Template talk:Did you know

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from T:TDYK)
Jump to: navigation, search
"Did you know...?"
Discussion WT:DYK
Rules WP:DYK
Supplementary rules WP:DYKSG
Noms (awaiting approval) WP:DYKN
Reviewing guide WP:DYKR
Noms (approved) WP:DYKNA
Preps & Queues T:DYK/Q
Currently on Main Page
Main Page errors WP:ERRORS
Archive of DYKs WP:DYKA

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


TOC:    Go to bottom     Go to top
Count of DYK Hooks
Section # of Hooks # Verified
November 18 1
November 24 1
December 2 1
December 4 1
December 5 1
December 6 1
December 8 1
December 12 1
December 14 1
December 16 1
December 17 1
December 18 2
December 19 1
December 20 2
December 21 1
December 22 1
December 23 2
December 25 2
December 28 1
January 1 2
January 2 1
January 5 1 1
January 6 1
January 8 1
January 9 2
January 10 1
January 12 1
January 13 2
January 14 1 1
January 17 2 1
January 20 2 1
January 23 3
January 24 2
January 25 3 2
January 26 2
January 27 5 1
January 28 1
January 29 3 3
January 30 3
January 31 4 2
February 1 2 2
February 2 4 1
February 3 7 3
February 4 6 1
February 5 7 2
February 6 3 1
February 7 2 1
February 8 5 4
February 9 9 6
February 10 12 8
February 11 10 8
February 12 12 9
February 13 7 4
February 14 6 4
February 15 9 3
February 16 4 2
February 17 4 1
February 18 8 4
February 19 12 7
February 20 8 1
February 21 1
February 22 1
Total 205 84
Last updated 11:13, 22 February 2017 UTC
Current time is 11:38, 22 February 2017 UTC [refresh]

Instructions for nominators[edit]

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

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

To nominate an article[edit]

Read these instructions completely before proceeding.

For simplified instructions, see User:Rjanag/Quick DYK 2.

Create the nomination subpage.

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

Write the nomination.

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

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

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

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

How to review a nomination[edit]

Any editor who was not involved in writing/expanding or nominating an article may review it by checking to see that the article meets all the DYK criteria (long enough, new enough, no serious editorial or content issues) and the hook is cited. Editors may also alter the suggested hook to improve it, suggest new hooks, or even lend a hand and make edits to the article to which the hook applies so that the hook is supported and accurate. For a more detailed discussion of the DYK rules and review process see the supplementary guidelines and the WP:Did you know/Reviewing guide.

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

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

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

    If you are the first person to comment on the nomination, there will be a line :* <!-- REPLACE THIS LINE TO WRITE FIRST COMMENT, KEEPING :* --> showing you where you should put the comment.
  • Save the page.

If there is any problem or concern about a nomination, please consider notifying the nominator by placing {{subst:DYKproblem|Article|header=yes|sig=yes}} on the nominator's talk page.

Frequently asked questions[edit]


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

Where is my hook?[edit]

If you can't find the nomination you submitted to this nominations page, it may have been approved and is on the approved nominations page waiting to be promoted. It could also have been added to one of the prep areas, promoted from prep to a queue, or is on the main page.

If the nominated hook is in none of those places, then the nomination has probably been rejected. Such a rejection usually only occurs if it was at least a couple of weeks old and had unresolved issues for which any discussion had gone stale. If you think your nomination was unfairly rejected, you can query this on the DYK discussion page, but as a general rule such nominations will only be restored in exceptional circumstances.

Search archived DYK nomination discussions[edit]

Instructions for other editors[edit]

How to promote an accepted hook[edit]

  • See Wikipedia:Did you know/Preparation areas for full instructions.
  • Hooks that have been approved are located on the approved nominations page.
  • In one window, open the DYK nomination subpage of the hook you would like to promote.
  • In another window, open the prep set you intend to add the hook to.
  • In the prep set...
    • Paste the hook into the hook area (be sure to not paste in that that)
    • Paste the credit information ({{DYKmake}} and/or {{DYKnom}}) into the credits area.
    • Add an edit summary, e.g. "Promoted [[Jane Fonda]]", preview, and save
  • Back on DYK nomination page...
    • change {{DYKsubpage to {{subst:DYKsubpage
    • change |passed= to |passed=yes
    • Add an edit summary, e.g. "Promoted to Prep 3", preview, and save

How to remove a rejected hook[edit]

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

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

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

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

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


Older nominations[edit]

Articles created/expanded on November 18[edit]

3D Fold Evolution

  • ... that a growing anticline can force a stream to abandon its channel to form wind gaps that are progressively lower? Source: from the Keller reference "Geomorphic criteria to determine direction of lateral propagation of reverse faulting and folding." Hook si from :" Multiple wind gaps can be formed from a single river if there is continuous lateral fold growth and the river keeps being deflected, by abandoning its earlier channel and forming a new one around the outside of the developing fold" in the Wind gaps section.

Moved to mainspace by Jeffreyfung (talk). Nominated by Graeme Bartlett (talk) at 06:06, 21 November 2016 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg New and long enough. Insufficient in-line citations, with some paragraphs going fully without any cites. This article needs to be wikified a good deal, as it looks extremely unappealing visually due to the placement, size, and frequency of images as well as the unusual formatting for headings, etc. At parts, this reads almost like an essay, especially in the case study portion (which is likely not necessary at all). The hook appears to be accurate, but due to the writing of the article, it's hard to tell where exactly this information appears in the article. After correcting the more general issues, please direct a reviewer to the specific sentence or sentences in the article that support the hook. I have access to the source cited for the hook if anyone needs me to review it. It does seem to support the information, but I'm happy to check again. ~ Rob13Talk 07:26, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
Deflected stream schematic.gif
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg I am sticking the references on, and will make the hook statement more apparent. I have rewritten the statement that supports the hook. I am also trying an image to see if it looks good at the small size. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 03:29, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg @Graeme Bartlett: This still needs substantial wikification and editing. The images (of which there are many) are huge and jut into the page awkwardly at weird sizes. Large sections are written like an essay, and there are many technical mistakes with the writing (using 2 instead of two, etc). The little things add up quickly here. Additionally, there's a clean-up tag relating to categories on the page, and we can't run any DYKs with clean-up tags. This is far closer to being a fail than a pass. I won't fail this so as to give you both a chance to fix things and a chance to get a second opinion, but these things must be fixed before putting this up for review again or I imagine the next person will fail it. ~ Rob13Talk 00:08, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
  • I have removed the cleanup tags, as they were useless. Anyone can add better categories if they want, but its not a problem as it stands. Also I have done wikification adding links, and appropriate bolding. I also changed 2 to two etc. I am shrinking and moving images currently. Some of these are WP:MOS complience issues, that are not actually part of WP:DYK rules. The idea is not to set the bar too high for new editors. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:45, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Agreed, but we do need a minimum level of presentation in order to push this to the main page. ~ Rob13Talk 23:58, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on November 24[edit]

James Oakley (politician)

Created by EdChem (talk). Self-nominated at 10:27, 3 December 2016 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Interesting hooks, but the article has a merge tag on it. Yoninah (talk) 21:42, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • @Yoninah: The shooting of Benjamin Marconi article (the proposed merge target) also has a merge tag on it, and was run at DYK a few days ago. That generate one new !vote on the merge proposal, an oppose. I think that merging a biography into an article on the shooting murder of which he only commented would be a BLP violation. I do recognise that naming Oakley in these hooks might be a problem, and so note that they could be reworded as "an American politician" or "an American County Judge" (which is his title, though it would be controversial to use as his position as County Judge is much more a political role than a judicial one). Added ALT3 in this format, supported by Huffington Post article. Note that next PEC board meeting is on 17 Jan, so more news on the topic of ALT2 and article edits will be likely in the next few days. EdChem (talk) 00:23, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg This may indeed be this individual's principal claim to notoriety but doesn't it run afoul of the same BLP don't-be-negative issues as this review? — LlywelynII 13:44, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 2[edit]

Grand Matsu Temple

  • ... that Tainan's Grand Matsu Temple was built as the palace of a Ming prince fleeing the Qing conquest of China?
    • ALT1:... that five concubines of the Prince of Ningjing hanged themselves in the rear hall of Tainan's Grand Matsu Temple?
    • ALT2:... that Shi Lang convinced the Kangxi Emperor to convert a Ming palace into the Grand Matsu Temple to win support for the Qing conquest of Taiwan?
    • ALT3:... that Tainan's Grand Matsu Temple honors the deified form of a medieval Chinese shamaness?
    • ALT4:... that Tainan's Grand Matsu Temple was the first in China to honor Mazu as the Empress of Heaven?
    • ALT5:... that Tainan's Grand Matsu Temple was almost privatized under Japanese rule but was spared at the last minute?
    • ALT6:... that singles looking for love in the Taiwanese city of Tainan visit the altar of the Old Man under the Moon at the Grand Matsu Temple?
  • Reviewed: Will do Tank steering systems
  • Comment: @Reviewers: Don't worry. You only need to verify the hook(s) you are most interested in. If it's ALT3, I can bring over cites from the Mazu article if necessary to support the point.

Created by LlywelynII (talk). Self-nominated at 02:46, 6 December 2016 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg The article is new enough and long enough. It does not seem to have copyright violations. It uses inline citations. I assumed good faith for the offline sources. But the "Tainan City Guide" source does not seem very reliable. According to this page, "This blog is a one-man operation done during my spare time. I have no editors or fact-checkers." The content citing the "Tainan City Guide" source needs to be removed or edited to use citations to reliable sources. The image is freely licensed. The nominator says "Will do", so the QPQ requirement will be met when they do the review. The article needs some more work to be eligible. Gulumeemee (talk) 07:38, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg With respect, you have confused WP:RS with WP:BLACKLIST. You're absolutely right that you shouldn't use a hook sourced to something that isn't up to WP:RS standards; that's part of the DYK process. All the same, we don't just blank information because the source isn't perfect. If there's any actual material you find questionable, I'm more than happy to deal with it but it's better to have some source than no source and it's better to have some information than no information.
    You're welcome to find a well-sourced hook or to hand the review off to another reviewer. — LlywelynII 08:39, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
  • I don't understand what you mean by "confused WP:RS with WP:BLACKLIST". The blacklist is a list of spammers that prevents external links from being added. While it may sometimes be acceptable to have unreliably sourced material that is not related to living persons, I don't think that is acceptable in articles for DYK. WP:DYKRULES states "Nominations should be rejected if an inspection reveals that they are not based on reliable sources". I did not say that the material must be blanked; I said that they need to be removed or edited so that it is based on reliable sources. Gulumeemee (talk) 05:16, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
  • That rule is to keep us from having nonsense articles on Trump's endorsement by the pope, not to require editors to blank perfectly valid information irrelevant to the hook to process the nomination, followed by adding it back once the process is complete. If the information being cited were germane to a hook or dubious, you'd have a point; but it's not and you really don't. That said, it's an honest mistake and you're more than welcome to stand by your guns and claim it as a QPQ. — LlywelynII 22:16, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
  • @LlywelynII: After thinking about it, this is my opinion. It is OK if you don't agree. Wikipedia:Verifiability requires content to be attributable to reliable sources. Even if something is true, if it cannot be attributed to a reliable source, it should not be in Wikipedia. The DYK rules force you to prove that the content really is verifiable. Blanking the content is not the only way to adhere to the rules. You can also remove the citations to unreliable sources and add citations to reliable sources. It may be true that English sources on this location are mostly informal, but per WP:NONENG, while English sources are preferred, reliable sources do not necessarily have to be in English. Gulumeemee (talk) 09:31, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
  • I got it that it's your opinion that you look down on the source. WP:IAR trumps obnoxious rule thumping and pushes us back to thinking about why the rule exists. It's there to remove bullshit. Howevermuch you dislike the source, none of the items cited to it are actually dubious and noone (at all) is actually well-served by removing the information or cites to where it came from. If other editors come by and think that I'm wrong about that, I'll blank the material for the DYK process and add it back later. In any case, you really don't have to keep repeating yourself. It's a good-faith mistake and you're welcome to use this for QPQ purposes. — LlywelynII 20:13, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
  • This conversation continues on my talk page. For the record, I used strongish language above but absolutely understand Gulumeemee's GOODFAITH objections. I happen to think it's not productive here (few English sources, non-dubious information, non-POVy reporting by someone who visited the temple and is presumably repeating on-site information) but am perfectly willing to remove it if editors feel GLMM's objections are well-taken in this case. The article is still long enough, removing all of the material from that source. — LlywelynII 04:19, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Assuming the admins don't really need me to blank three lines of text of perfectly valid info from a quasi-reliable source—which I can do to process the nomination but consider a disservice to our readers and not an improvement—this still needs a new reviewer. — LlywelynII 22:16, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg This nomination has been lingering too long. I see the discussion above about the reliability of one of the sources but think the matter not a deal-breaker. I find ALT1 much the most interesting hook, and the hook facts are confirmed by other sources used in the article. The article meets the criteria of newness, length, neutrality and policy. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:46, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg LlywelynII, I'm really surprised by how you berated the first reviewer. I, too, would remove a wordpress source as non-RS. I added a book citation for ALT1, but I don't see anything in the article about the hanging taking place in a rear hall of the temple; you wrote that they hung themselves in the palace bedroom. Yoninah (talk) 01:26, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Well, reread what was written and none of it is terribly surprising on either side, except for how you came to consider respecting the first reviewer's good faith objections "berating". Thanks for your own once-over and the additional citation. As the article clearly states the palace is the temple; its bedroom is its rear hall; but you're right that if that's our hook I should specifically note and source that aspect of it. On it. — LlywelynII 02:24, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 4[edit]

Charu Mihir Sarkar, Bhabatosh Soren

Created by Soman (talk). Self-nominated at 04:32, 5 December 2016 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg These two articles are new enough and long enough. The hook facts are supported by inline citations, the articles are neutral and I detected no copyright issues. As the three ministers all resigned on the same day, there was presumably a reason for this. Why did they resign? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:38, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
  • There were multiple reasons, but all boil down to the climate of disagreement between Bangla Congress and CPI(M). Bangla Congress had 4 ministers in the Second United Front Cabinet, including the Chief Minister. On Feb 19 these three ministers resigned, on orders from their party. A few days later the Chief Minister resigned as well, a move that brought the end of the cabinet. --Soman (talk) 12:17, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol voting keep.svg It would be helpful to add that information to the articles. All DYK criteria met. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:23, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg This looks like a good candidate for a slot on February 19. @Soman: if you are able to source the part about the party ordering them to resign, and the chief minister resigning too, we could write a more interesting hook:
  • ALT1: ... that on February 19, 1970, the Bangla Congress ordered Charu Mihir Sarkar, Bhabatosh Soren, and one other minister to resign from the West Bengal cabinet, and a few days later the chief minister resigned too? Yoninah (talk) 21:12, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
  • I'm ok with ALT1. --Soman (talk) 19:20, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
  • I have to shorten it to under 200 char:
  • ALT1a: ... that on February 19, 1970, the Bangla Congress ordered Charu Mihir Sarkar, Bhabatosh Soren, and another minister to resign from the West Bengal cabinet, and then the chief minister resigned too? Yoninah (talk) 21:12, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
  • But you haven't added or sourced the last fact in the hook, about the chief minister resigning too. @Soman:. Yoninah (talk) 20:26, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 5[edit]

Han Zhuo

  • ... that China's Xia dynasty was overthrown for a time by the archer Houyi and his advisor Han Zhuo?
    • ALT1:... that, according to Chinese legend, Houyi's wife conspired to overthrow her husband with Han Zhuo, who then tried to feed the archer's body to his sons?
    • ALT2:... that Chinese legends state Houyi's wife pushed his advisor Han Zhuo to overthrow her husband?
    • ALT3:... that Chinese stories hold that Han Zhuo overthrew the archer Houyi only to be overthrown himself by the Xia?
    • ALT4:... that Chinese legend holds that Han Zhuo tried to feed the archer Houyi's body to his sons and killed them when they refused to eat it?
    • ALT5:... that, in Chinese legend, the sons of the archer Houyi were killed for refusing Han Zhuo’s command to eat their father's body?
    • ALT6:... that traditional accounts of the Xia dynasty state that the archer Houyi left day-to-day administration to Han Zhuo, who then seduced his wife and usurped his kingdom?
    • ALT7:... that Han Zhuo was legendary Chinese advisor who usurped his king's throne, seduced his wife, and executed his children when they refused to eat their father's body?
    • ALT8:... that the Chinese usurper Han Zhuo’s son Ao is still worshipped as a culture hero responsible for the invention of the ship?
  • Reviewed: Will do Mapping of Venus
  • Comment: @Reviewers: Don't worry. You only need to check up on the hook(s) you're most interested in seeing promoted.
    I'd kind of like the hook to obliquely note that western scholars don't really think the Xia existed in anything like the way it's presented in traditional Chinese history, but I'm open to using whichever phrasing you like best from any of the hooks.

Created by LlywelynII (talk). Self-nominated at 05:13, 7 December 2016 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg A QPQ review appears to be needed before this can move forward. North America1000 20:21, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Well, the review can still happen now. I'll get the QPQ in the next day or two. I had a stack to get through. Done. — LlywelynII 06:08, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed now that QPQ has been submitted. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:42, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg This article is new enough and long enough. There is a "clarification needed" tag that you seem to have added yourself, and the single sentence lead is sure to attract a "Lead too short" tag unless you expand it. The hooks are much of a muchness; I like ALT4 and ALT5 best. The article is neutral and I detected no policy issues. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:33, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
@LlywelynII: If you were to respond to these two points, I could wind up this review. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:56, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Which two points? The clarification tag should stay: If I could clarify the point, I already would have but the source I found didn't use Pinyin or even provide the Chinese character. Assuming it's in Wade, "Kuei" can be either of Gui or Kui, each of which comes in four tones and several hundred separate characters. Just be thankful I was able to find the right Chinese and links for the rest of the names. I expanded the lead a bit more, but it's a few paragraphs on a legendary figure. The lead captures what we realistically do know about the guy in the sources I found.

    Between ALT4 & 5? Same basic idea but I suppose ALT4 is worded a bit more cleanly. — LlywelynII 10:23, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 6[edit]

Susan Dynarski

  • ... that economist Susan Dynarski, who advocates for simplifying the US Federal Student Aid application process, was the first member of her family to attend college? Source: “My dad was a high school dropout. And I’m a professor. I’ve testified before Congress, and I’ve gone to the White House, and I write for the New York Times, and all of this would have been completely unimaginable for my mother and my father. So education can be transformative,” Dynarski begins. However, Dynarski clearly recognizes how unusual her own experience is, citing “enormous disparities by income—by accident of birth—in who goes to college.” A huge barrier to college for low-income and first-generation students is the FAFSA, or Free Application for Federal Student Aid, with 108 questions and, as Dynarski says, “dozens of pages of arcane instructions.” Through extensive research, Dynarski has found that two simple questions could replace the FAFSA with minimal impact on aid calculations: 1) What is your income, and 2) What is your family size. Both questions, she explains, are already included in IRS tax forms, eliminating the need for a complicated form that presents a formidable barrier that stands “between low-income kids and the education they deserve.” Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy News Source2: "Susan Dynarski, a U-M professor of education, public policy, and economics at the Ford School of Public Policy shares her experience as a first-generation college student..."[4]
  • review: I am exempt from the QPQ requirement because this was my first DYK nomination.

Created by EAWH (talk). Self-nominated at 20:37, 7 December 2016 (UTC).

  • Note: This is minor and hopefully can be fixed, but the article is presently ineligible because the short (separate) paragraph stating "She is married and has two children." does not have an inline citation, per D2 of the DYK Supplementary guidelines. North America1000 20:10, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
  • I have removed the short paragraph without inline citation from the article. EAWH (talk) 02:21, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed. North America1000 03:17, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Long enough, nominated in timely fashion, no QPQ needed (2nd DYK). Hook is interesting, sufficiently short, neutral and not negative. However, I found a number of problems. Earwig found that substantial parts of the article are copied from a range of sources. Only one of the references in the article (ref 7) is independent of Dynarski & the institution she works for so assessing its neutrality is difficult. The hook might need tweaking; there's no reference stating she's primarily an economist and she seems to work primarily in education policy, and the sources aren't 100% clear on her being "the first member of her family to attend college" though she does say she is a "first-generation student". Also the quotation you give here in DYK is not cited immediately adjacent to the fact in the article, which is a requirement.
  • Other points not required by DYK: Much of the lead should instead be in the body. Some of the facts in the infobox need referencing. The infobox could do with slimming down; the students field is intended for notable students (ie people with articles or who should have them), the awards for highly notable awards (others can go in the text), the third website has no content. You could add a few (3–5 is good) "Selected publications" with some of the ones with high citations here. Hope all this is not too intimidating; Dynarski is obviously a notable and interesting subject, and I hope the article can be reworked to feature on DYK. Espresso Addict (talk) 08:49, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for the useful comments! I think I have now addressed these issues:

  • I have rewritten most of the sentences that Earwig highlighted as potential copyright violations; the remaining sentences contain items such as journal titles, which cannot be paraphrased.
  • The references state that Dynarski has a PhD in economics and is a professor of economics, so I believe it is reasonable to call her an economist.
  • I have added another source to address the "first-generation college student" concern
  • I have commented out the unsourced information in the infobox and added the selected works, as suggested EAWH (talk) 02:14, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
Symbol possible vote.svg There is still way too much use of the exact phraseology of the sources, not just one source, but several, see here. Sentences such as "Dynarski's research focuses on the effectiveness of charter schools, the optimal design of financial aid, the price elasticity of private school attendance, the relationship between postsecondary schooling and labor market outcomes, and the effect of high school and community college reforms on academic achievement and educational attainment" should be written in your own words. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:14, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
  • I have rewritten additional sentences to reduce similarity with the sources. The sentences that earwig continues to highlight involve institution names and journal titles, and these cannot be paraphrased.EAWH (talk) 21:27, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 8[edit]


  • ... that Queen Furra executed men for being bald, old and short.

