given the extensive edits made to this article in the past several days, I think it's important that the article gets rechecked so that the new material is reviewed, including being given its own check for copyright issues. It should be part of the standard DYK checks. Also, make sure the recent edits left the hook info in the article and its sourcing intact as well; there were significant deletions made as well as additions. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:26, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed -- Esemono (talk) 04:33, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
  • I'm looking into this. It starts with a bunch of copyedits, and one cn tag. Drmies (talk) 20:20, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Jytdog, please find me a reference for the term "pharming" that's available online. That Winston-Salem Journal article (hate that damn website with all their flash and video) doesn't contain the word, and I can't read the Forbes article. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 22:47, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done here. Jytdog (talk) 22:56, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Symbol confirmed.svg There are citations and other things that I am not perfectly happy with, but it's time to get this show on the road. I have spot-checked for plagiarism etc. and have not found anything. I prefer ALT 4, though if the promoter (and I know BlueMoonset is watching too) wants to stick the picture in, that's fine with me--I have not checked its license. Note also that I removed the two redundant commas from the hook. Drmies (talk) 23:27, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on August 6[edit]

St. Augustine Parish Church (Bay)

Bay Church

Created by Carlojoseph14 (talk). Nominated by Shhhhwwww!! (talk) at 19:30, 18 August 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg New enough, not long enough. Needs 134 more characters.  ΤheQ Editor  Talk? 19:30, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg It now has > 134 chars more Victuallers (talk) 13:35, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg New enough and just long enough. No close paraphrasing seen in online sources. No QPQ needed for non-self-nomination.
  • I was looking around Google and Google Books for more information about the architecture of the church and its national historical landmark status, and was surprised not to find anything. Isn't it mentioned in guidebooks? I'd also like to mention that it was hard finding anything about the church under the name St. Augustine Parish Church (Bay). My searches turned up churches in England and San Francisco rather than this one, so I moved the page to St. Augustine Parish Church (Laguna), which seemed to generate more hits. But maybe that is inaccurate? Perhaps "Philippines" should be in the name somewhere?
  • Regarding the hook, the location of the church should be included. Also, nipa needs to be disambiguated – do you mean Nypa fruticans (Nipa palm) or Distichlis palmeri (Nipa grass)? Yoninah (talk) 23:37, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Regarding references, there is certainly a very few sources for this type of article and for cultural heritage in the Philippines as a whole. Historical markers are the most common source of the information. If the title will be St. Augustine Parish Church (Philippines), following WP:COMMONNAME, it should be given to San Agustin Church (Manila) since it is the most common and known St. Agustin Church in the Philippines. With the concern on disambugating nipa, there are no references citing what species of nipa was used. --Carlojoseph14 (talk) 04:51, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg A view. OK its tricky to find extra information. I know because I had to add the extra bits. It would also be nice to know the species of Nypa but we describe objects as "wooden" without knowing the precise species of timber. The Phillipines is a country and Augustine is not an obscure saint. It seems unlikely that this is the most important, but I guess wiki rules would allow it to dabbed in the simplest way. The key point here is that this simple little article needs a review. Please assist. Victuallers (talk) 21:51, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg This article is new enough and long enough. The hook citation did not work for me so I added another. I also added a wikilink for "nipa". The article is neutral and I identified no copyright issues. The submitted image was not used in the article so I have taken the liberty of substituting the one that is used which is in the public domain. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:55, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Symbol possible vote.svg I have removed this from the prep area and reopen this nomination, because the hook is not adequately sourced. Source 1, dioceseofsanpablo.com, is not active (you get a general page from Sedo, the webhost apparently). Source 2, [1] is a wordpress source where the actual information about the hook comes from Wiki Pilipinas. So we don't have a reliable source for the hook, and this can't go on the main page. Worse, it seems very probable that the information is simply wrong, and has been a mixup with the San Agustin Church (Manila). Fram (talk) 09:49, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Article is not a mixup with San Agustin Church (Manila). These are too different structures/buildings. The article really needs good sources, as stated in the previous comments. --Carlojoseph14 (talk) 10:16, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Carlojoseph14, as this article was created by you, you're the logical person to supply those reliable sources, particularly for the hook. Please reply here if you add them to the article. If you don't have them, then it doesn't seem to me that the article can qualify for DYK. I realize that you didn't nominate the article, but as the nominator is not participating, it's left to you to determine what happens next. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:04, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Yes, edited the article and added reliable sources. I would like to change the hook.
ALT2: ... that the first church of Bay was constructed from cane and nipa by the Augustinians? --Carlojoseph14 (talk) 01:07, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Carlojoseph14, changing the hook is fine. (You might want to wikilink "nipa" to match the article.) While checking the new hook in the article, I noticed some redundant phrases in the History section. After doing a copyedit, the article is now 1474 prose characters, too short for DYK (it will need further expansion). I also noticed that one of the sources, biyahero.net, is a "travel portal", and as such is unlikely to be considered a reliable source. As the bulk of the second History paragraph is sourced to that site, a new source will be needed for that information. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:33, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
  • I think the phrase, "under the patronage of St. Augustine" should be kept since not all Augustinian parishes are established under the advocacy of St. Augustine. Regarding the travel site, only one line is source to that. --Carlojoseph14 (talk) 04:48, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
  • You're right about "patronage"—I hadn't realized that meant Augustine was the "patron saint", rather than it simply being an Augustinian-run church. I'm glad you restored it. The travel site remains an issue; if it's not reliable, then it simply shouldn't be used as a reference, and material sourced to it should be removed. I'm sorry, but information needs to be verifiable, and that requires reliability. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:07, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Removed the line sourced to the travel site. It is now less than 1500 char. So, I think, we need to close this nomination.Carlojoseph14 (talk) 04:04, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
6 weeks of tweaking? Pity to give up now, we don't have enough articles here. If someone could translate the plaque in the picture then we would have another reliable source. The article is over 1500 chars again Victuallers (talk) 13:20, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
The marker/plaque is already included as a source in the article. Although, some editor, would consider it a primary source. Carlojoseph14 (talk) 13:26, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
Article is now again above 1500 char. --Carlojoseph14 (talk) 07:18, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg New full review needed; issues raised in Fram's pulling of the hook from prep should be checked in the course of it. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:57, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol voting keep.svg The article is now over 1500 char and appears stable. The page creator has provided a new foreign-language source for the ALT1 hook which is AGF, answering Fram's concerns. (Thanks for disambiguating the nipa link, too!). All refs cited in the article are RS. This nomination is new enough, long enough, adequately referenced, no close paraphrasing seen in English-language sources. No QPQ needed for non-self-nom. ALT1 hook ref AGF and cited inline. ALT1 good to go. Yoninah (talk) 19:59, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on August 11[edit]

Welcome to the Jungle (Neon Jungle album)

5x expanded by Launchballer (talk). Self nominated at 08:51, 11 August 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Article has had its prose portion expanded at least fivefold and is long enough. However, almost the entire prose portion of the article consists of quotations of non-free text, which may be a close paraphrasing issue. Also, the first section ("Singles") is not cited by an inline source. Another issue is the presence of a Controversy section, which is generally prohibited by the neutral point-of-view policy. --Hirolovesswords (talk) 05:27, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
The singles were there when I got there. All I've done is taken them out as they are already present in the infobox and other places. As for the Controversy section, it is now called "Cover versions". What does the article look like without the quotations?--Launchballer 07:17, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
Since the emphasis at DYK is on new and original content, an article that is almost entirely taken from other sources is not appropriate. Either paraphrase or trim some of quotes or add more content so the quotes don't take up as much space. --Hirolovesswords (talk) 12:01, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
Blockquotes have been placed where appropriate, and the prose character count now in the mid-1300s, below the minimum required. Breaking up the quotes into more chunks won't make them less unoriginal; proper paraphrasing is the way to go, as it reduces the number of characters quoted. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:04, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
I've paraphrased the first quote slightly as I feel that information on the two highlights should adjoin each other, and the third quote I've paraphrased as well.--Launchballer 14:26, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
There are two ways of looking at the problem of overquotation: from the article and from the source. From the side of the article, overquoting creates stylistic issues and makes it difficult to meet DYK's requirement for original prose, and I would tend to think that this article wouldn't quite qualify there. What I'm a bit more concerned about here, though, is the source side: when you have a source as short as that Guardian review, your quotation represents over 50% of the source, and that's a non-free content problem. Similarly, the Stoke Sentinel quote is nearly 50% of that review. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:53, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Reiterating the earlier icon, and have tagged the article. Slight paraphrasing won't cut it; this article needs a major cut in quoted material if it's to qualify for DYK, and it needs to happen soon. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:26, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
I've just pillaged the contents of the Critical reception blockquotes, which yielded very little. I haven't yet looked at the Cover versions sections - should that be trimmed as well?--Launchballer 18:36, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
I trimmed Cover versions myself. As was true with the other section, the quote from Banks was almost the entire Facebook post (non-free content problem), and really wasn't needed, so except for a few words it's gone. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:37, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on August 13[edit]

Jonas Wood

Created by TonyTheTiger (talk). Self nominated at 15:27, 13 August 2014 (UTC).

  • Shouldn't it be "transcended"? Cbl62 (talk) 20:25, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment I am struggling with this article. Is this person somehow famous, or at least notable? It seems to be, because he appears to be mentioned in a number of notable sources. So why do I have no idea why he's notable? Transcending art movements? Who doesn't do that? Surely there is something less ephemeral that Wood is known for? Maury Markowitz (talk) 12:39, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
No, I get that, it's the hook I'm worried about. Every artist transcends art movements, that kind of goes with the territory these days. And looking over the examples I can find, I'm also struggling to see what is transcending about the work, it looks an awful lot like the stuff hanging in every gallery I visit. Is there nothing else special about this person or his work that actually differentiates him? Here, how about this... Maury Markowitz (talk) 18:26, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
  • ReviewSymbol question.svg @TonyTheTiger: The hook about transcending. It's not sourced, and by that I mean there is not a link beside it to the quote that says he does, and you need that for DYK. Suggestion: Something like ALT3 " ... that psychologist Jonas Wood explores the psychological effects of various living spaces through art? " Okay so... I do not like the Art Review cite (6). I do not think it says "the result is an impression of" sincerity, and I have racked myself to reword it. I can't find it. So, those are two issues. I have done some editing in the article and it is otherwise ready for DYK. ~ R.T.G 19:10, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
I appreciate that but DYK principle rule is sourcing, particularly the hook. ~ R.T.G 10:26, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Hooks absolutely can be summations and/or paraphrases of sources, as is the case here. Maury Markowitz (talk) 11:49, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
DYK Rules:"3. Cited hook – The fact(s) mentioned in the hook must be cited in the article. (See more information under The hook, below.) Facts should have an inline citation. The article as a whole should use inline, cited sources.

a) The hook should include a definite fact that is mentioned in the article and interesting to a broad audience. b) Each fact in the hook must be supported in the article by at least one inline citation to a reliable source, appearing no later than the end of the sentence(s) offering that fact. Citations at the end of the paragraph are not sufficient." ~ R.T.G 13:27, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Good question. Well the bit in our article isn't exact, it doesn't exactly say "results" or "perception", close as that is, and it makes for a good edit if you can get a sentence like that more precise without adding a load of ifs and ands and buts.. But.. I found him to be saying that Jonas Wood was really insistent about his work and that he, the reporter, appreciated that insistence. But writing that into the WP article would not fit because that is my own abstraction. You should disregard this one for the DYK because it is only semantic, however the lead sentence really should be sourceable in the main body, and the hook must be directly sourced. And I don't know what way to write a sentence about that source(6). So just leave it I guess. But fix something into the lead and use a hook that is quotable and it's all done. ~ R.T.G 10:26, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, don't feel the need to respond about the cite (6). I am just being conversational about that. Transcendence is a connotatively spiritual reference. It implies things of that sort. I do not see that sort of implication in the sources. You could say, Jonas Woods art is not defined by a single genre. Isn't that? ~ R.T.G 17:32, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Comment: I'd like to get some closure on this one. RTG has a problem with the original hook's cite, I had a problem with the hook itself but in retrospect I see I was simply reading it incorrectly (I think). Anyway we now have two ALTs we can choose among. RTG, I don't think your ALT is correct unless I missed something; did he actually work as a psychologist at any point? If so, I'm happy going with ALT3, otherwise I propose ALT2. Maury Markowitz (talk) 15:39, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Maybe I have confused the level of his training, but he does not have to be paid to be one. It is kind of misleading taken out of context, but in this context, that he is psychologically evaluating, I suppose that is even paid psychology work... (part of the article is the insistence that the guy is serious) But, he is a bachelor of the arts in psychology. I'm not sure how that can be construed... sorry. He's a "Psychology major" that is for sure... ~ R.T.G 10:00, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on August 15[edit]

Cathedral Parish of Saint Paul the First Hermit

San Pablo Cathedral

Created/expanded by Carlojoseph14 (talk). Nominated by Shhhhwwww!! (talk) at 23:46, 22 August 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg There is no inline citation for the hook fact nor can I find it in any of the referenced sites. I suggest
  • ALT1 ... that San Pablo Cathedral (pictured) was a parish church prior to a new diocese being established in 1966? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:13, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed. (Finished making the appropriate template updates to reflect the article move; struck original hook per Cwmhiraeth.) BlueMoonset (talk) 18:47, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • The sources in the first two footnotes don't look reliable to me. Is there any reason to assume they are?--Carabinieri (talk) 08:41, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol delete vote.svg Article was created on 15 August and nominated 22 August, so it meets the "new" criteria. Length checks out. However, like Carabinieri, I agree about the concern of reliability of those initial two citations. In addition, the citation for the hook appears to be a Media Office of the Constitution and By-Laws of the Catholic Bishops (CBCP) and I'm not sure this is sufficiently independent of the subject. There are also close paraphrasing concerns in this source from its first bullet point in the article. Unless all of these can be addressed, I don't think this is an appropriate article for DYK. I, JethroBT drop me a line 20:23, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg Sourcing checks out, but paraphrasing concerns are still there. Compare:
  • Source: The Cathedral of St. Paul the Hermit was first built with light materials by Fr. Mateo Mendoza in 1586. The second church, made of brick and stone, was built in 1629 by Father Hernando Cabrera. The present building was built in 1714 by Fr. Francisco Eloriaga on a foundation laid down by Fr. Juan Labao in 1680.
  • Article: The Parish of San Pablo de los Montes was established in 1586 by Augustinian Father Mateo Mendoza and a church made of light materials was built. The second church made of stone and adobe was built in 1629. In 1662, a new church was built under the Augustinians, then in 1680 under Father Juan Labo, OSA laid the foundations of the current church. The present church was built in 1714 and completed in 1721 by Father Francisco Juan de Elorreaga, OSA.
It's clear you tried to paraphrase here in some spots, but I think it could still be a little better, particularly about the second church. If this section can be rephrased, I think this should be good to go. I, JethroBT drop me a line 19:46, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Done. --Carlojoseph14 (talk) 08:55, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
The article has some unsourced material.--Carabinieri (talk) 18:51, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
Carabinieri? Can you please add a citation tag to those line/s that is/are unsourced? Per Rule D2, a minimum of one citation per paragraph is needed to qualify for DYK. --Carlojoseph14 (talk) 09:49, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
"Its titular is St. Paul the First Hermit and its feast is celebrated every January 15." That sentence is unsourced.
"In 1680 under Father Juan Labo laid the foundations of the current church. The current church building was started in 1714 and completed in 1721 by Father Francisco Juan de Elorreaga, OSA" These two sentences are also unsourced.
"The Franciscan later administered the parish of San Pablo (which was then part of the province of Batangas) on April 4, 1794 with Father Andres Cabrera, OFM as parish priest". You probably means the Franciscans. I think the source actually says that it was the Augustinians.
Also the article probably needs copyediting by a native English speaker.--Carabinieri (talk) 06:13, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
I would like to seek first Rule D2.--Carlojoseph14 (talk) 07:23, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
If you want to throw policy around, there is also WP:WIADYK: "Articles for DYK must conform to the core policies of Verifiability, Living Person Biographies and Copyright. Nominations should be rejected if an inspection reveals that they are not based on reliable sources".--Carabinieri (talk) 17:16, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Okay. Will edit this. I though the one ref per para is enough after I saw this nomination passed DYK.--Carlojoseph14 (talk) 17:36, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Dispatch (sternwheeler)

Created by Mtsmallwood (talk). Nominated by Aboutmovies (talk) at 14:56, 22 August 2014 (UTC).

  • Just a suggestion; consider rewording the hook. $18 was an impressive sum in 1904 no doubt but from the hook itself it looks like a rather lame amount as there's no specific indication of the time this occurred from the hook. Granted there are a lot less sternwheelers in operation now, but they're still around and one cigar stolen from one today could easily be worth more than $18. A lot of work has clearly been put into this article, I just think it deserves a hook that will get it more hits. Freikorp (talk) 15:56, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
  • ALT1 ... that the Dispatch sternwheeler from Oregon had cigars stolen from its barbershop one night? Aboutmovies (talk) 07:09, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
    • Symbol confirmed.svg Article new enough (created by Mtsmallwood on 15 August 2014), long enough (10,915 characters). Fully referenced. Hook verified. Good to go. Hawkeye7 (talk) 02:29, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg The hooks have to be just about the most uninteresting ones I've ever read at DYK, so I've struck them. The article is difficult to mine for interesting hooks because it's a series of fact snapshots from newspaper reports, most of which aren't that interesting in and of themselves, but build a bit of a picture of the place and time. I think my suggestion would be to go for the baseball game. Let me know whether this works:
  • ALT2: ... that the Dispatch sternwheeler carried as many as 400 passengers over two hours downriver from Coquille to Bandon, Oregon, to attend baseball games there?
I'm basing "over two hours" on the advertised schedules that showed 2.5 hours each way in October 1908 (the ad listed 3 hours upstream and 4 hours downstream in 1904 and 1905, as odd as that seems). Could change it from "baseball games" to "a baseball game" if the source only mentions a single instance; since it's not online, I can't check it myself, but obviously it's a better hook if this wasn't a one-off occurrence. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:14, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Lausanne-Flon station

  • ... that Lausanne-Flon station, the hub of the metro system in the Swiss city of Lausanne, has been rebuilt four times since it opened in 1877, and was the subject of a 1988 design competition?
  • ALT1:... that Lausanne-Flon station was rebuilt for the start of LEB services in 2000 after a design competition held in 1988?

5x expanded by Peeky44 (talk). Self nominated at 16:07, 20 August 2014 (UTC).

Newest building of Lausanne-Flon station

  • On re-examination, I think it needs a picture. I would suggest File:Leflon Lausanne.jpg and a revised hook which reads
Symbol question.svg The claim that this is the hub of the metro system is sourced to a dead link. I'm also a little concerned that all of the article's sources are local government websites, the station's architects, and local transport agencies. None of those seem to be truely independent sources.--Carabinieri (talk) 10:45, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on August 16[edit]

Gun politics in the Czech Republic

CZ 75 is the most common firearm in the Czech Republic

Got to GA level by Cimmerian praetor (talk). Self nominated at 21:23, 16 August 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg I prefer ALT1, but that statement is only found in the intro as far as I can tell, but it is not sourced there.--Carabinieri (talk) 09:52, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
That is something hard to source from meaningful sources. Just a cursory look through the Gun politics in the European Union will prove it. Then the original is more suitable, I guess. The concealed carry is stated expressively in the section Carrying a firearm, the self defense is covered extensively in section Self defense with firearms. It is well sourced. I carry daily, should there be any questions, I'll be more than happy to address them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cimmerian praetor (talkcontribs) 06:07, 14 October 2014‎ (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg - Full review needed as above reviewer didn't check other necessary items - NickGibson3900 Talk 04:54, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
I'd only like to point out that the article recently passed GA level review. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cimmerian praetor (talkcontribs) 06:07, 14 October 2014‎ (UTC)
  • Cimmerian praetor, that's true of all GA-listed articles, but we give them the same checks as all other nominated articles just the same. GA articles generally have a single reviewer, and that person can miss things as easily as anyone else. We've had a number of GA articles that have needed some extra work because of issues that were discovered in the DYK review. Indeed, there was a recent article that went through a GA reassessment because of the number of DYK issues found that were issues for GAs as well, and it was ultimately delisted; the reviewer had been new to GAs, and missed a number of problems involving the standard GA criteria. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:36, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks for letting me know. I surely have no problem with taking the article further, should the need arise. Thank you for your involvement. Regards, Cimmerian praetor (talk) 05:32, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Turn Me On (Kim Kyu-jong EP)

5x expanded by 001Jrm (talk). Self nominated at 06:13, 16 August 2014 (UTC).

People are sensitive about the exact words used for this sort of thing. Here's another possibility:

  • ALT1: ... that Kim Kyu-jong dressed as a woman for photographs included in his debut EP Turn Me On, but later said he was disappointed that he did not look pretty?

Antony–22 (talkcontribs) 20:06, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. I didn't know that those words are sensitive to some as I'm not affected. Anyways, the alternate is good too, though the first one attracts more attention IMO. Either way, I'm ok with it. :) 001Jrm (talk) 03:04, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
I put a strike through the first lead. I think we need to take care not to offend anyone and I think the first one definitely goes over the line. Secondly, if we did do a lead like this, we need to attribute the source. Who said he looked like a transvestite/not pretty? Did he say it himself? A journalist? Otherwise, it's original research. Also, I'm having trouble finding that hook in the article. I saw the part about "turn me on", but nothing about pictures, transvestites, or the like. Maybe my eyes are just crossing and I'm overlooking it (it's happened before), can you point me to it? Edit: Doh! I was looking at his article, not the turn it on article. NVM Bali88 (talk) 19:35, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
I'm glad you saw the hook in the article. Just to clarify, the term "transvestite" was mentioned by him here. The news was translated from a Korean site, but since I'm not a Korean myself and the news was from 2011, I can only depend on the English sites in this case. I'm also okay with the second hook since I don't want to offend anyone either. Thank you :) 001Jrm (talk) 02:39, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
I'm not crazy about the second hook, but it'll work if we can't find anything else. Transvestite is now considered to be a derogatory term. I'm quite certain he probably didn't mean it to be derogatory when he said it, but that's how it was translated, so we're kind of stuck with it. I'd like to put something about his motives in the hook, but again, the translation...it's kind of vague so I'm not really sure how to paraphrase that either. Hmm...I'll see if I can find someone who speaks Korean. Maybe they can look at it. Bali88 (talk) 04:19, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
I'm sorry for the late response... Thanks a lot for taking your time to look for a Korean-speaking person and putting an effort for the hook. I appreciate your help so much! I'll just wait for your news then, and we'll decide whether to use the second hook or not later on. Good luck! :) 001Jrm (talk) 05:16, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
No luck so far! I know plenty of people who speak arabic, chinese, and Japanese, but no Koreans yet! Bali88 (talk) 13:29, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
Have you tried asking Wikipedia:WikiProject Korea? Antony–22 (talkcontribs) 04:35, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on August 19[edit]

Oliver Evans

Oliver Evans (Engraving)

  • ... that Oliver Evans (pictured) designed the first fully automated industrial process?
  • ALT1:... that Oliver Evans' (pictured) automatic flour mill from the late 18th century is regarded as the first fully automated industrial process?
  • Reviewed: Not a self-nomination

Improved to Good Article status by Unus Multorum (talk). Nominated by Oceanh (talk) at 18:56, 19 August 2014 (UTC).

