Template talk:Did you know: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎Großbottwar: +hopefully fixed issues
Line 625: Line 625:
:::*What I wasn't aware of is that you don't speak much German. If you need a hand with sourcing or want things double checked, feel free to ask for a hand through my talk page. '''<font color="#000000">[[User:Schwede66|Schwede]]</font><font color="#FF4500">[[User talk:Schwede66|66]]</font>''' 20:09, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
:::*What I wasn't aware of is that you don't speak much German. If you need a hand with sourcing or want things double checked, feel free to ask for a hand through my talk page. '''<font color="#000000">[[User:Schwede66|Schwede]]</font><font color="#FF4500">[[User talk:Schwede66|66]]</font>''' 20:09, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
::::*The "citation directly after hook" rule tends to be (in practice) infrequently enforced. [[User:The ed17|Ed]]&nbsp;<sup>[[User talk:The ed17|[talk]]] [[WP:OMT|[majestic titan]]]</sup> 20:12, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
::::*The "citation directly after hook" rule tends to be (in practice) infrequently enforced. [[User:The ed17|Ed]]&nbsp;<sup>[[User talk:The ed17|[talk]]] [[WP:OMT|[majestic titan]]]</sup> 20:12, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
::::*Thank you for the review, Schwede, I've made the suggested alterations. I've rewritten the lede, pointed the references to specific pages of the town website, and put inline citations after the hook fact. I found a reference for the closing date of the school, and, to be safe, fixed the 1496 founding to the more general "about 1490", as the town's website says. I realise there is more content to be added to the article, but hopefully this will suffice for now. [[User:Maedin|'''<font color="#4B0082">Mae</font><font color="#008080">din\</font>''']]<sup>[[User_talk:Maedin|talk]]</sup> 11:13, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

{{-}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line.-->
{{-}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line.-->



Revision as of 11:13, 7 January 2011

Template:DYK rules change

Did you know?
Introduction and rules
IntroductionWP:DYK
General discussionWT:DYK
GuidelinesWP:DYKCRIT
Reviewer instructionsWP:DYKRI
Nominations
Nominate an articleWP:DYKCNN
Awaiting approvalWP:DYKN
ApprovedWP:DYKNA
April 1 hooksWP:DYKAPRIL
Preparation
Preps and queuesT:DYK/Q
Prepper instructionsWP:DYKPBI
Admin instructionsWP:DYKAI
Main Page errorsWP:ERRORS
History
StatisticsWP:DYKSTATS
Archived setsWP:DYKA
Just for fun
Monthly wrapsWP:DYKW
AwardsWP:DYKAWARDS
UserboxesWP:DYKUBX
Hall of FameWP:DYK/HoF
List of users ...
... by nominationsWP:DYKNC
... by promotionsWP:DYKPC
Administrative
Scripts and botsWP:DYKSB
On the Main Page
WP:ErrorsWP:Errors
To ping the DYK admins{{DYK admins}}

This page is for nominations to appear in the "Did you know" section on the Main Page.

NOTE: This page might load very slowly with Internet Explorer. Regular contributors may like to try Opera, Firefox or Google Chrome instead.

Purge

Instructions

Using a DYK suggestion string (see below examples), list new suggestions in the candidate entries section 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 user may nominate a DYK suggestion; self-nominations are permitted and encouraged. Thanks for participating and please remember to check back for comments on your nomination. Every approved hook will appear on the main page.

DYK criteria

Official criteria: DYK rules and additional guidelines
Unofficial Guide: Learning DYK

How to list a new nomination

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

Please use one of the strings below to post your DYK nomination, using the "author" and "nominator" fields to identify the users who should receive credit for their contributions if the hook is featured on the main page.

  1. Nom without image: {{subst:NewDYKnom | article= | hook=... that ? | author= }}
  2. Nom with image: {{subst:NewDYKnom | article= | hook=... that ? | author= | image= | caption= }}
    To include more than one new or expanded article in a single hook: |article2= |article3= |article4= | (etc)
    To include more than one author: |author2= |author3= | (etc)
    To include alternate hooks: |ALT1= |ALT2= | (etc)
    To add a comment: |comment=
    To add the article you reviewed: |reviewed=

Do not wikilink the article title, or the author username field; the template will wikilink them automatically. Do wikilink the article title in the hook field, however.
Do not add a section heading if you are using the template; the template will add one for you.
Do not include a signature (~~~~) after the template.
Do not use non-free images in your hook suggestion.

An example of how to use the template is given below. Don't forget to fill out the rollover text, so people know what the image is of! Full details are at {{NewDYKnom}}:

{{subst:NewDYKnom
 | article    = Example
 | status     = new<!--(or)  expanded-->
 | hook       = ... that this [[article]] is an  '''[[example]]''' ''(pictured)''?
 | author     = User
 | nominator  =
 | image      = Example.png
 | rollover   = An example image
 | alttext    = Description of the image
 | comment    =
}}
  • Note that you should only use one of the above templates for the original hook. If you want to suggest a second, alternative hook for the same article submission, just type it in manually. The above templates output useful code for each submission and if you employ them for alternative hooks, you will mess up the page formatting.
  • When saving your suggestion, please add the name of the suggested article to your edit summary.
  • Please check back for comments on your nomination. Responding to reasonable objections will help ensure that your article is listed.
  • If you nominate someone else's article, you can use {{subst:DYKNom}} to notify them. Usage: {{subst:DYKNom|Article name}}

How to review a nomination

Any editor who was not involved in writing/expanding or nominating an article may review it by checking to see that the article meets all the DYK criteria (long enough, new enough, no serious editorial or content issues) and the hook is cited. Editors may also alter the suggested hook to improve it, or may suggest new hooks. For a more detailed discussion of the DYK rules and review process see the additional rules.

If you want to confirm that an article is ready to be placed on a later update, or note that there is an issue with the article or hook, please use the following symbols to point the issues out:

Symbol Code DYK Ready? Description
{{subst:DYKtick}} Yes No problems, ready for DYK
{{subst:DYKtickAGF}} Yes Article is ready for DYK, with a foreign-language or offline hook reference accepted in good faith
{{subst:DYK?}} Query DYK eligibility requires that an issue be addressed. Notify nominator with {{subst:DYKproblem|Article}}
{{subst:DYK?no}} Maybe DYK eligibility requires additional work. Notify nominator with {{subst:DYKproblem|Article}}
{{subst:DYKno}} No Article is either completely ineligible, or else requires considerable work before becoming eligible

Please consider using {{subst:DYKproblem|Article|header=yes|sig=yes}} on the nominator's talk page, in case they do not notice that there is an issue.

Backlogged?

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

Where is my hook?

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

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

Nominations

Older nominations

Articles created/expanded on December 8

Critical Foreign Dependencies Initiative

Created by Wnt (talk). Nominated by Silver seren (talk) at 02:10, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Wnt and I have worked really hard on expanding and referencing this article over the past few days and we're proud to bring it here now. SilverserenC 02:10, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. As an administrator monitoring this article, I would point out that there continue to be active disputes about the sourcing of this article, which disputes have overflowed to multiple dispute noticeboards. Many of the disputes involve sourcing, and the article continues to contain a great deal of information that is either unsourced, or from questionable sources. Considering the active nature of the disputes, I do not think it would be wise for this article to be a DYK candidate at this time. --Elonka 04:42, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I ask the reviewing DYK user to look over the article and determine themselves whether there is "unsourced information". The only information that is currently unsourced is from the factual list from the primary source (the factual list is also supported, however, by two secondary sources at the beginning line of the list, so it doesn't really matter). User:Elonka has been actively pursuing the removal of the primary source in the article (please see here), however, the primary source has nothing to do with the "unsourced sections" or whatever "questionable sources" that Elonka is referring to. And please note that all of the overflowing disputes, save the original one at ANI that isn't active anymore, since there haven't been any new responses for an entire day (see here), have been initiated by User:Elonka. Furthermore, the discussion at AN is currently about the use of links to classified documents on Wikipedia. An RfC will likely be drafted soon, but that has little to do with this article. If you would like the primary source to be removed from the article for the period that this DYK nomination is up, I am okay with that as well. SilverserenC 05:10, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. The use of "as an administrator" is very unadministrator-like, since there is no current consensus for your opinion on classified document links, so please don't try and push your rank at DYK. You should be asking things as a user here. SilverserenC 05:10, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Another user has made a fairly good summation in terms of User:Elonka's above comment. You can find that user's summation on Elonka's talk page, here. SilverserenC 05:36, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, Elonka needs a {{trout}} for using that as ammunition for their POV; terrible behaviour. Most of the source arguments are just wiki-lawyering at this stage I think. The others have done extensive work sourcing the article. --Errant (chat!) 09:34, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The comment that "all of the overlowing disputes ... have been initiated by User:Elonka" is not accurate. For a complete list of where the sourcing issues are being discussed, see Wikipedia:AN#On linking to classified documents. --Elonka 14:46, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I wish to assure people that there is no unsourced information in the article. Some people believe that the full text of the "2008 Critical Foreign Dependencies Initiative (CFDI) list", a document prepared by the Department of Homeland Security in collaboration with other federal agencies, should be counted as a primary source. It is still a source. We cite it via original Wikileaked cable to the Secretary of State which included it, a Business Insider article which reprinted it in full (and two others more obscure), and a host of sources that Silverseren collected which list the items in one country or province. However, I disagree with Silverseren about any compromise involving removing the primary source while the DYK is up - it is the most definitive source. We should not make a new article worse while exposing it to new editors, nor accede to calls for censorship with no basis in law nor policy nor current practice. Wnt (talk) 15:50, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Wnt, this has nothing to do with censorship, it has to do with proper sourcing, and creating an article which reflects positively on the project. There have been strong concerns expressed by multiple editors about the sourcing on the article, as well as about the large amounts of "laundry list" information. Rather than continuing to argue that you are right and any dissenters are wrong, better would be to listen to the concerns, and modify the article accordingly in an attempt to find a compromise. --Elonka 16:11, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've gone back and forth with you in several forums about whether a primary source is a source. I think WP:Primary is clear enough. Many articles like U.S. State Department list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations use a list based entirely on one single primary source, without demands that each and every organization on the list has to be cited to a newspaper. WP:Notability is applied to articles, not to each and every item on a list. Even so Silver seren heroically dug up reams of secondary sources -- and then the argument becomes that because a secondary source quotes a primary source the information is still primary anyway, which means it's not a source! Just not true. Wnt (talk) 18:09, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • To be clear, I am not an editor of this article, and am simply trying to ensure that the article stays in accordance with Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Right now the article is attempting to reproduce, pretty much verbatim, a section from a leaked classified document. Concerns have been raised by other editors both as to whether it is appropriate to use that document as a source, and whether it is appropriate to include all of the information from that document on Wikipedia, especially considering that the classified document is the only source for some sections, and that those sections did not receive any coverage in reliable secondary sources. Discussions are ongoing at the talkpage, and a new Centralized RfC was just opened: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Use of classified documents. Because the sourcing of the article is in dispute, and because there are questions of legality of using the classified document, I think it would be extremely unwise to banner this article on the mainpage of Wikipedia in the DYK section until after the disputes are resolved. --Elonka 17:59, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Considering that the RfC was just launched a few hours ago, it's a bit premature to say that it's supporting one thing or another. I am also very concerned by this demeanor that you are using this article, and Wikipedia, to make some kind of political point.[1] Wikipedia is not a battleground, and DYK should not be used to promote controversial views. --Elonka 21:01, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's a response to a different sort of conversation on my talk page, and expresses my hopes for publication of the article. I did not impose that point of view into the article. I believe every editor has a personal point of view, and should not feel afraid to admit it. Wnt (talk) 04:56, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Elonka, it's obvious to uninvolved bystanders that you are on a crusade to stop or limit the use of the Wikileak documents, and to limit their visibility in cases where you have failed to stop their use. Avoiding editing of the article does not make you uninvolved. The RfC so far strongly endorses use of the documents. You may act in what you feel is best for the encyclopaedia, but either your definition of "best" is not shared by the community, or we disagree on the impact of using these documents. Please stop spreading this discussion beyond the 25 fora it already is in, and in particular, please stop waving your adminship around like a magic wand in a content dispute. Admins have no special privileges with respect to content discussions. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 17:04, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps the best approach here will be to wait and see how the RFC turns out, as we do for AFDs. Gatoclass (talk) 12:09, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