Created by Abeshababe (talk) and Andrew Davidson (talk). Nominated by Andrew Davidson (talk) at 01:30, 18 December 2016 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Article is long enough and within policy. Hook is short enough. Two issues:
Article was created 10 days before nomination. Day before nom, expanded from 780 to 3160 characters / 129 words to 556 words. Neither is five fold expansion (4.05 and 4.31 respectively). Notifying @Andrew Davidson: additional expansion is needed.
Per source for the hook, this claim is from legend - two men escaped by "inventing platform shoes" and "inventing wigs". Hook should be rewritten to clarify this is folklore, not documented fact. Argento Surfer (talk)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Additionally, striking ALT0 as unsupported by its source. Even once you change the hook to fix the grammar (done) and to note that this was legend (done), there's nothing in the source mentioning age at all. — LlywelynII 15:52, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
  • ALT1 ... that Ethiopian legend holds that Queen Furra executed men for being bald, old, or short?
  • ALT2 ... that the legendary Queen Furra executed men for being bald, old and short?
  • I have amended LlywelynII's action as it seems better to present alternate hooks separately so that the history of proposals is clear. The issue about age not being in the source is incorrect as the comment above quotes the source directly, "Then she ordered executions, particularly, of all the short and old bald men." LlywelynII's suggested hook is shown as ALT1 and my preferred revision is ALT2 as hooks should be short and succinct. I have done some expansion of the article since the review by Argento Surfer but still have more to do; Christmas has been a distraction. I am keen that we get a result here as the article was started by a new editor during the BBC editathon and it seems good to exhibit the work from such events. Andrew D. (talk) 18:21, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Restoring grammatical corrections. (Seriously, don't remove those.)
Striking ALT0—as amended—as a violation of DONTLIE (she's a legendary figure, not a historical one); striking ALT0, ALT1, ALT2 as still unsupported by the article or source.
I know this isn't your fault; it's mostly a result of bad policy. We should not be listing citations in the templates here at all. It confuses you as to what's actually in the article, which is the only thing that we're actually concerned with. The one you're giving here is not in the article, Wordpress blogs are not actually reliable sources, and your claim (as already discussed) is not supported by the actual source in the article. (This one.) It says she killed bald men and short men; your own source doesn't claim she killed old men who weren't bald, so I'm not sure why you're so hung up on this. Drop out the "old" and move on with your life and this nomination. — LlywelynII 15:51, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
Reminder to Mssrs Shababe, Davidson, and Igott to let me know when there's a usable hook here. — LlywelynII 13:32, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
  • ALT3 ... that Queen Furra was reportedly styled the "Queen of the Women" rather than "Queen of Sidama" due to her partisanship? Source: "On this basis of her partisanship approach, she was deemed as mentu biilo {'Queen of the Women') and not the 'Queen of Sidama'" Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 15:13, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg New enough (some stretching of guideline is allowable given queue length); long enough; within policy (neutral, cited, no close paraphrasing; acceptable use of cited quotations); QPQ not required for first-time editor; I have proposed two new hooks (above) which are both stated and cited. Someone else will need to re-review to confirm the new hooks. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 16:08, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Thanks to Mary for picking this up and suggesting some new hooks. ALT3 is too stilted for my taste but ALT4 is more promising. I still reckon that the original hook is quite good though and so will continue to advocate for that. I have edited the article to ensure that there's an inline citation for it, along with the links provided above. Andrew D. (talk) 17:26, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • I don't see why this should not go ahead with a variation of ALT0. The main source mentions that she ordered the execution of "all the old and short bald men". It's not clear whether being old, short or bald was sufficient in itself, but if that phrase were quoted in the article and hook, it would get over the ambiguity. The other source seems less reliable (the high-heeled shoes and wigs don't impress me). Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:58, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
  • I think Mary Mark Ockerbloom was invoking WP:DYKSG#D9, which allows some leeway for late nominations if there isn't a major backlog in the number of hooks; in that case, three days would be allowable, and the article was 2615 prose characters at that point, well over the 1500 minimum. However, as there's been a major backlog for many months, and there were in the neighborhood of 300 active nominations back on December 18, I doubt I'd be lenient for that reason, but you could decide differently, LlywelynII. The article's size prior to Andrew Davidson's expansion, which began on December 11, was 762 prose characters according to DYKcheck, meaning that the article needs to be 3810 prose characters assuming it needs to meet the 5x expansion requirement. It's currently 2971 prose characters by DYKcheck's count, so another 839 prose characters are wanted.
I have taken the liberty of adjusting the credits: adding categories is not enough for a "make" credit, nor is adding wikilinks and a "citation needed" tag, nor supplying said citation. Since Andrew Davidson expanded the article from stub length to nearly four times its original length, I've given him a DYKmake rather than a DYKnom; he's done a great deal more work than the original creator. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:43, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Well, yeah, a months-long backlog so long that the newest nominations aren't even displaying is certainly no reason for a no-backlog exemption.

    It is an interesting topic and everyone appreciates the work that went into it, though, so I think a decent compromise is that if someone out of Mssrs Shababe, Gott, and Davidson (or maybe even Mr Surfer and Ms Ockerbloom) pushes this the rest of the way to a 5× by adding a few sourced paragraphs (Moonset's 837 characters) in the next week or two we do some D13 and WP:IAR handwaving and ignore the timeline. If Mr Davidson really preferred ALT0, it also gives him a chance to rephrase it to reflect the sources, as Cwm and I both proposed. (I think ALT4 is pleasantly enigmatic, myself.) — LlywelynII 02:36, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
  • I've added about 100 words and another source: it now counts as 3480 characters (629 words). Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 02:53, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Requiring the page to be 5x expanded as well as being new seemed like double jeopardy or a second shift but it is good that the article is still progressing. I have re-established contact with the journalist that I assisted at the editathon. I shan't involve her in this DYK nomination as it's too bureaucratic – rather like the BBC. But, as and when the item reaches the main page, I'll ping her to take a look at the outcome. As she has thousands of followers on Twitter, this may help the number of views we get. Andrew D. (talk) 08:07, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
  • No, [snip], the entire problem was that it was not new enough. Having someone (else) bring it to 5× despite the blown deadline was a second chance. Thanks for your help, Ms Ockerbloom. — LlywelynII 13:24, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
  • This has been knocking around for a long time. I propose that we accept that this article is eligible for DYK and go ahead with ALT1a. Could you give it a tick @LlywelynII:? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:43, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
  • ALT1a ... that Ethiopian legend holds that Queen Furra ordered the execution of men, particularly old and short bald ones?
  • ALT1a is unsatisfactory in a couple of ways. Firstly, the quote isn't the same as that provided originally above so it's not clear what is being quoted. Secondly, Furra was a Sidama queen and that people were not conquered by the Ethiopian empire until later. The main source talks about her as Sidama rather than Ethiopian. I suggest that we duck the issue of nationality as follows. Andrew D. (talk) 11:15, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
  • ALT1b ... that the legendary Queen Furra ordered the execution of men, particularly short and old bald ones?
  • Gimme a minute. — LlywelynII 10:51, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

    Symbol confirmed.svg ALT4 G2G. See above for the drama over timing but Ms Ockerbloom pitched in and we'll call it 5×; long enough (~3.5k elig. chars.); neutral, sourced, and Earwig finds minimal copyvio; ALT4 terse enough, intriguing, and sourced. ALT 1a/b are both mistaken in saying she ordered executions of some men, particularly including short and old bald ones: the sources state she specifically ordered the execution of the short and bald ones or the short and old bald ones. Both Cwm and Mr Davidson seem to have misunderstood the grammar of the second source. It's fine, though, since both ALT3 and 4 are fine. — LlywelynII 13:43, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg I don't accept LlywelynII's judgment on the grammatical point. As LlywelynII proposed hooks themself and has now started making personal attacks, they seem too involved to be getting the last word on this. Can we have an independent reviewer, please. Andrew D. (talk) 13:50, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
  • The high-handed rudeness started on your end, but—absolutely—apologies if you take git as a strong term instead of a mild one. I even linked the article discussing its rather mild nature, but everyone's different and I certainly appreciate your work bringing new articles in, even if not the tone you took w/r/t the rest of us. I'm fine with a second reviewer if wanted, though I don't think any of the ALTs were mine and it seems superfluous.

    The grammar issues are straightforward: as already covered, neither source in the article supports the idea she executed old men who were neither bald nor short. Simply use those adjectives instead. Similarly, one source says she ordered the execution of all men who were short or bald. The other says, "Then she ordered executions, particularly, of all the short and old bald men." The second comma makes the "particularly" refer to the entire sentence and limits the executions being discussed to the sorts of men who are listed and not to any other. — LlywelynII 14:32, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

    As such, restriking the ALTs above (again), but open—as always—to a rephrasing supported by the sources. Don't see the problem with simply using ALT4 instead, though the 2nd reviewer may feel otherwise. — LlywelynII 14:34, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
Calling someone a "rude git" is about a light year removed from a "mild term". Git, as you so conveniently linked, stands for "denoting an unpleasant, silly, incompetent, stupid, annoying, senile, elderly or childish person" That is not a 'mild' insult, but an egregious one. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 14:40, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
Welp, reread the article, which specifically describes it as a milder term of opprobrium. Again, it may be out of date and I have apologized for it being taken any more harshly than that, despite the lack of apology on the other end. This really isn't the place for an extended discussion of British manners and diction, though. You're welcome to continue to berate me on my talk page. — LlywelynII 14:44, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 12[edit]

Student Initiative Rahel

Coffee Ceremony (7926066672).jpg

Created by Urmelbeauftragter (talk). Self-nominated at 22:43, 17 December 2016 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg New enough, long enough. The article has a cleanup tag on it for too many primary source citations, and the tag seems reasonable given the sources. This must be addressed before promotion. Partially as a result of the sources, the article focuses quite a bit on how the organization views itself rather than how its covered by reliable secondary sources. Lots of mission statement stuff, etc. That needs to be reduced for this to be neutral. I haven't evaluated close paraphrasing because the sources are likely to change quite a bit before this is acceptable, so it makes more sense to check that in the future. First hook doesn't have a cite after the sentence supporting it. Second hook is sourced to foreign-language sources, so I'm unable to evaluate the sourcing. I noted that the article contradicts itself on the orphan's name (Rahel vs. Rachel). This should be corrected. Still pending a QPQ as well. The image is fine from a licensing standpoint, but it doesn't appear great at a small size and its content isn't connected to any of the hooks, so it probably shouldn't be used. ~ Rob13Talk 14:47, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
Thank you, the spelling "Rachel" was wrong. Her name is Rahel. Unfortunately there are less sources which are not from current or former members of the student initiative. So it seems to me there's nothing I can do for removing the cleanup tag. Perhaps I can do something in reducing the articles length. What do you mean with "First hook doesn't have a cite after the sentence supporting it."? What is a QPQ? I could only use pictures which were already on WP Commons so I believe I could not find a better one.--Urmelbeauftragter 20:21, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
It's not so easy to shorten the text for me. I will have a look on it in the next days.--Urmelbeauftragter 20:51, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
For DYK, the sentence supporting your hook needs to have a citation at the end of it (even if a supporting citation appears elsewhere). The sentence supporting the ALT0 hook you proposed is "It was in the context of a research project of the German Bishops' Conference (German: Deutsche Bischofskonferenz) in Adigrat in Tigray Region in northern Ethiopia.", so it needs a citation at the end. A QPQ is a quid-pro-quo; you're required to review one DYK nomination before your own is accepted. I just checked and you're exempt from that requirement because you have less than five DYK credits already, so don't worry about that for now. You don't have to use a picture either in your article or for the DYK, so I'd recommend not using one in this case. ~ Rob13Talk 06:10, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
The same citation was for the whole paragraph. Is there one needed for every sentence. I have added it a second time for this sentence.--Urmelbeauftragter 21:29, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
It's a rather silly rule specific to DYK; to make it easier for readers to find the reference supporting the fact appearing on our main page, we require a cite at the end of the sentence that contains the DYK hook's fact. You can remove the extra cite after this has run on the main page. Still pending some other changes, especially related to the cleanup tag. ~ Rob13Talk 14:47, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 14[edit]

Corruption in Ecuador

  • ... that after a Congresswoman was arrested for soliciting a bribe, Ecuador's president placed the blame on his opposition, claiming they hadn't done enough to combat corruption?
    • ALT1:... that a member of Ecuador's opposition party alleged that his country loses approximately $2 billion a year from corruption?
    • ALT2:... that Julian Assange had previously made revelations about corruption in Ecuador when seeking asylum in the country?
    • ALT3:... that Ecuador's state-owned oil company was at the center of alleged illegal oil shipments to China in exchange for credit and loans from the Chinese?
    • ALT4:... that in 2012 an Ecuadorean journalist was sentenced to three years in prison for reporting that Ecuador's president, Rafael Correa, had ordered soldiers to fire on civilians during a 2010 coup attempt?

Created by DaltonCastle (talk). Self-nominated at 18:25, 17 December 2016 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg This article is new enough and plenty long enough. I think all the hooks are sourced inline and the hook facts backed up by the sources. The article is neutral and I detected no copyright issues. I will leave the promoter to choose which hook to use (but I would choose ALT1, ALT2 or ALT3). Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:36, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg The article takes as its premise that Ecuador is corrupt, and goes from there. I have tagged the page for POV because no alternate opinions or rationales have been forwarded to guarantee neutrality. The article also suffers from simplistic topic sentences, like Corruption in Ecuador is a highly serious problem. and: Ecuador's police sector is awash in corruption. It would be best to quote the source when making sweeping indictments (e.g. "According to Human Rights Watch..."), in addition to citing them. Yoninah (talk) 00:56, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 16[edit]

Petra Hřebíčková

Petra Hřebíčková, Czech actress
Petra Hřebíčková, Czech actress
  • Reviewed: Mike McCray
  • Comment: All sources are in Czech. The 2008 awards were held in 2009, as is typical for acting awards.

Created by Cloudz679 (talk). Self-nominated at 18:05, 17 December 2016 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg I was able to verify the hook and some other randomly-selected elements of the article using Google translate and didn't spot anything which looked like a copyright violation. The hook is reasonably interesting, and the photo is credibly PD. As such, this is good to go - nice work with the article. Nick-D (talk) 10:17, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Cloudz679 I'm returning the hook from the prep area. It has an unsourced section and DYK criteria are therefore not met. Also, I suggest that Thalia Awards is unsuitable for homepage exposure. While the sea of red links has already been addressed, it's a stub with just over 300kB of prose (i.e. close to none) and not a single secondary reference. Can you think of a better article to include in the hook? I appreciate that the second issue isn't a show stopper going by current DYK rules, but the first one is. Schwede66 22:53, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
    • @Schwede66: I have added some secondary references to the linked article, although not sure that this is part of the criteria. Regarding the article itself, I would argue that it's not an unsourced section, as some of her film roles are mentioned and referenced in the prose. The award ceremony is prestigious in a national context as can be seen by three independent references easily found, and qualifies as a "good enough" "article to include in the hook". Could you clarify what needs to be done here, please? C679 15:51, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg I wasn't thinking that I would review the nomination once it's ready, but I'd rather stay out of that so that I don't have to be careful when promoting preps to queue. I can't do that admin function if I have had a prior reviewer involvement. So could one of the regulars please check this out? Schwede66 01:18, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 17[edit]

Srikakulam peasant uprising

  • Comment: Article created on 17 December,2016

Created by Maaley (talk). Self-nominated at 02:07, 19 December 2016 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Interesting article, length, date and hook checks out. No QPQ needed, new user. But article would need some copy-editing (punctuations, spacings, etc.). Moreover, I think some of the background needs to be reviewed. The AICCCR was founded in 12 Nov 1967, but the Srikakulam uprising was already in motion then. I'll try to look some sources on my side, but some additional clarification would be of interest here. --Soman (talk) 18:58, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
Soman Thanks for your review.I have written as per the timeline and incidences mentioned in the following links. Hope it will help to understand how the two movements are aligned together yet independently initiated.
Yours sincerely,
Maaley (talk) 03:55, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Ok. In a few days, I'll regain access to some literature on this topic, I'll try to sort out some details then. --Soman (talk) 10:30, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
SomanThanks.Looking forward for your feedback. :) Maaley (talk) 12:15, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Soman, Maaley, I don't see any edits at all in 2017, and it has been nearly two months since material was posted on Maaley's talk page. The further fact that Maaley has not edited on Wikipedia since December 26 is also a major concern. Soman, unless you are prepared to update the article yourself, now that Maaley is not around, I think it's time to close this nomination. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:06, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 18[edit]

Battle Royale

  • ... that the Japanese novel Battle Royale was rejected in the final round of the 1997 Japan Horror Fiction Awards due to its backdrop of students killing each other being too reminiscent of the Kobe child murders committed the previous year?

Improved to Good Article status by Xfansd (talk) and Bluesphere (talk). Nominated by Bluesphere (talk) at 05:03, 6 January 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol voting keep.svg The age and length are good and everything seems within policy. Hook is interesting and cited. This looks good to go. --Coemgenus (talk) 01:10, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg The hook, at 237 characters, is well over the absolute maximum of 200 characters (spaces count in the total) allowed for DYK hooks, and has been struck. Please provide a new ALT hook that is short enough to qualify. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:14, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
  • @BlueMoonset: I'm going to step up and provide one that is 199 characters...
ALT1: ... that Battle Royale was rejected in the final round of the 1997 Japan Horror Fiction Awards, as its setting was too similar to the Kobe child murders committed the previous year?
Raymie (tc) 05:58, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Reiterating that this is not ready for promotion (despite it having been briefly promoted). The "as" part of the hook is problematic, since the article doesn't seem to support the assertion: only one of the judges seem to be alluding to the child murders, according to the first Reception paragraph, with the other two judges rejecting the novel for other reasons entirely. The particular claim here is not supported by an inline source citation at the end of the relevant sentence, while an earlier claim in Background and publication says only that one of the preliminary committee members "later suspected" that the judges' rejection was due to the Kobe child murders, but that's grossly inadequate. Cwmhiraeth suggested "may have been rejected", but it's not sufficient in my eye given the sourced wording in the article. Another hook angle that might be pursued is that the book was considered the best submitted but was rejected anyway, yet it became a bestseller when ultimately published two years later. (It does seem a bit odd to be talking about an award for unpublished manuscripts to begin with; just how notable is it, anyway?) BlueMoonset (talk) 07:36, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment Anyone can read the relevant chapter of the book cited in the reception section for the judges' comments here at Amazon.com. This is also what The Japan Times article that is used to cite the proposed hook in the Background and publication section is referencing. Hopefully this helps clarify things and/or sparks a re-wording of the hook. Xfansd (talk) 15:37, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
@BlueMoonset: Any updates on this DYK entry? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluesphere (talkcontribs) 05:17, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
Bluesphere, pings only work when you sign your post; I happened to see your recent edit on my watchlist and clicked out of curiosity. The re-wording of the hook is up to you or Xfansd, and depends on the angle you want to take with the information in the article. Whatever the sources may or may not say, the article needs to have the specific information for it to be usable in a hook. As I pointed out, the ALT1 hook is not supported in the article; I think I was clear above where the claims were lacking the necessary sourcing. You will need to have any necessary sourcing added. Please be sure to post here when that is done. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:38, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
@BlueMoonset: I unfortunately am stumped to continue this process. If no one can take up the mantle here and closing is the only other option right now, so be it. Thanks for your time. Bluesphere 05:46, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Chinese Taipei Olympic Committee

Created/expanded by Sdee (talk). Self-nominated at 02:10, 18 December 2016 (UTC).

  • Comment only That hook is not "interesting", as it merely states the obvious. Is there nothing better? Edwardx (talk) 10:54, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
  • I reviewed and changed. Or please give some suggestion.--TINHO (talk) 17:40, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg The page history shows that Sdee started editing the article on 10 December 2016, eight days before the nomination, but the fivefold expansion seems to have begun on 16 December 2016, so it is probably acceptable. The article is long enough, neutral, and uses inline citations. It does not seem to have copyright violations. I assume good faith for the offline The Times source. The article says that the National Flag Anthem is used because of an agreement signed in 1981, and the lyrics were modified in 1981, but the sources cited seem to say 1983. The source cited does not contain some of the dates in the list of presidents. I did some copy editing and added archive URLs to dead links, but the article needs more cleanup. I am not sure what "recolonize" means. The hook is interesting, but it is a little confusing and needs to be edited. According to the QPQ check tool, the nominator has 6 DYK credits, so QPQ is needed. This will be good to go when the QPQ is done and the article is cleaned up. Gulumeemee (talk) 07:23, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol delete vote.svg Even consider the version before 10 December the prose was about 3300 bytes, and now the prose is about 7200 bytes just twofold of the older version. I don't think it meets the expansion criteria.-- (talk) 04:23, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
  • You might be right. The version before 10 December presented the history as a list, so the tool I used didn't count the characters in the history section. Thanks for noticing that. Gulumeemee (talk) 04:48, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Lists are not counted as prose, so the pre-expansion version on November 22, 2016 was 487 characters. This is indeed a 5x expansion, and the review should continue. Yoninah (talk) 21:42, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
  • It appears that the list was converted to prose. Gulumeemee (talk) 23:59, 10 January 2017 (UTC) Some items were removed, and some content was added. Gulumeemee (talk) 04:13, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 19[edit]

Kucheipadar tribal movement

  • ... that Kucheipadar tribal movement opposed mining to save environment ?
    • ALT1:... mining was put to an hold in the region till 2000 ?
  • Comment: Kucheipadar became famous for its tribal movement, article created on 19 dec,2016.

Created by Maaley (talk). Self-nominated at 04:11, 20 December 2016 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article is new and long enough. It is neutral and cites sources inline. However, ref #4 is not accessible to me and the sentence with the phrase "attended by 6,000 villagers from three panchayats" is not supported by ref #6. "Earwig's Copyvio Detector" reports only one match with ref #1, which can not be considered as copyvio. Hook is interesting and its length is within limit. The phrase "environment" of original hook does not appear in the article. ALT1 is not a complete hook. I will re-review after above mentioned issues are resolved. CeeGee 08:06, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 20[edit]

Corruption in Yemen

  • ... that the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace ruled Yemen's government was more likely to topple from corruption than Al-Qaeda
    • ALT1:... that a UN panel believed that Yemen's former president, Ali Abdullah Saleh, had illicitly accumulated up to $60 billion during his rule?
    • ALT2:... that only about a tenth of an intended $4.7 billion in aid to Yemen reached its destination?
    • ALT3:... that Yemen’s Ministry of Social and Labor Affairs created more cumbersome obstacles for human-rights groups to be recognized?
    • ALT4:... that a Yemeni medical professional bore witness to graft on a daily basis?

