Template talk:Did you know

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
For instructions on how to nominate an article, see below.
"Did you know...?"
Supplementary rulesWP:DYKSG
Noms (awaiting approval)WP:DYKN
Reviewing guideWP:DYKR
Noms (approved)WP:DYKNA
Preps & QueuesT:DYK/Q
Currently on Main Page
Main Page errorsWP:ERRORS
Archive of DYKsWP:DYKA
April 1 hooksWP:DYKAPRIL
April 1 talkWT:DYKAPRIL

This page is to nominate fresh articles to appear in the "Did you know" section on the Main Page, by a "hook" (an interesting note). Nominations that have been approved are moved to a staging area, from which the articles are promoted into the Queue.


Count of DYK Hooks
Section # of Hooks # Verified
November 22 1
December 3 1 1
December 25 1
December 27 1
January 23 1
January 29 1
January 31 2
February 5 1
February 6 1
February 9 1
February 10 1 1
February 14 1
February 21 2
February 23 1
February 24 1
February 26 1
February 27 3
March 3 1
March 4 1
March 5 1
March 6 1
March 8 1
March 9 2
March 10 1
March 11 4
March 12 4
March 13 1
March 14 4 1
March 15 1
March 17 1
March 18 6 1
March 19 2
March 20 1
March 21 3 1
March 23 6
March 24 2 2
March 25 2
March 26 5 2
March 27 2
March 28 2 2
March 29 5 2
March 30 2 1
March 31 6 2
April 1 6 3
April 2 6 3
April 3 8 5
April 4 5 2
April 5 11 6
April 6 7 5
April 7 5
April 8 9 5
April 9 8 5
April 10 10 7
April 11 3 2
April 12 10 5
April 13 10 3
April 14 10 2
April 15 11 1
April 16 12 6
April 17 2 2
April 18 3 2
April 19 7 1
April 20 5 1
April 21 7 1
April 22 6 1
April 23
Total 249 84
Last updated 07:46, 23 April 2019 UTC
Current time is 07:52, 23 April 2019 UTC refresh

Instructions for nominators

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 or it became a good article (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

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.

In the current nominations section find the subsection for the date on which the article was created or on which expansion began (or, if a new Good Article, the date on which it became a GA), 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Frequently asked questions


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?

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

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

Search archived DYK nomination discussions

Instructions for other editors

How to promote an accepted hook

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

How to remove a rejected hook

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

How to move a nomination subpage to a new name

  • 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

Articles created/expanded on November 22

Joe Kryczka, Andrey Starovoytov, Hotel International Prague, Bunny Ahearne, Fred Page

A place in Prague
A place in Prague
  • ... that Justice Joe and a Russian referee met at a place in Prague (pictured) and agreed to a Cold War on ice, approved by a Bunny and a Page?
    Source 1:The Globe and Mail article which mentions the four signatories on the document, and it taking place in Prague on April 18, 1972.
    Source 2: Specifically mentions the Hotel Internation Prague as the location, and confirms the four men and date.
    Houston, William; Shoalts, David (1993). Eagleson: The Fall of a Hockey Czar. Whitby, Ontario: McGraw-Hill Ryerson Ltd. pp. 76–77. ISBN 0-07-551706-X.

Created/expanded by Flibirigit (talk). Self-nominated at 18:36, 29 November 2018 (UTC).

  • Starting this review now. Will probably do it in bits & pieces.
  • ☑Y Joe Kryczka is long enough (27,000 characters), nominated just in time (created on 22 November, nominated on 29 November), and article is within policy.
  • ☑Y Andrey Starovoytov is long enough (3341 characters), nominated in time (created 24 November, nominated on 29 November), and article is within policy. Article is well-sourced and glad to see the unsourced content from the Russian article has been left on the talkpage rather than included in this article.
  • ☑Y Bunny Ahearne has been expanded enough (from 831 characters to 6200 characters, which is more than 5x), nominated in time (expanded on 28 November, nominated on 29 November), and article is within policy. Bunny appears to be his common name and so the correct article title, as I've noted in the article.
  • Question? On Hotel International Prague, three of the six sources don't seem to be independent reliable sources. [1] is a primary source, [2] and [3] are tourist sites. As such, much of the text isn't source by reliable sources. Please can you find better sources?
  • ☑Y Fred Page has been expanded enough (688 characters to 7293 characters is well over 5x), nominated in time (expanded on 29 November and nominated on same day), and article is within policy.
  • ☑Y Hook is short enough, interesting and quirky enough for April Fool's hook (or failing that, the "quirky" last slot of a normal set). The connection between articles and the Summit Series is mentioned in all five articles, and the hook is supported by [4].
  • ☑Y 5 QPQs done, as required to nominate 5 articles.
  • ☑Y Image is freely licenced, in Hotel International Prague and Joe Kryczka articles, and looks fine at 100px.
  • Symbol question.svg Hotel International Prague needs more reliable sources, no other issues. Joseph2302 (talk) 21:14, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
@Joseph2302: I did find one other usable source here for the hotel. A google search for the hotel is inherently difficult as almost all hits are for tourism sites. I will try to see if I can independently source the Czech cultural status from another site. Having said that, removing those three sources as citations still leaves almost everything else sourced. The questions then are a "four star rating" which is a tourist term would only come from a tourist web site, and the amenities. How do you feel about listing the number of rooms and conference capacity from a tourist site? Flibirigit (talk) 21:19, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
@Joseph2302: I found the Czech cultural status from a Czech web site. I also added in the Mark Baker interview here. I have also rearranged the amenities section. It includes one citation from a tourist web site to say that it is a four star hotel, and one primary source to say the hotel has 278 rooms and the conference centre. It's the best arrangement I could find, unless the entire amenities section is removed. That would also mean removing the number of rooms from the infobox. What are your thoughts? Flibirigit (talk) 22:35, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
  • ☑Y Seems fine to me for amenities section to be referenced to primary sources or tourist sites, as this is likely the only place to find them. Rest of article is sourced with reliable sources, article is clearly long enough, nominated in time, and within policy.
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Overall, this nomination now passes, as issues on the one article have been resolved. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:20, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

I am proposing new hooks below to run as a special occasion on April 18, instead of the April Fool's Day hook above. Thanks. Flibirigit (talk) 23:32, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Hotel International Prague
Hotel International Prague

So Flibirigit, you are saying you don't want this to run as an April fool's hook anymore? Gatoclass (talk) 02:24, 27 March 2019 (UTC).

Correct. Thank you for considering the alternate hooks. Flibirigit (talk) 17:44, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg approving new hook as it's well sourced, and in the articles (the April 18 date is mentioned explicitly on one article, which is enough). Joseph2302 (talk) 17:54, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Returned from prep per nominator's request. One or more new, hooky hooks are needed. Yoninah (talk) 22:06, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
Adding here suggested separate hooks for the Hotel and for the people (copied from WT:DYK); @Flibirigit and Joseph2302: would you be fine with this separation, or would either or both of you prefer a variation of ALT2?
Hotel hooks:
ALT3 ... that the 1972 Summit Series, a series of ice hockey games between Soviet and Canadian players, was agreed upon at the Hotel International Prague (pictured)?
ALT4 ... that the 1972 Summit Series, the first international ice hockey games played between players from the Soviet Union and Canada, was agreed upon at the Hotel International Prague (pictured)?
People hooks:
ALT5... that Joe Kryczka, Andrey Starovoytov, Bunny Ahearne, and Fred Page approved the agreement that led to the first international ice hockey games between Soviet and Canadian players?
Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:27, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

I asked for this nomination to be returned from the prep sets because I feel the best course of action is to split it up into five separate hooks. I will start suggesting hooks tomorrow or Tuesday. I need some rest as real life has been very busy lately. Thank you for your patience and understanding. Flibirigit (talk) 02:48, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

I have begun to suggest hooks below. I hope to have some suggested for each article within a couple days. Please note, I am very busy in real life, and may not respond quickly this week. Thank you again for your patience and understanding. Flibirigit (talk) 18:41, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
Hotel International Prague
Symbol question.svg Already reviewed by Joseph, but will be leaving comments here for the hooks itself. ALT6 and ALT7 are mentioned in the article text and are verified. ALT8 is interesting as well, but the article doesn't seem to mention that it's the tallest building in Prague, and indeed List of tallest buildings in Prague seems to contradict it. I actually had a preference for a hook combining ALT7 and ALT8, but since ALT8 seems inaccurate, I would instead give a preference for ALT 6 or 7 (or possibly a hook combining the two). @Flibirigit: This will be good to go once my concerns are addressed. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 06:35, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
I have struck ALT8, and suggested ALT6a and ALT7a.Flibirigit (talk) 15:32, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Andrey Starovoytov
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Reviewer needed to check hooks. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:24, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Approving hook ALT9 as the more impressive of the two (especially his role in the Summit Series). -Bryanrutherford0 (talk) 14:35, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Bunny Ahearne
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Symbol confirmed.svg Joseph has already reviewed the article itself, so only reviewing the hooks here. Both hooks are interesting, but I think ALT12 would appeal better even to non-ice hockey fans. One possible suggestion I have is to possibly mention that he was a travel agent, though this is optional. Approving ALT12. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 06:35, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • ALT12 promoted to Prep 6. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:42, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Joe Kryczka
  • Comment: Please consider a special occasion request for his birthdate on June 4, since the April 18 suggestion failed. Flibirigit (talk) 14:55, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Reviewer needed to check hooks. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:24, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Approving hook ALT13 as the more impressive of the two. -Bryanrutherford0 (talk) 14:35, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Fred Page

I will propose hooks shortly for Fred Page, as I am actively working on some additions to the article. Flibirigit (talk) 21:17, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

General discussion

Symbol question.svg Will be claiming Hotel International and Bunny for review, with a tentative preference for ALT8 and ALT12 for the Hotel and Bunny respectively. Another option could be to be to combine ALT7 and ALT8 into something like:

ALT15 ... that the Hotel International (pictured), the tallest building in Prague and a Czech cultural monument, was built to strengthen ties with the Soviet Union?

Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 17:05, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Striking as it appears that the hook is inaccurate. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 06:35, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
The nomination was split up into headers for the sake of organization, and the ability to close certain sections as hooks are promoted. Do you mind splitting up questions into the appropriate sections? Joseph2302, are you interested in continuing a review on these? Flibirigit (talk) 18:56, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
  • I'm on a Wikibreak so not going to rereview these. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:06, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
No problem, Joseph. Thanks for the update. Flibirigit (talk) 19:48, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  •  Done Bunny and Hotel have been reviewed. As I'm currently busy with other matters, I won't have time to review all articles, and will thus leave them to another editor. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 06:35, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Reviewers needed to check hooks for the Andrey Starovoytov and Joe Kryczka nominations. Prep builder needed (pinging Cwmhiraeth and Yoninah) to consider the Bunny Ahearne nom for readiness; please hat individual article section when promoting instead of closing this template; this template needs to stay open until the fifth and final article nomination has been approved and promoted. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:24, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • ALT12 (Bunny Ahearne) promoted to Prep 6. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:42, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 25

Crowd control in Jammu and Kashmir

A J&K policeman holding a pellet gun during a violent clash
A J&K policeman holding a pellet gun during a violent clash

** ALT1:... that ...security forces in India also use slingshots for crowd control in Jammu and Kashmir? Source: The Central Reserve Police Force uses a variety of weapons, including pellet guns, tear gas, and slingshots that hurl stones when glass marbles aren’t available. National Geographic

Source: "The army has recommended replacing pellet guns used by paramilitary forces and state police for crowd control in Kashmir with less lethal weapons such as sound cannons, pepper shotguns and chilli grenades." Hindustan Times
  • Comment: image is entirely optional, only text DYK or text+Image DYK can also be considered. ALT2 if approved would need a different image 2

Created by DiplomatTesterMan (talk), DBigXray (talk), and Kautilya3 (talk). Nominated by DBigXray (talk) at 18:30, 30 December 2018 (UTC).

QPQ: None required.

Overall: Symbol confirmed.svg Everything looks great. Can you pick a hook and image should I can approve it? All hooks should work, and both images do as well. DannyS712 (talk) 22:58, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

DannyS712 test, thanks a lot for your kind comment and review. we did a quick poll among ourselves, we feel that ALT0 is the best among the three along with pic 1, please proceed with ALT0. DBigXray 04:52, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
Also notify User:DannyS712 DBigXray 05:31, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
@DBigXray: thanks. The test sig was a mistake, the real reviewer is this account. I'll pass this now.
Thank you User:DannyS712. I made a minor correction in the caption above. regards. DBigXray 13:35, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
@DBigXray: still Symbol confirmed.svg passes --DannyS712 (talk) 17:16, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Put this on hold, please. Unless I manage to read the entirety and (possibly) get over my initial feelings of slapping a POV tag. If you see no editorial efforts of mine within the next 48 hrs. at the article, feel free to proceed. WBGconverse 13:09, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
  • @DannyS712:--This's is a blatant POV piece; manifested as an highly effective praise of the Indian machinery. The author has been careful in weeding out any source (of which there is an abundance) that criticizes the methods.
That I'm not involved with the article/ broader area in any editorial manner (and nether with the author in any manner), I don't see any reason to not perform a second-review.
This's a solid ☒N decline from me on grounds of Rule 4 (NPOV). WBGconverse 14:16, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
Hi User:Winged Blades of Godric thanks for sharing your opinion on the article. The article authored by DiplomatTesterMan as it stands right now covers all aspect of the crowd control in J&K and covers the victims from both sides. This article has recently been created so it does "not" need to pass a GA criteria for being able to pass the DYK nomination stage. That said there is always some room for improvement everywhere, even in a GA/ FA article. So lets contribute collaboratively. If you can elaborate your specific problems with the article on the article talk page and your suggestions on how it can be addressed we all can see what more can be done to improve this article. regardsDBigXray 15:15, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
@Winged Blades of Godric: I'll re-read the article. I'm sorry I didn't catch this when doing my review --DannyS712 (talk) 16:41, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
DannyS712 it would be very helpful for the article if after your review you can also share (here or on article talk) your suggestions to improve if you find any "major" issues. regards DBigXray 16:46, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
@DannyS712: The article mentions in the lead the number of protestors killed in 2018 - "51 rioters being killed during clashes and 37 rioters being killed during encounters". The article mentions how over 100 protestors were killed in police firing in 2010. The article mentions how "thousands of people in Jammu and Kashmir have suffered pellet wounds, hundreds have eye-injuries, and at least 14 people have died due to their pellet injuries." The article also talks about "One of the youngest pellet guns victims is a 19 month old child, Heeba Jan, who suffered injuries in 2018. Another young person to suffer from pellet injuries is Insha Malik (Insha Ahmed), who was left blind as a result of her injuries." The article also mentions pellet guns are criticised. The article also mentions how tear gas shells have killed people. It also says how curfews have been held for long periods... Winged Blades of Godric is inaccurate according to me in saying that this is NPOV. I would request someone else to go through it, or even better..... expand it so the NPOV is sorted and we can get over with this, rather than say that this is a highly effective praise of the Indian machinery which should be meaningless here... I also think Winged Blades of Godric is throwing his own highly effective propaganda around if they can't help improve the article despite clearly knowing its faults and saying they are uninvolved despite "trying" to touch it up.
@DannyS712: Even after this if you think it is NPOV should I create an entirely new section in the article called "Criticism" and stuff it with criticism of the methods of India dating all the way back to 1947, about the horrendousness of Indian crowd control methods and how severely inhumane and barbaric they are... that is according to the sources Winged Blades is probably talking about? DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 06:06, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
p.s. Wikipedia:Sarcasm is really helpful... DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 06:42, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Without an explanation from WBG about what specifically they object to, and given that, having re-read this, I believe it to be NPOV, this review is still a Symbol confirmed.svg pass from me. --DannyS712 (talk) 22:30, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Symbol delete vote.svg The page itself is misleading by its name. There is no mention of neutral sources like local newspapers, UNHRC or any representative report of other countries. The page should be renamed as Kashmir Uprising and content included from those hundreds of neutral sources out there and can anyone explain how can be a 19 month old child as a rioter?  MehrajMir (talk) 16:43, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
@Mehrajmir13: in that case, I'm going to recuse myself from this DYK, and ask for another reviewer: Symbol redirect vote 4.svg --DannyS712 (talk) 16:55, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Mehrajmir13 I note that you are having an ongoing content dispute with me at [9] another article and you have followed me here. Per WP:BATTLE you should not really be using these DYK nominations as battle grounds to attack editors you are having content disputes with. The language used in your comment clearly shows that you are at an impasse.
  • There is nothing misleading about the article title, it has a specific scope and the article covers its scope quite well.
  • Your suggestion to rename this as "Kashmir Uprising" is entirely frivolous because that article on that topic already exists at 2016–17 Kashmir unrest.
  • After your comment I have included the UNCHR report from a local Kashmiri newspaper. I note that the article already includes criticism from notable organisations such as Amnesty International. DBigXray 22:40, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
Mehrajmir13, that is unfortunately not a productive comment. You very well know that Crowd control in Kashmir and Kashmir uprising can never be the same article. If you would like an article on the latter, you are free to create one. As far as this article is concerned, if you are able to make any suggestions for improvements, either before or after DYK, I am sure DBigXray will take them on board and I will be happy to help to the extent I can. The current sources include the New York Times, Washington Post, BBC and Reuters. They are from "third countries" as far as I am aware. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 23:47, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
  • I do not think that the renaming that is suggested in the link above will occur and I have commented the same on the talk page WP:BOLD. The other points raised related to the sources cited can be addressed accordingly, and do not have anything to with this DYK as far as I can tell now since Winged Blades doubts have also been addressed as far as I can tell since there in no reply from his side here above. I request this DYK to continue for now unless no one has any other page rename suggestions, and inclusion of sources which haven't been used, can carry on. Again I repeat, as far as the DYK issue is concerned, I think it can proceed as normal. Regards. DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 15:31, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
  • You don't have to be "WP:BOLD" to reply on talk page. Fact that you are completely misunderstanding the concerns and throwing a bunch of personal attacks as per your talk page comments,[10] it only means that that the issue has not resolved. A simple concern, that you are still not understanding, is that this is not a normal crowd but protesters, and this issue doesn't concerns entire Jammu and Kashmir but only Kashmir Valley. The problem is not just with the title but article itself.  MehrajMir (talk) 16:21, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Mehrajmir13 you are acting naive now. Crowd control is the standard phrase used internationally, if you arent aware of the standard terms then knowledge is just a quick google search away, ("crowd control"+"kashmir") which turns up a large number of reliable sources that are using this term.
  • DiplomatTesterMan (You do not have to respond to Mehrajmir) let's wait for a neutral DYK reviewer to come along and review this, as I already noted above, Mehrajmir13 has followed my contributions to reach this DYK and to continue his content dispute with me. The points he has raised are clearly frivolous WP:IDONTLIKEIT kind of stalling tactics. DBigXray 16:41, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
  • I watched this DYK since it is concerns one of the area where I frequently contribute and I am a long term contributor to DYKs in general, having nearly 3 times more edits to DYK space than you.
  • You should refrain from any more personal attacks now. Your "standard terms" show nothing compared to what we see after searching "protestors"+"kashmir"+"pellet" on Google. Indeed, reliable sources like Amnesty, BBC[11][12], DNA India, The Hindu and many others make no mention of "crowd" but talk about "protestors".  MehrajMir (talk) 16:00, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Oh Congratulations to you, that you have 3 times more edits than me on DYK, unfortunately I am not interested in comparing dick sizes or DYK edit counts. You have already confessed above that you are going through my contribution, which is how you found that you have "three times more edits on DYK than me". I would advise you not to follow my contribution history anymore. On the next instance of your hounding I will seek admin actions to prevent this.
  • The comments by Mehrajmir13 (who seems to be here only to stall the DYK and get rid of the article) have already been replied to both here and on the talk page. WBG has also warned him against this behavior [13]. The consensus on the talk page is to continue with the current title and article, there is absolutely no consensus for any kind of merge or rename. DBigXray 11:46, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
  • I note here, that I will wait for comments from a new DYK reviewer, so that this DYK page does not become another WP:BATTLEGROUND.DBigXray 11:46, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg New reviewer needed, as noted above. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:53, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Simple requests: who, what, where and why? I made a few edits but have already been reverted: one to explain that the region belongs to India, and to explain who is using these weapons. I am not interested in an edit war, only in resolving this nomination. I understand that the 2016–17 Kashmir unrest is WP:TOOBIG otherwise this clearly belongs there because every date cited is from that period.
  • Can the background section or lead please summarize why conflict is necessary?
  • Can the hook please say that Indian security forces are using these weapons?