LOL does Elonka work for the CIA?♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:21, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, I've verified the hook and think the article is good to go. It looks as if the RfC is pretty clearly going to decide using classified docs is ok and unless I'm mistaken, the article doesn't even directly reference any material from WL. Does anyone have any specific objections to this being promoted? SmartSE (talk) 17:29, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Anything that's got coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources is of course fine, but the unsourced elements should be removed, and there have been requests on the talkpage that some of the list parts would be better presented as prose. --Elonka 07:17, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Which parts are unsourced? The list is referenced off the Business Insider AFAICT and then has extra references for a lot of it as well. Maybe prose would be better, feel free to fix it, but this isn't GAN or FAC and it clearly meets all of our selection criteria. SmartSE (talk) 11:30, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Business Insider is a blog, and not a particularly solid source. As for fixing the article, editors have tried to remove unsourced and poorly sourced information, and they just get reverted. Warnings have been issued to the editors who were re-inserting unsourced information, but it's clear that the article is not yet in a stable state. Regarding the RfC, participation in it has been limited so far, with substantial participation by editors who are involved in the Wikileaks disputes, so I don't believe it would be wise to say that it yet reflects a broad community consensus. For example, look at this discussion at WP:ELN, where the general consensus among uninvolved editors seemed to be that the links to Wikileaks documents should be removed. As for why the RfC is so far saying something different than WP:ELN, I am guessing that this is because there are more involved than uninvolved editors participating, perhaps because many established editors are away for the holidays, so haven't had time to participate at the RfC yet. Ultimately, as regards the DYK question, there is no deadline, so I am in agreement with Gatoclass that the wisest course of action here might be to simply wait for the RfC to run its course. --Elonka 19:09, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Wasn't there a discussion at RSN which said that BI was ok to use though? You're saying there is unsourced material, but aren't pointing out what it is... can you please state what is unsourced so that something can be done? Your claim that it is unstable is false, there have been 7 edits to the article in the last week and regardless, rightly or wrongly, stability isn't a criterion for DYK. Regarding the ELN and the RFC - as I thought I made clear before, they are irrelevant to this article, as it does not contain any links to cables, only secondary sources which discuss them. WP:DEADLINE is about completing the project, when it comes to DYKs there is indeed a deadline, otherwise it wouldn't be right to say "From Wikipedia's newest articles:" (there are notable exceptions, but this doesn't seem to be a case to apply one to me). SmartSE (talk) 20:00, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion at RSN about Business Insider was mostly between involved editors, and there weren't sufficient uninvolved voices to really point to a consensus either way. My own opinion that it is a blog comes from the fact that, as can be seen at the Business Insider article, it has won "best blog" awards. As for the unsourced elements, these are in the list section of the CFDI article: elements which have no sources, and there are even comments at the talkpage stating that secondary sources could not be located for those sections. If the unsourced and poorly sourced (meaning to challenged primary sources or dubious sources such as blogs) sections are removed, I think that would help to address concerns. --Elonka 06:06, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A "blog" is not inherently unreliable and there are criteria for determining reliability. The Business Insider is apparently notable, professionally operated and edited, and is quoted by other reliable news sources (such as The New York Times) leading me to believe that it's a sufficiently reliable source. This is not the place to dispute an RSN consensus just because you don't like it. - Dravecky (talk) 09:58, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, it's not as if it some random person's blog. We need to also consider whether it is an RS for what it is referencing anyway, rather than whether the whole site is an RS or not. When I do so, it is clearly an RS since it is copying a primary source, which officials have indirectly confirmed is real. As I'm now trying to explain for the third time, the whole list is referenced to BI (ref 21) and then there are extra references for many of them as well. It could be argued that the article is in fact a linkfarm since we could get away with most of them and only reference BI for the whole of the list. Removing sections like that about Japan would create a bias towards coverage in western media which is clearly not appropriate. As I still can't find any problems with the article and because the RfC is irrelevant to this article at present, I am boldly approving the article. SmartSE (talk) 17:49, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Considering that you yourself are an involved editor in the Wikileaks topic area, Smartse, I do not think that you should really be the one making that decision. There are many agenda-driven editors in this topic area right now, there is an ongoing RfC, and edit wars at multiple articles. It is not appropriate for you to force one of the disputed articles onto the Wikipedia mainpage, over objections by other editors. --Elonka 18:29, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't forced anything anywhere, I've just indicated that there are no reasons why this shouldn't be displayed on the main page and it's up to others to move it to prep and then the main page. The fact that I've edited WL articles is irrelevant to my ability to review an article against DYK criteria and nearly all the edits I have made in the area have been general maintenance, rather than trying to push some POV as your comment insinuates. You appear to be the only editor who doesn't agree, but you don't seem to be able explain why, other than that you don't like the idea. SmartSE (talk) 20:59, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have explained multiple times: (1) There are editors who disagree with the state of the article, but who get reverted when they try to change things; (2) There is an ongoing RfC; (3) The RfC has a great deal of participation from involved editors, but is not matching up with other discussions that occurred among uninvolved editors, such as at WP:ELN; (4) There appears to be decreased participation in the RfC right now because of the holidays; (5) I am not the only one who has suggested waiting (see above comment by Gatoclass); (6) There appears to be an attempt by some editors to use Wikipedia as a battleground to make a political point, by reproducing contents of classified documents here. It's one thing for there to be a dispute about this, it's another for something as controversial as leaked classified information, sourced only to primary sources, suddenly appearing on Wikipedia's mainpage in the DYK section. I am of the strong opinion that this would be extremely unwise, especially since there have been prior discussions strongly objecting to the use of classified documents as sources, the RfC is still ongoing, and the WMF has not yet weighed in on the issue of legality. So rather than pushing this article through to the mainpage over objections, let's please take our time and make sure we're getting things right. --Elonka 03:09, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There's a difference between "caution" and "stalling". Can we please come to a decision on this nomination? - Dravecky (talk) 03:42, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Given that there's an open RfC that directly relates to this, it seems reasonable to continue to wait, just as we would if there were an open AfD discussion. It certainly seems to me that the RfC is likely to be closed in a manner that will support us running this, but I see no reason not to continue to wait for the actual closing. cmadler (talk) 13:35, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, since that RfC opened on December 14, in all likelihood it will close thirty days later on January 13, 2011, while most AFDs close in a mere 7 days. Could we at least have a carefully crafted hook ready to go on that distant day? - Dravecky (talk) 14:11, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am in agreement that we should probably wait until after the RfC. However, there is another possible compromise: simply remove the information from the article that is in dispute, and then it would probably be fine to proceed to DYK. The issues, as I understand them, revolve not around the prose of the article, but the "laundry list" section that is reproducing the classified section verbatim, as well as the link in the External links section that directs to an IP which is supposedly mirroring the stolen classified document. If those were removed (the list and link), at least temporarily, I doubt there would be any objections to the article appearing on the Wikipedia mainpage. That way the DYK could proceed, and the RfC could proceed on its own. --Elonka 16:33, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Since those are whole sections, do you think it would work to just comment them out, even just for the time it's linked from the Main Page? If the problem can be solved so easily, it would be nice to go ahead and run this hook. cmadler (talk) 20:20, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I think that would be fine, but we should probably check with the editors at that article's talkpage (I am not one of the editors). So I'd say go ahead, and mention it at the talkpage. If no one objects in a reasonable amount of time, then we could proceed with the DYK. One of my concerns is that the commenting out might just result in another revert war, but it's worth a try! --Elonka 00:12, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What section is in dispute? The only parts of the list that don't have references as of yet is Japan, some of China, and then one or two others here and there in the list. Everything else is referenced to reliable sources. I strongly object to commenting out the list just because of User Elonka's dislike of it, when so many other users have expressed both here and in the RFC that there isn't a problem with it. SilverserenC 02:02, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
They are referenced though aren't they - just to a secondary source Elonka says is unreliable, even though we can be fairly sure it is correct. I've noticed that the BBC linked directly to the cable using the same link that we have in the article at the moment. If such a strong source has done so, I don't really see why we shouldn't, they evidently consider it reliable as well, so we could use this as a primary source for the list (as was done before). I don't see how hiding the content that isn't liked for the time it is on DYK would help either - sure we should make sure that articles on the main page meet proper standards, but that means that the content either belongs in the article or doesn't, not that it is hidden for 6 hours when most people will read it. SmartSE (talk) 11:57, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The BBC did not reproduce the cable verbatim. But that's not the point here, to re-debate the issue of whether the link is appropriate, that's something for the RfC and/or the WMF to figure out. For now, is it really worth prolonging the dispute and stalling the DYK over this? Why not simply comment out the sections that are in dispute, let the DYK proceed, and then see how the RfC turns out as to whether those sections should be re-included? --Elonka 20:12, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
So...we're going to comment out Japan and China? That seems a little weird. Though I suppose it must be done, since all of the other places have reliable sources in abundance and those two countries just didn't feel like making news reports on the subject. Their loss, I suppose. (Hint: This is sarcasm) SilverserenC 23:03, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure which sections Elonka means are disputed, there's certainly not been any discussion on the talk page as far as I can see. I've a feeling Elonka is suggesting we remove the entire list, but I'm really not sure. Seeming as after >2 weeks the RfC is pretty clearly supportive (or at least not against) of referencing classified material, could somebody who is totally uninvolved take a fresh look at this and promote if you think it is ok? (SS, have you thought about asking Japanese + Chinese WProjects to see if they can find news reports about the list?) SmartSE (talk) 20:00, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No, but that's a good idea. I'll look into it. SilverserenC 21:19, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The simplest solution would be to comment out the entire list and the external link, which would address concerns enough to let the article proceed to DYK. A more complex compromise, but also acceptable, would be to remove the sections of the list which are either unsourced or sourced to dubious sources (such as the Business Insider blog). The external link should also be removed or commented out. In fact, it's not even pointing to Wikileaks, but just a nameless IP mirror at this point. --Elonka 18:01, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There is no current consensus about the reliability of Business Insider, according to you, but that includes it being not reliable, so I would ask that you stop calling it dubious, as that is merely your opinion. Furthermore, you also have no consensus on removal of the external link. In fact, the consensus at the RfC seems to be in favor of keeping such links. Furthermore, it is pointing to that IP mirror because it is a stable source, the Wikileaks website is currently not. We need to provide a stable source for our readers, not one that is under DDos attacks. SilverserenC 23:18, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) We're going round in circles so I won't repeat myself again, but it is sourced and the link is to WL. Rather than promote only half the article, or leave out chunks, showing a bias, I think it is best to wait to the end of the RfC, even though as I think I've made clear enough, I don't think it's necessary. SmartSE (talk) 23:22, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We're going on a month since when this hook was nominated. With that in mind, this article is anything but a "New Article". I'm sorry but I'm boldly rejecting this article as the amount of lapsed time is simply too much and now with an RfC going on, I doubt that this hook will ever see the main page. (DYK is already backed up enough anyway, as shown by the new requirements that went into effect this year) If anyone disagrees with my decision, feel free to let me know and we can talk this over. (Here or on my talk page) and of course another reviewer can always overrule me ;)--White Shadows We live in a beautiful world 03:47, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That's not how things work or we wouldn't have a special occasion area, nor would we have had the FBI seal hook there for four months. A DYK nomination only has to be new upon it being nominated, that's all the requirement says. And it was new then and it is only a week and a half older than the rest of the hooks on this page, which is really not that long at all. SilverserenC 05:26, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hang on: I've waited in good faith to promote this hook pending the outcome of the RfC and would feel quite abused if that was all a stall to quietly kill the hook just before the RfC came to an end. We've held on this long, we can wait a few more days... or promote it without waiting... but I think waiting is the best middle course to take. - Dravecky (talk) 05:23, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on December 24

The Stars Shine (film)

Created by MichaelQSchmidt (talk). Self nom at 00:06, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • The hook as a whole is not cited in the article; rather, segments of the hook are cited and scattered in different sections of the article. Not as clearly stated as it preferably could be. The problem is, the references aren't all accessable online. I'll accept good faith on those, tho :) What I propose to easily resolve this is; include the hook as part of the article lead, with all citations required to support the entire statement. Rcej (Robert) - talk 07:15, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not bothered by the fact that the hook is based on the entire article, rather than a particular sentence in the article. I am, however, bothered by the fact that sourcing for the entire article seems to be very thin. Most of the sources are accessible online, and from examining the sources it appears to me that the article creator had to work very hard to assemble this interesting article from the snippets of information in the sources. The article is an impressive creation, but I have to wonder whether the creator either (1) had a source that isn't cited here or (2) had to do some original synthesis. I'd like to hear the back story before sending this hook to the main page.
    I did find one potentially useful online source that isn't cited in the article -- http://books.google.com/books?id=4SMM3dcHbwYC (search on the film name). Also, many of the sources emphasize the role of the Ufa film company in this film and in Nazi cinema in general, so I'm surprised not to see the company mentioned in the article. --Orlady (talk) 17:29, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ooooo... I like to source you found. Let me check it out and come back with an ALT hook. Thanks. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 20:10, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • thx, Orlady :) Rcej (Robert) - talk 06:28, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on December 25

Vale of Avoca

A large concrete bridge crosses a deep tree-filled valley. Men work to complete the mosty-finished structure. To its right is a narrow iron tressle bridge with cars driving across.

  • ... that The Vale of Avoca bridge was opened in 1924, replacing an iron bridge built in 1888 (both pictured)?

Created by Floydian (talk). Self nom at 02:54, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is long enough and expanded enough, but the hook is not cited, except by a footnote which asserts only part of the hook, and there are no actual citations in the article at all. For DYK it needs to be fully cited – viz., at least one citation per paragraph. Moonraker2 (talk) 03:05, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This would mean using the same reference for each paragraph, which is the reference at the bottom, in the bibliography section. This article is fully cited to a reliable secondary source published by the Deer Park Library; it just lacks inline citations. If I were to use them, it would be the same ref three times. I was instead waiting until I retreived more reliable sources since there is only clutter to be gained when using a single source. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 03:19, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, what is given there is single title, without other information, such as the name of the author, date of publication, or page number. That isn't a citation, it's a title, and hooks need to be verifiable. Please see Wikipedia:Did you know. Moonraker2 (talk) 03:44, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The information given is all that is necessary. There is no given author or publisher, so the Library defaults as the publisher of that information (it is given). The location of the item is given (local history reference), and the fonds in which it is contained (bridges). It is a single sheet, printed front and back; there are no page numbers, no author, no date, and nothing else besides a title and two pages of text. I'd be happy to scan the item in full and publish that in my own webspace. As it is, however, this is referenced to a secondary source created by a government archive. We do not have a citation template to appropriately display such a reference to the best of my knowledge. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 04:15, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I also noted your edit summary "Unfortunately the paper lacks a proper publisher; most likely a Deer Park Historical Society, if it exists". See Secondary source. Moonraker2 (talk) 04:33, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I also notice you continue to ignore everything I am writing and drawing your own baseless conclusions. This is a paper made available in the local history archives of a very well-established and reputable public library system. I am well aware of wikipedia policies on verifiability and reliable sourcing to secondary sources. The point is, what should I do about a situation which A) does not warrant using an inline citation, as the whole article is sourced to one place, and B) is provided by a type of source that has generally been overlooked on wikipedia (secondary sources created by archivists and historians that are stored in a government archives or library reference section), and thus is difficult to present using our citation templates? - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 05:06, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't shoot the messenger. A single sheet of paper which lacks author, date, publisher, and any sign of having been peer reviewed, won't stand up as the only source for a new article offered to DYK for the Main Page. I think it would be better for others to carry on this discussion. Moonraker2 (talk) 03:21, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion, being in the local archives = Peer reviewed and verified as fact. This is far more reliable than a published book where the publisher and editor have no way of verifying the historical accuracy of the authors text. This a government run insistution. I will try to uncover at least one author and perhaps a second secondary source, but the publisher is the public library branch. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 18:46, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Having placed materials into local archives, I can assure you that it can not be considered peer reviewed or verified. It's certainly possible that was done in this case, but I would definitely not make such an assumption without some information from and about the library in question. cmadler (talk) 20:56, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I added a few new sources, including one from Lost Rivers Toronto (a website of the Toronto Field Naturalists) and from an article out of the Deer Park Newsletter. These two sources back up all of the facts in the hook. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 19:45, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on December 26

Albert Estopinal

Albert Estopinal, c. 1900-1919, head and shoulders portrait, facing front.

5x expanded by Billy Hathorn (talk). Self nom at 05:25, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Article currently at 6065 characters prose; however, before expansion, the article had 1318 characters (requiring a minimum of 6590 for 5x). Some additional expansion needed. Calmer Waters 21:54, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I expanded from 3,157 bytes to more than 16,000 bytes. I don't know how to measure "characters." This is 5+ expansion. Billy Hathorn (talk) 20:55, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Article is currently at 6300 characters of readable prose. Since 5x expansion refers only to readable prose, not a simple byte count, this article will need to be at least 6590 characters of readable prose to pass. It's close now, only 290 characters short, so a small amount of additional text will get it across the line. - Dravecky (talk) 05:26, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Expanded again, 1/1/11 Billy Hathorn (talk) 03:55, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Expansion is now sufficient, but I don't see where the cited sources say that Kenilworth was originally a Spanish fort. Added photo. cmadler (talk) 18:34, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The only references I can find that give the old Spanish fort quote are Wiki mirrors. Needs a different hook. - The Bushranger One ping only 23:28, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
ALT:... that U.S. Rep. Albert Estopinal of Louisiana had led three missions during the Civil War to transport Union prisoners to the Confederate capital at Richmond,

Virginia?