Created by DaltonCastle (talk). Self-nominated at 22:28, 22 December 2016 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg This article is new enough and long enough. I am approving ALT1, - the other hooks may be all right but I have not checked them. The article gives a depressing view of Yemen today. It is neutral and I detected no policy issues, Earwig's 17.4% being largely due to quotations. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:45, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
  • He may be a dictator, but BLP still applies. I think ALT2 is the best hook; it is verified and cited inline. Yoninah (talk) 21:29, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg I agree, ALT2 is better and I have struck the other hooks. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:38, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg@Cwmhiraeth, Yoninah, and DaltonCastle: (with apologies to Cwm for three pings in near as many minutes): come on, folks, this is not in a state to go on the main page. The article begins "Corruption in Yemen is a highly serious problem. Yemen is the most corrupt country in the Gulf region.", and this is sourced to a blog. Hosted on the world bank website, but still a blog. Not to mention the issues with saying "highly serious." The same blog source is used a number of times through the article. If this article wants to actually comply with NPOV, it needs to do one of two things: restrict itself to describing incidents of corruption, or alternatively incorporate sufficient heavyweight sourcing to make its analytical and comparative claims compliant with WP:DUE. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vanamonde93 (talkcontribs) 09:51, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
@Yoninah, DaltonCastle, and Vanamonde93: The pings did not get through, perhaps because Vanamonde failed to sign the post, so I have repinged the others. I certainly considered the World Bank to be a reliable source. It's going to be very difficult for DaltonCastle to write these articles if they are not allowed to be sourced to any commentary. Corruption is insidious and the facts are not obvious. Investigative journalists find things out and the information ends up in columns in respected newspapers, or blogs of this sort which is the online equivalent. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:16, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
Hm, yes, I guess I forgot that. My issue is not with the World Bank: my issue is with a) the single source, and b) with the fact that it is a blog, ie has little to no editorial oversight. It is the equivalent to the Op-Ed section of a newspaper: which we do not usually treat as a reliable source. Moreover, there are many kinds of commentary: saying something like "Yemen is the most corrupt country in XYZ" requires sources a lot weightier than saying, for instance, "there have been numerous publicized incidents of corruption in Yemen". Vanamonde (talk) 11:04, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Please see my followup review on Corruption in Ecuador. This article, too, suffers from POV. It goes in with guns blazing about corruption in Yemen without giving any indication to the contrary. Yoninah (talk) 01:00, 5 February 2017 (UTC)


Moved to mainspace by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk). Self-nominated at 13:55, 20 December 2016 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svgArticle is new and long enough. The hook is referenced. No copyright or neutrality issue detected. QPQ is done. Good to go. --KAVEBEAR (talk) 07:16, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
Symbol possible vote.svg @Jo-Jo Eumerus: I came to promote this but could not find mention of all the aspects of the hook. I see that various possible dates are mentioned for the most recent eruption, and they are all more recent than 50,000 years ago, so that part is OK, but the article does not seem to mention that this was a sub-Plinian eruption (spelt subplinian in some parts of the article). Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:12, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Um, Cwmhiraeth, what is "this" eruption? The hook does not refer to specific eruptions as the chronology of Ciomadul's activity is sort of confusing. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:38, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
@Jo-Jo Eumerus: The eruptions in the last 50,000 years, then. I don't see the word "subplinian" associated with them. If the word were not in the hook, it would not be a problem. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:07, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
@Cwmhiraeth: Now it has. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:11, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Would you be happy with ALT1? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:21, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • ALT1 ... that Ciomadul volcano in Romania last erupted less than 50,000 years ago and is still potentially active?

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Wary of that. I think it's important that Ciomadul doesn't just do small steam explosions, but also large eruptions with with tall columns, ash fall into neighbouring countries and deadly pyroclastic flows in the area around the volcano. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:14, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

  • Sorry to be a pain, but the article states "Ciomadul has been active for over half a million years.[4] Other estimates indicate that activity did not start before 250,000 years ago." and "The oldest activity occurred between 1,000,000 and 750,000 years ago". These views seem to contradict each other. It seems as if there are varying views and that you have arbitrarily chosen one as being accurate. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:36, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
    @Cwmhiraeth: I think I got it. These disagreements between dating results are a nuisance to write about. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:23, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
    Cwmhiraeth. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:33, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Please could somebody else look at this, because I am not happy to approve it. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:53, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 21[edit]

Charmian Gooch

  • Comment: Article 5X expanded by User:Sasha.sov Apologies for nominating slightly late.

5x expanded by Sasha.sov (talk). Nominated by Jaobar (talk) at 04:35, 30 December 2016 (UTC).

  • Note: I have struck ALT1, since at 221 characters it was well above the 200 character maximum for a hook. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:14, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Response: Dear BlueMoonset, thank you for pointing this out. I have reduced the character count for the hook and created a second alternate. I hope this is acceptable. Best, --Jaobar (talk) 15:47, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
Or consider ALT3, which is even tighter, with an important wiki link restored and the relevant countries named. —Patrug (talk) 01:28, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
Dear Patrug, thank you for providing an alternate hook. I agree that ALT3 is an improvement over ALT2. We'll see what happens! Best, --Jaobar (talk) 15:27, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg This article is a five-fold expansion and is new enough and long enough. The ALT3 hook is sourced inline and the article is neutral. Earwig produced rather high percentages, but many of these were quotations and others were the names of organizations and much used phrases and I think the article passes the close paraphrasing test. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 21:06, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg I disagree. Much has been put in quotes, but there are still instances of close paraphrasing which really can and should be rewritten in your own words:
  • Source: after lobbying G-8 members to embrace transparency
  • Article: After lobbying G8 members to embrace transparency
  • Source: Since 2010, Global Witness has worked with a coalition of NGOs lobbying political leaders in London, Brussels and Washington to force companies to identify their ultimate, or beneficial, owners.
  • Article: Beginning in 2010, Gooch and Global Witness started working with a union of non-governmental organizations aimed at lobbying political leaders in major cities such as London, Brussels, and Washington to force companies to identify their ultimate owners.
  • Source: Through tactics such as undercover investigations and high-level lobby meetings,
  • Article: Through the deployment of various tactics such as undercover investigations and high-level lobby meetings
  • Source: has run pioneering investigations and campaigns uncovering the links between natural resources, corruption and conflict.
  • Article: It has become a pioneer in investigations and campaigns related to uncovering the links between natural resources, corruption, and conflict.
  • In general, the article quotes snippets from the sources far too much; sentences should be rewritten and rephrased in your own words. Wikipedia articles are often used by college students and all these quotes are going to look strange in a term paper. The article has a strong tone of self-promotion as well. Yoninah (talk) 17:58, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol delete vote.svg There has been no response in three weeks, and close paraphrasing is a serious issue. Marking for closure, though if the issues raised are responded to here before the nomination closes and addressed on the article, the review can resume. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:46, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Dear BlueMoonset, Yoninah and others, thank you for your note and for your patience. Let me contact the editor and give this another try. I'll email as soon as I complete this note. Best, Jaobar (talk) 15:10, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 22[edit]

Yu Zigao

  • Reviewed: Will do Goofus and Gallant
  • Comment: @Reviewers: Don't worry. Everything's covered but you only need to verify the hook(s) you're most interested in.

Created by LlywelynII (talk). Self-nominated at 13:54, 25 December 2016 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg New enough when nominated, long enough, QPQ done.
  • Thank you for the review. Since you split up the separate issues into bullet points, I'll just reply in the same format.
  • Running Away with the Circus is published by Lulu.com. Definitely not a reliable source.
  • It's published by Friendlysong Books (as shown in the article and verifiable at the linked work); it's sourcing minor information based on a personal visit to the site, which is fine if not scholarly; the cited information is unrelated to any of the hooks (and thus completely irrelevant to this DYK review though a very legitimate concern prior to GA status). Leaving the cite and the non-dubious information is better than removing either, but you're welcome to find a better source or note the objection on the article's talk page if you like. — LlywelynII 05:42, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
  • WP:SPS is part of policy. I can't even link to the page on lulu.com where the book is listed because the domain lulu.com is blacklisted. Now, if we can show that the author is an expert, then using a self-published book is okay, but I don't agree that leaving the cite to a self-published book in is better than removing it. I'm happy to get a third-opinion on this, however. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:43, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Earwig's tool shows no violations and random googling of three phrases turned up no evidence of plagiarism.
  • Can we standardize the way the subject is referred to in the article - we have Zigao, Yu, and Yu Zigao. Normally I'd have fixed this myself but I'm not sure which is the convention and/or complies with the MOS.
  • Of course not. Now that I've looked up your name, I'm pretty sure you already know this. When he's being distinguished from his father or other members of his family, you use his first name. Elsewhere in the article it's perfectly standard to alternate between using the last name by itself and the full name. See literally any biography article on this or any other encyclopedia. That said, I had forgotten to add the {{chinese name}} template, so thanks for that reminder.
  • The relevant guideline is WP:SURNAME, and I was just trying to spare you someone coming along and complaining that it's wrong for our MOS. If you prefer to not comply with the MOS, I'm certainly not going to hold up the DYK nom on it. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:43, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
  • I prefer the first hook, but it isn't clear in the article that Yu Zigao was actually in command of the forces that forced the Dutch off the islands. ALT2 is directly supported by a citation. Likewise ALT4. [—User:Ealdgyth.]
  • He was the military governor (i.e., supreme commander) for the region, he assembled the forces, and he was the one who personally forced the Dutch to remove themselves. There's a linked cite if any of that is unclear. If that doesn't meet your idea of "command", well, there are the other hooks.
    Also, kindly remember to sign your name to your posts. — LlywelynII 05:42, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Given the recent number of pulled hooks over similar wording issues, let's err on the safe side. Yes, normally I would assume that "commanded" fit in this situation, but you know what they say ... "assume makes an ass out of me". As for the forgetting to sign, I apologize. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:43, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 23[edit]

2011 in politics

Kim Jong-Il
Kim Jong-Il

5x expanded by ThatGuyJabbles (talk). Nominated by Jaobar (talk) at 04:04, 30 December 2016 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg This has been significantly expanded. DYKcheck doesn't count bulleted items such as this but I do. However, many of these items are unsourced, and at least one requires clarification. I stopped reviewing where I stopped tagging, while I await referencing for all items. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:23, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Dear Muboshgu, thank you for your review and for your comments. I looked through the article and see only a few "citation needed" requests and other missing citations from almost 200 bullet points and citations added. If you don't mind my saying, this suggests to me that your comment "many of these items are unsourced" is an overstatement. I will email the individual that expanded the article today and request that these additions be added right away. This shouldn't be a problem as there are only a few instances where citations are missing. I hope that once this is completed that you will update your review and we can hopefully move this process forward. Thanks again. Best, Jaobar (talk) 21:35, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Like I said, I stopped reviewing part way through. I can add the rest, because the items of June 5, September 21, and December 26 need sources. There is also the matter of the QPQ review that needs to be completed. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:39, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • I have emailed the student and expect to see edits soon. I will add a comment here once edits have been made. Thanks again for your help with this. Best, Jaobar (talk) 21:44, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • I can acknowledge that I overstated based on a generalization how much more sourcing is needed here. It's not as bad as it initially appeared to me, once I got the rest of the way through the article. I will need to do a more thorough review to ensure that no other clarifications are needed on any points. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:46, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol delete vote.svg It's been a month with no progress. I recommend closing this. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:38, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Monument to Women Memorial Garden

Created by FallingGravity (talk). Self-nominated at 05:17, 24 December 2016 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Not a review of the full nomination but we cannot use the image (at least on the main page) as, being a copyrighted three-dimensional artwork, it is exempt from freedom of panorama under U.S. copyright law and thus any photograph of it is legally a derivative work. In fact, it cannot be hosted on Commons, either. Daniel Case (talk) 18:37, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
@Daniel Case: I've removed the photo from hook. If the image is deleted from Commons then I will remove it from the article, too. FallingGravity 19:25, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
Well, you could actually host it here under fair use; we do have a template allowing for that exemption (If you want to do this let me know; I'm very good at writing the rationale to satisfy the free-use zealots). Daniel Case (talk) 06:53, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review still needed. FallingGravity 03:23, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
    • Symbol possible vote.svg New, long enough. Neutral and properly cites sources. I detected some rather close paraphrasing in my spot checking, which I did primarily on the "1933 Relief Society monument" section. A lot of the wording is directly ripped from the article being cited, with some minor wording changes. This will need to be substantially rewritten, as it currently constitutes a copyright violation. The hook is an appropriate length, interesting, and cited (AGF on offline source). After the identified close paraphrasing issue is addressed, this will need a thorough review for additional close paraphrasing issues, preferably from someone with access to the offline source. ~ Rob13Talk 11:58, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
I've done some copyediting of the article. FallingGravity 18:24, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 25[edit]

Ingeborg Weber-Kellermann

  • ... that Ingeborg Weber-Kellermann wrote a collection of Christmas carols with background information about them, and a book about rural life in the 19th century which was not idyllic? Source: both books have their source.

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 21:05, 1 January 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg QPQ done. New enough, long enough. Neutral. Her death needs a cite. AGF on close paraphrasing due to offline/foreign language sources. Just to make sure, can you clarify where you got the description of Landleben im 19. Jahrhundert from? Does the source explicitly state that the goal of the text is to contrast with the idyllic view of farmlife? We should only report that if covered in reliable sources, to avoid turning the encyclopedia into one of those annoyingly intrusive English courses that assigns meaning to a text rather than letting the reader generate their own meaning. The hook is not particularly concise nor well-worded, in my opinion. "With background information about them" is vague and a bit confusing, and we appear to be stuffing two hooks into one. Could you propose a more punchy hook with a bit more concise wording? Ping me upon response, please; I like to follow up on these nominations with just a couple issues. ~ Rob13Talk 00:25, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
I almost forgot about her, written for Christmas, when we sang from her book, - a first for me, and great pleasure. How would you say in better English that each carol is accompanied by a period illustration, background information about its author(s) and the history of its creation? And how to source other than the book itself? And still stay within 200 chars?
ALT1: ... that Ingeborg Weber-Kellermann, who received her doctor's degree in Berlin in 1940 for her studies of Josefsdorf in Slawonia, wrote an anthology of Christmas carols in 1982? Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:19, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg I'm coming up rather blank on wording ideas for this hook. I think a second set of eyes would be helpful. ~ Rob13Talk 04:58, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
I think her book about Christmas carols should be in it, because the many red links for her as a major reference for their history and meaning was what made me write the article. The early studies of other cultures in Nazi times, she traveling herself, are also special. Changing job from East Berlin to Marburg because of The Wall is unusual but says less about her work. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:00, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
  • I've struck ALT1 for being too dull. Here are some ideas:
  • ALT2: ... that Ingeborg Weber-Kellermann published a book of 151 German Christmas carols together with historical information and a period illustration for each piece?
  • ALT3: ... that German folklorist Ingeborg Weber-Kellermann shattered the idyllic view of 19th century rural life in her 1987 book Landleben im 19. Jahrhundert? Yoninah (talk) 22:31, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
Too tired to think about it, - tomorrow. Not every song has a period illustration. She is THE reference, - how can we say that. - "shatters" sounds a bit too dramatic. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:41, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
  • I was just suggesting alts based on what you wrote in the article. If she was THE reference, maybe you should write that. Maybe you could add other things from the sources that would make a good hook. Yoninah (talk) 22:43, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for trying, - I thought I wrote above "the many red links for her as a major reference for their history and meaning" made me write the article, - before I even knew her book. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:53, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
The following is an idea - reducing her to Christmas seems to be unfair -, better wording welcome:
ALT4: ... that the German anthropologist Ingeborg Weber-Kellermann, who researched Slavonian villages around 1940, published a collection of 151 illustrated Christmas carols that is also a reference book? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:50, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Well, I don't see why the two aspects of her work go together, and neither seems really interesting. Yoninah (talk) 22:14, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
She enjoyed a long life, and did not only one thing. But I like to please.
ALT5: ... that the anthropologist Ingeborg Weber-Kellermann made field trips to villages in Slavonia, Transylvania and Turkey, focusing on the relation between different ethnic groups? Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:29, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
One word less, and I wonder how we could include "at the time when they were rescued", many people met them decades later:
ALT7: ... that the anthropologist Ingeborg Weber-Kellermann, who made field trips to villages in Slavonia, Transylvania, and Turkey, met Jews rescued from the Theresienstadt concentration camp? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:11, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
Rob, what do you think? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:58, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── @Gerda Arendt: That one's over the character limit (201 - but preferably should be shorter). Could we cut out one of the field trip locales and call it a day? ~ Rob13Talk 18:05, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

I suggest to pipe the camp, people will know the name, or not be interested:
ALT7b: ... that the anthropologist Ingeborg Weber-Kellermann, who made field trips to villages in Slavonia, Transylvania, and Turkey, met Jews after they were liberated from Theresienstadt? - (my last open nom for an article written in 2016) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:10, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Of course it makes sense to shorten the name. Calling on another reviewer to finish the review for ALT7c, since I suggested the hook. Yoninah (talk) 18:39, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
I believe Rob could finish his review, no? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:14, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
@Gerda Arendt: I don't see any problems with it, but I'd actually like another set of eyes on this because of how much back-and-forth we've had. It's nice to get someone "fresh" to take a quick peek at the hook. ~ Rob13Talk 19:25, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Rossa Matilda Richter

The 14-year-old Richter with her cannon in 1877.
The 14-year-old Richter with her cannon in 1877.
  • ... that the first recorded human cannonball act was 14-year-old Rossa Matilda Richter's 1877 performance in London? Source: "A 14-year-old acrobat, Rosa Richter - Zazel - was chosen to be fired out of it and became the first recorded human cannonball." BBC (there are others in the article)

Created by Rhododendrites (talk). Self-nominated at 20:04, 31 December 2016 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Without the image The article is long enough, and new enough at the time of nomination. It is within policy and stable. The hook is interesting, a QPQ has been completed and spotchecks have been carried out for paraphrasing. I don't see any evidence that the image was published prior to 1923, which would be required for it to be free-use. Indeed, Getty Images apparently claim a 2009 copyright on it, so unless there is compelling evidence to the contrary, we can't use it on the main page, and we might have to consider its use on the encyclopedia at all. Even fair-use is a bit iffy where Getty are involved. Harrias talk 16:56, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Hold please - At work and can't take the time to look into this at the moment, but I'd like to open a discussion on Commons regarding copyright. No doubt they've encountered something like this before. My understanding of copyright (in the UK for this image, and US for Wikimedia), since Getty includes a creation date of January 01, 1877, it should be in the public domain. I'm not entirely certain of that, and know that creation and publication are different things. I'll open that thread later today and link it here. To the closing admin please hold off on closing this for now. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 18:59, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
  • For clarity, I've changed the symbol above. Feel free to tag me into discussion wherever it ends up (I'm interested in the outcome as much as anything else.) Harrias talk 19:23, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment This might be of help with the photo. We hope (talk) 03:41, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Thanks, We hope. @Rhododendrites:, if you can update the copyright information on your image, I'll be happy to pass this (not that you'll to leave your source file information the same of course.) Harrias talk 13:43, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
  • @We hope and Harrias: Thanks. That Strand clipping is a nice find. Question: why tag it as a file not to be copied to Commons? The Commons Village Pump discussion was inconclusive, but the indication seems to be that if publication prior to Getty's could be established, and if the author either died before 1947 or cannot be identified, it would qualify for PD-1923 and PD-UK-Unknown. This publication in The Strand clearly satisfies the former, and we still don't know the author. I've updated the tags on the Commons file, fwiw, though. Thanks. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 01:45, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Habit makes me cautious re: uploads of non-US material, so I always start out by uploading it here. ;) We hope (talk) 14:01, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 28[edit]

Revolutionary Communist Party of India

5x expanded by Soman (talk). Self-nominated at 21:36, 28 December 2016 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg The article needs a lot of clean-up, but that doesn't disqualify it from DYK. I'm more concerned about the hook citation - it seems to be a primary source that is, at least ideologically, involved with the subject. For a statement like the hook statement, an independent source is needed. Other than that, I don't see any copyvios/close paraphrasing after running Earwig's tool, and the article was expanded within the timeframe of nomination. The content is neutral and is well-cited.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 21:19, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
  • In what sense is it a primary source?? --Soman (talk) 18:02, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
  • It was a journal issued by CPI. --Soman (talk) 19:55, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
Then it is affiliated with the subject. For a statement such as "the first," we really need some kind of outside source. It's probably true, but the organization could benefit from making claims to fame.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 06:36, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
How would a CPI journal be related to RCPI? --Soman (talk) 07:24, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
RCPI did break away from CPI, true, but I'm concerned about how reputable CPI is a source for historical analysis. Ideology doesn't inherently disqualify a source, but is CPI's Party Life known for presenting information from a neutral perspective, or at least one independent of the publisher? I also would be skeptical of a right-wing source, for similar reasons.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 18:12, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
Well, if CPI stated that RCPI predated it in Assam, wouldn't that be a reliable claim? --Soman (talk) 19:53, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── That statement would be a reliable claim - but was there an organization prior to RCPI in Assam? I don't know if CPI is reliable for that claim. I don't have access to the source, so I can't look at it and consult it to get a feel for its reliability, which is why I'm unsure.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 05:14, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on January 1[edit]

Why (Taeyeon song)

  • ... that the song "Why", from K-pop artist Taeyeon, was noted for its "powerhouse vocals" with "precise harmonies and an emotional punch", deemed unusual for a typical EDM song?

Improved to Good Article status by (talk). Nominated by TerryAlex (talk) at 20:17, 2 January 2017 (UTC).

Hook eligiblity:

  • Cited: Green tickY
  • Interesting: Red XN - Not really. The hook consists of a quote from a critic. I've suggested alts below.
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Nominator is exempt from QPQ requirements. I'm not a fan of DYKs on art consisting solely of reiterating what critics had to say about the art. For this article I'd prefer something like:

Alt 1 ... that despite reaching number 6 on the Billboard World Digital Songs chart, "Why" was Kim Tae-yeon's least successful single in her solo career?

~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 18:18, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Comment: Hi ONUnicorn, I've modified your suggestion a little. Is this good to go? Thanks for your review.---TerryAlex (talk) 06:39, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
As far as I'm concerned it's good to go; but I think a second reviewer needs to approve the alternate hook since I suggested it. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 15:16, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg New reviewer needed to check ALT1. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:41, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg - Length, Date, and Copyvio all check. Nom is exempt from QPQ however the cited sources do not directly verify the hook. I went through and verified that this was this musician's first song not to enter the top five of the Gaon Digital Chart however to do so I had to follow the cites of every other song she has released. Further, the cites do not verify that it was her least successful song though it could be inferred from context. I've proposed ALT 2 below. If you were to copy the citations concerning the chart position on the Gaon Digital Chart from the other articles ALT2 would in my estimation be verifiable and good to go. Mifter (talk) 08:43, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Alt 2 ... that despite reaching number 6 on the Billboard World Digital Songs chart, "Why" was Kim Tae-yeon's first single not to enter the top five of the Gaon Chart?