  • I'm going to have to challenge a statement of "first fully [whatever]", in an area as broad as industrial processes, which is based on a source almost 60 years old. I think we need something including more recent research into the history of technology, which was a relatively new field at the time. EEng (talk) 21:35, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
Sorry I forgot about this. I have now searched for more recent sources, and came across his biography in Encyclopedia Britannica, which says, "American inventor who pioneered the high-pressure steam engine (U.S. patent, 1790) and created the first continuous production line (1784)." They use the different wording created the first continuous production line, while the proposed hooks are taken from the Wikipedia article. Any suggestions on how to proceed with this? (modify the article? different hook? withdraw nomination?) Oceanh (talk) 19:55, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
EEng, do you have any suggestions for Oceanh? BlueMoonset (talk) 03:21, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed, which should consider the initial concerns and response to them, and perhaps give a suggestion on how to proceed. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:59, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
I would like to suggest
  • ALT1 ... that other millers viewing the fully-automated flour mill designed by Oliver Evans (pictured) could not appreciate its advantages? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:03, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for providing an alternative hook, which I think catches the essence of the article. Oceanh (talk) 22:20, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on August 20[edit]

List of Marvel Cinematic Universe television series

Moved to mainspace by Favre1fan93 (talk). Self nominated at 02:41, 25 August 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article is new enough, long enough and within policy. The hook however isn't all that interesting. Perhaps if it explained why expanding to Netflix is unique.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 12:24, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
How about these TriiipleThreat? Any other suggestions if you feel these aren't interesting enough? - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:01, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
I like ALT1 better but at 205 characters, its too long. Try trimming it back a bit.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 17:06, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
ALT 1 (second attempt): ... that the Marvel Cinematic Universe television series will expand to Netflix in 2015, after realizing the streaming service could grow the popularity of the characters of the series?
This is 180 characters. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:16, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg Support with ALT 1. Good job.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 18:40, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Thank you! To the closing user, I have put strikes through previous versions, to ensure the correct one gets added. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 21:22, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg The ALT1 hook language is a verbatim quote from the source. Either it should be put in quotes here and in the article, or rewritten to avoid close paraphrasing. It seems to me that someone should review all the sources in the article to verify that there is no close paraphrasing elsewhere. Yoninah (talk) 22:41, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
The quotes were added in the article, but not here, as the direct wording is not used here. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 00:26, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
ALT1 is no good as a television series is incapable of "realizing" anything (also "grow the popularity" is horrible marketing-speak). Belle (talk) 01:38, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Reattempt: ... that the Marvel Cinematic Universe television series will expand to Netflix in 2015, after Disney realized the streaming service could "grow the popularity of the characters" of the series?

Reattempting this to hopefully address Belle's comments. And if that still isn't good, let's try these (or these may even be outright better). Pinging TriiipleThreat and Yoninah to maybe get their opinons as well:

ALT 3: ... that the Marvel Cinematic Universe television series has seen multiple actors reprise their roles from the MCU films?

ALT 4: ... that Amazon and WGN America expressed interest in airing the Marvel Cinematic Universe television series on the "Defenders", before Netflix acquired them? - Favre1fan93 (talk) 03:18, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

  • Symbol question.svg Alt 4 can be verified but is possibly the dullest fact from the entire article. Alt 3 is not in the article—nowhere is there a sentence that says multiple actors reprised their roles, but I'd have thought that would be easy enough to add in and source. Or better still, you could add "including actor X and actor Y", selecting two or three of the most notable actors. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:03, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Rework: ... that the Marvel Cinematic Universe television series have seen multiple actors, such as Clark Gregg and Hayley Atwell, reprise their roles from the MCU films? How's that @HJ Mitchell:? - Favre1fan93 (talk) 00:33, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Much better, but it needs to say that in the article—DYK rules require that the hook fact be derived from a sentence in the article and that that sentence has an inline citation, not just that it can be inferred from the article as a whole. It's silly, I know, but DYK loves rules. Also, shouldn't series be a plural (as in series have, rather than has) since we're talking about more than one series? (@ Favre1fan93) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:56, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Both are sourced, not inferred, here. Grammar fixed. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 02:05, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on August 21[edit]

Nuestra Señora de Candelaria Parish Church (Mabitac)

Mabitac Church

Created by Carlojoseph14 (talk). Nominated by Shhhhwwww!! (talk) at 17:42, 28 August 2014 (UTC).

Symbol confirmed.svg QPQ bye, DKYcheck, newness, hook and cites all pass. Good to go as-is. However, if I may be so bold...
No problem, I think it is more interesting. :) Carlojoseph14 (talk) 03:41, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg New reviewer needed for ALT1. Yoninah (talk) 21:02, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svgThe source cited in footnote 6 doesn't look reliable to me. Footnote 5 also looks iffy. It's a site hosted on blogspot that claims to be a government National Registry. Has anyone established that it really was created by a government institution? How about footnote 8? What makes that source reliable? The article also needs copyediting.--Carabinieri (talk) 13:30, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Thank you for those clarifications. What about fn 6? Also, which source describes the panoramic view? Fn 1, which follows the claim does not mention the view. Fn 2 is a full-length book, so you should really give the page numbers you got the information from. Carabinieri (talk) 15:07, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Issues resolved! :) I would like to propose a new ALT
ALT2:: ... that the Mabitac Church (pictured) is located on a hill named as Calvario? --Carlojoseph14 (talk) 08:46, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, but now there's actually quite a bit of unsourced material. Also, I don't really see what's interesting about ALT2.--Carabinieri (talk) 18:48, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
Have you taken a look on its citations, Carabinieri? Can you please add a citation tag to those line/s that is/are unsourced? Regarding the hook, it is unusual for a church or Catholic/religious structure to be built on a hill named not after a saint but after Calvary, the site where Christ is crucified. --Carlojoseph14 (talk) 09:40, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Juan Karlos Labajo

Created by 001Jrm (talk). Nominated by PapaJeckloy (talk) at 11:31, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

001Jrm (talk) 05:11, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

ironically is not an appropriate word in an encyclopedic content, and the people don't need to know if he's half german or not, be straight to the point -PAPAJECKLOY (hearthrob! kiss me! <3) (talk) 08:32, 25 August 2014 (UTC).
To the future non-involved reviewer: I'm sorry that our (me and the other editor) disagreements will be dragged here. I tried talking with him/her through his/her talk page but there was no consensus. I was willing to compromise with him/her if s/he talked things through with me, but it never happened. As for the hook, I can and I'm willing to explain why I added the hook, but only after you commented on that. I believe that you will be fair with any decision that you will make, which we needed from the start. In the same way, I'll accept any criticisms/comments from you. I hope we'll have a better conversation here as a non-involved editor will be in between us (me and the other editor) now. Thank you! (edit: After much deliberation with myself, I will just add the nominator's name for contributing 0.2% text in the article (note: contributor, not creator) since I don't want to look like I'm being inconsiderate. Fighting over this is actually lame and I don't want to make this issue bigger. However, I still want to know who can be considered as a contributor in cases like ours. I want to at least give credit to others if something like this happens again in the future. Thank you!)
To the nominator: As much as possible, please refrain yourself from editing this page unless it's really needed. Respect others to comment here first especially that you're the nominator.
001Jrm (talk) 20:16, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg Please stop arguing with each other, the disagreements between you and him really don't help this nomination, this article is new and long enough, created on Aug 21 and nominated within seven day period on Aug 23, the article is more than 1,500 readable prose. The article is well sourced, neutral and the hook is ok i prefer ALT3, this article is now ready for DYK. -EtitsNgKabayo (talk) 07:18, 29 August 2014 (UTC).
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg - Wait! Besides the really offensive username (Etits ng Kabayo is "Horse's penis" in Filipino), the "reviewer" have only edited this article is no way to prove that he is an experienced reviewer. Can someone review this article again? Thanks. -WayKurat (talk) 12:26, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
  • 001Jrm, do you want to continue with this nomination? We're happy to do so if you'd like. PapaJeckloy is no longer involved (I've removed his credit, as it seems undeserved based on what I can see of his article edits), as he has been indefinitely blocked on Wikipedia (and thus from DYK) for sockpuppeting—among other things, he attempted to pass this very nomination by using the EtitsNgKabayo account that he created. If any of his edits to this article were suboptimal, you might want to fix them. Further, if any of his hook suggestions are problematic, please feel free to strike them out, and you can propose other hooks if you want. Please let us know how you'd like to proceed. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:41, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
First of all, thank you for your much effort in taking care of the user's actions and behavior. I've seen the many discussion pages involving the user, and I'm happy to know your (you and the other editors') collaborative effort in fixing the problem. Anyways, I'm willing to continue the nomination. For the hooks... as much as I want to use my own hook here (which is ALT2: ... that half-German singer Juan Karlos Labajo ironically experienced collecting trash and bullying in his hometown despite his Caucasian look? ), I don't want to exclude the nominator's proposed hooks either. I'll just leave the choosing of the right hook for you or other reviewers. Thank you again! 001Jrm (talk) 03:51, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
  • I've just edited the prose and references in the article, and adding and removing facts depending on whether they seemed to be supported by the available sources. As I've mentioned on your talk page, I have trouble with "ironically", which is not in the article and is rather subjective. I do have a couple of hook suggestions that I think work better than the ones PapaJeckloy suggested:
If this aren't interesting enough, I can try to create others, or you can if you'd rather. (If you want to specify that he's half-German, for example, you'd need also to mention half-Filipino, because that wouldn't be known either unless it's included.) BlueMoonset (talk) 00:29, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
Both alt look good to me, though I'd probably prefer alt4. Concerning alt2, I honestly didn't notice my exclusion of JK's Filipino blood since I was focused on his Caucasian look. Adding both bloodlines will make the hook much longer, however, so excluding both is probably the better choice. I added the word "ironically" because of his statement: "Marami pong nag aakala na, ‘Uy mayaman yan!’ Dahil nga daw po sa mukha ko. Pero ‘di po nila alam, sa Cebu ang dami po naming utang, nangungupahan lang kami, palipat-lipat ng bahay," ("Many had thought I was rich because of my face. What they did not know was that my family was in big debt and we always moved from house to house.") Since his face made him look like a "rich" kid, I added the word "ironically" to emphasize the irony between the "rich face" and "collecting trash". That's my reason. In the same way, he also mentioned his mixed race the reason of bullying. Now that I think about it, bullying shouldn't have been included in my initial hook since ironically wouldn't fit that fact. IF my hook is still valid, I'll reword it into this: ALT6 ... that Juan Karlos Labajo ironically experienced collecting trash despite his rich look? Of course, the word "ironically" can still be removed if my reason is not enough. I also believe 'rich look' is not the right term but I can't think of any at this moment + Caucasian is probably the one that's making it subjective after all. It's not that I don't like your hooks, though. In the end, you will still be the last to decide. :) BTW, I already replied on my talk page concerning other stuff. Thank you! 001Jrm (talk) 06:49, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Charles Cryer Theatre, Secombe Theatre

The Secombe Theatre

  • Comment: Not a self-nomination.

Created by A P Monblat (talk). Nominated by Launchballer (talk) at 19:35, 21 August 2014 (UTC).

  • ReviewSymbol question.svg Okay, Cryer Theatre, is passed, except for the Prince opening because the link is dead. Because of close paraphrasing, I had to rewrite most of the article. Secombe also has a deadlink in the lead section. Except for those, it's a pass. ~ R.T.G 20:08, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment @A P Monblat, Launchballer:I want to remove the Charles Cryer article so that we can used this hook below in ALT1 because I believe that will generate a thousand hits but saying "named after the guy who liked it" will generate a hundred..
  • ALT1 ... that closure-threatened Secombe Theatre (pictured) was converted from a Christian Scientist Church in 1984?
  • Note: All that is needed to pass is to address the dead links. Changing the DYK is just my idea. ~ R.T.G 21:45, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
  • I am happy with ALT 1 (with small typo correction which I have made). A P Monblat (talk) 23:37, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Update I have fixed the broken link for Charles Cryer, but not for Secombe, as the whole Welsh Icons website appears to be unobtainable. A P Monblat (talk) 01:44, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
@A P Monblat:Well the only bit that leaves unsourced is that Prince Harry opened it. There are a lot of Secombe surnames associated with Harry in the press (I can't find an alternative resource), so I'd just remove that sentence and source the opening sentence to another source already on the page, and then it's a pass... Note it on the talk page and someone will add it eventually or disprove it or whatever. ~ R.T.G 08:04, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
And if this one uses only one of the articles, you could try for another one with the other theatre. ~ R.T.G 08:06, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
@RTG: I have followed your advice, and removed the now unsourced fact (by the way it is Sir Harry, not Prince Harry), and have used the Theatre Trust link for the opening sentence. So, I think we are now good to go on the Secombe Theatre, and can always nominate the Charles Cryer Theatre on another occasion, as you say. However, I think we should wait for Launchballer, as nominator, to indicate that he too is content. A P Monblat (talk) 11:03, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
@Launchballer: Is this approach OK with you too? A P Monblat (talk) 11:03, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
@A P Monblat, Launchballer:Symbol confirmed.svg I will go ahead and place the tick, and also, I have reviewed the Cryer article. If you can put a hook here for it, I can approve them both in one go even if they are split to two DYKs, or at least, enter a new nomination for it, and ping me in the comment, and I can just approve it. ~ R.T.G 11:13, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment for closing admin please read this one carefully. there is discussion of splitting this into two DYKs (for a more catchy hook based on one of them), just in case ~ R.T.G 11:16, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Struck the original hook because it is not supported in the Secombe article by an inline source citation after the relevant sentence, and the articles are clearly being split. Fixed the grammar of the ALT1 hook, which I didn't understand until I'd read the article. I'm a bit troubled by the Secombe article's using the phrase "future was secured" in the Operation of the theatre section, only to say that it's at risk of closure in the next section. I think the former needs to be reworded, while the risk needs to be better explained in the latter (there's more detail in the Tim Vine source, and the link from it to the council's consultation led me to discover that the consultation period ended hours before I got there), including when the council decided to consider closing various cultural institutions, before the nomination can be approved. Incidentally, the Cryer article should be addressed in this nomination—even if separately—rather than opening a new nomination, which would be considered to be too late. For that, however, a new hook is needed, and should be proposed right away. Once that is done, a new reviewer will be needed for ALT1, since an RTG-created hook cannot also be approved by RTG. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:37, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
I have made the two edits about Secombes security and possible closure. That leaves only the hooks. So I will note in short below that it is just the hooks now, ~ R.T.G 10:58, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Symbol question.svgNew reviewer needed to approve hooks only, ALT1 above, and one for the Cryer theatre (I will mark it "ALT1a, ALT2a" for the Cryer) ALT1a ... that the Charles Cryer Theatre, opened by His Royal Highness Prince Edward in 1991 in Carshalton, was given the name of a man who campaigned for creation of the local Secombe Theatre? ALT2a ... that the Charles Cryer Theatre, opened by His Royal Highness Prince Edward in 1991 in Carshalton, has also been a public hall, an ice skating rink and a cinema? (Note: or if those hooks are a bit wordy, try removing reference to prince Edward, or ping me and I'll do it) ~ R.T.G 10:58, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

I think we should retain the reference to Prince Edward as this adds notability, but I am otherwise happy with both ALT1a and ALT2a. I have also fixed a small typo in the former; and have added in "(pictured)" in ALT1, as it comes with an image. A P Monblat (talk) 14:10, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
@BlueMoonset: Not sure if that does it? ~ R.T.G 18:06, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg Yeah I think it is okay with AP Monblat okaying the hook so I will put the tick. ~ R.T.G 11:13, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Also, RTG should not be approving hooks that he or she proposed. Someone else will need to review those. (Which I think means the hooks for both articles, at this point.) BlueMoonset (talk) 19:52, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
  • I have removed the two tags, as I don't think they apply any more- see article history for reasons. A P Monblat (talk) 20:02, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Is it not okay for A P Monblat to review the hooks? It was their say so I thought had it. ~ R.T.G 22:31, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
  • As creator, A P Monblat can say whether a proposed hook works or not—we give a certain amount of deference to nominators on what hooks should be used—but neither nominator nor creator can approve hooks on their nominations. The same is true for people who propose hooks; they can't review their own hooks. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:28, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg New reviewer needed to check the ALT hooks for the two articles. Be sure to specify which hooks/articles are approved, and strike any that aren't to avoid confusion. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:28, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg for Alts 1a and 2a (Charles Cryer Theatre)—1a is not supported by the article (which says rollerskating, not ice skating, though I have the balance for neither!) and 2a is too long. It's 183 characters (17 under the 200 hard limit), but is too wordy, too complicated. Without the Prince Edward sub-clause it would probably be acceptable, but I haven't extensively reviewed the article. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:23, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Good to go for ALT 1 (Secombe Theatre; ... that closure-threatened Secombe Theatre (pictured) was converted from a Christian Scientist Church in 1984? ). New enough, long enough, hook fact is cited and verified. No obvious issues with copyright/NPOV/etc. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:23, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Note to promoter: please do not close this template when you promote the Secombe Theatre hook; instead, strike that hook and remove the DYKmake and DYKnom for it. Work will continue on the Charles Cryer Theatre part of the nomination. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:50, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Secombe hook has been promoted and then struck here and the DYKmake/DYKnom templates for it have been deleted, since it is now completed. All that remains to do is the nomination of Charles Cryer Theatre. I've struck ALT2a (which mentions the non-existent ice staking rink). A new review is in order since the article has a new Productions and workshops section; reviewer should take into account HJ Mitchell's comments on ALT1a's length (which he accidentally ascribes to ALT2a). Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:52, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
  • How about leaving out the words "His Royal Highness" from ALT1a, while retaining "Prince Edward"? A P Monblat (talk) 00:57, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
  • That would result in the following 164-character hook:
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Review still needed per above. —BlueMoonset (talk) 03:55, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

HOP Ranch

Created by Dnforney (talk). Self nominated at 04:57, 21 August 2014 (UTC).

  • Even before I look at the article, the hook is far too long at 240 characters.--Launchballer 19:42, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Not only that... the article doesn't say he "rediscovered" a "forgotten process", rather that the subject was on a "quest to identify soils that could be used to re-create a pottery glaze resembling that of Ming Dynasty works". That's quite different. EEng (talk) 02:04, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Look, I'm not trying to be difficult, but now that I look at the source, it says he "became intrigued with re-creating the lost matte glaze of the Chinese Ming Dynasty." It doesn't say he did it. And to be blunt, I'm not sure we should be adopting phrases like "international acclaim" for attempted recreation of the lost Ming process from New Falcon Herald, the "Local newspaper for Falcon, Calhan, Peyton, Black Forest and Stetson Hills." An extraordinary claim requires extraordinary sources. EEng (talk) 13:39, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
I have tried to address above comments. In particular I've completely re-worked the Van Briggle information to attribute it to the leading experts/authors books on Van Briggle and make the information far more specific. Hopefully it leaves no doubt that he in fact re-created, revived (or what have you) the old process having a breakthrough in 1901, later winning top awards in international exhibits in 1903, 1904. Thanks! dnforney (talk) 13:42, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Hook has apparently been shortened in place (next time please use ALT hooks!) so it isn't above the maximum allowed; full review needed, including of issues already raised. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:19, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg I agree that the part about "international acclaim" is superfluous. The first part is enough...
  • ALT1: ... that potter Artus Van Briggle spent three summers at HOP Ranch to gather strength as he recreated a forgotten Ming Dynasty glaze process?
  • However, the hook fact about recreating the glaze process is not cited in the article, after the sentence in question. Also, the first paragraph under Dangers, and the last paragraph under Ranch culture, need at least one cite, per DYK rules. Yoninah (talk) 00:04, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on August 22[edit]

2014 Musab bin Umair mosque massacre

  • * ... that the 2014 Musab bin Umair mosque massacre (pictured) that killed 73 people in Iraq was carried out in revenge for the bombing of a local militia leader?
  • Reviewed:

Created by Fotoriety (talk). Nominated by AndrewRT (talk) at 21:23, 27 August 2014 (UTC).

Symbol possible vote.svg The hook is not supported in the article, the cite doesn't even really imply it. Suggest simple change:
  • Symbol question.svg Albasrah doesn't look like a reliable source to me. It says that it "is a personal website that first appeared on the Internet in April 2003 as a personal endeavor."
  • Footnote 17 is a dead link.
  • What makes Al-Quds Al-Arabi a reliable source?--Carabinieri (talk) 10:59, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Tijuana Cross-border Terminal]

Article created by Keizers (talk) mostly from material recently written by Rnieders (talk), but which has been added to the article Tijuana International Airport. Nominated by Keizers (talk) at 01:58, 23 August 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol delete vote.svg Article - majority of it copied from another article, and not expanded fivefold as per policy. Interesting material, well sourced and long enough. No obvious copyvio. There is a problem with the Hook - although it is short enough and interesting, the sentence it refers to does not have an inline citation ending it, in the main article as per policy. -LookingYourBest (talk) 11:27, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • I have requested help from a DYK admin on the first point of the review, as I realise the text was newly created, just in a different article. -LookingYourBest (talk) 11:56, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Interesting - I'd say as the text itself was new (created only hours before being shifted), then this is ok I would have thought as the text falls within the seven day period, so I personally would be happy to take the text as new. However I don't feel strongly and am happy to go with consensus. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:14, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • I'll strike the first problem in that case as it's a very interesting article and subject. The Hook problem still stands, but I imagine this could be easily resolved. Thank you very much for looking in. -LookingYourBest (talk) 12:38, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Fixed source issue. Keizers (talk) 13:12, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Problems above resolved. Article looks good to go, although I am a new reviewer and would like a second opinion, and would appreciate any comments. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LookingYourBest (talkcontribs) 13:38, 18 September 2014‎ (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg By my count, eight of the History paragraphs are completely unsourced, and should have at least one inline source citation in each per DYK requirements. There are also some problems with the article not reflecting the current status of the terminal (which is under construction); for example, the second-to-last paragraph referring to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton—she isn't SoS now, though she was then—and "an expected groundbreaking in late 2013", which is now in the past. I realize this is in a History section, but that means you have to be especially careful with tenses and wording. Note to LookingYourBest: as I think you realized, the "passed" parameter at the top shouldn't be filled out by the reviewer, but by the person who ultimately promotes the nomination (who is always someone other than the reviewer). Thanks for reviewing! BlueMoonset (talk) 20:10, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
I added sources to the article where missing. (In fact the source material was provided by the original project manager as images, but OK I added the ref tags.) Please have a look again to reconsider.Keizers (talk) 17:03, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Keizers, thanks for the improvements. However, the second paragraph in the 1989 - Mexicana de Aviacion proposal section is still unreferenced, as is the entire 1996 - Casey Development proposal section. The other issue I mentioned, with the article not reflecting the current state of the terminal, has not been addressed at all. More needs to be done here. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:13, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
Completed additional changes, thank you. Keizers (talk) 13:20, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg I would like a more experienced DYK reviewer to assess the current state of the hook and article now that it has inline source citations for the paragraphs, and edits have been made to address the tense issues and current state of the terminal. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:42, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

United States Navy systems commands

  • ... that six systems commands not only design, construct, and maintain the U. S. Navy's military hardware, but also include the chiefs of two of the Navy's eight staff corps?

Created by Antony-22 (talk). Self nominated at 18:18, 23 August 2014 (UTC).

Okay, I suppose that people have been avoiding this nomination because there are a lot of references to look at to support the hook. So I'm going to make it easy and point out the relevant parts of the sources for you.