Neft Daşları

Oil Rocks

5x expanded by NovaSkola (talk). Self nom at 11:55, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • The prose has only been expanded 2.3x in the last 5 days (3327/1424). —Bruce1eetalk 08:58, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on December 27

Daniel Balsam

Created by Qrsdogg (talk). Self nom at 01:15, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • I understand the purpose of the hook is to draw the reader into the article, however, I think it should be altered to offer a little bit more information on what he decided to do after receiving spam. Location (talk) 07:23, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with user:Location. More info is needed in the hook. Also, most of the information in the hook is not found anywhere in the article. Megan|talkcontribs 11:40, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The breast enlargement info was removed by an IP who may well be the subject (see Wikipedia:COIN#dan_balsam) after Qrsdogg posted here. I suggest a hook like:
The article needs to be gone over with a fine toothcomb before being promoted though to ensure everything is cited per BLP as the IP added seemingly unverifiable information as well. SmartSE (talk) 12:16, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

France–Monaco relations

Created by Lihaas (talk). Self nom at 21:00, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • . Nice article. Length, date, references and hook works out. However, the passage "The unrest continued until the ruling prince gave up his claim to the two towns (some 95% of the country), and they were ceded to France in return for four million francs." is unsourced, and for DYK all passages needs to have at least one reference. --Soman (talk) 15:42, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
thats a copy+paste from the requisite wikipedia articles. but it can be removed if need be.(Lihaas (talk) 21:42, 1 January 2011 (UTC)).[reply]

Agragami Adivasi Samiti

Created by Soman (talk). Self nom at 20:24, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, 2 bengal articles on the same day ;)
Anyhoo, think the article needs an expansion for it to be DYK eligible. im rather new here, but someone told me over 1000 words.(Lihaas (talk) 20:54, 27 December 2010 (UTC)).[reply]
The DYK rules (WP:DYK) says "Articles must have a minimum of 1,500 characters of prose". --Soman (talk) 08:03, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, okay, confused characters for words. Now, my nom should be good too;)Lihaas (talk) 20:54, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Length, date verified. One of the hook's two refs is already a deadlink but the other is a reliable source. The hook isn't too exciting but I can't think of a better one myself (I tried to figure out a way to incorporate Ol Chiki script somehow.) The history section could benefit from another source, too. — AjaxSmack 19:36, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a hook that is not as "ITN-ish"? --PFHLai (talk) 08:41, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

West Bengal legislative assembly election, 2011

Created by Lihaas (talk). Self nom at 18:12, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Obiviously not ready yet, will be after the election in a few months, so can we move it to the alternative later date? It will also then go for a further expansion over time.Lihaas (talk).18:12, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This is rarely done. If you want to prepare an article then use a sandbox (I can explain how). I think this has missed its chance Victuallers (talk) 15:25, 4 January 2011 (UTC) .... no - leave it as it is and then expand it by 5 times when the election is complete? Victuallers (talk) 15:27, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Cool, definately.
We did so somethign similar for the Bihar legislative assembly election, 2010 (also could you move to the holding area for May. Lihaas (talk).18:12, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest that we remove this nomination, await the election, expand the prose of the article at least five times within five days, and you then resubmit. Schwede66 15:54, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking something like the bihar one to have an ongoing expansion (although the results will definately be massively expanded when finalised)Lihaas (talk).18:12, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

George Huscher

George Huscher
George Huscher

5x expanded by Stundra (talk), Ser Amantio di Nicolao (talk). Self nom at 02:42, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Article length is only ~1,100 characters. I also assume "this date" refers to January 1, but that date isn't even in the main text of the article and is still missing a citation in the infobox. 97198 (talk) 07:18, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unless otherwise specified, most mayors in the United States take the oath of office on January 1, the date intended for publication. However, citation can be found in one of the references. User:Stundra (talk) 10:20, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • January 1 has come and gone so this needs a new hook, once length issues are resolved. - Dravecky (talk) 06:01, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on December 28

Viktor Kalashnikov and Marina Kalashnikov

Created by Malick78 (talk). Self nom at 21:44, 2 January 2011 (GMT)

    • I'm about to review somebody else's article as per the requirement... Malick78 (talk) 21:49, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Marina's page needs at least 140 characters more to qualify. --PFHLai (talk) 03:51, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Viktor's article is 1641 characters of readable prose but Marina's is just 1261 characters. - Dravecky (talk) 06:04, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Marina has just been expanded significantly. Malick78 (talk) 23:01, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Eugene K. Garfield

5x expanded by Acdavidson6 (talk), Diiscool (talk). Self nom at 18:52, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Date and length are good, and (although I didn't check it) probably the hook as well; however, I'm concerned about the extensive use of this source — I can't see why the South Florida Astrological Association is a reliable source. Nyttend (talk) 13:06, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I do not think SFAA is a reliable source either. Almost everything that is cited using SFAA as a source can probably be found in the NYTimes article as well, I just didn't have the time to comb through and change the refs.—Diiscool (talk) 14:34, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Everything mentioned in the SFAA link has been sourced to the obituary from The New York Times. Alansohn (talk) 02:21, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • 5x expansion and hook-fact source check out OK (this is a 5x expansion from the article that existed for the last 3 years, although it was longer for a few weeks in 2007). However, a few paragraphs in the article still need inline citations. Also, hook wording is awkward; I suggest the following ALT:
  • ALT1... that Eugene K. Garfield used a personal Pullman car when he rode the Auto-Train service he started to carry people and their vehicles between Virginia and Florida? --Orlady (talk) 15:18, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Vincent Kosuga

Created by Qrsdogg (talk). Self nom at 14:56, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Article length and creation date is fine and seems well structured, generally well written. AGF on usage of offline refs (entire article is cited offline). Some clarifications I would suggest prior to adding to DYK.
    (i) No date of birth/death is given, making the timeframe of his life unclear (dates are given later for manipulation of the market, but I still can't place what stage of life he was at - some dates of when he was doing what throughout the article would be nice).
    (ii) The article says he "manipulat(ed) the onion futures market" which is explained to a degree, but it's never clear whether this was the entire American market or just the Chicago market, and if just Chicago, why this then led to Federal action.
    (iii) I may just be not reading it properly, but in "Cornering the market" it says they stored their onions in Chicago, and a couple of sentences later says they "re-shipped" the onions to Chicago - when did they ever leave Chicago?
    (iv) In the same section I'm also not clear on how if Seigel and Kosuga still owned most of the onions, they were able to make millions by driving the price down so low - was it that by driving other farmers into bankruptcy they were able to profit greatly in future, or did they somehow make a packet at the time in a way that I'm not really seeing?
    (v) The article just ends after the onion incident. Given the article is about the man, it would be nice to know what happened to him after this incident, even if just in a sentence or two.
    (vi) The article is very American-centric - please remember Wikipedia is written for a worldwide audience. I have added convert templates to weights given in pounds and a temperature given without any units. --jjron (talk) 12:11, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Joseph Tabarlet

Created by Billy Hathorn (talk). Self nom at 05:34, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ALT:that World War I veteran Joseph Tabarlet, subsequently the mayor of Jonesboro, Louisiana, was active with the Red Cross during World War II?

Aleksandra Samusenko

Created by Twilight Chill (talk). Self nom at 14:03, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • This article is under 1500 characters if the "Rumors" section blockquote is not counted. The quote shouldn't even be included, in my opinion. - PM800 (talk) 02:42, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • The rumors section reads like a commentary, with unclear notability and unclear point targeted (that she fought? or that she concealed? or that Zhukov said so? Who is Zhukov? Who is Garin, except for a war veteran?). Materialscientist (talk) 02:51, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Garin is a writer, ru wiki has an article on him. The quotes are largely converted now and a minor addition has been made. Twilightchill t 19:28, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I still don't think the Rumors section is necessary, and without that it's still under 1500 characters. - PM800 (talk) 21:23, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Incorporated into the Life section now. It is to show that most likely she didn't fight in Spain. Twilightchill t 01:25, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • What I meant was that I don't think the last two paragraphs should be included at all, and taking out the section header doesn't change much. I would suggest expanding the actual biography some more. Or you could just ask for a second opinion on this. - PM800 (talk) 09:15, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is virtually no more info for further expansion beyond most recent addition, so I don't think there is a reasonable ground to exclude her purported military background. Twilightchill t 13:55, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on December 29

Pratt & Whitney J48

Three men work on a large jet engine suspended in a frame

  • Comment: Reviewed Monotown. Nom per additional rule D9.

Created by BilCat (talk), The Bushranger (talk). Nominated by The Bushranger (talk) at 21:13, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seems fine, looks supported by off-line references, only needed stub tag removed (as dyk's can't be labelled as stubs, doing that. --Doncram (talk) 01:50, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Savoyard crusade

Map of the western Black Sea coast with arrows marking the movement of troops commanded by Amadeus VI of Savoy against Bulgaria

  • ... that although it was not a true crusade because it was mostly focused on Bulgaria, the Savoyard crusade was nevertheless the first Christian success against the Ottomans?

Created by Srnec (talk). Nominated by TodorBozhinov (talk) at 12:38, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Crusades didn't have to be directed at the Holy Land - there were several in Iberia & Prussia etc. The historian quoted seems to reject the term because of the size & opportunistic nature of the "escapade" rather than the target as the hook implies. Johnbod (talk) 16:58, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it can be argued that a "true crusade" is in the Holy Land or at least targeted against non-Christians, but you're right to note this is not in the article. Will "although it was not a true crusade and it was mostly focused on Bulgaria..." fix this, or should I go with an entirely different hook? I sort of like this one, there's something I find curious about it. Toдor Boжinov 21:54, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I like the idea you're going with this but I agree with John that we should remove the "true crusade" part. How about the Alt below? AgneCheese/Wine 05:48, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tethys fimbria

a sea slug on sand a sea slug swimming

Created by Snek01 (talk). Self nom at 20:17, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ALT1: ... that predatory sea slug Tethys fimbria (pictured) can self amputate its cerata?

--Snek01 (talk) 08:56, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • It is only 1131 characters at the moment so still requires expansion. SmartSE (talk) 12:19, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are 1229 characters of prose now. Let's let the article grow. --PFHLai (talk) 17:36, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on December 30

Waterbury Union Station

A narrow square brick tower. At its bottom is a clock with white Roman numerals. Above it is a balcony with narrowly spaced brick supports; on top is a narrower section with a narrow round-topped opening and an overhanging roof

5x expanded by Daniel Case (talk). Self nom at 18:02, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As now required, I have verified Polad Bülbüloğlu. Daniel Case (talk) 18:13, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Both hooks look good. Date, length and hook all verified. Patriarca12 (talk) 04:43, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not comfortable with the fact that this article is based essentially on a single source, the NRHP nomination form. I read through the form and it didn't appear to be closely paraphrased, but I'd still vastly prefer a diversity of sources before this article appears on the Main Page. Also, the first section has no sources whatsoever. Grondemar 05:13, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This has been discussed before here many times. For many NRHP listings, which we have often considered inherently notable, the nomination document is the only secondary/tertiary source available (note that it does have a bibliography citing its own sources). The so-called policy mandating this does not exist, as I noted without serious opposition during last spring's deletion discussion for the {{one source}} template. And also please note that the documentation on that template says "A single source is not automatically a problem. Good judgment and common sense should be used.". And believe me, I do look for other sources ... I would not be filling my editorial obligations if I did. You would better exercise your concern by surprising me with some I didn't know about. (And as for the suggestion that I was plagiarizing, do you really think that if I did that I would be citing the source I plagiarized from so heavily?

I don't put footnotes in the intro unless there's an extraordinary claim there, per WP:LEADCITE. Daniel Case (talk) 00:09, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Second Patriarca's review that everything is good to go. The NRHP nomination form is an formidably reliable source for an area that, while undoubtedly notable, suffers from a lack of scholarly work that usually produces the secondary/tertiary sources we look for. Consensus at DYK for quite some time has been that their extensive use, in absence of other sources, are acceptable. Doing a google news/book/scholar search seems to confirm Daniel's note about the absence of other sources on Waterbury Union Station that would be of use to adding to this article. AgneCheese/Wine 06:01, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bodinnick

A view of Bodinnick village, the Fowey town and Fowey River

5x expanded by Dr. Blofeld (talk), Nvvchar (talk). Self nom at 14:01, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Verified, 5x, and ready for DYK. Rcej (Robert) - talk 06:14, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
NB, removed stub class Worm 11:47, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Carrier Strike Group Fourteen

Created by Marcd30319 (talk). Self nom at 01:18, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • The length is definitely good, and the fact is interesting! I imagine that you want us to be specifically looking at Carrier_Strike_Group_Fourteen#Force_composition_in_2010 for the citations, as the fact stated in the opening paragraph doesn't have any references given. However, even those citations don't seem to mention CSG14, and the issue of CSG14 not having an aircraft carrier or CVW assigned. Have I missed something? -danjel (talk to me) 12:58, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I made several fixes, including citations from two offical U.S. Navy web sites confirming that Carrier Strike Group Fourteen has only two ships assigned to it, the cruisers Gettysburg and Philippine Sea, and therefore CARSTRKGRU 14 currently does not have an assigned aircraft carrier and carrier air wing. I hope this clarifies the matter. Marcd30319 (talk) 14:54, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Philippine senatorial elections

5x expanded by Howard the Duck (talk). Self nom at 19:34, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Your DYK is uncited in the opening paragraph. I think that needs to be fixed. That being said, I like ALT1 more... which is cited as required. Otherwise, it has been expanded enough (acc. DYKcheck), and the article seems OK. Good job. I'll drop you a message shortly so that you can either fix or endorse ALT1. -danjel (talk to me) 13:09, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Polish songs by Frédéric Chopin

Created by JackofOz (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 13:15, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Article length and date are fine. Hook length is fine and hook is cited but the source's reliability is questionable and it needs more info than "Jim Samson" in the article. Other parts of the article are also unsourced. — AjaxSmack 19:45, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I see what you mean. I'm not the author, just noticed the article and thought it should be known, so picked the first fact with a ref. Looking closer, other sources don't even believe any of the songs were published during the composers lifetime. For references please contact the author, who may be surprised. Trying to keep the hook simple and undisputable:
ALT1: ... that 17 Polish songs by Frédéric Chopin were published after the composer's death as his Op.74. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:21, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The page simply cited as "Jim Samson" is a copy of the article by Kornel Michałowski & Jim Samson in Oxford/Grove Music Online (haven't checked everything, but they appear identical at first glance), including the bibliography at the end, except for the table of works approximately two thirds down the page, which is presumably inserted from some other source. --Hegvald (talk) 07:36, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article author here: I confess I'm somewhat unsure of how to proceed. The "Jim Samson" ref is something I found online; it's not given a title, but seems comprehensive enough. And now it's been identified, thanks to Hegvald. If the relevant Grove citation can be added, would that not do the trick? (I don't have access to New Grove, only to the 1954 5th ed, which is no good on this occasion.) -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 19:51, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I added a cite in the article for the dates from the online Oxford Music/New Grove which confirms the hook. However, the site is subscription only so you'll have to AGF. Interestingly, my dead-tree New Grove 1st ed. (1988 reprint) dates the two pieces mentioned in the hook as being published in Kiev, 1856. — AjaxSmack 02:52, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Brazo

  • Comment: Reviewed Sunstone (medieval).

Created by The Bushranger (talk). Self nom at 01:23, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Can you tell me what the two meanings are that make Brazo a pun? Maybe I'm missing a clue Victuallers (talk) 20:48, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Brazo" is the Spanish word for "Arm". The Brazo missile was an Anti-Radiation Missile, which, when acronymised as the military so loves to do, becomes ARM... - The Bushranger One ping only 00:14, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thx - sorry I missed the acronym - Ive capitalised it to help later readers Victuallers (talk) 18:06, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Date fine. Length is barely over at 1520 prose (with some slight padding language) but I'm not sold on the hook. First off, the reference cite (FN#1) doesn't actually make explicit that the name was intended to be a pun. In fact the wording almost conveys that it was a happy accident. If you want to stay with this hook I would recommend finding a source that sheds more light on the actual intent of the naming. I suppose we can also just trim the hook of the word "intended", however. But truth be told, I think the article would benefit from a little more content beyond its "squeaker" 1520 and maybe a catchier hook will jump out with a more solid ref support. AgneCheese/Wine 06:10, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, I'm not sure it's possible to expand the article much more at all - it was difficult to get it over 1500 characters as it was. But I'll see what I can do about it, and the hook, in the morning. - The Bushranger One ping only 06:13, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sewall Memorial Torches

The Sewall Memorial Torches

Created by User:Lottie Ford. Nominated by User:RichardMcCoy at 03:09, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • - This nice looking article needs some fixing. Point 1 is that the Gorham Co. is used as a source for the statement thats the Gorham Co is very famous. Sources need to be 3rd party. The middle sections lacks sources. More oddly we have a ref for these torches having a lot of corrosion on them when they were re-installed (surely when they were removed for cleaning?) and the source is a manual on corrosion (not a likely source). There may be other points. I also notice that the school where these are installed doesnt mention them and the links to the people these torches honour could also be inspected. Do have a go, do ask for help, but this will need some attention . Victuallers (talk) 21:09, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on December 31

Großbottwar

Tall, portrait image of a substantial, several-storey half-timbered building with elaborately carved and red and white painted façade

  • ... that a wooden stork on the façade of the Rathaus (pictured) in the German town of Großbottwar nods its head when the town hall clock strikes the hour?

