Template talk:Did you know

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from T:TDYK)
Jump to: navigation, search
"Did you know...?" template
Discussion WT:DYK
Rules WP:DYK
Supplementary rules WP:DYKSG
Nominations T:TDYK
Reviewing guide WP:DYKR
Preps & Queues T:DYK/Q
Currently on Main Page
Main Page errors WP:ERRORS
Removed hooks WP:DYKREMOVED
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
List of DYK Hooks by Date
Date # of Hooks # Verified
April 28 1
May 1 1
May 4 1 1
May 6 1
May 8 1
May 11 2 1
May 12 1
May 15 1
May 20 6
May 21 2
May 22 1
May 23 2
May 25 3
May 26 6 1
May 27 5
May 28 3
May 29 6 1
May 30 7 1
June 1 7
June 2 1
June 3 1 1
June 4 6 1
June 5 2
June 6 3
June 7 9 2
June 8 5 1
June 9 5 2
June 10 3
June 11 4
June 12 6 1
June 13 8 2
June 14 6 1
June 15 4
June 16 7 2
June 17 10 3
June 18 7 3
June 19 12 8
June 20 9 7
June 21 14 9
June 22 10 4
June 23 13 9
June 24 10 3
June 25 12 7
June 26 14 5
June 27 16 9
June 28 13 7
June 29 7 4
June 30 12 4
July 1 15 4
July 2 8
July 3 10 5
July 4 7 2
July 5 7
July 6
Total 333 111
Last updated 06:03, July 6, 2015 (UTC)
Current time is 06:53, July 6, 2015 UTC (purge)

Instructions for nominators[edit]

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

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

To nominate an article[edit]

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

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

Write the nomination.

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

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

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

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

How to review a nomination[edit]

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

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

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

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

    If you are the first person to comment on the nomination, there will be a line :*<!--Make first comment here--> showing you where you can put the comment.
  • Save the page.

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

Frequently asked questions[edit]


This page is often backlogged. As long as your submission is still on the page, it will stay there until an editor reviews it. Since editors are encouraged to review the oldest submissions first (so that those hooks don't grow stale), it may take several 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 hook you submitted to this page, in most cases it means your article has been approved and is in the queue for display on the main page. You can check whether your hook has been moved to the queue by reviewing the queue listings.

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

Search archived DYK nomination discussions[edit]

Instructions for other editors[edit]

How to promote an accepted hook[edit]

  • See Wikipedia:Did you know/Preparation areas for full instructions.
  • 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
  • Paste the credit information ({{DYKmake}} and/or {{DYKnom}}) into the credits area.
  • 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", 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 is usually a link to it in the credits section).
    • View the edit history for that page
    • Go back to the last version before the edit where the hook was promoted, and revert to that version to make the nomination active again.
    • Leave a comment explaining that the hook was removed from the queue, and why, so that later reviewers are aware of this issue.
    • If the day title for the section that contained the hook has been removed from this page, restore that section.
  • If you removed the hook from a queue, it is best to either replace it with another hook from one of the prep areas, or to leave a message at WT:DYK asking someone else to do so.
  • Add a link to the nomination subpage at Wikipedia:Did you know/Removed

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

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


Older nominations[edit]

Articles created/expanded on April 28[edit]

2015 Baltimore protests

(previously nominated "Death of Freddy Gray")

Protest at the Baltimore Police Department Western District building

  • ... that within an hour of being taken into police custody, Freddie Gray lapsed into a coma?

:* ALT1:... that as children, Freddie Gray and his sisters were found to have lead poisoning in their blood levels?

Created/expanded by Grand'mere Eugene (talk). Self-nominated at 04:10, 26 April 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Not sure this is a great idea for DYK. ALT2 is definitely a poor choice—it's completely irrelevant to Gray's death, but seems to imply he was recently poisoned or that it was involved in his death. More generally, with this being such a current event, putting it in DYK will probably just come across as political. GorillaWarfare (talk) 02:15, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol delete vote.svg - Agree that this is not in good taste for a DYK, and is way too soon considering it's a breaking news story. -- Fuzheado | Talk 02:21, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol delete vote.svg Given the stability issues of this article, plus the fact that the hooks are insensitive to Gray's family, I suggest withdrawal. Epic Genius (talk) 02:32, 28 April 2015 (UTC) (edited 02:57, 28 April 2015 (UTC))
  • Symbol delete vote.svg Bad timing to have this, we should think of the family. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:52, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol delete vote.svg Too sensitive a topic for DYK, already covered under In the News. ViperSnake151  Talk  05:38, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
  • @ViperSnake151: Not really. Many opposed featuring it on Main Page's ITN, so it's not featured at this time. George Ho (talk) 08:38, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol delete vote.svg I agree this DYK is not now appropriate for reasons cited above. When George Ho asked me about nominating it, the protests had just begun on April 25, and the article was more stable. I request withdrawal of this nomination. — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 09:35, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Wait... Give it some more weeks. This isn't a voting discussion or something like that. Yeah, now is not the time to approve or promote mainly due to the nature of the topic. However, rejecting it now is also not the right time. So is requesting withdrawal. Why impatience nowadays? --George Ho (talk) 10:23, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
  • But then we would need another hook. All three alts given are too insensitive. How about:
  • Yeah, not too good, since people in the US already mostly know about this, but not too insensitive, either. Epic Genius (talk) 13:55, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
  • If this DYK goes forward, the lead poison alternatives should be replaced since that info is not well-integrated into the narrative, and seems irrelevant. I've offered a replacement hook; perhaps in the next days/weeks we'll have better perspective on whether to go forward with it, and if so, what an appropriate (i.e., less insensitive?) hook would be. Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 16:46, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
  • How about these:
Also, I am nominating 2015 Baltimore riots for DYK. Here is my QPQ for that article: Template:Did you know nominations/Party of the Democratic Revolution. (Pulling the QPQ out into another nomination page.) --George Ho (talk) 06:01, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
Sounds a lot better than my hook. Epic Genius (talk) 13:53, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Symbol redirect vote 4.svg The article, "Death of Freddie Grey", has been featured as part of ITN. Therefore, it's no longer eligible for DYK. There's still hope. The link to the other article that I'm nominating is not bolded in ITN, so it's still eligible. --George Ho (talk) 04:03, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Because I added another related article originally intended to be the 2nd article for one hook, I moved the nomination forward to April 28. Although the nomination page is titled this way originally intended for already-featured article, I'd still want to retain the other article without creating a separate nomination page. George Ho (talk) 04:14, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Reverted back.Changed to "protests". George Ho (talk) 20:20, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Changed ALT5 slightly. Also, full review is needed. George Ho (talk) 20:14, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

  • NB: The article at issue has been moved to 2015 Baltimore protests and there is a pending request for it to be merged with 2015 Baltimore curfew that has very strong support but has stalled since June 5, presumably in want of a closer willing to do the merge. - Dravecky (talk) 10:57, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Subsequent note: the merge proposal, of curfew into protests, has just been closed as "merge". Until the merger has been completed, the review should not be started, because a significant amount of material needs to be incorporated into the final version of the protests article, and that new material will need to be properly sourced and meet other DYK criteria. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:16, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 1[edit]

Price Creek, Pancoast Creek

Moved to mainspace by Jakec (talk). Self-nominated at 18:32, 1 May 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg New (28th), long enough, neutral, no copyvio found via spot check but be careful of close paraphrasing even from the older sources, QPQs done but I noticed that many of your recent reviews did not check for QPQs, so something to consider. Hook facts check out (3b) but it doesn't appear to make sense. If Pancoast is a tributary into Price, and Price is the one that has culm contamination halfway down, why would we care that Pancoast has no culm? Instead it could be phrased that Pancoast contributes sewage and Price adds culm, if it's even still true. How does notability work on this stuff? The creeks don't appear to be the subject of independent commentary, unless there is some kind of content guideline that covers them. czar  21:27, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Earwig results show 13% for Price Creek and 5% for Pancoast Creek. Almost all PA streams are notable, but even if they weren't, it would probably pass GNG (I don't even know what a non-independent source for a geographical feature would be). I don't know what you have against the hook, but it could possibly be split. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 20:04, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Independent commentary as in discussed on its own—I wasn't talking about independence from the subject. Didn't know about NGEO, which is why I asked. What is Earwig? I don't have anything "against" the hook—I explained what I felt was unclear about it. czar  23:54, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
@Czar: As I have said, I have no objection to splitting this nomination, if you think that would make the hooks more interesting. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 20:57, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
It may not be necessary if you can clarify what I said I didn't understand above. Feel free to split if you would prefer. – czar 21:00, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Splitting into ... that in the early 1900s, Price Creek was full of culm? and ... that in the early 1900s, Pancoast Creek was discolored by sewage? --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 00:40, 30 May 2015 (UTC) Meh. I think the original is better. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 18:58, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
Suggesting an ALT2 to spur discussion and a possible final review. A cursory look makes it appear that all is in order. - Dravecky (talk) 11:08, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
  • ALT2: ... that in the early 1900s, Pennsylvania's Pancoast Creek was discolored by sewage before it flowed into Price Creek, which was partially filled with culm?
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Per Dravecky, final review including ALT2 is hoped for. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:37, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg The hook checks out and has a citation in each article, but Pancoast is very similar to its source so as to constitute close paraphrasing. Also I thought there was a DYK rule that double/multi hooks require the full hook facts to be mentioned in both articles (i.e., Pancoast should mention the part of the hook re: Price), but I can't find it in the guidelines. ALT2 preferred over the main, though I still don't see how they're particularly interesting/"hook"-y together. Requesting another reviewer/second opinion. – czar 05:09, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
I see no close paraphrasing, but if there is, feel free to fix it yourself. I have recently learned from BlueMoonset that there is no such rule regarding multi-hooks. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 11:52, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Source: Pancoast Creek, which is a tributary of Price Creek, is clear of culm from source to mouth, though it receives streams of surface water and sewage which discolor it.
  • WP page: Pancoast Creek was clear of culm from its source downstream to its mouth, unlike Price Creek, which it is a tributary of. However, Pancoast Creek was discolored by streams of surface water and sewage.
There are many ways to rephrase the WP text so that it doesn't closely follow the source ("clear of culm", "streams of xy"). Price's WP page uses similar phrases to the source too. I don't think it would even be an issue if the article noted that it incorporates PD text (published 1916)... I won't be fixing it myself as I've stepped away from this nom.
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg – czar 12:59, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 4[edit]

Curtis Culwell Center attack

Created by Benbuff91 (talk). Nominated by George Ho (talk) at 00:14, 9 May 2015 (UTC).

  • The problem with these hooks is that the answer to "Did you know" these two things is, "Yes, we did know." Can't something interesting be said about this incident, beyond that it happened? EEng (talk) 18:38, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
I'll provide more if none of above pleases you. George Ho (talk) 20:21, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
I am not, and do not wish to be, the All-High DYK Arbiter, but I like ALT4 best by far. I've CEd to remove the attacker's name from the hook -- with the mother still alive I think it's a bit too close to putting her name on WP's main page. EEng (talk) 20:23, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
I copy edited ALT3 for its length. --George Ho (talk) 03:47, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
ALT4 is 202 characters, which is too long. Also, I think it would need to be "the mother"; "a mother" makes it sound like he has more than one, which is not the case here. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:47, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • ALT5:... that after the attack at the Curtis Culwell Center in Garland, Texas, a mother of one of the attackers said her son was brainwashed and did not blame the police for killing him during the attack? EEng (talk) 04:41, 26 May 2015 (UTC) (I think that's exactly 200)
  • ALT4b:... that after the attack at the Curtis Culwell Center in Garland, Texas, the mother of one of the gunmen said her son had been brainwashed and did not blame the police for killing him during the event?
  • ALT5 is technically ALT4a. I changed words to reduce characters; instead, it is one character more than ALT5. --George Ho (talk) 08:06, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • You could take out "gun" and just make it "attack". Yoninah (talk) 15:05, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg New enough, long enough, neutrally written, well referenced, no close paraphrasing seen. ALT4b hook ref verified and cited inline. I tweaked the hook to avoid the repetition of attack-attackers. QPQ done. ALT4b good to go. Yoninah (talk) 22:12, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 6[edit]

A Walk Across America

5x expanded by Georgejdorner (talk). Self-nominated at 17:57, 6 May 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg The article is sufficiently long and had been expanded by more than five times on the nomination date (4,542 characters on 7 May compared to 259 characters on 22 November 2014). I did not notice any copyright violation or close paraphrasing. However, I think the following issues need to be fixed:
    • The article is almost completely unreferenced. I would suggest that the text in the "Synopsis" section be cited to appropriate pages of the book. The contents of the "Themes" section and the first paragraph of the "Publication details" section also need to be referenced.
    • The hook is of an appropriate length, but I am not sure whether a citation to reviews on Amazon.com (footnote 3) constitutes a reliable reference. Also, I don't know if the rather cryptic way in which the hook is phrased is usual for "Did you know".
SMUconlaw (talk) 18:35, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
    • The Synopsis section is drawn from the book in its entirety. I can place cites stating such, though the source is self-evident and the cites would be overkill. In similar situations, I have noted no references given by other editors.
    • I do believe that reference to Amazon to illustrate the book's continuing popularity is a valid reference. Please note that I do not quote any reviews, or do I refer to any facts from Amazon—merely the great number of reviews the book has garnered, showing the public's interest in it. For this it is reliable.
    • A cryptic hook gathers page views because readers want to satisfy their curiosity about it.Georgejdorner (talk) 14:49, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
My concern about footnote 3 which references the hook is that you are relying on Amazon reviews to establish that the book is used as a text in colleges. Can't you find a more reliable source? Also, the content in "Themes" and the first paragraph of "Publication details" remain unreferenced. As for the other points (referencing of the "Synopsis" section and the cryptic nature of the hook), I'll leave it to the DYK volunteer who is closing the review to make the final decision. — SMUconlaw (talk) 15:22, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
It may seem a niggling difference to note that I wrote that a reviewer claims to use the text in classrooms, rather than for me to directly claim its use in classrooms. Nevertheless, the former claim is supported by the Amazon reference. I agree that to support the latter claim (which I did not make), a different reference is needed. However, it is such a minor point that it may yet be deleted without harming the article. Let's see what another reviewer will say.
P.S. I did change "reviewers" to "reviewer" for accuracy's sake. Also, if you are not going to approve this nomination, please ask for a further review.Georgejdorner (talk) 14:50, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
Yes, but your hook ("... can lead to a college classroom") asserts the use of the text in college classrooms rather than states that one Amazon reviewer claims to have used the textbook in his or her class. Thus, footnote 3 may not fully support the hook. If you delete the sentence about the (alleged) use of the book in a college classroom, then you will have to rewrite the hook entirely. I don't think it's for me to call for a second review – doesn't the DYK volunteer decide if one is necessary? — SMUconlaw (talk) 21:53, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
Hook has been struck, per your objections. A new hook has been supplied, and the referent sentence in the article emended.
Either party in a review may ask for another reviewer. However, I hope these changes will garner your approval without that.Georgejdorner (talk) 17:45, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Requesting new reviewer to check over the hooks and sourcing. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:47, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 8[edit]

Better (Kim Hyung-jun song)

  • ... that Kim Hyung Jun's personal car was used in "Better" music video just so the shooting will advance?

Created by 001Jrm (talk). Self-nominated at 06:16, 8 May 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg The article is sufficiently long, and was submitted for the nomination within the given time frame. The hook is interesting, clear, straight to the point and well within the 200-character limit. A simple Google translation of the source (Reference no. 22) appears to confirm the fact. It appears the nominator has also done his QPQ too. This article is good to go. — SyFuelIgniteBurned 15:37, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg I just took a look at the article, and it has some prose and grammar issues. I suggest an outside copyeditor, given that other recent articles have had prose and grammar problems as well. There's also a tense issue with the proposed hook, and it shouldn't have been passed in that condition. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:47, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Oh, uhhmm,, would this do?
ALT1: ... that Kim Hyung Jun's personal car was used in the music video for his single "Better" just so the shooting would advance?
Thanks! 001Jrm (talk) 21:25, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 11[edit]

20th century in ichnology

Mounted skeleton of Apatosaurus in position over a trackway slab from the Glen Rose Formation in the American Museum of Natural History

Created by Abyssal (talk). Self-nominated at 15:42, 11 May 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Article new enough, long enough, and adequately cited. Hook short enough, interesting enough, and also cited. Article appears to be neutral and free of copyright violations and plagiarism. Cheers!♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:23, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Hey, could we wait a little while to run this? I have a 19th century article that just needs a bit of sprucing before nominating and I'd like to run them in order. Abyssal (talk) 21:53, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
  • The 19th century article is basically ready to nominate, I just need to finish its QPQ. Thanks for your patience. Abyssal (talk) 14:45, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
  • @Abyssal: it's almost 2 weeks since your last note. Yoninah (talk) 21:54, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Thr QPQ is finished, but no one's reviewed the article. It should go quickly when the review begins, that's all we're waiting for. Abyssal (talk) 00:42, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Timeline of ankylosaur research

Skeletal mount of the ankylosaur Euoplocephalus tutus

Created by Abyssal (talk). Self-nominated at 15:38, 11 May 2015 (UTC).

Review by AshLin
  • New enough!
  • Long enough!
  • Issue One - Nine "disambiguation needed" links need attention. May please resolve so that I can proceed further after that. @Abyssal: AshLin (talk) 13:37, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. I'll look into it after the weekend. Abyssal (talk) 15:50, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed now that the one issue has been resolved. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:37, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol voting keep.svg Completing review as this one has been sitting for a couple of weeks. The tags have now been resolved, and to add to the previous review, the article is fully cited with the hook fact cited to an offline source, so taking good faith on that. QPQ has been completed, image has an appropriate permission. So this is good to go. Miyagawa (talk) 17:14, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg I'm really confused as to what the hook means. My gut feeling is it could be simplified, but I'm not sure how. As it stands, it jars a bit too much on the queue so I've pulled it back into review pending improvements. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:26, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
  • I edited this hook when I promoted it to the prep area and what you pulled was actually ALT1, which was what I came up with. It is easy to criticise the efforts of others, so why don't you suggest a better hook yourself? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:34, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
To be honest, I like the original a lot more, but if this rephrasing satisfies @Ritchie333: I'm will to let it pass or attempt to rephrase it again. Abyssal (talk) 17:52, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Abyssal, ALT1 is what Ritchie333 pulled in the first place—it was Cwmhiraeth's edit of the original hook when she promoted this to prep, and Ritchie333 didn't like it. I've struck it, and the original as well. I'd like to suggest that you come up with an ALT2 hook, either new or another rephrasing; the original's "decades of the history of ankylosaur research" phrasing strikes me as clunky, which I imagine is why Cwmhiraeth tried to clean it up in the first place. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:47, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
  • To be perfectly honest, I think we're better off deferring to a third opinion on this. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:04, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Third opinion needed on the suitability of ALT2, and also a review of its sourcing and neutrality. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:43, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Third party comment: I'm sorry, but these three hooks are all pretty boring: most people won't care that clade A used to be in clade B, and even most dinosaur fans would just go "oh, ok". (The DYK hooks in general seem to be rather hum drum lately). And Alt2 makes me picture ankylosaurs chipping away with rock hammers. I think a much more interesting hook would involve the pre-scientific hypotheses of the bones (grandfather of the Buffalo, Yeitso, etc), however from the way the article is written, it seems like these theories could be said about any old bones beside ankylosaurs. --Animalparty-- (talk) 01:39, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 12[edit]

Babette Haag

Created by Dr. Blofeld (talk) and Vic. Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 16:39, 19 May 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg New (article created within a week of this nomination, on May 12) and long enough (3091 characters). Quite a bit of close paraphrasing detected from the Bach Cantatas site, though I don't know if they copied the German Wikipedia or what. (The cited article has been existent in its current version since March 2014, so perhaps not). 23W 00:05, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
  • I am only the nominator. I would not be surprised if the German Wikipedia was first, being copied and translated to other similar versions. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:58, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg QPQ is also required. The Bach Cantatas website gives its source as Haag's website, and the English translation as dating from October 2013. Interesting, the BC translator is also that website's copyright agent, so this is definitely a case where we'd want to move with caution. The BC page does have external links to both Haag's website and the German Wikipedia article. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:09, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

I've noticed that quite a few translated articles from other wikis end up closely paraphrasing Bach Cantatas when translated into English. In future if it's a Bach Cantatas bio it's probably best to say so and start it using the source directly.♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:20, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Dr. Blofeld, something will need to be done if the English Wikipedia article has substantial close paraphrasing of the Bach Cantatas website's copyrighted English version of Haag's bio (which is based, I'm assuming, on the website's German version, almost certainly copyrighted as well). As things stand now, this nomination cannot pass. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:55, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Is it correct that the German Wikipedia - of which the article is a faithful translation - is different, - so we will have to say something different from the German Wikipedia? - It can be done, but I see some irony, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:17, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
I've shuffled it about and added a few extra bits to reduce the copyright issue. I ve added myself as a minor author and the QPQ can Tales of Frankenstein as the QPQ Victuallers (talk) 12:49, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Thank you so much! You can use the qpq next time, I reviewed Parliament House (Malta) t failed to mention it, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:41, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 15[edit]

1630 Crete earthquake, Kythira Strait

Created by Dr. Blofeld (talk), Nvvchar (talk), Rosiestep (talk), and Cplakidas (talk). Nominated by Rosiestep (talk) at 15:11, 16 May 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg New enough, long enough, meets core content policies. Hook cited to RS. GTG. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 20:43, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

@Jakec: Could you re-review a triple hook suggestion with

ALT1: ... that in 1988, K. G. Tsiknakis published two previously unpublished accounts of the 1630 Crete earthquake, which occurred in the Kythira Strait, in the Cretica Chronica?Dr. Blofeld 08:40, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

  • Note: I added credit templates for the two additional articles – each of the four originally credited users is credited for all three articles. Please add or remove any credit templates, as appropriate. MANdARAX  XAЯAbИAM 09:28, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • @Mandarax: thanks. I've tweaked the credits for one of them. --Rosiestep (talk) 13:35, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg For whatever reason, DYK rules mandate that all the articles mention the hook fact; only one does. The Cretica Chronica is also too short at 940 characters (and under-referenced). That said, the Kythira Strait article would be much better as a standalone hook: something along the lines of ... that the Kythira Strait is one of the most dangerous navigational hazards in the Mediterranean? --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 16:46, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Rosiestep, I was going to ping Jakob to take a look at ALT2, but instead I think there needs to be work done on the Kythira Strait article; in the Earthquakes and tsunami section, the final sentence is problematic, and "upto" is not a word. I will say that contrary to Jakob's statement, DYK rules do not mandate that each hook fact is mentioned in all of the articles of a multi-article hook, so I don't think that particular earthquake needs to be included in the Kythira article, where it would probably be considered "undue". BlueMoonset (talk) 07:07, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
  • @BlueMoonset: thanks for looking at it. I think I've taken care of the mentioned issues, but if I missed something, please ping me. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:17, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Rosiestep, the new edits help a great deal. I've made a couple of very minor additional changes and added a "citation needed" template for the list of ships in the intro, which will need to be resolved. (Any chance of there being more ancient ships known to have been wrecked there?) For that second intro paragraph, "several" is far too weak for a strait that has been the location of shipwrecks since Classical Antiquity; I'd say "many" at a minimum, and your sourcing will likely allow for an even stronger word or phrase. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:46, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Jakob, could you please check the proposed ALT2, now that Rosiestep has resolved the above issues? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:32, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • The hook is verified in the earthquake article. One question about the strait article though: the placement of the only citation in the geography section makes it unclear if it's supporting the entire section up to that point (which should be okay) or only part of a single sentence (which is not okay). I still think that the hook should be split, with the Kyrithra Strait using the hook I proposed and the earthquake article should use ALT0. The Kyrithra Strait hook is by far the most interesting of these alts. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 11:38, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 20[edit]

Internet intermediary

Created by Piotrus (talk). Self-nominated at 03:49, 26 May 2015 (UTC).

Symbol possible vote.svg Length and history OK. However, that long last graf appears to be copypasted from this UNESCO report. I realize that that document is licensed as CC-BY-SA-3.0, so I'm not going to call it copyvio ... but that "BY" provision means it needs to be properly attributed at the very least, which it isn't right now. In fact, I'd strongly recommend that you rewrite it with an eye toward summarizing it because as it is, it's just another wall o'text that most people will just glide right past. Daniel Case (talk) 17:26, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
I have added a cite; since it is BY I don't feel the need to summarize it further. It's relevant, I think. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 00:21, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg Thanks. I put the quote in a box and formatted it to make it more readable. Good to go. Daniel Case (talk) 14:48, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Comment: For DYK purposes you need 1500 characters of original text; text copied verbatim from a free source doesn't count. (see rule 2b). I'm getting 1467 characters excluding that text, and a lot of that is quoting the OECD source and/or a list formatted as prose, so it's kind of borderline. Antony–22 (talkcontribs) 04:45, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg If there are only 1467 non-copied characters, then it's too short, and needs to be expanded with original material. Superseding the approval now, so it doesn't get pulled from prep later. BlueMoonset (talk) 07:16, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
FWIW, the only original sentences in the UNESCO section are the first one, and the last sentence of the third paragraph. Formatting the list in the Definition section as an actual list brings down the character count to about 800. Antony–22 (talkcontribs) 23:22, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Soraya Syed

Created/expanded by Remonaaly (talk). Nominated by Fauzan (talk) at 16:50, 24 May 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg New enough and long enough. A lot of content is unreferenced, an especially bad thing since this is a BLP. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 20:33, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Which sections specifically could do with more references? Remonaaly (talk)
Ping Jakec --Fauzan✆ talk✉ mail 04:37, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
  • 2nd paragraph in "Education and training", last sentence of 3rd paragraph in "Education and training", and the 1st paragraph "Career" all have no citations. I'm also not sure that so many images of her work can fall under fair use, though I'm willing to defer to an expert on that one.. Speaking of fair use, evidence of permission should be provided for the picture of Syed herself (fair use is almost never appropriate for images of living people). --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 20:13, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
  • integrates is vague -- what does that mean in this context? EEng (talk) 08:13, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Soraya Syed at Leighton House.jpg
EEng, you can visit the website of the artict and look at her works to get an idea, meanwhile I have put up an alt. --Fauzan✆ talk✉ mail 14:30, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Way better. Thanks. EEng (talk) 14:31, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Wait! EEng, isn't a hook expected to be mysterious and present something unknown that attracts the reader? --Fauzan✆ talk✉ mail 14:47, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Yes it is. Personally I read ALT1 and think, "Hmm... I think of calligraphy as something down with a fountain pen, or brush. I wonder what these new technologies could be?" EEng (talk) 15:01, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
OK, then, I too feel the same on reconsidering. --Fauzan✆ talk✉ mail 15:13, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Several paragraphs still have no cites at all, per Rule D2: 2nd paragraph under "Education and training", first and last paragraphs under "Career". The hook is also too general. You could write:
  • ALT2: ... that classically-trained Islamic calligrapher Soraya Syed (pictured) incorporates modern technologies such as holography in her art? Yoninah (talk) 21:11, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
Yoninah, have a look at the article now. ALT2 looks better. --Fauzan✆ talk✉ mail 07:58, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Frankly, this article is based on a lot of non-reliable sources like blogs, and it's not clear to me that she's even notable per WP:ARTIST. I went through the article and removed all the non-reliable sources. A few paragraphs now have no references again. Yoninah (talk) 01:16, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol delete vote.svg Concerns have not been addressed. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 11:41, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Reid Anderson (dancer)

Created/expanded by Z1720 (talk). Self-nominated at 20:40, 22 May 2015 (UTC).