-SusanLesch (talk) 15:47, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

  • SusanLesch, my aim was also not to start an edit war. I reverted my own edit of your edit. The lead is again as you had put it. Thank you for these points. Regards. DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 15:56, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
  • SusanLesch, For your point - "I understand that the 2016–17 Kashmir unrest is WP:TOOBIG otherwise this clearly belongs there because every date cited is from that period." This article clearly has SOPs and laws and incidents and equipment which are prior to 2016 -17. There are plently more incidents which can be added prior to 2016. Hence the shift to 2016–17 Kashmir unrest isn't needed apart from the reason of WP:TOOBIG also. DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 16:01, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
  • @SusanLesch:, You have written - "Can the hook please say that Indian security forces are using these weapons?" It already says that. DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 16:08, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
  • "Can the background section or lead please summarize why conflict is necessary?" I have added two lines to the background section accordingly. I also mentioned security forces in the lead again. I think all your points should be covered with these answer? DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 16:17, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment: SusanLesch, You had written "I am not interested in an edit war". This is exactly how edit wars start. I will let others see how to handle this since this is taking too much energy and I don't have the energy to explain why so many points you have written above are nonsensical in my opinion stemming from not being able to understand what this article is about and seeming to not understand that other Wikipedia articles already cover your points which you want to add here. I am nominating this for article for AFD since if it can't pass a simple DYK then I don't think it should even be an article. Regards. Happy editing. DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 05:31, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
  • AFD link - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crowd control in Jammu and Kashmir. Regards. DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 05:33, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
  • @DBX and DTm:- This's getting more and more farcical with the passage of time. This article (though on a notable topic) will need a huge lot of work to be NPOV-free (and be DYK suitable) and rebut concerns of Cforking. Please withdraw this nom. WBGconverse 09:48, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
    SusanLesch thanks a lot for giving a detailed review along with your concerns. IMHO this is much more helpful than some of the other comments that were made above. DTM is on vacation and I will take time to fix the issues that you pointed. Thanks for your patience. DBigXray
Thank you, DBigXray. Something tells me there's a chance this could work out. P.S. Maybe you can edit down the section I added about the UN report. It sticks out like a sore thumb, maybe that's allright. -SusanLesch (talk) 19:24, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
I agree with WBG that you ought to withdraw your nomination unless one of you is going to fix this article now. Four days have passed since the second rejection, yet the original authors have made zero contributions. -SusanLesch (talk) 20:57, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
  •  Working to fix the concerns raised above. reviewing material and sources. DBigXray 06:31, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
  •  Working After a much needed break from this article, I am now able to shift to this article again and will take up each point raised one by one, as calmly as possible with the patience this one requires. This is a difficult article and will be given due consideration accordingly, as I had been giving accordingly when I first created it. Regards. DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 15:59, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
I have started a new section on the talk page of the article (Talk:Crowd_control_in_Jammu_and_Kashmir#Points_raised_in_the_DYK) that will deal with all the points raised by SusanLesch one by one. DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 16:31, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Symbol confirmed.svg, ALT3 is ready to go. -SusanLesch (talk) 22:51, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

  • Symbol possible vote.svg I'm concerned that some of the phrasing in this article is too close to that of its sources. Compare for example "the plastic of the soft-nosed shells easily melts and releases a gas that disperses the crowd. These soft-nosed shells cannot cause fatal injuries. According to CRPF officers, another point is that there have been advancements in tear smoke munitions allowing them to be used more prominently as compared to the other crowd-control weapons" with "The plastic of the soft-nosed shells melts very easily, releasing a gas that helps disperse the crowds. So the shells cannot be fatal in themselves. Secondly, we have made advancements in tear smoke munitions (TSM) that can be used more prominently than other crowd-control weapons". Nikkimaria (talk) 11:36, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
  •  Working to fix the concerns raised above. DBigXray 05:31, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Symbol redirect vote 4.svg article should be reviewed again. As noted above, the issues have been fixed. DBigXray 10:59, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 27

XIX Army Corps

  • Reviewed: NA, this is my 3rd DYK
  • Comment: Hook drafted by Ted52

Created by Ted52 (talk). Nominated by DannyS712 (talk) at 18:08, 31 December 2018 (UTC).

Policy compliance:

Hook eligiblity:

  • Cited: Red XN - I'm probably just blind, but I don't see where the article explicitly supports the material in the DYK hook and cites a source supporting it
  • Interesting: Green tickY
QPQ: None required.

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg I find the article very interesting and comprehensive; I can tell the creator worked very hard on it and that is much appreciated! However, I'm afraid this will require work before it can be eligible. I'd suggest first making sure all material is supported by a reliable sources and then requesting a copy-edit. I haven't fully reviewed for neutrality yet but will soon. Best of wishes, SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 03:13, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