5x expanded by Maedin (talk). Self nom at 19:07, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Nice work. Long enough, expansion date checks out. There are some minor issues outside of the DYK rules, and I've posted them on the article's talk page. What should be addressed before this can be promoted is sourcing. Citation #3 points to the homepage of the official website for that community, but the website produces specific URLs for all its subpages. Hence, all references should point to the more specific pages. The history page will have most of the info, but certainly not all of it. Where, for example, is the following sentence referenced? "A school of Latin was established in the town in 1496 and continued teaching until 1925." (On the history page, it talks about 'around 1490', but nothing about 1496, Latin or 1925 - where does this more precise info come from?) Also, there is a requirement to provide a source immediately after the sentence that states the hook fact, and that's currently not given. All in all, this will be easy to fix and given the article's overall quality, I have no doubt that it will be attended to swiftly. Schwede66 18:01, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The majority of the article is a translation of the German Wikipedia content: de:Großbottwar. The mention of the school in particular came directly from there. I can only assume that the information is from sources which aren't cited, or, of the ones they have cited, that I don't have access to. I have been searching for other sources, but between my limited German and the general lack of content on the web about Großbottwar, I've so far found very little.
  • I'll fix the issue with citing the individual pages of the website. I'll also give the hook its own inline citation, though this seems to be a new requirement, as almost all of my articles use end-of-paragraph citations only and have been through DYK.
  • I'll return when I've made as many of the suggested changes as I can. Maedin\talk 18:22, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The requirement for the hook citation isn't new; at least it was already there when I submitted my first DYK exactly a year ago. I guess the review quality is quite variable, as it depends on how well reviewers know the rules. I suspect that review quality has just become much more variable, with the requirement that submitters now review an article. But we'll see how this all pans out.
  • What I wasn't aware of is that you don't speak much German. If you need a hand with sourcing or want things double checked, feel free to ask for a hand through my talk page. Schwede66 20:09, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The "citation directly after hook" rule tends to be (in practice) infrequently enforced. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:12, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you for the review, Schwede, I've made the suggested alterations. I've rewritten the lede, pointed the references to specific pages of the town website, and put inline citations after the hook fact. I found a reference for the closing date of the school, and, to be safe, fixed the 1496 founding to the more general "about 1490", as the town's website says. I realise there is more content to be added to the article, but hopefully this will suffice for now. Maedin\talk 11:13, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Frans Otto Eriksson

Created by BabbaQ (talk), KimChee (talk). Self nom at 17:06, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • fix some grammatical problems with the article and you're good. Time and size verified. Lord Roem (talk) 20:11, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:27, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I was asked to review this nomination, and my review is that it's not ready. Most of the paragraphs in the article are not cited. References cannot be bare URLs, either. - PM800 (talk) 21:54, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I made made a few passes to clean up the article at the request of the nominator, but found that it is a close translation of a Swedish Wikipedia article created last October. I am unsure of the rules regarding newness of content from sister wikis in this case. KimChee (talk) 11:46, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, if concerns that KimChee makes are OK:ed, then I hope that KimChees helpful edits has made the article DYK-worthy. Thanks again KimChee.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:42, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The main source cited in the footnotes is a private genealogy webpage; it does not contain anything very strange or wildely unlikely but it is, in itself, rather underwhelmingly sourced and has no standing as a reliable source. The "Further reading" section shows that better sources are available. This appears to be a translation of the Swedish article, where those books appear to have been the real sources, so why cite a less reliable on-line source just to be able to insert a few footnotes? (BabbaQ, if you could quickly get to a library carrying these books and insert footnotes from them, that would be the best alternative.) --Hegvald (talk) 08:05, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Additional issue: he was almost certainly not born in the Badelunda ridge, but in or possibly just outside Västerås, at or by the ridge. The exact parish and place of birth would presumably be extremely easy to check from the church records (some of which are scanned by the National Archives and made available on-line with subscription), but that would be "original resarch" and thus prohibited by God Wikipedia policy. --Hegvald (talk) 08:05, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, that policy clearly allows for use of primary sources for simple facts like this. To quote, "A primary source may only be used on Wikipedia to make straightforward, descriptive statements that any educated person, with access to the source but without specialist knowledge, will be able to verify are supported by the source." A person's birthplace in an official record falls well within this usage of a primary source. - Dravecky (talk) 06:57, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Me and KimChee has now fixed what was needed. I believe it is DYK ready.--BabbaQ (talk) 00:00, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I added my name to the nom for having assisted in the article. If there is an objection, go ahead and remove me. KimChee (talk) 08:18, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think it has been greatly improved. --Hegvald (talk) 04:01, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

SMS Ostfriesland

A large warship bristling with guns sinks by the stern

5x expanded by Parsecboy (talk). Self nom at 16:39, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • That is a much better image for the hook - I wasn't thinking of that when I picked the image. I've replaced the image with that one. Parsecboy (talk) 16:19, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Harry Arthur Saintsbury

H. A. Saintsbury as Sherlock Holmes, about 1903

Created by Moonraker2 (talk). Self nom at 06:00, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Articles created/expanded on January 1

Heidi Løke

5x expanded by Thehoboclown (talk), Oceanh (talk). Nominated by Oceanh (talk) at 00:03, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Review: Have qc'ed the Tryvandshøiden (station) nomination (diff]). Oceanh (talk) 01:01, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • 5x expansion checked. The source says "pivot", not line player, but apparently those are the same things. You should probably add a source for the Personal section. - PM800 (talk) 00:45, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you for the review. I have provided an alt1 hook, where "line player" is substituted with "pivot". Hope that is satisfactory, at least it is more consistent with the source. (You are right that pivot and line player is the same thing.) I did not write the Personal section, but will look for sources. Oceanh (talk) 01:01, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Steve Collins (American football)

5x expanded by Wizardman (talk), Cbl62 (talk). Self nom at 15:30, 3 January 2011 (UTC) (Reviewed Al Burris under Dec. 29 per new rules)[reply]

  • Article up for deletion. Rcej (Robert) - talk 09:38, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeah, that's why I expanded and sourced it. Consensus is pretty clearly towards keep, so it will be fine once it's closed in a couple days. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 19:28, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The AfD result was "speedy keep". - Dravecky (talk) 07:04, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Expansion, date, and length of hook verified. Offline source for hook accepted in good faith. Great job in rescuing the article from AfD with thorough sourcing! GaryColemanFan (talk) 05:51, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nice job, Wizardman... and thx, GaryColemanFan :) Rcej (Robert) - talk 07:13, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I pulled this out of the prep area because it's a fairly mundane hook. Lots of college quarterbacks become starters having not played a college football game. cmadler (talk) 21:00, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Farman F.480 Alizé

  • Comment: Reviewed Brentwood Academy v. Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Assn.

Created by TSRL (talk). Nominated by The Bushranger (talk) at 19:58, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Article size and date checks out. AGF on offline source. Are there any further sources you can find for the Alizé? It is typically not a good idea (from an academic view) to rely solely on one source.
Also, the hook is a little lacking in context for the reader – it should say "all of the twelve Farman F.480 Alizé aircraft that were ever made served in the Spanish Civil War?" or similar. Still, I can't help but think that a better hook is being missed, perhaps something relating to the French (officially under a self-imposed arms embargo) allowing the Alizes to be sold on the quiet due to their status as civil aircraft. What do you think? SFB 02:03, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've only found two basic technical profiles online[3][4]. Not sure if you think they're worth adding as back-up sources to support the sole offline source, I'm excluding this issue from the DYK nom either way.
The alt hook looks good to me (tweaked a little). I hope you feel the same way and I haven't bullied you into it! Good to go. SFB 21:18, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, no bullying at all. Suggestions for improvement are always good! :) - The Bushranger One ping only 21:47, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Calafia

A modern sketch of a griffin standing aggressively, with talons outstretched

5x expanded by Binksternet (talk). Self nom at 19:39, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewed Saber of London. Binksternet (talk) 21:55, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • DYK check reports that the December 19 version prior to expansion contained 3785 characters (643 words) of readable prose. That would set 18,925 as the character target for 5× expansion, an amount equal to 5×3785. Over January 1–5 I expanded it until DYK check reported 19,191 characters (3184 words) of "readable prose". I think it's okay. Binksternet (talk) 23:42, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, my check turned up shorter, obviously, but I bow to DYK-check's count-fu. :) And even if it is a little short I think IAR applies given the amount of work done. Good to go, AGF on offline sources. - The Bushranger One ping only 20:34, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for passing the article! I have not used the charcount check tool; I was unaware it was available. Your IAR is joined in this instance by the crappy text I deleted during my expansion...     ;^)    Binksternet (talk) 21:11, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Boushey Vineyard

Dick Boushey

  • Comment: Reviewed Clutts House. Hook reference in Dick Boushey section with a direct quote from online Decanter magazine ref (FN#8) and several refs noting the vineyard's location in the Yakima Valley

Created by Agne27 (talk). Self nom at 09:56, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • is this about him, the vineyard or about opposition to the Rattlesnake Hills AVA? (I hope its not the latter as that will require a lot of balance) Victuallers (talk) 13:50, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The article is the vineyard, but similar to Champoux Vineyard and other articles where the notability of the person is essentially intertwined with the business/estate/crime/new story, we have Dick Boushey essentially "merged" into the article about his vineyard. The hook is about an event that impacted Bosuhey and his vineyard. AgneCheese/Wine 07:45, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


The Restless Gun

5x expanded by Billy Hathorn (talk). Self nom at 02:48, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ALT1:... that before becoming executive producer of Bonanza, David Dortort had produced another NBC western series, The Restless Gun, starring John Payne?
I reviewed the article "Racism in Film of the United States and find it too sketchy to be a separate article. There is not much "there there." Billy Hathorn (talk) 02:52, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Racism in Film of the United States

Created by Ktr101 (talk). Self nom at 23:56, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I reviewed the article "Japanese air attacks on the Mariana Islands". Kevin Rutherford (talk) 00:01, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think this article is too sketchy to be anything separate from The Birth of a Nation, which already exists. The hook is noneventful, it seems to me. Billy Hathorn (talk) 02:54, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with previous comment, and even more. This article is a woefully incomplete and erratic treatment of the topic. The formatting is substandard and no other articles link to it. It should not appear on the main page in this form. Wasted Time R (talk) 05:00, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I can fix it now that you guys have addressed it. I can do so over the next few days. Thanks for your comments. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 17:43, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Expanded, but far from finished or perfect. I might work on it a bit more over the next day or so but I do need to fix a few things on it at some point. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 22:11, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
ALT1: ... that the history of racism in American film might have begun with Thomas Edison's use of "Arab" women with enticing clothes dancing to seduce a male audience?
I added the alternate hook as it is more eventful than the first hook. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 22:18, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I still don't think you have any idea how big a topic you've taken on here. There have been dozens of books and scholarly papers written about the intersection of race and American film; look in Google Books or Google Scholar. They are the sources you want to be using, not unadorned web urls. You've left out some of the most famous early episodes, such as Hattie McDaniel's roles and Stepin Fetchit. The article's suggestion that the first films to explore racism have been American History X and Crash is wrong by several decades; try Guess Who's Coming to Dinner or Nothing But a Man or Imitation of Life or many, many more. This is not a matter of "fixing" something. This is a matter of researching and writing a long, complex article, and it's going to take a lot longer than a day to get right. Wasted Time R (talk) 03:53, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ugh, that's what I figured. I am far from an expert in this field though in this but I'm willing to expand the article to suffice. I can start searching later today and fixing up the last 2/3 of the article to a decent form since I know that they are underdeveloped at this point. Thanks for the help there. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 15:03, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The article is bordering WP:FRINGE, WP:POV and WP:UNDUE. For example the claim films like Executive Decision shows racism is sourced to this reference by Mazin B. Qumsiyeh, director of a pro-Arab lobby group. The article collects opinion pieces from advocacy groups, not serious academic research. --Neptune 123 (talk) 07:32, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pureora Forest Park

Pureora Forest Park

5x expanded by Rosiestep (talk), Dr. Blofeld (talk), Nvvchar (talk). Self nom at 21:27, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Added an img of the park.--Nvvchar. 01:40, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Article length (expansion), references and hook check out. Resolute 21:13, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

St Benedict's Church, Haltham-on-Bain

A stone church with a slate roof seen from the southwest, showing the weatherboarded bellcote and the gabled south porch

Created by Peter I. Vardy (talk). Self nom at 17:16, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. cubense

A Cavendish banana.

Created by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self nom at 11:32, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work in filling in a hole, which I'm quite surprised existed in the first place. There are a couple of problems with the hook though: 1) unless I missed it, extinction is only mentioned in the short blurb of the article referenced, but doesn't seem to be discussed in the 5 pages of text. If I've missed it, please let me know which page it is mentioned on or if not, can you find a reference which discusses it in more depth? 2) is it likely to cause the extinction of all Musa species, or only the Cavendish banana and other commercial cultivars? Also as a side point, I seem to remember reading something about using GM to create new resistant cultivars and found this discussing it, which could be used as a reference. SmartSE (talk) 20:38, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't really necessary for including the article at DYK, but this paper has been cited 255 times, so really should be referenced if possible. SmartSE (talk) 20:45, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have added some information on the research study you mentioned and the New Scientist article.
There is a statement on page 5. of the "hook" article How much time is left for the Cavendish? Some scientists say five years; some say 10. and What happens then is that people change - to apples.
Would this be an acceptable hook? The additional information included comes from page 1. of the same source. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:44, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for making the changes. That new hook is ok, but I think the weight fact sounds a bit tagged on. I'd suggest the shorter, and hopefully hookier:
(It hurt to write favorite but I guess as the hook is about America, it is only right) What do you think? SmartSE (talk) 23:30, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please note that Fusarium wilt is a separate article from the one about the pathogen organism Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. cubense. The latter is being nominated, and I would consider it improper to post the nomination under the name of another article. --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:04, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In view of what EncycloPetey says, how about -- Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:34, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I know that, which is why I wrote a fusarium wilt rather than simply fusarium wilt. I just think that the full species name is a little unweildly and that we should aim to makes hooks as "hooky" as possible. Would it help if the a was included in the link i.e. a fusarium wilt? I'm sure we have a rule about hatlinks somewhere but I can't find it at the moment, personally I think this is a reasonable way to link to the article, but if not an alternative would be to use fusarium wilt of banana and then maybe hat America's favorite fruit to Cavendish banana. I was going to say that we should probably change America > USA actually as well, seeming as they are very different, but I noticed that the source says it is the world's favourite fruit, which leads to ALT4. (The article will need tweaking if we use this). SmartSE (talk) 11:24, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm still concerned that the references to possible extinction are not warranted. Everything I've read on the topic suggests that, like Gros Michel, Cavendish will not become extinct but will no longer be commercially viable within 5 to 10 years. Before putting this on the Main Page, we need a reliable source that clearly states it. cmadler (talk) 13:07, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, I found this from the RSC which rebutts the New Scientist that I think the other articles written since were based on: "However, it is unlikely that these problems will cause production to decrease greatly in the next decade, let alone that the crop will become extinct." I think we need to think of a different hook. SmartSE (talk) 18:04, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I do not believe the article to which the hook refers states that the Cavendish banana is the world's favourite fruit but it does state that it is America's favourite fruit. I still favour ALT3 because it is interesting. It does not state that the Cavendish banana will become extinct but that it could become extinct. There may be controversy over whether all "export" bananas will become extinct but there is currently no alternative cultivar to the Cavendish and it is very likely to be wiped out by this disease as was the Gros Michel in the last century. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:54, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Any species could become extinct, the question is whether it's likely enough to be worth mentioning. In this case, I don't see any articles that suggest there's any noteworthy likelihood of Cavendish going extinct. It's possible, I suppose, but only in a Russell's teapot sense. cmadler (talk) 14:51, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest you read this article. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:07, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've read it a couple of times now, and as Smartse pointed out above, "extinction is only mentioned in the short blurb of the article referenced, but doesn't seem to be discussed in the 5 pages of text." Just to make sure I wasn't missing it, I searched the whole thing for "extinct" (which would also find "extinction") and the blurb was the only use of this term. You mentioned the quote asking how much time is left for the Cavendish, but it's not at all clear to me that they are referring there to extinction rather than commercial viability. You wrote that Cavendish "is very likely to be wiped out by this disease as was the Gros Michel in the last century", but Gros Michel is also not extinct, it's just no longer commercially viable. But today, 50 years after the commercial collapse, Gros Michel is still not extinct, and there's no reason to think the Cavendish progression will be much different. cmadler (talk) 21:18, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How about this then: Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:05, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I inserted "commercially", and then ALT5 works for me. I've stricken the other proposed hooks. Thanks, cmadler (talk) 12:50, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kankakee Torrent

Sandstone cliff face carved out by the flooding of the Kankakee Torrent

  • ALT1:... that scouring by the Kankakee Torrent was responsible for creating the canyons in Illinois' Starved Rock State Park?
  • Comment: My first DYK. I don't know if I'm even doing this right, so any help is welcome.