Symbol question.svg Thank you for another dancer's bio, solid expansion on good sources. I removed a few overlinks and linked to the one ballet mentioned. As a reader, I would be interested in more works, and some review of his dancing style. Compare Ray Barra. The hook is sourced, not too interesting, at least to me. Other suggestions? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:42, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
@Gerda Arendt:Thank you for reviewing this article, and sorry for my delayed response. I have been looking for more reliable sources but they are difficult to find online. If you find anything please feel free to add them to the article or post them on my talk page. Here is another DYK nomination from new information that I found. Z1720 (talk) 06:34, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
ALT 1 ... that Reid Anderson suggested Chan-hon Goh become the National Ballet of Canada's first Chinese Canadian principal dancer?
That's an idea but will it make people curious enough? Possibly they will want to know more about the Chinese dancer ;) - Can you try something pointing out his connection to both Stuttgart and National Canadian, because I think that connects him to known values? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:38, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

No. 106 Squadron IAF

5x expanded by AshLin (talk). Self-nominated at 21:25, 20 May 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svgArticle nominated on the 7th day after creation, so still considered new. Long enough at 3137 characters.
  • Review verified for White Oak Run (Lackawanna River).
  • The text needs a little bit of work as it uses acronyms which are not explained or linked (e.g., NRSA) as well as abbreviations instead of full words (e.g., "sqn", "Wg Cdr", ). There are also one or two parts where it is not neutrally worded (e.g., "...desperately sought to avoid destruction...").
    • Yes check.svg Done, removed abbreviations & POV text, please confirm that the text is neutral now. I'd be happy to rewrite any parts inadvertantly missed out.
  • Citation #5 needs to be split up so you can cite specific pages so the hook can be verified. The book cited is about 150pp, so it's impossible to know where to look in the book to find the information without doing a lot of extra work.
  • The hook isn't really interesting. The list of mission locations is too long, and planes flying missions in 1971 is just not that interesting unless there is something unique about the missions. After reading the article, I don't have a good suggestion for an alternate hook. The missions described in the article are pretty mundane (or at least par for the course when it comes to missions like these). ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 08:08, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Point well taken, the missions actually spanned the geographical limits of the warring nations - Gwadar to the west on the Mekran coast of Pakistan, Karakorum mountains border Chinese Sinkiang, while Cox's Bazaar is at the south-eastern tip of Bangladesh. Two alts are placed below for consideration please :
  • I can't find anything in the article stating "thus spanning the entire war zone". This needs to be in the article and referenced to be in the hook. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 05:16, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
  • I can't find anything in the article stating they were awarded ten gallantry medals. The article lists at least 12 medals or awards (and maybe one or two more, based on some of the other text). The hook should be consistent with the sourced information in the article. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 05:16, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

@Nihonjoe:, may please review the changes made. AshLin (talk) 04:08, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

@AshLin: Comments left above. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 05:16, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
I no longer have access to the source till August 2015 (owned by some one else), hence I request withdrawal of the DYK. Thanks for reviewing @Nihonjoe:, AshLin (talk) 14:22, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
@AshLin: I'm sorry you lost access to the source. Is there any way to find another copy of it? I would hate for you to lose out on the DYK because of that. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 16:29, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
@Nihonjoe:, I'm in Kolkata shifting in August to Pune, then I get access to it again. Is such a long wait acceptable? AshLin (talk) 15:46, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Not sure. We may need someone else to comment on that. DYK has their own little way of doing things which is not all that easy to figure out. Anyone else want to comment on this? ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 06:06, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

The Inbetweeners 2

  • ... that the director of the Australian-set film The Inbetweeners 2 considered filming it in South Africa in order to save money?

Improved to Good Article status by The Almightey Drill (talk). Self-nominated at 08:32, 20 May 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg New enough as promoted to GA on 20 May, long enough at 16,949 characters, neutral and hooks and article are well sourced and QPQ done. Would go with ALT 1. Good to go.Blethering Scot 16:46, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg I've checked the sources and something doesn't smell right (if you'll pardon the wording) about ALT1. Just when and where was this alleged "craze"? Who is this "travel expert" (or "travel law expert") Nick Harris? EEng (talk) 04:41, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
Can i apologise I never checked the ALT and this is not the one I meant to approve. The approved Hook was the first one and it is definitely sourced. As for Nick Harris a google search shows a fair amount of news articles he is quoted in including The Sunday Times on a variety of travel issues. He is head of travel law at Simpson Millar’s and appears according to his bio to previously of been a defendant lawyer for Thomas Cook, Airtours, Going Places and Direct Holidays. Safe to say he is probably considered an expert in that field. Don't see an issue with its use in the article.Blethering Scot 18:33, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Struck ALT1 due to the above commentary. Given the above, would like a second opinion on the original hook and the review as a whole; new reviewer can reissue the tick if all is well. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:52, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Solo (EP)

5x expanded by 001Jrm (talk). Self-nominated at 05:00, 20 May 2015 (UTC).

  • This hook needs fixing. What is medium pop? Is the word song supposed to be after R&B? Young-saeng, not "Crying", should be the subject of "wanting to do light rock". hinnk (talk) 05:20, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
I based "medium pop" from this Korean article and this English article, but I guess the better translation would be "medium-tempo pop" just like what this article stated..? I also rearranged the hook into this:
Let me know if it needs more fixing. Thanks for pointing those out! :) 001Jrm (talk) 20:59, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 21[edit]

Charles W. Wantland

Created by UCO2009bluejay (talk). Self-nominated at 19:48, 23 May 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Article is new enough and long enough, and nominated in timely fashion. QPQ can be waived with only one prior DYK. No apparent paraphrasing issues; I'm assuming good faith on The Oklahoman source, as registration is required. I wouldn't generally consider a high school alumni website like seminolealumni.com to be reliable, so I would suggest removing it. Most of the material is sourced by Legendary Locals of Edmond, so you can just tweak the few parts that were based on the alumni page. Finally, the hook fails to show the significance of the event. The hook (and the article) can be enhanced to mention that Wantland voiced support for Murray's opponent, Frank Buttram. Legendary states that Wantland was "perhaps the only coach ever fired by a governor", but that would need to be properly attributed per WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV if it were to be used in the hook.—Bagumba (talk) 18:49, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for responding. I have adjusted the paragraph in the article to include the information about him supporting Buttram. I have found another link stating that Buttram played baseball at OU and graduated 1910 (the same time as Wantland, so they likely were teammates) but left it out of the article because the source it didn't mention Wantland. I am willing to adjust the article more if need be. In the hook I added info that his removal was politically motivated and dropped football because he coached more that football.UCO2009bluejay Y'all want to talk? 21:36, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
With the questionable alumni source removed, the following sentences are no longer supported by the remaining source: "In 1930 former representative Alfalfa Bill Murray ..." and "However, college president John Gorden Mitchell ..." For ALT1, it's not supported that he was fired "for supporting a political rival"; one option is to say he was fired "after supporting a political rival".—Bagumba (talk) 08:09, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
I wouldn't have an objection to changing it to "after" supporting a political rival. In regards to the first sentence of the paragraph, I can see how without that source it would be iffy, and at least I should drop put a period instead of the comma and remove the words after the comma. If this is deemed a reliable source([file:///home/chronos/u-71a6d4d0fd12439b2a0e92d9725db8f01c871cb5/Downloads/7127617%20(1).PDF] see footnote pages 133-4), could it potentially save the second sentence if it were revised to say something to the effect of College President and Wantland refused to support Murray's campaign and he fired them both after he was elected. UCO2009bluejay Y'all want to talk? 01:37, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
I don't have access to that url, which appears to be a local file on your computer or network. You can add the public url to the article with your proposed changes, and I can review it afterwards. If it is not available online, there is no requirement either that a source has to be online to meet WP:V.—Bagumba (talk) 03:24, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
I really appreciate your patience, and I appreciate good faith but I never want to abuse it either, so that is why I am hesitant before adding it to the article, even with the offline source option. The publication is a dissertation from 1971 by Stanley W. Hoig entitled, "A history of the development of institutions of higher education in Oklahoma". I'm not that computer savvy so I don't know why it wasn't accessible because I found it online through a google search. I looked a bit more and found this link and hope it may work [1]. This is the link prior to that page with an "open in document viewer option" [2] just in case that doesn't work. If not I'll attribute this to me being in Oklahoma, but it isn't through a database search or anything of that nature like the Daily Oklahoman article. Thanks-UCO2009bluejay (talk) 23:54, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
I have found two sources in regards to the above issues one I have found a internet source for the other is a print source.UCO2009bluejay (talk) 22:32, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Birdman (film)

Improved to Good Article status by Captain Assassin! (talk). Self-nominated at 15:57, 21 May 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Promoted to GA on 21 May so new enough, long enough at 35,026 characters, neutral, hook and article is well sourced as part of GA process, hook is interesting and QPQ done. Good to go.Blethering Scot 16:40, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Can we try for something hookier?
  • ALT1: ... that the script for Birdman (2014), winner of four Academy Awards, was mainly written through Skype calls and emails? Yoninah (talk) 09:04, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Not sure about this to be honest. Its a very interesting hook but for me its an interpretation of the source I'm not too sure of. The source says they mostly met over Skype and email. Not sure how much writing went on during these sessions, its a loose interpretation. The source also contradicts another statement in article. It says so the could shoot in the St. James for a month, however the article says they shot in it for just two weeks.Blethering Scot 18:32, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Hmm. I'm surprised this passed GA. Yoninah (talk) 20:33, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Yeah, reviewer just came by and passed the GAN on his first comment. I though he would be asking me address some issues, but....surprised me too. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 11:47, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
  • If the material doesn't align with the sources, then it needs to be delisted. Yoninah (talk) 15:16, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
  • The article is clearly well written and on that front I can't find much fault at all. The sentence needs changed as we can't say they did most of the writing by that method, only that they met or collaborated over Skype. As for the theatre this source says two weeks and this one says a month. Issue is differing sources. I may well have found the only two issues in the article. Very hard to tell.Blethering Scot 16:21, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
  • @Yoninah: whats your thoughts. Do u think a GA Review should be requested & DYK put on hold pending this.Blethering Scot 23:34, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Nah, I think even with the skype calls the DYK line is pretty boring. The most surprising fact I found while writing the production section was that the original ending was changed halfway through filming, so I thought:
  • ALT2: ... that the ending to Birdman (2014), was written halfway through filming after it came to the director in a dream?
  • As for whether the article's GA class, I think it's still fairly incomplete. In around a month I'll have time to finish off the production section and work on a themes section, but as it currently stands I don't consider it GA. The standards for GA class may have slipped elsewhere, but let's keep them strong in media and drama. Neuroxic (talk) 04:00, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
  • The Skype was very interesting but its disingenuous. As for the ALT hook as two editors have raised concern about the standard of the GA review this has to declined until it is re reviewed. Going to request that to happen.Blethering Scot 11:52, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Article is currently undergoing a Good Article Reassessment. Nomination on hold until the reassessment has concluded. If it remains listed, then the review can continue; if it is delisted, the nomination will be closed. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:18, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 22[edit]

Uyarndha Manithan

Improved to Good Article status by Thamizhan1994 (talk). Nominated by Vensatry (talk) at 12:51, 27 May 2015 (UTC).

  • Comment – Suggest ALT2 since the film was the first to be awarded under the category in the whole of Indian cinema. Vensatry (ping) 11:24, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 23[edit]

Zenobia (bird)

  • ... that Zenobia is one of the few Northern Ibis birds that know the migratory route to Ethiopia, a critical fact for species survival, and that she may have been killed by the terrorist group ISIS?

Created by Dharahara (talk). Self-nominated at 17:58, 25 May 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol delete vote.svg Firstly, the article is obviously too short. There are no inline references. The lead paragraph says (which in turn says a lot): "She is notable because of multiple reliable sources that cite her, thus meeting Wikipedia criteria for inclusion." I am afraid the article is closer to AfD than to DYK. Surtsicna (talk) 19:50, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
fixes have been made.Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Dharahara (talk) 21:52, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Rather than use a check, I switched a checkmark to a red "break" icon instead on your behalf. George Ho (talk) 22:30, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • ALT1 ... that ISIS may have killed an ibis? EEng (talk) 05:21, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Symbol question.svg I'm still seeing a "readable prose size" of 1035 bytes, too short. Calling Assad's government "the legitimate government" may be too much of an editorial statement; how about "the recognized government"? And the source (footnote 3) for the hook claim says nothing about the possibility of ISIS killing this bird; all it says is that the bird has been left without guards because of ISIS. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:39, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
  • ALT2 ... about the ISIS threat to an ibis?

I'll take a crack at bringing the article up to snuff. This is too good to lose. EEng (talk) 00:36, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

OK, I've cleaned up a lot -- can someone please handle the bare URLs? -- and expanded enough to meet 1500. EEng (talk) 02:37, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Page length now ok, but the claim that ISIS poses a threat to this bird is still backed by a source that doesn't say any such thing. All it says is that the bird lives in a region captured by ISIS and that the bird's guards fled for fear of ISIS. The same is true for the BBC source that it cribs from. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:14, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Hmmm. If all we had is the flight (so to speak) of the guards, for the reason stated, I'd say that saying ISIS is a threat to the ibis is a bit too SYNTHetic. But given that the BBC item [3] is titled "IS threat to Syria's northern bald ibis near Palmyra", don't we have what we need? EEng (talk) 05:38, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
It feels like fearmongering and propaganda to me. There are plenty of actual atrocities to lay at the feet of ISIS without making up new ones that for all we know they are completely ignorant of. Yes, the bird is endangered by living in a war zone, but why should ISIS pose more or less of a threat to it than the other combatants there? Is there some commandment to kill ibises in their interpretation of their holy writings? —David Eppstein (talk) 05:47, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Wouldn't surprise me, though when you think about it it's no weirder than cutting off foreskins and drinking some guy's blood every Sunday. But no one's saying it's on par with real atrocities, but it's also a reminder of just how many kinds of permanent damage these fucks are inflicting on the world -- human suffering and irreparable cultural loss and loss of genetic diversity... But I ask again: don't you think the BBC headline gets us off the SYNTH hook? And what if we said that "ISIS action" (instead of ISIS itself) poses a threat? EEng (talk) 06:42, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg I think we need another review to help resolve this. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:18, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
I hope you don't feel I was nagging you. I do think it would be a good idea to get a 3O because while I think your concern has merit I have trouble deciding whether I personally think it's a dealbreaker. Let's talk again after someone else has given their opinion. EEng (talk) 18:55, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
No, no problem with nagging, I merely had the feeling that we were reaching an impasse that could best be broken by another opinion. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:40, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
Ah, but we agree on getting a 3O to break the impasse so, paradoxically, it's not an impasse! Mandarax, can you opine? EEng (talk) 01:43, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Presumably I was summoned here because of my lame attempt at a humorous edit summary. But you should know that Mandarax is like a box of chocolates ... you never know what you're gonna get. While I'll give my long-winded opinion, I don't want to be the decider. In general, I like the idea of short, snappy hooks with some wordplay, especially when there's nothing more interesting to be gleaned from the article. For example, EEng, where I stole your idea, turning your hook into a shorter, snappier version. But in this case I find the story of this bird, who may be the only chance for survival of the species in the wild, to be very interesting. I don't think I would click on a hook just about the ISIS/ibis thing. But that's just me. (Also, if ALT2 were used, some people might be concerned about the lack of a "that", and it might even get changed to add one.)

As for the SYNTH issue.... I haven't checked the sources, but I would NEVER, NEVER, NEVER (yes, "never" is repeated in bold underlined uppercase italics, so you know I mean business) use a headline as a source. Headlines are generally written by someone other than the article's author; they're constructed to grab people's attention, and unless they accurately summarize what's also in the article, I would not trust them. MANdARAX  XAЯAbИAM 03:17, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Thx. Yeah, I know that about headlines. I see this SYNTH question as right on the knife edge so I'm desperate to find something to knock it one way or the other. Naturally I'd love to save this hook. EEng (talk) 04:24, 2 June 2015 (UTC) Tried decaf, Mandarax?
I do need to get more sleep. I realize now that I somehow neglected to make it multicolored and blinking. MANdARAX  XAЯAbИAM 07:06, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Yeah, Synth is an issue here. As is notability.... even the BBC article barely handles the bird herself. Heck, length is still a problem. Removing direct quotes knocks the article under 1500 characters. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:20, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Šime Budinić

Created by Antidiskriminator (talk). Self-nominated at 23:57, 24 May 2015 (UTC).

  • Struck ALT0 as somewhat unintelligible. I can kind of understand what it's trying to say but not really, so I can't fix it. EEng (talk) 05:23, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

EEng, What do you think about ALT1?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 07:15, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Well, "penetrate as much South Slavs as possible" makes no sense, and the article says the same thing so I just don't know what to tell you to do. I think you need to find a native English speaker to copyedit the article for you, and then reconsider the hook. The nomination can go on hold while you get this done. EEng (talk) 22:32, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
  • ALT2:
EEng, thanks for advice which I followed (diff) and requested copy editing at GOCE. What do you think about ALT2?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 06:18, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Why don't you ping me when the copyedit is done and we'll think about hooks then. EEng (talk) 12:08, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Ok. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 12:36, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

I came over at the request of Antidiskriminator. How about this:

Still a bit clunky, but I think it is definitely an improvement over the original. If you think it still needs further tweaking, let me know. -Pax Verbum 21:23, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Pax85, thank you for your effort. It is necessary to correct one thing. Cyrillic and Glagolitic which were not derived from Czech diacritics. Based on the Cyrillic and Glagolitic, Budinic created a version of Latin script which included a few Czech diacritics. To simplify things it might be a good idea to drop Czech diacritics and tweak ALT3 to be something like:
What do you think?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:54, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
@Antidiskriminator:Ah yes, that makes more sense now, and I think your new version looks good. It is more concise... -Pax Verbum 22:20, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

If I can comment on the proposed alternatives: (A) ALT 1 does not make sense because a literary language cannot be based on an alphabet such as the Cyrillic or Glagolitic. It's a bit like saying "the English literary language is based on the Roman alphabet" - well no - the English literary language is written in the Roman alphabet, but it is based on a specific dialect or a set or dialects. Maybe what was intended is something along the lines of "the literary language was based on the štokavski-ijekavski dialect which was (or still may be) the most widely understood dialect among the South Slavs". To avoid any controversies I've deliberately used a formulation that does not delimit the dialect by reference to the Croatia, Bosnian or the Serbian languages. However it should be noted that Budinić himself called the language "slovinjski" or Slav - while in Latin and Italian publications he used the name Illyrian for the language - this was common practice among Croatian writers until the 19th century. (B) ALT 3 is not correct, because looking at the 1583 edition of Suma nauka kristijanskoga (https://books.google.com.au/books?id=Rk48AAAAcAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=Summa+nauka&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CB8Q6AEwAGoVChMI4-zT4MeVxgIV6FCmCh2HPAyK#v=onepage&q&f=false) it is clear that Budinić used the Latin (latinica) ie. Roman alphabet that was traditionally used for Croatian at that time, with the addition of the letters č and ž, which can be ascribed to Czech Hussite influence. Even then, the form of the letters č and ž is not the same as the present day form. The hooks (diacritics) on top of the letters are more like commas rather than like chevrons - a clear sign of Czech usage at the time. (C) ALT 4 is not correct either, for the same reasons as ALT 3. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:09, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

The ALT4 refers to his 1582 work, not 1583. Thank you Pax85.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 11:19, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification about ALT 4. However, using ALT 4 would cause confusion because it is not apparent from the article that "Budinić created a version of the Latin script derived from Cyrillic and Glagolitic" in a 1582 work. There are only two references in the article to a 1582 work (confusingly, the article does not say what that work is, which is what you would expect if the 1582 work was so important to warrant a "Did you know"; you would also expect the article to say something about the version of the Latin script that Budinić is said to have created - with examples of that script, the changes introduced by Budinić, and whether those changes were accepted or used by anyone else). The first reference is in the sentence "Under the influence of Jesuit priest Peter Canisius, Budinić abandoned the language he had been using in his 1582 work..." - This sentence suggests that his 1582 work was his last work before he "created a version of the Latin script". So if Budinić did indeed create a new version of the Latin script, he did not do it in a 1582 work. The second reference in the article to a 1582 work is in note 18, which states "In his work printed in 1582 (Rome), Sime Budinic of Zadar referred to the language in his work as Slavonic" - This reference says nothing about the version of the Latin script that Budinić used in 1582. — Preceding unsigned comment added by‬ (talkcontribs) 01:10, 18 June 2015‎ ‪(UTC)

No, ALT4 will not create any confusion because it does not mention 1582 year. Additional citation for 1582 work added.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:10, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
Could you please clarify your comments:
- on 17 June 2015 you said that "The ALT4 refers to his 1582 work"
- on 18 June 2015 you said that "ALT4 will not create any confusion because it does not mention 1582 year."
Which is it? Does ALT4 refer to a 1582 work or not?
ALT4 still has the potential to mislead or confuse because the article does not say what that is the title of the 1582 work, which is the least that would be expected if that work was so important to warrant a "Did you know". Again, I repeat it would also be expected that the article says something about the version of the Latin script that Budinić is said to have created (especially if that is so important to warrant a "Did you know") - how was Budinić's script "based on the Cyrillic and Glagolitic scripts", with examples of the Latin script, examples of the changes introduced by Budinić, and whether those changes were accepted or used by anyone else. — Preceding unsigned comment added by‬ (talkcontribs) 01:03, 19 June 2015‎ ‪(UTC)
ALT4 referst to work written in 1582 but it does not specify year 1582. That is why ATL4 itself can not create any confusion. The clarification about work written in 1582 and additional citation are added to the article (diff). The article is start class article. Additional details and examples would be necessary if this was GA or FA nomination, not for DYK.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 05:51, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Based on suggestion for more precise translation:

Symbol redirect vote 4.svg The article is now copy edited and correctness of the translation has been confirmed. This nomination is ready for review.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:03, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 25[edit]

Ali Marpet

5x expanded by Epeefleche (talk). Self-nominated at 21:24, 29 May 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Hook is short and punchy (and slightly tweaked for clarity), sourcing is thorough, and the text is detailed and sufficiently neutral. Article was 1597 characters of readable prose before expansion began and 10328 characters five days after, far exceeding the 5x expansion requirement. However, spot checks of the prose found close paraphrasing (such as "his size coming out of high school kept bigger schools away" from the Boston Globe and "His size when graduating from high school had kept bigger schools away" from the article) which needs to be cleared up before this can be promoted. - Dravecky (talk) 01:10, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
Revisions have somewhat improved the situation but there are still whole long phrases that are word-for-word matches to sources like this one. - Dravecky (talk) 05:42, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
I've made revisions, seeking to address your concerns. Epeefleche (talk) 06:00, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
It's better, but I still keep finding things like "Hobart, a private liberal arts institution of 2,396 students in the Finger Lakes region" (from the source) and "Hobart is a private liberal arts institution of 2,396 students in Geneva, in Upstate New York" (in the article) which still fall into close paraphrasing. - Dravecky (talk) 06:29, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
That falls squarely within the ambit of WP:LIMITED. Most of the words there are immutable -- Hobart, private, liberal arts, 2,396, students. However, I can and will change institution.
That's similar, for example, to the DYK article for April Nelson saying " Her platform is "IOU, Improving Others Through U'", while the ref states: "Her platform is 'IOU, Improving Others Through You.'"[4] -- that also, and similar instances, though close to the ref's language fall within WP:LIMITED, because: "Close paraphrasing is ... permitted when there are only a limited number of ways to say the same thing ...." That's the case when in single sentences the words are largely immutable words.
Furthermore, as Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing#Substantial similarity points out, "A close paraphrase of one sentence from a book may be of low concern, while a close paraphrase of one paragraph of a two-paragraph article would be considered a serious violation ... The editor must be extra careful in these cases to extract the facts alone and present the facts in plain language, without carrying forward anything that could be considered 'creative expression'". I don't think there is any "creative expression" at all in either example -- this is all presentation of dry facts, in non-creative dry factual language. Epeefleche (talk) 08:07, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
The quoted part of the example you cite (everything but "Her platform is") isn't a phrase I've chosen but the actual title of Nelson's platform, like a movie or book title, and not subject to my personal creativity as a writer. Describing Hobart with that exact phrasing, including a precise student body figure that's likely no longer accurate, lifted from the source is a choice. If you think I'm being unfair, ask one of the other DYK regulars to look over Ali Marpet and if they're willing to give it a checkmark then I'll step quietly aside. - Dravecky (talk) 12:53, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Sure -- let's let a DYK regular (or other seasoned editor) review. I think the example you point to, supported by multiple RSs, in one brief factual-laden sentence, falls precisely within WP:LIMITED. At the same time, I'll round the figure that is reflected in the multiple RSs. Epeefleche (talk) 17:56, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Is the only holdup a matter of paraphrasing or is a total review required here? I am actually not the best reviewer for paraphrasing because I know there are websites that analyze copyvios that I do not use. However, this article passes the eye test on most issues and is certainly the type of content that I feel the main page should present. I would suggest changing the citations to the more common multicolumn format. The article has expanded sufficiently since May 25 to be eligible. The hook is intersting.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:39, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

History of Roman and Byzantine domes

Hagia Sophia

Improved to Good Article status by AmateurEditor (talk). Self-nominated at 21:00, 28 May 2015 (UTC).