@Ted52: can you take a look at this? I'm not any where to as knowledgeable about this page as you are... --DannyS712 (talk) 04:36, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
@DannyS712: All material can be supported by sources, but I was of the impression that citing the same page over and over again is just bad style. I could go through the work of citing every paragraph? Ted52 (talk) 14:29, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
Hey Ted52. Since you're using an inline citation style, then the general rule is that there should be a cite for at least every paragraph, and if a paragraph has material from multiple citations you may sometimes want to distribute multiple refs within that paragraph. Using a cite multiple times it's not a problem; it's certainly better than having unsourced material. The following sections in particular need to be sourced better:
  • Wizna and Brest-Litovsk (6–16 September 1939)
  • The "German-Soviet Parade" and the Conclusion of the Campaign (17 September - 6 October 1939)
  • Preparations
  • Attack towards the Meuse (10–13 May 1940)
  • In the Somme Basin (17–20 May 1940)
  • Towards Dunkirk (21–29 May 1940)
  • Panzergruppe Guderian and southern Redeployment (28 May - 9 June 1940)
  • Southern Offensive (10–22 June 1940)
  • Panzergruppe 2
  • XIX Mountain Army Corps
It's an interesting read, and again, I can tell you worked hard on it. Let me know if you have any questions.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 14:44, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
Template:Reply to:SkyGazer 512Very well, will do. Is there a way I can template one reference and use it for the next? Reentering the same book's info over and over again is cumbersome, but I also don't want to do the thing where it's like "p. 100 - 200", because that's silly. I would like to preferably use the same reference over and over again for like 60% of the passages you inquire about, but with a slightly different page notation each time. The reason why most of the paragraphs aren't cited is exactly that 'cumbersome' functionality of having to build the reference from scratch everytime. Ted52 (talk) 16:19, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
@Ted52: Well, I suppose you could convert to using {{sfn}} refs. Basically how that works is you have two reference sections; one of them has a list of sources and the other usually just contains {{reflist}}. For the list of sources section, you include |ref=harv at the end of each citation template. Then, whenever you want to use a reference in the article, use the coding {{sfn|Author's last name|Year the author wrote it|pp=Page number range (or p=single page number)}}, and make sure that in the list of sources section each ref has a last= parameter and either a year= or date= parameter. If you do everything correctly, when you click on a sfn ref used in the article, it will be abbreviated and take you to the ref section with the reflist; then if you click on the highlighted ref there, it will take you to that ref's entry in the list of full sources, which only need to be listed once. It sounds confusing, yes, but once you get used to it it's not as bad as it seems. The documentation page for the template gives a lot more details. I can give you some examples if you'd like and I could help you convert the refs for this one. It's often a good idea to use it when there are book citations which you use a large number of pages from. Another technique sometimes used is having sfn for some sources and the other "main" ref style for others, such as using sfn for only books.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 16:40, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
An example of a page using sfn for only the book refs is Chinese alligator (e.g., the abbreviated Reading & Miller 2000, p. 72. in the reflist which links to the full ref in the sources subsection: Reading, Richard P.; Miller, Brian (2000). Endangered Animals: A Reference Guide to Conflicting Issues (illustrated ed.). Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0313308161. Retrieved December 9, 2018.). Molly Morgan is an example of a page which uses sfn for all references except one. If you have any further questions, please let me know; this can seem quite confusing. I highly recommend that you read the documentation page for the sfn template if you might want to use this style.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 16:44, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
(btw, Ted52, the correct coding for a ping is {{reply to|USERNAME HERE}}, not {{reply to:USERNAME HERE}} :-)--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 16:47, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Another way to repeat citations of the same source, specifying different pages, is to define a reference by name (e.g. SOURCE) and combine that with a page number template e.g.
    <ref name="SOURCE"/>{{rp|6-42}}
    Repeat as needed, just give relevant page numbers each time. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 02:34, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

─────────────────────────G'day all, I just noticed this on the Milhist alert list. I thought I'd give you a heads-up that Guderian was the commanding general of this formation at the time, and we need to be careful about accepting what he says as gospel, given he is probably too close to the subject. It would be much better if this hook was cited to a reliable source that was independent of the subject. As a general observation, the article relies far too heavily on Guderian's writings, needs more independent reliable sources, and we need to be wary of the clean Wehrmacht trope associated with many Wehrmacht generals trying to whitewash their activities during the war. Also, the article should be at XIX Army Corps (Wehrmacht) IAW pre-emptive disambiguation arrangements for military formations per WP:MILMOS#UNITNAME. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:08, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

@Ted52: It's been a while since this nom has received any activity; would it be possible for you to cite the hook to a source that is independent of the subject and reliable, per Peacemaker67's suggestion? Thanks, --SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 04:19, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
@SkyGazer 512:@Peacemaker67: I think I have been quite careful in pointing out the rather obvious flaws with Guderian's writings in terms of the war crimes committed by the German units during the operation, and used them strictly for the purpose of the unit's military movement. Yes, there are authors I could cite - Piekalkiewicz, Mazouwer, Shirer, Frieser, Kershaw, Bishop and others have all at least tangentially written about XIX Army Corps, especially as it was so central to the operational success of the whole campaign. But - and this a big but -, they all go back to Guderian's writings as their source for any troop movements they describe. You'll reliably find his books in their bibliographies, and, if inline citations are used, they either reference him or often earlier authors that also referenced him. You're not going to find precise primary source information about what battle lines the units were to take on Guderian's orders or what crossroads they were to advance to or what towns were or weren't captured in a single day outside of Guderian, who got to use his personal notes for the information at hand. I tried desperately to staff up any information that could be double checked, but even good old Percy Schramm couldn't help me, as his war diaries don't start before August of 1940. So, if it's okay to just phantom cite Guderian through other authors, I guess I can try and do that, but that's hardly intellectually honest. Ted52 (talk) 08:36, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Thank you very much for your work on the article, Ted52. Looking through this nomination and the article, I think it would be best if I let somebody do the rest of the review. It would be nice to have a second opinion on whether the sourcing is sufficient now. Also, it is a really long article and I have been doing quite a bit in both real life and Wikipedia lately, so I'm not sure I would be able to take thoroughly look over so many paragraphs and sources myself. In addition, I'm not particularly knowledgeable with the article topic (although it is very interesting) or the languages the refs use. Therefore, I'm requesting a new reviewer. I apologize for taking so long to get back.--SkyGazer 512 My talk page 00:15, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on January 23

Composite Nationalism and Islam

Created by Anupam (talk). Self-nominated at 23:58, 30 January 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg I'm honestly not sure if the article subject meets the notability guidelines; I understand that the book is old and was published in 1938, but the sources in the article seem to be more about Maulana than the book itself (at least based on the quotations) Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:18, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
User:Narutolovehinata5, if you perform search for the book with its Urdu title متحدہ قومیت اور اسلام, there are a plethora of results, apart from the English ones in the article. As the article was only recently created, there is a lot of expansion that can be done. I hope this helps. With regards, AnupamTalk 01:39, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
Yeah, I'd suggest beefing up the article more at this point. While the article itself is long enough for DYK, the article doesn't really seem to go into much detail about the book itself, but rather Maulana's life. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:42, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
I appreciate the advice User:Narutolovehinata5. I'll definitely expand the article when I get some time. Thanks again, AnupamTalk 01:46, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
  • @Anupam: It's been more than a month since your last comment. Are you still willing to pursue the nomination? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:13, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
User:Narutolovehinata5, thanks for your reply. On the same day I said I would expand the article, I did so. I hope this helps. With regards, AnupamTalk 18:44, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Thanks for the expansion, it looks a lot better now. I think the article now meets the DYK requirements, or at least the technical ones (length, newness, etc.). The main concern I have is the statement that "most British Indian Muslims decided to remain in India rather than move to Pakistan". I am not well-versed enough in Indian history to know if this was indeed this case, so I'm leaving the rest of the review to someone who may be more familiar with the subject matter. One last clarification @Anupam: Is this your first DYK nomination? The DYK credit tool is down for me at the moment so I can't check. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:46, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
User:Narutolovehinata5, you're welcome. Indeed, this fact is corroborated by multiple sources. This article, published in The Conversation, for example, says: "It should be said, however, that the idea of Pakistan was not supported by all Muslims: More than half of them would remain in India after partition." Similarly, this one, published in The New York Times, states: "Despite the mass violence and displacement of the partition, around 35 million Muslims stayed in India after the creation of Pakistan..." The last DYK I did was this one, which User:Royroydeb approved (perhaps he could look at this one). I hope this helps. With regards, AnupamTalk 03:02, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
Narutolovehinata5, Anupam has two prior DYK credits: the one in February mentioned in their post, and one back in 2009(!). No QPQ is required for this nomination. BlueMoonset (talk) 13:54, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed of expanded article. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:44, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on January 29

2019 Peterborough recall petition

  • ... that the possible Peterborough recall petition, 2019 might be called if the sitting MP who compared herself to Jesus is unsuccessful in overturning her perverting the course of justice conviction?
  • ALT1: ... that there will be a recall petition called in Peterborough unless the sitting MP who compared herself to Jesus is unsuccessful in overturning her perverting the course of justice conviction? Source: BBC
  • Reviewed: HMS Saracen (P247)
  • Comment: This is a potentially politically charged topic regarding current UK politics so I would suggest holding it for a month or so. Happy to consider any alternate hook proposals or alterations

Created by The C of E (talk). Self-nominated at 11:06, 1 February 2019 (UTC).