Hi Mifter, sorry for the late reply, Alt 2 is fine, please help to see if this would be good to go. Thank you.TerryAlex (talk) 06:20, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Lalchand Fulamali‎

Created by Soman (talk). Self-nominated at 11:13, 1 January 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg (Not a full review) A QPQ review appears to be needed before this can move forward. North America1000 10:25, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
  • QPQ added. --Soman (talk) 07:58, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed now that QPQ has been submitted. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:14, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on January 2[edit]

Violin Sonata (Poulenc)

  • Reviewed: Nkosi's Haven
  • Comment: probably pointless to ask for the composer's birthday, because the prep for the day is already full ...

Created by LouisAlain (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 19:23, 4 January 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg This article is new enough and long enough and I have added Gerda's name to the "make" credits. The article is neutral and the sources not available to me. I would have passed the nomination, but really the hook is too awkward, trying to include too many details. I also prefer the bit of the quotation where Poulenc states "The monster is finished". Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:07, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
OK, we had several Poulenc good pieces with wind instruments, can be short for this one:
ALT1: ... that when Francis Poulenc completed his only surviving violin sonata he commented: "The monster is finished."? Source: [6] "Le monstre de ma Sonate est au point."
While I am sure that "not bad" is a good translation of "pas mal", I am less convinced of the other one, "sonate" certainly missing, and "au point" saying more than merely "finished". What do you think, LouisAlain? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:29, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
C'est au point actually means: there's no more to add to it; it's just OK the way it is, don't spoil it by trying to "perfect" it. (like a dish which is perfect)
Is there a term in English? "Finished" seems to be too harmless, - leave "au point"? In German, some use the French term for steaks ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:23, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
How about dropping "finished" or whatever?
ALT2: ... that Francis Poulenc called his Violin Sonata a monster of a sonata? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:34, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
ALT3: ... that Francis Poulenc described his Violin Sonata as a monster? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:09, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
Catchy, but is "described" the right term? Serious question, it may be just my lack of English, - I would expect a description then, Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:24, 22 February 2017 (UTC)--
He apparently said "The monster is finished", and that was describing the sonata as a monster. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:33, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on January 6[edit]

Léon Davent

Michelangelo at the Age of Twenty-Three, 1540s
Michelangelo at the Age of Twenty-Three, 1540s
  • ... that the etchings of Léon Davent include the "somewhat, but not altogether, surprising" subject of Michelangelo at the Age of Twenty-Three (pictured) made over 40 years after that point? Source: " Jacobson, Karen (ed), (often wrongly cat. as George Baselitz), The French Renaissance in Prints (most relevant text by Suzanne Boorsch or Henri Zerner), 1994, Grunwald Center, UCLA, ISBN 0962816221, pp. 264-265. Online, British Museum page. From the rest of the article, no one sees Davent making etchings as early as 1498+40=1538.

Created by Johnbod (talk). Self-nominated at 18:51, 10 January 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Long enough, created within time, hook fact is cited to an offline source. I like the hook but it's a bit confusing - after reading the article I get the point, but frankly the hook just seems to be garbled on first reading. What can we reword it to that will make it clear why the print's subject is surprising? Also - the nominator hasn't indicated which QPQ was done. Earwig's tool shows no problems (the one "problem" is actually a quotation in the wikipedia article...). Ealdgyth - Talk 15:10, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • I haven't done a qpq yet. I see the hook as hooky and intriguing rather than confusing, but there is a bit to squeeze in. Ideas on how to reword it are welcome. Johnbod (talk) 18:53, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
QPQ now done. Johnbod (talk) 05:22, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
I still don't have a better suggestion on the hook, unfortunately, given the space constraints. Perhaps "... that the etchings of Léon Davent include the "somewhat, but not altogether, surprising" subject of Michelangelo at the Age of Twenty-Three (pictured) made over 40 years after Michelangelo left France?" Ealdgyth - Talk 13:41, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
He was never in France (that was Leonardo). The difficulty is that you can't, I think, use "date". Is "time" better? Probably not. Johnbod (talk) 15:27, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
I've still got nothing better on this. I think the original hook is just too confusing for most folks to understand but cannot for the life of me think of anything better... Ealdgyth - Talk 16:16, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
I looked at article and hook, agree with the review above, minor: in each section, his name should be repeated, it's missing in Works, style and technique, after the preceding section dealt with something else. - I also find the Michelangelo the work that would show best in small size, - tend to keep it very simple:
ALT1: ... that the etchings of Léon Davent include Michelangelo at the Age of Twenty-Three (pictured)?
The caption could be shorter than repeating the whole title, such as Etching of Michelangelo, to have a link once. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:36, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on January 8[edit]

Tibbetts Brook

Created by Tdorante10 (talk). Nominated by Epicgenius (talk) at 01:45, 8 January 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg - sufficient length, well-sourced (a few lines actually border on WP:OVERKILL), accurate hook (confirmed with a source cited within the article). The first hook is probably the best; the second hook suggest that the European name means 'smooth stones', which is false, and the third hook isn't as interesting as the first. Kayau (talk · contribs) 15:03, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • @Kayau: Thank you for the review. In light of a new addition by Tdorante10, I would like to propose another hook based on the first hook: epicgenius (talk) 16:18, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • @Tdorante10: I'm not sure about this one, as it sounds like it's saying that its intended purpose is now carrying sewage from leaky sewers. What do you think? Kayau (talk · contribs) 17:05, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • @Kayau: If there was a better way to write it without being too long or wordy. The sewage from Yonkers is increasingly interesting as I do more research, but I still think the first hook is better and is a more defining characteristic of the brook itself. Tdorante10 (talk) 17:09, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • So I guess we should go with the original hook then. epicgenius (talk) 22:11, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Alrighty, in that case, Symbol confirmed.svg per the same reasons above. :) Kayau (talk · contribs) 14:32, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
Symbol possible vote.svg @Epicgenius: Coming to promote this I find the hook rather unsatisfactory. Does the drinking water bit come from "the local Lenape population utilized the brook for drinking water and fishing"? And a brook flowing into a sewer doesn't strike me as very interesting. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:09, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
@Cwmhiraeth: Yes. Actually, if that's unsatisfactory as well, we can merge this with Template:Did you know nominations/Van Cortlandt Park:
ALT6: ... that Van Cortlandt Park contains Tibbetts Brook, New York City's last freshwater marsh?
Pinging also Gerda Arendt. epicgenius (talk) 01:14, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
We could, but I wouldn't. Catching two sets of readers at different times will create more oerall attention to the two articles, imo, If you want to merge, I'd approve, of course. Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:36, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
Now that you mention it, separating the two hooks would create two different reader bases. I don't know if combining the hooks would be overall beneficial; it might save hook space, but also misses out on an opportunity to catch multiple reader bases. If not, we go with ALT3, which is not as interesting as ALT6 but separates the hook about the brook from the park's hook. epicgenius (talk) 16:44, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on January 9[edit]

Trifluoroperacetic acid

Created by DMacks (talk) and EdChem (talk). Nominated by EdChem (talk) at 13:27, 16 January 2017 (UTC).

  • @DMacks: Any suggestions for a better hook?
  • Symbol question.svg QPQ required. Nominated just in time for DYK eligibility, and of sufficient length. Assuming good faith for the references I cannot access (5 and 9). The last sentence of the article could probably use a link to methanolysis (or the redirect target transesterification). The sentence fragment "...is usually prepared immediately prior to use..." is probably true, but the ref only gives one example; it does not state this is typical (unless I missed it). Hook is OK and sourced in the article. Aside: I searched for an appropriate WP link to "α,β-unsaturated ester" but could find nothing relevant; is there a suitable target for this, as most readers will not be familiar with the term? (This is not required for this DYK nomination, just a suggestion to improve the article.) I'll review any additional hooks you want to consider; perhaps a hook such as ALT1, as most readers should be familiar with hydrogen peroxide. Mindmatrix 18:25, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
    • Editorial responses: I removed the methanolysis detail. The chemical is not available from Aldrich, a major/comprehensive chemical supplier for research labs, but I'll try to find a direct ref for made-when-needed. I linked "α,β-unsaturated ester" to A,b-unsaturated carbonyl compound, which is a redirect to a specific section of carbonyl group. DMacks (talk) 22:25, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • ALT1: ...that trifluoroperacetic acid can be prepared in two different ways using hydrogen peroxide?
I found a comment made in passing that there is a third way from H2O2, will track it down tonight and add what I find. DMacks (talk) 22:25, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Yup, using an alternate formulation (stable solid) that contains H2O2 rather than H2O2 itself in water. Added, with commentary about significance of this method. DMacks (talk) 03:33, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
In light of recent changes, ALT1 is wrong, so I am striking it in favour of ALT2:
I still need to do the QPQ. In the meantime, I wonder if we can come up with any other alternative hooks? DMacks? FYI, a valid hook starts with "that", has the article name in bold, and has a fact that is in the article and supported by an inline-citation, and a maximum of 200 characters. We want something that is interesting to as broad an audience as practicable. It's a much easier task for the HMB nomination. I've no other parts I'm planning to add at present, by the way. Is there anything else you think is important and missing? EdChem (talk) 12:16, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
I'll wait to review the new additions until you've completed your expansion. Mindmatrix 13:42, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
I just fleshed out the last part I intended to do: intro and expansion of the single example that had been § Oxidation with acidic rearrangement. One or more images still need to be redrawn to WP-MOS standard, will try to get to it tomorrow. DMacks (talk) 04:50, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
For the hook, might be able to make it seem more interesting ("wow, that's a crazy compound") by mentioning that it's too unstable/dangerous to ship but that it can be made easily three ways. DMacks (talk) 04:51, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
I like that idea, DMacks. We'll need to have a reference on shipping hazard, though, but that should be doable. EdChem (talk) 06:19, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
I can't find a cite for it (I don't have access to hazardous-materials encyclopedias). Can the hook be more than one sentence and include more than one interesting nugget?
is just under 200 characters as displayed. DMacks (talk) 16:07, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
No, it can't be more than one sentence, and it must be phrased as a question so it fits the format "Did you know ... that [TEXT]?" Yes, it can have more than one fact / nugget, so long as all are in the article and supported with inline citations. We could consider:
"Potentially explosive" is supported by this book reference (which I have added to the lede and property sections), that it is not commercially available is in the e-EROS source (ref 5), and the three preparations from H
are in refereces 2, 5, and 7. EdChem (talk) 01:32, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Ooh ALT4 is nice! DMacks (talk) 04:17, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
I've amended ALT4 as ALT5, which I think flows better and is slightly more compact. What do you think? Mindmatrix 13:44, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pinging DMacks and EdChem to comment on ALT5; if they're happy with it, we can proceed. Given that it is a simple rearrangement of ALT4, I don't think there will be any issue if Mindmatrix ultimately approves the hook. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:51, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the ping, BlueMoonset. I had been meaning to add a bio on the scientist who pioneered the work on TFPAA, but I haven't got to it and who knows when I will, so I agree this should be moved forward. I have added a hyphen to ALT5 in ALT5a, below, as I think it is more correct, but will stand corrected if I am in error. I have also struck the options prior to these as I agree that Mindmatrix's tweak is an improvement. Apologies for not commenting earlier, Mindmatrix.
DMacks, any thoughts on ALT5 v. ALT5a, and are you happy with the modification in going from ALT4 (which you said is nice) to ALT5 / ALT5a? EdChem (talk) 01:09, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
EdChem, definitely not ALT5a over ALT5: there shouldn't be a hyphen between an adverb ending in "ly" and the word after it that it's modifying. I've struck that variant; glad you think ALT5 is an improvement. BlueMoonset (talk) 07:41, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
I was thinking "potentially explosive" was serving as a an adjectival expression modifying the noun "trifluoroperacetic acid," though "potentially" is also modifying "explosive." Not stressed if I'm wrong, though. EdChem (talk) 14:52, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment: I will review the newly-updated article sometime early next week. Mindmatrix 15:46, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg @EdChem: Although the acid is likely easy to prepare, source only states "quickly" not "easily". Not needed for DYK, but ref 5, page 627 appears to list toxic effects that could be mentioned in the article (I base this on a "from inside the book" Google search which shows a three-line result, so I could be wrong.) I am assuming good faith for numerous refs I cannot access (the bulk of text from "Heteroatom oxidation" onward). The phrase "The hypervalent compound its conveniently accessible in two ways..." is odd; perhaps replace "its" with "is", and remove the POV statement "conveniently". The sentence "Common cases include iodine, for example, iodobenzene mentioned earlier, nitrogen, sulfur, and selenium" might be better phrased as "Common cases include iodine (for example, iodobenzene), nitrogen, sulfur, and selenium." In the phrase "By contrast, trifluoroperacetic acid typical oxidises...", you probably want "typically". Not needed for DYK, but are there suitable links for "pathway" (the closest I found was Metabolic pathway), "S-oxidation", and "S,S-dioxide". I can't seem to verify the sentence "For alkenes, the reaction gives carbonyl products..." - could you point me to the correct location (page and paragraph/section) in the source to verify this? Should the term "preferentially" link to PROX? Hook is OK and soured, with the exception of the term "easily" as mentioned earlier. Overall, only a few minor issues. Mindmatrix 17:39, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
Quoting your comments in blue for clarity in responding, Mindmatrix:
  • Although the acid is likely easy to prepare, source only states "quickly" not "easily".
It certainly is easy to prepare, essentially by mixing trifluoroacetic acid an hydrogen peroxide, though I recognise that my chemical knowledge is insufficient a source for the assertion. Changed
  • Not needed for DYK, but ref 5, page 627 appears to list toxic effects that could be mentioned in the article (I base this on a "from inside the book" Google search which shows a three-line result, so I could be wrong.)
I can't find this. Can you give me a link?
  • I am assuming good faith for numerous refs I cannot access (the bulk of text from "Heteroatom oxidation" onward).
Much of that content is at least outlined in reference 5, which you can find here
  • The phrase "The hypervalent compound its conveniently accessible in two ways..." is odd; perhaps replace "its" with "is", and remove the POV statement "conveniently".
Yes, it was meant to be "is" rather than "its" – fixed, and also removed conveniently as requested
  • The sentence "Common cases include iodine, for example, iodobenzene mentioned earlier, nitrogen, sulfur, and selenium" might be better phrased as "Common cases include iodine (for example, iodobenzene), nitrogen, sulfur, and selenium."
  • In the phrase "By contrast, trifluoroperacetic acid typical oxidises...", you probably want "typically".
  • Not needed for DYK, but are there suitable links for "pathway" (the closest I found was Metabolic pathway), "S-oxidation", and "S,S-dioxide".
S-oxide and S,S-dioxide are synonyms of sulfoxide and sulfone, respectively, both already included in the article with links. S-oxidation just means oxidation of the sulfur atom in a sulfide to a sulfoxide or sulfone. On "pathway", I don't see a suitable target. The content is covered in side reaction, at least somewhat.
  • I can't seem to verify the sentence "For alkenes, the reaction gives carbonyl products..." - could you point me to the correct location (page and paragraph/section) in the source to verify this?
It's in the title of the reference, the carbonyl product is the ketone to which the paper refers. I have made this clearer by using the term ketone in the article text.
  • Should the term "preferentially" link to PROX?
No, it should not. PROX is referring to gas streams where CO is oxidised in preference to H2, and thus CO can be a catalyst poison for a process. In this article, the preferential oxidation occurs when one moiety in a molecule oxidises before another, though both are oxidisable. Benzene undergoes a ring-opening oxidation with TFPAA. Pyridine theoretically can undergo N-oxidation or ring-opening or both, but in practice the N-oxidation occurs first and inactivates the ring sufficiently to prevent the ring-opening oxidation analogous to that which benzene undergoes from occurring.
  • Hook is OK and soured, with the exception of the term "easily" as mentioned earlier.
Struck ALT5, added ALT5b to use quickly instead of easily:
I think that covers everything you have raised, Mindmatrix? EdChem (talk) 14:21, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on January 10[edit]

Osmanoğlu and Kocabaş v. Switzerland

Created by Iselilja (talk). Self-nominated at 23:50, 17 January 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg New enough and long enough (2134 B readable prose size). Written in a neutral manner, but I found some referencing issue - specific number needs inline citation and need page number for multipage source, but otherwise the article is well-sourced and I spot-checking some of them. I also feel that the article could really use some copyedit for grammar and wording, please improve it or ask someone with a good command of English to do so (e.g. via WP:GOCER). No copyvio issues found. Regarding the hook, could you restate it in the same way as the source? The source says that Swiss authorities are right to insist etc., not that the parents cannot demand. I verified that the QPQ is in order. HaEr48 (talk) 08:42, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Iselilja, HaEr48, where does this nomination stand? There were some edits to the article, but nothing has been posted here about progress in over a month, and the article has a "copyedit" template on it, meaning that it cannot be promoted so long as the template remains. Thank you for your response. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:21, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
  • @BlueMoonset: The nominator hasn't responded, but I did post a WP:GOCER request for an expert to copy edit it. After that's taken up (maybe in one or two weeks) it should look better and we'll see how this stand. HaEr48 (talk) 02:34, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
  • HaEr48, that sounds good, though it might take until mid-March, given the backlog there. I take it you didn't think that Yngvadottir's copyedit back on January 27 was sufficient? BlueMoonset (talk) 03:43, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
* @BlueMoonset: Ah, I overlook Yngvadottir's copyedit. I read it again, and I believe the prose is more than decent enough now. I also requested a better restating of the hook. Since the nominator hasn't responded, I gave it a shot and added ALT1 above; does it look good to you? HaEr48 (talk) 05:58, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
  • HaEr48, ALT1 was 207 prose characters, which is above the absolute maximum of 200, so I had to strike it. (The original hook, by contrast, was 189 prose characters: on the long side, but within limits.) Do you want to try to craft a shorter ALT2? The article's prose seems decent to me as well. Have the referencing issues been settled? BlueMoonset (talk) 06:10, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
  • @BlueMoonset: Added a slightly shortened ALT2. Yes, the sourcing issue was resolved by updates on 18 January. If you agree with the hook, this is good to go now. HaEr48 (talk) 06:40, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on January 12[edit]

Layover (novel)

  • ... that unlike Doris Lessing, Margaret Atwood and Fay Weldon's "would-be female nut cases", Layover's heroine "doesn't set off on her journey needing to shuck her good-wife persona"? Source: "With '"Layover," Zeidner joins the ranks of Doris Lessing, Margaret Atwood and Fay Weldon, all of whom have written in the women-spiraling-into-madness genre. But Claire is something new. Unlike would-be female nut cases from an earlier time, she doesn't set off on her journey needing to shuck her good-wife persona" [7]
  • Reviewed: Susan Dynarski
  • Comment: Moved to mainspace on 12 January 2017; I haven't created an article for Zeidner as I'm not sure whether she meets the relevant guideline.

Moved to mainspace by Espresso Addict (talk). Self-nominated at 02:14, 16 January 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg 50.7% copyvios confidence. I would recommend cutting down a bit on the direct quotations of reviews, or use paraphrasing. The article is easily long enough and there are otherwise no problems. feminist (talk) 04:51, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
  • I'd like a second opinion on this. I don't feel the length of the cited quotations is either a copyright problem or a problem in terms of an article about a novel, where most of the content should be what reviewers say about it. Espresso Addict (talk) 03:33, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Stylistically, about 50% of the article consists of quotations, including multiple blockquotes, which I would say is excessive. In terms of copyright problems, for Austin Chronicle, Booklist, Publishers Weekly the quotes all exceed 10% of the original. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:19, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on January 13[edit]

Eastern Hills, Bogotá

Sué over the Eastern Hills
Sué over the Eastern Hills
  1. Julio H. Bonilla Romero, Edier H. Bustos Velazco, Jaime Duvan Reyes, 2017, Arqueoastronomía, alineaciones solares de solsticios y equinoccios en Bogotá-Bacatá - Archaeoastronomy, alignment solar from solstices and equinoxes in Bogota-Bacatá, Revista Científica, Universidad Distrital Francisco José de Caldas, volume 27, page 153
  2. Julio H. Bonilla Romero, 2011, Aproximaciones al observatorio solar de Bacatá-Bogotá-Colombia - Approaches to solar observatory Bacatá-Bogotá-Colombia, Azimut, Universidad Distrital Francisco José de Caldas, volume 3, pages 9-15

Same sources

Same sources

Same sources

  • Comment: Main hook: new article by Tisquesusa (talk), Monserrate, Guadalupe Hill (5x) and Bolívar Square (3.5x) expanded and infoboxed. Animation newly created and uploaded in English (long and short) and Spanish (short for now) to Commons.

Created/expanded by Tisquesusa (talk). Self-nominated at 03:43, 19 January 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg The main article, Eastern Hills, qualifies for DYK as a new article. The hook facts are in the article and the article is neutral. I am unable to assess whether there are any copyright issues because of lack of access to the sources and the sources being in Spanish, but that is no problem. I am approving the original hook, but not the others, because describing where the sun rises is meaningless unless you state your location. The animation is very impressive and is appropriately licensed. @Tisquesusa:, do you want to add Guadalupe to the hook as in ALT4 where I have bolded it? This article qualifies for DYK because you have expanded it more than five-fold, but Monserrate and Bolívar Square do not because they was not sufficiently expanded. Adding Guadalupe to the hook will give you DYKs for two articles, and both will be able to be submitted for points in the WikiCup. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 14:14, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Holman Rule

Source: "The Holman Rule... empowers any member of Congress to propose amending an appropriations bill to single out a government employee or cut a specific program." [8]

Created by Antony-22 (talk). Self-nominated at 04:24, 14 January 2017 (UTC).

