Wikipedia talk:Did you know

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 is where the Did you know section on the main page, its policies and the featured items can be discussed. Proposals for changing how Did You Know works were being discussed at Wikipedia:Did you know/2011 reform proposals.

Is a hook focusing on an athlete's injury negative?[edit]

I recently had a hook pulled from prep (in good faith, to be clear) because the prep builder thought a hook discussing an athlete's injury was negative. If that were the case, this would greatly affect sports-related hooks. I've had multiple hooks run with almost exclusively injury-related information in the past, so this is particularly relevant to the articles I write and nominate. Do injury-related hooks for athletes qualify as "focus[ing] unduly on negative aspects of living individuals", something that should be avoided as per the DYK criteria? ~ RobTalk 12:15, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

The specific nomination is here, but I'm looking for a general consensus on injury hooks, not something specific to that single nomination. Pinging The Almightey Drill, Keilana, Victuallers who have all been involved on that nomination. ~ RobTalk 12:15, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Rob. In this case the person involved's CV was a long list of injuries, some congenital. I don't want to discuss the specific case however as I don't think that's the point here. IMO if I was writing a positive view of someone then I would put the injuries in the title - ie its about the focus. IMO "after Alfred Doe broke his foot he still won Wimbledon" is fine - but "Jim Doe has never completed a match due to either his tendons or bones breaking" isnt. I think you can mention injuries but if the focus is the injury/ies then I think this is unduly negative. Victuallers (talk) 12:29, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
This has never occurred to me as an issue previously, but now that you mention it, I'm inclined to agree with Victuallers, though I don't think it would matter much for retired sportspeople. However, I might as well take the opportunity to say that I think there have been too many sports injury-related hooks lately. The occasional unusual injury-related hook is fine, but a continuous series of them looks inappropriate to me. Gatoclass (talk) 14:18, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
I think I've run three over the past two months. This would be the fourth. Not sure if others have run as well, but I don't recall any others. Two of those three ran this past week very close together after reviews took a long time to come through on them, so that may have given the appearance of a bunch clumped together. ~ RobTalk 14:42, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
That might be the case Rob - I think I saw all four of those recent hooks. All the same, I think it's important for the sake of variety to keep looking for different angles. Gatoclass (talk) 15:45, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── The approved hook, which does mention the injury, has just been promoted to Prep 1, but I'm wondering why it says "played". Based on the information in the article, he's an active player (the lede says "is"); at least, he was still playing as of July 16, 2015, which is only a few weeks ago. I believe "plays professional Canadian football" is more accurate, and frankly more upbeat. Rob, Victuallers, Gatoclass, I'm going to make the change; let me know if you have strong objections. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:31, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

@BlueMoonset: No objections from me. I have a tendency to word everything on Wikipedia in the past tense since the project will theoretically exist forever, but since the hook only appears on the main page for less than a day, that's not an issue at DYK. ~ RobTalk 16:37, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

DYK is almost overdue[edit]

In less than two hours Did you know will need to be updated, however the next queue either has no hooks or has not been approved by an administrator. It would be much appreciated if an administrator would take the time to ensure that DYK is updated on time by following these instructions:

  1. Check the prep areas; if there are between 6-10 hooks on the page then it is probably good to go. If not move approved hooks from the suggestions page and add them and the credits as required.
  2. Once completed edit queue #5 and replace the page with the entire content from the next update
  3. Add {{DYKbotdo|~~~}} to the top of the queue and save the page

Then, when the time is right I will be able to update the template. Thanks and have a good day, DYKUpdateBot (talk) 05:08, 26 August 2015 (UTC)


My DYK Check link (that gets created from Shrubinator's script in my vector.js) in the side bar has disappeared. Has anybody else lost theirs or is it just lil ol' me? Belle (talk) 11:32, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

It's come back now; it must have just required me to post here like a helpless bimbo to make it work; thanks mediawiki, love you. Belle (talk) 11:36, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
I've noticed it doesn't work in the draft space. Could that have been the issue? ~ RobTalk 12:28, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
I didn't even know there was such a namespace until you mentioned it; I noticed that I lost some of my preferences too, so it was probably just the software picking on me; I don't care, I still say it smells. Belle (talk) 13:19, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Special date request[edit]