Created by HuskyHuskie (talk). Self nom at 06:01, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • The article needs to have at least 1500 characters of prose to be eligible, and it currently has 900. Also, try to label your sources. You can review the DYK rules here and here. - PM800 (talk) 06:13, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Could someone give this a second look now? Some other editors have helped out with the issues raised. HuskyHuskie (talk) 05:19, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • References have been fixed. More text has been added. Now the text is about 2320 ch. That should be OK.--Nvvchar. 08:40, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good. --Stone (talk) 10:13, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

1284 Yuan expedition to Sri Lanka

  • The Chinese emperor Kublai Khan sent Marco Polo in 1284 on an expedition to Sri Lanka to acquire the tooth of Buddha, one of the holiest relics of Buddhism?

Created by User:Redtumor (talk). Self nom at 16:43, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Up to now it has only 600, but needs to have at least 1500 characters. --Stone (talk) 18:32, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

1971 Indian Ocean Vickers Viscount crash

An airport

Created by Wackywace (talk). Self nom at 17:53, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Was the plane a Vickers Viscount (75 passengers) or a Vickers Viking (3 passengers)? For a plane with 3 seats 69 death looks very odd !--Stone (talk) 08:46, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Whoops! Fixed. Thanks for noticing that! wackywace 10:34, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Breast cancer awareness

Created by User:WhatamIdoing (talk). Self nom at 22:40, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ref and length verafied, but it might be better if the hook sounds less like a direct quote. —focus 06:22, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not actually sure that the source does support the hook, or at least the "saves no lives" part. The focus of the source is more on how "pinkwashing" is more to do with corporate profits than helping solve a problem. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:16, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • You'll need to look at more than one sentence; despite Focus' comment, I'd been trying pull together a couple of major points rather than simply quoting a single sentence. The indisputable fact that symbolic action (e.g., pinning a piece of pink fabric to your clothes) does not prevent or cure cancer is a major theme of Sulik's book. WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:28, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK, I thought this was being sourced to the Landeman article, which is cited in support of the claim that "it has no practical positive effect". I now see that the Sulik book supports the hook. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:22, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As a side note, if DYK happens to need an image, then File:Pink ribbon.svg is an option. The icon is highly recognizable even at small sizes, and the image has a transparent background, so the file should be easy to use for this purpose. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:23, 2 January 2011 (UTC):[reply]

Current nominations

Articles created/expanded on January 2

Hugh Oldham

  • ... that Bishop Oldham liked to eat punctually on the hour and if he was running late the man he paid to look after his clock would stop it from striking until he was ready?

5x expanded by Smalljim (talk). Self nom at 18:26, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Length and date verified, ref's verified as far as accessible (I have no subscription);- the hook looks complicated, -can we tighten it? Maybe something like "that (he) liked to eat punctually on the hour so when late his servant would stop his clock from striking until he was ready" or " that (he) liked to eat at set times so when late, his servant would stop the clock until he was ready" or some other modification.Ekem (talk) 23:35, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks! Good point. If possible I'd like to retain the idea that he had a servant whose particular job was to look after his clock, which is what the source implies - see it here (4th para). What about something along these lines:
    ... that Bishop Oldham liked to eat punctually on the hour, so when he was late the man who looked after his clock always made sure that it didn't strike till he was ready?
    ... that the punctual Bishop Oldham always ate at exactly 5 pm, so when he was late the man who looked after his clock would make sure that it didn't strike till he was ready?
    ... that the very punctual Bishop Oldham always ate at exactly 11 am and 5 pm, so when he was late his clock-keeper made sure the hour was not struck until he was ready?
    I think I like the second of those.  —SMALLJIM  00:49, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Round Hill, Brighton, Roundhill Crescent

A terrace of seven white three-storey houses on a downhill curve. The house in the foreground stands on a road junction and has a side porch with a grey wall above

  • Comment: Reviewed Tryvandsbanen and Tryvandshøiden (station) under 4th January heading. Round Hill was started on 2nd Jan; the crescent was started on 4th. The hook fact is referenced by p63 of Rose Hill to Roundhill: a Brighton Community, which is currently ref [17] in the crescent article and [4] in the Round Hill article.

Created by Hassocks5489 (talk). Self nom at 13:30, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Saint Alkmunds Way Footbridge

a bridge leads up to a gothis church

Created by Tentheagle (talk), Victuallers (talk). Self nom at 13:03, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Article has no lead section. Is it possible that this article was written offline or in a sandbox and that the intro wasn't copied over when the text was moved to mainspace? I'm not in favor of sending an article to the Main Page that has such a conspicuous absence; however, this shouldn't be very hard to fix. Other than that, I can't see any significant issues; citations verify the information that they're used to support, the length is 1,646 characters, the date is correct, and the hook is verified. Nyttend (talk) 03:31, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Roy Torbet

Photograph of Roy "Squib" Torbet cropped from the 1912 Michigan Wolverines football team portrait

Created by Cbl62 (talk). Self nom at 22:41, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I have uploaded a cropped version of the same public domain photo. The cropped version will work better if used on Main Page. Cbl62 (talk) 01:08, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Otto Carpell and Efton James

Photograph of University of Michigan halfback Otto Carpell cropped from the Michigan Wolverines football team portrait

Created by Cbl62 (talk). Self nom at 19:40, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I reviewed Te Matua Ngahere. Cbl62 (talk) 19:40, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Both articles and hook verified, and ready for DYK. Rcej (Robert) - talk 06:06, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Barbara Newhall Follett

Created by Herostratus (talk), Nairebis (talk). Self nom at 04:00, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • on the article; however, the hook is a little too long at 231 characters. I suggest chopping the name-dropping of people most readers will never have heard of anyway, as follows:
  • ALT1: ... that Barbara Newhall Follett, who by age fourteen had published two novels to critical acclaim, vanished forever into the night of December 7, 1939 at age twenty-five?
  • Ucucha 08:30, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, ALT1 is fine, let's use that. I was just trying to get some other links into the hook, as I see most DYKs seem to have. Herostratus (talk) 15:54, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lavoy Allen

Created by Editorofthewiki (talk). Self nom at 01:32, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Length, date, and hook verified. - PM800 (talk) 02:33, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Chauncey McCormick, Hickory Hill (Glasgow, Virginia), William Grigsby McCormick

  • Comment: Yes, in the USA 100 years is a "long time".

Created by W Nowicki (talk). Self nom at 17:35, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's two articles. Which one are you nominating? Rwxrwxrwx (talk) 22:48, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Both. Sorry, should have made it clear. I like to do nominations in batches with a single hook to help reduce the backlog. Chauncey McCormick is a new biography, and Hickory Hill (Glasgow, Virginia) is on a registered historic place that was built by his great grandfather. Robert's article is old. You need to make sure both articles have > 1500 characters, both created January 2, and have proper citations. No idea if it counts as one or two revies for you? W Nowicki (talk) 23:25, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is my first time getting involved in DYK reviews, so maybe somebody more experienced than me should take this on. Rwxrwxrwx (talk) 23:53, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hate to make it even more daunting, but while waiting for someone to review I created another article on the family. Get all three of your review credits by reviewing one verifiable source. A triple hook:

ALT 1 ... that Chauncey McCormick (son of William Grigsby McCormick) and his cousin Robert bought the Hickory Hill estate more than a hundred years after it was built by their great grandfather?

Lake Alexandrina, New Zealand

Lake Alexandria
  • ... that there are more male snails than females in the shallow waters of Lake Alexandrina, New Zealand (pictured), and that snails are sicker in the lake's shallower rather than deeper water?

5x expanded by Nvvchar (talk), Dr. Blofeld (talk), Rosiestep (talk). Nominated by Rosiestep (talk) at 04:19, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Added an img of the lake.--Nvvchar. 05:02, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Good to go Thelmadatter (talk) 03:04, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tropical Storm Lidia (1981)

  • Comment: I (Miss Madeline) reviewed Carrier Strike Group Nine. This article was created in one of Yellow Evan's sandboxes. I wrote most of the prose, while he organized and changed the order of sentences and paragraph structure.

Created by Miss Madeline (talk), Yellow Evan (talk). Self nom at 03:46, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • The hook is in the lead, but unsourced, nor is this mentioned elsewhere in the article. Plz cite a source for the hooked statement, in the article. :) Rcej (Robert) - talk 07:00, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The source claims that out of 6 tropical cyclones to come onshore during the '81 season, damage and casualty reports were only received from 2: T.S. Lidia and Hurricane Norma. I'm not seeing the hook supported by that source. Can you recommend an alternate hook? Rcej (Robert) - talk 06:59, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • It says damage and deaths reports were received from two systems, Lidia and Norma. It says that Norma caused 6 deaths, and Lidia 73. It does not explicity say that Lidia was the deadliest, but it obvious from the death totals that Lidia was the deadlier system. (73 deaths is more than 6, and no other deaths were reported). Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 07:14, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If one still believes that another hook is necessary, then there is this one: Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 07:31, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Chateau Grand Traverse

George H.W. Bush

  • Comment: Reviewed Bakersfield California Building. Hook in both lead and history section referenced to online source (FN#3) by the Michigan Department of Agriculture

Created by Agne27 (talk). Self nom at 01:26, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Johnson-Corey-Chaykovsky reaction

Paclitaxel

5x expanded by Mdlevin (talk). Self nom at 23:18, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I reviewed Winter (dolphin). Mdlevin (talk) 03:03, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fluorene
ALT1: ... that the Johnson-Corey-Chaykovsky reaction was discovered accidentally when benzaldehyde was reacted with a sulfur ylide derived from fluorene (pictured)? M.Levin 16:00, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I like the look of ALT1, but the article doesn't mention anything about the discovery being accidental. If a chemist could take a look over this it would also be useful. One other thing - bullet pointed text doesn't technically count towards the character count we use, meaning it is 300 characters short of the 5x expansion, can you convert the "Types of ylides" section into prose? Nice work over all though SmartSE (talk) 13:51, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I went ahead and removed the bullet points. I'll see if I can clean the section up to look a little nicer in prose form. To clarify the article maybe doesn't make it clear but the reaction that Johnson carried out was "an attempted Wittig-like reaction" where he expected the synthesis of an olefin rather than an epoxide as per typical Wittig reaction. I can see if the Johnson paper has a quote I can pull about the unexpected nature of the results and add that in.M.Levin 13:57, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think a combined hook might be the best approach, using the 'accident' and Taxol. The fluoenyl sulfur ylide is pretty specialised as an interest trigger, IMO, and Taxol is a billion dollar per annum chemo agent so a fair number of people may have heard of it. Not sure whether to use the name "paclitaxel" or "Taxol" in the hook, though. EdChem (talk) 14:29, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Paclitaxel

  • I'd be in favor of the second alternative given that upon rereading it seems that Johnson was not overwhelmingly surprised by his discovery. He merely notes that "Reaction between the sulfur ylid and benzaldehydes did not afford benzalfluorenes as had the phosphorus and arsenic ylids." The expectation of an olefin is supported by the reference though. M.Levin 14:34, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edward Sarul

Created by Sillyfolkboy (talk). Self nom at 21:54, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think I'll avoid that link as that the article has just the bare results, while the two currently linked are probably more interesting targets for the general reader. Only just realised how unsatisfying the shot put article is though. I'll make that a target for improvement at some point (keep getting carried away with bloomin' biographies!) SFB 22:00, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hubert Guerin

Created by Mkativerata (talk). Self nom at 20:26, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewed: Wallblake House


Comment: The idea of the story is good. There is no date of birth and death (is that unavailable?) It may not be long enough with the 1500 characters required for a DYK. The hook does not have Hubert Guerin's name in the selection. I think it needs a little more work. Billy Hathorn (talk) 18:52, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the review. We have a date of birth but not death. I've thrown the date of birth in. Maybe that gets it over 1500 (I never seem to be able to use the tool properly!). I've exhausted the material in the sources so I can't expand it further except by gaming the DYK rules (like adding tangential or redundant text: eg I could have a sentence "Guerin was born in 1895."). I didn't know the hook needed to mention Guerin's name? Not mentioning his name allowed me to make the hook more interesting. Anyway, I'm not fussed - I can't do much more (at least, not legitimately) with the article. --Mkativerata (talk) 19:07, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The hook is not required to mention the article title, but normally it does. You have up to 200 characters to work with in the hook, and Guerin's name is not particularly long, so I would try to get it into the hook. How about ALT1: ... that in 1944, the Holy See departed from its usual practice by receiving Hubert Guerin as an envoy from Charles de Gaulle's French Committee of National Liberation? --Metropolitan90 (talk) 16:46, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I'm ok with that. It just loses brevity and the reader could wonder whether it was the fact of there being an envoy, or the fact of the envoy being Guerin, that is supposed to be a departure from the usual practice. --Mkativerata (talk) 18:20, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

1877 Iquique earthquake

Created by Mikenorton (talk). Self nom at 18:29, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ref, hook and length verified. Good to go. Good job!♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:53, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sampling frame

Created by Piotrus (talk). Self nom at 17:29, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Based on existing section, then significantly rewritten and expanded. Formerly a redirect, earlier - a one sentence stub. Since this is a self-nom, here's a review of another DYK: [5]. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 17:33, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Can't actually read source, but other sources cite it as well. Daniel Case (talk) 05:06, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Central Green Co. v. United States

Created by Lord Roem (talk). Self nom at 15:15, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All checks out. It appears that Lord Roem doesn't have five DYK credits yet, so the new rule doesn't apply. Moonraker2 (talk) 05:29, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Just two three so far. Cheers, Lord Roem (talk) 17:14, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List of international cricket centuries by Jacques Kallis

A man with receding, short brown hair is pictured from the side. He is wearing a green cricket uniform with the outline of a white flag in a shield predominantly on view on the shoulder.

Created by Harrias (talk). Self nom at 11:58, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


El Fonoll

Created by Rwxrwxrwx (talk). Self nom at 11:24, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good to go. Spongie555 (talk) 04:47, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thomcord (grape)

Plumb, blue-black skinned grapes hang on the vine.

Created by Visionholder (talk). Self nom at 10:22, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good, ready to go. I prefer the first hook; the second seems a bit speculative. Rwxrwxrwx (talk) 13:25, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Very cool article on a table grape. I have an idea for an Alt that may attract some attention for readers who have had Concord or Thompson Seedless before. AgneCheese/Wine 00:02, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I support this hook as well. – VisionHolder « talk » 13:26, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Juan Solano

Created by Alekjds (talk). Self nom at 07:54, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fascinating. Ready to go. -SusanLesch (talk) 08:17, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Art of Azerbaijani ashiqs

Created by --NovaSkola (talk) 07:10, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Article should be listed as "expansion" rather than "new", comes to ~9x expansion (by my count). Added one more source for the hook, but neither of them mention the second fact, (about 3000 Ashiqs). Everything else is fine. SPat talk 15:32, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jo Tong Sop

Created by Spongie555 (talk). Self nom at , 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Not sure the hook is catchy enough, but I can't come up with anything better myself. Perhaps something about the alleged public shaming might work? Rwxrwxrwx (talk) 14:23, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
DYK Koji Gyotoku has the same hook but different team and it was accepted. Spongie555 (talk) 00:25, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • This article includes a lot of padding to get it to 1500 characters, so maybe try to find some more information about this person. And Rwxrwxrwx is right that the hook isn't very impressive. Just because a subpar hook was accepted in the past doesn't mean it always has to be. - PM800 (talk) 14:49, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Due to North Korea's secretive nature there is limited sources on him and most is about him coaching and nothing about his personal life. Also yes the hook isn't impressive but I can't think of another so I'm open to any other hooks. Spongie555 (talk) 21:16, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why not omit the N. Korea reference and do something like:
    ... that Jo Tong Sop was shamed in a six-hour public inquisition when his football team failed to win the World Cup?
     —SMALLJIM  00:12, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I like that alt better if anyone wants to review the nomination again now. Spongie555 (talk) 03:02, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • There's a problem in that the article contradicts itself on that point: He was also part of North Korea's football team, on return home from the FIFA World Cup 2010 in South Africa when they were shamed in a six-hour public inquisition in Kim Il-Sung Square after the team's coach, Kim Jong-Hun, had been accused of "betraying" the nation's leader's heir apparent, Kim Jong Un, following their failure at the World Cup, according to reports. Later it was proven false that they were shamed and the team was busy practicing for the Asian Games. (Emphasis added.) It should be noted that the source for the second sentence doesn't rule out the possibility that Jo Tong Sop and the team were indeed subjected to a six-hour public shaming, but afterwards then allowed to return to their normal football schedule. Either way, this article should avoid having a self-contradiction on this point. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 05:16, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Drove Cottage Henge

  • ... that Drove Cottage Henge is around 54 metres (177 ft) in diameter, yet it is hard to see because repeated ploughing has heavily damaged it?