  • This article is WP:TOOSOON/WP:CRYSTAL and should probably be moved to draft space until the petition has actually happened. I had seen it pop up on the new article feed and was considering putting it up for deletion TBH. Number 57 12:45, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
    • It's not CRYSTAL as it is legally mandated to occur pending any appeals (Which we have expressed intent of, but none occurred as of yet) At present, it is something that will happen based on the court verdict. When there is an appeal we simply have to hold it until the decision is made. If the verdict is quashed then it can be deleted. Until then, it is just on hold pending any appeal. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 14:20, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
  • The page should be moved in keeping with this RfC that determined the year should go first. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:40, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Moved. -- KTC (talk) 01:01, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

@The C of E:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol question.svg I have no problem on the question of TOOSOON or CRYSTAL as unless any appeal is successful or she resigns in the mean time, this will happen by operation of law, and the time frame we are talking about is months so not too far away. The hook need to be reworded. Either 'there will be a recall petition unless', or this is kept on hold until appeal is determined. The article itself could do with a bit of copyediting, but I'm happy with it for the purpose of DYK. KTC (talk) 01:01, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

@KTC: I have made the amendments you have asked for. Thank you for making the move, I am unsure if this nomination page needs any further alterations to reflect the move. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 12:04, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg @The C of E: Okay. No, the nomination page shouldn't be moved or anything. Things will redirect so is fine. I've also copyedited the article a little on what I had most problems with. Suggest this be held until at least after the currently scheduled appeal hearing on 5 March. -- KTC (talk) 17:09, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg The QPQ review had a major flaw, in that the article was passed despite being over 600 characters short of a 5x expansion. Under the circumstances, a new QPQ should probably be submitted, since the original one was problematic. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:09, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
@BlueMoonset: I have done Template:Did you know nominations/Boston Manor tube station as the QPQ. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 06:54, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg@KTC: I'm surprised you approved this hook, with that BLP violation staring you in the face. Even without mentioning her name, the note that she compared herself to Jesus and is involved in overturning her perverting the course of justice conviction is not acceptable for the main page. The C of E please provide a new hook. Yoninah (talk) 20:58, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Yoninah You're going to have to be more specific exactly what problem you have with it in terms of BLP. The BLP subject is WELLKNOWN, so BLPCRIME doesn't applies, and even if it does, she have been duly convicted in a court of law, not just accused. The "Jesus" comparison by the BLP subject herself in response to the conviction was 1) a comparison made by the subject herself, and 2) is cited to a reliable source, and for that matter widely reported at the time and after sentencing. The second part is also cited, neutrally and legally correct. She have been convicted and sentence to a term of imprisonment less than or equal to 12 months, which mean by operation of law a recall petition will happen unless she appeals sucessfully. Exactly what is the problem with us saying precisely that? -- KTC (talk) 23:51, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
  • ALT1 is not accurate as written; it's backwards. The petition will occur unless she's successful with her appeal to overturn (or occur if she's unsuccessful with said appeal to overturn). Under the circumstances, I think this needs to go on hold until after the appeal (now only six days away) and the ruling from it, after which everything should be much clearer (unless there are multiple levels of appeal, which could delay things even further). We'd want a new hook in that event anyway (and preferably one that doesn't use both "recall" and "called").
If her appeal succeeds, she's considered to be not guilty, right? We shouldn't risk running a hook about her perverting the course of justice if there's a chance the law decides next week that she didn't do so. I'm not well-versed in the intricacies of BLP, but as her fame seems to be primarily due to this incident, it would seem to follow that an overturned conviction would prevent us featuring it on the main page. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:47, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
Of course if she succeeds, then this won't happen and we can close it. As for the hook, yes it will have to be held until all legal avenues are exhausted, I even said that when I first nominated it which was before she appealed. To reword the hook, ALT3... that there will be a recall petition called in Peterborough as the sitting MP who compared herself to Jesus was convicted of perverting the course of justice? The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 07:28, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
Her appeal have been rejected, and it have been reported that she have "exhausted her appeal processes". -- KTC (talk) 15:50, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
The only question we have now @KTC: is if this falls under the 30 day elections moratorium. It's not an election as the policy is written but it is going to be treated as one by the media and Electoral Commission (for all intents and purposes) so are we moving forward or holding longer? The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 20:43, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
@The C of E: If posting, either post it before the recall petition is opened, or after it has closed. In the latter case, if the petition is sucessful, after the resulting by-election. Opinions may differ on whether it falls under WP:DYKNOT. -- KTC (talk) 20:52, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
The C of E, at this point, since the recall petition has to be opened within ten days, as an electoral matter I think this has to wait until the petition has concluded and, unfortunately, if she is recalled but then contests the seat, it would then have an additional wait until the by-election had taken place. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:44, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Narutolovehinata5, we're unavoidably in a holding pattern here because due to the elections provision at DYK, this cannot run while the recall petition is ongoing, which means until after May 1. If the recall is successful and Onasanya is a candidate in the resulting by-election, we would have to delay further until that election takes place. If she isn't a candidate, or if the recall fails and she keeps her seat in Parliament, then this would no longer need to be held after May 1. However, a new hook will be needed in any event, since all the previous hooks assume the recall is in the future, not in the past as will be the case. There will also be, it seems likely, a disagreement as to how BLP will affect the hook wording. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:45, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
It might solve the tense part, but the "compared herself to Jesus" part worries me as a possible BLP problem. Is there nothing else that can be suggested that doesn't involve the Jesus thing? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:13, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
As KTC said above, she's the one who said it about herself and it is reliably sourced and well reported. I don't think this is a problem so I'd rather stick with what we have. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 07:26, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
I'm not sure about that: KTC seems fine with it but at least two other editors have concerns. That doesn't look like consensus to use it in any case. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:48, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
  • I've struck ALT4 due to possible BLP concerns. I know WP:BLPCRIME, but the wording remains too close for comfort. A new hook, one that does not mention the Jesus thing, is needed here. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:21, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
    • I respectfully disagree, I don't think it is a BLP issue because it is something she used to refer to herself. I'm happy to drop the reference to the specific conviction but I'd rather keep the Jesus comparison in there. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 12:42, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Symbol delete vote.svg As no agreement can be reached for a new hook, add to the fact that there doesn't seem to be anything else in the article that could be used as a hook (I've looked at the article and everything doesn't seem to be suitable, either due to BLP reasons or due to Election reasons), I am now marking this as unsuccessful. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:45, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Objection. Just because you don't like the hook doesn't mean it can't be used, we already have some 3rd party views that it is fine. Plus election reasons may delay it yes but that is a CRYSTAL argument because the result of the petition isn't in yet. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 06:59, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
It is not just me who objected to it though but also Yoninah. And even when you consider BLPCRIME, I still think that the hook is a terrible idea. Can't an alternative be suggested here? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 09:02, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

BlueMoonset asked me to comment on this nomination. I agree with other users that the phrase about her comparing herself to Jesus is a BLP violation. Other than that, I'm thinking that this nomination should be held over until the result of the recall petition is known, when the article can be adjusted accordingly. Gatoclass (talk) 09:54, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Nomination is on hold until the results of the recall are known late on May 1, or sooner if a new general election is called, but could be delayed further if the recall succeeds and/or Onasanya is a candidate in an immediately ensuing election, in which case this has to wait for the polls to close on election day. ALT3 has been struck; given the number of objections from DYK reviewers here, it isn't going to fly and would surely be pulled from prep or even the main page as a BLP issue so long as the Jesus comparison is included in the hook. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:36, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
  • @The C of E: As all suggestions involving the Jesus comparison are now by consensus rejected, please suggest a new hook. Thanks. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 20:41, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
@The C of E, KTC, BlueMoonset, Gatoclass, and Yoninah: Could a variation of ALT4 without the Jesus part potentially work, or does it still possibly violate BLP?
ALT4a ... that the 2019 Peterborough recall petition was called as the sitting MP was unsuccessful in overturning her perverting the course of justice conviction?
Of course, this hook wouldn't be allowed to run immediately anyway, this is just to see if this is a possible option. I'm personally not comfortable with it either, this is just to test consensus. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 20:46, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
It may have to be. I'd have thought the conviction reference would have been more of a BLP issue than the Jesus reference given she used it to refer to herself which was reported in several RS's. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 20:56, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
  • I really don't care what the hook is in the end, so long as everyone's happy. However, I object strongly to the characterisation that a factual statement reporting a comparison that the subject (who is a public figure) made publicly themselves, and reported in the national press amounts to a violation of WP:BLP, or even worse the implication that a statement saying that anyone nevermind a public figure that have been duly convicted in a court of law (and whose appeal have been rejected with no more right of appeal) is a violation of BLP or BLPCRIME specifically. -- KTC (talk) 21:40, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
KTC, just because something is factual does not mean it complies with BLP. In order to comply, content has to be presented neutrally and in a balanced manner. Additionally, DYK rules state that articles and hooks that focus unduly on negative aspects of living individuals or promote one side of an ongoing dispute should be avoided. Running a hook which states that the subject "compared herself to Jesus" is anything but neutral, it's sensationalist and is essentially holding the subject up to mockery. It's also misleading, because it implies the subject thinks she's as great as Jesus when in fact all she was doing was saying in effect that Jesus was wrongly convicted too - and it's really not at all unusual for Christians to find parallels between their lives and that of Jesus. To that I would add that the focus on the woman's conviction for perverting the course of justice is also arguably a BLP violation in a DYK hook, because it could be said to be focusing unduly on a negative aspect of her life. We can probably eventually run this nomination, but I think it will have to wait until either the petition is completed or the election held, as BlueMoonset suggested, when it should be easier to find a more neutral hook. Gatoclass (talk) 14:05, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
And exactly what part of the statement that someone have been convicted of a specific crime that she was indeed convicted of, and that she herself made that certain statement or comparison not neutral or balanced? It's not unduly focusing on a negative aspect when that's the whole legal basis for the article subject existing in the first place. A recall petition exist here precisely because a member of the UK House of Commons was convicted and sentence to a term of imprisonment of a year or less. If there was no conviction, or sentence of imprisonment (or for that matter if the sentence was for longer), we wouldn't be having this discussion since there would be no recall petition, and the article wouldn't exist at all.
"Compared herself to Jesus" does not state any opinion, and there is no judgement attached. It's only holding someone up to mockery if you think such a comparison is a problem, when yourself stated that it's not "at all unusual for Christians to find parallels between their lives and that of Jesus". It's not misleading to say someone made a comparison when they made that comparison! You are adding implication in your mind that's not in that simple sentence.
No one is suggesting that we not wait..... and like I said, I really don't care what the hook is. If people prefer different wordings, by all mean. -- KTC (talk) 16:51, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on January 31

Lorraine 12 D

  • ... that the Lorraine 12D was put into production before the design was finalized?
    • ALT1:... that the Lorraine 12D originally had a horsepower of 350 at the time it was first manufactured, but only 50 were produced before they managed to improve it to 400 horsepower?
  • Comment: Just made this, looks good and rather long

Created/expanded by Username Needed (talk). Self-nominated at 12:26, 31 January 2019 (UTC).