Template:Did you know nominations/Constitution of Saint Kitts and Nevis has been promoted to prep 1; does that mean that it's not being held for September 19, or did the promoter just not notice the date request? ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 14:02, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

ONUnicorn, it wasn't exactly a request; you just said "it might be nice" if it was held over. Do you want it held over to run on the 19th, or not? Gatoclass (talk) 14:09, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Yes. I think it would be good to hold it for the 19th. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 15:41, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Okay, I returned it to the nomination page. Gatoclass (talk) 16:21, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 16:40, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Varanasi[edit]

The hook needs to be changed for the above nomination (currently at Queue 6) as it's partially wrong: "... that the Kashi Vishwanath Temple (pictured), on the Ganges, destroyed and rebuilt several times throughout its existence, is one of the 12 Jyotirlingas Shiva temples in Varanasi?" to " ... that the Kashi Vishwanath Temple (pictured), on the Ganges, destroyed and rebuilt several times throughout its existence, is one of the 12 Jyotirlingas Shiva temples in India?" I had pointed out this error at the nomination, but forgot to strike the original hook. Thanks! Vensatry (ping) 15:18, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Your suggested alt wouldn't work because it fails to mention the nominated article. I have changed the hook to this:
Ah, missed that! Thanks, looks good now. Vensatry (ping) 16:43, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Main Page redesign[edit]

A redesign of the Main Page is underway to give it a modern look. Feedback is welcome. Please stop by and let us know what you think about the placement of the various features ("Today's featured article", "In the news", "Did you know", etc.) The Transhumanist 17:54, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

I encourage every editor interested in DYK to look at the redesign, as it places the DYK section significantly lower on the page than it currently appears. ~ RobTalk 18:05, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
I strongly recommend that the DYK section be placed directly below TFA if this proposal gets through. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 18:16, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Screwed up placement -- should I move it?[edit]

I nominated an article that received GA yesterday, but I just realized I put it under today's date. Should I move it? valereee (talk) 13:07, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

It really doesn't matter at the end of the day, but you can move it if you'd like. It would probably be reviewed faster if you move it, as it will appear higher up on the page. ~ RobTalk 13:40, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, Rob! valereee (talk) 16:15, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Oldest nominations needing DYK reviewers[edit]

The previous list has just been archived, so I've compiled a new set of the 37 oldest nominations that need reviewing. Of these, 21 are left over from last time. As of the most recent update, 99 nominations are approved, leaving 206 of 305 nominations still needing approval. Thanks to everyone who reviews these, especially those left over from June and early July.

Please remember to cross off entries as you finish reviewing them (unless you're asking for further review), even if the review was not an approval. Many thanks! BlueMoonset (talk) 01:32, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Uganda mining hook[edit]

Does this hook read as misleading to anyone else?

In reality, the article only states that the revenues increased by 48% between 1995 and 1997. The hook reads as if this is the value for the entire 90s, when the value is likely higher and certainly different than 48%. I believe this should be pulled from Prep 6 (or possibly altered in prep), but I want other opinions on this before doing that. Pinging Keilana and Thibbs, who were involved in the nomination. ~ RobTalk 15:52, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

I don't think it's misleading, but I've gone ahead and changed it to "...that between 1995 and 1997" for greater accuracy. Keilana (talk) 15:53, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
Alright, fair enough, I didn't want to make that sort of content change myself without discussion. ~ RobTalk 16:02, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
That sounds good to me as well. Thanks, both of you. -Thibbs (talk) 17:00, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Discussions about (partially) replacing DYK with "Selected Good Articles"[edit]

There have been recent discussions started about replacing DYK with a "Selected Good Articles" section, either entirely or on certain days/on a rotating basis. As that obviously affects DYK quite a bit, I encourage interested editors to take a look and participate in the discussions that stared on the GAN talk page and have continued at the talk page for an attempt to redesign the main page. ~ RobTalk 00:36, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Anniversary-related hook for next week[edit]

Since the 20th anniversary of the murder of Michael Nigg is coming up in a week, I would like to know if someone can review the nomination in time for it to run on the Main Page on September 8. (This is, somewhat thankfully for me, the last true-crime-anniversary DYK I expect to create and nominate until late October). Daniel Case (talk) 04:22, 1 September 2015 (UTC)