Antony–22 (talkcontribs) 23:34, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Thanks for the above Antony–22. Hm. So, the article was created in March 2010, though it was basically a list of wikilinks. The current version is probably better filed under a 5x expansion rather than a new article. The prose is definitely long enough. Some of the Function and organization section is indeed sourced to entirely primary sources, which is a concern. The hook meets length requirements, but the concern is that all of its sources, except for Ref. 13, are primary sources from the system commands' websites, many of which resemble mission statements that support the hook's claim that they "design, construct, and maintain the U. S. Navy's military hardware". Primary sources should be avoided when trying to make interpretations, but I don't think the hook represents original research by the author. That said, I really don't think mission statements are appropriate sources as a general rule. On that basis, I'd recommend the hook be changed to:
ALT 1: ... that the six systems commands include chiefs from two of the Navy's eight staff corps?
QPQ also checks out, so in summary, I'd like to see a few non-primary sources in the Function and organization section, and a change to the hook. I, JethroBT drop me a line 22:39, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on August 23[edit]

One Commercial Street, Poor door

Created by Edwardx (talk), Philafrenzy (talk). Nominated by Edwardx (talk) at 14:09, 30 August 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svgOne Commercial Street is marked as a stub and reads like one. It is also just barely over 1,500 characters and that includes a significant amount of text that's not really about this building. To be honest, I'm not even certain, the sources cited in the article are enough to clearly establish the topic's notability.
  • Poor door has an unsourced paragraph.--Carabinieri (talk) 13:41, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Edwardx, it's been almost a week since I pinged you on this one. I've taken a look at the articles, and in addition to the issues already raised, there's the fact that 369 characters from the poor door article were copied into One Commercial Street. By DYK rules, this requires that One Commercial Street is a 5x expansion of that copied material, or 1845 prose characters. It's currently 1656 prose characters, and has a stub template; it also reads like a stub, with incomplete sentences, some tense issues (as the building has opened, using future tense to describe it isn't appropriate; it certainly isn't appropriate for the hook, since the source indicates that the elevator serving the building's poor door has already broken down), and some claims that definitely need sourcing, like the construction suspension and subsequent purchase. It may be that One Commercial Street will ultimately have to be dropped from the nomination, leaving poor door, but the entire nomination will have to be closed if you fail to respond. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:17, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol delete vote.svg No response to pings and no edits to the article, despite Edwardx having made several dozen edits on Wikipedia in the interim, including a new DYK nomination. Closing as unsuccessful. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:51, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Tafelberg School

* ... that Tafelberg School in Cape Town was originally established for white students?

* ALT1:... that Tafelberg School was first established in a building from 1899 and moved to a new location in 2010?
* ALT2:... that a psychiatrist at Tafelberg School estimated a third of its learners were on Ritalin?

Moved to mainspace by Nathan121212 (talk), Victuallers (talk) Afri Twin article created by HelenOnline (talk). Nominated by Nathan121212 (talk) at 17:01, 23 August 2014 (UTC).

 :) EEng (talk) 13:40, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Striking through other ALTS, this nomination is ready to be reviewed. Nathan121212 (talk) 13:52, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Note I have added Afri Twin by User:HelenOnline to this nomination. I hope I have adjusted this template accordingly. The following was suggested by HelenOnline:
  • ALT4: ... that Tafelberg School is one of over 250 schools in the United Kingdom and South Africa linked with overseas schools for mutual benefit via Afri Twin? Nathan121212 (talk) 13:54, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Note: I've fixed the new DYKmake credit, added a DYKnom, and the Afri Twin article history link is also now available. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:39, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Note: I have (hopefully) made some improvements to Tafelberg School nominated by Nathan121212. @Nathan121212: I could not find sources for some content relating to the school's early history. Please add sources where indicated in the article otherwise I think the unsourced content should be removed which is not too serious as it is not a lot of text and we can work around it. HelenOnline 14:49, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
  • @HelenOnline: I'm also struggling to find sources for that info. I came up with the year by seeing the age of the school in one of the articles and deducting that from the date the source article was written. That needs to be confirmed though. That text may need to be removed for the purpose of this DYK nomination. Nathan121212 (talk) 15:11, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
  • OK thanks, I found that source (note the article date was two years out in the citation) and have incorporated it into the article. HelenOnline 17:02, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Note I would like to propose ALT5 elaborating on the school as otherwise I think the hook is unlikely to attract interest in that particular article, and perhaps it will also attract a reviewer with an interest in the subject:
  • ALT5: ... that Tafelberg School for children with special learning needs is one of over 250 schools in the United Kingdom and South Africa linked with overseas schools for mutual benefit via Afri Twin? HelenOnline 10:31, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

FYI, I reformatted the references, but did not change the substance of the content. 7&6=thirteen () 22:56, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on August 24[edit]

Sutton heritage mosaic

The Sutton heritage mosaic in Sutton High Street

  • ... that if you haven't got time to visit them, you can see all of Sutton's heritage sites on the Sutton heritage mosaic (pictured), one of the largest examples of wall art in Britain?

Created by A P Monblat (talk). Self nominated at 21:53, 24 August 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg The article creation date and length are OK. Assuming good faith on one source, the other two are not plagiarized. The image is free and used in the article. QPQ was done. The only problem is the hook: you write about "all of Sutton`s heritage sites", in the article are mentioned the "main heritage sites", in the source there is no mention of sites, but only of "heritage buildings" plus other features. I think that here some more consistency with the source is needed. Alex2006 (talk) 17:27, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
  • You have a point. In retrospect the word "sites" was not the best choice of description. I've amended the article slightly in the lead, and propose a revised hook at ALT1. A P Monblat (talk) 19:28, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
  • ALT1... that if you haven't got time to experience it first hand, you can see many aspects of Sutton's heritage and local history on the Sutton heritage mosaic (pictured), one of the largest examples of wall art in Britain?
  • Symbol question.svg Now is perfect, except the length (218 characters): you have to cut something, and go below 200, sorry... Alex2006 (talk) 14:02, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
  • How about ALT2 ... that you can see many aspects of Sutton's heritage and local history on the Sutton heritage mosaic (pictured), one of the largest examples of wall art in Britain? A P Monblat (talk) 16:04, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol voting keep.svg Very good! Good to go for ALT2, thanks, Alex2006 (talk) 07:08, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svgFootnotes 3, 4, and 5 are personal websites. There is an unsourced section. I think that should be taken care of.--Carabinieri (talk) 04:08, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
  • I have dealt with all these issues now. A P Monblat (talk) 02:22, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Although the original review says the QPQ was done, it is not listed on this nomination template, and it has to be linked to here so it can be checked. A P Monblat, can you please list your quid pro quo review here (with the link to that review's template)? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:29, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
  • In saying QPQ was done, I assume the original reviewer meant the matter had been looked into: I am a Did You Know newby, having only three DYK nominations to my name. A P Monblat (talk) 09:47, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Got it, thanks. Usually it's noted as something like "QPQ not required because nominator does not yet have five DYKs". I'll let Carabinieri continue reviewing, then. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:00, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
  • No more objections on my part.--Carabinieri (talk) 18:38, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Needs a reviewer to give this a new approval. Thanks. Striking original and ALT1 hooks due to issues raised. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:51, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg, I doubted noteability first, it looks like late GDR propaganda as well, but it is reasonale sourced. Pic is on commons. Lets go Serten (talk) 16:25, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on August 26[edit]

Barton Currie

Officer 666

  • ... that Barton Currie wrote the comic novel Officer 666 (pictured), and a book about tractors?
  • Reviewed: not a self-nom

Created by Philafrenzy (talk). Nominated by Edwardx (talk) at 23:10, 2 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg New enough, long enough, well referenced, no close paraphrasing seen. No QPQ needed for non-self-nom. Image is pd. The image is terrific, but the hook is a little flat. Would you like to expand on the Broadway and film adaptations of the novel? Alternately, you may find something else for the hook in material that I added to the Writing Career section. Best, Yoninah (talk) 20:42, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks for your additions! I will take a look. Philafrenzy (talk) 21:31, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on August 27[edit]

John Messinger

Created by Teemu08 (talk). Self nominated at 19:16, 27 August 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol voting keep.svg Following the review criteria here: Article creation date and length verified. The article is neutral and cites sources with inline citations. The sources are offline, so I take on good faith that it is free of close paraphrasing issues, copyright violations and plagiarism.

    The hook is very interesting and is cited in the article.

    Excellent work on the article!

    Cunard (talk) 22:02, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Pulled from prep because the hook statement in the article is unsourced. Gatoclass (talk) 14:00, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Gatoclass (talk · contribs), the hook statement in the article is sourced:

He represented Illinois when the state line with the Territory of Michigan was formed, now the state line with Wisconsin.[1][2]

  1. ^ Allen, John W. (1968). It Happened in Southern Illinois. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University. pp. 22–23. 
  2. ^ Weber, Jessie Palmer, ed. (1920). The Centennial of the State of Illinois. Springfield, IL: Illinois State Journal Co. p. 339. 

Cunard (talk) 03:32, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

That's right, it only says he "represented Illinois" when the state line was formed, it doesn't say he personally set it. Gatoclass (talk) 13:52, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Would this rephrasing be acceptable? Teemu08 (talk) 18:31, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
ALT1 ... that John Messinger, the first Speaker of the Illinois House of Representatives, helped to set the state line between Illinois and Wisconsin?
ALT2 ... that John Messinger was responsible for surveying the state line between Illinois and Wisconsin?
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg New reviewer needed to see whether ALT1 solves the issues raised above and is properly supported in the article. Since this was overlooked in the original review, checks should probably be made to confirm that the other DYK criteria are also fully followed. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:27, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg ALT1 is supported and cited by article emendment. Given that Messinger was a surveyor, he probably helped measure the boundary, but ya never know. Given his profession, I threw in another ALT.Georgejdorner (talk) 03:56, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on August 28[edit]

Lem (satellite), Heweliusz (satellite)

A replica of Heweliusz, similar to Lem

  • ... that Lem started its stellar observations before Heweliusz (pictured)?

Created by LukaszKatlewa (talk). Self nominated at 09:31, 2 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Hi. I've only looked at the Lem article. It has a considerable amount of unsourced material and also needs copyediting.--Carabinieri (talk) 09:34, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I tried to source the informations in the article properly, could you indicate more precisely what should be sourced? Then I will try to source it better:)LukaszKatlewa (talk) 03:02, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

I was mainly refering to the paragraph to which you added the footnote. I still think the article needs to be copyedited, preferably by a native English speaker. I've also stumbled accross the following issues:
  • The press release by the University of Vienna cited in footnote 7 of the Lem article does not mention Lem or Heweliusz. The satellites it is discussing were manufactured in Austria and launched from India, so they are clearly Lem or Heweliusz.
  • I also couldn't find any information about Lem in the source cited in footnote 4. Could you help me out there?--Carabinieri (talk) 05:52, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Comment: I have struck two of the hooks and amended two others. None of the hooks are particulary interesting, and the nom should try to come up with some better alternatives. G S Palmer (talkcontribs) 19:06, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on August 29[edit]

1978 Sikh-Nirankari clashes

Created by Vigyani (talk). Self nominated at 02:33, 29 August 2014 (UTC).

  • ALT1 is no good since it provides no context for the reader not familiar with Indian history. They won't know what Operation Blue Star was. The first suggestion is better, but some more context would be better there as well. Also, simply saying that 16 died doesn't hook very much. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 02:21, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
For ALT1: Thats why it is wiki linked, so that those interested can read about Operation Blue Star. It will be difficult to provide much context in less than 200 characters. I have seen plenty of hooks like this in DYK. For main: I am trying to find some alternative wording. --Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 09:21, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
I think Oiyarbepsy didn't mean to review this and was just giving his comments. So a review is needed here. --Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 15:32, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol delete vote.svg, the article repeats the notion of the event being instrumental in the Punjap clashes, thats not substantiated elsewhere. Low quality. Better no go. Serten (talk) 16:04, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on August 31[edit]

Market Basket protests

Created by Hirolovesswords (talk). Self nominated at 02:04, 5 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Article is new and long enough. I do not see anything interesting with the hook or the ALT. I only checked one source, as of now, and I found a lot of close paraphrasing in the article that must be addressed first. --Carlojoseph14 (talk) 13:08, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
  • For example, in this ref, source says: was around the corner a suffolk superior court judge ruled that shea and darman were required to attend success story by almost any measure market basket, and on your article, a suffolk superior court judge ruled that shea and darman were required to attend. Please review again. --Carlojoseph14 (talk) 14:45, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on September 2[edit]

Tootie Perry, Edgar C. Jones, Goldy Golstein, Red Bethea, Larry Dupree, Charles Casey (American football), Vel Heckman

Photograph of Carl "Tootie" Perry, the Gators' "jolly captain" and "Dixie's greatest guard"

Created by Cbl62 (talk), Dirtlawyer1 (talk). Nominated by Cbl62 (talk) at 19:25, 9 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Note: The nom is a few hours late on Edgar C. Jones but timely on the others. I ask for a few hours leeway on Jones. I am working on the QPQs. Cbl62 (talk) 19:50, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Seven QPQs have now been done for this 7-part nom. Cbl62 (talk) 21:27, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
I believe this is a reliable source. I will ping @Dirtlawyer1: for his input on this. Cbl62 (talk) 21:17, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
The "F Club" is the University of Florida Varsity Lettermen's Club, and it is the organization that maintains the University of Florida Athletic Hall of Fame. As simple as the F Club list is, it is the official list of "Gator Greats." I have added secondary sources for the induction of Tootie Perry (1992 news article) and Larry Dupree (2014 obituary), but most of these guys were inducted into the HOF in the 1930s, 1940s and 1950s, when it was much more low-key affair and news coverage of the Gators was sparse. Cbl already added a obituary footnote for Red Bethea's induction in 1986, and a news brief for Goldy Goldstein's induction in 1989. I am scouring the internet, but I may not find secondary sources for Jones, Heckman and Casey. The old newspaper searches are hit and miss, and I've often found HOF announcements by accident. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 22:34, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • The articles are neutral, adequately sources, pass a copyvio check and are within general MOS guidelines.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:26, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
  • QPQs are done.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:26, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
  • The hook is adequately interesting. It would be tough to work all the articles into a single hook in any other way. Several of the articles may have more intriguing hook possibilities, but there isn't much else that can be done for a 7-way multi.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:26, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
  • The hook is 316 characters. It might be worth paring down some of its flowery and wordy content.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:28, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
Not sure what language it is that you consider to be "flowery and wordy." The rules specify that multis are not limited to 200 characters; 300 characters for a 7-part multi strike me as pretty efficient. Cbl62 (talk) 21:17, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Forgot to query BlueMoonset regarding leniency for the one article that was nearly a day late.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 18:07, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Unlike you fellas, I'm not a DYK regular, so pardon me if this is a dumb question. In a DYK blurb about seven members of the University of Florida Athletic Hall of Fame, is there a reason why we are not linking to the Wikipedia article that lists all of its members? Can we only link to newly created articles? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 21:26, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
We could do that, but the goal is to draw page views to the newly created articles. The more articles that are linked in the hook, the greater the risk that page hits get diluted to the non-featured article. If you could respond to Tony's question above, that would be appreciated. Cbl62 (talk) 22:10, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • TonyTheTiger, the leniency is up to you, but I'd imagine a day late is permissible given the number of articles involved. However, I don't see a single review icon from you indicating the state of this review, which is really needed, especially as you have already begun to claim review credit. As for the length of the hook, Cbl62, it is long by DYK standards: WP:DYKSG#C3 says, If your hook introduces more than one article, you can do a basic calculation by subtracting the number of characters in the bolded character string for each additional new article beyond the first. After having done that, if the hook length is still 200 characters or fewer, it is probably an acceptable length. If it is over 200 characters after the subtractions, it may still be considered eligible if the hook is reasonably compact and readable, but such hooks will be considered on a case-by-case basis. As this is 223 characters after all those subtractions (and the 11 for "(pictured)"), it is too long. You might want to omit the positions of the final four players (you don't mention one for the first three), which should save the characters you need, or find a different approach. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:24, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
  • @BlueMoonset: Cbl62 is an attorney in real life, and he has been consumed with RL concerns for the last week or so. I was one of the contributors to these articles and I am familiar with the subject material. If anything else needs to be done, please let me know and I will do my best to comply. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 19:34, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks, Dirtlawyer1. If you want, I can post an edited version of the hook with the cuts as I suggested as an ALT1. But at this point, it's up to TonyTheTiger to weigh in, since it's his review. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:39, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
  • @TonyTheTiger:@BlueMoonset: Tony is one of the most active sports editors we have, and his editing history indicates he has been active in the last 24 hours. Please feel free to post your ALT1 version, and hopefully my ping will attract Tony's attention so we can wrap this up. Cheers, Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 19:43, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
  • ALT1: ... that the American football players inducted into the University of Florida Athletic Hall of Fame as "Gator Greats" include "All-American Waterboy" Tootie Perry (pictured), athletic director Edgar C. Jones, attorney Goldy Goldstein, plus Red Bethea, Larry Dupree, Charles Casey and Vel Heckman? (I thought it was better with the "plus" to separate the ones with descriptions from the ones without, but that means it's 202 characters eliminating all but the first bold link, or 205 if we eliminate all but the longest link. I'll leave it to Tony whether the "plus" stays or goes; either way we're down to 200 or fewer if it goes.) BlueMoonset (talk) 19:55, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
  • The real problem here is that the one source is just a list of names and sports. There's nothing to explicitly connect these particular articles/people with that list; in particular, that lack for Jones, Heckman, and Casey is a problem, and something is needed to confirm that their articles are about those Gator Greats if the hook is to run at DYK. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:29, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
  • @BlueMoonset: Well, you mean other than the fact that these named athletes played for the Florida Gators football team as indicated by the list, right? But, yes, I understand what you're saying about sourcing: it's thin. FYI, the F Club list, such as it is, is the official list of Gator Great members of the UFHOF. For members who have been inducted since the late 1970s, I have usually been able to find newspaper articles about the then-current class of new inductees. Before that, not a lot of ink was spilled when these oldtimers were inducted at a private UF event, and in some case, posthumously. All of that is background so you can understand the available sources. For Jones, Heckman and Casey, would you accept an internal article/release from the UF athletic department, explicitly confirming their membership in the UFHOF? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 15:48, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Dirtlawyer1, I don't see how an internal article/release would qualify as "published" under WP:SOURCES, but as I consulted Crisco 1492 before my previous reply, I'll do so again on this, since he's more experienced than I am in these matters. I understand the background; unfortunately, when adequate sources aren't available, it affects what can be claimed in an article or hook. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:05, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
  • My objection was not to the source being primary, but to the lack of sports and other information necessary to contextualize this. Individual articles might be worth using, if nothing else is available, but that list doesn't have enough info. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:06, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Saints Row: Gat out of Hell

Created by MAinternational (talk). Nominated by Czar (talk) at 05:53, 8 September 2014 (UTC).

Symbol question.svg Preliminary review. First, things that are ok:

  • New – Created Aug 29, nominated Sept 8 = 9 days
  • Long enough – is 2,300 characters
  • Within policy – I don't see any editorializing. Sources are cited. There is no close paraphrasing or worse from the cited sources.
  • Hook – is about 100 characters
  • Hook – is neutral and does not focus on living people
  • QPQ – not self-nominated
  • Image - no image

Second, things that need fixing.

  • Within policy – 7/8 sources are cited to bare urls, I understand that this formatting should be changed.
  • Within policy – I don't know who is copying from what, but the sentence "The game's plot sees Johnny Gat and the Saints in search of the leader of the Saints who has been kidnapped by Satan." appears word for word in the imdb page for the game. There are similarly google results for "Five islands make up the city: Shantytown, Barrens, Downtown, Forge, and the Den, all surrounding Satan's tower on a middle island."
  • Hook – I think the hook might be interesting, but I'm not sure because the sentence doesn't make sense. (Probably because I don't know anything about video games.) What does it mean to "fill a level"? Is that the same as complete a level? I could see it if this meant "fulfill Satan's Wrath" or "arouse Satan's Wrath" but it seems unclear at the moment.

Third, Help?

  • Within policy – Three citations are to YouTube videos. Is the reviewer expected to watch all these videos to check for plagiarism? It would be a total of nearly 20 minutes.
  • Hook – the hook is cited to a 12 minute YouTube video. Can you provide the exact time to check it please? (talk) 17:56, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the review. I didn't write the article, so I don't have the answers for some of your questions. The IMDB page uses a portion of that quoted line (added in this edit) and nothing else from the article, so it looks to me like IMDB got its line from WP and not vice versa. (You can ask @MAinternational, the editor who added that line, if you insist.) The other results are apparently copying WP, but I think that's self-evident. The hook is a play on words and isn't supposed to tell you exactly what's happening. If you meant its usage in the article, I cleaned that up (level→meter). No, reviewers aren't expected to watch all the videos. I gave them a cursory review when I nominated this and I didn't see copyvio. The hook citation is at 2:46. czar  10:04, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Kızıl Kilise

Kızıl Kilise

5x expanded by CeeGee (talk). Self nominated at 11:23, 5 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Name, date, length, and hook check out, as well as close checks for paraphrasing. Good article! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 14:08, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg The article does unfortunately contain close paraphrasing: for example, compare "It was a stop for pilgrims on their way to Jerusalem" with the source's "The site was also a stop for pilgrims on their way to Jerusalem.", and the article's "the church served as an imperial, or funerary chapel" with the source's "the church served as an imperial, or funerary, chapel"—in the latter case, the article prefaces this with "It is assumed that", while the source cites not only evidence for this, but also says who owned the church. The article could also use a copyedit: I started one, but stopped when I found the copying in the Background section, as the removal of the hook from prep took priority. The Restoration section's first and third sentences are still problematic as well. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:14, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • I've copyedited respecting the issues raised above. Pls re-check. Thanks. --CeeGee 18:12, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the copyedit. I'm going to ask Nikkimaria to do a general close paraphrasing check, since she is an expert. However, I have noticed some assumptions being made in the revisions, such as that the church was "situated on the pilgrims' way to Jerusalem", when it might instead have been considered a holy destination that pulled pilgrims off what would have been a more direct route to Jerusalem. The source doesn't say one way or the other, and the article shouldn't make claims not backed up by the source. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:27, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • I agree that there is some too-close paraphrasing still evident here - compare for example "an octagonal base support the central dome, which is the most important architectural element of the church" with "central dome, supported by an octagonal base, is the most prominent architectural element of the church". Nikkimaria (talk) 02:51, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • I've reworded further. I hope the a.m. issue is eliminated. Thanks again. --CeeGee 07:16, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • I'm afraid it isn't - compare for example "harsh winters with extreme cold weather could be the reason for the abandonment of the church long time ago" with "Harsh winters and intense cold weather eventually led to the abandonment of the church long ago". You might find it helpful to go seek out a collaborator to help you rewrite this article. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:06, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Unfortunately, I wasn't here since September 14. So, I couldn't do anything against the a.m. claim. However, to my surprise, I see now that the DYK nom has been promoted anyhow, and I've been credited as well. In this case, this page needs to be archived I guess. --CeeGee 16:24, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
  • CeeGee, I'm afraid the hook wasn't promoted then; I had removed it from the prep area on September 12 (as noted above). However, when I did so I neglected to also remove the DYKmake template that causes notifications to be sent out. No one caught my error, so your talk page and the article's talk page falsely claimed that the hook had run. I've just removed both talk page messages, and offer you my profound apologies for the misleading messages.
That said, the article is still nominated and under review and should not be archived, and the close paraphrasing still needs to be dealt with. When you do so, the nomination can proceed. Please let us know. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:07, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Hallo BlueMoonset, a copyedit has been done, please check again, thanks! Alex2006 (talk) 09:19, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Hello Alex, it looks like over the course of editing some references have gotten separated from the material they're meant to support - for example, the beginning of the second Background paragraph is supported by footnote 3, but actually cited to footnote 5. Can you fix this to make checking possible? Nikkimaria (talk) 01:08, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svgHello Nikkimaria, I corrected the "shifted" reference, added another one to support the claim that the church has four columns, added info about the dedication, and checked the other references. I think that you can continue to review the article now. Sorry about the circumstances, but the original author disappeared (in Cappadocia? :-)), so I adopted the article. :-) Alex2006 (talk) 17:24, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks for doing that. It looks like some of the phrasing is still a bit close to this source - could you do a bit more reworking? Nikkimaria (talk) 18:38, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svgHello Nikkimaria, please give another look: paraphrasing paraphrasing I will slowly go back to the original :-) Alex2006 (talk) 17:14, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg I've done some further copy-editing and this should now be good to go. Nikkimaria (talk) 05:51, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on September 3[edit]

Preoperative care

Created/expanded by Bluerasberry (talk). Self nominated at 16:51, 3 September 2014 (UTC).