  • Review: These aren’t bad facts. My only issue is there is no source for the hook and only one source for the article. Jhenderson 777 16:41, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
  • ... that the Lorraine 12D was put into production before the design was finalized?(source: [14] page 9 (in french) Could somebody verify that please. [Username Needed] 14:03, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
Note. I might need help on reviewing. I am not familiar with the source being reliable or not. Also I don’t know what it says since it’s in French. I tried googling this particular engine to help find sources but I didn’t find much. Jhenderson 777 23:42, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Petebutt may be able to help, he's done some work with this article recently. [Username Needed] 11:06, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
There isn't much available WYSIWYG I'm afraid. The engine was developed rapidly at the start of its production, that much is clear!--Petebutt (talk) 12:00, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg (Not a full review) The article is presently ineligible because some non-lead paragraphs do not have inline citations, per D2 of the DYK Supplementary guidelines. The Variants section also has no sources. Also, as per the above, none of the hook content is sourced within the article. North America1000 11:08, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Fixed the variants section, and propose a new, sourced hook. ALT2:... that the Lorraine 12D was the first french engine to reach 400 horsepower?(source: [15] page 9 (in french) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Username Needed (talkcontribs) 13:09, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed now that additional sourcing has been provided and a new hook as well. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:58, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
Just a drive-by comment, but I don't find ALT2 to be interesting. ALT0 probably remains the best option if the source mentioned above could be confirmed as being reliable. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 04:13, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Nominator has not edited since March 14 and has not been able to address issues with ALT0. If there is no response in a week I will mark this for closure. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:10, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
  • No, I'm sorry, Narutolovehinata5—they have in good faith provided an ALT2 to replace ALT0, and a drive-by comment is not a review. This nomination still has not been given a full review, and frankly needs one. Until that happens, it doesn't matter how actively the nominator is editing or not editing, so long as they return to address any issues once the review has been given. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:07, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed, including of the hooks. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:07, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Symbol question.svg The article was new enough and long enough at the time of the nomination. For the most part it is adequately sourced: both sources are not in English so they are accepted in good faith. QPQ check is down at the moment but this appears to be the nominator's first nomination (at least from what I can tell on his talk page) so no QPQ is needed. Concerns have been raised on the reliability of the French source, and while I took a look at it and it seemed professional, I'd rather leave this analysis to a French speaker or an expert on this sort of thing. As I mentioned above, ALT2 (and by extension ALT1) do not feel like they'd be interesting to a broad audience, so I have struck them. This will be good to go once the nominator returns and/or the issues with the ALT0 source are resolved. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:43, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

  • I'm here, just not very active and not checking very often. [Username Needed] 17:53, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Mazeno Peak

Created/expanded by Mehrajmir13 (talk). Self-nominated at 18:04, 31 January 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg A new hook needs to be proposed here as the current one is very difficult to understand. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:35, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
Might still need a little more rephrasing, to be honest. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:59, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
ALT2 ... that Mazeno (7,120 metres or 23,360 feet) in Gilgit-Baltistan, Pakistan, has the longest ridge route of any eight thousander? Source: At ten kilometres in length, the Mazeno is the longest route to the summit of an 8,000-metre peak
ALT3 ... that Mazeno, located on the Nanga Parbat massif, has the longest ridge route of any eight thousander in the world? Source: At ten kilometres in length, the Mazeno is the longest route to the summit of an 8,000-metre peak
ALT4 ... that Mazeno Peak (7,120 metres or 23,360 feet) is the highest peak of Pakistan's Mazeno Ridge? Source: At ten kilometres in length, the Mazeno is the longest route to the summit of an 8,000-metre peak  MehrajMir (talk) 11:22, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
All of the suggestions above need to be checked for grammar and all feel a bit too cumbersome or complicated for DYK. I see some potential with ALT1, but the grammar has to be fixed first. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:37, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
Grammar fixt. — LlywelynII 20:05, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Hook eligiblity:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol confirmed.svg Mazeno is not an eight thousander. It leads to the eight thousander, Nanga Parbat, so edited that mistake in first sentence and removed at least two statements not in the sources given. Approved all hooks for citation. Suggest ALT2 or hook to the effect of ALT2 as opinion. Pinging @Mehrajmir13: to ask for QPQ (you must review another DYK for your nomination to qualify) ~ R.T.G 15:36, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

If you think the nom is good to go, you just explain that and post your tick mark. The other guys'll handle closing the discussion and editing the template. — LlywelynII 20:07, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
Rgr, tnky o7 ~ R.T.G 20:18, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
@RTG:--Which hook are you passing? DYK reviewing guidelines ask reviewers to strike out all hooks other than the approved one; for a quick understanding. WBGconverse 11:05, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
@Winged Blades of Godric: Done, ~^\\\.rT'{~ g 14:55, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Drive-by comment: Mehrajmir13 your use of measurements in this and other hooks is confusing. You don't have to say everything in a hook; you just have to be hooky :) Yoninah (talk) 21:33, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
  • (Citizen Buttinski.jpg Buttinski) I should suggest using the word "mountain" after eight thousander. Removing the numbers and/or changing to "any eight thousander mountain" on ALT2 is automatically accepted by me as reviewer or will be ~^\\\.rT'{~ g 23:40, 16 March 2019 (UTC)


  • Symbol possible vote.svg Several questionable sources have been removed from the article since the review, and the article, as it stands, is virtually unsourced. If no one is willing to take up this article and improve it, this will need to be closed. feminist (talk) 03:38, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg I propose adopting the nomination and to this end have reverted the article to a previous version. A new review is needed. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:41, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
@Cwmhiraeth: Are you still planning on working on this? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:54, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5: As far as I am concerned, the article is fully sourced now and is awaiting review in the normal way. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:06, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on February 5

Nubra River

Created by Mehrajmir13 (talk). Self-nominated at 10:59, 5 February 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg This article replaces a redirect and is long enough and new enough. The hook facts are cited inline, the article is neutral and I detected no policy issues. A QPQ has been done. @Mehrajmir13: Please check the change I made to the article about the direction of river flow. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:31, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
  • @Cwmhiraeth:-Sheer pathetic review. Which of my edits over the article; you don't agree with? WBGconverse 15:20, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Your reviews directly affect the quality of content appearing at main page. Take the responsibility of your failure rather than blame my rudeness. WBGconverse 05:26, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Stop until I take a comprehensive look. Multiple concerns about using fake references (using cites that does not support what's cited) have been raised about the other creations by this author. WBGconverse 14:22, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
  • ☒N Fails basic requirements; after a purge of stuff written by the means of fake citations or poor-quality citations.WBGconverse 15:20, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
  • I expanded the article once again. The prose is now more than required.  MehrajMir (talk) 16:45, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg I reviewed the article according to the DYK criteria which does not include reviewing all the references. @Mehrajmir13: I will have another look at the article in a couple of days to see if it is stable and meets the other DYK requirements. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:32, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Wow. I presume that it was you who wrote that no policy issues were detected ? Last time I checked, WP:V and WP:RS were both included in our list of fundamental policies and guidelines. WBGconverse 05:26, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Handing over this acrimonious review to someone else as I have been working on the article. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:31, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Now appears to meet DYK requirements, and was new enough at the time of nomination. My one suggestion is to revise the last sentence to better reflect the source content, to something along the lines of "The toxins eventually reach the Indus River where there is potential to impact millions of people". NoGhost (talk) 05:55, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Ok looks good, sorry for the slow response. I still find some of the present/future verb tenses in the last paragraph awkward ("20,000 troops stationed[...]" vs. "The toxins will eventually[...]") for an encyclopedic entry, but I think this has more to do with my personal preference and shouldn't impact the DYK nom. NoGhost (talk) 23:50, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Hi, I came by to promote this, but the hook quickly moves away from the main subject to a glacier and a mountain range. Could you write something more to the point about the river? Yoninah (talk) 20:51, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
  • This is probably promotionable; wait. WBGconverse 11:03, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Article rewrote in near-entirety. Struck hook which is factually inaccurate. WBGconverse 13:38, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
The article creator having not edited recently, I have added some information and restored some content removed by WBoG. Can I suggest:-
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Reviewer needed to check ALT1 hook; original hook has been struck due to previous concerns. It's probably also a good idea to recheck the article after the recent edits removing and adding content. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:16, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on February 6

Fatwa of Ali Khamenei against insulting revered Sunni figures

  • Comment: I know that I have 7 days to take action for nominating DYK, but since it is my first experince, please do not ignore me.