  • I suggest you specify the refs for the hook. Reviewers should'nt be expected to work this out for an article this long. Johnbod (talk) 18:22, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
The reference for the Pantheon having the widest dome is reference number 46 (Mark and Hutchinson, page 34)[5], and the reference for the pendentives of Hagia Sophia being 7% greater is reference number 90 91 (Mark and Billington, page 308)[6]. Sorry for any inconvenience, this is the first DYK nomination that I have tried and I'm not familiar with the process. AmateurEditor (talk) 20:18, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Thank you! I changed reference 90 in my above comment to 91 because an additional reference added after May 29 shifted it. The page number and external link were still accurate, of course. AmateurEditor (talk) 22:22, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg This newly promoted GA passes the newness and length requirements for DYK. I was able to verify the hook sources as I have access to JSTOR. The image is appropriately licensed and the article is neutral, but checking for close paraphrasing was beyond my capabilities and enthusiasm. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:51, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for stepping up. I guess access to JSTOR is not as common among Wikipedia editors as I thought. AmateurEditor (talk) 01:12, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg I have pulled this one from prep as the larger dome appears to be a hypothetical rather than actual dome according to the article, so a new hook is required. Gatoclass (talk) 12:45, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (alt) that the widest of the Roman and Byzantine domes was that of the Pantheon, but the pendentives of Hagia Sophia (pictured) form part of a theoretical hemisphere seven percent wider?
I added the "theoretical" word (as that's how I read the meaning) Victuallers (talk) 14:42, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
The point is, the hook appears to refer to the original dome and pendetives, neither of whose dimensions are known. It‍‍ '​‍s just a theory that the pendetives for the original dome were "7 percent wider" than the Pantheon - nobody actually knows. The hook, on the other hand, states that the current dome has pendetives 7 percent wider. That‍‍ '​‍s why the hook needs work, because it‍‍ '​‍s conflating the current dome with a theoretical version of the original dome - either that, or the relevant part of the article needs to be clarified to confirm the hook. Gatoclass (talk) 15:40, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
I'm fine with the alternate hook, as well. My original above refers to the dimensions of the present pendentives of Hagia Sophia, rather than to the original dome, which may or may not have continued the curve of those pendentives. You are right that the pendentives and the no-longer-existing original shallower dome above them are theorized (among other theories) to have been continuous and so both part of an imaginary hemisphere 7 percent wider than the span of the Pantheon's dome, but I deliberately did not refer to the dome of the Hagia Sophia at all (referring instead just to the pendentives) in order to keep everything fact-based, rather than theoretical. That is, the 46 meter span from the base of one of the pendentives to the base of the one opposite is not a theoretical distance. I have never read even a suggestion that the location of the bases of the pendentives has moved to be different than their original locations, which would have to have involved altering the entire building. Having said that, the hemisphere that they form a part of is certainly a theoretical hemisphere, in that a full half-sphere does not actually exist there and never did. AmateurEditor (talk) 23:05, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
The hook states the pendentives of Hagia Sophia form part of a hemisphere seven percent wider. But nowhere in the article does that claim appear. The article only says: One theory is that the original dome continued the curve of the pendentives, creating a massive sail vault pierced with a ring of windows.[93] The diameter of this hemisphere, 46 meters (151 ft) from the base of one pendentive to the base of the one opposite, would have been 7 percent greater than that of the Pantheon. It says the diameter of the pendetives of the original dome ... would have been greater than the Pantheon. It says nothing about the pendetives of the current dome. If you are sure the existing pendetives are the original pendetives, and you have a source for that, then you can probably clarify that sufficiently simply by adding the word "existing" so that the operative phrase reads One theory is that the original dome continued the curve of the existing pendentives. Then the article will concur with the hook. Gatoclass (talk) 07:09, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
I have found another source by Mark on the same point but with more clear language. Instead of referring to the original dome and "its" pendentives, it refers to the pendentives in the present tense and reveals that the span of 46 meters comes from the distance between the piers. I have also rephrased the article to hopefully clarify things. The only source I could find so far on whether the pendentives are original or not was the mention in Krautheimer, page 206 that they were "partially reconstructed" after the collapse of the first dome in 558 (although when Krautheimer mentions the theory of the original dome being a sail vault, he says it may have continued the curve of "the pendentives", rather than "its pendentives" or "the original pendentives", for what its worth). AmateurEditor (talk) 03:28, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg With the addition of the new source, I accept that the sources are almost certainly referring to the existing pendetives rather than "original" pendetives that no source has mentioned. I'd still like to see the word "existing" in there for clarity, but I'm not going to hold this one up any longer, so I will put it up for re-review. Gatoclass (talk) 07:31, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
I added to the article the word "existing" for clarity as well as mentioning that the pendentives were partially reconstructed after the collapse of the first dome, citing Krautheimer. AmateurEditor (talk) 16:22, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

El Gamma Penumbra

Created by 001Jrm (talk). Self-nominated at 22:42, 25 May 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Definitely long and new enough to warrant this DYK, and the hook is interesting. The article is also very nice to read, and there seem to be no major problems. Looking forward to supporting this. :) --Sky Harbor (talk) 07:51, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed by new reviewer, since original reviewer has not returned after over three weeks. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:45, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 26[edit]

Statue of George Palmer

George Palmer with his umbrella

Created by Rich Farmbrough (talk). Self-nominated at 11:15, 28 May 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg It's new enough and long enough, and the article itself is well-sourced, but it doesn't seem to confirm either hook. If he gave the town Palmer Park in 1889/90, how is that the same day as the statue was unveiled in November 1891? There is quite clearly an umbrella in the statue, but the article says nothing about it being the first one. '''tAD''' (talk) 18:01, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
I need to change that date, but also the reference with it.
The primacy needs inserting, now I have found a suitable reference, but also more umbrella material needs to be inserted. Thanks and - All the best: Rich Farmbrough20:58, 28 May 2015 (UTC).
Hooks now cited, date issues resolved. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 19:12, 26 June 2015 (UTC).

Third Cape Cod Canal road bridge

5x expanded by Ktr101 (talk). Self-nominated at 23:53, 30 May 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Expanded 5x starting on May 25. The article is long enough (2275 characters). Article appears thoroughly sourced and neutral. No paraphrasing concerns. QPQ requirement met. The citation for your hook appears to state that the Southside Connector wasn't investigated until the 1960s. The bridge that was considered before then was an extension to MA 25, which would connect it to Sagamore Bridge. Could you take another look at your citation for this fact and give your thoughts on how it supports your hook? The citation does not appear to support the specific reference to the Southside Connector that you included in your hook. Please note that this is one of my first reviews, and so a second opinion from an experienced reviewer would be helpful. ~ RobTalk 09:50, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
  • I will get to that soon, as I have been busy and apparently either never noticed that information change in the article, or it was added later. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 20:53, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
  • @BU Rob13: I think I fixed everything and clarified it all, so let me know if you need more information!
  • @Ktr101: The article itself has addressed my concern, but you'll need to propose an ALT 1 hook as the original hook contained a factual error. ~ RobTalk 06:12, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

We Come from the Same Place

Created by Dennisthemonkeychild (talk). Self-nominated at 08:36, 27 May 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg It could be just me, but I do not find that hook interesting. What would be interesting is discovering why Morris moved to Italy and left the band behind in London. Also, the critical reception section has too much quoting and not enough paraphrasing. @Dennisthemonkeychild: Could you copyedit the critical reception section and come up with a few ALT hooks, please? Viriditas (talk) 19:47, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the comments Viriditas, I appreciate your having a look. I have now added the line about why Morris moved to Italy, but am struggling to rewrite the critical reception album without using the quotes as to do so makes the section unencyclopaedic. I'm aware of Other stuff exists but would state that on good and featured album pages direct quotes from reviews feature heavily.
An ALT hook playing on the geography could be:
ALT1... that We Come from the Same Place by London-based Anglo-Australian indie band Allo Darlin' was recorded whilst singer Elizabeth Morris lived in Florence whilst the rest of the band remained in London?Dennisthemonkeychild (talk) 07:50, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Great work on presenting a new hook, Dennisthemonkeychild. I see I'm dealing with an expert. Although it comes just under the limit at 199, it's still a bit long. I see what you are trying to do by juxtaposing their locations, but I wonder if shortening wouldn't also have a similar but punchier feel. Something like:
ALT2... that indie band Allo Darlin' recorded the album We Come from the Same Place in London while their vocalist Elizabeth Morris lived in Florence, Italy?
You don't have to use that hook, of course, but maybe you can create a similar, short hook? 199 characters is a bit much for this type of hook, IMO. Viriditas (talk) 23:51, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
That hook is great, thanks Viriditas for coming up with it! Dennisthemonkeychild (talk) 12:12, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
I'll format it as an ALT2. I'll review the hook and the article now. Viriditas (talk) 00:44, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Croats (military unit)

  • ... that some 17th century Hungarians, Serbs, Albanians and other Eastern European men wore cravat, probably for hygienic purposes, and were indiscriminately referred to as "Croats"?

Created by Antidiskriminator (talk). Self-nominated at 21:29, 26 May 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Length, date and hook verified. Toдor Boжinov 08:17, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Toдor Boжinov, a DYK review requires far more than merely length, date, and hook verification. You need to check for close paraphrasing/copyvio, neutrality (both article and hook), sourcing throughout the article, and whether a valid QPQ has been done (which itself needs to cover all these criteria). Please do a full review to DYK standards. If you prefer not to, I'll call for a new reviewer. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:08, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg The article is neutral and properly sourced. The hook is under 200 characters and the nominator has properly reviewed another submission. But on a more thorough look, I noticed a lot of close paraphrasing. Antidiskriminator, please rewrite the article in your own words rather than borrowing entire expressions from the sources. Examples: "The Croats were of little value in the stand-up fight so their duties were off-battlefield" is two sentences from the source combined, "worst offenders during the Sack of Magdeburg", "tales of vicious Croats"... Thanks! Toдor Boжinov 19:21, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Thanks TodorBozhinov. I rewrote text to avoid close paraphrasing.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 12:35, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
  • I think a more thorough rewrite is necessary, Antidiskriminator. Some of the changes are still close paraphrasing in my book and other sentences remain which directly borrow phrases from the sources. Sorry, but I think you should go through your text once more and really interpret the sources rather than shuffle the word order and sentence structure a bit. Toдor Boжinov 10:32, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
  • TodorBozhinov I rewrote more text. Looking at sources I don't think there is a close paraphrasing or direct borrowing of the phrases which can be an issue for DYK. I hope you agree?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:45, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Okay, almost there. But still some sentences clearly borrow from the source, please rewrite them thoroughly, don't just replace words or move them around:
  • "The Croats had off-battlefield duties because they were of little value in the stand-up fight. In case they participated in the battle, they were deployed on the army wings to distract enemy flanks." - rewrite completely, lots of expressions from the source
  • "They were dismissed after the military campaign was finished and Croat soldiers returned in the spring to seek an employment from their old commanders" - same
  • "... some authors often used the term "Croat", almost always as reference to the military unit or cavalry"
  • I think with these three I'll be finally OK with it, but Antidiskriminator, please consider revising the way you work with sources because close paraphrasing is still copyright infringement and it's harmful to Wikipedia. Toдor Boжinov 08:51, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Thanks TodorBozhinov, I will rewrite those three. If topics can be subject of dispute I sometimes try to closely follow the sources to avoid eventual source misinterpretation. Thanks for thorough review.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 09:41, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Alright, close paraphrasing now appears to have been resolved as far as I'm concerned. All other criteria have already been met too. Toдor Boжinov 12:02, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • How about this alternative hook Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:01, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • ALT1 ... that cravats were named after scarves worn by the "Croats", bands of 17th-century Croatian and other Eastern European mercenaries?
There are two important and hooky things that alt1 does not cover. First is that Eastern European mercenaries were referred to as Croats not because they were Croats and second is that probable purpose of the cravat was hygienic. That is why I still prefer the original hook.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 08:24, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
On the other hand simplifying might be beneficial, so:
  • ALT2 ... that cravats were named after scarves that "Croats", bands of 17th-century Croatian and other Eastern European mercenaries, probably wore for hygienic purposes?
TodorBozhinov what do you think?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 10:33, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
The reason I suggested a new hook was because I could not bring myself to promote the original hook, which I find poorly expressed, to a prep area. Someone else may have no such qualms. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:29, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Thanks Cwmhiraeth. The hook you suggested is much clearer. What do you think abut slightly expanded version I proposed as ALT2?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 11:39, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
I will leave it for somebody else to decide. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:16, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
I'm fine with ALT2. Though I understand why Antidiskriminator prefers his original hook: it has this curious contradiction of
I'd go for something as simple as this personally! Toдor Boжinov 08:28, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Thanks TodorBozhinov. There are two very hooky assertions here.
  1. 17th century Eastern European mercenaries, including Hungarians, Serbs, Albanians, Tatars and other Eastern European men, were all indiscriminately referred to as Croats. (which is what Alt3 say, more or less)
  2. modern day neck-tie has its origin in scarves they wore probably for hygienic purposes.
Thank you for your proposal, but I would not give advantage to any of them because both are very interesting and hooky. That is why I proposed the original hook. I wish I had better language skills to define more readable alternative which would clearly say ... that modern day neck-tie has its origin in scarves probably worn for hygienic purposes by 17-th century Hungarian, Serbs, Albanian, Tatar and other Eastern European mercenaries who were all indiscriminately referred to as Croats? Alt2 is less interesting, but I supported it because it is more clear. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 10:07, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Cabbage (video game)

  • ... that three of the greatest video game developers at Nintendo were once working on Cabbage?
  • Comment: This is my first suggestion here - what do you think?

Created by Maplestrip (talk). Self-nominated at 17:50, 26 May 2015 (UTC).

  • Don't see the word greatest in the article, and anyway that's a word best reserved for people long dead with substantial historical agreement. EEng (talk) 05:47, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Hmm, fair enough. Looking through the sources, Kotaku refers to them as "three of the smartest and most interesting devs of the era" and 1up called them "three of Nintendo's biggest talents." I could incorporate something along these lines in the article. How does "...that three of the most talented video game developers at..." sound? Also to note is Nintendo Life referred to them as "legendary," though I don't think that would work. ~Mable (chat) 08:40, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
I'd go with "most talented" (and use quote marks in the hook). EEng (talk) 13:12, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
  • ... that three of the "most talented" video game developers at Nintendo were once working on Cabbage?
  • Comment: I edited the article a bit so it says "Produced by a team of Nintendo's "biggest talents,"[1] consisting of ..." Thoughts? ~Mable (chat) 13:58, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Good. EEng (talk) 15:40, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
  • ALT1: ... that three of Nintendo's best known video game developers once worked on Cabbage?
  • Symbol question.svg New (26th), long enough, neutral, some close paraphrasing issues found via spot check (please check other sources as well), no QPQ necessary for nom's first hook. ALT1 checks out in the reference, but isn't directedly cited in the article (see 3b). (Lede should be a summary of the prose, where every lede fact should be cited.) A better hook might be one that names the three devs and Iwata by name (last name). Also Unseen64 and GoNintendo reports are not reliable sources and should be replaced. Please ping me if I don't respond. – czar 17:24, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
  • I do think the new alt is less eye-grabbing, but it's alright if that's the best way to do it. Using your idea, another possible alt would be the following. However, this would be a lot less interesting for anyone who doesn't have knowledge of the field. ~Mable (chat) 21:11, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
The thing with close paraphrasing is not to just change a few words from the sentence but to make sure each sentence is its own unique thought, apart from the source. ALT2 would be better phrased as Mario's creator, etc. if those facts are sourced in the article. Right now that line remains unsourced so both ALT1/ALT2 can't run. – czar 23:36, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
I am not entirely sure what it is that isn't sourced here, though? I'm a bit confused, as 1Up literally says: "...Yet was remarkable for bringing together three of Nintendo's biggest talents: Shigeru Miyamoto, Pokemon director Tsunekazu Ishihara, and Earthbound/Mother creator (and notable author) Shigesato Itoi" and similar things are said in the other sources. What is it that isn't sourced? ~Mable (chat) 08:13, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
See 3b—the line of the article that contains the hook's fact needs to have an immediate reference. Also every paragraph needs to have sources for DYK. Since the lede is asserting new information that isn't in the rest of the text, its facts too need to cite a source. – czar 04:57, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Underwater Love (Smoke City song)

5x expanded by Launchballer (talk). Self-nominated at 16:44, 26 May 2015 (UTC).

  • Comment Hook and article need quotation marks around the title (MOS:TITLEQUOTES). hinnk (talk) 18:59, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
Fixed both.--Launchballer 15:31, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 27[edit]

Patrick Roscoe

  • ... that novelist Patrick Roscoe told made-up stories about himself to reporters, explaining years later that his real life was none of their business?

Created/expanded by E.M.Gregory (talk). Self-nominated at 11:11, 15 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Comment Newness ok, but as an expansion does not seem to meet 5x criterion—I make it about 3.5x from last version prior to submitter's recent interventions. Think it's a worthwhile article, though, so maybe it could be expanded to meet this criterion? (N.B. I am new to DYK reviewing and may be misinterpreting the 5x rule, would appreciate input from another editor.)Alafarge (talk) 23:29, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Seattle Arctic drilling protests

The Shell Polar Pioneer at Terminal 5 in the Port of Seattle

  • ... that when word got out that the Shell Polar Pioneer (pictured) and other Arctic drilling vessels were coming to Seattle, the term kayaktivists was popluarized for the waterborne activists who turned out to protest?

Created by Dennis Bratland (talk). Self-nominated at 21:03, 4 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg @Brian Everlasting: you should provide a review that explicitly confirms that the five main DYK criteria have been met. The nominator has more than 5 DYKs, so he should submit a QPQ. I also think the hook is too clunky and should be shortened to something like:
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Thank you. New reviewer needed. Yoninah (talk) 20:13, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
  • If it said "...hundreds of kayativists came out..." it would still only be 165 characters, well within limits. The visual impact[7] of all those boats was part of the reason for the press attention (still looking for a free image of that). --Dennis Bratland (talk) 03:22, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Good idea. Tweaked ALT1. Yoninah (talk) 09:43, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Stewart Ford

Created by Edwardx (talk). Self-nominated at 22:53, 3 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg QPQ still not supplied after over three weeks. No point in calling for a reviewer until it has been completed. BlueMoonset (talk) 13:09, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the reminder. QPQ review done. Edwardx (talk) 11:22, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed now that QPQ has been supplied. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:08, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol delete vote.svg Article is only 1200 characters long, far below the 1500-character minimum for DYK. Yoninah (talk) 20:47, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • 1752 characters now. Edwardx (talk) 10:16, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Editing has taken it down to 1630 characters, which is nominally sufficient, but there is a gaping hole in the article that fails to note when he founded Keydata (and how it developed). Since his fortune would appear to derive from the company, and it's the reason he's being fined, I don't see how the article can be considered to be sufficiently complete for DYK. FN3 (the CityWire) source should be good for the details; as it is now, the little that's been used from that source is a close paraphrase and needs work regardless. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:03, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Johann Lukas Legrand

Created by Aymatth2 (talk). Nominated by Dr. Blofeld (talk) at 16:51, 3 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article is new and long enough. It is neutral and well-sourced with inline citations. A spot check reveals no signs of plagiarism although the translation of the German is a bit direct at times. I must admit my German is a little rusty, but does Seidenfabrik not translate to silk factory? A Seidenbandfabrik (silk ribbon factory) is only mentioned in the section after his political career. So for the hook part he would only be a silk manufacturer. Hook is cited in the correct manner and interesting, but it is too long I'm afraid. The 200 character limit includes the spaces, and this hook is 219 characters long. QPQ done, no image present. Crispulop (talk) 18:41, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
  • The German sources are mini-bio catalogs of facts with no creative expression, as is the article, so I don't think there is any close paraphrasing issue. Two cited sources support "Legrand returned to Basel in 1779, where he took over the manufacture of silk ribbons". Salvisberg 2008: 1779 kehrte er nach Basel zurück und wurde Seidenbandfabrikant gives "silk ribbon", and Bonjour 1985: worauf er die geistliche Laufbahn aufgab und eine Basler Seidenfabrik übernahm. gives "took over". But the hook is too long and at some stage he changed over to making cotton ribbons. "...puis se retira à Arlesheim ... et y fonda une fabrique de rubans de coton" How about ALT1? Aymatth2 (talk) 22:46, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg I think the text is far enough removed from the original German not to be considered close paraphrasing. Thanks for clearing up the ribbon maker situation. ALT 1 is fine and still interesting. I've added direct citations after the hook facts per DYK rules. Crispulop (talk) 12:15, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Original text: "brutal despotism and rapacity"; this text: "brutality and rapacity". That's too close to source for my liking - this one may need closer inspection for PARAPHRASE. Gatoclass (talk) 10:31, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
  • The original text is "brutalen Willkür und Raublust". "Brutalen" means brutal. "Willkür" means arbitrariness, capriciousness, despotism. "Raublust" means rapacity, aggressive greed. The article attempts to capture the meaning of the original, while avoiding any creative expression. I do not see this as a close paraphrase. Aymatth2 (talk) 11:45, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
I will take a closer look at the rest of the article tomorrow. Gatoclass (talk) 11:55, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Terug tot Ina Damman

Created by Drmies (talk). Self-nominated at 22:43, 28 May 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Long enough, new enough, no obvious plagiarism, meets other criteria. Good to go.Epeefleche (talk) 21:20, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Symbol possible vote.svg However much I appreciate the edits to the nominated article proposed as a QPQ, I would not consider a copyedit to be a complete DYK review. Please submit another. Fuebaey (talk) 18:35, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Dear Fuebaey, I would have appreciated a ping. Also, I don't agree. Since I spent so much time on that article I can hardly pass it (the original hook, for whoever cares, would be my choice)--so the next person who comes along and plants that *tick* there will be quite happy, no doubt. After further edits the article is good to go. Paragraphs are cited, and while that tool of yours indicates some 70%, with closer inspection revealing that many phrases that are supposed to be the same are really false negatives (phrases like "the regiment had been" and "money and a", a book title, and a direct quote). Now, you may well be right in your reading of the letter, but not in that of the spirit, and I'm afraid I can't accept this kind of dictum from someone who, with all respect, is comparatively new to Wikipedia and to the process. In other words, I'd like to have an editor like BlueMoonset or someone else look at it. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 20:00, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg By all means. Although I am disappointed with rationale for the request - in which I consider is based on the age of my account rather than my recent contributions - I have nothing against a second opinion. Fuebaey (talk) 20:56, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
@Drmies -- this is Fuebaey's third account, so he may not be as new to Wikipedia as you had thought. Epeefleche (talk) 21:24, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
Fuebaey, on the Internet no one knows you're a dog and on Wikipedia we have few options to judge someone's quality. I did, in fact, base my request on your recent edits: you turn down a perfectly valid DYK, and rather than accept my many edits to that article and comments on the nomination you simply say "the rules is the rules". I do not accept such a dictum easily, unless it comes from someone with some authoritay of some kind or another. You do not have that. If you'd added up all the edits from your previous accounts, maybe. Also, I don't like this business of starting up new accounts: one never knows who one is dealing with. Finally, that you didn't even let me know you saw a problem, and that you'd try to play the legal expert with someone who has over two hundred DYKs, that's not the kind of thing an experienced editor would do. Also, I don't like this business of starting up new accounts. Thank you Epeefleche. Drmies (talk) 08:10, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
Reiterating something isn't really going to strengthen your argument. As I said we have a difference of opinion, so a third opinion would probably be best way forward. Assuming that another editor is incorrect based on a disagreement, let alone dragging up experience, is bad form. If you have a problem with myself in general please use my talk page as to not derail this nomination. Fuebaey (talk) 16:43, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg Since I've been invoked, in all honesty when I saw the original Drmies post over at Froberg last week I thought it was simply an editor working on an article that clearly needed improvement if it was to survive at DYK, not that this was in any way a review that had turned into editing. Indeed, the nomination was at a point where it had been reviewed and found wanting: what it needed then was improvement, not further review, and the two are not the same at DYK. My opinion is that this nomination needs a different QPQ submission. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:49, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
Commenting only on Fuebaey's assertion that "dragging up experience ... is bad form." I have the opposite view. It is appropriate to look at editor experience in many areas at Wikipedia, and saying it is "bad form" seems like an effort to evade something. My early posts on Fuebaey's talkpage were prompted by a similar concern, coupled with his initial editing under this name, that he was an editor who had edited under another name. At WP, it is common to point to issues with an editor's past editing that re-arise, so the mention seemed appropriate. To me. Epeefleche (talk) 19:29, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
BlueMoonset, I thought to do you all a favor by picking up on something that was languishing at DYK--of course I was going to do a review, until I saw how much needed to be done editing-wise. I should have simply found something easy--a quick glance at the article, a tick, and done. I always thought that the idea of working at DYK was to get articles in a good enough shape to put them on the front page. In this case, I spent at least 45 minutes working on the article, for which I will receive no credit, though I made it survive, I think. You know I've done stuff like this before, and I've done much more than I've been credited with. DYK doesn't need me anymore than the wiki needs me, of course, but good luck with it--I suppose I'll continue to write and submit articles, and I'll do the cursory review in the way that all too often is common practice; I'm sure Fuebay will be happy to step up to the plate and start making the kind of edits that move things forward. Happy days. Drmies (talk) 20:07, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
It is refreshing to see someone admit to arguing from authority. Honestly, how smug have you got to be to actually admit to it? Alakzi (talk) 20:30, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Reviewed Template:Did you know nominations/Valdemar Tofte. Drmies (talk) 20:26, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
    • BlueMoonset, I just got a notification from some bot that something is missing here. I wouldn't know what, and perhaps, if you want to clear up the backlog on this page, you can figure it out. I've done my DYK review, besides all the other work I did on the aforementioned article--which, I noticed, made it to the front page and got over 5000 views. If you're wondering why I haven't been back at DYK--well, you know. Drmies (talk) 01:53, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 28[edit]

Charlie Charlie Challenge

Created by Yunshui (talk). Self-nominated at 09:26, 2 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Article new enough, long enough, and adequately cited. Hook short enough, interesting enough, and also cited. Article appears to be neutral and free of copyright violations and plagiarism. Cheers!♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:55, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg I have pulled this hook from prep for now as the article is the subject of an npov dispute. Gatoclass (talk) 13:04, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Knights of the Forest

Created by Peterkc (talk) and Victuallers. Self-nominated at 19:41, 30 May 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Moved to mainspace on 28 May, article is short of 1.5k chars (stands at 1412 chars) Vensatry (ping) 08:01, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

By my count, it's 3489 characters. Peterkc (talk) 01:50, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Yes, of course, including the quoted material. Vensatry (ping) 16:00, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
  • To clarify, Peterkc, DYK requires 1500 original prose characters that don't include lists, blockquotes or other long quotes, and so on. In this case, the article has 1412 prose characters, which do include the quotes at the end of the second and final regular paragraphs and perhaps should not. The point here is that to qualify for DYK, the article needs more material that is your writing. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:57, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
Ive fixed the length problem Victuallers (talk) 22:00, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Statue of George Palmer

George Palmer with his umbrella

Created by Rich Farmbrough (talk). Self-nominated at 11:15, 28 May 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg It's new enough and long enough, and the article itself is well-sourced, but it doesn't seem to confirm either hook. If he gave the town Palmer Park in 1889/90, how is that the same day as the statue was unveiled in November 1891? There is quite clearly an umbrella in the statue, but the article says nothing about it being the first one. '''tAD''' (talk) 18:01, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
I need to change that date, but also the reference with it.
The primacy needs inserting, now I have found a suitable reference, but also more umbrella material needs to be inserted. Thanks and - All the best: Rich Farmbrough20:58, 28 May 2015 (UTC).
Hooks now cited, date issues resolved. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 19:12, 26 June 2015 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on May 29[edit]

Bissau Cathedral, Port of Bissau

Bissau Cathedral

Created by Dr. Blofeld (talk), Nvvchar (talk), and Rosiestep (talk). Nominated by Rosiestep (talk) at 20:42, 31 May 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol voting keep.svg These two articles are long enough and new enough. The image is appropriately licensed and the hook fact has an inline citation and is accepted in good faith. The articles are neutral and I observed no copyright issues/close paraphrasing. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:59, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
  • @Yoninah: References refixed in both articles. Pl see. Thanks.--Nvvchar. 04:40, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol voting keep.svg Thanks. Restoring tick per Cwmhiraeth's review. Yoninah (talk) 14:49, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Lake Tsongmo

Lake Tsongmo in Sikkim

  • ... that Buddhist monks prognosticated the future of the country after studying the changing colours of the Lake Tsongmo (pictured)?