Symbol confirmed.svg Length, history and reference verified. Daniel Case (talk) 04:01, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg I've re-opened this and puled it from the queue. What the article says is "Cardiac imaging and cardiac stress tests are usually unnecessary for people who do not have a serious heart condition and who are having surgery unrelated to the heart (my emphasis), not that cardiac imaging is unnecessary for minor heart surgery. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:42, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
It looks like the hook has been corrected to reflect the source better. Daniel Case (talk) 15:55, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Oh, no! I made a mistake, and I see why it was missed in the first check, no fault of Daniel Case. HJ Mitchell is right! Here is a new version:
It would have been embarrassing to have let that mistake through. Thanks for catching it. Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:29, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, but I don't see how this is even remotely interesting. You may as well say "... that people who have brain surgery don't need their ankles x-rayed during preoperative care?" 97198 (talk) 05:58, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
97198 Yes, you understand the situation, because that is what is happening. I added content to the article which suggests as much, but the sources do not say this outright and instead just say that the procedure is "overused". What is certain is that doctors, seemingly for no reason in published sources, are stating completely obvious things like "Do not do this procedure for no reason". There is data which says that the procedure is done for no reason, and statements by experts saying do not do the procedure for no reason, but the interesting fact that you want - "Doctors do things for no reason, therefore they should quit" is not published outright because the problem is too troublesome to admit in that way. The best I can do is close to what you say, "people who have brain surgery don't need their ankles x-rayed", because that is what reliable sources report. It is only interesting in the sense that experts say it this way. Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:20, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Bluerasberry, one of the requirements for DYK is that the hook should should include a definite fact that is mentioned in the article and interesting to a broad audience. As 97198 points out, neither ALT2 nor ALT3 are remotely interesting. Your task, if you wish this nomination to succeed, is to come up with an interesting hook from your article. I think you need to try basing the hook on something other than cardiac imaging. Sometimes articles don't have anything that can be made into an interesting hook, which means they don't qualify to be run at DYK. (Sometimes they slip through anyway, but they shouldn't.) I've sometimes not nominated articles because there weren't any facts that lent themselves to a sufficiently interesting hook. Best of luck. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:38, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
BlueMoonset Acknowledged, you are totally correct and my mind was in space. I knew all of this but somehow forgot everything. By the end of the week I will either propose a new hook or otherwise just leave this nomination. Thanks for your attention and for perceiving the nature of my oversight. Blue Rasberry (talk) 21:54, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Jihadism and hip-hop

Deso Dogg, German rapper who later took the name Abou Maleeq and became a jihadist

  • ALT1:... that one jihadist hip-hop song includes the lyrics "Bomb by bomb, blast by blast, only going to bring back the glorious past"?
  • ALT2:... that Amir Khan has argued that what makes ISIL so dangerous is its ability to combine radical Islamism with gangsta rap culture?
  • ALT3:... that L Jinny, a jihadist rapper, once Tweeted a photo of himself holding a man's severed head with the caption "Chillin' with my homie or what's left of him"?

Created by FiredanceThroughTheNight (talk). Self nominated at 01:07, 3 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Interesting. But this article needs some cleaning up first, FiredanceThroughTheNight. You're not mandated, I suppose, to clean up/complete the citation templates, but really, you should: include authors, dates, publications, etc. I removed an Amazon link: that mention in the article needs a secondary source. Writing a separate lead would be more than a little helpful. The second paragraph needs a citation at the end. You can probably say a bit more about Douglas McCain, who was an aspiring rapper (and I just added your article to the EL section there). These hooks aren't bad. ALT3 is a bit...well, gruesome, and I think it's the best one (but the Twitter and "homie" wikilinks need to be scrapped, IMO). Drmies (talk) 02:58, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
  • I formatted the refs. Yoninah (talk) 23:38, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Sorry, but the more I look at it, the more I wonder. First of all, a month ago ALT3 seemed in OK taste; now I'm not so sure anymore. Second, the article. The first three examples in "Notable examples" need work (references) and text, and what they need most of all is some kind of connection between the rapping and the jihadism. The strongest part in there is probably the unverified note about the Kosovar. The fourth paragraph of that section, however, is neither here nor there--it's not about rap, unless by a stretch of the imagination, and that's OR. The section "Analysis" is the strongest in the article, though starting a paragraph with "Person X wrote a book" is totally pedestrian, and I don't know why Omar Hamaami is mentioned in that paragraph (isn't he a "notable example"?). The biggest suggestion I have for article improvement is that someone go to the library and check out that book, if only to strengthen the case that "jihadism and hip-hop" is a viable topic. Drmies (talk) 03:43, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
Symbol delete vote.svg. The topic might be notable, but it lacks proper sourcing, e.g. Roc the Mic Right: The Language of Hip Hop Culture H. Samy Alim for a start. I tagged the article and recommand to stop the process here. Serten (talk) 07:34, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on September 5[edit]

The Caravan Club (Endell Street)

Caravan Club advertising, 1934

  • ... that The Caravan Club (advertising pictured) claimed to be "the most unconventional spot in town" with "All night gaiety" and "Dancing to Charlie"?
  • ALT1:... that The Caravan Club (advertising pictured) was put under observation by police eleven days after opening and raided a month later with 103 arrests?
  • ALT2:... that locals thought The Caravan Club (advertising pictured) was "absolutely a sink of iniquity"?
  • ALT3:... that in a 1934 police visit to The Caravan Club (advertising pictured), 39/40 men were of the "importuning type" and 18/26 women of the "prostitute class"?
  • Reviewed: not a self-nom
  • Comment: many hook possibilities - take your pick, or feel free to tweak and/or add your own...

Created by Philafrenzy (talk). Nominated by Edwardx (talk) at 22:54, 12 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Wonderful array of Alts - thank you Edward! Philafrenzy (talk) 22:57, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Symbol voting keep.svg Article new enough (created by Philafrenzy on 5 September 2014), long enough (7,690 characters). Fully referenced. Was a stub but I have re-graded it a B. Image licence okay (but looks indistinct at 100px). AGF on ALT hooks (but main verified). Good to go. Hawkeye7 (talk) 02:46, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Butterfly Valley, Fethiye

A view of Butterfly Valley

Created by CeeGee (talk). Self nominated at 11:04, 8 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg In time and long enough, covering all aspects in concise prose and being based on various sources. Great contribution. Go along. Serten (talk) 07:20, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Maximilian William of Brunswick-Lüneburg

Maximilian William of Brunswick-Lüneburg

5x expanded by Surtsicna (talk). Self nominated at 21:02, 5 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol voting keep.svg Long enough, interesting enough and fivefold extended, then in time. First hook too long. Serten (talk) 08:50, 17 October 2014 (UTC) Serten (talk) 08:50, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
    • Thanks for taking a look (really, it's been over a month!), but you cannot strike out the original hook without discussion. At 195 characters, it's not too long. "(pictured)" doesn't count. Surtsicna (talk) 18:49, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Surtsicna, actually, a reviewer can do just that, though it doesn't often happen. There's another concurrent review where this has happened. According to the rules, The hook should be concise: fewer than about 200 characters (including spaces and the question mark, but not including the "..." or any "(pictured)". While 200 is an outside limit, hooks slightly under 200 characters may still be rejected at the discretion of the selecting reviewers and administrators. I'll leave it to Serten's discretion as to whether the strikeout should be reinstated or not (whether this particular hook is deemed too long for this nomination at 195 characters). BlueMoonset (talk) 00:30, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg I have experience with deWP's 'Schon gewusst' but undergo a steep learning curve with enWP culture, I welcome feedback as here. If I have an issue with a hook, I feel obliged to provide a new one. Formally lenght of 195 is within limits (without the "pictured") - noted, but its still not a good hook / teaser, way too clumsy and not concise. The striked one involves strong claims that are on the fringe of the sources. I e.g. strongly doubt another conversion would have helped Max to become Bishop in OS. Therefore I ask to boil it down. Feel free to do so. Serten (talk) 01:20, 18 October 2014 (UTC) Another hook suggested
ALT2 looks great, unless someone objects to the fact that the "unluckiness" itself is not mentioned in the article. Surtsicna (talk) 21:47, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Operation All Clear

Created by Catlemur (talk). Self nominated at 16:04, 5 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Article is new and long enough. It has inline citations. However, I cannot find the hook in the article. --Carlojoseph14 (talk) 10:18, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Please review again the article, close paraphrasing issues. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carlojoseph14 (talkcontribs) 13:17, 12 October 2014‎ (UTC)
  • While this does seem to be something of an issue with FN9 (defence.pk)—Carlojoseph14, it is good practice to give an example of the close paraphrasing you found, comparing article and source—my problem is more that it is being used as a reliable source; it appears to be user contributions without any editorial supervision; some of the material being used is from a quoted section where the source of the original text is not identified, and it is not even quoted in this article. This is not the only source with questionable reliability: there's varnam.nationalinterest.in (FN7), a "blog on Indian history"; bhutannews.blogspot.gr (FN2), another blog; www.tibet.ca (FN11), an advocacy group. I'm stopping at this point; there may be more in the final ten source citations. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:31, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

All above mentioned refs fixed.--Catlemur (talk) 21:08, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Catlemur, while you may have removed some of the refs, you left their material in the article. I mentioned that I had confirmed Carlojoseph14's close paraphrasing issues with the defence.pk site—now that you have removed the reference to it, there is no acknowledgement of the source of your material, which made the matter even more serious. I have deleted the virtually identical material from the article (under "By 27 December 2003" and "By 3 January 2004" in the Operation section); it will have to be completely rewritten if you wish to include it again in the article. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:31, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Remade the delete sections.Any more issues?--Catlemur (talk) 12:38, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on September 6[edit]

Lutefisk (band)

* ... that the album Burn in Hell Fuckers by rock band Lutefisk was named after a phrase written on the wall of the band's recording studio after it was robbed?

  • ALT1: ... that Lutefisk's decision to cover "Play That Funky Music" raised doubts about the band's musical judgment?
  • ALT2: ... that Lutefisk's founding as a band was the result of a premature midlife artistic crisis of the frontman?

Created by Jinkinson (talk). Self nominated at 01:36, 10 September 2014 (UTC).

  • The first hook was more sensational than the article or the music involved, which is sort of dull and not overwhelmingly tasty. The article is long enough, was nominated in time and has various not-too-much-blurb sources. Symbol voting keep.svg Serten (talk) 06:48, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
I think the first alternate one proposed above looks good. Jinkinson talk to me 22:22, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg Serten (talk) 23:47, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
It also needs to be cehcked to be sourced in every fact, Serten.
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg New reviewer needed to check the ALT hooks. Serten, you're not allowed to review or approve your own hooks (which I've labeled ALT1 and ALT2); it looks like Jinkinson prefers ALT1. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:37, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Symbol possible vote.svg@Serten, Jinkinson:ALT1, "Funky music", no cite after the hook, and the cite for the next sentence says Funky Music is near perfect rather than doubtable. So it fails DYK just having that on the article without a source. ALT2, needs a reword, which I will do after I post this, and is good for the hook. ~ R.T.G 21:34, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

George H. Harlow

Created by Teemu08 (talk). Self nominated at 04:38, 7 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg New enough, long enough, adequately referenced (I added some online refs to verify the information). QPQ done. However, the hook could be spiced up with something you wrote in the article:
  • ALT1: ... that before George H. Harlow could take office as first assistant secretary of the Illinois Senate, he was tapped as the personal secretary of Governor Richard J. Oglesby? Yoninah (talk) 20:38, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Maup Caransa

Maup Caransa in 1977

Created by Drmies (talk). Self nominated at 02:09, 7 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg New enough, long enough, neutrality and inline citation checks, refs checks, qpq done. good 2 go.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:06, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg This is a great hook, but the part about the Maupoleum being ugly isn't cited, and nowhere in the article does it say "sons of the gods". Yoninah (talk) 21:06, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Yoninah, "Godenzonen" is a common nickname for the club. Do you want me to add that to the Caransa article and source it? I've added sources for ugliness. Drmies (talk) 00:14, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Yes, if it's going to appear in the hook, it should be mentioned in the article. Yoninah (talk) 08:51, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
  • OK, but it's going to look really stupid, and afterward I'll remove it rightaway. Drmies (talk) 15:55, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Symbol voting keep.svg Really? I think it was very clever the way you combined the "sons of the gods" explanation with "Caransajax". Article is new enough, long enough, well referenced, most refs foreign-language so AGF. QPQ done. Image is public domain. Hook refs AGF/verified and cited inline. Good to go. Yoninah (talk) 17:34, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on September 7[edit]

Hendrik Koot

Created by Drmies (talk). Self nominated at 03:11, 8 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg age and size check out. material true to sources. English sources do not appear to have been paraphrased. Hook cited. Good to go once a QPQ is done. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 05:45, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Done, G S Palmer. Sorry, I don't regularly check this page. Drmies (talk) 23:29, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
  • BTW, Cas Liber and G S Palmer, I'm sure you understand why I didn't put the guy's name in the hook; I want to keep it that way so, whoever promotes this, please don't think it wasn't on purpose. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 23:33, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on September 8[edit]

Iron Foot Jack

  • ALT1:... that Iron Foot Jack appeared in Pathé's 1955 newsreel Soho Goes Gay?
  • Reviewed: not a self-nom
  • Comment: more and better hooks welcome

Created by Philafrenzy (talk). Nominated by Edwardx (talk) at 09:46, 15 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Article was long enough when nominated, and is definitely long enough at present. Hook is 152 characters, so it's okay. I spot checked via Googling for copyright vios, with no duplication showing. However, I also spot-checked some quotations, with no match showing; due to lack of URLs in cites, I could not verify veracity of quotes, including the one in the hook. I do not know how to check image copyright, etcetera; however, I doubt the image will show well at 100x100 pixels resolution.
  • As I am returning to DYK after some years away, I will recommend a more experienced editor sign off on this nomination.Georgejdorner (talk) 14:46, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
  • The image won't be used anyway as it is fair use. Philafrenzy (talk) 14:49, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Having committed several reviews since this one, I suppose I have become the more experienced editor. With the graphics question settled, this article is DYK material. I do believe the original hook is best.Georgejdorner (talk) 03:39, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Normandia, Roraima

5x expanded by Prburley (talk). Self nominated at 01:19, 15 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svgThis article has several unreferenced sections. It also needs copyediting. Furthermore, the website cited in the first footnote, which appears to be some kind of travel portal, may not be reliable. Could you explain what kind website that is and why you consider it a reliable source?--Carabinieri (talk) 09:18, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Sources: very difficult to come by for regional geography, and I'm a librarian. The sources are weak, I'll try to come up with something better over the weekend. Prburley (talk) 20:51, 17 October 2014 (UTC)


Improved to Good Article status by Cambalachero (talk). Self nominated at 15:16, 9 September 2014 (UTC).

Heather Stewart-Whyte

2x expanded and sourced (BLP) 5x expanded by TonyTheTiger (talk). Self nominated at 16:13, 8 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Sorry, but this is not eligible for the 2x unsourced BLP exception, because there was a source prior to expansion. Note that "unsourced" does not mean "without inline references". The source, in the form of an external link, was used a dozen times in the expanded version as an inline ref. But it's close to the normal 5x expansion which is required. It started with 483 prose characters and it's currently 1980, so just another 435 more are required. MANdARAX  XAЯAbИAM 21:53, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • There were facts in the unexpanded article which could be verified with the preexisting source. As one example, it said that she appeared on the covers of UK editions of Elle and Marie Claire; the section of the source on confirmed magazine covers says "UK: 'Marie Claire' - September 1992; 'Elle' - December 1992; 'Marie Claire' - September 1993". The 2x BLP rule is a very generous exception which is only available for BLPs which had absolutely no sources of any kind prior to expansion. MANdARAX  XAЯAbИAM 23:25, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Can I request the help of French language speakers to expand upon three stories:
  1. It seems her husband used a variety of aliases.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:45, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  2. Her husband died of a heart attack in 2004.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:45, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  3. She was indicted for not paying her servants.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:45, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • I am unable to find English language versions of these stories and I the translations I am getting seem a bit rough.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:45, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  1. This seems to be confirmed per this source, starts "L'homme aux multiples identités, plus connu pour ses démêlés avec la justice que pour ses talents de boxeur, a été terrassé par un oedème pulmonaire.", which translates as "The man with many identities, more known for his spats with the law than for his talents as a boxer, was brought down by a pulmonary edema." He is later described as "Franck Ferrando, connu sous divers alias et ...", "Franck Ferrando, known by various aliases and..." That seems confirmed.
    1. Added.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:14, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
  2. Per this source, Franck Ferrando, who was married to model Heather Stewart-Whyte, died at age 37 "probably from a heart attack". This follow up story, however, says that it was determined that he died from a pulmonary edema. In either case, it happened in a boxing gym called Marcel-Cerdan in Noisy-le-Grand at the beginning of a boxing match in July 2004.
    1. Added.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:29, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
  3. This seems confirmed per this story. The headline says she was sought on an international arrest warrant and was at that time free in Britain after having sold her Central Park apartment to her ex-husband, Yannick Noah. The relevant section is below, "En juillet dernier, elle a entre autres été condamnée à six mois de prison avec sursis et à 25.000 € de dommages et intérêts par le tribunal correctionnel de Blois, pour avoir fait travailler, neuf mois durant, une famille de trois personnes sans contrat… et sans salaire." - "Last July, she was, along with others, convicted to a six month suspended sentence for having a family of three people work for nine months without a contract and without pay." The rest of the story is mostly just backstory. There's also further confirmation that her husband Franck Ferrando had many aliases: "Connu sous de multiples pseudonymes, Ferrando est un escroc habitué des maisons d’arrêt.", "Known under multiple pseudonyms, Ferrando is a [regular customer] of [the prison system]". 0x0077BE [talk/contrib] 15:22, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
    1. Added.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:46, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Looks mostly consistent with the sources to me. I adjusted one part (the first article says that it was "probably" a heart attack, and the second one seemed more definitive, so I made that clearer), but the rest looks more or less OK. The only part I'm unsure about is the part that says she was part of a group convicted to a 6 month suspended sentence. I'm not a native French speaker, but it does seem ambiguous whether everyone in the group got the same sentence, or if she was part of a group of people convicted of the crime, and her sentence was a 6-month suspended sentence. Also, looking back at it, I forgot to translate a part of that sentence - she was given a 6-month suspended sentence and charged "25,000 euros in damages and interest by a 'correctional tribunal' in Blois". I've adjusted the wording to reflect some of this. Thanks. 0x0077BE [talk/contrib] 14:14, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
    • N.B. it seems that there are some useful sources at FR:Heather_Stewart-Whyte.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:47, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
      • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg It's now 2892 prose characters, so the 5x expansion requirement has been met. (Note that DYKcheck is not recognizing the recent expansion as being sufficient. I believe this is because in July 2011 a large passage was added, but soon removed; it was the clearest case of copyright violation I've ever seen, and such items are not considered when calculating expansion.) Now that expansion has been taken care of, this is ready for a full review. MANdARAX  XAЯAbИAM 19:03, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Oud-Strijders Legioen

  • ... that the Dutch right-wing military veterans' organization Oud-Strijders Legioen, which was pro-NATO, pro-apartheid, and anti-permissiveness, was compared to a "boy scout organization for the elderly"?

Created by Drmies (talk). Self nominated at 01:42, 8 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol voting keep.svg Good to go: new, long enough, pretty neutral, QPQ met, interesting hook. AGF on offline and non-English sources, including those used for the hook. —innotata 05:25, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on September 9[edit]

Nobelium, Lawrencium

  • ... that the discoveries of nobelium and lawrencium were disputed between Soviet and American scientists for decades?

Improved to Good Article status by Double sharp (talk). Self nominated at 13:25, 15 September 2014 (UTC).

Sikkimese general election, 1974

  • Comment: This is my 5th self-nom

Created by Number 57 (talk), Vigyani (talk). Nominated by Vigyani (talk) at 17:16, 12 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svgThe hook seems uncontroversial, but it is not directly cited, and the source at the end of the paragraph does not really support the claim. (for instance, how does a reader know for certain there was no general election in January 1975?) Otherwise the article is eligible for DYK. New enough, long enough, neutral, well cited, no paraphrasing or other copyright concerns. I hope a source directly supporting the hook can be found, because I thought it highly interesting. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 14:20, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Nile Delta toad, Amietophrynus vittatus

  • ... that toads found in Egypt around 1909 and identified as Degen's toad (A. vittatus) are now considered a separate species, the Nile Delta toad (A. kassasii)?

5x expanded by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self nominated at 09:14, 11 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg@Cwmhiraeth: The source relating to the hook itself is a paid online resource, but in the summary which I didn't need to pay for, it says the species was misidentified in 1906 as Bufo vittatus. This matches neither the hook nor the article. ~ R.T.G 21:48, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
And that is specific to Nile Delta toad ~ R.T.G 21:49, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
@RTG: I can see your difficulty! Both toads were originally included in the genus Bufo but in 2006, Frost split the large genus Bufo and created a new genus Amietophrynus to accommodate the African species. A bit complex for DYK. How about ALT1? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:16, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
  • ALT1 ... that toads found in Egypt around 1909 and identified as Degen's toad are now considered a separate species, the Nile Delta toad?

Mikuszowice, Komorowice, Bielsko-Biała

  • Comment: my first nomination, please be gentle

Created by D T G (talk). Self nominated at 13:27, 10 September 2014 (UTC).

2014 Malaysian sedition dragnet

Created/expanded by Kawaputra (talk). Self nominated at 05:42, 10 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Seems like the Malaysian government should have spent more time watching its planes and less time watching its intellectuals. EEng (talk) 20:12, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on September 10[edit]

Kawasaki Ninja H2

5x expanded by Brianhe (talk). Self nominated at 21:04, 1 October 2014 (UTC).

Ji Dengkui

Created by Zanhe (talk), Colipon (talk). Nominated by Zanhe (talk) at 10:26, 14 September 2014 (UTC).