Created by M1nhm (talk). Self-nominated at 09:54, 14 February 2019 (UTC).

  • @M1nhm: (QPQ not required for new DYK nominators) You must review another nomination to validate your nomination. ~ R.T.G 16:11, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
@RTG: This appears to be the nominator's first nomination: per the rules, nominators with less than five DYK credits are exempted from the QPQ requirement. With that said, I am not very sure about either hook: the topic has potential, but each hook has inadequate wording and may need rephrasing, and I'm worried that the article itself may not pass due to possible POV concerns. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:46, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5: I was trying for a neutral hook. Maybe I have a line, ALT2: "...that insulting Sunni religious figures was not prohibited by fatwa in Iran until the 21st century?" I only didn't review it because I couldn't neutralise the hook... ~^\\\.rT'{~ g 15:10, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
That sounds better, but I'd like to hear from the nom first. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 08:18, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
@RTG: The nominator hasn't edited in almost two weeks and never replied here. What can be done at this point? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 04:14, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5:, In fact they haven't edited since a few hours before the first ping to them from this page, except one "mobile" edit to correct a typo. Either I have scared them away from the site or, they do appear to take wikibreaks for a few days up to a couple of weeks. This editor has only edited a relatively few pages for about 1,000 edits, the largest part of which to one draft article and not many talk pages, so they are a hands off editor.
I think the done thing is to post it on Wikipedia talk:Did you know, so I've done that.
I will also suggest slightly less worded, ALT3 "... that insulting Sunni religious figures was prohibited by fatwa in Iran in the 21st century?" ~^\\\.rTG'{~ 15:54, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
  • I will give the nominator one week to reply to the messages here. If there is no response, this will be marked for closure. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:42, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed. I don't see how we can possibly close this without an actual review, since we have an ALT3 proposed that seems to be free of POV issues, and no need for a nominator response unless and until issues are found in the review that need (and do not get) such a response. Thanks to anyone who gives this a full review. (I've done a very minor edit to ALT3.) BlueMoonset (talk) 14:02, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
I'm willing to give this a full review, but it probably wouldn't hurt to at least raise some immediate comments. For example, the "Reactions" sections probably works better in prose instead of as a list. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:05, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Symbol possible vote.svg While this was nominated a day late (the article was created on February 6 but not nominated until February 14), we typically allow leniency for newcomers to DYK, so that will not be an issue here. What is an issue is that the article is too short: at 1363 prose characters, it's below the 1500 minimum required at DYK. (Narutolovehinata5's suggestion to turn the Reactions lists into prose is one way to solve this problem.) It is really a shame that such a basic check was not made sooner. Another significant issue, I think, is that the Reactions are uniformly positive to the Fatwa. This strikes me as a potential neutrality issue—were there no countries or significant religious figures that objected? Finally, I don't understand why there are so many sources cited in some places: for example, the text of Khamenei's statement only needs a single reliable source, not four separate sources. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:27, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol delete vote.svg Nominator hasn't edited in almost a month, hasn't edited the article since February, and never responded to reviewer concerns. Marking for closure as stale. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:18, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg I've converted the Reactions list into prose, making the article long enough for DYK. Now the main problem is that the section is too positive. Are there any responses to this fatwa by secular/irreligious critics? Surely a legal opinion condemning criticism of religious figures would be a trespass on the freedom of speech? feminist (talk) 04:38, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
  • I had mentioned my concerns about the neutrality of the article above. I have just added a neutrality template to the article, which will need to be addressed before the nomination can be approved. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:07, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
  • To be fair, I won't be that surprised if it turns out there is indeed little criticism of this topic from secular (or at least non-Muslim) critics. It may likely be considered too far from home for non-Muslim audiences, resulting in little coverage. It's the same reason why Christian conservative organizations in the US tend to get outraged easier by an American celebrity than someone from Europe who is decidedly more socially liberal. I've tried Google searching for opinion pieces regarding this fatwa but most results I get that aren't overtly religious seem to concern an unrelated fatwa involving Salman Rushdie. The cited Reuters article suggests that the support this fatwa enjoyed among the Muslim world is unusually broad. This means we are unlikely to find negative coverage from non-progressive Muslims. If the reactions are primarily positive, it's not necessarily inappropriate for this article to cover primarily positive reactions. feminist (talk) 15:21, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
Well if that were the case, we'd probably need a source to confirm that reactions were primarily positive, otherwise the neutrality issue still won't be resolved. And in any case, some negative comments might still be needed while adhering to WP:WEIGHT. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:39, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Per the Reuters source: The fatwa issued on Sept. 30 was not unusual in itself but the fact that Saudi Shi’ites publicly requested Khamenei’s opinion and that it has been so widely welcomed by Sunnis and Shi’ites suggests Iran is winning the regional clout it craves. and Khamenei’s intervention won widespread praise. feminist (talk) 01:53, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
  • feminist, even the Reuters article isn't universally positive, as witness the final four paragraphs. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:32, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
  • I guess we should keep looking then, if that's the case. feminist (talk) 02:49, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg As the article length issue is now addressed, I will give this nomination one more week. @M1nhm: Please respond to the comments left above and leave us a notice if you will be able to fix the issues, so that this can continue. Thanks. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:45, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5 and BlueMoonset:I am sorry for the delay, I didn't access to the net for logging on the wiki. I will do my best trying to solve problems of the article such as length or adding opposite views. For the reason, I ask you to give me time from three days up to one week. M1nhm (talk) 12:08, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
@Feminist:Thanks for your precise comment. I added some opposite opinions in the article M1nhm (talk) 19:47, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on February 9

Dolo hospital airstrike

Created by Chetsford (talk). Self-nominated at 10:16, 9 February 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg New, in time, long enough, sourced, inline hook citation checks out, no apparent copyvios. Chetsford, QPQ needed. Also, please clip the newspapers.com articles so that those without subscriptions can also access the content. --Usernameunique (talk) 23:05, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
Usernameunique - thanks much, I've finished the QPQ now. Chetsford (talk) 09:31, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
Chetsford, could you also clip the newspapers.com articles so that others can read them? Thanks, --Usernameunique (talk) 04:19, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
@Usernameunique: Note that your clipping request above is not part of the DYK rules, and also that per WP:SOURCEACCESS, it is advised to "not reject reliable sources just because they are difficult or costly to access". North America1000 12:31, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
Northamerica1000, they are not being rejected, nor are they "difficult or costly to access". Rather, newspapers.com provides a simple way of letting other people access them: clipping. Moreover, since at least one of the articles supports the hook fact, I think it is reasonable to ask Chetsford to clip the articles in question. Thanks, --Usernameunique (talk) 22:17, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
I apologize, I've been a bit behind and haven't had a chance to get around to clipping all the articles. I'm not 100% sure I know how to do it, but I'll figure it out and get to it ASAP. Chetsford (talk) 22:36, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg It has been over a month without a response or edit from Chetsford. There needs to be progress on this soon if the nomination is to proceed. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:51, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
Sorry, I probably won't be able to get to this in a timely manner. If clipping is a prerequisite to promotion I may have to withdraw this nomination. Apologies, I will make a note of this for future nominations. Chetsford (talk) 20:57, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
Actually, now that I look more closely at this, I wonder why clipping is being required at all—I can't recall ever seeing such a case. Usernameunique, the AGF tick was invented for just this reason, that we assume good faith that the sources are as claimed, even if they are behind a firewall or not on line at all. Clipping might be required at FAC, but at DYK? BlueMoonset (talk) 00:27, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
BlueMoonset, neither FAC nor GA nor DYK requires clipping. WBGconverse 12:54, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol voting keep.svg--Hook is blatantly wrong and I have struck it, for there is considerable doubt over the precise death tally. Also, the statement is not hooky, at all. Airstrikes can kill lots more than 30 and it's entirely non-surprising.
    The way to elicit attention of the reader is to emphasize upon the extraordinary fact that Italy was bombing a hospital; something which is now deemed as a war-crime. So, a new hook, please:-) WBGconverse 13:01, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
I have no problem changing the hook, but on what basis is it "blatantly wrong"? Three sources report death totals of 22, 28, and 30. The hook establishes that between zero and 30 people were killed. If you have better sources and could add them to the article, that would be appreciated. "Something which is now deemed as a war-crime" - under customary international law I'm certain attacking a hospital was a war crime in 1935 as well, and it was most certainly a codified war crime under the convention of 1864. A hook which suggested otherwise would be blatantly wrong, I'm sure. Chetsford (talk) 13:21, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
Chetsford, when tolls of 22, 28 and 30 are reported, claiming as many as 30 people were killed is wrong. As many as means different things to different readers across different contexts and it does not always equate to maximum.
AFAIR, the codifications of not striking hospitals, centers of art et al came in effect from 1907. Also, I was not asking for any insertion about war crime bit, either and I mentioned the particular locus as to locating a more interesting angle (violation of war-conventions) to write a hook. Something of the form:-
ALT1 ... that Italy chose to assault a Red Cross Hospital during the Dolo hospital airstrike in the Second Italo-Ethiopian War?
WBGconverse 13:55, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
... when tolls of 22, 28 and 30 are reported, claiming as many as 30 people were killed is wrong ... No.
...AFAIR, the codifications of not striking hospitals, centers of art et al came in effect from 1907. As I said, the inviolability and neutrality of hospitals was codified in the convention of 1864. Chetsford (talk) 14:42, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
Yep, that's wrong. 22 is not as many as 30. WBGconverse 17:27, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
"Yep, that's wrong." As I, and others, have counseled you: no, it isn't. If you require further clarification or would like to debate and/or promote any alternate theories of predicate logic, I suggest you take this to a Talk page or to DYK discussion as there's probably no point in continuing it here since we've moved to a new hook. Thanks. Chetsford (talk) 18:21, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg I have no idea why Winged Blades of Godric gave this an AGF tick when saying "Hook is blatantly wrong and I have struck it", because that tick means the nomination has passed, which is clearly not the case. The slash icon is the best given the hook strike. Also, Chetsford is correct: saying "as many as 30 people were killed" when the reports include the number 30 is not wrong at all, since "as many as" gives an upper limit. It is, however, not a good idea to give the high number of a range of reports in a hook, because it gives emphasis to a number that may well be incorrect. (I don't know the comparative reliability of the sources and their source material.) While the article gives the number dead in the lead as 22 to 30, if there were 2 Swedes and between 18 and 28 Ethiopians killed, shouldn't that range be 20 to 30? For ALT1, I'm wondering why "Italy chose to assault" rather than "the Italian Air Force chose to bomb" (when I see "assault", I imagine a ground assault), and would suggest a piped link rather than the direct one to the article: "a Red Cross hospital in Dolo during the Second Italo-Ethiopian War?" (Still not happy with the flow of "chose to", but couldn't find any better wording that was as clear that this the hospital was picked for bombing, not struck as the result of targeting gone awry.) BlueMoonset (talk) 15:24, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
I'm also not thrilled by the use of "chose" simply because it's an unusual, albeit not necessarily incorrect, word to use in reference to a corporate body. I'd suggest -
We can't name Tito Minnetti by name since Italy never attributed their retaliation specifically to him, only to an unnamed Italian aviator (the article, itself, is careful to only mention that Minnetti was lost at Dolo right before the attack but doesn't make a direct connection). I think this is hooky, though, as the casual observer will wonder what the circumstances of the execution were that caused a Swedish installation to come under attack. And, indeed, since the role of Sweden in the Second Italo-Abyssinian War is not widely known, it will be unlikely anyone will realize this occurred in Ethiopia at all until they click. It also maintains a NPOV by acknowledging both of the war crimes that occurred on the part of the two separate parties to the conflict. Chetsford (talk) 16:15, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
This is damn good. WBGconverse 17:19, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
  • @BMS:-The article was solidly crafted with due sourcing and the tick for that. That, I've struck the hook, there did not lie any possibility of mistaken promotion. WBGconverse 17:19, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
A tick indicates a nom is ready for promotion. You can't strike the hook and then tick the nom. We can't promote blank space to the main page. Chetsford (talk) 18:21, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
We can't promote blank space to the main page--I have my assurances that not all are fuckwits. WBGconverse 19:55, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Reviewer needed to formally approve ALT2 and the rest of the nomination. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:03, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on February 14