  • Review – Note: I have done some copyedits and clean-up, and though I added the reference of exceptions from Deschler's, I do not consider myself to have done enough to be unable to evaluate this nomination.
  • Article is new enough and long enough, and cited. It does not lack neutrality, but it is incomplete.
  • I am concerned about inconsistencies in the content and between the article and the hook and the sources. The sources speak of reducing the salary of targeted employees to $1, but the articles speak of firing. Though the former may have the effect of forcing a resignation and thus have the effect of the latter, they are not the same. This needs to be clarified and resolved. The source cited above also says "any member of Congress" but the United States Congress includes the Senate and the article and other sources speak of a House of Representatives rule. It may be that the hook needs to speak of reducing salary to $1.
  • On the hook, I'm also not keen on "newly reinstated", I would say when - either January 2017 or at the start of the XXth Congress or something like that. "Propose firing" also needs clarification, because it is a proposal to the House which, if passed as part of an appropriations bill, becomes a mandate. After all, a Member of Congress can write a letter to someone's boss proposing that s/he be fired, but the boss can ignore it. We are talking here about something much more draconian, where federal employees are potentially threatened. The hook needs to be neutral, but also to accurately portray the facts.
  • Earwig raises only the quotation from Deschler's, which is appropriately identified and supported, so no copyvio issues, and no problematic paraphrasing of the sources noted. The commentary in the articles could be expanded, too, and also some recognition that the quotations from Deschler's were published in 1994, and so is the version as was eliminated in 1983... is the 2017 version the same? Certainly the sources provided do not establish that, nor does the article address the issue. Also, should the dissent from Republicans and the unanimous opposition from Democrats in passing the new rules package is due some notice. Covering these issues in a policy-compliant manner is a challenge and is not (technically) an expansion required under DYK rules. However, in presenting an article like this on the main page at a period of time when the topic of the rule and politics in general is highly contentious, I think it behoves us to avoid highlighting an article where obvious questions can be raised and yet go unaddressed.
  • QPQ done as required.
  • Symbol question.svg The inconsistencies noted need to be resolved, and a new hook wording proposed. The areas not covered should be addressed, and I hope that Antony-22 as the article creator will choose to take on that challenge. EdChem (talk) 07:24, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the thorough review. First off, upon doing the research for this article I discovered that there's nothing significant about the amount of $1; the rule allows salaries to be cut to any amount or for a position st be eliminated completely. This source says that there is no evidence that the rule has ever been historically used to cut a salary to an inappropriate level, and I haven't seen any comments from any lawmakers advocating to use it in this way. My guess is that some PR person came up with the $1 line to draw attention to it, and I think we have a responsibility on Wikipedia to avoid repeating clickbait.
Good catch on checking the new wording; it is slightly different so I have included both in the article. Also, it's specifically a House rule and so doesn't directly affect the Senate, so the source may be using the informal use of "Congresspeople" to refer only to House members. The final paragraph of the article already briefly states the Republican and Democratic viewpoints on the rule. The following hook is more specific as you requested, but the original hook is more succinct and still accurate. Antony–22 (talkcontribs) 20:27, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Calling for a second opinion. The updated text from the 2017 version is clear on reducing salary of "any person" and reducing numbers, but not (to me) clear on the ability to fire individuals, and "proposing firing" is something anyone can do any time, and be ignored. This is including in legislation a mandate that a person's salary must be reduced, or the number of people reduced. I am not comfortable that the hook is accurate. I will post at WT:DYK for another opinion. EdChem (talk) 12:43, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
The effective text is "the reduction of the number and salary of the officers of the United States"; the "number" part is where the proposals of firing come from. It might help if it can be demonstrated that both (contemporary) liberal and conservative sources say that the rule allows firing of individuals. The Deschler's Precidents source seems to be neutral and reliable, being published long before the current controversy, and it give specific examples of amendments firing individuals in the past. Here's a more specific and wordier hook. Antony–22 (talkcontribs) 05:21, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on January 17[edit]

Bruce by-election, April 1865


Expanded by J947 (talk). Self-nominated at 04:15, 18 January 2017 (UTC).

  • Comment: @J947: I think 30 ALTs is excessive, especially since most are similar. Could you please select one or two with your preferred phrasing and strike or remove the rest. (Note: I am not reviewing this nomination, only offering a comment.) Mindmatrix 19:45, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
  • YesY Selected three. J947 19:56, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment: No QPQ needed. J947 19:56, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on January 20[edit]

Dhanush filmography

5x expanded by Vensatry (talk). Self-nominated at 15:51, 20 January 2017 (UTC).

  • Somebody wins a National Award each year. Not sure what makes it so 'exceptional'? Vensatry (talk) 16:37, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg (Not a full review) A QPQ review appears to be needed before this can move forward. North America1000 11:51, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
@Northamerica1000: Done Vensatry (talk) 18:41, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg Well sourced detailed list with enough interesting prose to be long enough, no copyvio obvious. What do you think about a link such as 3, a 2012 Tamil film? I confess that I noticed the 3 only after the third reading. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:17, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on January 23[edit]

Susanna Elm

Created by Jwslubbock (talk) and Haylesley (talk). Nominated by Andrew Davidson (talk) at 21:05, 29 January 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Length, Date, Cite, QPQ, and Earwigs checkout. Mifter (talk) 23:20, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Returned from prep. Sorry, this is not a hook. I've also written things. If you're trying to emphasize the bawdy title, please put it into a better setting. Yoninah (talk) 15:04, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
  • I don't agree with Yoninah's complaint. The hook is deliberately "short, punchy, catchy, and likely to draw the readers in" as recommended at WP:DYKHOOK. Let's see what the reviewer Mifter says. So that we may have more choice, here's a more verbose version. My fear is that, if we make it longer like this, it will attract more nitpicking. KISS. Andrew D. (talk) 17:30, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
  • ALT1 ... that Susanna Elm wrote Virgins of God, reviewed as a stimulating exposition and exploitation of little-known virginity literature?
  • No, you don't have to go from snappy to verbose. If you had a cite for this, you could write:
  • ALT2: ... that Susanna Elm expanded her doctoral thesis on female asceticism into the book Virgins of God? Yoninah (talk) 20:42, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
  • It's not unusual for a thesis to be turned into a book and so ALT2 tends to dilute the hook's impact. It also explains too much about the work and this will tend to lessen interest in clicking through. I still prefer the original which gets the reader wondering what Virgins of God is about rather than telling them at the outset. We're writing a hook here, not a summary. Andrew D. (talk) 21:06, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Hervé Pierre

  • Reviewed: To come soon

Created by Iselilja (talk). Self-nominated at 23:40, 30 January 2017 (UTC).

  • Long enough, well-sourced, neutral and free from apparent copyvio. Hook is interesting, appropriate and the source checks out (WWD is a reputable fashion journal). Regarding newness - technically you nominated in on the 8th day - I won't fail the nomination because of this technicality, but next time please be sure to be punctual. QPQ remains to be done. HaEr48 (talk) 20:11, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg Adding icon to indicate that this is lacking QPQ. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:28, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Miriam T. Griffin

  • ... that Miriam Griffin hosted the first Women in Classics dinner at Oxford?
    • ALT1:... that Miriam Griffin analysed the reasons for the fall of the Emperor Nero?

Created by DonPantalone (talk). Nominated by Andrew Davidson (talk) at 16:31, 23 January 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg (Not a full review) Sorry, a minor matter, but the article is presently ineligible because the single-sentence paragraph in the "Personal life" section of the article has no inline citations, which is required per D2 of the DYK Supplementary guidelines. North America1000 12:20, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg That section has been updated and a citation added to support it. Andrew D. (talk) 20:52, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg New enough and long enough; the lead does not strike me as too short now given the article's overall size, and it obeys WP:LEADLENGTH. QPQ has been done. Earwig found no likely copyvio — the biggest hits it found were book title and editor listings. I have to admit that I'm not too excited by either hook: the first is "woman organizes dinner party" and the second is "scholar analyzes some historical detail that nobody cares about any more". (Actually, I think people should care about the reasons for the fall of Nero, as history tends to repeat, but that doesn't mean they do.) Also, although the article as a whole is adequately sourced, the dinner party hook is not: one source mentions her and the dinner but doesn't say she was the host, while the other is written by her rather than being about her. Some of the article also looks like filler: "The Oxford University library catalogue (SOLO) shows that she frequently donates academic books"? It's not needed as the article would be long enough and punchier without it. But that's not really a DYK rules issue. We just need a better and better-sourced hook and we can be good to go. —David Eppstein (talk) 08:24, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
  • The Women in Classics dinner was a big deal to the women who are trying to establish themselves in this male-dominated field and this aspect was the point of the editathon. But I grant that this will be of limited interest to others. Nero and his downfall, on the other hand, is quite topical, because Nero was a populist leader who was reviled by the patrician class. Here's a selection of headlines which demonstrate that people do still care about this historical detail:
  1. "Donald Trump: the modern-day Nero ready to burn down America" (Guardian)
  2. "To understand Trump, we should look to the tyrants of ancient Rome" (Guardian)
  3. "Donald Trump could be America's Nero — if we're lucky" (Spectator)
  4. "Trump as Nero - Europe Must Defend Itself Against A Dangerous President" (Der Speigel)
  5. "Bring Your Own Applause - What Donald Trump and Roman Emperor Nero Have in Common" (JSTOR Daily)
  6. "Caligula, Nero, Donald Trump?" (PennLive)
  7. "Emperor Nero has now taken power in Washington" (Financial Times)
  8. "Dealing with Emperor Trump: Field Notes from Ancient Rome" (Common Dreams)

Symbol redirect vote 4.svg So, given these parallels, please reconsider ALT1. Andrew D. (talk) 10:12, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

  • A DYK hook should be attention-catching. These are not, regardless of how significant what they describe is. If you want to include Nero, can you at least briefly describe something surprising that she concluded about Nero (and include it with appropriate sourcing in the article so that we can use it as a hook)? We leave the hook and the article knowing no more about Nero than we did before. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:09, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on January 24[edit]

Kathleen N. Straus

  • Reviewed: I am exempt from the QPQ requirement because this is only my fourth DYN nomination

Created by EAWH (talk). Self-nominated at 17:34, 31 January 2017 (UTC).

Symbol question.svg Detailed bio, on good sources, no copyvio obvious. - I moved the detailed award section from the lead, - please consider to mentions two or three as a summary in the lead. You may want to place the refs to their first occurrence, or perhaps place them all in a references section, away from the prose. - I confess that the hook - correct as it all is - would not not make me want to find out more about her. Can you think of something more catchy? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:02, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Hari Bhimaraju

  • ... that Hari Bhimaraju was 11 years old when she developed a teaching aid to help blind and visually impaired students to learn the periodic table? Source:"First place: Manasa (Hari) Bhimaraju, 11, Kennedy Middle School, Cupertino, Calif. Hari designed and built a computer system to help students learn the periodic table of the elements. She also incorporated sound to aid people who are visually impaired." https://www.sciencenewsforstudents.org/article/cooking-broadcom-win “Cooking up a Broadcom win" from Science News for Students.
  • Reviewed: William Hoapili Kaauwai
  • Comment: I'd like to promote young females in science as they are under-represented on Wikipedia

Created by Mramoeba (talk). Self-nominated at 00:07, 25 January 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg I was going to review this hook since the subject was fascinating. Unfortunately @Mramoeba:, it is listed for Deletion. Putting the review on hold, I will pick it up if the article is kept.  MPJ-DK  01:21, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
Ok, thanks for stopping by @MPJ-DK:. You can of course comment on the deletion if you have an opinion. Cheers Mramoeba (talk) 01:33, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on January 25[edit]

Kodandera M. Cariappa

Improved to Good Article status by Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk). Self-nominated at 15:39, 30 January 2017 (UTC).

  • Recent GA. The article and hook are referenced. I prefer the first one. No copyright or neutrality issue detected. QPQ is done. Good to go.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 23:59, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Actually there is a some worrisome areas where the text is copied straight from the source especially the sentence starting with "Cariappa's association with the Indian Army" [13]. Can Krishna Chaitanya Velaga please reword those parts?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 00:11, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
@KAVEBEAR: Fixed. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 13:39, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg --KAVEBEAR (talk) 17:02, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Hail, America

  • ... that, after Jimmy Carter abolished the performance of "Hail, America" at White House events, a "very confused" cat named Misty Malarkey Yin Yang (pictured) stood-in for the president's ceremonial military escort?
*ALT1 ... that this year is the 100th anniversary of the composition of "Hail, America"?

Created/expanded by DarjeelingTea (talk). Self-nominated at 09:25, 25 January 2017 (UTC).

Symbol question.svg You got me interested in the topic, but before I can review, I need to understand a few things. The piece is a march, right, to be played by brass, not a song, to be sung by a human voice? Why do you use {{infobox song}}? We have {{infobox musical composition}}. I'd say it doesn't even belong in any song category. - Images: I am trained old style, no image left under a header, person should look "in", chronology, no images on both sides squeezing text. - Links: do we need US government? (especially when the ceremony should be the focus). - Refs: I don't appreciate four for one fact. Pick the most relevant 1 or 2 for it, and place the others somewhere else. - Finally: the whole story about the cat (which is hard to see on the image) belongs in an article about the cat ;) - I'd prefer a hook about the music and its use to what happened when it was not used. - What do you think? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:40, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
Thanks much for this thorough review, Gerda Arendt. I think I've incorporated all your edits, as well as proposed an Alt hook, but let me know if I missed something. DarjeelingTea (talk) 23:50, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for listening, - the greatest gift, as I said on my talk page ;) - The ALT is more to my liking. How about dropping the link to the year, because we don't want readers to go there and stay because it's interesting reading. I suggest plain "... that 2017 is". Now the title doesn't tell that it's more than some American patriotic song, which might leave foreigners like myself cold. Say a bit more but after the title. Use as Presidential Entrance March should somehow go to the infobox, best with years. If there's no good parameter yet, we should make one. Or how about the second (neutral) image there, with a caption that mentions the music not the man (who is not seen), but perhaps a date? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:08, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
Gerda Arendt - I think I've incorporated all these changes, but let me know if I missed something. DarjeelingTea (talk) 23:40, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
Thank you, I made one more change to image placement, and changed a fixed image size to an upright, which reflects users' preferences. Sorry, I have another concern: "Presidential Entrance March", says the article, is the name of the ceremony. Who says so? I'd think "Presidential Entrance" might be the name of a ceremony, and the march played for it. Any source for the ceremony known as march? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:25, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
Gerda Arendt, thanks very much - I've made this change. DarjeelingTea (talk) 02:49, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for changing march to entrance. Now please just one source naming it so. You gave an offline one that I can't see, but if it's really known as such, there must be something online, no? Please link the ambiguous term trio and mention in the caption for the second image that only the trio (Trio?) was played then. I moved it from its position in Entrance section. Getting closer ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:40, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on January 26[edit]


  • ... that the dinosaur Paludititan lived on Hațeg Island, which is now part of Romania? Source: [14]
    • ALT1:... that ...? Source: "You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)

5x expanded by MWAK (talk) and Robin Liesens. Nominated by Casliber (talk) at 12:49, 30 January 2017 (UTC).

  • starting review--Kevmin § 13:43, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg*Article expansion new enough and long enough. hook is cited and confirmed by the source, and no policy violations or copyvio issues are seen in the article. The first paragraph of the Description section needs a citation, and i would suggest a hook based on Paludititan being considered a island dwarf (with image) as a very hooky alternative.--Kevmin § 13:54, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
Yes it would be great....but Paludititan isn't mentioned in that article...Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:35, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
You can work this reference in to complete the island dwarfism portion. Plos 1--Kevmin § 18:39, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
How do you like-
ALT3: "... that Paludititan is a Romanian island dwarf?
As a catchy hook that follows the sourcing--Kevmin § 23:44, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Byzantine (video game)

  • ... that Discovery Communications' Byzantine allowed players to explore Turkish tourist attractions?
  • ... that the team of edutainment title Byzantine received permission from the Turkish government to capture photography and footage within the country?

Created by Coin945 (talk). Self-nominated at 17:24, 27 January 2017 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on January 27[edit]

Hanover Lodge

Hanover Lodge
Hanover Lodge
  • ... that London's Hanover Lodge (pictured) became the UK’s most expensive home in 2012, when it sold for £120 million? Source: "Andrey Goncharenko shelled out a massive £120 million ($205 million) for Britain’s most expensive home, it has been revealed. The oligarch has since filled for planning permission to extend the Grade-2 listed London property. " (and [15] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)

Created by Edwardx (talk). Self-nominated at 23:20, 3 February 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg New enough. Long enough. Neutral tone. Reliable citations throughout. Citations check out. Hook is interesting enough. Wish the article was written in a less list-like manner but clearly written nonetheless. GTG. Hybernator (talk) 05:38, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Article has been pulled from prep because it has been templated for not having a lead section, and because the hook doesn't seem to account for homes that are typically not for sale, such as Buckingham Palace or the like. Highest price paid for a home/residence, perhaps? (And is this a purchase or a take over of the 150-year lease mentioned earlier? In any event, the article needs reorganization, including dealing with the high number of single-sentence paragraphs, and a better attempt at a chronology of ownership. There's also a disagreement between two of the major sources as to the architect that should be addressed. (I would also suggest that starting five consecutive paragraphs with the word "From" should be addressed as well.) BlueMoonset (talk) 23:18, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

It also transpires that it isn't the most expensive house in the UK, per RS. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:07, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Herbert Reiner Jr.

Created by Fowler&fowler (talk). Self-nominated at 13:23, 2 February 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg New enough, long enough, neutrally written, well referenced, no close paraphrasing seen. However, several paragraphs lack at least one citation, per Rule D2. Hook ref verified and cited inline. I tweaked the hooks, and like the shorter, snappier ALT1. No QPQ needed for nominator with less than 5 DYK credits. Yoninah (talk) 23:10, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Sonata for horn, trumpet and trombone

Created by LouisAlain (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 15:26, 3 February 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg New enough, long enough. The quote about "minions" is unclear. Where does the quote start and end? Is the (?) part of the quote? Please make that a bit more clear. AGF on cites and close paraphrasing due to offline sources. Neutral. Hook (barely) short enough, interesting enough to encourage a click, and cited (AGF on offline source). QPQ complete. Just the one small quote query to address. ~ Rob13Talk 04:57, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
LouisAlain, could you help comparing to the original, please? And help to understand "minions", - is it something like "little ones"? Hard to translate humour, see the "au point" of the violin sonata ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:51, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
Improved by LouisAlain, please check, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:36, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Gladiolus Amicitia

Source: [17]Created by PanagiotisZois (talk). Self-nominated at 23:27, 27 January 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Hook is cited and very interesting. Page is new enough and long enough. One eyeball issue, that I might take a crack at myself, is that some paragraphs on the article lack inline-citations. If someone wants to address that before me, by all means do. Other than that, the article is well-written and has no policy issues. The creator has not completed a QPQ but I have a ton of those credits and am willing to do away with one on their behalf. No CopyVio issues. I guess inline citations is the only issue. DaltonCastle (talk) 01:17, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
  • I guess I would also consider the alternate hook of "that Gladiolus was redesigned during the development of Final Fantasy XV to look more intelligent?". DaltonCastle (talk) 01:20, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Wow, that was fast. First of all, thank you :) . Second of all, maybe an alternative could be "that Final Fantasy XV party member Gladiolus was redesigned during development of the game to look more intelligent?" --PanagiotisZois (talk) 01:23, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

I also added an inline citation. It's not much but it's a start. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 01:29, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
Ok, great! Looking at the page now it looks a lot better. The one reason I have to await a more experienced editor to review is that, while I think sourcing is all good for an article about a fictional video game character, I don't know that all of it is. Hopefully somebody can clear this up. DaltonCastle (talk) 01:37, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
I'm guessing the fact I haven't reviewed another nomination is the reason this DYK wasn't accepted? PanagiotisZois (talk) 11:30, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
  • @PanagiotisZois: Don't worry, it can take a while to get through the process -- there's often a backlog of a month or two. You just need to be patient, and help resolve any issues that are brought up. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 19:33, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on January 28[edit]

Loose Change (EP)

Created by HeyJude70 (talk). Self-nominated at 08:09, 28 January 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg - Date, cite, QPQ, and Earwigs all checkout. Unfortunately the article is too short at only 1199b. Expand the article to at least 1500b and it should be good to go. Mifter (talk) 23:39, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
@Mifter: I've added some information to the article and it has now been expanded to 1776b. Changes may need to be reviewed by someone else but I think it should be fine now. ThomDevexx ॐ (talk) 07:50, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on January 30[edit]

Una Kroll

  • ... that Una Kroll's parents were both spies, but she became a nun and missionary doctor? Source: "You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)

Created by Edwardx (talk). Self-nominated at 23:50, 6 February 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol delete vote.svg - Article is a very close paraphrasing of this - Earwigs doesn't pick it up because it requires registration to view the article. Please rework to avoid copyright violations. Mifter (talk) 05:57, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Antonín Cyril Stojan

  • Reviewed: IOU

Created by Lord Sidious 82 (talk) and Cloudz679 (talk). Nominated by Cloudz679 (talk) at 10:19, 6 February 2017 (UTC).

  • @Cloudz679:: New enough, long enough, no copyvio problems. The hook, while cited, is going to put me to sleep, and I think it would put readers who aren't aware of the Catholic meaning of Venerable to sleep as well. Unfortunately, the article doesn't have anything better to offer in terms of a hook. QPQ pending. At this point, it's about the hook and QPQ to get this approved. Raymie (tc) 05:36, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Adding icon to reflect nomination status. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:39, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Romanian Senate election, 1868

  • ... that the Romanian Senate election of 1868, which consolidated the "reddish" liberal legislature, was held in July, when many conservative voters had left on vacation? Source: Ghimpele, 8/1868, p. 1: Dupe părerea mai multora, Senatulŭ celŭ noŭ se d̦ice a fi, daca nu roșu, celŭ puținŭ roșatecŭ saŭ pembe. Toțĭ se mirŭ de una ca acésta, numaĭ noĭ nu ne mirămŭ. Se înțelege de sine că a trebuitŭ să se 'ntêmple, pe câtŭ timpŭ guvernulŭ a pusŭ alegerile tocmaĭ în timpulŭ cândŭ boieriĭ [...] aŭ tabietŭ a merge în streinătate ca să maĭ resufle din plictiséla d'aicĭ ("By many accounts, the new Senate is said to be, if not scarlet red, then at least reddish or pink. Everyone is stunned by this, but not us. It is self-evident that this should have occurred, for as long as government called elections just when the boyars [...] have this comfort of traveling abroad to relieve themselves of the boredom in these here parts").