5x expanded by Nvvchar (talk). Self-nominated at 11:16, 31 May 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg All checks out. good to go. Johnbod (talk) 15:51, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg Pardon me, but what country? EEng (talk) 02:05, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
It's in Sikkim, but what country the monks thought they came from is a more complicated issue, I daresay. Johnbod (talk) 04:15, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
Don't you think the hook is a bit odd as stated? EEng (talk) 07:45, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
It is. ALT1: ... that Buddhist monks prognosticated the future of the country after studying the changing colours of Lake Tsongmo (pictured) in Sikkim? - I think saying "prognosticated the future of Sikkim" is best avoided. Johnbod (talk) 12:42, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
I defer to your judgment in the matter. Lovely image. EEng (talk) 13:55, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
  • @Johnbod:. Thanks. I had camped at the lake for a few days in the 1960s. Modified the hook as ALT2... that Buddhist monks gave forecasts on the future of the country after studying the changing colours of Lake Tsongmo (pictured) in Sikkim? --Nvvchar. 15:07, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
ALT2 is much better. EEng (talk) 17:37, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
Agreed. Johnbod (talk) 19:49, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
  • I prefer the original hook, mention of the state is superfluous in this case IMO because it seems we don't know what country the Lake belonged to when this practice was extant. I agree the image is a standout.
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Unfortunately though, I can't verify the hook, one of the provided cites is broken and the other two appear to make no mention of the practice. Gatoclass (talk) 07:47, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
  • @Gatoclass: I have refixed the same reference in the artcile. It is here [8] and it works now. Please see.--Nvvchar. 20:23, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
That looks fine now, except that it only says the monks forecast "the future" rather than "the future of the country". So unless you have another source, the hook should be altered accordingly. But I am also curious as to why you chose to name the article "Lake Tsongmo" when most sources appear to refer to it as "Lake Tsomgo"? Gatoclass (talk) 06:21, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
  • @Gatoclass: When I expanded the article it was already named "Lake Tsongmo". I later added "Lake Tsomgo" in the lead as the government sources mentioned this name. This reference [9] says "future of the state", which could be deleted from the hook or this reference added now to support it, if you agree.--Nvvchar. 14:50, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Eliza Wigham, Priscilla Bright McLaren, Jane Wigham

1866 emancipation logo

Created by Woodey7 and Historyhunter1 (talk), Brunettekoala (talk), Victuallers (talk), and Vanessah1978 (talk). Nominated by Victuallers (talk) at 23:42, 30 May 2015 (UTC).

Temporary Problem spotted with hook - give me 48 hours please Victuallers (talk) 07:33, 5 June 2015 (UTC) better now? Victuallers (talk) 15:35, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Its OK to approve one, two or three hooks and leave the rest for another reviewer. Victuallers (talk) 12:48, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Nkandla compound firepool controversy

  • ... that a pool at South African president Jacob Zuma's Nkandla compound is referred to as a fire pool in official South African documents?

Created by Sburnettza (talk). Expanded by Nathan121212 and Northamerica1000. Nominated by Northamerica1000 (talk) at 07:18, 30 May 2015 (UTC).

  • Whether or not it survives AfD (personally it should simply be redirected to cistern) as the article stands it's a WP:COATRACK for this presidential scandal-ette. It can't run at DYK until it actually talks about its nominal subject. EEng (talk) 02:14, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
  • The Firepool article was deleted, along with a rationale at the AfD discussion in part of "No prejudice against creation of an article with an appropriate title such as "Nkandla firepool controversy..." The Firepool article was userfied to my userspace, where I copy edited it, and is now in main namespace, titled Nkandla compound firepool controversy. As such, I have struck the initial hook above, modified the title of this nomination, and have provided ALT1 below. North America1000 07:12, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
  • ALT1: ... that a controversial pool built at South African president Jacob Zuma's Nkandla compound, deemed as a "fire pool," has faced "public condemnation" from some South Africans?
  • As the original author of the article but a new wiki editor, it has been an intriguing process seeing how it developed - and what happens behind the scenes. I'm in support of it being labelled to a redirect. My intentions were originally to show how disingenious it is for government ministers to use Wikipedia as a source for official reports due to its fluid nature of updating. The word 'firepool' might eventually become commonplace, but it should be known that it started as an excuse and I think the current status shows just that. Sburnettza (talk) 12:55, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
  • EEng, the article was deleted early on June 7, userfied, and moved back to mainspace under its new name a few hours later. Has it avoided its coatrack aspects this time? Were there other issues you were concerned about? If not, I'll call for a reviewer. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:10, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
The article is now about what it's really about, if you get what I mean, so the coatrack issue is gone. I think it's a bit marginal for notability -- sudden issue which quickly disappeared -- but I'm not worried about it myself. EEng (talk) 16:22, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed of reconstituted article and hook. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:53, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Fort Binġemma

View of Fort Binġemma

Created by Xwejnusgozo (talk). Self-nominated at 23:29, 29 May 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg New enough. Long enough. DYK check shows only 3 previous DYKs, so no QPQ needed. NPOV. Image suitable for main page. Good hook, backed up by the source, but the hook fact needs to be more explicitly stated in the article, with a cite immediately following it.
Dup detector show some close paraphrasing, eg:
Article: "used for espionage purposes including to train Albanian insurgents"
Source: "used for espionage purposes including the training of Albanian insurgents"

Edwardx (talk) 09:57, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

@Edwardx: I added the hook fact in the beginning of the article, and changed some of the paraphrasing. Xwejnusgozo (talk) 17:36, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Xwejnusgozo, since the review, you have had two more DYK credits, using up your "free" five submissions. You will need to do a quid pro quo (QPQ) review for this DYK nomination, and for all current and future nominations. You can check the reviewing guide for more information; DYK criteria are at WP:DYK, with deeper explanations at WP:DYKSG, if you need further information. Thanks for participating at DYK! BlueMoonset (talk) 14:42, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Life (Heo Young-saeng album)

Singer of Life EP, Heo Young-saeng

5x expanded by 001Jrm (talk). Self-nominated at 08:05, 29 May 2015 (UTC).

  • Edited hooks for grammar. ALT0 is good; ALT1 doesn't make any sense. Yoninah (talk) 15:43, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 30[edit]

H2O (software)

H2O.ai was co-founded by chief technical officer Cliff Click and chief executive officer SriSatish Ambati.

  • ... that Google optimizes its suggestions for each user according to the time of day by using the open-source software H2O of H2O.ai, which was founded by Cliff Click and SriSatish Ambati (pictured)?
    Alt1 ... that, after H2O.ai's open-source machine-learning software H2O was ranked best in its class, Fortune profiled H2O programmer Arno Candel as a Big-Data All-Star?
  • Comment: I started H2O.ai today, spinning off the business part from H2O (software), which I had expanded in the last 4 days. On 29 May 2015, the H2O (software) lacked sourcing, was not Wikified, and had problems tagged.[10] Almost nothing remains from the old version.[11] Since then, the H2O has been expanded more than 5 times (until I removed the business sections). Finally, please do not add links to the hook; all key-words are linked in the lede. Perhaps the H2O software link should not be emboldened? (The alternative hook is problematic/confusing because H2O.ai was known as 0xdata in 2014 when the "hacker" was named to an all-star team.)
  • Reviewed: In silico clinical trials[12]

5x expanded and sourced by Dame Etna (talk). Self-nominated at 10:20, 2 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg The articles are new enough, long enough and well cited. I only made some minor corrections/copyedits. The problem is that the H2O.ai is essentially a content fork of the original H2O article, with much the same content. This contravenes rule #1 of the eligibility criteria, "For DYK purposes, a "new" article is no more than seven days old, and may not consist of text spun off from a pre-existing article". In short, if one of the two articles is DYK-suitable, it is the H2O one, not the company. This means that the hooks should be rewritten, and the submission be limited to the software product. Otherwise the nomination appears to be solid. Constantine 12:29, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
  • I nominated first the software article, which I expanded five fold in the last 3 days. Today I realized the article really needed division into two articles, one on the software and one the company, so I spun off the new article using my new text. Please use a plagiarism-detector on the old article[13]] and the new article H2O.ai to see that at most 1-2 sentences remain from the old article, so it is not spun-off (in the sense that somebody cut and pasted existing text, the obvious intention of the rule).[14],[15] Dame Etna (talk) 17:11, 3 June 2015 (UTC) (Updated hood with picture. 07:22, 4 June 2015 (UTC))
  • I fully agree that there is little text left over from the original version of the H2O article, before you began your work on it; the problem is that the text in the present articles is pretty much identical. H2O.ai is, for now at least, to about 80% a word-for-word copy of the "new" H2O article, which means that H2O.ai is a content fork of H2O, and so falls squarely under the clause mentioned above. Constantine 08:33, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
  • For clarity: A content fork of new text, written in the last 3 days, much of which has been removed from the software article.
  • If I had put my new text in the new H2O.ai article and then used it to fix the old mess at H2O (software), all would be well I guess. I am sorry for having misread the rules. I just wanted to fix the article, and then I thought I could nominate it here. Perhaps I should have worked off line and consulted a DYK person before changing the old article. Maybe that WP:IAR could apply to my mistake, which was done in ignornace. Dame Etna (talk) Dame Etna (talk) 08:57, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
  • I am not sure, but I think it would probably equally have been a problem if you had started the H2O.ai article and then copied it into H2O (software), because then it would comprise about half the latter article. Anyhow, what is done is done. Please provide/rewrite a hook so that only the H2O (software) is bolded, and this nomination can be signed off. Constantine 10:31, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Thanks! Following your instructions, I disemboldened H2O.ai. Dame Etna (talk) 10:36, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Original hook and ALT1 are interesting and referenced; QPQ review done; article in question is long enough, new enough, well-written and -referenced, no copyvio detected; image is suitably licensed and used although not necessarily linked directly to the product at hand. Good to go. --Constantine 16:12, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── @ reviewing DYK delegate: No idea if and how this impacts DYK, but the nominating user and main author has just been blocked as a sockpuppet. Constantine 16:35, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Petre P. Panaitescu

  • ... that Romanian literary historian Petre P. Panaitescu challenged important aspects of his country's dominant nationalist historiography, but belonged to the ultra-nationalist Iron Guard?

Created by Biruitorul (talk). Self-nominated at 19:31, 31 May 2015 (UTC).

Ezhavathu Manithan

5x expanded by Vensatry (talk). Self-nominated at 12:25, 31 May 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg 5x expansion verified. New enough, long enough, well referenced, neutrally written, no close paraphrasing seen. Hook ref verified and cited inline. Please provide a source for the chart of soundtrack titles and artists. QPQ done. Yoninah (talk) 19:46, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Indium(III) sulfate

  • ... that Indium sulfate is unusual in forming a complex with the sulfate ion in solution?

5x expanded by Graeme Bartlett (talk). Self-nominated at 22:53, 30 May 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg @Graeme Bartlett: I don't doubt the accuracy of the hook, but I'm not finding that claim repeated as stated in the article. The article says that "Indium is unusual in forming a sulfate complex", but doesn't specify that it's "unusual in forming a complex with the sulfate ion in solution". At least in my mind, these are slightly different claims. Can we tweak either the hook or the article so that they match up? Otherwise this is a Symbol confirmed.svg for the nomination in all other factors (article criteria, hook criteria and QPQ). Imzadi 1979  12:05, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
You may have to read more to find out that it is in a water solution. I was going to say unique, but since I nominated I discovered other metals also do it, but not so well. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:11, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Need a reviewer to see whether the new hook solves the issue raised with the original hook. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:34, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol voting keep.svg The ALT1 hook is acceptable. In ticking this, I am relying on Imzadi1979's review on the other DYK criteria. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:28, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Symbol question.svg Umm, ALT1 is unintelligible. The idea is that the aqueous form of indium(III) sulfate contains complexes of associated indium and sulfate rather than having them dissociated, right? The title of the cited article says aqueous solutions so that's not in doubt. How about this? Antony–22 (talkcontribs) 04:19, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

  • ALT2: ... that Indium sulfate is unusual because the indium and sulfate remain associated while in aqueous solution?


Created by Launchballer (talk). Self-nominated at 23:04, 30 May 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg I think there are too many problems with this one. The article is new enough, having been created on 30 May, but is only just long enough at 1,500 characters of prose by my count, and with copyediting could drop below that. Half the article is unsourced - I don't mind leads being unsourced if they summarise things in the body, but this one doesn't. Also, the hook doesn't make it clear that the source is describing finishing surgery from breast cancer patients, which I think it should. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:03, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, only just seen this. Surely a solution would be to find bits in the lede that aren't sourced, and then repeat them in the article sourced? That said, which bits aren't sourced? I made a concerted effort to make sure all of it was.
ALT1: ... that since 2011 the Royal Derby Hospital has offered titoos as finishing surgery for breast cancer?--Launchballer 09:28, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Not convinced. This article is not only an orphan but it is in no categories. I went to fix the orphan problem and then I think I worked out why. This is a neologism .... the main source doesn't use this word and google searchs of "tattoo" and "titoo" produce very few results. I think its going to be a while before we see "This way to the titoo clinic" inside Derby hospital. Can you supply some reliable sources or withdraw this nom? Victuallers (talk) 13:35, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
Try "nipple tattoo" given that that is basically what it is. Added links from other articles and categories, removed Manchestereveningnews.com (or whatever it was called), added some books. Not including the books, the sources are The Guardian, the BBC, The Daily Telegraph, Royal Derby Hospital and a Channel 4 documentary. Can you tell me which ones, if any, of those sources are unreliable?--Launchballer 00:30, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Double Six Crash

  • ... that the investigative reports of aircraft disaster Double Six Crash remain classified by the Malaysian government despite the fact that the accident happened 39 years ago?
  • ALT1:... that the aircraft disaster Double Six Crash killed a total of five cabinet ministers in the Malaysian state of Sabah in 1976?

5x expanded by Cerevisae (talk). Self-nominated at 17:36, 30 May 2015 (UTC).

  • Comment: It would be great if the hook can be promoted to the main page on 6 June 2015 to commemorate the accident. Otherwise, it would be ok :-)

Aaron Novick

5x expanded by Hawkeye7 (talk). Self-nominated at 02:54, 30 May 2015 (UTC).

Symbol question.svg - long enough, interesting enough - however article and hook claim that Szilárd and Novick invented the chemostat, while the sourced used to cite clearly states "the chemostat [...] was independently invented by Jacques Monod and by Aaron Novick and Leo Szilard who also coined the term chemostat" - so I think both the hook and article need re-wording slightly to reflect that. GiantSnowman 10:22, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Why? Hawkeye7 (talk) 10:30, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Because the content should reflect the source, obviously. GiantSnowman 11:03, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
It does. They invented the chemostat. The details can be found in its article. Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:26, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
...as did Jacques Monod, who is not mentioned anywhere. Therefore it is not accurate. GiantSnowman 12:00, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Jacques Monod independently invented it the same year (1950). It happens sometimes. He called it the "bactogéne", but his name did not catch on. I have added this to the article in a footnote. Proposed an ALT. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:05, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
I have suggested ALT2, but I am happy with either ALT1 or ALT2 - do you have a preference? GiantSnowman 09:04, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
My preference is for ALT1. The bactogéne was not identical, but it was a chemostat. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:37, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 1[edit]

Coffee production in Panama

Coffee pods in Panama

Created by Rosiestep (talk), Nvvchar (talk), and Dr. Blofeld (talk). Nominated by Nvvchar (talk) at 14:39, 8 June 2015 (UTC).

  • DYK checklist template
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol confirmed.svg Passes DYK checklist. Good To Go!--Doug Coldwell (talk) 19:09, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

  • That doesn't say exactly what it says in the article. The text states that the best-quality coffee in Panama is grown in Boquete, not that Boquete has top-quality coffee. Perhaps you could recheck the source, which is offline. Yoninah (talk) 00:45, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Great. Since I suggested the new hook, could another reviewer sign off on this please? Yoninah (talk) 09:14, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Six "citation needed" templates were added to the article a few days ago, and that's too many for an article intended to run on the main page. Please add the appropriate inline citations. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:23, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • @BlueMoonset: All inline citations have been provided now and tags removed. No new references have been added.--Nvvchar. 14:50, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Reviewer needed to check ALT4. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:55, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • OK, I confirm that Alt4 is referenced to an offline hook Victuallers (talk) 18:10, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Yao Yuan Hao

Created by 001Jrm (talk). Self-nominated at 18:39, 1 June 2015 (UTC).

Climate Hawks Vote

  • Comment: New article created June 1 under AfC, started in my sandbox on Apr 30. I recognize that there could be concern about this hook advertising Sen. Sander's campaign, but that isn't the intent. I am truly undecided on the presidential race, so that is not my purpose at all. We are far outside the 30-day election window, and I believe this is the most interesting hook for Climate Hawks Vote.
  • Reviewed: Edwin_Maxwell_(attorney_general) — Preceding unsigned comment added by RichardMathews (talkcontribs) 07:49, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Moved to mainspace by RichardMathews (talk). Self-nominated at 18:19, 1 June 2015 (UTC).

Meredith Creek

Moved to mainspace by Jakec (talk). Self-nominated at 17:17, 1 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg New enough, long enough, adequately referenced, neutrally written, no close paraphrasing seen. QPQ done. Regarding the hook fact, where do I find the length figure on The National Map site? Yoninah (talk) 20:42, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Is the new permanent link satisfactory? --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 14:45, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • When the link opens, I just see a map. I don't see anything about the creek being 0.4 miles long. Yoninah (talk) 19:21, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Lees Creek (Lackawanna River)

  • ... that part of the channel Lees Creek cuts through coal waste, cinders, and railroad ballast?

Moved to mainspace by Jakec (talk). Self-nominated at 17:15, 1 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol delete vote.svg Starting with approved matters: new and long enough. Per the revision history, the page was actually created on 29 May 2015‎, but the nomination is still within seven days of the publishing to main namespace (the entry is listed on the DYK nominations page under Articles created/expanded on June 1). All non-lead paragraphs have inline citations, Checks for copyvio reveals no problems, content of the hook is backed by an inline citation to a reliable source in the article (here, p. 323).
A problem is that the QPQ review at Template:Did you know nominations/1630 Crete earthquake is being used for this nomination and for the Template:Did you know nominations/Eddy Creek (Lackawanna River) (which was approved by another user) and Template:Did you know nominations/Powderly Creek nominations. Per WP:WIADYK, #5, "For every nomination you make you must review one other nomination." The 1630 Crete earthquake review cannot be used for multiple nominations. North America1000 04:47, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Whoa, hold it. The 1630 Crete Earthquake is a triple nomination! The nominator added two more bolded links and I reviewed them. Even if that weren't the case, you could just, you know, have me do another QPQ instead of rejecting it. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 09:58, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
Sorry for the potential confusion. However, at the 1630 Crete Earthquake nomination, you did not really provide a review for Kythira Strait. Rather, you proposed a standalone hook. North America1000 10:22, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
@Northamerica1000: I did in fact do a full review of both articles, but am waiting for the nominator to respond to my concerns. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 14:26, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
@Jakec: Essentially, you reviewed Cretica Chronica, rejecting it for being too short, but you haven't addressed any of the five points of WP:WIADYK for the Kythira Strait nomination. The way to rectify this is to provide a full review along with your ALT suggestion. Sorry for any hassle, but I'm not comfortable stating that a full QPQ has been performed for the latter article at this time, because it really hasn't yet. North America1000 16:57, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
@Northamerica1000: If that's how you feel, I don't mind putting this nomination on hold until Dr. Blofeld responds to my comments on the 1630 Crete earthquake nomination and the review over there gets completed. Or I could seek a 3rd opinion from WT:DYK. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 13:43, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Powderly Creek

  • ... that in the early 1970s, a flooded strip pit near Powderly Creek made national news when a UFO supposedly crashed into it?

Moved to mainspace by Jakec (talk). Self-nominated at 17:11, 1 June 2015 (UTC).

Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Whoa, hold it. The 1630 Crete Earthquake is a triple nomination! The nominator added two more bolded links and I reviewed them. Even if that weren't the case, you could just, you know, have me do another QPQ instead of rejecting it. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 09:59, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
Sorry for the potential confusion. However, at the 1630 Crete Earthquake nomination, you did not really provide a review for Kythira Strait. Rather, you proposed a standalone hook. North America1000 10:22, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Callender Gap Creek

  • ... that Callender Gap Creek is a Coldwater Fishery despite being impaired by abandoned mine drainage?

Moved to mainspace by Jakec (talk). Self-nominated at 17:08, 1 June 2015 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on June 2[edit]

Coffee production in Jamaica

Jamaican Blue Mountain Coffee

Created by Rosiestep (talk), Nvvchar (talk), and Dr. Blofeld (talk). Nominated by Dr. Blofeld (talk) at 19:46, 8 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article is long enough with 2683 chars, and nominated on 7th day so new enough. Neutral, in-line citations, does not appear to have close paraphrasing. Hook is interesting (where can I get it?) and is 168 chars (omitting word pictured). I'm okay with the first part of the hook, but do not see a source for the claim that it "is mostly exported". The source says importer demand exceeds production but that doesn't necessarily equate to them exporting it. (It could simply mean that the government doesn't allow export, but people want it.) Photo appears to be properly released and available for any use per commons. SusunW (talk) 21:04, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg Perfect! GTG. SusunW (talk) 01:11, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg To my ears, the hook sounds too repetitive. Also, a number of citation needed tags have been added to the article. Yoninah (talk) 23:44, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Thanks @Yoninah: All the citations have been fixed now. The references were already there at the end of each section. How about this ALT2 hook ... that Coffee export to Japan is mainly of Jamaican Blue Mountain Coffee (pictured), which is reported to be more than 80 per cent of its production?--Nvvchar. 00:43, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 3[edit]

Ark: Survival Evolved

Gameplay from Ark: Survival Evolved

Created by Rhain1999 (talk). Self-nominated at 10:11, 3 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg This article is new enough and long enough. The hooks are sourced, but I have struck ALT2 because I didn't see reference to "most of [the dinosaurs]" in the source. The article is neutral and appears to respect copyright laws. The image is appropriately licensed. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:57, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 4[edit]


Created/Expanded by Earthh (talk). Self-nominated at 15:53, 8 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg It's an interesting and neutral hook, expanded recently enough after initially being created as a redirect, and I see no copyright violations, but which reference specifically is the hook being attributed to? Snuggums (talk / edits) 02:56, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Thanks for that. It seems reliable, and QPQ is also complete. All good to go. Snuggums (talk / edits) 22:05, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg There is quite a bit of close paraphrasing here.
  • Source: We currently have the main page, Live, and Vault, as well as a number of personal pages that can be accessed for their applicable necessities.
  • Article: The VyRT website features a main page, Live, and Vault, as well as a number of personal pages that can be accessed for their applicable necessities.
  • Source: Whether or not there is a live event, you can still chat with others within the interests chats of your choice. VAULT features all available events for purchase
  • Article: Whether or not there is a live event, users can chat with others within the interests chats of their choice. The Vault sections features all available events for purchase, including streaming and downloads.
  • Source: so the team transitioned to a new site, rewrote everything in Ruby on Rails and expanded their capacity on Heroku
  • Article: After the first streamed events, VyRT transitioned to a new site ... The team rewrote the website in Ruby on Rails and expanded its capacity on Heroku.
  • Source: A user simply logs in at the designated time and date of the broadcast and can interact with other users via live feed.
  • Article: Users log in at the designated time and date of the broadcast and can interact with others via live feed.
  • Source: Artists interact with the audience over a live feed
  • Article: Artists can also interact with the audience over a live feed.
  • Source: VyRT is a website and startup that lets performers create live experiences and broadcast them to the world
  • Article: His aim was to let musicians create live experiences and broadcast them on the Internet
  • Source: Viewers who want to access the live show from Los Angeles as it happens on September 15, complete with real-time social community engagement from audiences worldwide, can do so for $14.99
  • Article: The event included real-time social community engagement from audiences worldwide.
  • Yoninah (talk) 22:39, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Not everything you cited is close paraphrasing. I'll fix this in the next days.--Earthh (talk) 18:30, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Ephemera vulgata

Ephemera vulgata

  • ... that male Ephemera vulgata (pictured) congregate in swarms in which each insect moves repeatedly up and down?

