* ... that [[Australia]]n [[composer]] '''[[Raymond Hanson]]''', a highly regarded teacher of [[music composition]] at the [[Sydney Conservatorium of Music|Sydney Conservatorium]], was himself largely [[self-taught]]? '''[[Raymond Hanson]]''' - new article by [[User:Gatoclass|Gatoclass]] ([[User talk:Gatoclass|talk]]) 10:50, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
* ... that [[Australia]]n [[composer]] '''[[Raymond Hanson]]''', a highly regarded teacher of [[music composition]] at the [[Sydney Conservatorium of Music|Sydney Conservatorium]], was himself largely [[self-taught]]? '''[[Raymond Hanson]]''' - new article by [[User:Gatoclass|Gatoclass]] ([[User talk:Gatoclass|talk]]) 10:50, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
**[[Image:Symbol confirmed.svg|18px]] Date/reference/length all fine; just mild surprise that it's [[User:Gatoclass#Contributions|not an article about a ship]]... <runs away> [[User:Bencherlite|Bencherlite]][[User talk:Bencherlite|<i><sup>Talk</sup></i>]] 01:49, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
* ... that the '''[[Berezan' Runestone]]''' is the only [[runestone]] discovered in Eastern Europe? (self-nom)--[[User:Berig|Berig]] ([[User talk:Berig|talk]]) 08:49, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
* ... that the '''[[Berezan' Runestone]]''' is the only [[runestone]] discovered in Eastern Europe? (self-nom)--[[User:Berig|Berig]] ([[User talk:Berig|talk]]) 08:49, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
This page is for nominations to appear in the "Did you know" section (reproduced on the right) on the Main Page. Eligible articles may only be up to 5 days old; for details see these rules.
List new suggestions here, under the date the article was created or expanded (not the date you submit it here), with the newest dates at the top. If a suitable image is available, place it immediately before the suggestion. Any user may nominate a DYK suggestion; self-nominations are permitted and encouraged.
contain more than 1,500 characters (around 1.5 kilobytes) in main body text (ignoring infoboxes, categories, references, lists, and tables). This is a mandatory minimum; in practice, articles longer than 1,500 characters may still be rejected as too short, at the discretion of the selecting administrators.
cite their sources (these sources should be properly labelled; that is, not under an "External links" header); and
be no more than five days old (former redirects, stubs, or other short articles that have been expanded fivefold or more within the last five days are acceptable).
Articles on living individuals must be carefully checked to ensure that no unsourced or poorly sourced negative material is included. Articles and hooks which focus on negative aspects of living individuals should be avoided.
Articles with good references and citations are preferred.
To count the number of characters in a piece of text, you will need to use a JavaScript extension like User:Dr pda/prosesize.js (instructions on the talk page), a free website like this, or an external softwareprogram that has a character-counting feature. For example, if you are using Microsoft Word, select the text from the article page (or, in the case of "Did you know" nominations, this Talk page) – not the edit page containing Wikitext – then copy and paste it into a blank document. Click "Tools" ("Review" in Office 2007), then "Word Count", and note the "Characters (with spaces)" figure. Other word processing programs may have a similar feature. (The character counts indicated on "Revision history" pages are not accurate for DYK purposes as they include categories, infoboxes and similar text in articles, and comments and signatures in hooks on this page.)
Suggested facts (the 'hook') should be:
interesting to draw in a variety of readers,
short and concise (fewer than about 200 characters, including spaces),
suitably and freely (PD, GFDL, CC etc) licensed (NOT fair use) because the main page can only have freely-licensed pictures;
attractive and interesting, even at a very small (100px-wide) resolution;
already in the article; and
relevant to the article.
formatted as [[Image:image name |right|100x100px| Description]] and placed directly above the suggested fact.
Proposed lists should have two characteristics to be considered for DYK: (i) be a compilation of entries that are unlikely to have ever been compiled anywhere else (e.g. List of architectural vaults), and (ii) have 1,500+ character non-stub text that brings out interesting, relational, and referenced facts from the compiled list that may not otherwise be obvious but for the compilation.
Please sign the nomination, giving due credit to other editors if relevant. For example:
*... that (text)? -- new article by [[User]]; Nom by ~~~~
*... that (text)? -- new article self-nom by ~~~~
*... that (text)? -- new article by [[User]] and ~~~~
*... that (text)? -- Article expanded fivefold by [[User]]; Nom by ~~~~
*... that (text)? -- Article expanded fivefold and self-nom by ~~~~
*... that (text)? -- Article expanded fivefold by [[User]] and ~~~~
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|August 27}} Thanks, ~~~~
If you want to confirm that an article is ready to be placed on a later update, or that there is an issue with the article or hook, you may use the following symbols (optional) to point the issues out:
Symbol
Code
Ready for DYK?