Created by Dahn (talk). Self-nominated at 13:17, 1 February 2017 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on January 31[edit]

Executive Order 13767

Trump signing the order.
Trump signing the order.
  • ... that President Donald Trump signed Executive Order 13767 to create a physical wall in order to secure the southern border of US, and prevent illegal immigration (pictured)? Source: [18]
    • ALT1:... that President Donald Trump signed Executive Order 13767 to create a physical wall in order to "secure the southern border of US, and prevent illegal immigration" (pictured)? Source: [19]

Created by Junosoon (talk) and Gamebuster19901 (talk). Nominated by Gamebuster19901 (talk) at 15:29, 1 February 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg @Gamebuster19901: There are a few problems with this. Aside of the hook link not being bold (which I have fixed), the article is only 1,366 characters long and thus is below the threshold. There is also a citation needed tag which would need to be replaced with an inline source. Also, I'm not too comfortable with the tag on the white house link because it appears to imply close paraphrasing, which would need to reword certain parts of the article. Once these are fixed, ping me and I'll have another look. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 23:41, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for pointing out some of the issues with the article, I'll get them fixed asap!
However, According to section 2.b. of the eligibility criteria, public domain material is allowed in articles, it just can't be counted towards the total character count. I'll expand the sections some more to help it meet the criteria. Thanks Gamebuster19901 (TalkContributions) 14:36, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
@The C of E: I believe the issues you have shown have been addressed as of now. Gamebuster19901 (TalkContributions) 16:02, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Side point Is it too late to sic Dicklyon on Trump for his idiotic capitalization of Southern Border? Now that would be a useful outlet for Dick's crusading zeal! EEng 17:41, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
If you want, you can uncapitalize it, I just quoted it from the source. Gamebuster19901 (TalkContributions) 18:08, 3 February 2017 (UTC) Actually, that was a mistake on my part, I have corrected it. 18:23, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
OK, good. Now then... ALT0 is untenable because it's inappropriate to state, in WP's voice, why Trump signed the thing -- there are too many other possibilities (stupidity, perfidy, racism, personal profit, and just plain meanness) that history will have to sort out. Even ALT1 uses a primary source for this key assertion of purpose, which is marginal (thought the quotations help). If you agree I suggest you strike them. Let me suggest:
ALT2:... that Donald Trump's Executive Order 13767 stated purpose is "construction of a physical wall on the southern border ... to prevent illegal immigration, drug and human trafficking, and acts of terrorism (pictured)"?
EEng 18:50, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
I think you're right, it's better to stick to the facts. How does this sound:
Gamebuster19901 (TalkContributions) 05:54, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Ready for a review of ALT3 since all previous concerns are adressed. Gamebuster19901 (TalkContributions) 15:31, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
I don't get the along the southern border of the US (pictured) bit. The picture doesn't show the southern border of the US, though it might reasonably be said to show an act of terrorism. That's why I'd suggest ALT2 over ALT3. EEng 16:09, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
When it's taken out of context like that, I could see the confusion. However, the (pictured) is applying to the whole sentence, and the caption of the image clearly states what it's showing. Gamebuster19901 (TalkContributions) 13:36, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
How does ALT4 look? Gamebuster19901 (TalkContributions) 13:46, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
Well, now that we come down to it, I don't think the picture's worth much at all -- some guy at a desk signing something. And when you think about it, pretty much only people on Jupiter would be able to answer the question posed in all these hooks with anything other than "Of course I know!" Can't we have a hook on something actually new and interesting, like that the former commissioner says that the current system of patrol is better than a wall? EEng 21:22, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
Well first off, the President isn't just "some guy", secondly, If the phrase "signed Executive Order 13767 to create a physical wall in order to secure the southern border of US, and prevent illegal immigration" isn't suitable for Wikipedia's voice, then there is no way that the former commissioner saying that the current system is better would be suitable either, as that's even more subjective.
Also, DYK isn't about answering the question, it's about exposing new and improved content, and to encourage more editors to edit the article. see WP:DYKAIM Gamebuster19901 (TalkContributions) 13:48, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
It's not the subjectivity, it's the voice. It would be OK for Wikipedia to report that Trump says he signed it for such-and-such a reason (as opposed to reporting that he did it for those reasons), and similarly it would be OK to report that Mr. Ex-Commissioner says that the current approach is better. My point is that the latter will be news to most readers, while the former will be news to no one. EEng 15:50, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg for Alt 4 or Alt 1 Gamebuster19901 (TalkContributions) 13:48, 8 February 2017 (UTC).

Is Alt 1 or Alt 4 good for DYK, if not, how should it be improved? What are some appropriate hooks for this DYK about Executive Order 13767? 14:07, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

  • Comment An RfC for a DYK hook? Whatever next? And suddenly opening an RfC posing a choice between the two particular hooks you happen to be interested in, when other ideas are on the table, isn't appropriate. How about:
ALT5 ... a former US Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection has stated that the current methods of border patrol are preferable to a wall?
There are a few issues with that one, it doesn't have a way to link to the article. It's also just stating the opinion of just one person, and the article isn't specifically about that, even though it's within the scope of the article. Gamebuster19901 (TalkContributions) 15:26, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
EEng 14:20, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
You're right, the RFC was not neutral enough, sorry I have corrected it. Gamebuster19901 (TalkContributions) 15:26, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Sorry about not mentioning the article in ALT5 -- got distracted by some spilled oatmeal. As to the hook vs. what the article is "specifically about", hooks often (even usually) highlight some peripheral, little-known fact rather than obvious things like, "Did you know that Picasso was an artist?" or "Did you know that the order to build a wall is meant to prevent illegal immigration?" And it's fine to express the opinion of just one person, as long as it's ascribed to that person. Anyway:
ALT6 ... a former US Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection has stated that the current methods of border patrol are preferable to the border wall called for by Executive Order 13767?
EEng 15:38, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
I see, I think I'm willing to go with something similar to Alt 6 if Alt 4 or Alt 1 cannot be used, though. I would also like to have a link to Gil Kerlikowske and a source if we're going that route, without making it too wordy.
perhaps ALT7 or ALT 8
ALT7 ... that a former US Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection has stated that the current methods of border patrol are preferable to the border wall called for by Executive Order 13767? [22]
ALT8 ... that a former US Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection has stated that the current methods of border patrol are preferable to the border wall called for by Executive Order 13767? [23]
Gamebuster19901 (TalkContributions) 16:04, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
I'm not saying this just because you've warmed up to ALTs 6-8, but now that we're moving along here may I suggest you withdraw the RfC (though I don't know how that's done, actually). Do we really want to wait 30 days and have everyone and his brother chiming in on something which is typically left to the privileged few? EEng 18:11, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment I thought the bot was screwing up when it summoned me here, but we really do seem to have an RFC for a DYK hook. Whatever will we come up with next. Since you both seem to be moving towards consensus, I would suggest closing the RFC (which should be as simple as placing the archive top and archive bottom templates, together with a note saying that you've come to an agreement). For what it's worth I'd agree with EEng that presenting new information is likely to be hookier than what Trump's been promising for a long long time. Vanamonde (talk) 09:25, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on February 1[edit]

Jadunath Singh

Improved to Good Article status by Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk). Self-nominated at 01:39, 2 February 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Newly promoted to GA after two GARs and one PR. Good quality article, long enough. No apparent copyvios, Earwig's tool gives red alert on copyvio for the large quote which is acceptable. Both alts are verified and QPQ is done. Although I have one point to address. The article in the section "War of 1947" does not anywhere mention that he died in the action. We come to know of that only through the PVC quote. Please add that. Rest is all good. Also, Talk:Jadunath_Singh#Sums mentions a minor problem that needs fixing. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 04:44, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
@Dharmadhyaksha: Fixed. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 13:02, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg New reviewer needed to complete the review; previous review has retired from Wikipedia. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:41, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg The page creator has taken care of the point raised by the reviewer, as well as points made on the article's talk page by other editors. The article is new enough, long enough, neutrally written, well referenced, and no close paraphrasing seen. The hook refs are verified and cited inline. The only image in the article is freely-licensed. QPQ done. ALT0 good to go. Yoninah (talk) 00:09, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on February 2[edit]

Was Gott tut, das ist wohlgetan

Nordhausen hymnal of 1695
Nordhausen hymnal of 1695
  • Reviewed: The Tank (theater)
  • Comment: The article began as an AfC by and was expanded by Mathsci. - Many sources say "deathbed", but then he recovered. - Please with image, even if it is hard to see, or we need a year in the already long hook. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:48, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

5x expanded by (talk) and Mathsci (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 16:48, 9 February 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg New enough, long enough. Neutral, cited to offline sources, AGF on close paraphrasing/copyvios since I can't access the offline sources. Hook is interesting, especially if you click through and note the recovery, and short enough. It's not quite supported by the article text. Gerda Arendt, could you double-check the source (or ask Mathsci to do so) and ensure that the "for his friend" bit is supported? If that can't specifically be verified, we could reword this along the lines of so-and-so wrote the text of blank to accompany a melody composed by so-and-so-2 on his deathbed. I'll leave the specifics of that wording to you so I'm still able to approve an alt hook, if you have to re-word. As for the image, I really can't approve it. It's so impossible to see at small sizes that it would be fairly useless on the main page. Sheet music might be a decent compromise, since the sheet music images will at least be recognizable at low resolutions. ~ Rob13Talk 00:16, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
The source is here.[24] The authorship of the melody has been an issue since the hymn was written. Taking into account BU Rob13's comments above, perhaps the DYK hook could be changed to
"that according to a hymnal (account pictured), Samuel Rodigast wrote the text of "Was Gott tut, das ist wohlgetan" for his seriously ill friend Severus Gastorius, who after he recovered had it sung at his door each week."
Mathsci (talk) 08:08, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
@Mathsci: I was more concerned with the "for his friend" bit. (Although authorship is also possibly an issue, now that I've seen the source.) That's attributing a reason for writing the text that isn't explicitly stated in the source. ~ Rob13Talk 00:50, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
User:Gerda Arendt made this DYK request and devised the hook, not me. Another possibility might be ""that according to a hymnal (account pictured), Samuel Rodigast wrote the text of "Was Gott tut, das ist wohlgetan" during the serious illness of his friend Severus Gastorius, who after he recovered had it sung at his door each week." Mathsci (talk) 06:42, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
We could say it completely differently, because we will never be able to know reasons behind an action as a fact, ever. Fact is that the two were friends at school and university, and that Rodigast - if he was at the bed - must have traveled.
ALT2: ... that a "deathbed story" printed in 1695 (pictured) narrates the creation of the hymn "Was Gott tut, das ist wohlgetan"?
Please, Rob, even if you don't agree with showing an image, don't change a hook. It will be up to the prep builders to use it or not. Most suggested images will not be shown. This one supports the hook. The current Gotteslob simply states below the hymn: T: Samuel Rodigast [1674/75] 1775, M: (Severus Gastorius [1675] 1679. No question about the authors, just the dates are not certain.
I don't think ALT2 is an improvement. Also I think Gerda should base what she what wants to include in the hook or her statements about the subject to what is in the article. Mathsci (talk) 15:25, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
Mathsci, it doesn't have to be word by word in the article, - this a suggestion to use a summary, which doesn't distract attention by links to the authors' articles. If you don't like it, it's your turn to suggest something better. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:34, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
I already made two suggestions further up the page. Why not read them and then comment? Thanks, Mathsci (talk) 20:19, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Wayzata Bay Center

  • ... that in 2011, Wayzata Bay Center was shut and torn down to make way for a mixed-use retail and residential community center?
  • Comment: I have never nominated an article for DYK mention before, so I apologize if I make an error or mistake during this, thank you. Carbrera (talk) 02:12, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Improved to Good Article status by Carbrera (talk). Self-nominated at 02:12, 21 April 2016 (UTC). Transcluded 21:27, 2 February 2017.

  • Comment: this nomination was not originally transcluded at time of nomination, but is being reactivated now. Yoninah (talk) 21:27, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg This nomination was made by a first-time nominator 3 weeks after receiving a Good Article icon. However, since we are finally transcluding it 10 months later, I will IAR on this first nomination and review it for DYK. It is long enough, neutrally written, well referenced, and no close paraphrasing seen. No QPQ needed for nominator with less than 5 DYK credits. The only issue is the hook. It seems like a pretty ordinary fact. The part about the vacancy rate going up so dramatically is more interesting – but please note that the source cited at the end of this sentence says nothing about store closures being the cause of the increased vacancy rate, so this clause needs to be sourced. The trolley is also cute. Yoninah (talk) 21:44, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
  • @Yoninah: How about this one? I wouldn't know how to formulate the trolley fact since it uses a book source instead of a website/online publication. Carbrera (talk) 22:13, 2 February 2017‎ (UTC)
  • I don't understand; you just make a hook out of what you wrote in the article. The ALT1 is okay; you don't have to say it's defunct (that will turn off readers). I suggest shortening it to:
  • ALT1a: ... that the Wayzata Bay Center shopping mall was built over wetlands?
  • Here's another suggestion:
  • ALT2: ... that the Wayzata Bay Center shopping mall, with 1,200 parking spaces, used to offer a shuttle service? (Note: a trolley car runs on rails; is that what the source says?) Yoninah (talk) 23:03, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
  • @Yoninah: Perhaps I'm incorrect, but I was told in a previous DYK nom that the source used to verify the DYK has to be available on the internet. And since the book is not (in full) available online, I was hesitant to use the trolley factoid. But in the case I'm wrong, I strongly prefer ALT2. Carbrera (talk) 03:38, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
  • @Carbrera: that information is incorrect. You'll notice that we have 2 approval icons, one green (for online sources that the reviewer can verify personally) and one gray (for AGF, or "assume good faith") for offline sources. We AGF hooks all the time. Could you please verify the nature of the trolley, as I'd like to link it in the article to tram? Then another reviewer will have to approve the alt, since I wrote it. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 11:38, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
  • @Yoninah: Thanks for the clarification. Unfortunately, I no longer have the book in my possession, but it definitely wasn't on a rail. I think the author was using "trolley" for "shuttle". Regards, Carbrera (talk) 21:32, 3 February 2017 (UTC).

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Symbol redirect vote 4.svg I agree. I searched on "trolley" in the Google book source and nothing came up. I edited the article and hook. Calling on another editor to complete the review of ALT2. Yoninah (talk) 19:31, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

  • @Yoninah: Just wondering what the importance of that note is in ALT 2. Thanks, Carbrera (talk) 21:02, 5 February 2017 (UTC).
  • @Carbrera: I asked you a question there, and you answered it below. Then I struck it out, but I left it there so the prep promoter can read through the review and see for himself/herself that any problems that were raised were resolved. (Don't worry, it's not part of the hook; any prep builder knows that the hook ends with the question mark.) The whole nomination, including strikethroughs, stands as a complete record of the review for interested prep promoters, queue promoters, and main page administrators. Yoninah (talk) 21:09, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Reviewer still needed for ALT2. Yoninah (talk) 23:01, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Henri Beau

  • ... that Henri Beau is a forgotten Canadian painter who enjoyed success as an early Canadian Impressionist painter in Paris?
  • Comment: this nomination was not originally transcluded at time of nomination, but is being reactivated now. Adding a DYKmake for a subsequent editor. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:00, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Created by L. John Dory (talk). Self-nominated at 23:20, 19 April 2016 (UTC). Transcluded 20:00, 2 February 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg This is an orphaned nomination that was never transcluded properly. It was nominated within 7 days of creation, is long enough, neutrally written, adequately referenced, and no close paraphrasing seen. However, there are a few paragraphs which need at least one citation per Rule D2. Regarding the hook, the second part about the hook is cited to an offline source, but the first part, about him being "forgotten", needs an inline cite. No QPQ needed for nominator with less than 5 DYK credits. Yoninah (talk) 20:44, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
  • I see the page creator has not edited since April 2016. I'm therefore pinging W.carter, who is listed in the DYK creation credits for the editing he did on the article, to see if he can help out here. Yoninah (talk) 20:46, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Hi Yoninah, it was a while since I worked on this article, it was to help out a new user. I'll look at it more closely tomorrow and see if I can make something of it. Best, cart-Talk 20:52, 2 February 2017 (UTC) (btw, I'm a "she")
  • @Yoninah: (No problem.) I've had a look at the article and I'm sorry but I can't help you out here. I don't have access to the books and I would never submit a DYK with this many unrefed sentences. I think the only option is to decline this. Sorry. cart-Talk 14:23, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
  • @W.carter: thanks for your time. BTW, DYK only requires one cite per paragraph; this is not GA, which wants citations for every sentence. I'll look at this nomination again later. Yoninah (talk) 19:34, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on February 3[edit]

Sark during the German occupation of the Channel Islands

Aerial view of Sark
Aerial view of Sark
  • Comment: part of a series of articles about the Channel Islands during World War II
  • Comment: this nomination was not originally transcluded at time of nomination, but is being reactivated now.BlueMoonset (talk) 16:56, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Created by Ânes-pur-sàng (talk). Self-nominated at 10:33, 12 February 2016 (UTC). Transcluded at 16:56, 3 February 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg New enough, long enough, within policy. Hook's format and content are fine. No apparent close-paraphrasing. Img license is ok. QPQ not required. Thanks for noticing the snafu and getting this aerticle to the review page; better late than never. GTG. --Rosiestep (talk) 22:55, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg The article has acquired a template indicating that it needs more referencing, and indeed a number of paragraphs have no inline citations at all. This has been discussed on Ânes-pur-sàng's talk page, but unfortunately there hasn't yet been any work done to rectify the issue. I have pulled it from prep. I've also replaced the original image here with the one that was used on the main page, and added the "pictured" version of the hook as ALT1; I hope it can be promoted with the picture once the referencing has been improved. BlueMoonset (talk) 07:56, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Maria Eugenia Bozzoli

  • Reviewed: pending
  • Comment: Hook has two inline citations supporting it (Hartney, p. 147; Society for Applied Anthropology, p. 58). ALT1 is supported by the "Penland, p. 124" inline citation.

Created by Rosiestep (talk), Dr. Blofeld (talk), and Ipigott (talk). Nominated by Rosiestep (talk) at 02:03, 5 February 2017 (UTC).

Symbol question.svg Thank you, team, for meeting an interesting woman, on good sources, Spanish source accepted AGF, no copyio obvious. I prefer the original hook, - don't like "first" in hooks ;) - Before approving I have a few wishes for the article:
  • The lead could be more of a summary instead of repeating when she started working and the length of some term, for example.
  • "... work has been into ..." is not a phrase I know, - should I learn it?
  • "She has worked with government institutes on numerous occasions" - I don't think that needs to be said at all, certainly not in a summary.
  • Even the prizes might be summarized, instead of all these colourful names.
  • To have a 1975 date under "education" looks funny.
  • The quote in the Career section needs a ref right behind it.
  • "mainly been concentrated" - the article is long enough, we don't need redundancy ;)
  • In the second para there, we have "Bozzoli" three sentences in a row.
  • Acclaim - don't think that's a frequent header, but may be wrong.
  • "as well as daughter, Leticia," looks strange.
Good reading! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:29, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

The Vinh wiretap

The Hughes OH-6 Cayuse was the basis for "The Quiet One".
The Hughes OH-6 Cayuse was the basis for "The Quiet One".
  • ... that the CIA's black helicopter (pictured) from Area 51 was used to eavesdrop on Paris Peace Talks discussions?
    • Source: Conboy, Kenneth and James Morrison (1995). Shadow War: The CIA's Secret War in Laos. Paladin Press. ISBN 0-87364-825-0 pp. 381-386. Also, Chiles, James R., "Air America's Black Helicopters", Air and Space Magazine, March 2008. Retrieved 17 January 2017 from [25].
      • Having scanned other noms in the new format, I realize I could be more explicit in my sourcing:
      • "...it received an experimental , radar-absorbent, semigloss black finish." "On 8 April 1971, Hughes officially unveiled the Quiet One to the public." Conboy p. 382.
      • "Flights of The Quiet One included low-level work at the secret Air Force base Area 51..." Air/Space Mag, p. 3 in hard copy.
      • "...the Vinh [wire]tap was providing a stream of information from inside the DRV [Democratic Republic of Vietnam]." (Bracketed info added for clarification.) Conboy p. 385.Georgejdorner (talk) 18:19, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Reviewed: TBA Horse Soldiers (film)
  • Comment: Nomination for April Fool's Day. I am baffled by the process of attaching a photo. If some kind soul could attach the photo from the article, I will alter the caption to fit.Georgejdorner (talk) 20:15, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Created by Georgejdorner (talk). Nominated by Casliber (talk) at 22:45, 4 February 2017 (UTC).

    • A grateful tip of the hat to Casliber--the most recent of many.
    • Now--let the review begin.Georgejdorner (talk) 17:56, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

International Juridical Association

Mahatma Gandhi
Mahatma Gandhi
  • Reviewed: National Lawyers Guild
  • Comment: This nomination was not originally transcluded at time of nomination, but is being reactivated now. Yoninah (talk) 00:26, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Created by Aboudaqn (talk). Self-nominated at 13:49, 2 December 2016 (UTC). Transcluded on 3 February 2017.

  • Reformatting hook correctly; removing bold links to articles that are not part of this nomination, and removing citations:
  • ALT0a: ... that despite accusations by future US president Richard Nixon's House Un-American Activities Committee of being a communist front, the International Juridical Association had members ranging from alleged Soviet spy Alger Hiss to non-violence champion Mahatma Gandhi – and SCOTUS Abe Fortas? Yoninah (talk) 00:26, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment: reformatted hook ALT0a is almost 300 characters. I've trimmed some bits to come up with ALT0b, but it's still about 20 characters too long. Mindmatrix 02:51, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
  • ALT0b: ... that despite accusations by the House Un-American Activities Committee of being a communist front, the International Juridical Association membership included alleged spy Alger Hiss, pacifist Gandhi and judge Abe Fortas?
  • Comment: reading through the article in the hopes of finding a hook shorter than the 200 character maximum, it strikes me that the article has major neutrality problems, since it seems to be primarily cast as HUAC's views of, or reports of, the IJA. Without independent reliable sources detailing what the organization did and stood for, this won't be able to meet DYK's neutrality requirement. There's also issues with hook accuracy, since the IJA had gone out of existence more than two decades before Fortas became an Associate Justice on SCOTUS. I'm also not sure why "despite" is used when Hiss was later accused of being a Soviet spy. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:02, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Reply to (BlueMoonset talk):
Regarding neutrality, I have expanded the article greatly, particularly with a whole news section on its activities
Revised blurb by removing mention of Fortas (which deleted more than 20 characters): despite accusations by future US president Richard Nixon's HUAC of being a communist front, the International Juridical Association (IJA) had members ranging from alleged Soviet spy Alger Hiss to non-violence champion Mahatma Gandhi? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aboudaqn (talkcontribs) 18:04, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Aboudaqn, thanks for the article expansion. The hook is still far too long at 237 prose characters (spaces are included, as is the initial "that" you omitted), and the only bold links should be to the expanded articles (in this case, just International Juridical Association should be bolded). However, the hook has a basic accuracy problem: the IJA was in existence from 1931 to 1942, and Richard Nixon did not serve in the House or on HUAC until 1947. Further, Nixon is not mentioned at all in the IJA article, so he cannot be named in a hook.
There's also a major problem with the article: it seems to conflate the international organization as led by Alfred Apfel, whom King met in 1931, with the American branch of the international organization founded by King later that year. The thing is, while Hiss may have been a member of the American organization, which is what this article concentrates on, there's no indication that Gandhi was affiliated with the Americans, or even which branch he was with; the sources given antedate the formation of the American IJA. I rather doubt that the international components of the IJA folded into the American NLG, yet there's nothing here about what happened to the full IJA. I would also like someone else to take a look at this article to see whether it is sufficiently neutral—the HUAC's assessments still seem to be a primary source.
I have proposed a shorter hook below, but I think the article still needs more work. For the record, it is:
BlueMoonset: Your latest comments nailed the issues for me: I hereby withdraw my DYK request, with apologies for inconvenience. However, you have also inspired me to have resolved the issues you raise. Thank you!