Created by Reaper Eternal (talk). Self nom at 03:07, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good to go just take off the stub icon on the bottom Spongie555 (talk) 05:42, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List of birds of Pennsylvania

A brown, white, and gray bird with significant barring standing on leaves.

Created by Focus (talk). Self nom at 04:53, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Article meets all DYK criteria. Added the name of the state bird to the DYK for clarity. -- Kim van der Linde at venus 05:34, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks —focus 06:16, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Changed "which" to "that" for grammar. Nyttend (talk) 13:21, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Winter (dolphin)

Created by Focus (talk). Self nom at 23:28, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Length, hook, and reference verified. Interesting DYK. Mdlevin (talk) 03:01, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on January 3

Okanagan Valley (wine region)

View of Okanagan near Kelowna

  • Comment: Reviewed Brazo. Primary refs are Oxford Companion to Wine (FN #1) and online British Columbia Wine Institute (FN#3), however there are additional online refs in the lead to help with verification.

Created by Agne27 (talk). Self nom at 06:52, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • - Fixed hook to point directly to created article as it had been moved. Offline ref doesn't specifically mention Champagne, Rheingau or Mexico as far as I can see - just the latitude and desert - but online refs seem fine to confirm the hook without needing OR. Verified image license suitability. Camw (talk) 07:46, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sorry I didn't clarify this in my comment above)-Yes, Oxford mentions the latitude (and of course, in the Champagne and Rhiengau entries of the same text, the same latitude is seen) but to avoid claims of WP:SYNTHESIS I had (FN#2) right next to the Oxford cite that went to the Canadian Encyclopedia where Champagne and Rheingau are specifically mentioned and the BC Wine Institute (FN#3) does specifically mention Baja, Mexico. So there was no OR involved. AgneCheese/Wine 08:00, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: There is an editor on the page who seems to be taking issue with the Sonoran desert claim. I would hope that this doesn't become an edit war that would make the article unstable. But any editor who is worried about this part of the hook or the potential to show up on WP:ERRORS, I encourage you to take a look at some of the abundant reliable sources that support this aspect of the hook/article at Talk:Okanagan_Valley_(wine_region)#Sonoran_Desert_refs. In particular, the last link which goes to a project of the Royal BC Museum (with a bc.ca government website address to boot) should put aside any questions to the validity of the claim. AgneCheese/Wine 09:21, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Arnold Weiss

Created by Alansohn (talk). Self nom at 23:15, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Neil Young (footballer born 1944), 1969 FA Cup Final

5x expanded by Oldelpaso (talk). Self nom at 22:18, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewed Groningen gas field on Jan 3. If possible I'd like this to go on the Main Page on Sunday 9th, see the last para of the Young article for why. Oldelpaso (talk) 22:18, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Agree, definitely should be featured on 9 January! J04n(talk page) 04:39, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Expansion verified at 6.8x and 25.7x, respectively. Hook ref accepted AGF, but I added an online ref so AGF is not necessary. Expansion date of 1969 FA Cup Final is actually 3 January (moved from 4 January), but otherwise okay. KimChee (talk) 08:45, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kenneth Setton

  • ... that American historian Kenneth Setton spent nearly two decades finishing his classic work The Papacy and the Levant, 1204-1571?

Created by Antidiskriminator (talk). Self nom at 02:12, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I reviewed E.B. Harris. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 09:49, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Length, date, and source verified for the first hook. However, this article needs a copy edit, and I'd also like to see some citations for the education and teaching career paragraphs. - PM800 (talk) 18:44, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for review. I inserted a couple of inline citations to support statements about education and teaching. Also, I asked for help with copyediting in WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors because I am not a native speaker of English. As soon as I see that copy editing is finished I will post a message here.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 20:19, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

St. John's Cathedral, St. John's

St. John's Cathedral, St. John's

5x expanded by Nvvchar (talk), Dr. Blofeld (talk). Self nom at 00:51, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Date, length and sources checked. I copyedited a couple of items for flow. Acroterion (talk) 23:02, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Shark fin trading in Costa Rica

Confiscated Shark fins
  • ... that British chef Gordon Ramsay, who was threatened at gunpoint whilst filming in Costa Rica described the illegal Shark fin trading (pictured) in the country as "a multi-billion dollar industry"?

Created by Dr. Blofeld (talk), Nvvchar (talk), Rosiestep (talk),. Self nom at 15:26, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Date, length and sources checked. An interesting and sad story that deserves Main Page attention. Cbl62 (talk) 20:02, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Te Matua Ngahere

Te Matua Ngahere

5x expanded by Nvvchar (talk), Dr. Blofeld (talk), Rosiestep (talk). Self nom at 13:06, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Date, five-fold expansion and sources all check out. Cbl62 (talk) 19:28, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mikea Forest

  • ... that the Mikea Forest, one of the largest remaining forest blocks in southwestern Madagascar, is not protected?

Created by Visionholder (talk), Ucucha (talk). Nominated by Ucucha (talk) at 08:34, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Date length and sources are all OK. Good to go. However, an alternate hook is proposed. Alt3 ... that the Mikea Forest, one of the largest remaining forest blocks in southwestern Madagascar, is yet to be protected? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nvvchar (talkcontribs)
  • Thanks; the alt is fine with me. Ucucha 09:59, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Angangueo

  • ... that the town of Angangueo, Mexico was nearly moved completely because of landslides and flooding in February 2010?

5x expanded by Thelmadatter (talk). Self nom at 03:01, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

source and 5x expansion check out J04n(talk page) 03:07, 4 January 2011 (UTC)-hook also checks out. J04n(talk page) 10:53, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Chuck McCoy (Canadian radio)

  • ... that Chuck McCoy was inducted into the Canadian Music Industry Hall of Fame in 2009?

Created by J04n (talk). Self nom at 02:40, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • It's long enough, new enough, and the cited hook checks out. Well done. — AlekJDS talk 05:28, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've pulled this from the queue. Look carefully at the source for the hook. The source, dated 2008, says he "will be inducted" in March the following year (ie 2009). So the date is wrong, and the statement as a whole is not supported by the source. We need a source saying he was actually inducted, not predicting his induction, (ie there were no intervening events that prevented his induction). --Mkativerata (talk) 23:08, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for that - I tried finding a source myself to avoid pulling it but must have missed that one.--Mkativerata (talk) 01:26, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blue Sulphur Springs Pavilion

Created by TheCatalyst31 (talk). Self nom at 02:00, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: I reviewed Wojciech Giertych below.

Wojciech Giertych

Created by Alekjds (talk). Self nom at 21:37, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Shwenyaungbin

Created by Dr. Blofeld (talk). Self nom at 21:26, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Nicely done. May I suggest a slight modification to the hook so that it reads: "... that during the 1765 Sino–Burmese War, the Qing army built a stockade, described as being "as big as a city", at Shwenyaungbin?" I think it reads easier without the parenthetical date, and the "massive"-ness of the stockage is implied by its being "as big as a city". — AlekJDS talk 21:43, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Another suggested Alt hook: "... that during the 1765 Sino–Burmese War the Qing army built a stockade "as big as a city" at Shwenyaungbin?" (note: I assume AlekJDS verified the quote; this reads easier and the inverted commas make the 'described as' rather redundant). --jjron (talk) 15:03, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fine with whatever you suggest.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:27, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Groningen gas field

Satellite image of a land mass with some different sized dots and lots of water

  • ... that the Groningen gas field (location pictured) is the largest natural gas field in Europe and the tenth largest in the world?

Created/expanded by Bine Mai (talk). Self nom at 20:06, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Length, reference, hook and image licensing all OK. Oldelpaso (talk) 22:09, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nice to read. I added a few things to the talk page, and a little bit more about the geology might help.--Stone (talk) 21:12, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent, Stone! Do you use a tool for the references, or is that just plain hard work? Classical geographer (talk) 09:08, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ghorband District

  • ... that in November 2010 it was reported that two Iranian Secret Intelligence agents arrived in Ghorband District and were accused by the US of helping insurgents to attack coalition forces?
  • Comment: I reviewed Macrotarsomys petteri below.

Created by Dr. Blofeld (talk), Afghanpolicy27 (talk). Self nom at 18:04, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Macrotarsomys petteri

  • ... that the range of the rodent Macrotarsomys petteri is believed to have shifted as a result of climatic change?
  • Comment: I reviewed La Lutte (newspaper) below.

Created by Ucucha (talk). Self nom at 17:41, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't a DYK be a solid fact? This seems very vague..♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:06, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Solid facts are rare. DYK facts are required to be verifiable, not solid, as far as I know. Ucucha 18:35, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And indeed, the fact used here seems similar in nature to the "it was reported" hook you proposed right above here. Ucucha 18:36, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tweaked the hook for better phrasing and readability. AGF on subscription-required sources. Should be good to go. - The Bushranger One ping only 00:50, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

St Nicholas' Church, Feltwell

A stone church with a brick porch seen from the south. To the left are the remains of the collapsed tower. The clerestory contains three windows and six carved panels.

Created by Peter I. Vardy (talk). Self nom at 17:16, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Size, date and length verified with cite for hook fact. -- Lord Roem (talk) 17:28, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


La Lutte (newspaper)

Created by Soman (talk). Self nom at 16:41, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Length, date, and hook confirmed; article looks good. Ucucha 17:39, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

2010 Indian Onion Crisis

Created by SPat (talk). Self nom at 15:42, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ALT1: ... that in December 2010, the price of onion in India rose from 35 (44¢ US) to 85 (US$1.10) per kg in the period of one week?
Comment: I reviewed Art of Azerbaijani ashiqs above. SPat talk 15:42, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Length, time, and ref verified. I tend to prefer the first hook. —focus 21:13, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Tweaked hook#1. SPat talk 04:41, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Seems fine on second read.  狐 FOX  00:15, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jenny Lind Tower

Created by Ktr101 (talk). Self nom at 07:31, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • The length and references check out (I'm assuming they stand up to whatever notability criteria we have for places/buildings, which I'm not familiar with - there's also Google Books), but the hook is a bit convoluted. It could, instead, be about the performance...? Roscelese (talkcontribs) 07:46, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Go for it! I wasn't sure if that would work but it sounds better than the original. Thanks for your help. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 22:53, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Patience and Sarah (opera)

Created by Roscelese (talk). Self nom at 07:17, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: I have too few DYK credits to be required to review, but I hope to help out once I figure out how it works. Alas, I also have no fair use pictures for this nomination. Roscelese (talkcontribs) 07:17, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The sources and length check out just fine. Thank you for your hard work. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 07:31, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Papal conclave, 1740

Pope Benedict XIV

Created by Moonraker2 (talk). Self nom at 05:35, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Bhutanese legislation

  • ... that in the case of budget bills and urgent matters, a bill must be passed in the same session of Parliament in Bhutan?

Created by JFHJr (talk). Nominated by Spongie555 (talk) at , 3 January, 2011 (UTC)

Comment: I reviwed El Fonoll nomination under January 2. Spongie555 (talk) 04:49, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please do specify the country in the hook. Ucucha 17:42, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand this comment. It wouldn't make sense without the country. --jjron (talk) 14:55, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

2010 Okhaldhunga aircraft crash

Aircraft

Created by Wackywace (talk). Self nom at 21:14, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Question What where the nationalities of the passengers? Every news article I read about the crash always had different nationalities like Bhutanese to Nepalese and American. Spongie555 (talk) 21:25, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Aside from that, which isn't disqualifying but should be added, it looks OK from here. I'm AGF'ing that the crash is notable enough to merit its own article; given the number of fatalities, it should be. - The Bushranger One ping only 07:25, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List of Chicago Bears in the Pro Football Hall of Fame

Created by Happyman22 (talk) 17:33, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on January 4

First Presbyterian Church (Batavia, New York)

A light gray stone building seen from across a street with a pointed roof in the middle, a tower on the left and two sets of pointed-arch red doors in the center and right. A banner on the left of the center door says "Celebration" in vertical type.

5x expanded by Daniel Case (talk). Self nom at 04:57, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have reviewed sampling frame. Daniel Case (talk) 05:07, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


La Sarre, Quebec

5x expanded by P199 (talk). Self nom at 14:38, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Technically I could pass this nomination but I think the claim in the first sentence of the article needs to be cited. Mangoe (talk) 15:12, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I can't believe the reliability of the opening statement is challenged! It is a ridiculous nitpicking challenge that needlessly applies policy too far, as if it is an outlandish statement. Anyway, ref added. -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 15:51, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hey, if you say that it's the biggest X, I want some documentation for that, and so should everyone else. Thank you for adding the citation, this one is GTG. Mangoe (talk) 17:04, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mesa Distance Learning Program

Created by Tyw7 (talk). Self nom at 02:23, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Leave a message on my talk page if you have any problems with this nomination or if it fails. --Please leave me a {{talkback}} if you reply here. Thanks, Tyw7  (☎ Contact me! • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 02:26, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • What hooks can you suggest? This is my first time here. And that is my first article :/ --Tyw7  (☎ Contact me! • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 08:26, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • And I was kinda hoping the DYK nomination would drive some interest into the article to expand it. --Tyw7  (☎ Contact me! • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 08:31, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, I'm not sure about the hook; there's nothing wrong with the current one, just it seems slightly...mundane. But it would work. Expansion is still needed though, hopefully it'll attract some attention. :) - The Bushranger One ping only 20:35, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cornelius Dupree

  • ... that Cornelius Dupree served 30 years in prison for a rape and aggravated robbery before being exonerated in January 2011?

Created by KimChee (talk), BabbaQ (talk)

  • Good article! Article length, date, hook length and citation all verified. Good article! -Location (talk) 21:21, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I re-arranged the hook for clarity and fixed the credits. - PM800 (talk) 21:41, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I just wanted to clarify that the reworded hook is not the one I initially verified, however, the strikeout does make the new one accurate. BTW: Although it does not jive with the other references, the first citation from the NYT does state that "...Cornelius Dupree Jr. was imprisoned for rape and robbery..." [emphasis mine] Location (talk) 03:21, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Good observation. The accuracy of the New York Times article does appear to suffer from oversimplified reporting. I added a new source for the first sentence of the lead that covers this in better detail. KimChee (talk) 04:29, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Burnett, Somerset

  • that Burnett, a village in Somerset had a civil parish of 608 acres until it was abolished and merged into the neighbouring village of Compton Dando?