Description
[[Image:Symbol confirmed.svg|18px]]
Yes
No problems, ready for DYK
[[Image:Symbol question.svg|18px]]
Query
An issue needs to be clarified before the article's eligibility can be determined
[[Image:Symbol possible vote.svg|18px]]
Maybe
Article is currently ineligible but may only need some minor work to fix.
[[Image:Symbol delete vote.svg|18px]]
No
Article is either completely ineligible, or else requires considerable work before becoming eligible
2024-08-27T00:00:00Z
Backlogged?
This page often seems to be backlogged. If the DYK template has not been updated for substantially more than 6 hours, it may be useful to attract the attention of one of the administrators who regularly updates the template. See the page Wikipedia:Did you know/Admins for a list of administrators who have volunteered to help with this project.
Agree that this "despite" sounds odd - what does the first part of this sentence have to do at all with the second part? Has this sort of comparison been made in any independent WP:RS/WP:V sources - or is this conclusion being made for the first time in this sentence? Seems to be pushing something. Cirt (talk) 09:13, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
nomination withdrawn -Sorry. Although 5,000 to 10,000 is the real figure there is no way to sift out the inflated estimates. My point was that the church made a big public impact with very few people. Steve Dufour (talk) 00:35, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Some oppose all multi-sentence hooks, but if there is a multi-sentence hook, then the question mark belongs after the first sentence because of the implied "Did you know...". I put that in the rules a couple months ago. Art LaPella (talk) 20:47, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I know this is a bit unconventional, but since it's an important book and two famous and important literary figures I thought I'd be bold and see what others thought. --JayHenry (talk) 23:18, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I was once a great science fiction fan and I've never even heard of this book. Also, one of your refs is entitled "Hubbard hot-author status called illusion", which doesn't sound like they are about to heap the guy with praise. Hubbard is usually regarded as a hack writer in SF, so I am kind of suprised by this claim. Have you actually read these articles yourself? Gatoclass (talk) 06:56, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I have, and even that particular article that you refer to does acknowledge that this particular novel is seen as a classic in the Golden Age of Science Fiction genre. Feel free to check the cites - I did use one or two press releases but really only for basic info like publication re-release dates. Every single sentence is backed up to multipleWP:RS/WP:V sources. Cirt (talk) 07:02, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
On request from Cirt I just took a look, and everything seems fine to me. I don't have access to the offline sources, but I trust him to not make it up—I didn't have any WTF moments while reading over it. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 07:50, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Assertions of "early" or "late" require dates in order to be meaningful. I inserted the publishing dates from the article. --Wetman (talk) 19:16, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Article by PHG (talk·contribs) according to edit history. Not sure if 1688 is the appropriate name for this Siamese item. The Gregorian calendar was unlikely to be in use by the locals. "1688" was probably only used by historians from the West. What's the local name for this event? --74.13.130.46 (talk) 05:52, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I posted the question on PHG (talk·contribs)'s talk page. The name derives from western accounts such as 1688: Revolution in Siam. The Memoir of Father De Bèze,S.J. by E. W. Hutchinson, Three Military Accounts Of The 1688 'Revolution' In Siam by Lieutenant General Desfarges, De La Touche, and J. V. des Verquains, Witnesses to a Revolution: Siam 1688 Edited and translated by Michael Smithies. I'll add that Michael Smithies is an honorary member of the Siam Society Under Royal Patronage. The last book I mentioned is available through their website.--Work permit (talk) 15:47, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm pretty sure the monk will object to the use of the verb "create", as only (his) God can create! Try "established" or "developed". --74.13.130.46 (talk) 05:56, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
First, the monk is dead. Second, he created this breed from other breeds just in the same way that art is created or a house is built. You take the things "god created" and combine or alter them to create something new. It's not a religious offense. Third, who cares? This is an encyclopedia, not a religious oligarchy. VanTucky19:21, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
... that the Dead PlaneEP is one of five limited edition singles and EPs released on five different labels by No Age on the same day, March 26, 2007?
Alt: ... that of the 500 copies of No Age's vinylEPDead Plane, 400 were black vinyl and 100 were beige vinyl? This one has a steadier source, but the other hook is more interesting.