Don Bitterlich

2x expanded and sourced (BLP) 5x expanded by ZappaOMati (talk). Self nominated at 01:17, 12 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Note: this is not eligible for the 2x BLP exception because it had a source (in the infobox) prior to expansion, but it's not necessary, as the article has been 5x expanded. MANdARAX  XAЯAbИAM 08:45, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Still awaiting QPQ.
  • QPQ provided. Zappa24Mati 01:00, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
I'm not familiar with the game of American football. When I look at the #8 to verify the original hook I see a reference to week 1 of 1976. Was this the first year in which the Seahawks team participated in the league? Does the word "history" have a special meaning with regard to American football? ALT1 looks OK but might be better worded "... to take part in a musical performance". Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:36, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
Yes, 1976 was the first season for Seattle. Sort of, "history" has a special meaning, since it's the first official points recorded by a player for the Seahawks. Zappa24Mati 14:36, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on September 11[edit]

Robert Young (musician)

  • Reviewed: tba
  • Comment: Other hook ideas welcome

Created by Edwardx (talk), Doc Strange (talk), Michig (talk), and Lugnuts (talk). Nominated by Edwardx (talk) at 12:12, 15 September 2014 (UTC).

Gilindire Cave

  • ... that the 1999-discovered Gilindire Cave in southern Turkey features a mirror-like lake with two different water salinity, brackish and salty?

Created by CeeGee (talk). Self nominated at 19:05, 11 September 2014 (UTC).

  • How about:
Alt2: ... that Gilindire Cave in southern Turkey features a mirror-like lake divided into two different levels, brackish water and salty?
G S Palmer (talkcontribs) 00:23, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
  • I find it better. Thanks. --CeeGee 07:20, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg New, long enough, in policy: OK. QPQ done. Hook length OK, good faith assumed for non-English sources, but I don't see a source for the lake being "mirror-like", only that it is informally called "Mirror Lake". Also, I'd tweak the grammar of the hook:
Alt3: ... that Gilindire Cave in southern Turkey features a mirror-like lake divided into two different levels, [containing] brackish and salty water?

The Stanford Prison Experiment (film)

Created by Captain Assassin! (talk). Self nominated at 16:38, 11 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svgLength is good (1867 characters); created on September 11 and self-nominated on that day; references good; but 1) readers need to be told why the original production fell through and why it took so many years to get to the stage of production. 2) Hook could be sharper
  • ALT1: "that the The Stanford Prison Experiment about the infamous 1971 Stanford prison experiment is now in production after a standoff of eight years?" ch (talk) 00:26, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Standoff was of twelve years actually, and I mentioned the reason which refs provided us. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 16:37, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
  • @Captain Assassin!:: Right about the twelve years! But the article would be stronger and check out with its sources if it explained (from the dishy 2006 Hollywood Reporter article) that there were not one but two competing projects, a law suit, etc. You have enough good material to say more than "went through many problems like financing." The Plot section is not adequate, though at this stage you could just explain what the "experiment" was, what the good Professor thought he was trying to do, and why Hollywood people were falling over themselves to do films. Then the hook would be stronger and lead more people to the article. In expanding, there is proof reading to do, e.g. "announced first announced," "effect" to "affect" ch (talk) 19:21, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
  • No CWH, there were two other projects which I've provided and plot's also updated now. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 18:40, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
  • @Captain Assassin!: -- thanks for clarifying and expanding the article. It looks good to me now (I also made a few edits and expanded it slightly). I think readers will find it useful. Is ALt2 OK with you or do you want to write an amended hook? ch (talk) 18:45, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg New reviewer needed, since previous reviewer provided the hooks (can't review your own hooks). BlueMoonset (talk) 04:52, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
Sorry,BlueMoonset, please forgive me, I didn't realize this was the rule. Can Captain Assassin! suggest Hook #3? Can I then approve? ch (talk) 22:24, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
  • ch, it isn't a problem; reviewers frequently suggest alternate hooks. It's just that someone else needs to approve them. (You hadn't approved your own hook; I just wanted to be sure that the "review again" icon was out there to attract that someone else.) Captain Assassin can certainly suggest an ALT3 on a different topic, which you can then review. However, if it's a minor variant on your ALT2, then it pretty much needs a new reviewer anyway. With any luck, a new reviewer will stop by soon to check out ALT2. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:55, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
  • I'll suggest another hook, it passes or fails, it's on your luck CWH. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 01:36, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
  • It's very similar to my first hook, but I think it's the one CWH can review. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 02:23, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Mahikeng Airport

  • ... that Mahikeng Airport was an air force base and is now trying to become an international airport?

5x expanded by Nathan121212 (talk). Self nominated at 16:25, 11 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Sufficiently expanded, meets core content policies. ALT1 was supported by sources, so let's go with that. --Jakob (talk) 16:47, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Symbol question.svg Pulled from Queue, reopened; one hook was approved, but another one (that wasn't explivitly approved) promoted, which is making the review process rather useless. Fram (talk) 15:32, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

  • @Fram: - who was the promoter? The reviewer did say ALT1. Nathan121212 (talk) 15:46, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Hawkeye7. Fram (talk) 15:51, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Striking the original hook, leaving the approved ALT1 intact. Fram, did you find any issues with ALT1? I'm wondering why you didn't simply substitute the approved hook for the unapproved one. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:01, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • A hook should be checked by the reviewer and the promotor (and the nominator of course). If either one is missing, it should go back. Fram (talk) 17:18, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg ALT1 is in the article and supported by the cited inline source; expansion was done on nomination date and is, as noted, sufficient; spotcheck of three sources reveals no close paraphrasing. Restoring approval. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:55, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Symbol possible vote.svg The main hook was not struck at the time, and when I double-checked, I found it was correct and sourced. However ALT1 is not supported; the licence was not removed, it was merely suspended on 16 April 2001, and was renewed on 27 April 2001.[2] How about:
  • ALT2:... that Mahikeng Airport's airport license was suspended after failing to comply with various regulations? Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:46, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • I quite like ALT3: ... that efforts are underway to help Mahikeng Airport, a former air force base, regain its status as an international airport? by User:EEng - Nathan121212 (talk) 04:21, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg New review needed for the proposed (and unstruck) ALT hooks above. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:56, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

L.A. Takedown

  • ... that the lead character Vincent Hanna in the film L.A. Takedown was an inspired by real-life ex-police officer Chuck Adamson?

Improved to Good Article status by Daß Wölf (talk). Nominated by Captain Assassin! (talk) at 15:43, 11 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg This is a newly approved GA and is long enough and nominated in the correct timeframe. The hook fact has an inline citation although the website in question is mainly referring to the film Heat, of which this made-for-television movie is an earlier version with the same lead character. I found no policy issues. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:26, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Second wind (sleep)

  • ... that those who feel sleepy perform better on tests after three more hours of sleep deprivation in the wake maintenance zone?

Created/expanded by Codehydro (talk). Self nominated at 00:11, 12 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg This article is a fivefold expansion and is new enough and long enough. I prefer ALT1, which has an inline citation, as the research to which the original hook refers appears to apply to sleep-deprived people rather than merely sleepy people. QPQ has been done and I saw no evidence of close paraphrasing or other issues. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:56, 21 October 2014 (UTC)


Improved to Good Article status by Lemurbaby (talk). Self nominated at 22:49, 11 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Article promoted to GA on Sept 11. Date and length are OK. No copyvio detected. No need for QPQ since it is not a self-nomination. The hook is not cited in the article nor mentions the year 1625 in that line (except in the lead paragraph). Antananarivo as Madagascar's capital is not also cited in the article. See sections on Etymology and Government. A minor edit will solve this DYK nomination. --Carlojoseph14 (talk) 13:40, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
  • This is a self-nomination. QPQ is not required because the nominator has not had five DYK credits, not because it's not a self-nom. -Zanhe (talk) 02:03, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on September 12[edit]

Sinema (Swoope album)

  • ... that on his album Sinema, rapper Swoope causes listeners to examine themselves to discover their selfish desires?

Created by IntHonest (talk), AdditionSubtraction (talk). Nominated by 3family6 (talk) at 23:00, 18 September 2014 (UTC).

Dolores (model)

  • ALT1:... that the model Dolores denied that she was "a heartless vampire"?
  • Reviewed: One of my first self noms.

Created by Philafrenzy (talk), Edwardx (talk). Nominated by Philafrenzy (talk) at 18:58, 17 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol voting keep.svg The article is well-referenced and was nominated within the required time period. It is written well. I like the first hook and AGF regarding the content, as the source is a book I don't have access to. I don't like the second hook because the article does not say that she was accused of being a heartless vampire (such that she would then deny it), only that she said she was not. Subtle distinction, but important, I believe.
Disappointed that QPQ was not done. The spirit of the QPQ exception is for newer users who have less experience in DYK matters and article review in general. As the nominator is a very experienced editor with several DYK credits who must be familiar with the process, this exception doesn't really apply for him, regardless of the self-nom circumstances. Julia\talk 21:49, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
  • I am less informed than you would think about DYK rules Julia. On the matter of the second hook, it was Dolores herself who said she wasn't a heartless vampire, at least if you believe the reporting of The Daily Express as quoted in the article. For what it's worth I think ALt1 is by far the stronger hook. Philafrenzy (talk) 23:06, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Sorry, I think maybe I wasn't clear. I thought the wording of the hook, saying that "she denied" being a heartless vampire, means that she was accused of being one first. This is the part that isn't really accurate. Perhaps I'm just being too pedantic? Julia\talk 05:09, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
  • I count myself amongst the foremost pedants in this land Julia, but I do think you are worrying unnecessarily. She was accused in court of preying on Atkinson and leaving him when his money ran out, I don't know if anyone used the exact phrase "heartless vampire" to her face or in print, but we have a source for her denying it and I really think that is enough. It's a matter a fact that she denied she was a heartless vampire. I would further like to state that I am not Santa Claus, and you can quote me on that! Philafrenzy (talk) 09:01, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Okay! Consider my concerns assuaged.  :) Julia\talk 16:23, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Anna Karoline

Anna Karoline as a museum ship in Bodø
  • Reviewed: Not a self-nom. Article creator/main author has few DYKs.

Created by Ulflarsen (talk), Manxruler (talk). Nominated by Iselilja (talk) at 10:31, 16 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol voting keep.svg New enough, long enough by far, neutral, sourced, I couldn't detect any copyvio or close paraphrasing; hook is short enough; no QPQ needed, not a self-nom. The source for the hook is available online[3] but as I can't understand Norse, I was unable to find the hook fact in the text. It would be nice if the nominator (or the creator) could give the exact sentence(s) that support the hook. Fram (talk) 12:25, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the reivew. Unfortunately, I couldn't find the fact in the text either; rather it says "preserver one of the old jekts that have sailed in Nordland". I am sorry for this; it was me who suggested the hook at my own initiative. I don't think I notices that there was an online version, so that was unfortunate. Do you want to have another suggestion or will you remove it? Iselilja (talk) 12:59, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
The best thing would be to have another hook, e.g. focusing on "the museum bought the Anna Karoline after their first choice sank?" or something similar. It would be a pity to not have this in DYK, it's a nice article. By the way, have you let the article creators know that the article is at DYK? There is some discussion at WT:DYK at the moment about a similar case, and dropping a note at their talk page (if not yet done) may be prudent. Fram (talk) 13:13, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Thank you. I will look into it and make a new suggestion soon. It was actually the article's creator who asked me if the article was suitable for DYK since I previously has nominated two other of his articles, so he's well aware that it's nominated, but I never asked him to suggest a hook. I'll notify him again, he's mostly at NOWP. Regards, Iselilja (talk) 13:41, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
It was quite difficult to find an alternative hook actually. Her «career» as a fishing ship/sailing vessel was pretty normal, so it’s the fact that she is preserved as an example of these kind of vessels which is notable. And regardsless of whether there existed other jekts in original condition at the time AK was bought, she is today the only one that has been preserved per this NRK source (and other sources):
...ALT 1 ... that Anna Karoline (pictured) is the only jekt that is preserved in a somewhat original condition?
Source: NRK (second last paragraph) "Anna Karoline er verdens eneste bevarte originale nordlandsjekt". "Anna Karoline is the world's only preserved original Nordlandsjekt" (Jekt and Nordlandsjekt appears to be used interchangely). I am qualifying "original" a bit; as such things will always be relative.
Iselilja (talk) 16:52, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Re-review needed for ALT1. 97198 (talk) 10:09, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg The source confirms the hook, but I wonder what the situation is with Holvikejekta[4] (Jekat Pauline seems to have been restored, not preserved in the original condition, and most other jektas are reconstructions, not originals). Holvikejekta seems to be even better (more original) than Anna karoline[5], although it has lost its mast.[6] I'm not really comfortable promoting a hook that is well-sourced but at least debatable. Fram (talk) 11:24, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
Well, you're absolutely right. The issue seems to be that Anna Karoline is the only preserved Nordlandsjekt in original condition; the only one which has sailed in Northern Norway and sailed Northern-Norway - Bergen, the distance the vessel type is most associated with. So, my statement that Nordlandsjekt and jekt is used interchangely was wrong, and the NRK source seems to have done the same mistake as I did. I am sorry for the mess. So what to do now? I seem to have some problem concentration on this article. We can of course use the one you suggested if you're still fine with that
...ALT 3 ... that the museum Nordland fylkesmuseum bought the Nordlandsjekt Anna Karoline (pictured) after their first choice Brødrene shipwrecked?
(Jekt/Nordlandsjekt should preferably also have its own article)
Iselilja (talk) 12:48, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Never Say Never (Basement Jaxx song)

Created by EditorE (talk). Self nominated at 01:49, 14 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg The hook is 226 prose characters, well above the absolute maximum of 200 (and hooks should be shorter than that max), so I've struck it. A new, shorter hook needs to be proposed as an ALT1. According to DYKcheck, the article itself is 8096 prose characters, far more than the minimum 1500 required for new articles. The article was rated as a stub on its talk page, which is clearly out of date; I've bumped that to C class. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:11, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Richard Hamming

The color of each pixel is the Hamming distance between the binary representations of its x and y coordinates, modulo 16, in the 16-color system.

Improved to Good Article status by Hawkeye7 (talk) at 22:17, 12 September 2014 (UTC).

I've taken the liberty of striking the original hook and correcting it below -- clarifying the definition of Hamming dist (and I've corrected it in the article, too), and accommodating the fact that just as Hilbert didn't use the term Hilbert space, Hamming didn't use the term Hamming distance.

ALT2 ... that Richard Hamming introduced what is now called the Hamming distance (illustrated), the number of positions by which two code words differ?

Give me any trouble on this and I'll play the expert card. EEng (talk) 19:49, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Is ALT1 "correct"? I find it punchier, although a short explanation of what EEC is would be useful. Maury Markowitz (talk) 12:33, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
ALT1 doesn't go with the image though. Hawkeye7 (talk) 02:51, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
I wish I could remember what it was, but I recall a maths lecture where something came up and the lecturer said: "he actually did name this after himself". Hawkeye7 (talk) 02:54, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Re ALT1, there are too many earlier systems which, arguably, provided forward error correction of one sort or another -- if not systematically -- for ALT1 not to attract criticism. I modestly recommend ALT2. EEng (talk) 04:09, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Symbol confirmed.svg Good to go on ALT2, based on recent GA. Maury Markowitz (talk) 13:00, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

  • Symbol possible vote.svg ALT2 isn't quite right; the "in which by which" is one which too many. The DYK approval not only missed this but apparently relies entirely on the GA review, even for the hook and its sourcing, which GA naturally doesn't cover. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:49, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

The Blood Red Tape of Charity

5x expanded by ChrisGualtieri (talk), Lugnuts (talk). Nominated by Lugnuts (talk) at 17:32, 12 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg The nominator needs to submit a QPQ. Yoninah (talk) 11:37, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on September 13[edit]

Frank Facer

Created by Casliber (talk), Vox3000 (talk). Nominated by Casliber (talk) at 13:37, 18 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg This article is new enough and long enough. The hook facts have inline citations. Only two sources were available to me and I considered the article text was within policy. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:53, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Peter Settman

Peter Settman

  • ... that Peter Settman (pictured) is known for his appearances in the comedy show Ronny och Ragge?
  • Reviewed:Geoffrey Bles

Created by BabbaQ (talk). Self nominated at 18:09, 17 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Hook not very interesting or unusual. What is so special about this actor playing in a comedy show? Did he recover from a crippling accident just before performing in a comedy? Did he just learn how to speak after being deaf all his life? Hook is trivia. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 00:23, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
  • ALT1 ... that Swedish television presenter Peter Settman (pictured) in 1989 started his television production company Baluba which he still owns and runs today?
ALT1 much better. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 20:41, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg Hook length and article length okay. Photo is own work -- i.e.okay. No dup links. This is English Wikipedia and apparently all the sources are written in Swedish(?), so I can't say for sure if citations are in order, or if there is any close paraphrasing. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 02:49, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
Symbol voting keep.svg Photograph is in public domain. Hook is cited. It's long enough. New enough. AGF on the Swedish language sources. Nice article! Étienne Dolet (talk) 17:50, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Symbol voting keep.svg I'll go ahead and AGF, with the comment that we've been seeing a lot of AGF's around here. I would ask, if we are going to assume good faith that the nominator respond in kind and at least quote the passage in English, along with page number, for any cite(s) used in the hook. This way we're not putting out the message that anyone can come along and simply expect us to AGF at any time. Fair? -- Gwillhickers (talk) 15:21, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
I have now translated the refs. That is as far as my AGF for this review goes. What language the refs are in are not a contributing factor to an articles notability, but more so is the facts inside the refs. For the rest of your comments, I am a contributer who has created articles for several years and to question my good faith concerning honesty of hooks and refs is a bit odd to say the least. This should be good to go now.--BabbaQ (talk) 15:38, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Italian cave salamander, Ambrosi's cave salamander

Italian cave salamander

5x expanded by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self nominated at 08:58, 14 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Review for Italian cave salamander: nominated for DYK one day after expansion began, and was expanded from 270 bytes to about 1900, satisfying date and length criteria. A snippet view on Google Books of the 1978 version of A Field Guide to the Reptiles and Amphibians of Britain and Europe states this salamander is also found in SE France (page 36, #5). It also states the toes are "stubby", whereas this article says "pointed". Are these facts superceded by more recent research? Other than that, all other text is well-sourced, and I'm assuming good faith for the offline ref #2. Mindmatrix 17:35, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Review for Ambrosi's cave salamander: nominated for DYK one day after expansion began, and was expanded from 323 bytes to 2240, satisfying date and length criteria. I am assuming good faith for ref #2, which is used to support the bulk of the article. The IUCN ref indicates that a sub-population may be reassigned to S. italicus, which I think merits inclusion in the article. (It also mentions additional details for habitat, which would also be welcome in the article.) Please remove opinion/commentary "is of some reassurance". Please fix copy/paste error for "Italian cave salamander" in status section. Overall, only a few minor issues to address for this article. Mindmatrix 17:53, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Overall review: double QPQ completed. Assuming good faith for offline ref (same one for both articles). Hook is reasonable length and has a citation in both articles; as it is offline, I will assume good faith for this. Image appears to be OK and has a CC licence. There are only a few outstanding minor issues to address. Mindmatrix 17:56, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on September 14[edit]

Robert J. Healey

  • ALT1:... that Bob Healey, founder of the Cool Moose Party, has run for RI Lt. Governor in order to abolish the office?
  • ALT3:... that Cool Moose Party founder Bob Healey, well-known for his political satire, won his first political election using the slogan "a strange man for a strange job"?
  • Comment: I'm putting in a last-minute nomination before the 7-day expiration date. Is is possible to put this nomination on hold until a public domain photo of Healey can be found? Part of Healey's notoriety is due to his unusual appearance (i.e. long hair, beard, et. al.). I think it'd make a great addition to the main page with the right DYK "hook". Sources: Hook #1, Rhode Island Curiosities: Quirky Characters, Roadside Oddities and Other Offbeat Stuff (pg. 158-159) - Hook #2/Hook #3, You Know You're in Rhode Island When...: 101 Quintessential Places, People, Events, Customs, Lingo, and Eats of the Ocean State (pg. 16) - Hook #2/#3, Hook #2 Hook #2. (talk) 23:56, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Created by RhodeIslandGreen (talk). Nominated by (talk) at 23:56, 21 September 2014 (UTC).

Boston Society for Medical Improvement

Members of the Boston Society for Medical Improvement.jpg

Created by G S Palmer (talk). Self nominated at 23:15, 20 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg This article is new enough and long enough. The hook facts have inline citations to reliable sources and I detected no policy issues. The image is in the public domain. I would go for the original hook as being more interesting than ALT1. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:00, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

(The stalagmite would not have been considered a "case" but a "specimen", and I think it's a good idea to orient the reader chronologically. ALT2A is 189 chars, not counting (pictured).) EEng (talk) 15:04, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

  • @EEng: I think I would go with ALT2B; it's the better flowing of the two. And in response to your post on my talk page, I don't mind your having pulled this at all. I only found this article because of a redlink on Phineas Gage. G S Palmer (talkcontribs) 16:01, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Great, thanks for understanding. Not sure if you're aware of [7].
Cwmhiraeth, can you approve 2B? The quote is in the article, and I can vouch for the source if you can't find it online. EEng (talk)
@EEng: yes, I had seen that on your page. Thanks for fixing the link: for a while there I thought you were criticizing my use of commas in the article. :) G S Palmer (talkcontribs) 13:50, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Approving ALT2A and ALT2B, which are both suitably referenced, preferably using ALT2B as the more interesting hook. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:24, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Jonathan Kurtiss

Created by Raintheone (talk). Self nominated at 23:08, 17 September 2014 (UTC).

Assassination of Gabriel Narutowicz

Created by Halibutt (talk), Piotrus (talk). Nominated by Piotrus (talk) at 05:09, 17 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol voting keep.svg Long enough, new enough, assuming good faith on offline sources, hook cited, good to go. Zappa24Mati 00:57, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg The hooks makes no sense as written; Narutowicz was the one killed, not the one behind the propaganda. I think, perhaps, "admits" should be "amidst"—Piotrus, can you please check it?—but in its present form, the hook can't be run. Further, the word "vile" would seem to violate neutrality, another hook (and article) requirement. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:55, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

The Second Arthur Guinness

  • ... that the 1855 funeral procession of the Second Arthur Guinness in Dublin was accompanied by mutes bearing wands and mourning badges?

Created/expanded by PatrickGuinness (talk). Self nominated at 17:49, 14 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Date, size, hook neutrality are fine. But the article is not referenced sufficiently; I see numerous sentences - even entire paragraphs - lacking citation. The hook sentence is also not referenced; and while the following sentence is referenced as the source is not linked, given the poor referencing of the rest of the article, I cannot even attest that the hook's claim is referenced. Also, please remove the "op cit", they are incompatible with a wiki referencing system (already the first mention of the Joyce is "op cit"...). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:08, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
[WP:CIVILITY violation removed]PatrickGuinness (talk) 12:33, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
@PatrickGuinness, Piotrus: You don't interact like that. ~ R.T.G 14:46, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Auguste van Biene

Auguste van Biene, c. 1907

  • ... that Auguste van Biene (pictured) composed incidental music for the play The Broken Melody and performed the leading role of a cellist?

Created by Cassianto (talk), Tim riley (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 12:10, 16 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol voting keep.svg This article is new enough and long enough. The hook fact has an inline citation and the image is in the public domain. I detected no policy issues. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:33, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

P.S. Krøyer's paintings of Marie‎

Double self-portrait of Marie and P.S. Krøyer

Created by Ipigott (talk). Nominated by Belle (talk) at 13:45, 15 September 2014 (UTC).