Created by Jaguar (talk), Rodw (talk). Self nom at 16:09, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No where in the article discusses that it was merged in the village of Compton Dando. And the article was created on January 4 not January 5 and you should have credited User:Rodw! pLease add a sentence to the history section about it being a civil parish and discuss its merger and source it, credit Rodw also and it should be good to go..♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:51, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have mentioned the setence in the history section and credited Rodw. Sorry about that! I forgot! Jaguar (talk) 16:09, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ernest P. Goodrich

Created by Cmadler (talk), Paulmcdonald (talk). Self nom by Cmadler at 14:34, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Julio Ibarra

Created by Diego Grez (talk). Self nom at 00:49, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Spanish-language source accepted in good faith. —Ynhockey (Talk) 23:15, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The red link on the hook will be fixed soon! I admit the hook is a bit boring, but well, this is a wiki! Suggest something better :-p Diego Grez (EMSIUB) (talk) 00:50, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Point Danger Light

A white lighthouse constructed of four white pillars, one showing with the word "NORTH", and a bronze object suspended between the pillars

Created by Muhandes (talk). Self nom at 23:16, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Novacam Technologies

Created by Arelle1 (talk). Nominated by Sonia (talk) at 23:05, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: User:Shearonink's idea (and work with the new user); nomming per request- I don't have five credits, but I'll review one in a moment.
  • I know that citations are not required for every paragraph, but there are none in the entire History section. - PM800 (talk) 00:23, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Now fixed by Shearonink, and external links converted to notes. sonia 04:11, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Brentwood Academy v. Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Assn.

Created by Lord Roem (talk). Self nom at 22:43, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I do not have 5 credits yet but I will still review an article. -- Lord Roem (talk) Reviewed: Steve Hanley (rugby union). -- Lord Roem (talk) 22:49, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • There's one paragraph that's uncited; it's very short and could just be 'merged' into another, but I'd also like to see additional sources, and some of the long unreferenced paragraph sections being referenced as well. - The Bushranger One ping only 19:54, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

St Barbara's Church, Haceby

A stone church seen from the southeast, showing the chancel, beyond which is the nave with a clerestory, a south aisle and a porch, beyond which is a tower with a plain parapet

Created by Peter I. Vardy (talk). Self nom at 18:09, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Date, length and sourcing all check out. Cbl62 (talk) 19:12, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Five articles

Created by Bine Mai (talk). Self nom at 17:28, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there are two problems. The first one (easy to solve) is that all five articles have an orphan tag, and that needs to be dealt with before the hook can be promoted to the homepage. The second issue is more complex, though. By itself, each article is just long enough, as they all have just over 1500 bytes of readable prose. However, the articles are all much the same, with just the technical details differing between the various rigs. By way of example, they all contain the sentence "GSP xyz drilling rig is designed by Sonnat Offshore and was built by Petrom at the Galaţi Shipyard in 19yy." (a side issue is that it should say "was designed" in that sentence) As it stands, this could be promoted (once the orphan tags are gone) as a single article, rather than all five, as they are all more or less of the same content. Any of the duplication needs to be discounted for article prose, and if we do that, then they are all well under the 1500 bytes cut off.
But what can i do if the rigs are very similar in characteristics and construction process. The sentence containing designed by Sonnat Offshore and built by Petrom at the Galaţi Shipyard is a must in these articles because it states their origin. BineMai 12:52, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You also need to familiarise yourself with the difference between "its" and "it's" and fix the articles accordingly. Schwede66 21:29, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed. BineMai 12:52, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Chloe Hosking

Chloe Hosking on an awards podium after an event. She is a nineteen year old white female with brown hair, blue eyes and a big smile, wearing a pink and white cycling jersey and a blue peaked cap with pink framed mirror sunglasses on top

Created by jjron (talk). Self nom at 14:36, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Cheers. Thanks for the speedy review. --jjron (talk) 02:26, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tryvandsbanen, Tryvandshøiden (station)

Created by Eisfbnore (talk). Self nom at 14:07, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Tryvandshøiden (station) is ready for the Main Page: length and creation date are fine, and the hook is referenced to offline reliable sources. At ~350 bytes of prose, Tryvandsbanen is too short to be included as a bold link in the hook; unless the article can be expanded and destubbed, this hook will have to be put forward with just the station article bolded. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 13:19, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you! I fear that I cannot expand Tryvandsbanen any further. It is covered in several Norwegian-language encyclopedias, but they all provide almost the same information at a two or three lines. It only excisted in five years, so there isn't that much to write about. I therefore do not mind if Tryvandsbanen will not be bolded in the hook. bw, Eisfbnore talk 14:09, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine; as a rail enthusiast with an interest in obscure branch lines myself, I appreciate the difficulty of finding much information about them. I have removed Tryvandsbanen from the credits and un-bolded it in the hook, and have marked both hooks verified. I prefer the original hook, incidentally. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 23:25, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The ALT1 hook seems to be fine. But the statement "established solely for the purpose of expanding the Holmenkollen Line 800 m from Frognerseteren Station to Tryvandshøiden Station" in the original hook seems to be absent in the Tryvandshøiden (station) article. On the contrary, the article claims that the company Tryvandsbanen also expanded the line from Besserud to Frognerseteren. Have therefore put <s></s> around the original hook. Oceanh (talk) 00:41, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

1954 Cotton Bowl Classic

Created by Patriarca12 (talk). Self nom at 12:51, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Length, date, and source verified. - PM800 (talk) 16:23, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List of year-end number-one singles (New Zealand)

  • Comment: Reviewed It's Sad to Belong

Created by Adabow (talk). Self nom at 11:04, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I should really stop the late-at-night submissions. :p Your hook is great, thanks. Adabow (talk · contribs) 04:02, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cachorro López

Created by Jaespinoza (talk) 09:40, 4 January 2011 (UTC). Self nom at 09:37, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • it needs 500 more characters (c. 120 words) of referenced pure text (ie no bullets or tables) to qualify. You also need to mention and reference the national anthem if the hook above is going to work. However... welcome, don't give up, it look like a go-er Victuallers (talk) 17:35, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
ALT1 ... that record producer Cachorro López co-wrote "Color Esperanza", a song performed in Argentina back to back with the national anthem? Jaespinoza (talk) 22:22, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The ref for this hook can be found here. [1]
ALT2 NOT CHECKED YET ... that Argentine record producer Cachorro López received the Latin Grammy Award for Producer of the Year in 2006 and 2009? Jaespinoza (talk) 22:34, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Reviewed: Flora and Maria Jaespinoza (talk) 23:04, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
main hook and Alt1 - thanks - it looks much better now although I ve only checked the main hook and alt1 Victuallers (talk) 10:23, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
ALT1 , ALT2 - the references only state he was nominated for the 2006 and 2009 awards, they're pre-award Billboard articles. Are there post-award articles? - The Bushranger One ping only 02:33, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's Sad to Belong

5x expanded by PM800 (talk). Self nom at 08:25, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ready. Adabow (talk · contribs) 11:04, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Polad Bülbüloğlu

5x expanded by Ynhockey (talk). Self nom at 05:48, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Пpoвepявшo (I think that's how you say "verified" in Russian). Daniel Case (talk) 18:11, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hyacinthe-Marie Cormier

Created by Alekjds (talk). Self nom at 05:22, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

..(alt)... that Liszt declared organist Hyacinthe-Marie Cormier a "master of the art", but the Pope said he was a saint?
Less reverence, but maybe you'll like the alt Victuallers (talk) 17:41, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • DYK criteria met. I cannot find the ref online, but accepted IGF. I prefer the original hook; it's straightforward and IMO sufficiently interesting.--Peter I. Vardy (talk) 18:00, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dinocochlea

Created by Witty lama (talk). Self nom at 02:27, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Length, date verified. Hook's offline ref accepted AGF. --Rosiestep (talk) 02:49, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just to confirm, this is only Witty lama's 2nd DYK, so no review was required. SmartSE (talk) 11:07, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jersey City Armory

5x expanded by Djflem (talk). Self nom at 13:32, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Even better, concise and catchier. Thanks Djflem (talk) 19:07, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
ALT 2:... that in a 1979 fundraiser at the Jersey City Armory the Mayor of Jersey City challenged Muhammed Ali, then World Heavyweight Champion, to an exhibition bout before a crowd of 8,000?

No need to highlight person and more concise. Djflem (talk) 23:27, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • ALT 2 is fine. Good to go now.--Nvvchar. 01:16, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rail transport in Vietnam

5x expanded by Dragfyre (talk). Self nom at 18:43, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Hook ref is located in the third paragraph of the "Wartime" section. Note that the article was in userspace until Jan 4; history merge was done by MuZemike.
  • Reviewed: L&N Station (Knoxville)
  • The merge was confusing, but I eventually figured out article length went from 3000 to 50,000 bytes. Hook ref checks out, hook length OK. One : the cited sentence in the article concludes wth :...where [the Viet Minh] began to operate trains of their own." Operation of trains appears to be unsupported in the reference. Andrew Jameson (talk) 21:23, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hmm, you're right. I could have sworn that bit was in one of the references I've used, but I can't find it. Oh well, I'm OK with taking that out of the article until I find a better ref (done). --dragfyre_ʞןɐʇc 00:25, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Also I prefer ALT 2 Andrew Jameson (talk) 21:23, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on January 5

Angus Reach

  • ... that an 1848-9 crime thriller set in the world of horseracing, written by journalist Angus Reach, was later described as a "template for the pulp tradition"?

Created by Gonzonoir (talk). Self nom at 16:38, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Prudence Crandall House

Black and white Historic American Buildings Survey photo from 1940 of white mansion amidst trees

5x expanded by Doncram (talk), KudzuVine (talk). Self nom at 15:45, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Good article. Expansion confirmed; length and sources checked. I do suggest an alt hook, which I list below. --Bobak (talk) 20:51, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for developing the alt, that's great. --Doncram (talk) 01:32, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I reviewed DYK nom for Pratt & Whitney J48. --Doncram (talk) 01:52, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Macamic, Quebec

5x expanded by P199 (talk). Self nom at 14:18, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Reviewed Yeshayahu Yerushalmi below. For the record, the new policy seems to work too well: hardly anything left to review. This will create problems on its own (unqualified reviewers, forced reviews on topics the reviewer is not familiar with, etc...), so the policy must be relaxed. -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 14:30, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agreed --though I'm glad to see this one available to be reviewed. Often times its the ones that look like a headache that are left over. --Bobak (talk) 21:04, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Expansion confirmed; length and hook checked and approved. Google Translate gets the assist on confirming using a translation of the translation. --Bobak (talk) 21:04, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Allied naval bombardments of Japan during World War II

Color photograph of two World War II-era warships at sea near the coast. Clouds of smoke are visible on the left-hand side of the ship nearest the camera.

Created by Nick-D (talk). Self nom at 10:23, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I've assessed the nomination for Fort du Scex and Fort de Cindey below Nick-D (talk) 10:29, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Date checks out, length of hook is fine, hook fact is cited in the article, prose length is fine. AGF for offline sources. Image is in the public domain. Good to go. AustralianRupert (talk) 10:49, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Jens Blauert

5x expanded by Dr. Blofeld (talk). Self nom at 09:56, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLP expansion. Reviewed John Jardine Paterson below.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:57, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

John Jardine Paterson and Bengal Chamber of Commerce and Industry

Created by Moonraker2 (talk). Self nom at 09:44, 6 January 2011 (GMT)

Hook is not verified.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:14, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. Dr. Blofeld added a {{Fact}} template at the end of the relevant sentence in the JJP article, but long before that the citation for the hook was already immediately after the fact in the BCCI article. Before the above comment was written I replaced the {{Fact}} template with the citation needed, which was already at the end of the following sentence in the first article. Moonraker2 (talk) 15:48, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeshayahu Yerushalmi

5x expanded by Dr. Blofeld (talk). Self nom at 07:45, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLP expansion. Reviewed Burnett, Somerset.♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:57, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fort du Scex, Fort de Cindey

Vertical cliff with camouflaged gun emplacements

Created by Acroterion (talk). Self nom at 02:23, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I elected to keep the Grotte aux Fées for a separate DYK, a couple of slots below, although the trifecta was tempting. Acroterion (talk) 02:27, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Everything checks out - great work, these are very good little articles. Nick-D (talk) 10:29, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

George Macfarlan

  • Comment: Not one of my most brilliant articles, but the guy died young (30), so there's not much to find about him. I have reviewed Five articles.

Created by Schwede66 (talk). Self nom at 01:34, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Length, date, and source checked. - PM800 (talk) 05:25, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is the School House the Proper Place to Teach Raw Sex?

Created by Roscelese (talk). Self nom at 00:06, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • (Too much of a n00b to be required to review, but as I did last time, I may drop by to review some things anyway.) Roscelese (talkcontribs) 00:06, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Length, date, and hook verified. Those Commies will stop at nothing! Jayjg (talk) 04:09, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nathan MacKinnon

5x expanded by Nurmsook (talk). Self nom at 23:56, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Length, date, and hook verified. - PM800 (talk) 00:34, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Roberto Córdova

Roberto Córdova

5x expanded by Diego Grez (talk). Self nom at 23:43, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article looks good (a vast improvement on this hitherto barely-cited BLP) and the expansion checks out, but this particular hook seems to be cited to the subject's CV. Are we comfortable with citing DYK hooks to primary sources? Perhaps you could find another hook cited to one of the third-party sources you've added? Gonzonoir (talk) 16:33, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I couldn't find any other reference for his works in forestry, etc. So, I propose a different hook: --Diego Grez (EMSIUB) (talk) 17:26, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
New hook citation checks out (per my non-fluent Spanish); I have made minor typographical corrections to the hook above. I believe this is ready to go with the second hook. Gonzonoir (talk) 09:38, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Grotte aux Fées (Switzerland)

Created by Acroterion (talk). Self nom at 23:08, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Everything checks out OK. Nice work - I'll have to put that on my itinerary next time I visit the Valais! Prioryman (talk) 23:21, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jamaican Flightless Ibis

Created by KimvdLinde (talk), Jimfbleak (talk), Maias (talk), Chuunen Baka (talk), Snowmanradio (talk), MeegsC (talk). Self nom at 21:24, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hold on for a few days as I am trying to get permission for one of the images. This article would do well with a nice image.-- Kim van der Linde at venus 14:41, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Alright. :) I've added a hold-on check, let me know how the image search turns out. Having one would be pretty cool indeed. - The Bushranger One ping only 20:37, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I made the image File:Clubbed-wing-drawing-thumb.svg, but it does not show in the 100x100 image for DYK. So, forget it. -- Kim van der Linde at venus 01:24, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Good to go. - The Bushranger One ping only 02:26, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

John S. Gray (Michigan)

Formal portait of a middle-aged man, bearded and balding, in a formal coat

Created by Andrew Jameson (talk). Self nom at 21:05, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work and rather interesting (I have a spare NZ$10,500 for investment, too - if anybody can guarantee me that return, I'll consider it)! I've given the article a c/e for spelling. It's brand new, hook fact is fine, and it's well over the length requirement. I've amended the hook in the following ways: replaced the comma with a semicolon, changed 'candymaker' to 'candy maker' and wikilinked it (it redirects to Confectionery). I hope that's ok. Regarding the image, I assume that the public domain restriction doesn't apply, as the photo is from the US (that would need to be checked by an admin if this becomes the lead hook). This is lead hook material IMO. Schwede66 22:02, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! The hook reads a little better with the edits, so I have no issue. The photo was published in 1922 (it's in the first ref link I gave above); anything published before January 1, 1923 is public domain in the US (I'm not familiar with NZ). Andrew Jameson (talk) 22:07, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
My PD comments referred to the text shown on the Commons page: "This image might not be in the public domain outside of the United States; this especially applies in the countries and areas ..." Schwede66 01:20, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Julia Bonds

5x expanded by Randolph.hollingsworth (talk). Nominated by Oceanh (talk) at 20:34, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Expansion big enough, I couldn't find the fact referred to in the inline citation's link, so I added a more appropriate link which confirms the fact. Malick78 (talk) 23:40, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Baths (musician)

  • ... that Baths' debut album, Cerulean, though recorded in his bedroom in two months, was acknowledged by "album of the year" lists?