This article was started on the 31st (but wasn't over 1,500 characters until 6/2), but I'm nominating it for today anyway. EnjoiNico and myself have worked one-then-the-other on it since then. So it's both a new and expanded article! BobAmnertiopsisChitChat Me!03:09, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Who nominated this? Also, article looks like it may not satisfy notability standards (all primary sources, and the articles on the various members of the board of supervisors also look rather non-notable too). BuddingJournalist08:48, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
i nominated it, sorry i forgot to sign it. not all the sources are primary actually, check again. secondary sources where largely unavailable. the board members are irrelevant as they are not up for nomination. on a side note i fail to see how county supervisors could possibly be irrelevant, mayors are not, neither are city council members, especially in one of the richest most powerful counties in the nation and world. san francisco county board of supervisors all have articles.SuperSuperBoi (talk) 10:41, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The 2nd alternate hook is not currently mentioned in the article. If there's any place for the information, I can provide the citation. (Actually, it's already in the article: "Meyers, Joe. "These 2 winners are full of fun and substance", Connecticut Post, August 1, 2005."). –Black Falcon(Talk)23:47, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
... that Portland, Oregon's 140-mile long greenway system, the 40 Mile Loop, is far from complete though it was designed in 1903, but considered one of the most creative and resourceful greenway projects in the country? (new article, self) —EncMstr (talk) 09:12, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
... that the Jews of the Byzantine Empire enjoyed a unique legal status superior to other religious minorities, but inferior to Christians, because they were a "living testament" to the victory of Christianity?
I may be misreading it, but doesn't the actual intro say the opposite? ... The peasant retained ownership of his property, including land, but owed taxes and levies imposed by the noble. ... Is something missing? Autodidactyl (talk) 10:42, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The intro is giving the basic setup, that the peasant retained ownership while owing taxes. The hook comes from A series of privileges by the Grand Dukes (by Sigismund Kęstutaitis in 1434, Casimir IV Jagiellon in 1447, Alexander Jagiellon in 1492, Sigismund I the Old in 1507) released veldamai from their taxes to the state. The hook is about these historical events in 1447, 1492 and 1507. Vishnava talk 13:35, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Autodidactyl confuses 2 different taxes, as I did when I first studied this. The article explains: "... they owed taxes both to the state ... and their local noble. A series of privileges ... released veldamai from their taxes to the state." Art LaPella (talk) 20:47, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As I've already pointed out on the article talkpage, much of the sourcing for this article seems to rest on a web forum, although contributors on that forum do seem to refer to a book.David Underdown (talk) 11:19, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
the article has now been fairly extensively referenced (including the exemplary WW1 Modelers forum) and is currently rated B class. Autodidactyl (talk) 07:00, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I relied on a published source and as best I could researched the material (note the mention of holdings at MSU). While somewhat obscure this is an important part of the history of collectibles in terms of dealing with fraud and other growing pains. If you are adament I will remove the weblinks you object to, although I find your objections petty. I have been a comic book collector since 1975 and these are the most "reliable" sources I could find. It is nice to work hard to create an entry that illuminates and then have a snarky response. Dgabbard (talk) 17:30, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about the last message, I came across as a bit grumpy. I created an external links section and put the links there, and pulled the quote by Keller. Hope that addresses some of the concerns.Dgabbard (talk) 20:21, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I understand your feelings, its natural to be miffed at criticism of your hard work. I think we should wait for another DYK examiner like Daniel Case or Olaf Davis to give their opinion. As I said in the first place, I just started this work so its possible that I'm mistaken, although I don't think so. Vishnava talk 16:59, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thought I felt my ears burning. I hope I don't give the impression of being some sort of venerable DYK expert!
I think Frantz's book is fine as a reference. Yes multiple references are preferable, but they're not always available and we do accept DYKs without them. I do agree with Vishnava though that the external links are not needed. In an article on the book a review makes sense, but a review of a book that's just used as a source is too peripheral for inclusion. The link to the book's website is a bit close to sites that primarily exist to sell products or services. I'm not saying it's spam, but the main purpose it seems to be serving is letting people get hold of the book. Since the article includes the publication details and (now) ISBN, they shouldn't have any trouble doing that without it.
Ah, Ok. When you said "bring in more reliable sources", I thought you were objecting to a single-referenced DYK. In that case we are in agreement. Olaf Davis | Talk07:52, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The hook is not clear about time. Do you mean an advisor for the Syrians turns out to be a former flying ace? The old guy came out of retirement to shoot down 103 enemy aircraft? Or what? --74.14.19.91 (talk) 06:02, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like most of the expansion was done on the 3rd instead of the 29th. So shouldn't it should be listed in June 3rd section, not May 29th?--293.xx.xxx.xx (talk) 06:55, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I guess. Depends where you want to set the start point. I'll have to count it up but I suspect it is over 5x since June 3rd too. I just wanna leave it where it has most chance of gettin' picked is all...Cheers, Casliber (talk·contribs) 10:50, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not the one that makes the final cut, but best thing I would say is, move it to the June 3rd section (seeing the bulk of your edits were done on that day compared to your two minor edits on the 29th), that way you have at least a couple of days for it to "settle" abit just in case you need to do some tweaking or someone has a concern about your hook. --293.xx.xxx.xx (talk) 21:46, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Lengthen and reference good, but some might have a problem of putting an "ad" on the front page. Not me, really, but there might be some issue from others here.--BedfordPray02:57, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure what the issue is: the citation clearly references page 184. However, I've added the two relevant paragraphs from the source to the citation. —EncMstr (talk) 04:50, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]