  • I think the original hook is fine, especially if the picture can be maintained in the DYK display.--Ipigott (talk) 08:34, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Thornton's Corners GO Station

Created by Natural RX (talk), Secondarywaltz (talk), Mindmatrix (talk). Nominated by Mindmatrix (talk) at 23:04, 14 September 2014 (UTC).

  • but it is not the busiest at that point. Secondarywaltz (talk) 21:11, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • "...one of the busiest highways..."? --Natural RX 19:48, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Seems irrelevant. The 401 is just a regular 6 lane highway at the point where the new link will cross. Just like crossing the Amazon where it is only a steam. Now, if there was going to be some gigantic structure across a massive divide, that would be notable. Secondarywaltz (talk) 20:50, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Like Secondarywaltz, I think mention of highway 401 is tangential to the topic, and your two proposals may be unintentionally misleading. (I do think there's a better hook buried somewhere in the article, though.) Mindmatrix 21:17, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed, now that creators have discussed the hooks. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:28, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Cowpuncher's Cantata

5x expanded by Launchballer (talk). Self nominated at 21:40, 14 September 2014 (UTC).

Note: I have replaced the reviewer's {{subst:DYKno}} with {{subst:DYK?no}} to clarify that the nomination has not been completely rejected. G S Palmer (talkcontribs) 19:49, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
Noted, strange user of unknown identity. I'm going out into Sutton High Street anyway over the next couple of days so I'll try and find the offending book - Google Books offers no preview - because it definitely states it and Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth. In the meantime - please learn that Symbol delete vote.svg is for articles that have no hope in hell of making the front page, not hooks!--Launchballer 22:03, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Sorry - that's not really explained anywhere in any of the documentation. I made my best guess as to which one to use. :) Fryede (talk) 02:27, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
This is my interpretation of when to use each symbol. I just double checked the source - actually says "British male vocalist".--Launchballer 22:16, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Sikkim Scouts

  • ... that India is raising the Sikkim Scouts to defend its 222 km (138 mi) border with China in Sikkim?

Created by Innotata (talk). Self nominated at 02:26, 14 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article is new enough and long enough. There are a few statements that are not properly cited, or not in cited sources, which I've marked in the article. Statements regarding border disputes need to be supported with neutral, reliable sources. The hook may also be WP:OR. Although the iSikkim source says many Sikkimese have tattoos, it does not say that's the reason the recruitment fell short. -Zanhe (talk) 04:09, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
  • OK, I've changed the part on tattoos and stricken the alt hook, since I suppose it is a bit too much of a synthesis. The information on the border disputes was sourced to reliable sources, though, and I've added some more. —innotata 05:05, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks for proposing the new hook, it looks fine. But the neutrality issue has not been completely resolved. The Mishra book is Indian, therefore not a neutral source for the border dispute. The Calvin source is neutral and reliable, but I cannot find any mention of Sikkim in it. -Zanhe (talk) 05:37, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
  • I think he does mention localities there, but I've replaced Calvin with other sources. I take issue with the assumption that Indian academics are biased towards the Indian government, Mishra is not. —innotata 06:36, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Indian sources are non-neutral by definition regarding border disputes involving India. Imagine writing an article about Kashmir citing solely Pakistani academics. Using some non-neutral sources is fine if neutral ones cannot be found (as in this case, it seems), but they do need to attributed and not taken at face value. I've added the attribution to the article for neutrality. -Zanhe (talk) 07:20, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
  • I see that you've now removed the attribution. Why? -Zanhe (talk) 07:26, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
  • No, people are not biased by definition toward their country and government. There are other sources that mention the Chola incident, and 2000s incidents, in passing, but Mishra is quite good enough. Your change seemed to suggest there was a dispute about whether there were any incursions by the Chinese military into Sikkim. Nobody disputes that, especially in light of the Chola incident. The only question is how many there are, and since the statement that there were "many" incursions was removed, it wasn't necessary to qualify that sentence. These seem like nitpicks that shouldn't hold up the DYK nom. —innotata 07:36, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Symbol redirect vote 4.svg The Chola incident article is poorly written and almost completely unsourced, so citing that article is not very convincing. The fact is, the statements about the border dispute are not backed by neutral sources. Neutrality is one of the key requirements for DYK. And according to WP:BIASED, even "potentially biased source" should be attributed, but you removed the attribution I added. In any case, I've already spent too much time on this DYK review. So I'll request a second opinion. -Zanhe (talk) 08:04, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on September 15[edit]

Kira Kazantsev

Created by TonyTheTiger (talk), Jjj1238 (talk). Nominated by TonyTheTiger (talk) at 04:46, 19 September 2014 (UTC).

Marina Chan

Created by Ianblair23 (talk). Self nominated at 11:24, 15 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg "readable prose size" OK, Article created by Ianblair23 on September 14, 2014. QfQ OK. The article uses about 80 sources, mostly tables, and is more or less parroting the content of race result sheets. Needs some boiling down quality wise. I like the hook most, which is more of a teaser ;) Serten (talk) 08:47, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on September 16[edit]

Shuttlecock (film)

  • ... that filming Shuttlecock was described as "highly unorganized chaos" by its producer?
  • Reviewed: Not a self-nom

5x expanded by Dr. Blofeld (talk). Nominated by Rosiestep (talk) at 16:59, 20 September 2014 (UTC).

Eurasian eagle-owl


  • Reviewed: Not a self-nomination

Improved to Good Article status by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Nominated by Oceanh (talk) at 20:57, 17 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol voting keep.svg Article is newly taken to GA, and is fully cited to decent sources. Hook is interesting and directly cited. Good to go. Miyagawa (talk) 17:50, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol delete vote.svg The hook is not supported by the cited source. The sentence is cited to pages 122–126 of Owls of the World, which do not discuss prey at all. There is a mention of eating hedgehogs much later (page 325), but no mention of skinning them. Additionally, the article closely paraphrases from this source, apparently without proper attribution. There is also some less significant close paraphrasing of copyrighted sources. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:53, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
It appears that I have only partly access to the cited book reference (via Google Books), so I assumed good faith about the source when nominating. A bit research finds that the hook fact was added to the article in July 2012 (two different edits by same editor, cited to same book but without page range then; the page range has been added later, but I have not tracked down when that was done). It should be possible to find an alternative hook which is properly cited.
However, it is more urgent to first deal with the close paraphrasing issues, by removing or rephrasing the matches. Thank you for finding these! Oceanh (talk) 20:42, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
Maybe "urgent" is not the right word; the non-attributed close paraphrasing was introduced to the article in March 2011, and has thus survived more than 3 1/2 years of subsequent edits and reviews. Oceanh (talk) 22:24, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
The reference to skinning them is on page 335 (I had to check it when rewording the hook, so I remembered it was there; it's not like I remembered because I'm an owl or anything; [coughs up mouse] Ho Ho, So Witty; Too Witty Too). Belle (talk) 11:46, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
I have only recently become aware of this nomination and the problems with the article. I have now completely rewritten the description of the bird. I remember that when working on the article I found problems with the breeding section. Are there any other sections which require attention? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:27, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks to Cwmhiraeth for the effort of rewriting the description section. Thanks to Belle for peeling the hedgehog, you are now my favourite owl! I have extended the page range of the König book reference. The hook is supported on pages 325 and 335. Oceanh (talk) 23:04, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Ganga puja

  • ... that in the festival Ganga puja, the Tripuri people of India build a temporary bamboo temple in a river stream and pray to be saved from epidemic diseases?

5x expanded by Dr. Blofeld (talk), Nvvchar (talk), Dharmadhyaksha (talk). Nominated by Dharmadhyaksha (talk) at 08:57, 17 September 2014 (UTC).

Old Chicago Main Post Office Twin Towers

Created by TonyTheTiger (talk). Self nominated at 06:49, 17 September 2014 (UTC).

Province of Perugia

Lake Trasimeno

5x expanded by Skr15081997 (talk). Self nominated at 14:57, 16 September 2014 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on September 17[edit]


The Rechthuis in Bellingwolde

Created by Editør (talk). Self nominated at 12:08, 18 September 2014 (UTC).

Princeton Lectures in Analysis

Elias M. Stein

Created by Lagrange613 (talk). Self nominated at 04:26, 18 September 2014 (UTC).

Flag of Eritrea

Flag of Eritrea

5x expanded by Skr15081997 (talk). Self nominated at 13:53, 17 September 2014 (UTC).

Mamadou N'Diaye (basketball, born 1993)

Created by Temple of the Mousy (talk). Self nominated at 00:38, 20 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg New article is large enough, and nominated in time. The main hook is problematic, since NCAA basketball is currently in the off-season, and the term "active" is ambiguous. It is unclear if any new players recruited for the upcoming season are as tall or taller. ALT1's claim of "nearly losing his vision due to a tumor" comes from the site theleaguenews.us, which does not seem like a reliable source. It has only been around since 2013, and one of the minimum writer requirements for that site is merely being 14+ years old. ALT2 is not that interesting in that it only deals with "attempts to verify claims". Pending is QPQ from nominator, and checks if this article is within policy.—Bagumba (talk) 15:59, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
  • I added a reliable source, the LA Times, to the ALT1 hook. Please check it out for a second time. Temple of the Mousy (talk) 18:16, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
  1. The LAT article says the tumor "threatening his sight", it does not support the article's "During the surgery, doctors estimated that N'Diaye would likely lose most of his vision", nor ALT1's "nearly losing his vision due to a tumor".
  2. Not supported by LAT article: "He was also looked after by Stoneridge Preparatory School. N'Diaye was later adopted by a married couple in Huntington Beach, California, near the future high school where he would play basketball."
  3. While the quote "could barely get up and down the court more than a few times" is cited, it should be attributed if the quote is to stay. However, why not just paraphrase and present as a fact without the need for full quote?
  4. "Ndiaye is a legit 7-foot-5 prospect with extraordinary length and huge hands." needs a citation immediately after the quote (WP:INTEXT).
  5. WP:QPQ is pending. Otherwise, article seems neutral, adequately cited.—Bagumba (talk) 08:22, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
  • I have made some more changes based on the mistakes you pointed out. Temple of the Mousy (talk) 23:50, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on September 18[edit]

South-West African legislative election, 1978, Transitional Government of National Unity (Namibia)

both articles 5x expanded by Pgallert (talk). Self nominated at 19:21, 23 September 2014 (UTC).

Benguela Province

Fishing boats near Lobito

  • ... that since the 1960s, rich fish stocks off the coast have been one of the principal economic drivers of the Benguela Province (pictured) region?
  • Reviewed: pending

5x expanded by Dr. Blofeld (talk), Rosiestep (talk). Nominated by Rosiestep (talk) at 18:55, 20 September 2014 (UTC).

Stephen Simpson (writer)

Created by Gwillhickers (talk). Self nominated at 22:43, 19 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg @Gwillhickers: Date, size, refs, hook neutrality, everything GTG. But the hook reads a bit unclear, and also - IMHO - is not that interesting; it makes out the subject to be just some soldier. Can we think of a better / alt hook? I can review them after ping. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:01, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
Yes, I suppose you would have to know who Simpson was, and what he did, to find the hook more interesting.
  • ALT1 ... that Stephen Simpson, a journalist writing under the anonymous name of 'Brutus' in the 1820s, publicly criticized the First National Bank in editorials for primarily serving foreign interests? -- Gwillhickers (talk) 15:27, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
ALT1 seems more interesting, GTG - through I wonder if it is not a bit too long? Closing admin may chose the hook they find best. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 14:15, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
  • @Piotrus: -- Alt1 hook is 192 characters long, including the word ...that. I would like to make it shorter if possible but it's important that we mention the time frame, i.e.1820s, name of bank, Simpson and the fact that he was a journalist writing anonymously under the name of 'Brutus'. It was tough enough to get all this in with less than 200 characters. I recommend using ALT1 hook, as the 'Brutus' episodes are what made Simpson notable and caused quite an issue in his day. Article covers this well. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 17:13, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Cengiz Aktar

Created by Pensées de Pascal (talk), EtienneDolet (talk). Nominated by EtienneDolet (talk) at 04:08, 19 September 2014 (UTC).

Zenon B. Lukosius

  • Reviewed: Frankenstein, MD
  • Comment: I'm a new editor, and was not aware of the time limit; the article was 8 days old at the time of nomination.

Created by VCJeon (talk). Self nominated at 20:57, 18 September 2014 (UTC).

Just want to let reviewers know I work with VCJeon through the Pritzker Military Museum & Library GLAM, as we are both volunteers, where I train newer editors. This is her first DYK nom. I encouraged her to go through the DYK process here in spite of the fact that the nomination is technically one day over, which isn't such a big infraction in my mind. New nominators do not have to do QPQs, but as a show of good faith, I requested she do one for another nomination. Please take this into consideration in your review. Thanks, I, JethroBT drop me a line 21:12, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg No worries on being a day late! Article created long enough (2,161 characters), was created by by VCJeon on September 10, 2014. Hook verified. Impressed by reviewing another nomination. Good to go! Hawkeye7 (talk) 23:20, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

St. James Place

5x expanded by Captain Assassin! (talk). Self nominated at 18:58, 18 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Actually I'm confused here, what should we write in nom title when the film is currently untitled? --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 19:08, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • EEng, I think you should take a look here. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 19:25, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
You rang? Captain Assassin, you slay me! I've been waiting a long time to use that!
  • As to the hook itself, let me suggest.
ALT1 ... that an as-yet-untitled cold war thriller, now in production, portrays James B. Donovan's negotiations for the release of Francis Gary Powers, the American pilot shot down over the Soviet Union in the 1960 U-2 spyplane incident?
  • Notice I've omitted the separate link to U-2, leaving just the last link you see in ALT1. I think it's too confusing to link the incident and the type of plane, which is linked in the first sentence of the incident article anyway.
  • I added spyplane incident for James Bond appeal. Also, change portrays to depicts or centers on or concerns or whatever, as you prefer.
  • I don't like the article title untitled Cold War thriller (you have to click the bold link to see what I'm talking about). Presumably it will be changed to a actual title when that's known, but there will be other untitled Cold War thrillers in future, and that will make a redirect mess, so why don't we start out with something unique, like untitled Gary Powers thriller (production begun 2014). (Don't leave a redirect -- unnecessary and confusing to our posterity.)
EEng (talk) 22:06, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • We can use title "St. James Place" for the film and DYK nom, because it is the projects name currently they are using for filming. Links here 1 and 2. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 02:29, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
I don't do moves because I always manage to screw them up, but the article should be moved to St. James Place (better check the punctuation first -- St James's Place etc?) without a redirect (useless) and the links in the hooks above adjusted. DO NOT rename this nom page as (I'm told) that messes up all kinds of things. EEng (talk) 02:37, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Yeah sure, I understood. I'm going to ask an admin who will do the moves with leaving redirects. And the correct punctuation is St. James Place. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 07:27, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
I've moved the article to St. James Place and I proposed the template to an Admin. And we need to rephrase the hook, please mention about working title before film's title, i.e. ... that a working title film St. James Place ... --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 07:37, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

We've got a hook length problem -- even ALT1 was too long. This is 198 chars:

ALT2 ... that a film provisionally entitled St. James Place portrays negotiations for the release of American pilot Francis Gary Powers, shot down over the Soviet Union in the 1960 U-2 spyplane incident?

EEng (talk) 12:42, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

It would be more better if we mention the negotiator (James B. Donovan) in the hook. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 01:49, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
Will work, thanks EEng. The issue about name has already been solved HERE. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 09:32, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
If someone doesn't get to reviewing this soon, the film will be out of production, have won several academy awards, and be included in various "oldies but goodies" retrospective film collections by the time this hook gets to MP. EEng (talk) 16:54, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Province of Treviso

5x expanded by Skr15081997 (talk). Self nominated at 14:11, 18 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg This is a great expansion. I'm really glad to see important articles like this gain the length and depth they deserve. The DYK is almost good to go. I just feel that we can reword the hook a bit. I've provided an ALT. Let me know what you think. Also, I placed a Which? tag in the article over the term Barbarian. That's not a very encyclopedic word. Can you replace it with the type of "Barbarian" (i.e. Ostrogoths? Visigoths? Vandals?). Let me know on my talk page once you're done. Cheers, Étienne Dolet (talk) 05:59, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg Expanded enough. Long enough. Hook is cited. Good to go. Étienne Dolet (talk) 06:31, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Symbol possible vote.svg I've pulled this from the queue and reopened the nomination, since the hook is not supported by the source, nor by any other source I could find. It was a city in Roman times, not a province, and the current province didn't exist until much later. It was part of Gallia Cisalpina (province) and Venetia (region). No name for the current province of Treviso existed in Roman times. I have discussed this at Wikipedia talk:Did you know#Pulled one hook from Queue 6. Fram (talk) 11:38, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on September 19[edit]

Locus iste

  • Reviewed: Man Writing a Letter + Woman Reading a Letter
  • Comment: I may add an image once if I can be sure it's the chapel for which the composition was written. Kirchweih is "the anniversary of the dedication of a church", which would be too long, - is there a better term in English?

Created by Nikkimaria (talk), Gerda Arendt (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 14:04, 26 September 2014 (UTC).

ALT1: ... that Locus iste was composed by Anton Bruckner for four unaccompanied voices for the dedication of a chapel of the Linz Cathedral?
  • Note: the article was not only moved but split. The hook (which I restored) doesn't make sense any more. ALT 1 is on the boring side, sorry. Please let me expand a bit and find a suitable hook for the music alone. This may be next week, I will have practically no internet access on the weekend. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:14, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Linz Neuer Dom Innen Kapelle.JPG

ALT2: ... that in the motet Locus iste for the dedication of the first chapel (pictured) of the Linz Cathedral, Anton Bruckner requests a pause "by carefully measuring out five beats"?
I expanded a bit and am no longer ashamed ;) - It should be sufficient for DYK and will grow further. The best date would be 29 October, 155th anniversary of the premiere, - some time to go. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:09, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Battle of the Lippe

Cristóbal de Mondragón

  • Reviewed: Not a self-nomination

Improved to Good Article status by Weymar Horren (talk). Nominated by Oceanh (talk) at 20:02, 26 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol voting keep.svg This article is a new GA and is both long enough and nominated in the correct timeframe. The hook fact is cited in the form of a quote from a book source which has a citation and I think the requirement for an inline citation is sufficiently covered. The image is in the public domain and the article is neutral but I could not assess whether there were any copyright issues because the sources are not online. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:21, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Symbol possible vote.svg I have reversed the promotion of this hook and removed it from the queue. At best it is dubious, more likely it is simply wrong, but it certainly shouldn't be presented as fact. I have given my reasoning and supporting sources at WT:DYK#Another day, another hook removed from the queue. Fram (talk) 09:49, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Good catch. I have yet to find a suitable alt hook to replace the original. Maybe it would be appropriate to include a note in the article, mentioning that the birth year of the old general is disputed. Oceanh (talk) 22:18, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Caitlin Doughty

Caitlin Doughty

  • ... that it took Caitlin Doughty (pictured), host of the web series "Ask a Mortician", six months to find work in the funeral industry with no experience?

Created by Dennis Bratland (talk). Self nominated at 04:58, 23 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg long enough, new enough, qpq done, inline citation checks, refs checks, good 2 go.--BabbaQ (talk) 21:45, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Close paraphasing check, and neutrality is also checked. Overall a great article. And it is good 2 go.--BabbaQ (talk) 17:46, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg BabbaQ, you don't mention checking neutrality or close paraphrasing. Please complete those checks, so this can indeed be good to go. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:15, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg New reviewer needed to do the checks that BabbaQ omitted, so the nomination can be completed. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:48, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
    • Oh i do apologize for not seeing this earlier. Yes I have now completed the review and will add this information.--BabbaQ (talk) 17:46, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Reptilians (Starfucker album)

  • ... that Starfucker's third studio album, Reptilians (2011), includes snippets from British philosopher Alan Watts talking about his beliefs about death?

5x expanded by EditorE (talk). Self nominated at 20:49, 21 September 2014 (UTC).

Insurance Building

Created by DocumentError (talk). Self nominated at 00:44, 20 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol delete vote.svg Article is new but not long enough. It only has 1371 characters. --Carlojoseph14 (talk) 20:34, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
Carlojoseph14 - sorry, I accidentally omitted a paragraph when I was adding the article. I've updated it now and get a final character count of 1549. DocumentError (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 04:02, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Article is now 1808 prose characters according to DYKcheck. Have adjusted the template due to the article being moved last month (this template is fine just as it is). Carlojoseph14, the slash is more appropriate if the article is a little under the minimum; the X indicates that the nomination is unlikely to be fixed or fixable. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:16, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Joel Harlow, Barney Burman, Mindy Hall

5x expanded by Miyagawa (talk). Self nominated at 22:40, 19 September 2014 (UTC).

Enterprise (soundtrack)

5x expanded by Miyagawa (talk). Self nominated at 19:03, 19 September 2014 (UTC).

Code Reviser

Created by DocumentError (talk). Self nominated at 18:19, 19 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg The article is new enough, long enough and nominated timely. No copyvios found. QPQ is not required, since this is the author's fifth nomination, but it will be required from now on. There is one problem: the hook is not explicitly cited in the article. Instead there is a table showing the names of the officeholders and their years in office, and readers are required to do the math for themselves. I would suggest you eliminate the table format; there are only three people in it, and two of them are missing half the information you chose to include. I suggest that instead you describe the three office holders in prose sentences. That way you can include the information you have for Richard White but do not have for the other two. Important: specifically say 27-year term in the sentence about Richard White, and cite the reference to that sentence. This may seem like silly nit-picking - after all, readers CAN do the math - but it is a requirement of DYK that the hook fact be specifically cited by a reference on the sentence that includes the fact. Please ping me when this has been dealt with, or if you want to discuss it. Aside from that one issue, the nomination is good to go. --MelanieN (talk) 23:02, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks much, MelanieN, this is a great point. I have an ANI issue I need to deal with but, as soon as that's done, I'll make these changes. DocumentError (talk) 23:57, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Stranger Hollow

  • ... that Stranger Hollow has a gradient of 137.0 meters (449.5 ft) per 1 kilometer (0.62 mi)?

Moved to mainspace by Jakec (talk). Self nominated at 16:34, 19 September 2014 (UTC).

Sinclair C5

A Sinclair C5 with a "high vis mast"

  • ... that Sinclair C5 electric vehicles (pictured), once reviled as a notorious failure, have been modified with jet engines and run at 150 mph (240 km/h)?