Created by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self-nominated at 09:52, 7 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg This article was created within seven days of its nomination, its prose is the appropriate length, and the article meets core Wikipedia policies and guidelines. The hook meets DYK formatting guidelines, and its facts are verifiable and cited with inline citations in the article. A QPQ review has also been completed. The image is licensed CC0, so it is suitable for inclusion with the hook. Nicely done! -- West Virginian (talk) 11:25, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
  • @Cwmhiraeth: I'm wondering why you don't use the term "nuptial dance" to make this hook more attention-getting? Yoninah (talk) 23:00, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
Probably because the literature uses terms like "aggregation"and "swarm" while the term "nuptial dance" is used mostly in casual sources. We could have ALT1 or ALT2 I suppose. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:11, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • ALT1 ... that male Ephemera vulgata (pictured) aggregate and perform a nuptial dance in which each insect moves repeatedly up and down?
  • ALT2 ... that male Ephemera vulgata (pictured) group together and perform a nuptial dance?
  • I was thinking of just adding it to the original hook, to explain what they're doing:
  • ALT3: ... that male Ephemera vulgata (pictured) congregate in swarms in which each insect moves repeatedly up and down as part of a "nuptial dance"? Yoninah (talk) 09:51, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • If "nuptial dance" is directly from the (offline) source, we could put it in quotes.
ALT3 is fine. I have added an extra reference to the article for the "nuptial dance" and struck the other hooks. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:30, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Thank you. I see "nuptial dance" in the online source you provided. ALT3 verified, cited inline, and good to go. Yoninah (talk) 14:15, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

2009 All-SEC football team

Created by MisterCake (talk). Self-nominated at 20:57, 4 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg This article lacks the inline citations required by DYK to back up the hook facts. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:49, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Bitch I'm Madonna

Created by 11JORN (talk). Nominated by Calvin999 (talk) at 08:13, 5 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Hook is no good as the article doesn't state that (and, reading the sources, Madonna didn't either) Belle (talk) 12:26, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
  • She said she felt "artistically raped". I'm not using direct quotes, I'm using wordplay.  — Calvin999 14:51, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
  • She wrote and later deleted that it was "artistic rape" and a "form of terrorism". I'm going to go out on a limb and say that rape and terrorism are probably not good subjects for wordplay. Belle (talk) 15:31, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
  • ALT2: ... that in response to the criticism of Madonna's profound use of "bitch" on "Bitch I'm Madonna", she said that the "word police can fuck off"?
Going for another shock hook; at least they aren't boring. Unfortunately the quote in the article is the "word police can f--- off", so she could have been awarding them an f triple minus for their efforts or perhaps suggesting they "funk off" in the PG dubbed version; "file off"?, "fall off"?, "flit off"? You could change the hook to include the exact quote of "f---", but then there would be crying and wailing from people that suppose that we censored it. Belle (talk) 08:15, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
Well we all know that she is saying fuck and nothing else lol  — Calvin999 08:22, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Hilda C. Heine

Created by Dr. Blofeld (talk) and Rosiestep (talk). Nominated by Rosiestep (talk) at 03:32, 5 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Age and size of the article are okay. QPQ done. Good to go! -- FrankBoy CHITCHAT 17:29, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg The hook is rather dry (X is Y). How about:
  • ALT1: ... that Hilda C. Heine is the first Marshallese woman to earn a doctorate degree?
  • That will get a lot of clicks for the term "Marshallese" alone. Yoninah (talk) 21:00, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
  • @Yoninah: Thanks for the review. Cool ALT. Let's go with it! --Rosiestep (talk) 01:09, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Thank you. Could another reviewer sign off on ALT1? Yoninah (talk) 09:04, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Name changes due to the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant

Created by The Almightey Drill (talk). Self-nominated at 20:39, 4 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Comment (not a review): the chocolate part of the article is worded too closely to its source for my comfort. I didn't check the whole article carefully for close paraphrasing, but the first two or three others looked ok. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:56, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 5[edit]

Coffee production in Sri Lanka

Historical coffee regions of Sri Lanka

Created by Rosiestep (talk), Nvvchar (talk). Nominated by Nvvchar (talk) at 05:15, 12 June 2015 (UTC).

Philadelphia municipal election, 1955, Victor H. Blanc

Created by Coemgenus (talk). Self-nominated at 19:56, 9 June 2015 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on June 6[edit]

Al-Bayan (radio station)

Created by LavaBaron (talk). Self-nominated at 03:19, 7 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Not long enough: I only count about 1360 characters of prose- even stretching to 1420 characters if including footnotes and section headers doesn't quite meet the 1500 character minimum. If this gets expanded I will approve it. Article is new enough: created June 6, nom June 7th. No close paraphrasing or copyright violation (audio clip is short and has Non-free use rationale). Hook is neutral, sourced and very interesting. QPQ not needed, as less than five DYK credits (this is the fifth). Pinging LavaBaron to spruce this up a bit, I think it would be good to showcase. --Animalparty-- (talk) 02:41, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

National Smart Grid Mission

Created by InfernalH (talk). Self-nominated at 15:04, 7 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg @Nikkimaria: Some parts of this article are copied verbatim from this Indian Government source. A footnote states that "This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain." so in reviewing this nomination I need to establish whether the source is in fact in the public domain. An edit summary states "(Government work published by or under the direction or control of the [Indian] government or any department of the government, is free from copyright ([16])), so I looked up the link given and it stated "In the case of a government work, government shall, in the absence of any agreement to the contrary, be the first owner of the copyright therein." It did not mention that Indian Government documents are in the public domain. So I am unsure whether the article is or is not an infringement of copyright, and I am asking for an expert opinion (ie Nikkimaria). Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:35, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Guest Directed Shorts

  • ... the Max Winston, who directed a short for Uncle Grandpa, is a drummer for a band that has other crew members of the show in it?

Created by 23W (talk). Self-nominated at 09:22, 6 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol delete vote.svg Being considered for deletion. TheMagikCow (talk) 18:43, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg This is the proper symbol for a nominated article at AfD. If it survives, then the review needs to resume, but the X symbol could lead to the nomination being closed before the AfD concludes, which shouldn't be allowed to happen. BlueMoonset (talk) 07:14, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg AfD closed as no consensus. 23W 02:59, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 7[edit]

Réserve naturelle nationale de Saint-Barthélemy, Île Frégate

Created by Dr. Blofeld (talk), Nvvchar (talk), and Rosiestep (talk). Nominated by Nvvchar (talk) at 18:16, 14 June 2015 (UTC).

Symbol question.svg New enough (creation and expansion), long enough, good sources. The hook seems boring, saying something you could possibly say about any marine nature preserve. How about the number of coral and fish species, or mentioning interesting ones? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:56, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
ALT1: ... that the Saint-Barthélemy, which includes Île Frégate, has 45 species of coral reefs, 165 species of fish, sea urchins, starfish, shell fish, crustaceans and sea turtles? --Nvvchar. 14:27, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
Much better. How about mentioning coral reefs also? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:39, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
It was getting to be more than 200 ch. I have added the coral reefs also now and adjusted within the ALT1 Hook.--Nvvchar. 13:22, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
Reworded (we need somehow that it is a nature reserve, reefs are not a species and the many links distract from the new articles):
ALT2: ... that the nature reserve Saint-Barthélemy, which includes Île Frégate, protects 45 species of coral and 165 of fish, sea urchins, starfish, shell fish, crustaceans and sea turtles? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:21, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Fine. Thanks.--Nvvchar. 17:47, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Reviewer needed to check ALT2 suggested by Gerda Arendt. Thanks. --Nvvchar. 16:54, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Coffee production in Thailand

Coffee production at Doi Chang

Created by Rosiestep (talk), Nvvchar (talk), and Dr. Blofeld (talk). Nominated by Nvvchar (talk) at 02:09, 14 June 2015 (UTC).


New – The article is new enough, being created on 8 June and nominated on 14 June. Symbol confirmed.svg
Long enough – The article is currently at 1799 characters, but states that it includes PD text, I estimate this text to be less than 299 characters, meaning that the article is long enough. However, it would be good for @Rosiestep:, @Nvvchar:, or @Dr. Blofeld: to confirm what text is in the public domain, and preferably place the text in quotation marks (the relevant text is in the History section, and is from Board of Trade (1891)).Symbol voting keep.svg
Within policy – The article is neutral and generally well sourced (I did remove one CN tag which I felt was erroneous). However, the lead is not supported by the given citation (if you look at yield, there are more than twenty nations that produce more coffee that Thailand), and there is some prose which I consider a little close:
  • Robusta coffee is planted in six provinces in the South, namely, Chumphon, Surat Thani, Nakhon Si Thammarat, Krabi, Pang-nga and Ranong, covering a total area of 423,947 rai(6.25 rai = 1 ha) - from page 3
  • The six provinces in southern Thailand where this coffee is grown are: Chumphon, Surat Thani, Nakhon Si Thammarat, Krabi, Pangnga and Ranong, covering a total area of 423,947 rai (6.25 rai = 1 ha) - from Coffee production in Thailand#Production
There are also problems with the sentence: "Organic coffee is also cultivated in the highlands with an elevation above 800 metres (2,600 ft), which is inhabited by the indigenous people." which confuses a few things from the source, mixing up existing practice and potential organic opportunities.Symbol possible vote.svg


Format – The hook is formatted correctly and fewer than 200 characters.Symbol confirmed.svg However, I'm not sure how interesting is is, and it is not really supported by a citation (which actually says that Thailand is 18th as "Coffee, green, yield (hectogram per hectare)" and 22nd "Coffee, green, production quantity (tons)". I would suggest an alternative hook, potentially regarding the program to replace opium crops with coffee.Symbol possible vote.svg


QPQ – A QPQ has been done.Symbol confirmed.svg
Image - Is freely licenced, and used within the article, but may not render that well at 100 × 100px (it just looks like a conveyer belt); I think the articles other image would be better, but will still pass the image.Symbol confirmed.svg

@Nvvchar: If the issues regarding article length, content issues (including sourcing), and hook issues I have raised are dealt with I'd be happy to pass this.Symbol possible vote.svg ColonialGrid (talk) 16:33, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Coffee plant nursery in Maejantai Chiang Rai province

  • @ColonialGrid: Thanks for the review. The first lead sentence has been slightly modified and an additional sentence added. The two copy vio issues have been addressed. The PD sourced text (312 ch) has been put under inverted commas. The text in the last section has been made clear. I suggest the following ALT1 Hook.

ALT1 Hook ... that under the Thai/United Nations Crop Replacement and Community Development Project coffee cultivation (pictured) has been experimented as a replacement crop for opium?

I am also suggesting an alternate img with the alternate hook. After discounting PD sourced text the article has 1600 ch.--Nvvchar. 18:04, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Thank you for your prompt response and for addressing the minor issues I found. I suspect the history section should read: In 1891, the Board of Trade's Journal noted that at the time, "coffee cultivation, in a suitable locality and under favourable conditions, offered more remunerative prospects than any other agricultural enterprise, but that Java did not export more than one-third of the amount which that island used to produce." [3] - But am nonetheless happy with the attribution of PD content (which is really only to satisfy the 1,500 character minimum, not so much for legal/plagiarism concerns). The new hook and picture are both improvements. As far as I'm concerned, this DYK is now good to go with hook ALT1 and File:Maejantai_Chiang_Rai_province_04.JPG. Symbol confirmed.svg ColonialGrid (talk) 18:14, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Coffee production in Peru

Coffee beans in Peru

Created by Rosiestep (talk), Nvvchar (talk), and Dr. Blofeld (talk). Nominated by Nvvchar (talk) at 19:34, 13 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg This article was created within seven days of its nomination, its prose is the appropriate length, and the article meets core Wikipedia policies and guidelines. The hook meets DYK formatting guidelines, and its facts are verifiable and cited with inline citations in the article. A QPQ review has also been completed. The image is licensed CC BY-SA 3.0, and is therefore good to go for inclusion in DYK. -- West Virginian (talk) 17:07, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Once the PD content is excluded, this falls short of the minimum original content requirement. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:49, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
  • @Nikkimaria:Thanks for the review. More text has been added now which makes it eligible without the PD text.--Nvvchar. 18:55, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Le Mulâtre

Victor Séjour, author of "The Mulatto"

  • Comment: The article was created under its original French title, but we might consider whether it should be moved to the English title

5x expanded by Cynwolfe (talk). Self-nominated at 14:54, 11 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Comment, not a formal review: the references are a bit hard to well, reference, which may inhibit verification and checking for paraphrasing, etc. References like "Wester, African American Gothic, p. 90." for instance, do not mention year, publisher, edition, etc., and one must search the references to find the sole mention of "Maisha L. Wester, African American Gothic: Screams from Shadowed Places (Palgrave Macmillan, 2012)". I would recommend listing all repeated sources in full below the notes, ideally with {{Harvard citation}} or similar to easily pair short ref to full ref. And if any content is available online, links would help (as would ISBN, doi, etc.). --Animalparty-- (talk) 03:23, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • I'm not sure I have time at present to do that, and I'm fairly sure all the content is available in Google preview—though that can vary depending on where you are, and I had full access to the sources through a university. If you do a Google Books search with author and title as given in any note, there should be no obstacle to finding the references. Afaik, there's no requirement that a DYK article have its footnotes formatted in a particular way, and a full citation for each source is given in the first ref. Having already gone through this process to write the article, I should think it preferable that a another editor do fact-checking and check on accessibility outside the system within which I worked. Cynwolfe (talk) 00:55, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Charles R. Apted

Juan Rivera

  • ... that in 1915, "Harvard Cop No. 1" Charles Apted (pictured) identified the dynamite-wielding intruder who shot J. P. Morgan, Jr. and bombed the US Senate as a deranged wife-poisoning ex-Harvard German instructor?

Improved to Good Article status by EEng (talk). Self-nominated at 05:53, 9 June 2015 (UTC).

  • If run without image then quirky slot, please. EEng (talk) 06:12, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg · Article was improved to GA on 8 June, nominated for DYK on 9 June. QPQ is done, article is long enough. Hook is sourced and cited. I think he way that you have worded the hook in the article itself is more concise than how you have worded it here, though. I had to re-read a few times to understand what you was saying, partly because you missed out the intruders name here. I think the hook here needs rewording.  — Calvin999 10:31, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
    • ... um, "as a deranged wife-poisoning ex-Harvard German instructor"? - was that just a cunning disguise he had adopted? Martinevans123 (talk) 10:46, 12 June 2015 (UTC) p.s. User:EEng may be a little delayed in responding as he has some unexpected marine invertebrate issues to deal with, I bet.
      • I don't think the hook needs rewording, I think it needs commas. Viriditas (talk) 00:24, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

The problem is that ALT0 was already at the 200-character limit. But I've found a way to squeeze a bit more out:

  • ALT1 ... that in 1915, "Harvard Cop No. 1" Charles Apted (pictured) identified the dynamite-wielding intruder who shot J. P. Morgan, Jr., and bombed the US Senate, as a crazed wife-poisoning ex-Harvard German instructor?

EEng (talk) 16:29, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

  • I would like to see a comma after "crazed". Otherwise, I read it in Jack Kerouac's voice while bongos play in the background. I also read it differently with commas in different places:
ALT2 ... that in 1915, "Harvard Cop No. 1" Charles Apted (pictured) identified the dynamite-wielding intruder who shot J. P. Morgan, Jr. and bombed the US Senate as a crazed, wife-poisoning ex-Harvard German instructor?
Since this isn't supposed to be beat poetry, I'm looking for the comma after crazed, but you can see I don't read it in the same place that you do. Viriditas (talk) 01:12, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Well, I think we need the commas around "and bombed the US Senate" because (as Martin so insightfully pointed out) otherwise the as reads like the as in "He attended the party as a pirate." So just for you I'll give up wielding, which I really didn't want to do -- but I get deranged back in the bargain, so that's some solace:

  • ALT3 ... that in 1915, "Harvard Cop No. 1" Charles Apted (pictured) identified the dynamite-armed intruder who shot J. P. Morgan, Jr., and bombed the US Senate, as a deranged, wife-poisoning ex-Harvard German instructor?

If that's OK with you can you strike ALT2? EEng (talk) 04:33, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

I agree with you. Stricken. Viriditas (talk) 06:20, 14 June 2015 (UTC)


5x expanded by Dr. Lurk (talk). Self-nominated at 03:33, 9 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Article is new and long enough, and well referenced. Hook is concise and meets all requirements. But I have a problem with the massive amounts of quoted text in the references. Providing the source as a citation is enough, no need to copy the actual paragraph from the source. This could have potential copyright issues (which is ironically the reason why the article creator previously deleted the entire text). -- P 1 9 9   17:37, 18 June 2015 (UTC)



  • ... that Sanatkumara (pictured) told Gautama that Hamsopanishad is a compendium of mystic knowledge, which was propounded by Parvati, after due consultation with her consort Shiva?

Created by Nvvchar (talk). Self-nominated at 15:08, 8 June 2015 (UTC).

Savitri Upanishad

Gayatri or Savitri personified as a Goddess

  • ... that Savitri Upanishad (picture personified as a goddess), which has 15 verses, begins with an invocation hymn seeking blessings for strong functioning of motory and sensory organs?

Created by Nvvchar (talk). Self-nominated at 05:25, 8 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol voting keep.svg QPQ done. Prose size more than 1500. Nominated within 5 days. Inline sources mentioned. GTG! - Vivvt (Talk) 13:43, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
@Vivvt:. Thanks for the review. But please sign your review.--Nvvchar. 13:22, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Coffee production in Democratic Republic of the Congo

Created by Rosiestep (talk), Nvvchar (talk), and Dr. Blofeld (talk). Nominated by Dr. Blofeld (talk) at 17:55, 7 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Beginning review. Article is new enough and long enough. Did some light copyediting. Should it be "Coffee production in the Democratic Republic of the Congo"? I have changed all instances of tons to tonnes for consistency (I hope they are the same thing!). Philafrenzy (talk) 08:52, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
I will continue the review shortly. Philafrenzy (talk) 12:47, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
@Philafrenzy: a friendly FYI, tonne and ton are not the same thing. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:06, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, changed them back. Could you link them accordingly? Ref 5 indexmundi.com supports a tons figure but seems to be in kg? Philafrenzy (talk) 14:24, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
In Ref 5, the table gives figures in 60 kg bags and the quantity reported in bags has been converted into tons.--Nvvchar. 03:34, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
Please change it to Kg to match the source. Thanks. Philafrenzy (talk) 07:35, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
@Philafrenzy: Done, though I am not convinced as conversion to tons is valid.--Nvvchar. 17:25, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
Thank you (how could we be sure you did the conversion accurately?) I will finish the review shortly. Philafrenzy (talk) 08:48, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Weights and measures are a problem with this article. In the paragraph on production it says first that 119,320 tonnes were produced, then it fell to an unspecified amount before "increasing" to 40,000 tons in 2003. Can we link that instance to the relevant measure so that we know whether it was short tons or long tons? What amount did it fall to before recovering to 40,000 tons? There are four citation needed tags in the article that need attention. beenPhilafrenzy (talk) 19:53, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • @Philafrenzy: Thanks for the review. References have been fixed. Additional figures and wikilink to tons have been provided. Please see.--Nvvchar. 14:44, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 8[edit]

The Dance of Dragons

5x expanded by IdenticalHetero (talk). Nominated by Shhhhwwww!! (talk) at 21:16, 15 June 2015 (UTC).

  • "watching Dany soar about the stadium on Drogon is an iconic image" needs to be in quotes in that hook; but I'd go for an ALT rather than repeat the poor phrasing of the review (Oooohh get me, bitching about some critic's writing yet no alternative hook on offer). Belle (talk) 01:11, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Carl Nielsen works

Carl Nielsen in 1928Carl Nielsen in 1884

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk) and Ipigott (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 16:57, 15 June 2015 (UTC).

  • It's probably worth noting that there were gaps in the sequence. ALT1:
... that Carl Nielsen (pictured) selectively assigned an Opus number to only 44 of his compositions, running from Op. 1 to Op. 59?
Alakzi (talk) 18:38, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
Interesting but not actually part of this article, and abbreviated a bit, because he assigned to some more (such as the operas) but dropped them later, as List of compositions by Carl Nielsen has the details.
ALT2: ... that Carl Nielsen (pictured) assigned Opus numbers only to selected works of his compositions, between Op. 1 for the Suite for String Orchestra in 1888 and Op. 59 for Tre Klaverstykker in 1928? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:46, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
Works and compositions are synonymous, are they not? How about "... to a selection of his compositions"? Alakzi (talk) 21:24, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
I would suggest a hook covering the three sections of the article:
ALT3: ... that the works of Carl Nielsen (pictured) have been classified by opus number (selectively), by a fuller FS listing, and recently by a comprehensive catalogue of CNWs? --Ipigott (talk) 15:12, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
I would prefer to mention a bit of music, and added an image of the promising composer, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:37, 23 June 2015 (UTC)


Created by Daniel Case (talk) and Inks.LWC (talk). Nominated by Daniel Case (talk) at 03:42, 11 June 2015 (UTC).

Borders Railway

  • Comment: Article created in my userspace on 30 March 2015, moved to mainspace on 8 June 2015. This is my first DYK nomination.

Moved to mainspace by KlausFoehl (talk), Lamberhurst (talk), and RGloucester (talk). Nominated by KlausFoehl (talk) at 17:37, 10 June 2015 (UTC).

  • I'd propose that, should this hook be accepted, it be retained in the queue until the opening day of the line, on the 6th of September. RGloucester 03:35, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Tabu filmography

Indian actress Tabu

5x expanded by Krimuk90 (talk). Self-nominated at 06:23, 9 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Size, date and hook check out. Checked for copy-vio and QPQ. Regarding the hook, is winning Best Actress NFA twice the most hooky fact that you can get from the article? The fact that she has the maximum wins in the Filmfare Critics Awards is better IMO (I know this isn't mentioned in the article). Vensatry (ping) 19:09, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
I know, but I couldn't find any source that her four wins were the most by an actress. Sadly. :( --Krimuk|90 (talk) 01:38, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
Found a reference, thankfully. So here goes:
ALT1: ... that Tabu (pictured) has won the Filmfare Critics Award for Best Actress a record four times?