Articles created/expanded on February 4[edit]

Nyssa spatulata

  • ... that the fossil tupelo Nyssa spatulata was described from seeds found in Oregon?

Source: "You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)

Created by Kevmin (talk). Self-nominated at 18:40, 4 February 2017 (UTC).

John Plankinton statue, William Plankinton Mansion, William Plankinton

John Plankinton statue
John Plankinton statue

Created by Doug Coldwell (talk) and EdChem (talk). Nominated by Doug Coldwell (talk) at 15:56, 4 February 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg All three articles new enough and long enough. Earwig and spot-checking found no significant close paraphrasing issues, copyright violations or plagiarism. All articles are NPOV and well-cited inline. Unsure if the image is suitably licensed for the main page, "The copyright status of the image was undeterminable by the bot, and requires human attention". The hook is interesting, but it needs an inline cite(s) at the end of the sentence in the article itself. And the source quoted above makes no mention of the "sister's ex-fiancé" bit. That source is here. QPQs awaited. Edwardx (talk) 00:23, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
I will attempt to answer each concern. I show that William is the son of John Plankinton in references 2 & 3 in the William Plankinton article. In the Elizabeth Plankinton article I show she is the daughter of John Plankinton and therefore the sister of William. In the source for the hook it says, She was to have been married to Richard Hamilton Park, the British sculptor of the above, but was deserted in favor of a dancer from Minneapolis. The John Plankinton statue explains that it was make by Richard Henry Park, who was the Florentine sculptor engaged to Elizabeth.
The Flickr image has been reviewed February 5 by Administrator Mifter to have the appropriate license. Another version was previously approved February 2.
Reference #3 in the John Plankinton statue article = The statue was ordered by Mr. Wm. Plankinton (John's son) and will always occupy a place in the Plankinton rotunda.
I put this Marquette University reference at the end of the sentence of ... Park had betrayed Elizabeth Plankinton (William's sister) and married another woman in 1887, leaving her disappointed and distraught. = also put in reference of source suggested above.
I'm working on the 3 QPQs and will have them later today. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 11:34, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
Template:Did you know nominations/White-browed piculet - Reviewed these 2 articles 2/5/2017.
Template:Did you know nominations/Wär Gott nicht mit uns diese Zeit - Reviewed this article 2/5/2017.

LAbyrinth (2017 film)

Johnny Depp
Johnny Depp

Moved to mainspace by Captain Assassin! (talk). Self-nominated at 12:57, 4 February 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg @Captain Assassin!: Nominated two days after being moved to main namespace, and is about 2300 bytes, satisfying length and date criteria. The plot section is remarkably similar to a paragraph in this ref and needs to be changed, as it's essentially a copyright violation right now. The fragment "...to the Randall Sullivan's..." is odd; perhaps delete "the". Moreover, it also uses text similar to the source, as "bought the film rights to the Randall Sullivan's Los Angeles police corruption book LAbyrinth" in the article is quite similar to "bought the rights to Randall Sullivan’s L.A. cop corruption book LAbyrinth" in the source. The date "September 7, 2016" is the date it was reported in the media, not necessarily the date he signed a contract. (There are a number of these.) The fragment "who investigated the murders of rappers" makes it appear he only investigated such murders; perhaps insert "the" before "rappers". The "a" in "...Anderson playing a corrupt LAPD officer..." is superfluous, since we know he is playing the specific officer named. The fragment "joined the film" is overly colloquial; please change it. The second paragraph in "Production" is a bit droning and seems like filler, though I'm not sure how this can be changed given the nature of the data it presents. The article would benefit from a one or two paragraph "Background" section explaining the murders and ensuing investigation. The hook needs modification, as it is not Depp who will perform the investigation, but the character he portrays. Mindmatrix 19:16, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
  • I forgot to mention: QPQ completed, and image is freely licenced with an associated OTRS ticket. The image is suitable at the size needed for DYK. Mindmatrix 19:18, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
  • @Mindmatrix: Done some copy-editing on the article. No need to rewrite the hook, actually it's interesting way to attract more readers to the article. QPQ will be here soon. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 12:01, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
    Symbol question.svg @Captain Assassin!: QPQ still required, as previous QPQ was applied to another DYK nomination. Changes appear to be OK, and I've made a phrasing tweak to the article. I'd still strongly suggest a background section briefly discussing the history of the murders, but it's not necessary for DYK. Mindmatrix 17:52, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Dissent Channel

Created by Neutrality (talk) and TenOfAllTrades (talk). Nominated by Neutrality (talk) at 02:05, 4 February 2017 (UTC).

John William Kalua

[26] In support of the Government party candidates, the king made two electioneering trips to Maui and Hawaii. He was especially anxious to defeat the three leading native candidates on the Independent ticket, Joseph Nawahi, G. W. Pilipo, and J. W. Kalua; and he brought to bear upon the voters his personal influence, the weight of his high position, and other persuasive arguments. It was reliably reported that "all Gov't employes, Doctors, school teachers, etc., were warned that they must support the Govt ticket."

Created by KAVEBEAR (talk). Self-nominated at 22:32, 4 February 2017 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on February 5[edit]

Periclimenes rathbunae

  • ... that if the sun anemone shrimp is separated from its host for twenty-four hours, it loses its immunity to the sea anemone's stinging cells? Source: "shrimps which had been out of contact with the anemones for as long as 24 hours were no longer protected from the nematocysts"

Created by Cwmhiraeth (talk) and Hanberke (talk). Nominated by Cwmhiraeth (talk) at 11:30, 10 February 2017 (UTC).

  • starting review--Kevmin § 17:45, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Article new enough and long enough. Article hook is well referenced and the hook conforms to article and source. If i'm understanding the sources correctly Condylactis gigantea is the usual host, with Stichodactyla helianthus being an alternate, rather then the reverse as the article currently states. Also only the first instance of a wikilinked term needs the link the rest of the links for the anemones can be de-linked per wp:overlink.--Kevmin § 18:00, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
  • @Hanberke and Cwmhiraeth:
@Kevmin: The pinging didn't work. The full article is available to download and states that In the Turks and Caicos Islands, Stichodactyla helianthus is the usual host, with Condylactis gigantea acceptable in the absence of the other. It might be different in other parts of its range. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 21:03, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
@Cwmhiraeth: I reread the sources and you are correct. now all we need to do it clear up the over-linking and I think we will be good to go.--Kevmin § 22:01, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
Removed one, I think one in the lead and one in the main text is permissible. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:45, 21 February 2017 (UTC)


The straw sculpture of the Lovell Telescope by Snugburys
The straw sculpture of the Lovell Telescope by Snugburys
  • Reviewed: Bowling Green massacre
  • Comment: The text at the start of the article is a bit short: most of the text has ended up being best-suited to notes in a table. I hope this isn't a problem, although I'll continue to expand the main article text in case it is.

Created by Mike Peel (talk). Self-nominated at 23:39, 7 February 2017 (UTC).

  • Comment: DYK Check reports 1074 characters so well short of the 1500 required. Text in tables would take the total over the required 1500 characters. LoopZilla (talk) 20:21, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
  • I've expanded the prose some more, and it's now at 1564 characters, plus the text in the table. Also, I've added a few Daily Mail references while expanding the article, which has been noted in a discussion at RS/N. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 22:41, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed now that article is long enough. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:05, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Where in Europe Is Carmen Sandiego?

  • Reviewed: Note: I will do the QPQ asap. For now, please review the rest of the nom.

5x expanded by Coin945 (talk). Self-nominated at 16:59, 6 February 2017 (UTC).

Jessica Curry

  • ... that Jessica Curry has won a BAFTA for her video game scores, and has worked with the Poet Laureate?

Created/expanded by TheBigJagielka (talk) and Danno uk (talk). Nominated by Danno uk (talk) at 22:44, 5 February 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Newi-ish, hook is nice and short and pretty interesting. Could say more about Jessica Curry, as in "music composer Jessica Curry" or something. You'll also want to wikilink a thing or two in the hook, like BAFTA and Poet Laureate. Morganfitzp (talk) 20:22, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for your feedback. Very happy to incorporate your suggestions. How about "... that composer Jessica Curry has won a BAFTA award for her video game scores, and has also worked with the Poet Laureate?"
Linking video game scores is probably sensible in case readers think that she's some kind of champion player! danno_uk 21:03, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
Added danno's edit as ALT1 above. Morganfitzp (talk) 22:04, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
Symbol possible vote.svg The article has some [citation needed] tags please either source the information or remove it. Mifter (talk) 01:08, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
The sections without citations have been removed or adjusted to reflect available refs. danno_uk 21:31, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Partnership for Civil Justice Fund

5x expanded by Neutrality (talk). Self-nominated at 01:44, 5 February 2017 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on February 6[edit]

Fulham Refuge

Fulham Refuge, 1858
Fulham Refuge, 1858
  • ... that Fulham Refuge was the "most distinctively feminine of the early convict prisons"? Source: [27] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)
  • Reviewed: not yet done

Created by Edwardx (talk), Paul W (talk), and Philafrenzy (talk). Nominated by Edwardx (talk) at 23:41, 14 February 2017 (UTC).

Policy compliance:

QPQ: Red XN - to be done
Overall: Symbol question.svg Looks like a pleasant place and so it's a shame it was closed. Thanks for getting it started. Andrew D. (talk) 19:41, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Reader Rabbit

Created/expanded by Coin945 (talk). Self-nominated at 16:06, 6 February 2017 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on February 7[edit]

Robert E. Finnigan

Created by Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk). Self-nominated at 19:12, 7 February 2017 (UTC).

Symbol question.svg New enough, long enough, QPQ done, Earwig detects no copyvios. I'm having trouble verifying some of the statements from the cited sources.
  • "Finnigan Instrument Corporation's GC/MS was the technical underpining that made it possible for the EPA to carry out its regulatory efforts in the 1970s." This is a bit too much on the side of WP:SYNTHESIS, since it is implied but not explicitly stated in the source, which also mentions systems from Hewlett–Packard and others.
  • "In 1979, the EPA listed the Finnigan GC/MS as its standard instrument for the analysis of environmental pollutants in water and wastewater." This is cited to an alumni award biography, but it's unclear whether they were "listed" or just widely used. The other source for that citation merely mentions that EPA's standard manual was generally based on the Finnigan instrument.
  • "By 1984, all public water was to be tested by using a Finnigan GC/MS or accepted equivalent." I don't see this in the referenced source.
These points need clarification or revision, but once fixed this article should pass. John P. Sadowski (NIOSH) (talk) 21:51, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on February 8[edit]

Independent Democratic Conference

  • Comment: Admittedly, this is not the best hook. I'll try to think of a better one.

Created by Muboshgu (talk). Self-nominated at 19:44, 8 February 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg - Length, Date, Cite, and Earwigs checkout. QPQ does need to be completed however. I don't mind the hook. Given the current political climate in the US it is somewhat interesting. Mifter (talk) 02:00, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on February 9[edit]

Exercise TROPEX

A MiG 29K takes off from INS Vikramaditya during TROPEX 2017
A MiG 29K takes off from INS Vikramaditya during TROPEX 2017

Created by MBlaze Lightning (talk). Self-nominated at 05:45, 14 February 2017 (UTC).

LaMelo Ball

Created by TempleM (talk). Self-nominated at 21:28, 9 February 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg New enough, long enough, neutrally written, well referenced, no close paraphrasing seen. Image in article is freely licensed. QPQ done. I'm confused by the sourcing for the hook, however. Is this the sentence that the hook fact rests on: In late summer of his freshman season, Ball verbally committed to play college basketball for UCLA? If so, it doesn't accord with the source, which says, It's not often that a prospect commits to a college prior to his freshman year in high school, but despite that rarity LaMelo Ball's pledge to UCLA hardly arrived as a surprise. Yoninah (talk) 23:13, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Planar transmission line


Moved to mainspace by Spinningspark (talk). Self-nominated at 15:43, 10 February 2017 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on February 10[edit]

William Walsh (bishop of Dover)

William Walsh, Bishop of Dover and Mauritius
William Walsh, Bishop of Dover and Mauritius

5x expanded by Sidpickle (talk). Nominated by Storye book (talk) at 19:45, 13 February 2017 (UTC).

Wallachian legislative election, 1857

Allegory of the United Principalities, 1857
Allegory of the United Principalities, 1857
  • ... that two former Princes of Wallachia ran for deputy seats in 1857, both of them losing at Buzău and recovering to win at Dolj? Source: Preda, p. 74 — Gheorghe Bibescu și Barbu Știrbei au fost depășiți, la Buzău, de mai puțin cunoscuții N. N. Pieleanu și S. Voinescu, care adunaseră 49, respectiv 44 de voturi, față de trei voturi, respectiv 11, pentru foștii domni. Cei doi au fost totuși aleși la Dolj, pentru că, fiind incluși în categoria marilor boieri, puteau candida în mai multe locuri. ("Gheorghe Bibescu and Barbu Știrbei were outrun, at Buzău, but the lesser known N. N. Pieleanu and S. Voinescu, who gathered 49 and 44 votes, respectively, as compared to three and 11 votes, respectively, for the former rulers. The two [princes] were nonetheless elected at Dolj, since, as members of the grand boyars' category, they could run in multiple precincts.")
    • ALT1:... that, ahead of the 1857 election in Wallachia, conservatives supported union with Moldavia (allegory pictured), later claiming that liberal unionists had plagiarized their program? Source: Demetriescu, pp. 25–26: Un comitet compus din 9 membri se formă de timpuriu între conservatori. El făcu un apel către alegători [care] cuprindea următoarele opt puncte capitale: [...] 2. Unirea principatelor moldo-române într'un singur Stat [...]. La 30 Martie, adică la 11 zile după publicarea manifestului boierilor, apărù în Concordia manifestul liberalilor, [care] erà o copie a celui de mai sus [...]. Aci, ca în multe alte privințe 'liberalii surprinseseră pe conservatori, pe când aceștia se scăldau în gârlă și le le furaseră hainele de pe mal', ca să ne slujim de figura lui Disraeli aplicată lui Robert Peel. Deaceea avea mare dreptate B. Katargiu, când, adresându-se în ședința Camerei dela 23 Mai 1861 către capii partidului liberal, le zicea: 'Ați zis că d-voastră ați luat inițiativa celor patru puncte din Divanul ad-hoc și că dreapta le-a combătut. La aceasta nu vă voiu răspunde decât numai cu fapte, arătându-vă că acele patru puncte [...] s'au cerut de noi aristocrații, încă pe când d-voastră erați în străinătate'. ("A 9-member committee was formed very early on by the conservatives. It produced an appeal to the voters, [which] carried the following 8 points of agenda: [...] 2. The unification of the Moldavian-Romanian principalities as one State [...]. On March 30, that is to say 11 days after the publication of the boyar manifesto, Concordia put up the liberals' manifesto, [which] was a copy of the above [...]. Here, as in many other instances, 'the liberals caught the caught the conservatives bathing in the ravine, and walked away with their clothes', as per the figure [of speech] used by Disraeli against Robert Peel. And this is why B. Katargiu was entirely justified when, in his address to the liberal party chiefs on May 23, 1861, he was telling them: 'Gentlemen, you have claimed that the initiative for the four points of the ad-hoc Divan was yours, and that the right-wing fought against them. I shall resort only to facts in responding to this, by showing you that the four points [...] were demanded by us aristocrats, back when you were still [in exile] abroad'.")

Created by Dahn (talk). Self-nominated at 11:44, 11 February 2017 (UTC).

Litanies à la Vierge Noire

Mary at Rocamadour
Mary at Rocamadour

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 21:43, 10 February 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Articles is new enough, long enough, and neutrally written. No issues with copyvios that I can find. It is neutral, and well cited. The hook is interesting, the image checks out, and the hook is supported by an inline source. Minor quibble: the sentence "In 1947 Poulenc the instrumentation to string orchestra and timpani." Doesn't really mean anything: Gerda, if you will just fix that, I can pass this nomination. Vanamonde (talk) 04:25, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Thank you for the review, and catching that a word got lost. I hope for the image to appear, because so far it's not shown in the composer's article nor for the pilgrimage site, - it should be something new to readers. I was surprised myself, because I had expected - after reading about it - a painting, not a sculpture. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:34, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on February 11[edit]

Souper Salad

  • ... that a location of the all-you-can-eat Souper Salad buffet restaurant is in a former bank branch that has been called one of the "10 Coolest Buildings in Phoenix, Arizona?
  • Reviewed: tbd

5x expanded by MB (talk). Self-nominated at 06:18, 20 February 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg New and long enough, all ¶ with citations, a copyvio check reveals no problems, hook content is interesting and is verified with a citation to a reliable source in the article (source). Almost good to go; only a QPQ review remains to be performed for this to move forward. North America1000 08:19, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Qandala campaign

  • ... that when the Islamic State in Somalia captured Qandala in 2016, the group hoisted its flag on the same building where Somali folk hero Ali Fahiye Gedi had been imprisoned for burning the Italian flag in 1914? Source: "Video taken by the militants purported to show a fighter hoisting a black flag on top of a historic building erected by Italian colonial rulers early in the last century. The same building served as a prison for a Somali rebel who was arrested by Italian soldiers in 1914 for lowering the Italian flag and burning it. That freedom fighter of the last century, Ali Fahiye Gedi, became known as “the flag-burner” and a symbol for other Somalis who fought against Italian colonial rule." ([29])

Created by Applodion (talk). Self-nominated at 09:28, 14 February 2017 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on February 12[edit]

Jesse Root Grant

Created/expanded by Gwillhickers (talk). Self-nominated at 19:43, 18 February 2017 (UTC).

Professional Rapid Online Chess League

Created by Chessrat (talk) and 7&6=thirteen (talk). Nominated by 7&6=thirteen () 14 February 2017 (UTC) at 16:43(UTC).

  • REVIEW STARTED. New enough. Long enough. QPQ done. Edwardx (talk) 23:59, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Licence laundering

Moved to mainspace by Mindmatrix (talk). Self-nominated at 02:54, 12 February 2017 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on February 13[edit]

Wallachian princely election, 1842, Alecu Filipescu-Vulpea

Vulpea, portrait dated ca. 1830
Vulpea, portrait dated ca. 1830
  • ... that the aged, hernia-afflicted, Alecu Filipescu-Vulpea (pictured) reportedly ran in the Wallachian princely election only to hamper other candidates? Source: Lăcusteanu & Crutzescu, p. 138, reporting Vulpea's own words: Iar cât pentru alegere, puțin îmi pasă dacă mă vor alege, și mai puțin dacă nu mă vor alege. Mă vezi bine că îmi țiu mațele cu mâna (era surpat). Și apoi sunt în vârstă de șaptezeci de ani trecuți, dar nici cu olteanul ergheleghiu la vreun bine țara să nu se aștepte! ("As for the election, I couldn't care less if they elect me, and even less if they do not. You can plainly see yourself that I'm here holding my entrails with my hand (he was ruptured). And what is more I am over the age of seventy, but the country should not be expecting anything good from the horse-breeding Oltenian!" A note on p. 258 clarifies that "Oltenian horse-breeder" is a reference to the father of two other candidates, brothers Gheorghe Bibescu and Barbu Dimitrie Știrbei.).
    • ALT1:... that, ahead of princely elections in 1842, Alecu Filipescu-Vulpea (pictured) had hoped to unite Wallachia with Moldavia? Source: Xenopol, p. 181: La căderea lui Ghica mai mulți boieri munteni între cari Câmpineanu, Villara, Filipescu-Vulpe și Ioan Ghica se înțeleg să propună lui Mihail Sturza Domnul Moldovei primirea scaunului și în Muntenia, pentru a aduce astfel la îndeplinire gândul unirei Principatelor, admisă în principiu de Regulamentul Organic. Ion Ghica primește însă ca răspuns, că o asemenea combinație nu ar fi bine văzută de Rusia, și că deci, nu o poate primì. ("Upon Ghica's downfall several Wallachian boyars, among them Câmpineanu, Villara, Filipescu-Vulpe and Ioan Ghica, colluded to propose to Mihail Sturdza, Prince of Moldavia, to take the throne of Wallachia, and as such to fulfill the concept of union of the Principalities, which Regulamentul Organic tolerated on principle. Ion Ghica was however informed that such a scheme would not be welcomed by Russia and, therefore, that it was inadmissible.")

Created by Dahn (talk) and Biruitorul (talk). Nominated by Dahn (talk) at 10:32, 18 February 2017 (UTC).

John William Elliott Maikai, Francis Funk

Created/expanded by KAVEBEAR (talk). Self-nominated at 18:20, 14 February 2017 (UTC).

Roger P. Minert

  • ... that in the U.S., local church records are more likely than naturalization records to have information about a German immigrant's birthplace, according to research by Roger P. Minert? Source: The familysearch article has a frequency table, along with this explanation: "A striking observation is that “local church vital records” are most likely to tell the hometown. By that phrase, Dr. Minert means items such as burial entries in Lutheran parishes here in the United States. They reveal where the immigrant was born. Naturalization records, which most people think will tell the birthplace, is way down the list. Only 1 out of 10 times will a pre-1900 naturalization record identify an exact overseas origin."
    • ALT1:... that in the U.S., local church records are most likely to have a record of a German immigrant's birthplace, according to research by genealogist Roger P. Minert?Source: same as previous hook
    • ALT2:... that when writing In Harm's Way: East German Latter-day Saints in World War II, Roger P. Minert interviewed over 500 German members of the LDS Church? Source: Contemporary church history quarterly's review: "Out of some thirteen thousand German members in 1939, he obtained interviews with five hundred survivors, who in turn also supplied first-person narratives or written stories of their own lives or those of deceased relatives."