5x expanded by Prioryman (talk). Self nominated at 11:51, 19 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol voting keep.svg New enough (promoted to Good Article status on 27 September 2014), long enough (47,905 characters). Most of hook verified against online sources - 150 mph claim AGF on offline hook. Good image, appropriately licensed. QPQ done. Good to go. Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:52, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Environmental issues in Kolkata

Created by EditorMakingEdits (talk). Self nominated at 07:21, 19 September 2014 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on September 20[edit]

Theodosia Trollope

Created by Victuallers (talk). Self nominated at 17:09, 21 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg This well-written article is new enough and long enough. The sentence to which the hook refers starts "Comparison's of the two households concluded that ..." which I think is expressed awkwardly, after all, a comparison cannot think or indeed conclude anything!. If it were to say something to the effect "Visitors comparing the two households ..." I could approve the hook, although I tried in vain to view page 90 of the source. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:45, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the review Cwmhiraeth but I'm a bit confused as to what we can do. Obviously I cannot correct the source's English, but I'm sure I understand the meaning. If it is totally ambiguous then can someone suggest an alt hook? Victuallers (talk) 15:11, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
Well I understand what it means but it doesn't seem good grammar to me. How about
Thx.Fine by me Victuallers (talk) 14:04, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg New reviewer needed to check ALT1 hook, and complete the earlier review, which doesn't mention sourcing, neutrality, or close paraphrasing checks. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:56, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Lichauco Heritage House

Lichauco Heritage House

Created by JannicaDiaz (talk). Nominated by Shhhhwwww!! (talk) at 13:18, 22 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg This article has insufficient references. A rule of thumb is a ref per para. Do ping me when it is ready to be reconsidered. Victuallers (talk) 13:15, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
@BlueMoonset: another nomination of Shhhhwwww!!. --Carlojoseph14 (talk) 09:50, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
@Victuallers: already added reference for that detail. Thanks! 7:07 PM, 21 October 2014
Carlojoseph14 thanks for the heads up! :). 7:08 PM. 21 October 2014

Czech language

Flag of the Czech Republic

Improved to Good Article status by Tezero (talk). Self nominated at 03:21, 22 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Alternate hook: ... that the Czech language contains a phoneme that does not occur in any other known language? Newyorkbrad (talk) 00:40, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
  • I'd accept that, though I think it'd be more interesting to the reader to specify what it sounds like, especially with a sound file. Tezero (talk) 00:48, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
    • That works for me; I didn't mean to suggest that had to come out. Newyorkbrad (talk) 23:16, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

International Wrestling Association (1970s)

5x expanded by Nikki311 (talk). Self nominated at 18:16, 21 September 2014 (UTC).


  • ... that "tiella" refers to several dishes in Italian cuisine, including a dish prepared with potato, rice, onion and mussels?

Created by Northamerica1000 (talk). Self nominated at 03:03, 21 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Comment (not a review): the image, originally from here, appears to be improperly licensed, claiming Cc-By-2.0 while the Flickr source is fully copyrighted. I have no idea if Flickr users can change the license after publication, and if they can, what effect that has on works derived under the previous license, but it might be a problem. G S Palmer (talkcontribs) 16:16, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
  • I have removed the image from the hook and the article, and I have nominated both files at Wikimedia Commons for speedy deletion: [8], [9]. Thanks for the notification. NorthAmerica1000 18:11, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Update: The images were deleted at Wikimedia Commons. NorthAmerica1000 18:14, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Antananarivo Province

5x expanded by Skr15081997 (talk). Self nominated at 15:54, 20 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Glad to see this topic was expanded. I've proposed an alternative hook above. - Lemurbaby (talk) 01:33, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Michael Ross (Washington politician)

  • ... that in 1972, four decades before the 2012 legalization of marijuana in the U.S. state of Washington, legislator Michael Ross introduced a bill that would have legalized the drug?

Created by DocumentError (talk). Self nominated at 09:24, 20 September 2014 (UTC).

  • This article states that "Sam Smith was just the second African-American elected to the Washington legislature", while the Sam Smith article claims he was the third... one of those appears to be wrong. Maury Markowitz (talk) 14:46, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, it was a typo by me. I've corrected it (I think). DocumentError (talk) 00:22, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg The hook fact is not in the article; all the article says is "He introduced what is believed to be the first bill to legalize the recreational use of marijuana", with no further detail and without an inline citation. 97198 (talk) 04:30, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
Apologies, 97198, I placed the reference in the incorrect place in the article. I think I've corrected it now; LMK if not. DocumentError (talk) 04:45, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
@DocumentError: the issue still remains that the whole hook fact needs to be present in the article. Currently it does not mention the year Ross proposed the bill or that marijuana was eventually legalised in 2012. You will need to add these facts (with sources) to the article for the current hook to be eligible. If not, you can suggest an alternative hook that is already mentioned in the article. 97198 (talk) 04:48, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
97198 - I think I've fixed it now. I changed the sentence to - "In 1972 he introduced what is believed to be the first bill to legalize the recreational use of marijuana, four decades before the drug was ultimately legalized in Washington ..." - which syncs to the source. DocumentError (talk) 01:13, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
No, it does not sync to the source (footnote 2), which only states "Mr. Ross sponsored what was believed to be the first bill to legalize possession and sale of marijuana in the nation." This on its own would make a nice hook, but does not support the hook or the statement in the article at all. 97198 (talk) 05:53, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on September 21[edit]

Rahat Hossain

Created by Temple of the Mousy (talk). Self nominated at 23:58, 9 October 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg:The image is not freely licensed so it can't goes to the main page. The sources seems to be temporary reports, so I'm not sure if he is notable enough?--Huang Jinghai (talk) 09:17, 17 October 2014 (UTC)


  • Reviewed: Not a self-nomination

Improved to Good Article status by Lucia Black (talk), Erachima (talk). Nominated by Oceanh (talk) at 21:17, 26 September 2014 (UTC).

Mexican spiny pocket mouse, Painted spiny pocket mouse

5x expanded by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self nominated at 06:32, 23 September 2014 (UTC).

Impedance analogy

Created/expanded by Spinningspark (talk). Self nominated at 10:30, 22 September 2014 (UTC).

Cape Verde at the 2008 Summer Olympics

5x expanded by NickGibson3900 (talk). Self nominated at 23:13, 21 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Comment: Why does the link simply read "Summer Olympics"? Is the relevant fact that they never progressed beyond the first round at the 2008 Olympics? If so, say that. Or is that they've never progressed beyond the first round? If so, why is this an appropriate fact for the 2008 Olympics specifically - what does that specific Olympics have to do with Cape Verde? Tezero (talk) 03:54, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
  • @Tezero: New hook suggestion:

-- NickGibson3900 Talk 04:53, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

  • That's better, yeah. I'm not sure if the wording is perfect and I haven't checked the other factors, though, so I'll leave this one to the others. Tezero (talk) 04:56, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

NickGibson3900 Talk 07:04, 22 September 2014 (UTC) - Another ALT:

Symbol redirect vote 4.svg new full review needed - NickGibson3900 Talk 05:25, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Another one:

  • ALT3:... that none of the competitors for Cape Verde at the 2008 Summer Olympics progressed beyond the first round in their events, replicating their performance at every other Olympic Games?

Symbol redirect vote 4.svg - for the reviewer: The hooks are all over the place, and only ALT 1, ALT 2 and ALT 3 are live. The original was struck - NickGibson3900 Talk 05:11, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Cities: Skylines

  • ... that the development team for Cities: Skylines, which has been called more ambitious than SimCity, consists of only nine people?
  • Reviewed: Ununpentium
  • Comment: I do not intend to violate WP:NOTADVERTISING, which is of course difficult with competing products; extra scrutiny and suggestions are requested.

Created by Knight of Truth (talk). Self nominated at 22:43, 21 September 2014 (UTC).

Benin at the 2008 Summer Olympics

5x expanded by NickGibson3900 (talk). Self nominated at 05:41, 21 September 2014 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on September 22[edit]

Otto Lucas

  • Reviewed: not a self-nom
  • Comment: better hook ideas welcome

Created by Libby norman (talk), Mabalu (talk), Gareth E Kegg (talk). Nominated by Edwardx (talk) at 23:03, 29 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Maybe reword? I thought "his plane" meant he owned it or was flying it... though perhaps that's just me. 97198 (talk) 05:14, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
  • I had the same thought when drafting the hook, seeking brevity. I've reworded it. Edwardx (talk) 09:44, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Hanna Stjärne

Hanna Stjärne 2014

  • ... that journalist Hanna Stjärne (pictured) in September 2014 was announced to be the new CEO of Sveriges Television and that she would take the post within six months?
  • Reviewed:Caitlin Doughty

Created by BabbaQ (talk). Self nominated at 21:41, 26 September 2014 (UTC).

Lord Zoltan

Lord Zoltan

Moved to mainspace by (talk). Self-nominated at 21:05, 22 September 2014 (UTC).

Anatolian rock lizard

5x expanded by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self nominated at 13:15, 24 September 2014 (UTC).

Fianarantsoa Province

  • ALT1:... that in Fianarantsoa Province of Madagascar the average fertility rate per woman was higher than 6, greatest in any of the country's provinces?
  • Reviewed: Dark-eared myza (5th of 8 QPQs)
  • Comment: Hook fact is cited to a chart

5x expanded by Skr15081997 (talk). Self nominated at 11:41, 23 September 2014 (UTC).

Klingermans Run, Cranberry Run

  • ... that although Klingermans Run and the nearby Cranberry Run have similar geologies and land uses, the former is Class A Wild Trout Waters and the latter is incapable of supporting fish life?

Moved to mainspace by Jakec (talk). Self nominated at 17:45, 22 September 2014 (UTC).

Ciceri e Tria

  • ALT1:... that fried pasta is used in Ciceri e Tria, which was originally performed to create a quality of meatiness in the dish during times of meat scarcity?
  • Reviewed: Strati (automobile)
  • Comment: I prefer the original hook compared to ALT1. NorthAmerica1000 07:44, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment: I also prefer the original hook compared to ALT1. --Gaff ταλκ 21:08, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Created by Northamerica1000 (talk). Self nominated at 07:44, 22 September 2014 (UTC).

Dixy Lee Ray

Dixy Lee Ray signing bill into law

5x expanded by DocumentError (talk). Self nominated at 03:54, 22 September 2014 (UTC).

  • The article was indeed lengthened, but not 5x: Sept length = 11,430, Sept 22 = 26,552. Otherwise, the length is fine, the Hook is interesting, the photo is from Washington State Archives. Did not check for other criteria, since does not appear to be eligible. ch (talk) 19:28, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg We go by number of prose characters, not file size. (See WP:DYKcheck for a tool which calculates prose size). This had 3,405 prose characters before expansion, and it's now 10,669. It would have to be 17,025 for a 5x expansion. MANdARAX  XAЯAbИAM 22:22, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi - DYKcheck probably isn't an accurate tool to use for this specific article, though certainly it is 99% of the time. This article, in its original form, had a voluminous "external links" and "further reading" list that violated the generally accepted WP:EXT standards. These "bulked up" the prose character count of the original article significantly. During the cleanup and reconstruction of the article I removed almost all of this. I believe it's a 5X increase if counting prose characters in the body of the article (plus infobox and image captions) and only fails this standard if you credit the original article with these lengthy "external links" and "further reading" lists that should not have been there in the first place and which were deleted, culled, or - in a few cases - refactored into inline citations. DocumentError (talk) 02:40, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Mandarax - I have further updated the article and now get a count of 19,021 prose characters. DocumentError (talk) 07:42, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
The count did not include anything from the Further reading or External links sections of the pre-expansion article, and the figure of 3,405 prose characters appears to be accurate. Infobox is never counted, nor are image captions, long quotes, or bulleted lists. It's currently 16,342 characters. MANdARAX  XAЯAbИAM 19:16, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
I'm sure coming up 700 characters short in a 17,000 character article will be fine, especially considering the article went from one to 8 images; 4 of which were new uploads to the Commons. We're humans here to edit as per the spirit of the law and apply WP:COMMONSENSE. A bot or script could process DYK noms otherwise. DocumentError (talk) 02:07, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
I don't see what the problem was here. I added over 1,200 characters simply by expanding the introduction. Despite its length, the article at times seems to be a procession of quotes, with low informational content. In the Atomic Energy Commission section, for example, the reader is not informed about who Milton Shaw was, how he created so much chaos, or why Ray had to remove him. Or the key fact that the AEC was broken up in 1975. I'm tempted to rewrite the whole section actually. I suggest that it be put up for Peer Review. Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:53, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg New enough (sort of), long enough (now), not quite fully referenced. Removed a bare URL. Hook fine, verified against online reference. I'm surprised you didn't use the lead image. This one is licensed okay, but may not look clear at 100x100. Bo QPQ required. Good to go. Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:53, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Billboard Latin Music Hall of Fame

Created by Magiciandude (talk), AJona1992 (talk). Nominated by Magiciandude (talk) at 02:40, 22 September 2014 (UTC).

@NickGibson3900: Yes check.svg I reviewed UR (album) Erick (talk) 14:48, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on September 23[edit]

Greenside Mine

George Head Head

  • ALT1:...have a go
  • Reviewed: QPQ is not required
  • Comment: This is one day out of date, but I suggest that we should not lose this article

Created/expanded by Silence-is-infinite (talk). Nominated by Victuallers (talk) at 20:33, 1 October 2014 (UTC).

Crab Tree Club

  • ... that the Crab Tree Club fined anyone who arrived in evening dress one shilling?
  • ALT1:... that the Crab Tree Club was described by Paul Nash as "a most disgusting place ... where only the very lowest city Jews and the most pinched harlots attend"?
  • ALT2:... that at the Crab Tree Club launch party in 1914, its founder Augustus John arrived extremely drunk and offered to marry all the women present?
  • Reviewed: Not a self-nom

Created by Philafrenzy (talk). Nominated by Edwardx (talk) at 23:24, 30 September 2014 (UTC).

Nagpur Mahanagar Parivahan Limited

  • Reviewed: Blackberry Passport

Created by Rsrikanth05 (talk). Self nominated at 21:17, 28 September 2014 (UTC).

Homecoming: When the Soldiers Returned from Vietnam

  • Reviewed: Although I did not commit a full review of another DYK, I did read several articles becalmed in the backlog and contributed review comments and suggestions. These articles were: 1 (2013 film); Go Eun-bi; Maricopa County Courthouse.
  • Comment: One of the great and continuing disagreements of the Vietnam War is whether or not returning soldiers were spat upon when they returned to the United States. Those who insist such incidents never happened are often vehement in branding such tales urban legends. Many veterans are outraged by this accusation, and insist on the truth of the tale. Homecoming: When the Soldiers Returned from Vietnam is an important source of information supporting the latter POV; however, I wrote it (I hope) in the spirit of NPOV. This would be a great article for Veterans Day, and I am requesting that it go to the Special Occasion Holding Area for that date, November 11th.

Created by Georgejdorner (talk). Self nominated at 17:50, 23 September 2014 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on September 24[edit]

Arabian partridge

  • ... that the Arabian partridge feeds on seeds, plant matter and small invertebrates?

5x expanded by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self nominated at 05:55, 26 September 2014 (UTC).

Magnificat in E-flat major, BWV 243a

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self nominated at 08:45, 25 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Nominated one day after creation, therefore new enough. Qualifies for "long enough" by a factor of nearly 10 (14568 characters of prose.) Article is written in neutral language, and the inline citations utilize a liberal selection of sources throughout the entire article. No paraphrasing or other copyright concerns detected. My preference is ALT2. The first hook is a bit confusing. Alt1 is good, but I find ALT2 to be more interesting than the average DYK hook. This hook fact is directly cited, and can be found in Jones, pages 132-133. The hook itself is neutral, negative BLP not applicable here. QPQ complete. No image to check. Ready for mainpage exposure. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 15:28, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Several paragraphs lack cites, per DYK rules. Yoninah (talk) 19:45, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
  • They are based on the score, written today, long after the nomination. I will supply page numbers tonight (but can't help thinking that the article is a few times long enough without the paragraphs). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:50, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
  • It's not a question of long enough; DYK requires at least one cite per paragraph. There is no cite in the last paragraph under History, and onward through the description of the score and each movement. Yoninah (talk) 19:53, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
  • I said I will add refs, no? I FEEL that the article was long enough without the paragraphs I added today, and if they cause problems I can remove them until after DYK. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:36, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Oh, now I understand what you wrote in parentheses. Yoninah (talk) 20:42, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
  • If that each paragraph must have an inline citation, shouldn't that appear in the rules, and in the meta material in the actual review process? I must have missed that discussion. Nonetheless I agree it is a good standard to follow, and in fact I passed this article because just above the "un-sourced" paragraphs the source for them is cited. I didn't view these as individual paragraphs, but a section, broken into parts, and felt the section as a whole was sourced. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 21:21, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Whatever Teh Rulez, I added the page numbers that will be requested in a GA review anyway. They will not help readers who have different editions of a score, - for them the precise naming of text and measure numbers - which was there - will be more helpful. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:04, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Thank you, Gerda. What about the first paragraph under Scoring and structure? Yoninah (talk) 23:22, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
  • That is kind of a sub-lead of things mentioned later. I will follow the rulez and double the refs. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:34, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
  • See remark at Talk:Magnificat in E-flat major, BWV 243a#WP:PRIMARY concerns - these need definitely be sorted before wider (...e.g. main page) exposure is given to the article. --Francis Schonken (talk) 07:37, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
  • I suppose it best to give a somewhat wider treatment to the four canticles in the Magnificat 243a article (somewhat like the treatment of the individual 12 movements): these canticles are the object of the DYK, the article doesn't give much information on them. E.g. Kuhnau, who used the text of these four canticles in a predecessor Christmas cantate isn't even mentioned in the 243a article, etc. --Francis Schonken (talk) 07:37, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
* I responded on the talk. This is DYK. It will grow, and feel free to add. I actually think it's ripe for a merge with the later one in D. No rush, Christmas would be a good day ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:05, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
* re. PRIMARY, see my answer there; re. DYK level: the DYK is about the "added four movements", the treatment of which is insufficient currently in the article (notwithstanding the many outstanding qualities of the article), so I really oppose this being ready for DYK. --Francis Schonken (talk) 08:50, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
The sections with "primary sources" were moved from the article, and information on the Christmas parts added. Please look again. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:14, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
Yes I think we're about where we need to be for more exposure on the article(s) (plural for the highly linked BWV 243). I'd leave the discretion to you DYK people from here on. Sorry for not being too consequential on reference formatting, less acquainted with the templates. --Francis Schonken (talk) 04:18, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
However... the noteworthy fact proposed under ALT2: "... that Bach added four movements to his Magnificat in E-flat major, BWV 243a, composed for the first Marian feast, when he performed it again for Christmas?" appears to be unreferenced. It is on several Wikipedia pages (I think also the cantatas pages mention it), but I didn't find any corroboration in any of the sources I read thusfar (that is up to and including the Jenkins 2000 introduction for Novello). All of them posit Christmas 1723 as the first version of the Magnificat (so no prior version from 2 July without the laudes):
  1. It shouldn't be presented as "fact" if it can only be found in a limited set of sources.
  2. The content should have a clear reference in all articles that mention it (I think 5 of 6). This is not something optional but subject to fundamental Wikipedia policy (WP:REDFLAG!!!)
  3. No DYK about it before this has been cleared.
--Francis Schonken (talk) 07:04, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
I don't like ALT2 too much if we don't have it for Christmas, and we will not, because DYK is kept only for six weeks. Can we look again at the other hooks? Until 2003, it was believed that Bach composed the piece for Christmas, that's why it's in the older sources. Ref #4: "about first performance s. A. Glöckner, in: BJ 2003, p. 37ff." That it was composed in July already, making it one of the early pieces of Bach's tenure in Leipzig, is a true DYK fact. Can someone word that? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:01, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Tx, I withdraw my last remark, it has been settled [10] --Francis Schonken (talk) 09:25, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

I added Francis as contributor, after a lot of source work, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:36, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on September 25[edit]

Lilian Shelley

  • ALT1:... that Lilian Shelley was "the craziest and most generous creature in the world"?
  • Reviewed: Not a self-nom

Created by Philafrenzy (talk). Nominated by Edwardx (talk) at 22:47, 2 October 2014 (UTC).


  • ... that Bodhamayananda, director of VIHE, speaks of three "H's": develop your head, feel with your heart, and work with your hands for the development of the society?

Created by AmritasyaPutra (talk). Self nominated at 13:16, 28 September 2014 (UTC).

Trento Longaretti

5x expanded by Mindmatrix (talk). Self nominated at 21:44, 26 September 2014 (UTC).

Southern grasshopper mouse

5x expanded by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self nominated at 07:48, 26 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Not a full review, but just pointing out that the wording of the original hook ought to be changed. Biologically speaking, "immune" implies the involvement of the immune system in some way which does not appear to be the case in this mouse's reaction to the venom; it may mean roughly the same thing to a layperson but something like "desensitised to the pain caused by their venom" would be more accurate. 97198 (talk) 03:42, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
The source used the word "immune" but the safest thing would be to go for ALT1. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:31, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Battle of Baguio (1945)

General Yamashita surrenders at the American Residence in Baguio

Created/expanded by RightCowLeftCoast (talk), Randelearcilla (talk), Nick-D (talk), and RioHondo (talk). Nominated by RightCowLeftCoast (talk) at 12:00, 25 September 2014 (UTC).

  • I'd note that the creator of this article, Randelearcilla (talk · contribs), is almost certainly the latest incarnation of a long running vandal who's been badly affecting articles on the military history of the Philippines for years, so I'd suggest that they not receive any credit for this nomination per WP:DENY, especially as RightCowLeftCoast appears to have entirely reworked the article. Nick-D (talk) 07:21, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
I have struck the individual from the list. I agree all of the content created by Randelearcilla was subject to WP:BURDEN, but it did instigate this improvement, if that means anything.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 18:52, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
  • "to surrender in it" -- surrender in WHAT? EEng (talk) 20:28, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
Surrender in the city; he left the city, only to return and surrender in it.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 04:33, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
Hook reads like it's the headquarters, not the city. Better fix it. EEng (talk) 17:45, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
Better?--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 19:43, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
I modified it a bit more (was feeling lazy before, sorry). But there's a problem: the article doesn't say he returned specifically to surrender, just that he surrendered there. EEng (talk) 20:00, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
So then does the edit that the above editor made to the hook solve their concern? Seriously, General Yamashita was taken to Bataan to surrender at the American Residence in Baguio, specifically to surrender. If that needs to be made more clear, the step by step, process of Yamashita making radio contact with the Americans, meeting with a party of the 32nd Infantry Division, then flown to Baguio for the formal surrender ceremony, that is outside of the scope of this article but more inside the scope of Yamashita's article to get so overly detailed. The aftermath of Yamashita returning to Baguio to surrender is within the scope, IMHO.
Does it seriously need to be stated that The American Residence, is in Baguio? There is a wikilink right there that will indicate to the reader that it is. I am not making this up.
If this is all that is holding this DYK up, then this is such a small detail.
As Administrator Nick-D stated this article is nearly a complete rewrite from the 19 September version of this article, and well cited.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 22:04, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
How about this as ALT2: ...that the Battle of Baguio involved the U.S. 33rd & 37th Infantry Divisions, and the guerrilla organization USAFIP–NL?
--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 20:53, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on September 26[edit]

Makode Linde

Makode Linde

Created by BabbaQ (talk). Self nominated at 13:19, 1 October 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Review: Long enough, the sources are OK. but not brilliant, you might find more science on the web. I think the hook is not adequate, the cake is about much more. The reference to genital cutting is lacking e.g. Serten (talk) 20:01, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Symbol voting keep.svg I approve ALT1. Article is long enough. New enough. The picture is PD. The hook is cited. AGF on the Swedish sources. Étienne Dolet (talk) 18:56, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Battle of Huangtiandang

5x expanded by Hwangjinghai (talk). Self nominated at 12:42, 30 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol delete vote.svg Has been on DYK before. ch (talk)
  • Symbol question.svg @CWH: could you provide a diff for the other DYK nom? According to the article history, this article was created on 21 September 2014. Yoninah (talk) 09:36, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
  • This article has not appeared on DYK before. I created it on 21 Sep and did not finish it within 7 days. But I expanded it 5x within the 7 days before the nomination. --Huang Jinghai (talk) 13:05, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg Apologies -- you are right, @Huangjinghai:. This is a a well researched and interesting article on a great topic. But there are several questions 1) The hook will not be understood by most readers so we need to make it clearer why people should come to the article. 2) The lead also needs to be clearer and enticing to readers who do not already know the subject. Let's explain the confusing names and places or remove them. 3) The titles for the Chinese references in the notes should be translated. 4) The notes and reading should add English language references for readers who want to find more. These could come from Jin-Song War article. 5) Just a suggestion: There are places where the grammar and style should be cleaned up. If it's OK with you, I'd be glad to go over it. 6) I see that the ZH Wikipedia article has interesting material on the different coverage of this topic in the Song Shi and the Jin Shi. Since you read Chinese, it might be good to use the Chinese article to add a section in the English article. Cheers, ch (talk) 18:47, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment: A little obscurity in the hook is fine; it makes people want to click on it. IMO the hook is OK. Yoninah (talk) 19:27, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Please feel free to make any clean-up, I will appreciate it very much. I didn't add English language sources found at Jin-Song wars article cause I have no access to them, those sources seem to be general introductions, I don't know if there's enough coverage about this battle in them. About the different coverage of this topic in the Song Shi and the Jin Shi, I may add a few words later. But I think to have large paragraphs of direct quotations is not necessary.--Huang Jinghai (talk) 07:20, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
@Yoninah: and @Hwangjinghai:: might this be both slightly obscure and acceptably comprehensible? ch (talk) 19:51, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
  • The rule of thumb for hooks is: The shorter, the better. I don't see the benefit of fleshing out the link. Yoninah (talk) 19:55, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Good -- I respect your experience and accumulated wisdom! ch (talk) 20:00, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

BlackBerry Passport

5x expanded by ViperSnake151 (talk). Self nominated at 19:15, 26 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Article is long enough, sourced, QPQ supplied. Both hooks are interesting, I'd actually say go for the first one. Hook is if appropriate length. Yes, all good to go.-Rsrikanth05 (talk) , 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Symbol possible vote.svg As discussed at WT:DYK, the hook has been pulled from the queue and the discussion reopened. Please try to avoid promo-hooks and go with what independent sources have to say about it instead. Fram (talk) 12:18, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Is the alt okay? ViperSnake151  Talk  14:51, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
It is neutral, within word limit and sourced. I guess another reviewer should look at it. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 13:12, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Mariam al-Mansuri

  • ... that Major Mariam al-Mansouri, UAEs first female fighter pilot, has a degree in English literature?