Symbol redirect vote 4.svg New review needed for ALT1 Vensatry (ping) 18:15, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg ALT1 hook ref verified and cited inline. Striking first hook. Yoninah (talk) 00:32, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 9[edit]

2015 Tour de Suisse

  • Started expansion on 9 June and the event concluded on 21 June. Mattsnow81 (Talk) 18:09, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Created/expanded by Mattsnow81 (talk). Self-nominated at 18:00, 21 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol delete vote.svg Does not meet the criteria for being new. A fivefold expansion did occur, but not in the past 7 days (11009 --> 38845 characters using the somewhat generous diff: [17]). I am a somewhat new reviewer, so a second opinion would be helpful (and easy, given the diff link provided). ~ RobTalk 12:06, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
  • The event finished on June 21st, it was therefore impossible to nominate it sooner, as I was writing it on the 21st. It started on June 13th, hence why some of it had been written before the 7 days, as I'm a guy that doesn't like to be late, I was writing whatever info I had as early as I could. Face-grin.svg Mattsnow81 (Talk) 12:56, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Nothing prevents you from nominating the article before the event is completed, although I personally agree with you that this one was better off waiting. As I mentioned on your talk page, this article could possibly be a candidate for good article status, which would make it eligible for DYK. I'd recommend trying that route, since a cursory glance at your article suggests that it's achievable. ~ RobTalk 13:02, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Suicide of Chen Gang

  • ... that a 34-year-old university administrator in China committed suicide after learning he had lost out on an opportunity for promotion?
  • Comment: This is a remarkable story. I had stumbled upon it while researching another person of the same name and reading about this case made me extremely intrigued. The question I sought to answer was, what would drive an upwardly mobile, bright, young academic commit suicide over not obtaining a promotion?
  • Reviewed: Prized Apart

Created by Colipon (talk). Self-nominated at 20:48, 14 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg New enough, long enough, adequately referenced, neutrally written. As all references are foreign-language, unable to check for close paraphrasing. I added an infobox. Regarding the hook: Since you don't give a birthdate, we don't know if he was 33 or 34. The hook is also misleading; it sounds like he was upset about a departmental promotion, not a promotion to Communist Youth League leader at the university. The hook fact also needs an inline cite in the article, probably after the second sentence under Suicide. You may also want to consider a more provocative hook, describing the censorship of his death. QPQ done. Yoninah (talk) 21:20, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Thanks for your review. I can find the inline cite for sure. Also there are plenty of Chinese-speaking editors who can check the refs if necessary. I am ok changing the blurb to:
  • ALT1: ... that a 34-year-old university lecturer in China committed suicide after learning he had lost out to a rival for the position of Communist Youth League leader at his alma mater?" But perhaps this is a little too wordy? What would you suggest? Colipon+(Talk) 02:22, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Actually, after looking at the article again and trying to come up with an alternate hook, I feel yours works pretty well. The words at the end, "at his alma mater", make it sound like it happened at a different university than the one he was working at. Please provide the cite for 34 years old. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 23:04, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Maasella edwardsi

Created by Dr. Blofeld (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). Nominated by Cwmhiraeth (talk) at 05:20, 14 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article is new enough, long enough, and does not contain copyvio or neutrality problems. The hook fact is cited inline, though its ambiguity (was it there all along and just recently detected, or is it a newcomer?) is what made me read closely enough to come up with the questions below. Something like "was reported in the Aegean Sea for the first time in 2015" would avoid the issue.
  • I know it's not part of the official DYK criteria, but the source (the Özalp article) contains a lot of good information that didn't make it into the wiki article (e.g. that it's a zooxanthellate and that the increase in range is likely due to climate change).
  • Lastly, which I think does have to be addressed (ping authors @Dr. Blofeld and Cwmhiraeth:):
  • The last sentence of the Distribution section says "Since about 1990 it seems to have spread to the eastern Mediterranean", but the closest footnote is Özalp, and I don't see that in the paper.
  • Our article gives the depth range as 12-40m with no direct cite. The closest footnote in the Distribution section is again Özalp, but that paper gives 2-50m, citing two earlier papers. Seems like there might be another reference that got accidentally skipped or removed?
  • Our article says the coral was found growing on "stones" in the Aegean Sea. I guess this is a paraphrase for "rocks" in the Özalp abstract, but the paper text says variously "rocky bottoms", "rocky substratum", and "rocky substrate" for this particular set of observations. "Rocky substrate" isn't the same as "stones".
Opabinia regalis (talk) 07:28, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

I have made some alterations to the article and suggest ALT1 : Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:48, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

  • ALT1 ... that in 2015, the soft coral Maasella edwardsi was reported in the Aegean Sea for the first time?
Symbol confirmed.svg Thanks; ALT1 is good to go! Opabinia regalis (talk) 02:02, 5 July 2015 (UTC)


Dactylotrochus cervicornis

Created by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self-nominated at 06:17, 11 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg New artcile created on 9th June. Long enough and well referenced. Hook reference verified. Copy vio not noted. Img is free. Good to go.--Nvvchar. 12:58, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Alex Sharp

5x expanded by TonyTheTiger (talk) and NOVAASA (talk). Nominated by TonyTheTiger (talk) at 23:50, 9 June 2015 (UTC).

@EricEnfermero and TonyTheTiger: Metro would not count as a RS. It is a tabloid newspaper of poor repute in the same family as the Daily Mail. However here is an alternative which specifies that he was the youngest winner in that category. [[18]] Cowlibob (talk) 21:54, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Thx.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:36, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Tony, there are too many "Tonys" in the hook :) Can you leave off the 69th Tony Awards? Yoninah (talk) 00:34, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 10[edit]

Alex Bregman

5x expanded by Epeefleche (talk). Self-nominated at 08:05, 13 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article satisfies the recency and length requirements with 5x expansion June 10-14. Hook is short enough and interesting enough. Hook is neutral and also supported by in-line citations to reliable sources. No evident problems with neutrality and in-line citations. However, spot-checking doesn't raise concern about close paraphrasing. For example, the LSU biography states: "Parents are Sam and Jackie Bregman, both of whom are attorneys ... has a younger sister, Jessica, and a younger brother, Anthony." The nominated article states: "His parents are Sam and Jackie Bregman (both of whom are attorneys), and he has a younger sister, Jessica, and a younger brother, Anthony." Also, the LSU bio states: "hit .678 as a high school junior in 2011 and set a New Mexico season record with 19 HRs." Article states: "hit .678 as a high school junior in 2011, and set a New Mexico season record with 19 home runs." Nominator should take another pass through the article to modify instances of close paraphrasing. QPQ looks ok but Epeefleche hasn't replied to the nominator's alt hook. Cbl62 (talk) 13:41, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Cbl62 -- Hi. First comment -- as to the QPQ, you wrote that I have not responded to nom's alt hook. I did respond with further questions, a number of hours prior to your saying I had not done so. Please take another look. As to the other point, I took another pass through the article, and sought to address your concerns both in those sentences and elsewhere. I would point out that the sentences you pointed to were heavy with immutables ... parents/Sam/Jackie/Bregman/younger sister/Jessica/younger brother/Anthony/.678/high school/junior/2011/New Mexico/19. The non-immutables can of course be worked with, and I've sought to address them, but all of those phrases would logically be in both (though at the end of the day I broke parents into mother and father). See also in this regard WP:LIMITED. Tx. --Epeefleche (talk) 14:05, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg The QPQ issue is resolved, and the nominator has made some tweaks on the unduly close paraphrasing. If someone with more experience in assessing "close paraphrasing" issues could take a second look at that narrow issue, I would greatly appreciate it having that done before I give this the green tick. Cbl62 (talk) 04:59, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
  • There is now an image at File:Alex Bregman at Baum Stadium.jpg. I'm not certain whether it is of sufficiently high resolution for the main page -- I submit it for consideration, but leave it to the promoter to decide. Tx. Epeefleche (talk) 04:09, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Jabali Upanishad

Trinity of Gods Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva

Created by Nvvchar (talk). Self-nominated at 14:03, 10 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg QPQ, hook is an appropriate length, the article is new, and I don't see any problems with the text (Dup check with the only online source passes, and I must assume good faith that the article does not copy/paraphrase the offline refs). The only problem with this hook is that the article Brahma is poorly referenced and also has a tag that it may contain original research. Such articles should not be featured on the main page (even if they are not the main article in the hook). Can you propose a different hook? Or at least change the hook to avoid a link to Brahma. AHeneen (talk) 01:07, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
  • @AHeneen: Thanks for the review. I was not aware of this rule. I am suggesting the following ALT1 hook with a different image.

Portrait of a person wearing the Bhasma (holy ash)

ALT1 hook ... that according to Jabali Upanishad smearing of the holy Bhasma by a person (pictured with holy ash on the forehead), whether he is a celibate brahamachari or renouncer, gives him the authority to worship all the divine beings? --Nvvchar. 04:22, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

A couple adjustments to the hook:
  • Use one term for "holy Bhasma" and "holy ash". I suggest using "holy ash", which is a link to Bhasma.
  • The hook length is within the 200 character limit, excluding "(pictured with holy ash on the forehead)". Can the caption just be limited to "(pictured)"?
  • The source says "whether he is a Brahamachari or Sanyasi". Is sanyasi the same as a renouncer? Should the Hindu terms be used (Brahamachari & Sanyasi)? Or translations, like "celibate Brahamachari" and "renouncer"?
  • It could be: ... that according to the Jabali Upanishad, smearing of holy ash by a brahamachari or sanyasi on their forehead (pictured) gives him the authority to worship all the divine beings?
AHeneen (talk) 22:27, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
  • @AHeneen: Thanks. I defer to your suggestions. I propose this ALT2 hook ... that according to the Jabali Upanishad, smearing of holy ash by a brahamachari or sanyasi on their forehead (pictured) gives him the authority to worship all the divine beings? --Nvvchar. 23:59, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg The hook is ungrammatical, whose forehead is smeared and who is being referred to by "their" and "him"? Gatoclass (talk) 07:05, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for noticing that! "Him" should be changed to "them" and "the" could be added before "smearing", making:
ALT2 (corrected) ... that according to the Jabali Upanishad, the smearing of holy ash by a brahamachari or sanyasi on their forehead (pictured) gives them the authority to worship all the divine beings?
Their & them refer to brahamachari/sanyasi. AHeneen (talk) 13:15, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

John D. Voelker

John D. Voelker in 1959

5x expanded by Imzadi1979 (talk). Self-nominated at 03:56, 11 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Comment: June 29 would be his 112th birthday, so it would be nice if this could run on that day if possible. Imzadi 1979  04:53, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Article is new enough and long enough. Referencing looks good. Concerned about the image though; do you have a link to the trailer, so I can see whether or not there was a copyright notice? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:54, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 11[edit]

Bryan Burnham

Created by BU Rob13 (talk) and Tavix (talk). Nominated by Tavix (talk) at 21:34, 15 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg New article is long enough and nominated in timely fashion. Written neutrally, sufficiently cited, and no paraphrasing concerns detected. Choosing ALT1 to avoid negative light on NCAA (it can do that on its own). Meets QPQ exemption. A minor issue unrelated to the hook, but the article says his debut was in Week 13, which doesn't seem to be directly obvious in the reference, which only says "... Bryan spent the first 11 weeks of the season on the practice roster before making his pro debut versus Toronto on Sep 19/14."—Bagumba (talk) 22:55, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
  • @Bagumba: I added another source that mentions that he practiced for twelve weeks before that game. You can corroborate this with 2014 BC Lions season, which says that the Toronto game is "week 13." I didn't find a source that mentions both Burnham's highlights and the fact that it was "week 13" and didn't want to add a source that only verified the week. If it's still a problem we could either replace it with the date or actually do that. I understand why you struck the first hook, but I do think his injuries are the most fascinating thing about him. I'm adding an ALT2 to highlight that. Also adding an ALT3 which is directly cited with a source that we haven't had any issues with (just in case). Tavix| Talk  15:55, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
  • As an aside, I'm using "American football" if the fact is from college, "Canadian football" if the fact is from his pro career, and "gridiron football" if it is both. Tavix| Talk  15:55, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Just was informed that this article was nominated on my talk page. I have no expertise in the criteria for DYK, so I'll leave this for Tavix to decide if he wants to update his nomination, but I'd suggest emphasizing the season-ending nature of his injuries as the most interesting fact about Bryan Burnham. Many people have had torn ACLs, for instance, but very few have had two major season-ending injuries in back-to-back games. For example:
"... that gridiron football player Bryan Burnham suffered a torn ACL to end his college career and a season-ending lacerated spleen in his first professional game in the Canadian Football League?" ~ RobTalk 15:24, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
  • I would agree with that (except the spleen injury happened in his second professional game). Apparently the arm infection was the reason he was redshirted so you could argue that he had three season ending injuries (although he never played a game his true-freshmen year). We could tweak your suggestion to say: "... that gridiron football player Bryan Burnham suffered a torn ACL to end his college career and a lacerated spleen to end his first professional season in the Canadian Football League?" I'll add it as an ALT 4 and we can always tweak it as necessary. BU Rob13 and Bagumba, what do you think? Tavix| Talk  15:46, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Oops! Sorry, I got this article and another I created where there was a season-ending injury in the first game jumbled in my head. Your suggestion is in the spirit of what I was suggesting, yes. ~ RobTalk 15:49, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
  • @BU Rob13: Great! You can edit the nomination if you think it could be worded better, but I'll just note here that I'm favoring ALT 4 at the moment. DYK is a good way to get exposure to some new articles, so if you have some free time, I'd suggest reading up on the criteria. I looked through your contributions, and didn't see another article that could be nominated at the moment, but it could be good to think about in the future! Tavix| Talk  16:05, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg @Bagumba: Needs another look. Issues addressed. ~ RobTalk 19:42, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Lola (song)

  • ... that Ray Davies was forced to make a six thousand mile round-trip flight from New York to London to rerecord two words in "Lola"?

Improved to Good Article status by Beatleswhobeachboys (talk). Self-nominated at 13:39, 13 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg This article doesn't appear to meet the seven-day rule - according to DYKCheck: "Assuming article is at 5x now, expansion began 366 edits ago on July 24, 2009". This is my first review so please could a more experienced reviewer double-check - thanks!JezGrove (talk) 19:03, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
  • @Beatleswhobeachboys Hi, my apologies - I couldn't find anything about GA status in the DYK Reviewing guide (which as a newbie I had printed off and was dutifully following) and have just spotted what it says at the top of this page. Sorry! The article is clearly long enough and good enough, the hook is great and interesting. The source cited for the hook fact supports it (although at one point it talks about him recording 'two lines' - despite the fact that it says 'two words' in it's own title, and it is very clear from the text that just two words were the reason for Ray's journey - but that's hardly your fault!) I'm assuming that part of the GA process covers copy vios, so I've only looked at the section relating to the hook and there are no problems at all. So I think you are good to go. Probably best if someone else gives you the final seal of approval as this is my first review, though!JezGrove (talk) 14:45, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
@JezGrove Thanks for your input: I'll hold on until another person reviews this. Beatleswhobeachboys (talk) 14:47, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Sargun Mehta

Sargun Mehta

  • ... that as a child Sargun Mehta (pictured) along with her brother participated in the dance reality show Boogie Woogie, though they were eventually rejected?

Improved to Good Article status by Hetika (talk). Nominated by FrB.TG (talk) at 16:39, 11 June 2015 (UTC).

Occupy the Hood

  • ... that in July 2012, Occupy the Hood held a national gathering of its national chapters in Atlanta, Georgia?

5x expanded by Northamerica1000 (talk). Self-nominated at 07:56, 11 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Is the ref for the hook -- to Free Speech Radio News -- an RS? I can't tell that it is offhand. Also, the citation for the hook does not state, as the hook does, "that various national Occupy the Hood chapters attended". Otherwise, new enough, long enough, within policy, format, content, and qpq all look good. Epeefleche (talk) 08:04, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
  • @Epeefleche: I have added more citations to this area of the article. I have struck the initial hook, proposing ALT1 below. North America1000 20:06, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
  • ALT1: ... that in July 2012, Occupy the Hood held a national gathering in Atlanta, Georgia that was attended by about 20 chapters of the organization?
Thanks. Sorry -- somehow I'm missing it ... where in the text body does it refer to "about 20 chapters"? Also, which refs are you asserting are RS refs? Thanks. --Epeefleche (talk) 09:34, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
@Epeefleche: Let's try this again. See ALT2 below. Struck ALT1 above. Here's the sources:
The Atlanta Voice: "Hundreds of “Occupy The Hood” activists from around the nation converged on Atlanta last week for “Hood Week,” the first-ever national gathering of one of America’s fastest-growing black activist movements. "
Free Speech Radio News: "Members of Occupy the Hood just wrapped up a national gathering in Atlanta. The Occupy the Hood movement started in New York City shortly after the encampment of Occupy Wall Street began and in response to how the movement was developing. Since then it has spread across the country, from Los Angeles to Milwaukee to Boston. Members say it’s an effort to highlight inequality and the voices of people of color and urban residents. FSRN’s Sacajawea Hall reports."
– The source used for ALT1 states "In Atlanta this week, a first-ever national gathering of about 20 chapters of Occupy the Hood, dubbed “Hood Week,” sought to bring together groups working locally on issues like police brutality, eviction and foreclosure and school closures." However, it's a blog, so doesn't qualify as a rs.
North America1000 08:47, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
  • ALT2: ... that Occupy the Hood held a national gathering in Atlanta, Georgia in July 2012 that was attended by hundreds of the organization's members?
I'm trying to understand why the Atlanta Voice might be considered an RS. While it has a staff of non-editors, it doesn't seem to have editorial review that I can glean from this. No discussion about it at RSN. Same with Free Speech Radio News (which "operates in a decentralized, collective manner"). Also, no discussion at RSN to help us. Is there something you see, that I've missed, that shows either of them to satisfy wp:RS? Epeefleche (talk) 09:47, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
  • @Epeefleche: I view The Atlanta Voice as a reliable source. For an overview about the publication, see their About us page (excerpts below):
North America1000 10:16, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
Well, all the laudatory language there is simply them describing themselves with self-serving claims. And they say nothing about editorial oversight. They do list their staff here -- but not an editor among them. A publisher, a party-promotor turned Director of Strategic Alliances, a Controller, an Office and Advertising Assistant, and "a consummated newspaper sales and marketing executive" (I think they could use a proofreader). It doesn't look like an RS to me. See also WP:QUESTIONABLE (emphasis added), which says: "Questionable sources are those with a poor reputation for checking the facts, or with no editorial oversight.... The proper uses of a questionable source are very limited."
I'm not aware that the number of subscribers is a factor considered by wp:rs. Certainly, there are non-RSs with many more subscribers than this publication says it has.
If you like, we can ask that someone else pick up this review in place of me, if you think I'm missing the obvious. Best. Epeefleche (talk) 10:31, 16 June 2015 (UTC)


  • [[File:Symbol redirect vote 4.svg|16px]] New review needed. Not reaching agreement about The Atlanta Voice per the above. North America1000 10:38, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Here's another alt below. North America1000 10:55, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
  • ALT3: ... that a goal of Occupy the Hood was to encourage more people of color to participate in occupy movement activities?
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg In the interest of moving forward, I have struck ALT2 and part of my comment above, and propose ALT3 (directly above) at this time. North America1000 12:31, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 12[edit]

Mehmet Baransu

  • ... that Turkish Journalist Mehmet Baransu was arrested by police after uncovering a military plot to overthrow the government?

Created/expanded by DaltonCastle (talk). Self-nominated at 03:06, 17 June 2015 (UTC).

Weyco Group

Created by TonyTheTiger (talk). Self-nominated at 05:39, 16 June 2015 (UTC).

45th Martín Fierro Awards

Created by Cambalachero (talk). Self-nominated at 18:56, 15 June 2015 (UTC).

Platygyra lamellina

Created by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self-nominated at 05:58, 14 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Date, size, refs, copyvio, all seem fine to the extent that I can tell, as some sources are not available via the internet, and are accepted on good faith (including for the hook). --Epeefleche (talk) 13:53, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
It is quite normal for coral spawning to be regulated by the phases of the moon, so this hook is a bit misleading as it implies that Platygyra lamellina does something unusual and that is why a reader should fasten their seatbelts, hold on to their panties and prepare for a madcap thrill ride when they click on the link to the article on this kraaazyyy coral; maybe I'm overstating it a bit, but a DYK hook should be something unique or out of the ordinary, shouldn't it? Belle (talk) 01:01, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
@Belle: Ideally, every organism would have unique features that could be used in DYK hooks. In practice they don't, and the differences between them rest on minute anatomical features or their rDNA or somesuch. I agree that many corals regulate their spawning by the phases of the moon, but I doubt that many of our readers know that, so I think it makes for a suitable hook. I could propose ALT1, but it might not be accurate because this particular spawning period may only apply to the population studied in the Red Sea. Maybe you would like to suggest a better hook? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:11, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
I think the original hook is better. And fine. The test isn't "would experts be surprised by this, and find it interesting?" Experts on the subjects of our DYKs would perhaps never be surprised, by any of our hooks in their area of expertise. We have in mind instead our general readership. And what they will find interesting. The original is hook-worthy. IMHO. Epeefleche (talk) 05:18, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
How about ALT2 which won't leave the reader thinking that this is a unique characteristic of Platygyra lamellina (though I'd give it 50/50 on surviving the passage through Prep unchanged). Belle (talk) 17:10, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
I am happy with ALT2, though it could be said that you have introduced an uncited fact, ie. that other corals also regulate their spawning in this way. It's a brilliant idea isn't it? How did the corals decide which day to choose? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:32, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Akshi Upanishad

Sun god or Surya

  • ... that in the Akshi Upanishad Sun god (pictured) instructs that Brahmavidya, the absolute universal reality, is difficult to learn but once acquired will result in self-realization?

Created by Nvvchar (talk). Self-nominated at 17:25, 12 June 2015 (UTC).


First Mughal Emperor, Babur

  • ... that the first Mughal Emperor Babur (pictured) wrote in his memoirs of an infatuation with a young boy when he was 16 years old?

Improved to Good Article status by Royroydeb (talk). Nominated by Calvin999 (talk) at 10:37, 12 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg The GA promotion has been challenged and a GAR is under way. See Talk:Babur/GA2. There is also a content dispute which has been brought to WP:ANI. -Zanhe (talk) 05:15, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 13[edit]

2015 attack on Dallas police

Dallas Police Department Headquarters

Created by SantiLak (talk), Knowledgekid87 (talk), Tony Sidaway (talk), and Prioryman (talk). Nominated by Prioryman (talk) at 21:40, 14 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Long enough, hook cited in the article and the exact phrase appears in the source, so GTG. Reviewing this one even though it's at the bottom of the queue, as if it's going on the mainpage it ought to be before the story is stale. – iridescent 10:52, hu 15 June 2015 (UTC)
  • As one of the contributors I think the hook here is rather too frivolous for this tragic case. It strikes me as tasteless. --TS 18:04, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
  • I agree with Tony. The hook seems very glib for a dangerous incident involving a public shooting spree. Liz Read! Talk! 10:11, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
  • I have no problem at all with someone proposing an alternative hook. Prioryman (talk) 11:46, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Acropora abrolhosensis, Acropora anthocercis, Acropora awi, Acropora batunai, Acropora caroliniana, Acropora dendrum, Acropora derawanensis, Acropora desalwii, Acropora donei, Acropora echinata, Acropora elegans, Acropora hemprichii, Acropora hoeksemai, Acropora horrida, Acropora indonesia, Acropora kimbeensis, Acropora kirstyae, Acropora kosurini, Acropora loisetteae, Acropora lokani, Acropora microclados, Acropora multiacuta, Acropora paniculata, Acropora papillare, Acropora pharaonis, Acropora plumosa, Acropora polystoma

Created by Thine Antique Pen (talk). Self-nominated at 19:24, 14 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg All articles are new enough (created on a range of dates from June 11 to June 13), long enough, and well sourced, including the hook source. Spot checking found no copied text (except from each other, but that's ok). Multiple QPQs all done. The overlong hook is justified by the many new articles listed. I fixed a minor formatting error in Acropora hoeksemai but otherwise didn't see any problems. Good to go. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:13, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Because of the repetition of content between articles, most of these fall short of the 1500-character minimum. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:22, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • I'll take a look into the articles soon and try to expand some. Thine Antique Pen (talk) 22:21, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • @Nikkimaria: I've been looking into whether the articles could fall under WP:DYKSG#A5, but am unsure about my understanding of that rule. Otherwise, which ones do you believe require expansion? Thine Antique Pen (talk) 10:45, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Over half of them are under 1500 characters once we exclude repeated text. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:26, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Hachim Mastour

Hachim Mastour

Created by Dudek1337 (talk), Adnan n2 (talk), Perspolis-ghermez (talk), TonyStarks (talk), and The Almightey Drill (talk). Nominated by The Almightey Drill (talk) at 19:08, 14 June 2015 (UTC).

Paramahamsa Parivrajaka Upanishad

Narayana who is Vishnu who enunciates the Upanishad

  • ... that literally Paramahamsa is "supreme swan" and "Parivarjaka" means "wandering", which are prefixed to Upanishad (pictured Narayana who explains the Upanishad), and which symbolize spiritual discrimination?

Created by Nvvchar (talk). Self-nominated at 14:48, 14 June 2015 (UTC).

Gonatopus clavipes

Created by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self-nominated at 09:54, 14 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg New enough, long enough, meets core content policies. Hook cited to RS. GTG. ALT1 might be a little more hooky:
I would be happy with ALT1. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:52, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg ALT1 hook ref verified and cited inline. ALT1 good to go. Yoninah (talk) 15:28, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Ștefan Petică

  • ... that Romanian Symbolist poet Ștefan Petică was an active socialist starting in high school, but later published articles denouncing socialism?

Created by Biruitorul (talk). Self-nominated at 03:56, 14 June 2015 (UTC).

Invasion of the Cape Colony (1795); Capitulation of Saldanha Bay

Moved to mainspace by Jackyd101 (talk). Self-nominated at 00:57, 14 June 2015 (UTC).

Prized Apart

  • ... that Prized Apart has been berated for its carbon footprint?

Created by Launchballer (talk). Self-nominated at 20:01, 13 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svgNew enough, length is ok, but I feel like the article can be more interesting. To me it is actually very difficult to picture what the show is about despite having read this article. Perhaps it is because the show is so new? I would suggest having a "background" section of how the show came to be, and perhaps make the prose a bit more crisp in the article body. Colipon+(Talk) 16:55, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
I've added a background section. The one edit you made, the previous wording was correct - I've added multiple sources to that effect.--Launchballer 15:26, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
I'm sorry, maybe I am just a bit "strict" about these things, but I feel like you need to ask for a copy-edit before this one is ready for prime time. There's some fairly awkward turns of phrase , use of contractions, and generally the article is just too "colloquial"-sounding to be encyclopedic. Examples of phrases that can use some rework include: "though they can't pick the category picked already", "Unlike other game shows, this one was developed in the UK", "the format jumped out at her", "unless one of the contestants are at the gate" (wrong grammar). Colipon+(Talk) 15:48, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
Removed contractions, fixed the four phrases listed here and requested a copyedit here. They are undergoing a June blitz focusing on requests starting tomorrow, so it's unlikely to take long.--Launchballer 15:37, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
Done.--Launchballer 09:39, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Looks much better, thanks for your efforts. I would say the only thing now is to work on a blurb. An alternative suggestion might be "British reality TV show Prized Apart was criticized for its high carbon footprint?" Colipon+(Talk) 16:16, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Funny looking reality show. ALT1: ... that BBC1 game show Prized Apart has been lambasted for its carbon footprint?--Launchballer 11:42, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 14[edit]

Terbaik Bagimu

Created by Syfuel (talk). Self-nominated at 14:43, 21 June 2015 (UTC).

Self-Portrait with Halo and Snake

Self-Portrait of Paul Gauguin painted on wood

Moved to mainspace by Viriditas (talk). Self-nominated at 02:09, 21 June 2015 (UTC).