5x expanded by Fox (talk). Self nom at 20:27, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Date, length, and 6.03x expansion verified. I do not mean to split hairs, but found references for two "album of the year" lists and several implies more than two. KimChee (talk) 23:10, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I thought that after I finished typing it... Could have sworn there were more than two, but I'm obviously mistaken... Bear with me.  狐 FOX  23:18, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
How about: ALT1
  • ... that Baths recorded four full-length albums and three EPs under a different stagename?
Maybe?  狐 FOX  23:58, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I updated the main hook to fit, and both check out okay. KimChee (talk) 00:26, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Saber of London

Created by Billy Hathorn (talk). Self nom at 18:46, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • There must be cite directly following the hook-proving sentence, not just a cite at the end of the paragraph. Otherwise the online viewable source supports the hook. Date and length okay. Binksternet (talk) 21:53, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article fixed. Nominator review noted. Good to go! Binksternet (talk) 23:51, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewed: Hubert Guerin.

Thomas Henderson (New Zealand)

portrait photo of a man aged 50

  • Comment: I have reviewed Großbottwar, which was nominated under 31 December.

5x expanded by Schwede66 (talk). Self nom at 18:13, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Length, date, hook, and image verified. This is a good one! - PM800 (talk) 19:11, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Mycena arcangeliana

Five small mushrooms with white caps growing from moss covered rocks and sticks

Created by J Milburn (talk). Self nom at 16:54, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Length, date, hook all good, reference taken under good faith (one thing, can you cite the actual fact? I assume the end-of-par citation is the same one?).  狐 FOX  20:27, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Added a cite after the fact just so it's clear. J Milburn (talk) 20:58, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Red (Communards album)

  • ... that the song "For a Friend" from The Communards' album Red was written in memory of Mark Aston, a friend of the band members, who died from AIDS?

Created by J04n (talk). Self nom at 16:03, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Length, date, and hook checked. - PM800 (talk) 19:00, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Marburg's Bloody Sunday

  • ... that during massacre known as Marburg's Bloody Sunday, on January 27, 1919 in Maribor, military units under command of Rudolf Maister killed between 11 and 13 and wounded 60 civilians during protest of several thousand German citizens of Maribor on central city square?
  • Comment: Please save this nomination for a couple days so it can be on the main page on January 27, on 92nd anniversary of the massacre

Created by Antidiskriminator (talk). Self nom at 13:32, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is my second DYK so no review is requested.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 14:38, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Good to go, save that the hook is 264 characters long. I suggest "... that during massacre known as Marburg's Bloody Sunday, military units commanded by Rudolf Maister killed between 11 and 13 civilians during protest of several thousand German on Maribor's city square?" to bring it to the 200-character maximum. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Howard the Duck (talkcontribs) 14:39, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Antoinette (barque)

Created by Worm That Turned (talk). Self nom at 11:35, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I have reviewed Louis Gilbert.Worm 11:44, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Looks good to me (an inexperienced DYKer) - length, dates, etc. I like the fact the date isn't mentioned, because I remember hearing about the recent attempt to shift the wreck, and I thought "that never blew out all the windows".  —SMALLJIM  19:25, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

St Margaret's Church, Hales

A stone church with thatched roofs seen from the north; on the left is a chancel with an apse, in the middle is the nave containing a Norman doorway, and on the right is a round tower

Created by Peter I. Vardy (talk). Self nom at 11:06, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Verified article length, creation, citations, hook fact, photo suitability. cmadler (talk) 15:04, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


MQR-16 Gunrunner

  • Comment: Reviewed 2010 Okhaldhunga aircraft crash.

Created by The Bushranger (talk). Self nom at 07:30, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Date, hook ref verified. Barely over 1,500 characters, but length checks out okay. Photo is credited to National Aerospace Education Council, checking to confirm whether it is a U.S. federal agency. KimChee (talk) 07:43, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Actually the image is a U.S. Army image, but is via the NAEC's collection. However the NAEC does appear to be government, since their books were published by the GPO... - The Bushranger One ping only 07:53, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • If you can link to a source that confirms it is from the army, then the image can be cleared. I also found similar publishing evidence of the NAEC, but that is not quite definitive as, for example, works of the post office ceased to be automatically in the public domain since the 1970s. KimChee (talk) 08:06, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • Unfortunatly, there are no other sources online; working on obscure stuff like this is fun, but can be frustrating. I'll pull the pic from DYK then, no worries. :) - The Bushranger One ping only 08:10, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
          • Verified. Sorry to see the image go, but everything else checks out. KimChee (talk) 08:13, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


E.B. Harris

Created by Qrsdogg (talk). Self nom at 05:48, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Length verified. Source is not available online but is well referenced and I think it is safe to AGF and consider source verified. Date verified. Interesting story that should have its place on DYK. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 09:42, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks--BTW, the book sources that I cited are actually available online on Google books or using Amazon.com's search inside feature. Qrsdogg (talk) 18:28, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

1953 Orange Bowl

Created by Patriarca12 (talk). Self nom at 04:59, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Length, date, and hook verified. - PM800 (talk) 05:12, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Leofric Missal

Created by Ealdgyth (talk). Self nom at 16:54, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Date and length check out, offline source accepted in good faith. J Milburn (talk) 16:59, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


General Duke (horse)

Created by Ealdgyth (talk). Self nom at 20:18, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Reviewed Xeromphalina setulipes, see diff for review. Ealdgyth - Talk 20:27, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Length and date good. While this was originally asking for AGF on the hook's source, I found the Belmont Stakes' official website actually had good information and I added it to the article; it also corroborates some other information. Thus I accept the rest of the article AGF. --Bobak (talk) 21:28, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on January 6

Rákóczi Museum, Tekirdağ

Created by CeeGee (talk). Self nom at 08:52, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jenova Chen

5x expanded by PresN (talk). Self nom at 23:42, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Verified, 5x per DYKcheck, and ready. Rcej (Robert) - talk 09:18, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Sodium tungsten bronze

  • Comment: Article created in my userspace on Jan 5, moved to mainspace on Jan 6.

Created by Brammers (talk). Self nom at 23:10, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Monotown

  • ... that there are hundreds of monotowns in Russia—towns whose economy is dominated by a single industry or company?

Created by Nanobear (talk). Self nom at 20:31, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Intriguing. However, two paragraphs have no references at all. Should be easy to fix, though, I'd think. - The Bushranger One ping only 21:11, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Prostitution in Iran

5x expanded by Binksternet (talk). Self nom at 19:55, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sathyamangalam Tiger Reserve (pro)

Created by Marcus334 (talk). Self nom at 18:30, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Reviewed: Fuller Rock Light-Marcus334 (talk) 19:18, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Xeromphalina setulipes

Created by J Milburn (talk). Self nom at 18:01, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Date and length are OK. Difficult to check the source material because a subscription is needed. Single source, but since the subject is a newly recorded species, this is unsurprising. I added a citation to the hook statement as I believe that is a requirement for DYK. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:28, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Date of creation and size good, hook is fine, ref'd to an offline source that is accepted in good faith. I ran the article through Coren's tool and Earwig's tool to check for plagarism, no problems with either tool. Looks fine to go! Ealdgyth - Talk 20:22, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fuller Rock Lighthouse

Created by Mangoe (talk). Self nom at 17:45, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewed La Sarre, Quebec Mangoe (talk) 17:45, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I thought about doing that but I haven't been able to find enough information to write any article about the Maine light at all; the only evidence it even exists is in the Light List and some placename directories that appear to use the LL as their source. None of the other standard sources acknowledge that it exists. I will add a note at the top of the article however. Mangoe (talk) 21:26, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Paolo Padovani

5x expanded by Dr. Blofeld (talk), David Eppstein (talk). Self nom at 15:49, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLP expansion. Can't find another hook needing reviewing!♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:50, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Length, expansion, and hook verified, but this article is being considered for deletion. As for not finding another hook to review, there actually are still hooks here that haven't been reviewed. - PM800 (talk) 18:45, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cebu's 5th legislative district special election, 2005

Created by Howard the Duck (talk). Self nom at 14:07, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ref, length and hook check out, though you might add into the hook that Cebu is in the Philippines. --PresN 23:34, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Length, date, and hook do check out, but there are only two citations in the article and the longest paragraph doesn't have any. - PM800 (talk) 00:33, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mihajlo Rostohar

  • Comment: this is my third nomination, but I still reviewed Jens Blauert.

Created by Antidiskriminator (talk). Self nom at 13:20, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • All checked out. Hook was too long so I shortened it. -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 14:55, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

MQR-13 BMTS

A tall, slender missile soars skyward on a tongue of flame

  • Comment: Reviewed Mesa Distance Learning Program.

Created by The Bushranger (talk). Self nom at 08:10, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All checks out. Moonraker2 (talk) 09:37, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Conspiracy theories involving Israel

Egyptian vulture

Created by Mbz1 (talk). Self nom at 05:40, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All the required parameters (length, source and hook) technically check out, but the article's got huge problems including massive POV, and would require substantial work before it could be suitable to appear anywhere near the main page. Roscelese (talk

contribs) 06:27, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The grammar is fixed. The only two opinions used in the article put in quotes. The article is well sourced. Every statement (including the lead) is sourced by at least one, usually more than one RS. The article has never been tagged. If you see some problems, could you please discuss those in specifics on the article talk page, and please consider changing your "decline" to "maybe". If this article appears on the main page, it will sure enough bring more donations to wikipedia.--Mbz1 (talk) 12:15, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Also, isn't the shark stuff copied from the page on the shark attacks that ran awhile back? Of course, the length is probably good even not counting that, but yeah, the article needs a lot of work. It may be the most scatterbrained theory ever, but saying so isn't really encyclopediatic (also, the whole vulture thing might be the Saudi sense of humour in the wake of the shark attacks...) - The Bushranger One ping only 06:31, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The article name is distracting and does not represent the full scope of the article which covers a multitude of crazy conspiracy theories about Jewish control of animals for allegedly nefarious purposes. "Mossad shark and Zionist vulture" sounds like a great idea for a webcomic, not the name of an encyclopedia article. - Dravecky (talk) 12:34, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree, it is all my limited English you know. May I please ask you to suggest a better name. BTW somebody has started the discussion here.--Mbz1 (talk) 15:46, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I see no POV in this article. It simply recounts the facts as they are told by multiply reliable sources. Wikipedia is not censored. Broccolo (talk) 19:09, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The article is now nominated for deletion, see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mossad shark and Zionist vulture, cheers, Huldra (talk) 20:05, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Broccolo, it's hard to see anything with your head in the sand. NickCT (talk) 20:08, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Article has been moved to Conspiracy theories involving Israel, an overly-broad name that should probably be renamed again to return the animal-based conspiracy focus to the article (see its talk page), and I have updated links and templates above. - Dravecky (talk) 07:49, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Beth Israel Congregation (Washington, Pennsylvania)

5x expanded by Jayjg(talk). Self nom at 02:56, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewed: Dawn Burrell. Jayjg (talk) 02:59, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Length, sources, and hook all seem fine. (Sorry to be obnoxious, but would you mind checking out my nomination, School House, above? It seems to have gotten overlooked in the turnover to January 6.) Roscelese (talkcontribs) 03:57, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Done! Jayjg (talk) 04:10, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks much. Roscelese (talkcontribs) 04:26, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GTR-18 Smokey Sam

Two men watch as a small rocket roars off its launch rail next to a Jeep and small truck

  • Comment: Reviewed List of Chicago Bears in the Pro Football Hall of Fame.

Created by The Bushranger (talk). Self nom at 00:58, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Length, date, hook and picture (nice pic) check out, offline source accepted IGF. Acroterion (talk) 02:33, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Andreas Parsch, the source for the hook (and article) appears to be a computer programmer; does this really count as a reliable source? Jayjg (talk) 02:46, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes. The reliability of designation-systems.net has been discussed at WP:MILHIST, and the consensus has been that it is indeed a reliable source for referencing Wikipedia articles; hence, it is widely used in the MILHIST project as a reference accordingly. - The Bushranger One ping only 03:57, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'll take your word for that. If MILHIST accepts it, it's good enough for a DYK. Jayjg (talk) 04:03, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Tropical Depression Nineteen (1970)

Created by Hurricanehink and Miss Madeline (talk). Self nom at 05:00, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed it. - Dravecky (talk) 07:52, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dawn Burrell

Photo of Burrell jumping into a sandpit at the 2000 Olympic Games

Created by Sillyfolkboy (talk). Self nom at 01:40, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Reviewing Farman F.480 Alizé.
  • Length, date, hook all good. Note, this is a 5x expansion, not a new article - nominator, please use the proper template in the future. Jayjg (talk) 02:51, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on January 7

Glee: The Music, The Power of Madonna

5x expanded by Legolas2186 (talk). Self nom at 05:25, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

LOCAT

  • ... that the Low-Cost Aerial Target rocket, constructed from plastic and paper tubing, was intended to provide 50% savings in target practice costs?
  • Comment: Reviewed Steele Dunning Historic District.

Created by The Bushranger (talk). Self nom at 05:24, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sex toys in the People's Republic of China

Sex shop in China.

Created by Neptune 123 (talk). Self nom at 05:03, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


pyridine, Cornforth reagent

  • Comment: See [6] for Cornforth and [7] for Crabtree. I am slightly short of 5x expansion on pyridine and above 5x on the reagent, please forgive me for this (pyridine is already at 65k+). Materialscientist (talk) 04:28, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

5x expanded by Materialscientist (talk). Self nom at 04:28, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Steele Dunning Historic District

Small single-storey wooden houses along a street in broad daylight

Created by Nyttend (talk). Self nom at 03:55, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


BOAR (rocket)

A fat, white-and-black-striped rocket is launched from a Navy blue, straight-winged jet in a steep climb

Created by The Bushranger (talk). Self nom at 02:39, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Date, length, and image source verified. "Unguided" is mentioned in the lead without a citation, which would be okay under some circumstances, except that it is not mentioned again in the prose of the rest of the article. Also, upon checking the references, there is mention that there has been some confusion between the "Bureau of Ordnance atomic rocket" and the ""bombardment aircraft rocket"; I noticed the 2003 reference by Michel about the "idiot loop" refers to the "Bureau of Ordnance atomic" version. Can you clarify in the article? KimChee (talk) 05:08, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Huh, I'd totally missed the alternate meaning of the acronym. They're the same rocket, and I've clarified both the name and the guidance (or lack thereof) in the article. Thanks! - The Bushranger One ping only 05:16, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Grammy Award for Best Contemporary R&B Album

An woman with brown complexion waves to people, wearing sunglasses and a dark shirt. A man stands in the background

Created/expanded by Candoy32 (talk). Self nom at 04:59, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Special occasion holding area

Do not nominate new articles for a special time in this section. Instead, please nominate them in the candidate entries section above under the date the article was created or the expansion began, and indicate your request for a specially-timed appearance on the Main Page.
Note: Articles nominated for a special occasion should be nominated within five days of creation or expansion as usual (with the exception of April Fools' Day 2011 - see Wikipedia:April Fool's Main Page/Did You Know). Also, articles should be nominated at least five days before the occasion to give reviewers time to check the nomination.


9 January 2011, Sunday after Epiphany

Mein liebster Jesus ist verloren, BWV 154

  • Comment: for 9 January 2011, First Sunday after Epiphany - I reviewed Gottlob Espenlaub, knowing that "the thing" is not yet on, but practising.

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self nom at 17:43, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Court of Appeal of Singapore

A glass and metal building with a disc-shaped structure on the top and trees in front of it.

Created by Jacklee (talk). Self nom at 17:38, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • The information in the hook is supported by footnotes 53 and 69–74. The Court of Appeal was established on 9 January 1970 so unfortunately we missed its 40th anniversary, but perhaps we can celebrate its 41st by having the hook appear on 9 January 2011? — Cheers, JackLee talk 17:40, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • (I've reviewed and approved "1st Provisional Marine Brigade".) — Cheers, JackLee talk 18:09, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
, meets requirements and appears well-resourced article. Cheers! -- Lord Roem (talk) 18:21, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See also

  1. ^ Fernández Bitar, Marcelo (April 24, 2004). "Torres Unplugs To Connect With Wider Audience". Billboard. 116 (17). Nielsen Business Media, Inc: 26. Retrieved January 03, 2011. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)