Created/expanded by Serten (talk). Self nominated at 15:25, 26 September 2014 (UTC).

  • How to shift mansuri -> mansouri? Serten (talk) 16:05, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg I've only reviewed 5-6 DYKs so bear with me if I don't present this properly...
    • Appears long enough.
    • Hook is interesting and properly referenced.
    • Article is properly referenced, but there appear to be several instances to very close paraphrasing evidenced here, here, and here, even after discounting what is included in quotation marks and only looking at 10+ matching words. If this can be cleaned up, then the article may be acceptable. A more experienced reviewer may want to weigh in here.--Godot13 (talk) 05:31, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
Hallo Godot, (has any joke been waiting?) The story went viral globaly, insofar a lot of news magazines parrot the same stuff. But I corrected the paraphrasing respectively more direct quotes have been used. Thnx Serten (talk) 06:48, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
Surprisingly fewer jokes than would be expected. I'll have another look...--Godot13 (talk) 03:10, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
Done some further polishing, should work now. Serten (talk) 10:25, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Not a full review, but the hook fact isn't the least bit interesting. I suggest that @Serten: think up an alt1. G S Palmer (talkcontribs) 20:07, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
    • I won't think on orders :) Serten (talk) 22:03, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Marshall Holloway

* ... that before the Ivy Mike nuclear test, Wallace Leland and Harold Agnew put a shark in Marshall Holloway's bed?

Created by Hawkeye7 (talk). Self nominated at 13:19, 26 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Great hook, but [11] says it was after Mike. BTW why not term Mike thermonuclear? EEng (talk) 20:23, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Made it thermonuclear. According to Peter Goodchild and Richard Rhodes it was before. I need to mention the test because otherwise it's just two of your mates with a shark. How about:

Hawkeye7 (talk) 02:26, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Anthony William Hall

5x expanded by Miyagawa (talk). Self nominated at 11:01, 26 September 2014 (UTC).

Belonogaster petiolata

  • ... that a queen of the wasp Belonogaster petiolata will inspect her nest to ensure the eggs are hers, and eat those that belong to other queens?
  • Comment: A new editor did a great job and deserves recognition and wikilove

Created by Probertsg (talk). Nominated by Oiyarbepsy (talk) at 05:28, 26 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Oppose May be OK on content, but the editor doesn't understand formatting. Only bolding should be first occurrence of article name, there are multiple repeated refs, even though I've refnamed a few, no wikilinks other than one put in by me, headings incorrectly capitalised, no categories Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:44, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Needs complete review in accordance with DYK review instructions please begin with one of the 5 review symbols that appear at the top of the edit screen, and then indicate all aspects of the article that you have reviewed. Details that are supposed to be checked in a review can be found at DYKReviewing guide. This is a new editor and should be given a chance to make corrections. Also, the nominator should have been notified on their talk page. That not having been done, I'm placing a notice on their talk page. This is not a FA process where a nomination gets voted on. It's a review process, whereby the nominator is given a chance to make corrections, and anyone can suggest different hooks. It either "passes" or "fails", but that is based on the criteria linked above. The only formatting issue mentioned in the criteria is how the hook itself is formatted. — Maile (talk) 19:46, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
I read the comment above and I assume that I do not need to do anything. It clearly is a request for a third-party to review this article, right? That was a rather long post that doesn't really give anyone clear instruction about anything. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 18:35, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed. Oiyarbepsy, you do not need to do anything until a full review is done. The above is merely stating that the "oppose" comment is not a review. Reviewers have criteria to follow, and the seasoned reviewers know what that is. If not, the links take them to the list of criteria. Repeat...full review still needed. — Maile (talk) 21:34, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Neuquén-Cipolletti bridges

Construction of the Neuquén-Cipolletti railway bridge in 1901

Created/expanded by GDuwen (talk). Self nominated at 16:07, 28 September 2014 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on September 27[edit]

Govanhill Baths

Govanhill Baths, 2014

  • ... that Govanhill Baths (pictured) is the last surviving Edwardian public bathhouse in Glasgow?
  • Reviewed: tba
  • Comment: Other hook ideas welcome

Created by Edwardx (talk), Philafrenzy (talk). Nominated by Edwardx (talk) at 23:08, 4 October 2014 (UTC).

Tim Frazier


Created by Temple of the Mousy (talk). Self nominated at 23:14, 30 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol voting keep.svg All sources look reliable, article is long enough and hook covers all aspects. Looks good. Great job! 和DITOREtails 00:31, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg I might be missing something, but where in the article is the claim "as did his older sister" mentioned? 97198 (talk) 11:48, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Information has been added to the "Redshirt" section of the article Temple of the Mousy (talk) 14:50, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

The Fog Warning

The Fog Warning

Created/expanded by Hafspajen (talk), Xanthomelanoussprog (talk), Serten (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 19:24, 29 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Looks good to me. Long enough, new enough. Don't see issues with neutrality. Hook is sourced inline. Image is properly licensed. —  Cliftonian (talk)  15:53, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Debbie Rodella

  • Reviewed: Jonas Wood
  • Comment: The text itself has been expanded more than five fold to over 1,500 characters

2x expanded and sourced (BLP) 5x expanded by Centpacrr (talk). Nominated by RTG (talk) at 18:03, 28 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Note: this had two references prior to expansion, so it is not eligible for the 2x unsourced BLP exception. But that doesn't matter, because it's been 5x expanded. MANdARAX  XAЯAbИAM 18:57, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Bob Litherland

  • ... that despite being in Parliament for 18 years, Bob Litherland never served as a government MP?

5x expanded by BethNaught (talk). Self nominated at 06:49, 28 September 2014 (UTC).

Secret Mountain Fort Awesome

5x expanded by 23W (talk). Self nominated at 11:20, 27 September 2014 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on September 28[edit]

2014 Colorado student protests

  • ... that hundreds of Colorado high school students are currently protesting a proposed curriculum change?

Created by Jinkinson (talk). Self nominated at 19:12, 4 October 2014 (UTC).

Kanojo x Kanojo x Kanojo

Created by GIR556 (talk). Self nominated at 16:43, 30 September 2014 (UTC).

Eddie Golden

Created/expanded by (talk). Self nominated at 17:07, 29 September 2014 (UTC).

Circumferential Road 5–Kalayaan Avenue Interchange

Northern elevated U-turn slot of the C-5–Kalayaan Interchange

Created by Sky Harbor (talk). Self nominated at 22:00, 28 September 2014 (UTC).

Symbol confirmed.svg Length, cites, hook and newness all good to go. Interesting too - doubled the speed along the line but everyone still hates it. How typical. Maury Markowitz (talk) 18:52, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg I've constructed an ALT hook that makes more sense. The point is that it is the two elevated U-turn slots that are the wonders:
I wouldn't mind going with this hook either. :) --Sky Harbor (talk) 23:13, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Deborah Luster

  • ... that Deborah Luster produced over 25,000 images around the year 2000 focusing on tintype and crime?
  • Reviewed: Heath Town and Samsung Galaxy Alpha
  • Comment: Needs much polish, but all the elements are there for DYK, and this subject could have had an article ages ago if you like.

Created by RTG (talk). Self nominated at 03:55, 28 September 2014 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on September 29[edit]

Henrietta Street, London

  • Alt 1 ... that in 1772, the poet Sheridan fought a duel with Matthews at the Castle Tavern in Henrietta Street?
  • Reviewed: not a self-nom

Created by Philafrenzy (talk). Nominated by Edwardx (talk) at 21:34, 6 October 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Hook fact does not have an inline citation. 97198 (talk) 08:08, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
  • We have no source for the current lack of pubs so I changed the hook to "by 1970" for which we have Sheppard. Philafrenzy (talk) 09:49, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
* Symbol voting keep.svg Further hook, OK now. Serten (talk) 10:45, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Michael Pospíšil

  • ... that the bass Michael Pospíšil and his ensemble Ritornello recorded music from the hymnal Capella Regia Musicalis, "one of the jewels of Czech musical history"?

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self nominated at 14:57, 6 October 2014 (UTC).

John Alvin Anderson

John Alvin Anderson in 1900

  • Alt1 ... that Swedish-American John Alvin Anderson (pictured) documented and photographed influential Sioux during a 45-year period?
  • ALT2:... that Swedish-American John Alvin Anderson (pictured) released his first book of photographs, titled Among the Sioux, in 1890?
  • Reviewed:Bellevue War, Thomas Cox (politician)

Created by BabbaQ (talk). Self nominated at 21:21, 5 October 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg This article qualifies for DYK on the grounds of newness and length and the image is in the public domain. The hook however is problematic. The word "unique" does not appear in the article nor does the article state that the photographs were taken in the Rosebud Indian Reservation. Alternative hook needed. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:05, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
* Symbol voting keep.svg I struck the unique and suggest another hook. Go ahead Serten (talk) 10:42, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
It clearly states unique photographs of the Sioux which he took at the Indian reservation Rosebud in South Dakota between the years of 1885 and 1930, which are also sourced and appears in the article.--BabbaQ (talk) 12:14, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
Added another hook.--BabbaQ (talk) 12:15, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg These hooks are still problematic. Indeed the word "unique" did appear in the lead but the citation did not support the use of the word. And now we have a conflict as to whether Among the Sioux was published in 1890 or 1896. ALT1 is nearly acceptable, but where does the date 1915 come from? The source seems to state a period 1885-1930, which admittently exceeds 20 years, but is actually 45. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:21, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
With the changes made after your suggestions Alt 1 should be ready.--BabbaQ (talk) 15:47, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg ALT1 is now satisfactory. Striking the other two. There is still an anomaly in the article however. It states "In 1889, General George Crook ..., ... the following year, Anderson released his first book of photographs, titled Among the Sioux." This makes its publication 1890 but in the Bibliography section, its publication date is given as 1896. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:53, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
  • I have fixed that issue as well. Thank you for all your input.--BabbaQ (talk) 19:39, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Scottish art in the eighteenth century

The Skating Minister

  • Reviewed: Not a self-nomination

Improved to Good Article status by Sabrebd (talk). Nominated by Oceanh (talk) at 12:02, 5 October 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol voting keep.svg I am surprised how short good article may be on the enWP. Formally OK, go ahead. Serten (talk) 10:37, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
The alt1 hook was added by the "reviewer", but placed above my signature. This hook contains information not found in the dyk article (although it is present in the article about the painting), and I therefore strike out the alt1 (in addition moving it below my signature). Oceanh (talk) 22:09, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Bossa Nova U.S.A.

Created by 78.26 (talk). Self nominated at 17:19, 2 October 2014 (UTC).

Meta von Salis

Meta von Salis

5x expanded by 97198 (talk). Self nominated at 08:10, 2 October 2014 (UTC).


  • Reviewed: Rage (roller coaster)
  • Comment: This is only a 4.6x expansion; can it be exempt from the rule? Now a GA.

Improved to Good Article status by 23W (talk). Self nominated at 02:10, 29 September 2014 (UTC).

Lake Choctaw

  • ... that the pH of Lake Choctaw increased from 4.5–5.0 to 6.5–7.0 within two months of the installation of a treatment system at the Oneida Number One Tunnel in 2000?

Moved to mainspace by Jakec (talk). Self nominated at 00:42, 29 September 2014 (UTC).

Minye Thihathu II of Toungoo

  • Reviewed: Azúcar Amarga

Created by Hybernator (talk). Self nominated at 00:53, 1 October 2014 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on September 30[edit]

Phuti Mahanyele

  • ... that South African businesswoman Phuti Mahanyele cannot understand people who waste their time?
  • Reviewed: not a self-nom
  • Comment: better hooks welcome

Created by Philafrenzy (talk). Nominated by Edwardx (talk) at 21:48, 6 October 2014 (UTC).

List of Major League Baseball hitters with six hits in one game

Created by TonyTheTiger (talk), Hoops gza (talk). Nominated by TonyTheTiger (talk) at 02:32, 5 October 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg I can find no evidence that "The 2008 Complete Baseball Record Book" exists. Only 15 hits on Google, all to WP articles using it as a ref, or to mirrors of such articles. There is insufficient information to track it down (no publisher, date, ISBN, author, etc.). No search engine finds this book, and Amazon and other book retailers do not list it. Please provide details for me to find this source. Mindmatrix 19:37, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Another worry is that in other articles in which it's used as a source, the only information provided is the title, and given that internet search companies and book retailers don't recognize the title, I would question it's authenticity. I'd be inclined to remove it from all WP articles using it as a reference unless I'm offered incontrovertible evidence of its existence and reliability. Mindmatrix 01:24, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
  • In the meantime... Article nominated within five days of creation, and has about 1700 bytes of text, satisfying date and length criteria. {{underconstruction}} tag needs to be removed. I wouldn't use the word 'phenomenal' to describe the accomplishment; perhaps 'statistically improbable'. I'm not sure why Burns, Pfeffer et al are mentioned - is there a need to state who didn't get six hits that could have? (If so, why restrict it to players with three hits in one inning? Why not those that had X hits in Y innings?) Ditto for Piggy Ward mention. As far as sourcing is concerned, everything referenced to sources #2 and #3 are OK, with the caveats I mentioned. Source #1 is a problem for now, as I noted above. There's no citation for the hook fact (it's in source #3). ALT1 is OK, but the name is misspelled. ALT2 is OK. I've changed a few things in the article, including the source for the claim in ALT2. QPQ completed. Mindmatrix 21:09, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
  • One of the big points of the article is that a lot of people have gotten 6 hits in 9 innings. 3 hits in one inning is even rarer. I am not sure what version of the article you are working from because it seems to only have 3 references and the current version has 4.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:29, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
  • I added the DiGiovanna reference after my review, which was based on this version (ie - the version before my three edits). The point about three hits in one inning is irrelevant - the article's subject is "List of Major League Baseball hitters with six hits in one game". Mindmatrix 01:24, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

I'm sorry, it's a PDF book that I downloaded for free from the internet many years ago. I guess it has been removed since then. I can tell you that the prose can certainly be supported by other sources. - Hoops gza (talk) 15:59, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

  • If you have the full book, are the author(s), publisher, year, and isbn available in the pdf? That would be sufficient for the cite; the book doesn't have to be online. It's usually good to have the page(s) in the cite too.—Bagumba (talk) 04:40, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Indeed. Please add source information to the article, and also address the concerns I mentioned in the paragraph above (starting with "In the meantime...") Mindmatrix 13:10, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Of the three options, I like Alt 2 the most. It is longer, but also refers to a major league record. Epeefleche (talk) 20:44, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
  • ALT1 also mentions an MLB record (most hits in an MLB game of any length). Mindmatrix 13:10, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Little Tomhicken Creek

Moved to mainspace by Jakec (talk). Self nominated at 22:23, 30 September 2014 (UTC).

Windows 10

Created by ViperSnake151 (talk). Self nominated at 19:21, 30 September 2014 (UTC).

Iranian-led intervention in Iraq

Created by DocumentError (talk). Self nominated at 11:12, 30 September 2014 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on October 1[edit]

Battle of Kolubara

  • Reviewed: Not a self-nomination

Improved to Good Article status by 23 editor (talk). Nominated by Oceanh (talk) at 21:22, 5 October 2014 (UTC).

Late Nite News with Loyiso Gola

Loyiso Gola

Created/expanded by HelenOnline (talk). Self nominated at 11:31, 3 October 2014 (UTC).

Vanadyl nitrate, Titanium nitrate

  • ... that the volatile anhydrous nitrates of titanium and vanadium can add nitro groups to organic compounds?

Moved to mainspace by Graeme Bartlett (talk). Self nominated at 06:35, 2 October 2014 (UTC).

  • Both articles are new and long enough. Both QPQ are done. I am in the process of verifying the content. Since it is mostly from research papers, I will need your help.
From Vanadyl nitrate - "Each nitrate is connected to the vanadium atom via two oxygen atoms, but one is closer than the other. " I am not able to directly pinpoint this. Can you tell me which part of the Ref[6] I should look to verify this. --Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 08:31, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
You can see it illustrated in figure 1, and then discussed in the Discussion section on page 476. The rel event oxygens are labelled O3 and O6 as one nitrate, and O7 and O9 on another. Tables 3 and 4 give numbers, and the text calls this "bidentate bound asymmetrically". Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:20, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Afraid of the Dark (song)

  • Alt2 ... that producer Joel Ford expressed hope about 12-year-old Vampire Diaries fans to like as well the song "Afraid of the Dark"?

Created/expanded by EditorE (talk). Self nominated at 00:30, 2 October 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol voting keep.svg. Long and fresh enough. Those articles often have to be based on blurb related music magazine speech, but at least uses enough variety of it. Serten (talk) 08:04, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Popular image of Native Americans in German speaking countries

Indian reenactment in Leipzig 1970

Created by User:Serten (talk), with help from Yngvadottir and Hafspajen. Self-nominated at 14:49, 1 October 2014 (UTC).

  • Hooks sourcing based on Lutz and others
I agree with your gut feeling, but as it stays the official title of the article, I tend to keep but link it. No German would write "Ostdeutschland", but some anglos propably wont find GDR/DDR on a map or think its a computer spare part. Serten (talk) 02:50, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
You could say communist Germany, to not support a strange view on the Main page, otherwise it sounds as if there was also a communist West Germany. East Germany means today the eastern part of Germany. There is nothing "official" about the article title, just the "consensus": it's common, and we always did it that way. "Official" would be different. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:01, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
the "consensus" is a strange beast, at least if you try to edit climate articles. I changed the wording. Serten (talk) 09:01, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
Ambiguity, for the sake of brevity, is fine in DYK, and just "East Germany" should be better. It definitely shouldn't say "Eastern Germany" as nobody uses that term. —innotata 20:55, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
Done so. Serten (talk) 02:34, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Mobility analogy

Created by Spinningspark (talk). Self nominated at 13:34, 1 October 2014 (UTC).

This is my 50,000th edit. Hope this is a worthy contribution for that milestone. SpinningSpark 13:34, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Realising that the original hook is too long, let me propose a shorter one, SpinningSpark 14:19, 1 October 2014 (UTC):

Reviewed: Betty May]

Capital Beltway (Amtrak station)

Passengers at Capital Beltway in 1974 as an Amtrak Metroliner arrives

Created by Mackensen (talk). Self nominated at 13:03, 1 October 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg This article is new enough and long enough. The hook is appropriately sourced and the image is in the public domain. I detected no policy issues. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:55, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Anjada Gandu (2014 film)

  • Comment: Currently at AfD, but should be a speedy keep now the expanison work has happened.

Created/expanded by MichaelQSchmidt (talk). Nominated by Lugnuts (talk) at 06:56, 1 October 2014 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on October 2[edit]

Ministry of Shipping (India)

  • ... that India's current Ministry of Shipping was historically part of the Department of Communications?
  • Reviewed: First nomination. No QPQ required.

5x expanded by Sukrut Phansalkar (talk). Self nominated at 10:30, 6 October 2014 (UTC).

Old Bridge, Hasankeyf

The piers of Hasankeyf's Old Bridge stand in the Tigris river 900 years after its construction

  • ALT1:... that a Venetian merchant described the 12th-century Old Bridge (piers pictured) in Hasankeyf, Turkey, as "so wide and lofty that a vessel of three hundred tons, with all its sails set, can pass under it"?
  • Reviewed: J. Carson Mark

Moved to mainspace by Rupert Clayton (talk). Self nominated at 19:28, 2 October 2014 (UTC).

New school (tattoo)

New school tattoo of an octopus

Moved to mainspace by I JethroBT (talk). Self nominated at 20:36, 3 October 2014 (UTC).

James William Lair

  • Reviewed: Iron Foot Jack
  • Comment: A natural nomination for Veterans Day/Armistice Day, November 11th. Plenty long enough, fully cited. Lair reminds me so much of Lawrence of Arabia—except Lair's espionage career lasted a lot longer and raised a larger guerrilla force. Then too, Lair trained Thai policemen into Special Forces. And he began the Secret War in Laos. And so much more.

2x expanded and sourced (BLP) by Georgejdorner (talk). Self nominated at 03:50, 3 October 2014 (UTC).

Little Catawissa Creek

Moved to mainspace by Jakec (talk). Self nominated at 17:00, 2 October 2014 (UTC).

Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon II: The Green Destiny

Created by Captain Assassin! (talk). Self nominated at 10:20, 2 October 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg @Captain Assassin!: The hook fact is mentioned in the lead, but not in the article (and it is not cited). The article also says that the movie is being released on IMAX at the same time, so perhaps the hook isn't entirely true? A complete review will follow if/when this is addressed. --Jakob (talk) 16:54, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Yes Jakob, I'll do it in a few hours. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 19:48, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Now Jakec, take a look at article again, all done. I think the hook is good, because the film will release simultaneously on IMAX, but many other theaters refused to show the film. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 16:26, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg New enough, long enough, meets core content policies. I was able to verify the hook. --Jakob (talk) 19:23, 5 October 2014 (UTC)