Symbol question.svg Interesting reflection of a great piece of art, on good sources. Would you find a more interesting hook, or do you trust that interest will be caused by the image? The image is excellent, even in small size, and licensed. - I added van Gogh's name to his work, - his influence would interest me more than "companion piece". Or say more about de Haan? Could you get the an Gogh pic closer to where it's mentioned? A gallery perhaps? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:17, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
One more: the "halo" looks almost like caricature to me, - are there comments in sources? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:18, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
I think over time, the caricature interpretation has fallen out of favor. The NGA notes, "At the time [it was painted], Gauguin's likeness was described by friends as an "unkind character sketch" - a caricature." Today, most art critics agree that it has "elements of caricature", but they focus more on the symbolism of Gauguin's contradictory, dual nature. According to the catalog for the Maker of Myth exhibition, "Gauguin portrays himself as a fundamentally contradictory man—saint and sinner, tempted and tempter, angel and Lucifer, civilized and savage." Gauguin himself wrote: "No one is good; no one is evil; everyone is both, in the same way and in different ways......You drag your double along with you, and yet the two contrive to get on together...I have been good sometimes; I do not congratulate myself because of it. I have been evil often; I do not repent it." As far as we know, Gauguin was using this painting and the companion piece of Meijer de Haan to comment on the dual nature of the sinner and the saint, the devil and the angel, and the civilized and the savage. Far from caricature, this is primitivism (uses Japanese form), symbolism (uses religion and spirituality, mythological and dream imagery, intensely personal, private, obscure and ambiguous), and synthetism (evokes cloisonné). There are several sources that connect this painting directly with Van Gogh, but they tend to be somewhat speculative, and I tend to avoid speculative hooks. I can of course, revisit this hypothesis. There are also many other possibilities to consider. I will take pause to reflect upon the infinite diversity in infinite combinations and further address your point shortly. I am patiently expecting a new book in the mail tomorrow, which may present a new solution. If it does not come, I will present an alternate hook or modify the present one, as well as address your concerns about caricature in the article. Viriditas (talk) 02:50, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
Excellent, now get the sinner and saint aspect of all of us into a hook, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:04, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Peanut production in China

Peanuts harvested in Jiangxia

Created by Dr. Blofeld (talk), Nvvchar (talk), and Rosiestep (talk). Nominated by Nvvchar (talk) at 19:51, 20 June 2015 (UTC).

I. I. Mironescu

  • ... that I. I. Mironescu, despite being a physician, served as a regular soldier and not a combat medic in the Second Balkan War, but did lead a cholera-fighting effort in its aftermath?

Created by Biruitorul (talk). Self-nominated at 14:56, 18 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Length and date of posting the article are in order. Ref 3 to original hook is in the Romanian language and the translation is AGK. Ref 1 to ALT1 hook is AGF. No copy vio noted. I like the original hook.--Nvvchar. 20:04, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Symbol possible vote.svg I have pulled this from prep 1 as the hook statement (ALT1) doesn't appear in the article, and I am not impressed by the original hook. Gatoclass (talk) 13:03, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

It looks tome like it's sourced almost verbatim in the final paragraph, with a clear citation. It's right there. Dahn (talk) 05:50, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
The hook says his best tales were told orally. But the last sentence only says This bears echoes of Mironescu's talent as a teller of tales, largely in oral fashion. It says he was a talented oral tale-teller, it doesn't say his best tales were not included in his books which is what the hook strongly implies. Gatoclass (talk) 07:32, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
If you look through various definitions of echo ("repeat, imitate, to be reminiscent of, evoke"), it's apparent that in this case, his best work did indeed consist of his narrated tales, and that what he published merely echoed those superior works, as opposed to equaling or bettering them. I'd be glad to resolve any further concerns, but really, I don't see anything misleading, vague or uncited here, and neither do the several other editors who've taken a look. Can we perhaps move on? - Biruitorul Talk 18:12, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
I still think the hook is misleading. Why not just stick to what the sources say, ie, something like he "published several books of stories which echo his reported talent for oral storytelling"? Gatoclass (talk) 06:31, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Frankly, Gatoclass, I find that less interesting than the first hook (the one about his war service), but if you insist:
  • ALT2:... that Romanian writer I. I. Mironescu published several books of stories that echo his reported talent for oral storytelling? - Biruitorul Talk 21:23, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Well we shouldn't run a misleading hook just because it‍ '​s hooky. I will see if I can come up with another alt. Gatoclass (talk) 06:56, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • ALT3: ... that Romanian writer I. I. Mironescu published several books of stories, though his oral storytelling was reportedly superior? On reflection, that isn't adequately supported by the source. Gatoclass (talk) 07:44, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Try this:
  • ALT4: ... that the flashes of folk humour in I. I. Mironescu's published stories bear witness to his reported skills as a raconteur? Gatoclass (talk) 08:01, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Xylolaemus sakhnovi

Created by Kevmin (talk). Self-nominated at 23:42, 14 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg New enough, QPQ, long enough, and since the main sources are not online, I will have to rely on good faith that the article does not infringe on their copyright. The hook is fine, except that I do not see that fact in the article (and read it several times to be certain). Could you please explicitly state where the hook fact is mentioned in the article? AHeneen (talk) 21:19, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
@Kevmin: The hook fact does not seem to be in the article, and what does "electromexicus" to do with this beetle? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:22, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
Apologies for the late response! I have removed electromexicus and replaced it with the correct species epithet, sakhnovi. I have also added the hook fact into the article, cited to the type description paper.--Kevmin § 17:41, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg AHeneen (talk) 21:55, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Racket Brook

  • ... that anthracite coal was being mined near the mouth of Racket Brook by 1820?

Moved to mainspace by Jakec (talk). Self-nominated at 14:33, 14 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Date and size with in policy, QPQ done, hook is cited inline. The Earwig's Copyvio Detector shows that there are close paraphrasing issues with at least two of the refs. Vensatry (ping) 18:43, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
  • @Vensatry: First of all, the "two...refs" in Earwig are really different URLs pointing to the same page. Secondly, the reference is barely even used in the article. Third, there are only a few two or three word bits like "Lackawanna River watershed" and "anthracite industry". The other eight URLs...aren't even used in the article. Earwig is a bit of a crude tool, so one needs to look at more than just the percentages in pretty much all cases. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 18:56, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Yeah, I too had this doubt. So you mean to say those sources are mirror sites? Vensatry (ping) 18:40, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
  • No, I'm saying there is no close paraphrasing. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 01:23, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 15[edit]

List of Xbox 360 games compatible with Xbox One

  • Comment: As noted in history, some content adapted from original content added to the Xbox One article on 15 June 2015 (and before) by ViperSnake151 and others.

Created by Xeno (talk). Self-nominated at 17:04, 17 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg I don't think so; as you have noted some (most) of the text comes from the Xbox One article. It's laudable that you been upfront about it, but your reward is to have your nomination rejected for not containing enough original text (I encourage you to seek a second opinion though; I'm a renowned bitch) Belle (talk) 23:36, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
  • The content is original and (mostly) new; just not necessarily all written by me. I didn't see any reason to reinvent the wheel and have differing prose between the articles. –xenotalk 02:00, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (I meant to edit this in on the 18th but looks like I forgot to click save): I'd be happy for ViperSnake151 to have or share credit on the DYK, since he first broke the news to the parent article. –xenotalk 18:52, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Symbol confirmed.svg Go on then; I've softened over the weekend (my stance on the item's eligibility, not physically). Length OK, age OK, neutral, no copyvio etc. Hook not knicker-wettingly exciting but not the dullest one we've ever had, and it's cited. QPQ not required as far as I can make out (I'm probably wrong, but Xeno looks like a long time listener, first time caller). Sort out the credit among yourself/ves. Belle (talk) 00:14, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Symbol delete vote.svgThis would be better as a pure list, not a DYKable article. The history section is a mirror of Xbox_One#Backward_compatibility and unnecessary for a list. If I search for a list of games, I expect a list of games, not an announcement timeline and erroneous technical detail (you don't emulate a ported game). - hahnchen 23:09, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Chhilchhila Wildlife Sanctuary

5x expanded by Nvvchar (talk). Self-nominated at 13:32, 17 June 2015 (UTC).

  • The lede doesn't make sense; the hook needs work (it isn't the staging and wintering ground of all avifauna); and has nobody noticed the animated, cartoon hummingbird? Belle (talk) 23:45, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the review. Do you want me to remove the animated cartoon. I retained it from the original article. Yes, I have changed the hook to ALT1 ... that the Chhilchhila Wildlife Sanctuary has recorded 57 species of wetland birds?--Nvvchar. 14:13, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
  • It should definitely be removed unless there is a new policy to include unrelated animated cartoon birds in articles (WP:INCLUDEANIMATEDCARTOONBIRDS; there, thought not). Belle (talk) 14:54, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
  • @Belle:Removed the animated img from the infobox.--Nvvchar. 16:04, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Ekakshara Upanishad

Ekakshara Ganapti, the imperishable God

  • ... that Ekakshara is defined as one syllable or single syllable word which represents the imperishable God (pictured)?

Created by Nvvchar (talk). Self-nominated at 14:12, 15 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg The hook appears to be sourced to "How To Regrow Lost Hairs". I find it very hard to believe that this meets any conceivable definition of reliable source. – iridescent 17:20, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Reference 5 which is cited for the hook opens in my computer with this url [19]--Nvvchar. 17:49, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
  • @Iridescent: Please treat the original hook as withdrawn. Now suggesting ALT1 hook ... that Ekakshara emphasizes that the Supreme Lord is the source of life and is an avatar of the Lord in the universe responsible for its creation?--Nvvchar. 14:45, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Philip Lutgendorf

Created by Gmcssb (talk). Self-nominated at 08:54, 15 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg The prose is too short. I was able to convert the Honors section to prose, increasing prose count. However, the bulleted list does not count; currently, the prose character count is 797 (bytes). Add more prose, so the article might pass the 1,500-character minimum. George Ho (talk) 00:55, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg The article has more than 1,500 characters, so another review is needed. George Ho (talk) 21:53, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 16[edit]

Qasim al-Ahmad, Beit Wazan

Beit Wazan, 2010

  • ... that Qasim al-Ahmad of Beit Wazan (pictured) broke a siege against his men by leading a charge against the Ottoman and Touqan besiegers, personally killing at least 295 enemy fighters?

Created/expanded by Al Ameer son (talk) and Huldra (talk). Nominated by Al Ameer son (talk) at 18:41, 23 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Article new enough, long enough, and adequately cited. Hook short enough, interesting enough, and also cited. Prefer the original hook. Article appears to be neutral and free of copyright violations and plagiarism. Cheers!♦ Dr. Blofeld 05:57, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
    • Symbol possible vote.svg I have returned this from prep 4 as the hook statement about personally killing 295 enemy is clearly an extraordinary claim that moreover is not supported in the article, which employs the caveat "according to local accounts". The hook will need to be revised or a new hook found. Gatoclass (talk) 19:39, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
      • @Gatoclass: How about with the caveat in the hook which I just added? --Al Ameer (talk) 00:07, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
Quite honestly, even the word "accounts" looks like an overstatement to me. I think "folklore" would probably be a more appropriate word, ie, "according to local folklore". But the hook is also a bit long with the added phrase and could use some trimming. Gatoclass (talk) 07:41, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
On reflection, maybe we should just go with Alt1. It's a decent hook and more informative anyway. Gatoclass (talk) 07:46, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
        • Note: I've struck the original hook, and put Al Ameer son's modifications to it as ALT2. Especially when a hook has been promoted and then reverted, it's important to see the original and the modification on this page so we know what has happened. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:59, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
          • Comment: I support using ALT1. Macalister & Masterman (the origin of the "295 enemy fighters killed") basically reported what they had heard; the problem is that such reports about local heroes have universally tended to become exaggerated. And how many people a person has killed in the heath of a battle would be unverifiable virtually anytime. Huldra (talk) 19:28, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Maputeoa, Rikitea, St. Michael's Cathedral, Rikitea


Created by Dr. Blofeld (talk), Nvvchar (talk), Rosiestep (talk), and KAVEBEAR (talk). Nominated by Rosiestep (talk) at 02:30, 23 June 2015 (UTC).

Day for night

  • Reviewed: Eugene Vielle
  • Comment: DYKcheck doesn't detect this as 5x expanded, but you can manually compare the character count it gives for the article now vs June 13.

5x expanded by Difference engine (talk) and Jim Stinson (talk). Nominated by Difference engine (talk) at 01:52, 20 June 2015 (UTC).

Smart Sheriff

Created by Piotrus (talk). Self-nominated at 06:57, 17 June 2015 (UTC).

  • To avoid the problems of "unspecified Korea", "app repetition" "multiple hyphens" and "nasty advertising jargon", I present this hardly altered:
ALT1: ... that, in South Korea, introduction of Smart Sheriff, the world's first government-mandated parental monitoring app, has raised concerns over spyware and Internet privacy? Belle (talk) 17:04, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
ALT2: ... that the introduction of Smart Sheriff in South Korea, the world's first government-mandated parental monitoring app, has raised concerns over spyware and Internet privacy?
  • Symbol question.svg The article is long enough, and new enough. There is referencing throughout. QPQ done. Correct person credited. One problem is that it is non-neutral, exclusively presenting a point of view opposed to this App. The hooks themselves are neutral enough. ALT2 is probably the most suitable given above. Now about the hook. It is referenced, but the BBC reference nowhere calls this invasion of privacy. The register and Techworm do substantiate the claim of calling it spyware. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:58, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
    • @Graeme Bartlett: I have backed the privacy concern claim with 2 more refs in text. Is this satisfactory now? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:32, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
      • Symbol question.svg Yes that addresses the hook support concerns. That just leave the POV issue to deal with. Currently there is only half a sentence that could be considered to be in favour of this, and a couple of paragraphs against. Surely the government or some of its supporters have something to say in support of the APP? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 14:06, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Jeff Seidel

Created by Yoninah (talk). Self-nominated at 00:27, 17 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Nice. Length of article, date of posting and hook reference conform to DYK rules. No copy vio noted. Good to go.--Nvvchar. 13:42, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Lalique, Wingen-sur-Moder

5x expanded by AHeneen (talk). Self-nominated at 21:25, 16 June 2015 (UTC).

The World Before the Flood

The World Before the Flood (detail)

  • ... that The World Before the Flood (detail pictured) was described on its initial exhibition as a "deadly sin against good taste"?

Created by Iridescent (talk). Self-nominated at 20:03, 16 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol voting keep.svg The article is new (created on 16th June 2015) and long enough. It is neutral and refers to sources with inline citations. The article is clearly ready for a GAN. Hook fact is accurate and cited with an inline citation in the article. Borsoka (talk) 02:53, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 17[edit]

Anoplius viaticus

Created by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self-nominated at 08:40, 21 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg New enough, long enough, within policy. No apparent close-paraphrasing. Img is from Commons. QPQ done. One issue: @Cwmhiraeth: I love the hook, but which ref verifies it? Please ping me. --Rosiestep (talk) 03:02, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
@Rosiestep: The behaviour is referenced to #4 and #5. I could provide a reference for every individual sentence in the second paragraph of the Biology section, but that would look a bit silly. Which of the words in the hook do you have a problem with? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 04:59, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
@Cwmhiraeth: I didn't suggest a ref for every individual sentence, nor did I say I had a problem with any of the words in the hook... I said I loved the hook. :) I was thinking that an inline citation after either of these sentences, (a) "The female catches spiders which are then buried in burrows where they provide food for its developing offspring." or (b) "The females capture spiders to provide their offspring with food." would be helpful. As I didn't find one, I asked about it here. It doesn't appear to me that ref4 or ref5 mention offspring feeding on the paralyzed spider, or am I just missing it? --Rosiestep (talk) 13:42, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
OK, I am with you now. I have added some extra information about the larva feeding on the spider, plus a suitable reference. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:47, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Wim van Norden

Created by Crispulop (talk). Self-nominated at 10:26, 20 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Article was created within the time limit and at 6K of prose is long enough. Nothing important showing up on the copyvio detector. The hook is cited to an obituary in Het Parool and although my Dutch is a little elementary it does suggest he never made a conscious decision to join the resistance but fell into it as part of his journalism work. Maybe adding "conscious" to the hook would be better - it's a nice juxtaposition, but if you read the article it suggests he was heavily involved with the resistance press. Also, I've done a few copyedits. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:36, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Thank you for the copyedits Ritchie333. I had originally considered adding something as "conscious" to the hook, but I thought that it would make the hook more "logical" for readers and thus somewhat less interesting. Feel free to change it if you like. Crispulop (talk) 22:22, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
  • I think I'll leave that as an exercise for the prep / queue builders. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:08, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Jan-Erik Olsson

  • ... that both the culprit and all the victims of the robbery which coined the term "Stockholm syndrom" survived the robbery?

Created by Josve05a (talk). Self-nominated at 08:26, 19 June 2015 (UTC).

AVI Records

  • ... that AVI Records was the second record label to use expanded grooves, after Motown?

Created by 78.26 (talk). Self-nominated at 15:58, 18 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Hook seemed good and short. The article is new enough, long enough, zero close paraphrase. Can anyone source the introduction section? Wikigyt@lk to M£ 13:12, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Usually the leads aren't cited, as they summarize the information found in the article body. I believe it does so, but that doesn't mean not I'm missing something. Which claim in the lede are you concerned about? 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 13:27, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
I'm not saying it's mandatory and the sourcing might not be necessary but I will keep this open for further review. Wikigyt@lk to M£ 16:19, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
See WP:LEAD, "Apart from trivial basic facts, significant information should not appear in the lead if it is not covered in the remainder of the article". Accordingly, the lead should not normally contain any citations. Edwardx (talk) 16:20, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Barbu Lăzăreanu

Created by Biruitorul (talk). Self-nominated at 14:56, 18 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Just as a quick note: the first hook option is technically correct, only somewhat anachronistic: (as is becoming apparent from the detail added since,) BL edited the anti-monarchy texts as a collection only after the war, though he presumably also edited some of them in the 1920s. Does the hook still work with that info, or can it be tweaked? Thanks. Dahn (talk) 10:18, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Romney Classical Institute

West Virginia Schools for the Deaf and Blind

ALT1: ... that Romney Classical Institute counted a West Virginia governor, a state senator, and a Presbyterian minister among its principals?

Moved to mainspace by West Virginian (talk). Self-nominated at 02:12, 18 June 2015 (UTC).

  • I'd also like to submit the following image as an alternative hook image for this DYK nomination:

West Virginia Schools for the Deaf and Blind -- West Virginian (talk) 02:20, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Jashodaben Narendrabhai Modi

Created by Bluerasberry (talk). Self-nominated at 12:09, 17 June 2015 (UTC).

Meteorite (song)

Created by Calvin999 (talk). Self-nominated at 17:34, 17 June 2015 (UTC).

Tallulah (film)

  • ... that Sian Heder had written the script for Tallulah by 2006, but the film only began shooting this June?

Created by 97198 (talk). Self-nominated at 12:50, 17 June 2015 (UTC).

Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Wildlands

Created by AdrianGamer (talk). Self-nominated at 10:13, 19 June 2015 (UTC).

  • The hooks are interesting and of the required length, and are suitably referenced; I prefer the main hook. QPQ not required (this is the fourth nomination for this user). The article is well-written, neutral, meets the required length, and has suitable references. Article was created on 17 June 2015, within seven days of this nomination (19 June). So, with that:
Symbol confirmed.svg We're good to go! Really great work with this, especially considering how recently the game was actually announced. -- Rhain1999 (talk to me) 01:00, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
I've struck ALT1 as it is no good: it says that the game is the first to return to a modern-day setting since Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter which isn't true. What it should say (according to the article; I have no knowledge of Tom Clancy or his ability to reconnoitre ghosts) is that the game is the first since the original Ghost Recon not to use a futuristic setting, though having a quick look through the Ghost Recon articles this doesn't seem to be true either:Advanced Warfighter 2 released in 2007 and set in 2014 is set in the (then) near future like its predecessor and the gap between the release date and the date of the setting (about 7 years) is the same as all the preceding games (two minutes reading a probably wrong article and I think I'm an expert). Belle (talk) 09:16, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg Restoring tick for main hook. -- Rhain1999 (talk to me) 15:30, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 18[edit]


Space-filling model of the difluorophosphate anion

Moved to mainspace by Graeme Bartlett (talk). Self-nominated at 08:32, 27 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg New enough and long enough. Article content is original. QPQ present. My only concern is that the sentence with the hook does not have an inline citation in it — which is a shame, as I certainly see the resemblance to perchlorates. Fix that minor error and you should be good to go. Raymie (tc) 03:21, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

United News of India

  • ALT1:... that the news agency United News of India had to use the rusted disused teleprinters of United Press of India after its formation?
  • ALT2:... that United News of India is the first and only news agency in the world to supply news in Urdu on the teleprinter?
  • Reviewed: No. This is my first nomination for DYK and I have less than 5 DYK credits, so may be exempted from review at this moment. I will try to review as I will learn about the same.
  • Comment: Source of the facts are placed in the references.

Created by Logical1004 (talk). Self-nominated at 21:03, 20 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Comment The first hook is very interesting and is the one that I would prefer used. So much of India's history has been molded by the emergency and Wikipedia's coverage of it is not good. This is a nice article. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:14, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church

The steeple of Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, South Carolina

Created by ParkerHiggins (talk), Dreamyshade (talk), BrillLyle (talk), and Raymie (talk). Nominated by Raymie (talk) at 07:50, 20 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svgThis article is plenty big enough, correct people credited, and new enough. The article is referenced throughout. Mostly appears to be neutrally written. However there is a mention of a white supremacist burning the church, but I see no support of that in the references. Also the bit about the Confederate Home seems to be irrelevant to this article. For the main hook it is just short enough, in the article, referenced and supported by references. alt1 is unconfirmable by me so I will not confirm if it is confirmed. Picture is free, and also confirmed on Flickr. QPQ was done. Several spot checks show no copyright infringement. Good to go with original hook. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:13, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Robert Dirks

Moved to mainspace by Daniel Case (talk) and Antony-22 (talk). Nominated by Daniel Case (talk) at 04:56, 20 June 2015 (UTC).

Lagetta lagetto

Specimens of Lagetta lagetto, the lacebark tree, together with a sample of lacebark cloth and a whip made using lacebark. Plate IV from William Hooker's Journal of Botany and Kew Garden Miscellany, vol. II, 1850.

  • ... that producing a lacelike fabric from the inner bark of the rare Caribbean lacebark tree is now almost a lost art?
  • ALT1:... that the inner bark of the rare Caribbean lacebark tree is a fine, lacelike netting that has been used for centuries to make clothing, including a dress for Queen Victoria?
  • Comment: Am nominating this article because lacebark is so unusual and seems to be little known among the plants that have been used to produce textiles and clothing.
  • update: altered main hook to focus on the lost art rather than the unusual fabric itself.