Created/expanded by Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk). Self-nominated at 21:27, 13 February 2017 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on February 14[edit]

Avraam Zak

Created by Futurist110 (talk). Self-nominated at 03:24, 15 February 2017 (UTC).

I have now reviewed this DYK? nomination: Template:Did you know nominations/Kayu ura Futurist110 (talk) 03:32, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
  • I am reviewing this nom.
    • The article was created within 7 days of the nom and the prose is over 1500 characters.
    • Article has a "violation likely" on copyvio report - all from Yivo Encyclopedia. Please consider revising some passages in your own words to avoid accusations of copyright violations down the track.
    • Hook is a little confusing. I ori8ginally read it as "He would only reject the offer if he was also allowed to convert to Christianity". Please consider revising for increased clarity. Content of hook is fine and interesting.
    • QPQ has been completed.

Symbol question.svg Waiting for hook to be revised, and potentntial copyright violations to be addressed. Good luck. :)--Coin945 (talk) 07:48, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Two Worlds (song)

  • The article was expanded 5 times.
  • Reviewed: I will do my QPQ asap. In the meantime, please review the rest of my nomination.--Coin945 (talk) 08:47, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Created/expanded by Coin945 (talk). Self-nominated at 08:47, 14 February 2017 (UTC).

Current nominations[edit]

Articles created/expanded on February 15[edit]

Sieben Stücke, Op. 145

Max Reger
Max Reger
  • ... that in seven last pieces for organ, Sieben Stücke, Op. 145, Max Reger (pictured) quotes Lutheran chorales and a patriotic anthem?

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk) and Mathsci (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 11:07, 22 February 2017 (UTC).

1891 State Normal School at Cheney fire

  • ... that the 1891 State Normal School at Cheney fire destroyed the school's only building? Attested to by the Spokane Chronicle and Spokane Review, publishing articles about the fire the day it burned down.
    • ALT1:... that a fire in 1891 forced the State Normal School at Cheney to hold classes in a local office building for two years? The two years spent in the Pomeroy office block are described in J. Orin Oliphant's History of the State Normal School at Cheney. I'll note that there's a public domain photograph of the Pomeroy block, which could be used as a picture accompanying this hook, although I'm not sure it's super compelling.
    • ALT2:... that, after a fire in 1891, it took six years for the state government to rebuild the State Normal School at Cheney? Also a citation from Oliphant's history of the institution, published in 1924.
  • Reviewed: None yet but I'm picking one!

Created by Jwrosenzweig (on behalf of the students/staff who worked on the recent EWU edit-a-thon) (talk). Nominated by Jwrosenzweig (talk) at 05:57, 22 February 2017 (UTC).

Angolan African dormouse

  • ... that the Angolan African dormouse has been assessed as "data deficient" by the IUCN because so little is known about it? Source: "Justification: Listed as Data Deficient in view of continuing uncertainty as to its taxonomic status, extent of occurrence, natural history, threats and conservation status."

5x expanded by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self-nominated at 20:38, 21 February 2017 (UTC).

  • I reviewed this one. Jwrosenzweig (talk) 06:48, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
    • Okay, 5x expansion verified by DYKcheck, and it's long enough (2300+ characters of prose), but I have some concerns about citations.  :**There aren't any citations in the lead paragraph, where a number of facts are related. And the citations in the rest of the piece all rely on a single source, and generally come at the end of a long paragraph. Can any other sources be found -- even one or two more would help. If not, how can the footnotes appear more frequently (and with more precision?) to make sure it's clear where assertions are coming from?
Thank you for reviewing this article. The MoS guidelines do not advocate having citations in the lead, because this section should be a summary of the text in the body of the article, where the information should be cited. Similarly, a citation at the end of a paragraph is meant to cover all the information before it, which in the paragraph without other sources, means the whole paragraph. There is no need for intermediate citations. I have added another source. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:37, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
    • At times, too, there are sentences that feel excessively casual - for example, in reference to the animal's tail, one sentence reads "It is basically the same colour as the back but some white hairs are mixed with the darker ones and the tip is white." Especially the phrase "basically the same" just strikes me as a little chatty in tone, rather than being a more clinical description.
I have altered this wording. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:37, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
    • And I hate to be tough about this, but the text in this article is just much too similar to the text in another article that Cwmhiraeth has been expanding, Rock dormouse. A sentence like "The fur on the back is soft, smooth and rather long" might be accurate of both animals, which are presumably very similar, but the two physical descriptions are so similar that I think there must either be a copy-and-paste error here, or just over-reliance on a sort of "template" approach to writing these descriptions. I'm not sure how we handle this kind of challenge -- it's not the same to me as an excessively close paraphrase or borrowing of language from some other site online -- but I feel like this is something Cwmhiraeth can fix and ought to.
Rock dormouse was written within 7 days before this article, and copying some of the text of one newly expanded article into another is generally viewed as permissible. However, any copied text should not count towards the required character count for the five-fold expansion. You can ask about this on the DYK discussion page if you wish. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:37, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
    • I think the hook is clear, and clearly cited -- it might be of interest, but I'm just slightly hesitant, since that exact same hook could be used by any of the mammals on this list, not to mention all the non-mammalian species also listed as "data deficient". I don't necessarily see a better hook in the article, though (the beehive story is interesting but it's not cited at the end of the sentence), and I don't want to be churlish about the hook. If Cwmhiraeth can come up with another hook, though, I'd be pleased to see it.
What you say is correct. I wondered about use of the beehive, how about

For now, it's a Symbol possible vote.svg but I'm hoping Cwmhiraeth can pretty easily resolve the issues I've noted. Jwrosenzweig (talk) 07:12, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Wayne Allison (Canadian football)

Created by BU Rob13 (talk). Self-nominated at 03:28, 16 February 2017 (UTC).

Symbol question.svg Trying to qpq your excellent reviews, I confess that I am so unfamiliar with this topic that I have a hard time to find a better hook, because for readers like myself, who first would have to look up dual-threat quarterback and defensive back, it's not attractive. I like the "converted" in the lead, that much I got. Should I look up interception and fumble? - I understand much better now why I should link movement and stanza ;) - Having said that, the article looks solid with plenty of sources, no copyvio obvious. Some number of games might be better accessible for us ignorants ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:09, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Jamaica–179th Street (IND Queens Boulevard Line), IND Queens Boulevard Line

Improved to Good Article status by Epicgenius (talk), Kew Gardens 613 (talk), and Tdorante10 (talk). Nominated by Epicgenius (talk) at 02:19, 16 February 2017 (UTC).

Creswell Eastman

Eastman examining Tibetan women for eye disorders in Tibet Autonomous Region May 2000
Eastman examining Tibetan women for eye disorders in Tibet Autonomous Region May 2000
  • ... that Creswell Eastman is known as "the man that saved a million brains" for his work treating iodine deficiency in the Republic of China? Source: ABC Radio National (2 December 2015)"You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)
    • ALT1:... that Creswell Eastman is concerned that Australian children's IQ is declining as a result of maternal iodine deficiency? Source: Sydney Morning Herald (6 December 2016) "You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)
  • Reviewed: This is my first DYK nomination so I am exempt from the QPQ
  • Comment: Article created in my userspace on February 2017, moved to mainspace on February 15.

Created/expanded by Harald Berents (talk). Nominated by HaraldW1954 (talk) at 05:38, 15 February 2017 (UTC).

  • Just a comment Don't mean to get political here but why would you refer to post-1949 China as the Republic of China?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 08:51, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
  • I thought all had Peoples Republic of China, but will make sure that all comments reflect this. Thanks for the comment.HaraldW1954 (talk) 07:47, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on February 16[edit]

Buddy Alliston

5x expanded by BU Rob13 (talk). Self-nominated at 00:21, 19 February 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article is well-sourced and neutral. It was expanded 5x recently. The hook is 165 characters. There's a couple of issues with the hook. Firstly, I was unable to find anywhere in the wiki article or the source provided that Alliston led the Eglin Air Force Base team. Secondly, the only source that says Alliston played for the team actually misspells it as "Elgin". Is there any other source for this claim? The second issue is probably not a big deal, but could the nom please clarify the "led" part? I'm not a sports expert, but I thought that "led" could only be used for team captains?VR talk 06:20, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
  • @Vice regent: Here, "led" is used as the best word that describes a better-than-average player playing for the team in a non-wordy way, but I'll have a go at rewording. (As a piece of speculation, he probably also literally led the team, as he certainly would have had the most experience of anyone on the team as a former professional player, but I meant it more figuratively.) As far as the source goes, I'm aware of the typo, but it's the only military base with a name similar to Elgin. We even redirect Elgin Air Force Base to the correct article on-wiki. It's obvious what the article meant. Here's another source supporting it: [32]. ~ Rob13Talk 06:30, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
  • (edit conflict)

Hook eligiblity:

  • Cited: Red XN - Please address the question regarding the hook above.
  • Interesting: Green tickY
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol question.svg VR talk 06:31, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

M. J. Thirumalachar

  • ... that M. J. Thirumalachar discovered two genera of fungi, Narasimhania and Narasimhella, which were later named after his father, M. J. Narasimhan?

Source: http://www.neglectedscience.com/alphabetical-list/n/mandayam-jeersannidhi-narasimhan; http://www.iisc.ernet.in/currsci/aug25/articles39.htm; http://www.mycobank.org/Biolomics.aspx?Table=Mycobank&MycoBankNr_=301707; http://www.mycobank.org/Biolomics.aspx?Table=Mycobank&MycoBankNr_=3425

Created by Tachs (talk). Self-nominated at 17:05, 17 February 2017 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on February 17[edit]


Licancabur is the cone slightly left of centre
Licancabur is the cone slightly left of centre

ALT1 ... that Licancabur volcano (pictured), despite being smaller than many neighbouring volcanoes, stands out among them? "This is lower than the height of many other peaks in the vicinity, yet Licancabur dominates the landscape. Its lone, perfect cone commands respect"

Improved to Good Article status by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk). Self-nominated at 10:15, 11 January 2017 (UTC).

  • @Jo-Jo Eumerus: The hook needs to be changed a little bit. It needs some commas added and it also needs the word "the" added before "Licancabur". The "(pictured)" also needs to be moved to after "volcano". After you make these changes, I'll give the article a full review. PhilrocMy contribs 17:23, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol voting keep.svg Good to go. PhilrocMy contribs 20:55, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Um, @Philroc: The source text is not part of the citation. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:59, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
@Jo-Jo Eumerus: Sorry. Please keep in mind that I am a new reviewer. PhilrocMy contribs 21:00, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Not sure if this is a possibility, but since the hook was pulled at WP:ERRORS for being inaccurate (outdated information in the source) there may be two subsitute hooks:

ALT2 ... that Licancabur volcano (pictured) stands out among peaks in the vicinity? "This is lower than the height of many other peaks in the vicinity, yet Licancabur dominates the landscape. Its lone, perfect cone commands respect" ALT3 ... that Licancabur volcano (pictured) was venerated by the Atacamenos?

Mexican Federal Highway 95D

The Cuetlajuchitlán archeological site sits atop the Autopista del Sol
The Cuetlajuchitlán archeological site sits atop the Autopista del Sol

Created by Raymie (talk). Self-nominated at 05:41, 18 February 2017 (UTC).

Eileen Riley Siegel

  • ... that American actress Alice Hirson played fictional character Eileen Riley Siegel, an Irish Catholic married to a Jew, on the ABC soap opera One Life to Live? Source: "Victor's other daughter, Victoria, the longest lasting and most central character in the show, also marries across class (against her father's wishes), at first resisting, but giving into the charms of Irish-Catholic reporter at The Banner, Joe Riley. Jewish David Siegel also crosses boundaries, marrying Joe's sister Eileen Riley." ([33])
  • Reviewed: WCHV (AM)
  • Comment: 5x expanded from redirect and sourced

Created/expanded by FrickFrack (talk). Self-nominated at 12:45, 17 February 2017 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on February 18[edit]

Loch Ewe Distillery

Loch Ewe Distillery, Drumchork

Created by NearEMPTiness (talk). Self-nominated at 09:21, 19 February 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg - Length, Date, QPQ, Cite, and Earwigs all checkout. Image is freely licensed. Mifter (talk) 17:38, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Removed from the prep, too many contentious issues, please see the discussion at DYK talkpage. Primary sources should never be used, and when claiming "biggest", "smallest" etc, always worth a check. Add to that a grammatically incorrect hook and you have a lemon. Removed from the prep set so it can be worked on in slow time. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:13, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Symbol possible vote.svg Adding necessary icon to superseded previous (and still active) tick. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:51, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
What is that in English? The Rambling Man (talk) 19:53, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
Next time, The Rambling Man, start your removal comment with an icon reflecting its current status. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:01, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
Nope. Next time, the project shouldn't promote such error-prone articles. That you feel the need to tell me to "use the right icon" is utterly symptomatic of the complete waste of time and arcane processes used here. The hook was wrong, the article was badly written, the review was inadequate, the promotion was wrong. I don't need to "add an icon" to make it better. Sort it out, and stop asking for stupid things when actually what's required is better quality control. Thank you. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:04, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
Fine. You do whatever you want, and please stop commenting when I clean up after you. We'll all be happier. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:27, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
It would better that if you didn't need to clean up at all, and got it right first time. This nomination had bad grammar, a primary source, a dubious hook, yet it made it almost to the main page. Stop blaming me for getting it away from the main page, and start looking at those who got it that far. I'll be much happier if you stop enabling this kind of garbage. Please stop commenting when we all pick up all these multiple issues with multiple hooks in multiple sets, many times a week. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:30, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
Ah, so it's now my fault. Tell you what: you take care of what you want to take care of, and I'll take care what I want to take care of, and we'll both be happier. I've long since given up hoping that you'll actually bother to use icons or do anything involving the background processes here. Perhaps you should do the same with me, since you're busy accusing me of blaming you for getting the hook away from the main page, when nothing could be further from the truth. (Don't bother replying here; I shan't answer you further.) BlueMoonset (talk) 04:23, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
You've given up hoping I'll "actually bother to use icons"?!! Seriously?? I would honestly reconsider what's important here, if that ever was.... The Rambling Man (talk) 08:45, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
Here's two alts (below). Further, if I recall correctly if we don't put some sort of problem symbol after an approval one, the bot will automatically move the page back to the approved queue once it sees it.
  • ALT2: ... that Loch Ewe Distillery in Drumchork (pictured) was the smallest legally operated distillery in Scotland when it opened in 2006? - source here and here.
  • ALT3: ... that Loch Ewe Distillery in Drumchork (pictured) was the allowed to open in 2006 with stills over 90% smaller than the legal minimum due to a loophole in the 1786 Wash Act? Source here and here and dividing 120L (their still) by the legal minimum of 1800L.
Both these books from 2012 mention it as the smallest and as there is conflicting information afterwords backing the claim to its opening helps side-step the issue as we are not sure if it is still the smallest in Scotland. Alternatively we could use the second book and just mention it sidestepping a very old law (still hooky in my estimate). We still have to add these book cites to the article and update the info but here is a start. Mifter (talk) 04:13, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Congressional Cannabis Caucus

  • Reviewed: IOU

Created by Muboshgu (talk). Self-nominated at 05:13, 19 February 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg New enough (created February 18), relatively short but objectively long enough (1,624 characters), well cited throughout the entire article, neutral, and free from close paraphrasing/copyvio issues. All hooks are short enough and interesting to a wide enough audience. ALT0 is cited in article to ref 8, where the information can be found. ALT1 is cited in the article to ref 4, where the information appears. ALT2 is cited in the article to ref 5, where it mentions that Rohrabacher stated that "we want to make the states' rights issue the core of what we are doing". QPQ not yet done, no image to worry about. Muboshgu This will be good to go after QPQ is completed! I prefer the first hook ("ALT0") if it's worth anything. BobAmnertiopsisChatMe! 21:06, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Kick Your Game

Created by Beyoncetan (talk). Self-nominated at 07:28, 18 February 2017 (UTC).

Star Wars: Droid Works

  • Reviewed: I will do my QPQ asap. In the meantime please review the rest of the nom.--Coin945 (talk) 00:11, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Created/expanded by Coin945 (talk). Self-nominated at 00:11, 18 February 2017 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on February 19[edit]

Penny graph

  • ... that, no matter how n non-overlapping pennies are arranged on a table, at least 0.258n of them will not touch each other? Source: The original source, Swanepoel 2002, is subscription-only, but the same result is cited by Dumitrescu and Jiang. See the first paragraph of section 3: "Swanepoel further raised it to 8n/31".

Created by David Eppstein (talk). Self-nominated at 22:56, 19 February 2017 (UTC).

Subramanian Kalyanaraman

Created by Tachs (talk). Self-nominated at 12:24, 19 February 2017 (UTC).

Peter Adamson (academic)

Created by HaEr48 (talk). Self-nominated at 23:37, 19 February 2017 (UTC).

Symbol question.svg Interesting topic, almost more work than bio, on good sources, no copyvio obvious. The hook is sourced and interesting, but I'd try to avoid the passive voice, for example:
ALT1: ... that Peter Adamson has used puns in his History of Philosophy series, which was both praised and criticized?
What do you think of adding "without a gap" - or should it be "Without a Gap"? - to add interest. Otherwise it could mean anything at any time. - Article: I'd like to see formatting, for example no "bare urls" for references, please, but a title, publisher, date and accessdate. The lead should be a summary, of sourced information in the body, without refs in the lead. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:53, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

1000 Second Avenue

  • ... that construction of 1000 Second Avenue in Downtown Seattle, Washington required demolition of a building donated for fire testing? Source: "Demolition at the site began in November 1984, with a series of fire prevention tests conducted by the Seattle Fire Department inside the vacated United Pacific Building, a 11-story office building constructed in 1909 and donated for the test by Selig." (The Seattle Times [offline, can be provided privately in PDF form])

5x expanded by SounderBruce (talk). Self-nominated at 01:45, 20 February 2017 (UTC).

2004 Nippon Professional Baseball realignment

  • Comment: It's a pretty giant article. I've been working on it for years. I figure the player strike is probably the most interesting part of the article though.

Created by Torsodog (talk). Self-nominated at 03:51, 20 February 2017 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on February 20[edit]

Islamophobia in Canada

5x expanded by Vice regent (talk). Self-nominated at 08:35, 21 February 2017 (UTC).

Private Practice (season 1)

KaDee Strickland
KaDee Strickland

Created/expanded by Aoba47 (talk). Self-nominated at 18:49, 21 February 2017 (UTC).

Matthew Lyon

  • ... that Matthew Lyon was jailed on charges of violating the Sedition Act, winning re-election to Congress from inside his jail cell.? Source: "You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)
    • ALT1:... that Matthew Lyon brawled with Roger Griswald on the floor of Congress? Source: "You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)

Improved to Good Article status by MisterCake (talk). Self-nominated at 16:46, 20 February 2017 (UTC).

Macedonia (ancient kingdom)

Improved to Good Article status by PericlesofAthens (talk). Self-nominated at 23:25, 20 February 2017 (UTC).

Weixin Shengjiao

Weixin Shengjiao headquarters at Hsien Fo Temple, Taiwan
Weixin Shengjiao headquarters at Hsien Fo Temple, Taiwan
  • ... that a Taiwanese religious movement teaching Feng Shui and I Ching since 1984 now has around 300,000 members ...? Source: "The global core membership of the movement grew to about 300,000, with a larger audience estimated by Taiwan's Ministry of Internal Affairs at 1,000,000"; "1993: Grand Master Hun Yuan held the 99 Days Chanting Ceremony and the first research classes on I Ching and Feng Shui." (Introvigne)
    • ALT1:... that ceremonies honoring Taiwanese ancestors held annually on January 1 in a stadium by a religious movement attract over 30,000 people, including the island's top politicians ...? Source: "Since January 2004, honoring the Great Ancestors and bringing peace to the victims of violence come together in the Unified Ancestor Worship Ceremony for Chinese in the twenty-first century. It is held each year on January 1 in Taipei's Linkou Stadium and attracts great crowds. Taiwanese political dignitaries, including presidents of the Republic, have also participated in the event." (Introvigne); "Weixinshengjiao holds large ancestor worship ceremonies to recognize the historical status of Chiyou as the national ancestor, and began holding the “21st Century Chinese Joint Ancestor Worship Ceremony (中華民族聯合祭祖大典)” in Linkou Stadium since 2004. This is a major event for ancestral worship and is also a carnival that mobilizes over 30 thousand members of the religious group, inviting politicians and businessmen from around the world, as well as representatives of Chinese religious groups." (Chang)

Created by Aidayoung (talk). Nominated by Fences and windows (talk) at 21:28, 20 February 2017 (UTC).

Printer's Devilry

  • ... that Printer's Devilry crossword puzzles were among Ximenes' most popular, even though they break Ximenes' rules of cryptic crossword setting?
    Source for "among most popular": "I was glad to read that the P.D. was so popular [...] I'll continue to keep the appearances of P.D. more frequent than those of other non-plain types. source. Source for "break Ximenes' rules": "This month we have a Printer’s Devilry puzzle, set by Chalicea. Instead of normal definition-and-wordplay clues, the solution has been removed from a certain sentence" source. See Derrick Somerset Macnutt#Influence for the definition of Ximenes rules as "wordplay + definition"
    • ALT1:... that ...?

Created by Smurrayinchester (talk). Self-nominated at 16:58, 20 February 2017 (UTC).

Sam Adonis

Created by MPJ-DK (talk). Self-nominated at 03:33, 20 February 2017 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on February 21[edit]

Wipeout Fusion

  • ... that the developers of Wipeout Fusion wanted to aim the game at an older and savvier crowd?
    • ALT1:... that the racing game Wipeout Fusion contains a total of 45 race tracks and 32 ship models?

Improved to Good Article status by Jaguar (talk). Self-nominated at 21:53, 21 February 2017 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on February 22[edit]


  • ... that tsukemen (pictured) became a popular dish at Taishoken restaurant in Tokyo soon after its 1961 invention there, and has since progressed to become popular throughout Japan? Sources: [34], [35], [36], [37], [38].

5x expanded by Northamerica1000 (talk). Self-nominated at 08:28, 22 February 2017 (UTC).

Special occasion holding area[edit]

The holding area has moved to its new location at the bottom of the Approved page. Please only place approved templates there; do not place them below.

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