5x expanded by Alafarge (talk). Self-nominated at 22:49, 18 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svgno QPQ done as of yet, also a couple instances of very close paraphrasing/the same phrases used, possibly running afoul of policy.--Kevmin § 21:18, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Imperium (Kracht novel)

Created by Smetanahue (talk). Self-nominated at 13:12, 18 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svgThe article was created on the day of the nomination, long enough and within policy. However, it is not within policy since the plot section is unreferenced. The hook has fewer than 200 characters, interesting and neutral but is not cited with sources. QPQ check is currently unavailable due to the tool not working. Vincent60030 (talk) 18:23, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
Plot sections generally don't need references, as the work itself is assumed to be the source. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction#Plot summaries, second to last paragraph. The hook is cited in the section about the political reaction, although it's been jumbled a bit now, I'll try to make it more clear. Smetanahue (talk) 13:25, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
  • It is true that plot sections generally don't need references for the reason given, though if aspects are open to interpretation, then it's best to cite those, since in that case the interpretation used should be from a reliable source. Plots should still be written in encyclopedic prose—"pigeons Engelhardt of his financial assets" is not, and is especially confusing given that Engelhardt somehow gains ownership of an entire island in the next sentence. Since the hook hangs on it, I have to say that "spreading racism" and "transmitting a 'racist worldview' " do not strike me as equivalent. The quote in the latter should be referenced by the end of the sentence in which it appears, as indeed should each quote, even within the same paragraph. (Multi-sentence quotes should be cited right after the quote's end.) I have adjusted all the long quotes (in the review section) so that they are blockquotes per the manual of style (see WP:Blockquote). On another front, I'm a bit worried about the WP:BLP implications: even though the novel is being "accused of spreading racism", that effectively accuses the author, and since this is one reviewer, who was counteraccused of dishonesty(!) by 17 signatories, if I'm reading this right (also a potential BLP issue), it may be ultimately overweighting his opinion. Finally, I see four previous DYKs, in 2011 and 2012. This will be the fifth DYK, and therefore will not need a quid pro quo review, though any future nominations will require a QPQ. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:56, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
Posted an alternative hook. Reworded "pigeons". Clarified that the island is bought on credit. I don't see a BLP problem since it's the summary of a public debate, and all accusations are attributed. Smetanahue (talk) 16:41, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, Smetanahue. One thing: the "racist worldview" quote must, as noted above, be cited no later than the end of the sentence in which it occurs, and this applies to the intro of the article in addition to the body (quoted material is one exception to the general rule of omitting inline citations for the intro section if the material also appears in the body and is cited there). This is not only a DYK requirement, but a MOS rule as well. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:54, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
OK, fixed. Smetanahue (talk) 17:03, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Third opinion here: so long as we're clear that it was just an accusation, I don't think there's a BLP issue. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:19, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Thanks, Chris. Vincent60030, I think you can finish the review now. I've struck the original hook; ALT1 remains in play. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:37, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Vincent60030, at this stage you can approve the hook if the nomination passes the criteria (which would mean adding the appropriate tick below), but as reviewer that's as far as you should go—it's what I meant by "finish the review". The actual promotion to prep needs to be by someone other than the reviewer or nominator—among other things, it means that another editor gets to check the approved nomination as part of the promotion, just to make sure nothing was overlooked. BlueMoonset (talk) 13:50, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Victoria Price

Created by Rjmail (talk). Self-nominated at 14:16, 18 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg The article is new and long enough, submitted within the time limit. The hook is short, simple and straight to the point. The point of the hook can be easily found in both sources. The user appears to only have one DYK article before this, so there's no need for QPC. My only comment is that in the first paragraph of Selected Publications, it would be better if you can put the ISBN code as a reference instead of putting it in the same sentence. Perhaps you can add references that indicate the book was released in 1999 and re-released in 2014 too.
  • Thank you, I've made your suggested changes. Rjmail (talk) 16:02, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg I made small edits yesterday to the article. I think this nomination is good to go, since the hook and the article are in great shape per my review above. SyFuelIgniteBurned 01:57, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg I've tagged the article for over-reliance on primary sources, especially the subject's own book and blog pages. The hook is also sourced to these types of sources. Please provide more reliable sources to prove notability. Yoninah (talk) 14:59, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Ok at this point out of 15 cites, 2 are her personal blog, but it is speaking of things directly relating to herself, which I believe WP:BLP allows, and I don't think DYK Hook disallows that. At the point of using those two cites, I also used one from a different source to help back things up a little more. Since the entire hook is in that different source, I could remove the personal blog ones, but I thought I would leave them in to help back up the cite to the original quote. What do you think?
  • No, the cites are fine. I just went through all the sources and reformatted the refs, so now it's clear that they are all (except Inside Social) reliable refs. Please just add a cite to the first paragraph under Personal, and we'll be ready to go. Yoninah (talk) 22:10, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Ok I have cited the pages in the Vincent Price Biography that speaks to the ancestry elements in that paragraph. Thanks again.
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Great, thanks. Restoring tick per Syfuel's review. Yoninah (talk) 23:07, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 19[edit]

The Oceanides

Jean Sibelius at the time of the composition

  • ... that in his tone poem The Oceanides, Jean Sibelius (pictured) "applied the impressionist method of scoring to the bass instruments, thereby achieving effects of sonority hitherto unknown"?
  • Reviewed: Sarah Kyolaba
  • Comment: I just discovered this beauty, - too good not to try a day late,

5x expanded by Sgvrfjs (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 10:17, 27 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol voting keep.svg This is a fivefold expansion and was nominated just in time. The hook fact comes from a quotation in the article that has an inline citation. The image is in the public domain. The article is neutral but I did not have access to the sources and could not therefore assess whether there were any copyright infringements. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:28, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Eugene Vielle

  • Reviewed: To be done

Created by Philafrenzy (talk). Self-nominated at 18:24, 26 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Long enough, new enough. The start of the sentence that discusses his posting to the Courageous is a little too close to the source text in the Telegraph article. Other than that, no other close paraphrasing issues. Hook is appropriately cited, and article has good inline citations. Needs QPQ. I think the hook is overstating things by saying that the Vielle system "led to" the cruise missile. That implies a causal relationship, which the Telegraph obit claims but doesn't elaborate on. Many people around the world were simultaneously working on systems that could be considered predecessors of the cruise missile. There either needs to be a better source, like a history of missile technology, or the claim needs to be reduced from "which led to" to something like ", an early predecessor of". --diff (talk) 00:42, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, I will take a look at it. Philafrenzy (talk) 08:18, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Hane, Marquesas Islands

Bay of Hane

Created by Dr. Blofeld (talk), Nvvchar (talk), and Rosiestep (talk). Nominated by Dr. Blofeld (talk) at 06:53, 26 June 2015 (UTC).

  • DYK checklist template
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol confirmed.svg Passes DYK checklist. Excellent article.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 09:55, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Toilet service

Silver-gilt service made in London in 1777–78 for the Swedish royal family, 26 pieces

  • ... that a toilet service of as many as 48 pieces in silver or silver-gilt for the dressing-table was a wedding present for rich women from the 17th century onwards?

Created by Johnbod (talk). Self-nominated at 03:55, 26 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Please don't link dressing-table in the hook, unless somebody starts an article that actually deals with this topic. Johnbod (talk) 04:08, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Article new enough, long enough, and adequately cited. Hook short enough, interesting enough, and also cited. Article appears to be neutral and free of copyright violations and plagiarism. Cheers!♦ Dr. Blofeld 06:47, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Girl with a Pearl Earring (soundtrack)

  • ALT1:... that Alexandre Desplat's musical score to Girl with a Pearl Earring (2003) was considered his breakthrough in Hollywood, despite it being his 50th production as composer?
  • Reviewed: Nekima Levy-Pounds
  • Comment: The alt hook is meant to be ironic, since a veteran composer like Desplat didn't really get noticed in Hollywood until Girl - alternative hooks are welcome

5x expanded by Ruby2010 (talk). Self-nominated at 01:01, 26 June 2015 (UTC).

Marcelo Odebrecht

Marcelo Odebrecht, WEF Davos, 2009

Created by Edwardx (talk). Self-nominated at 20:32, 24 June 2015 (UTC).

  • The original hook looks unverifiable, and the article doesn't say he is the third generation. I added two ALTs below:

Joseph Kaiha

Created by Dr. Blofeld (talk) and Aymatth2 (talk). Nominated by Dr. Blofeld (talk) at 08:59, 24 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol voting keep.svg Article is newly created, fully cited and over the minimum size. Citations are foreign language and taken in good faith. Miyagawa (talk) 16:41, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Sceliphron laetum

  • ... that the wasp Sceliphron laetum caches up to nine spiders in a mud cell for consumption by its developing offspring?

Created by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self-nominated at 05:31, 23 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol voting keep.svg Article new enough, long enough, fully referenced, and appropriately licensed image-wise; hook short enough, interesting enough, and cited to offline source. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 08:27, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Benjamin Franklin Baker (musician)

Created by 78.26 (talk). Self-nominated at 14:55, 22 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Good to go. A bit characterless, though. The sources have more. Johnbod (talk) 04:06, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg There should be more, to show notability. Right now it's all biography and bibliography, with 2 sentences about his style. Please expand the latter section a bit. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 00:28, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Darwin's Arch

Darwin's Arch

  • ... that Darwin's Arch (pictured) sits like a bridge on an irregularly shaped, rocky, submerged plateau, nicknamed "the theatre"?

Created by Nvvchar (talk), Rosiestep (talk), and Dr. Blofeld (talk). Nominated by Rosiestep (talk) at 01:11, 22 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Length, age, copyvio, neutrality, QPQ all that normal stuff are fine. Pic is good, either hook is OK. The only reason I haven't ticked it is that ref 2 is a blog and isn't really required except for diving recommendations which probably should be covered by submergipedia, or scubipedia or one of those Atlantaen encyclopaedias. And on a separate note let me shake my fist at you for getting in a review on experimental beer just as I was starting one; I'm not resentful though; forgive and forget that's my motto; I won't be following you around nit-picking every contribution like some sort of crazed stalker; right...where was I...contributions for Rosi....) Belle (talk) 01:44, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Belle, lol! Thanks for the review. And yes, one of us -- @Dr. Blofeld: or @Nvvchar: or I -- will deal with that blog post issue. --Rosiestep (talk) 02:47, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
  • @Belle: Removed the blog ref and associated content. --Rosiestep (talk) 02:57, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg Now practically the perfect DYK (this coffee is strong!) Belle (talk) 08:27, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Mahler on the Couch

Created by ManKevinNTU (talk) and DESiegel (talk). Nominated by DESiegel (talk) at 06:36, 20 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg New enough. Long enough. QPQ review done. NPOV. All paras cited. Hooks are good, check out with their sources and are cited. Dup detector found no close paraphrasing issues, copyright violations or plagiarism. The article could do with an infobox, cast, plot summary and some categories, although not all of those are strictly necessary for DYK. I think both hooks might benefit from the addition of "the film" before the article name. I've tweaked the hooks slightly. Edwardx (talk) 19:35, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg There is now an infobox and categories. The overall plot is clear enough from reading the other sections. Good to go. Edwardx (talk) 11:39, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • "the film" added to start of hooks as requested. DES (talk) 12:44, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Thanks. It is somewhat marginal, and there is a good case for not having it, especially in the interests of hook brevity! Edwardx (talk) 12:56, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • I don't really care either way, and added it purely at the suggestion above. Feel free to include "the film" or not, when this is used. DES (talk) 21:33, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

List of cricketers who have taken five-wicket hauls on ODI debut, Uvais Karnain

5x expanded by Vensatry (talk). Self-nominated at 18:24, 19 June 2015 (UTC).

  • @Jakec: The hook is cited in the table. Nevertheless, I've added a source in the lead too. Vensatry (ping) 07:35, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Review Comment : Article has been expanded 5X since June 19th, long enough and meets core policies and guidelines. Hook fact is accurate and cited with an inline citation in the article. QPQ done. Logical1004 (talk) 11:04, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Please don't steal a review that's still in progress unless the reviewer has abandoned the nomination. I still don't see a direct citation. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 01:23, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Sorry, didn't want to steal any review. Direct in-line citation was not there, but citation for the same was in the table, so provided a new citation in the lead section of the article. Logical1004 (talk) 06:33, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Okay. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 11:43, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 20[edit]

Calopteryx dimidiata

Created by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self-nominated at 05:55, 23 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg This article was created within seven days of its nomination, its prose is the appropriate length, and the article meets core Wikipedia policies and guidelines. The hook meets DYK formatting guidelines, and its facts are verifiable and cited with inline citations in the article. A QPQ review has also been completed. -- West Virginian (talk) 17:03, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Journey Through the Impossible

Improved to Good Article status by Lemuellio (talk). Self-nominated at 13:44, 22 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Recently promoted to GA, long enough, within policy, hook is cited and interesting, and QPQ is done. GtG. --Captain Assassin! «TCG» 09:15, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

An Invitation to the White House

5x expanded by Wasted Time R (talk). Self-nominated at 13:47, 21 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Expansion long enough (the page size of older versions is deceptive, as much of that is taken up with templates which don't count towards prose size), and hook is cited. It does seem a somewhat boring hook, but there's nothing hookier immediately apparent—this sounds like a good candidate for dullest book of all time, and there probably genuinely isn't anything unusual to say about it. Good to go. – iridescent 18:02, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

For Honor

Created by AdrianGamer (talk). Self-nominated at 03:19, 21 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Prose expanded fivefold, long enough (3235 characters), verifiable, neutral, no copyvio issues detected. The hook is cited and hooky. The hook is neutral, as it clearly attributes the phrase to a specific person identified as having worked on the game. The phrase itself is descriptive rather than promotional. Very nice work on this article. Good to go! Please note that as I am a relatively new reviewer, a second opinion would be helpful. ~ RobTalk 10:22, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg The article does not describe the game as "hack and slash", but as "melee fighting game". If you use the latter term, it needs an inline cite. Yoninah (talk) 22:53, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • The article previously detailed it as a hack and slash when I reviewed this, and it appears an IP editor came in and altered it a few days back. There are other edits that prevent an undo, so the IP editors changes will need to be manually looked over and partially (or fully) reverted. ~ RobTalk 04:00, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Thanks. Hook ref verified and cited inline. Rest of review per User:BU Rob13. Restoring tick. Yoninah (talk) 14:58, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Warner B. Snider

Created by Orygun (talk). Self-nominated at 00:18, 21 June 2015 (UTC).

Lummelunda Cave

Original entrance of the Lummelunda Cave

  • ... that the Lummelunda Cave (entrance pictured) is one of the longest caves in Sweden?
  • Reviewed: Conrad Meit
  • Comment: Article expanded more than 5x on 19-20 June 2015

5x expanded by W.carter (talk). Self-nominated at 18:46, 20 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol voting keep.svg Article was expanded 5x in past 5 days; article is long enough and appears to be adequately referenced (though all of the sources are in Swedish so I can’t check actual text); hook is appropriate length and Swedish language source appears to be good and is taken in good faith; photo is "own work" of Wikipedia editor Carl von Blixen, who has released it to Public Domain.--Orygun (talk) 00:12, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Just confirming that the cite for the hook is fine. Belle (talk) 12:09, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Surya Upanishad

Sun God depicted riding his chariot

Created by Nvvchar (talk). Self-nominated at 14:03, 20 June 2015 (UTC).

Spencer Wilson

Created by BU Rob13 (talk). Self-nominated at 07:19, 20 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg The page is long enough and new enough. I prefer the ALT1 hook. This is the user's 2nd DYK nomination, so the QPQ is exempt. The article is neutral and reasonably cited by reliable sources. I'd welcome other feedback, as I have not reviewed a DYK for a very long time (or maybe ever). (Aside: I think it is funny that I was looking to review a DYK after posting Curtis Manning (lacrosse) and I found another Calgary athlete.) --JamesTeterenko (talk) 21:27, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
  • As a quick comment to make sure this is clear for my future noms, this is my first nomination, not my second. I was the creator of Bryan Burnham, but it was nominated by Tavix, not myself. I assume that's where you believed I had my first nom. Feel free to correct me if you saw something else. Just reread criteria, and it's credits, not noms; you were 100% correct. Ignore that. Now that I'm looking at this again, I also prefer ALT1. Thanks for the review! ~ RobTalk 22:34, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Well, you've had 0 that got through DYK (the real criteria), this is the first nomination you have done, and the second article of yours nominated. It passes the QPQ test regardless of which one you use. So, it's all good. -- JamesTeterenko (talk) 06:31, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Music of L.A. Noire

  • ... that the music of L.A. Noire consists of original vocal recordings to suit the musical identity of its 1940s setting?

Created by Rhain1999 (talk). Self-nominated at 01:09, 20 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Article is new enough (created on June 14), long enough (5441 characters), no close paraphrasing, plenty of sources. The hook is of suitable length, interesting and is supported by sources. QPQ done. Impressive work. AdrianGamer (talk) 09:52, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 21[edit]

Unity (Star Trek: Voyager)

Improved to Good Article status by Miyagawa (talk). Self-nominated at 16:48, 26 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol voting keep.svg The article achieved Good Article status, is long enough, and never featured on the Main Page. The article uses inline citations with a "Notes" and "References" section. ALT1 and ALT2 have inline citations to offline citations, there are no dispute templates and there doesn't seem to be copyright violations. I did some minor formatting fixes of the nominations, and the hooks are short enough and neutral. QPQ has been completed.
The first hook is not referenced directly after the sentence it is featured, so it is not approved at this time. ALT1 and ALT2 are approved with offline sources accepted in good faith. If you would like another look at the first hook please ping me. Z1720 (talk) 03:10, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
@Z1720: Since it was a quick fix, I added the cite for the original hook (also to give the promoter more choice in hooks). Miyagawa (talk) 07:51, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Symbol voting keep.svgI checked the hook and it now has the correct citation. All the nominated hooks are accepted. Z1720 (talk) 15:57, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Murder of Ramona Moore

Intersection in South Blooming Grove, NY, where the body was found

5x expanded by Daniel Case (talk). Self-nominated at 17:37, 23 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Well first, I like how the title is very similar to that of another New York City murder a dozen years past. (How coincidental, right?) But anyway, let's get on to the review. Epic Genius (talk) 23:53, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Well, the article is obviously new (from a redirect) and apparently long enough. The hook is sourced, and definitely interesting, because as a certain former prosecutor said in the New York Times, “When you don't have a body, you don't have the best evidence in the crime," of course with a NYT source that quotes exactly that. After omitting the quotes from the plagiarism detector, I didn't see any plagiarism. The picture is the nominator's own and is licensed under a Creative Commons CC-SA-3.0 license, so the license is compatible. The image is at least 800x554 px wide, so no problem with that. All told, this is good to go. Epic Genius (talk) 23:53, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

  • @Daniel Case: You can also use "new" as a rationale for this DYK, because you technically created a new article (creations from redirects count as new articles). Epic Genius (talk) 23:54, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Thomas Asen Palaiologos, Matthew Palaiologos Asen

Modern appearance of the Church of Saints Peter and Paul of the Greeks in Naples, the construction of which Thomas Asen Palaiologos financed

Created by TodorBozhinov (talk) and Cplakidas (talk). Nominated by TodorBozhinov (talk) at 08:11, 23 June 2015 (UTC).

Stanisława Leszczyńska

Stanisława Leszczyńska

5x expanded by Poeticbent (talk). Self-nominated at 00:48, 23 June 2015 (UTC). Expansion began on 21 June 2015‎. Poeticbent talk 03:55, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Symbol voting keep.svg This should be GTG, although there are a few minor issues that ideally would be fixed. The article has been expanded enough to meet the criteria, and meets the baseline length requirement. It is free of copy-vios that I can find; the only duplications are at Wikipedia mirrors. It is largely neutral and well cited, but this is where I was not 100% happy; many of the sources are websites that don't throw up red flags, but are don't seem a priori reliable either. This is exacerbated by the fact that they are in Polish, making them harder to verify. I am only willing to pass this because the reliable sources back up the other ones. There was also an uncited sentence, which I removed. It could also use a more thorough copy-edit that the one I gave it. The hook is fine; interesting, short, etc. The image is supposedly PD in Poland, therefore acceptable; promoters call on using it. Oh, and Poeticbent, please put a little more effort into your QPQ next time; a two line review is not quite thorough enough. Vanamonde93 (talk) 21:34, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the QPQ review, User:Vanamonde93, much appreciated. WP:RS added. Foreign-language tick not necessary because books are in English. Btw, my own QPQ was fine; although promoted to WP:Good article I still improved on its sourcing.[20] Thanks, Poeticbent talk 00:38, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Thanks for adding the reference. In a sense you are correct, I cannot judge how much effort you put into your QPQ; what I have to go by is the text which you added to the nomination page. That, in itself, was insufficient, because it does not tell the reviewer that you have checked every one of the DYK criteria, which of course you need to do even if the article is a new GA. Regards, Vanamonde93 (talk) 01:28, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Paramahamsa Upanishad

Brahma riding his mount Hamsa (swan)

  • ... that in the Paramahamsa Upanishad Brahma (pictured riding his mount) explains that Paramahamsa carrying the staff gives him the epithet "Ekadandi", as he is a renouncer of all pleasures of the world?

Created by Nvvchar (talk). Self-nominated at 20:30, 22 June 2015 (UTC).

Boletus rubrosanguineus

Boletus rubrosanguineus mushrooms

  • Reviewed: TBA

5x expanded by Casliber (talk) and Sasata (talk). Nominated by Casliber (talk) at 14:33, 22 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Expansion and age OK; length: just squeaks in; neutral; copyvio and plagiarism: assuming OK as I can only see one source and though it sails pretty close there are only limited ways to say "blue" or "flat". Hook is fine and cited; picture is quite cute (for a fungus). Just needs the QPQ before I tick it. Belle (talk) 14:55, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
QPQ done - see Template:Did you know nominations/Breakneck Brook cheers, Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:15, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Symbol voting keep.svg Now ready (is it some Wiki mushroom policy not to mention if they are edible? Because it doesn't look that appetizing but if I was really hungry I might try one [flies to Czech Republic, picks mushroom, eats it]. AAAAaaaaacckkk or MMMMmmmmmmmmm?) Belle (talk) 08:34, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
If we find a source saying it is one way or 'tother we add...but hard finding for some...no sucker's been game enough to try.....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:03, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Any use? [21] It says Boletus rubrosanguineus is in the "Groupe toxique" (I don't suppose you need to know French to work out what that means), but I'm not sure it counts as a reliable source; it's reliable enough for me to cancel my mushroom picking holiday in Eastern Europe, but maybe not up to the standards of Wikipedia. Belle (talk) 18:05, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Gah! almost...except we know that already in that it is in a group of fungi with the poisonous Rubroboletus satanas...was nosing around on google books too....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:13, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
Satanas should give a clue about that one; then again Trompette de la mort; delicious. Belle (talk) 10:24, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
That's a red link? Somebody who knows how to do redirects please fix it to point at Craterellus cornucopioides (I might have known how to do redirects but, if so, I've forgotten) Belle (talk) 10:28, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Symbol voting keep.svg Still ready; ignore all that fungi talk above. Belle (talk) 10:28, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Enceliopsis argophylla

closeup of flowerhead of Enceliopsis argophylla

  • ... that the fragile habitat of the silver-leaf sunray (pictured) is threatened by off-road recreational vehicles?

Created by Casliber (talk). Self-nominated at 12:58, 22 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Length, date of posting and hook refrence verified and found to be in order. No copy vio noted. QPQ is done. Img is free. Good to go.--Nvvchar. 20:40, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Thomas Corbett (Shaker doctor)

  • ... that Thomas Corbett, a Shaker doctor, developed an electrostatic medical device in 1810 as a "cure" for rheumatism?

Created by Doug Coldwell (talk). Self-nominated at 19:25, 21 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Nice article. New enough, long enough, well-referenced and nicely illustrated. The hook is sourced and interesting. QPQ has been done. Good to go. Prioryman (talk) 20:49, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Puerto Baquerizo Moreno

Puerto Baquerizo Moreno

5x expanded by Nvvchar (talk), Rosiestep (talk), and Dr. Blofeld (talk). Nominated by Dr. Blofeld (talk) at 08:59, 21 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg What did I say about not stalking you? I forget. Age, length, neutrality Ok. QPQ done. No copyvio or plagiarism; hook cited. Picture OK, but doesn't really show the town and a bit dull at DYK size, up to the promoter if they want to use it (we could play "Where's Wally the Sea Lion?" with it, but he's obvious). Not a DYK deal-breaker but the climate section should be rearranged as it is messy talking about rainfall in two separate sections and swapping leading units from F to C. Belle (talk) 11:11, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Done.--Nvvchar. 15:19, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg And still good to go. Belle (talk) 11:37, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

West Branch Lackawanna River

  • ... that the West Branch Lackawanna River was referred to as Ball Creek on a 1944 USGS map, but in 1968, a USGS employee was unable to verify the usage of that variant name among locals?

Moved to mainspace by Jakec (talk). Self-nominated at 00:38, 21 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg This nomination is misfiled – it was moved to mainspace on June 14, not June 21, and should be filed under that date. But it's still within the seven days, so it's still eligible. Article is definitely long enough. Hook interesting enough, sourcing verified. Hook length at 186 characters is okay, but shouldn't USGS be spelled out as United States Geological Survey on first reference? While many U.S. readers will know what USGS is, most foreign ones won't. That would push the hook length over 2000 unless some rewording is done. Neutrality and sourcing okay and didn't detect any copyvios. QPQ was done. Couple of other points. There should be a redirect of Ball Creek to this article, since that phrase is bolded in the lead. The footnote title beginning "HARVEYS CREEK" should be switched to mixed case. Wasted Time R (talk) 12:36, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
  • @Wasted Time R: I've linked "USGS" to the United States Geological Survey. However, I think the hook would be over 200 characters if I spelled it out in full, which is why I abbreviated it. I've also made a redirect from Ball Creek to West Branch Lackawanna River. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 12:43, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Okay, good to go. I do like the hook – I never realized that name usage gets verified like that. On a separate matter one thing you could do is disambiguate a red link in List of watercourses in Western Australia, B that now points to the wrong Ball Creek. Wasted Time R (talk) 13:33, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Fiddle Lake Creek

Moved to mainspace by Jakec (talk). Self-nominated at 00:40, 21 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Long enough, new enough, within policy. Hook verified. Interesting hook. No apparent close-paraphrasing. QPQ done. GTG. --Rosiestep (talk) 02:55, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

List of tributaries of the Lackawanna River

Moved to mainspace by Jakec (talk). Self-nominated at 00:42, 21 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg I know how they feel… Size checks out, hook checks out, source checks out. I have a gut instinct there ought to be something considerably more interesting to say about a significant river system than this, but nothing obvious is jumping out at me. Good to go, although if there's anything more interesting you can find I'd strongly recommend going for that; this seems like a prime example of "Did you know…?" as "Did you care…?". – iridescent 16:07, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Ilorin Sallah Stampede

Created/expanded by Wikicology (talk). Self-nominated at 13:30, 21 June 2015 (UTC).

List of Burmese consorts

Created by Hybernator (talk). Self-nominated at 23:39, 22 June 2015 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on June 22[edit]

Cannon Hall, Hampstead

Cannon Hall, Hampstead

  • Reviewed: To be done.

Created by Philafrenzy (talk). Self-nominated at 22:44, 29 June 2015 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg It meets the time requirement (i.e. creation recently), and is neutral and cites its sources, and is long enough (i.e. around 500 words). I say that it would benefit from a picture, though. How about the one in the article? Potentially better than nothing. Note, that I would add the years in which du Maurier lived (1907-1989) just so people have some historical context. (Happy monsoon day 18:40, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, I found a good drawing which I have added. As far as I know, there are no free photographs of the building. Philafrenzy (talk) 19:20, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Added "writer" to the hook. Philafrenzy (talk) 19:31, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Lychee and Dog Meat Festival

Dog meat hot pot, Guilin, China

Created by Varmapak (talk), Edwardx (talk), Mouselmm (talk), and Philafrenzy (talk). Nominated by Edwardx (talk) at 12:36, 28 June 2015 (UTC).

David Tab Rasmussen

Created by Maky (talk). Self-nominated at 22:25, 25 June 2015 (UTC).

Symbol question.svg Interesting life, good sources. The hook is too general for my taste, unless you want to advertise the Neotropics. I would prefer something like ... in Costa Rica and Brazil, he studied the behavior of monkeys, woolly opossums, and birds - only an example, want to try? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:11, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, I know the article is not terribly exciting. I'm open to suggestions. – Maky « talk » 05:39, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Shine (Years & Years song)

  • ... that it has been suggested that the similarity between "Shine" by Years & Years and "Call the Shots" by Girls Aloud would have "inspired eight bootlegs, two compilation albums and a club night by now" had it been released in 2012?
  • Comment: If you are looking for a review to accept quickly as part of a QPQ, do not review this. It was hastily cobbled together during a spare lunch break of 30 minutes three days ago, and this fact shows. I haven't checked the hook, either, but it may be longer than 200 characters.

5x expanded by Launchballer (talk). Self-nominated at 11:22, 25 June 2015 (UTC).

Ilana Kratysh