The cities of Charibael and his neighbors in the 1st-century Periplus
The cities of Charibael and his neighbors in the 1st-century Periplus
  • ... that the Periplus of the Erythraean Sea credited the Yemeni king "Charibael" (Karibʾīl) with control of the major ports of the Swahili Coast?
    • ALT1:... that "Charibael" (Karibʾīl)—and not the Roman army—was probably responsible for the destruction of Aden shortly before the composition of the Periplus of the Erythraean Sea?
  • Reviewed: Will do "From Dixie with Love".
  • Comment: No, I don't want many other extraneous links in these hooks—just the ones to the page being promoted. Thanks.

Created by LlywelynII (talk). Self-nominated at 15:26, 18 February 2019 (UTC).

  • @LlywelynII:, please forgive my propensity to meandering discourse. This category of information interests me greatly, the origins of language and culture interspersed with situational trivia through the eyes of historical historians. I am compelled to attempt reviewing this DYK. And I tried about two nights ago. However I failed after a couple of hours with little to report, but the DYK has languished with no input, so I will explain what stopped me. The first few citations are in foreign languages and in the old day, for the purpose of DYK, an editor in good standing and literacy was to be trusted for minor translations. So I confirmed the names I could, no obvious mistake, and moved on to the Description section.
It says, "He is said to exercise control over..." three or four named towns and villages. So as I went about checking this part, I had to figure out and repair a small error to linking of the Periplus notes section, minor issue but may explain my failure to sufficiently concentrate, so on to the confirmation of sovereignty, he, Schoff, waffles on a bit about the history of royalty in that particular area, relating and supposing lineage and miscalculations in route based on other books, fine. I believed however that he was telling us about the kings which came before Charibael in relation to some of these towns, particularly Muza, that the kingdom was split up before Charibael. Between the notes and the Periplus itself, nothing seemed to say explicitly say he was king of Muza in particular and perhaps one or more of the others. Nine or ten days between ports may represent a thousand miles, so I had to reread and reference and reread and eventually, I failed concentration with little to report except that I don't believe that part is accurate.
I did not study even to the very end of the paragraph yet, however, this subject interests me enough to try again perhaps by tomorrow or after, but it is best I give you the opportunity to review my review, and perhaps even guide me in part if you are familiar enough to since researching the article. I do intend to have another look when it is out of my mind again, perhaps by tomorrow or later.
If any of that was confusing, I intend to attempt a meaningful review of this DYK over the next few days. I am not sure the extent of Charibaels sovereignty, particularly regarding Muza, is accurate to the source. Checking was longer than expected and broke my concentration. I invite you to review that one part and I will hopefully return with a simpler and more complete review during this week. ~^\\\.rT'{~ g 13:50, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed, as promised review never materialized and it's been half a month. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:05, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on February 21

Czarnik v. Illumina Inc.

  • ... that after the Czarnik v. Illumina Inc. patent law case, if you are an inventor and have been left off the inventors list, legal remedy is available?

Created by AWCzarnik (talk). Nominated by FamJoshua1 (talk) at 08:29, 27 February 2019 (UTC).

@Narutolovehinata5: Please find the new hook for your review -
  • ALT1: ... that for the first time, in Czarnik v. Illumina Inc., a court has ruled that an inventor has grounds to sue if their name has been left off a U.S. patent?

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FamJoshua1 (talkcontribs) 09:32, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

It might need to be rephrased further, it's still a bit difficult to read. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 04:11, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5: Sure, please find the new hook for your review -
This hook is inaccurate; as a district court decision this is not precedent as the hook implies. Indeed, the article's intro says this has created a split among district courts that has yet to be resolved. Daniel Case (talk) 05:34, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
If it does, we can call for a reviewer to do a full review of the nomination. I'm not sure what text is best being the bold link, and if another placement works better, go for it. Thanks. (I've struck ALT2 because it is indeed inaccurate.) BlueMoonset (talk) 15:24, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
@BlueMoonset: It's good for me. Daniel Case (talk) 15:55, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Blue and White (political alliance)

Created by Bellezzasolo (talk). Self-nominated at 13:18, 27 February 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg The newness of the party has some potential, but I don't think being a new party by itself is a good enough hook for DYK. @Bellezzasolo: Could you propose something else here? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:13, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Can I make a suggestion? Ivar the Boneful (talk) 15:50, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

  • ALT3:... that the leaders of Israel's Blue and White alliance have agreed to rotate the office of prime minister if elected?
That sounds better, I will approve it if Bellezzasolo doesn't object. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:35, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg I was about to give this a full review, but I noticed that the article has a citation needed tag: @Bellezzasolo: Can this be addressed so that this can proceed? Thanks. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:15, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5: Sorted. Bellezzasolo Discuss 19:30, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
@Bellezzasolo: There is still no reference for the position of Yesh Atid in the table. I'm aware the fact is in the article for the party itself, but still. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:49, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
Narutolovehinata5, That should be solved now. Bellezzasolo Discuss 14:43, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
There's one more sentence that needs to be sourced, about one of the parties and the number of seats they won. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:44, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
Narutolovehinata5, done (I forgot to ping) Bellezzasolo Discuss 09:51, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Thanks. This should be good to go now as the article meets DYK requirements. No QPQ needed for nominator with less than five credits. Struck the other hooks and leaving ALT3 as the only approved option, for reasons I mentioned above (it's the only one that's interesting to a broad audience, and it's cited inline and verified). Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:51, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Since the Israeli elections are on April 9, this hook cannot run before then per WP:DYK#Content. To run after the elections, a different hook is needed. Yoninah (talk) 17:36, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
@Yoninah and Bellezzasolo: How about this?
  • ALT4 ... that the Blue and White political alliance is named after the colors of Israel's flag?
Granted, since ALT3 can run after the election anyway, this might end up being moot anyway. In the likely event that they don't win the election, then ALT3 would need to be modified slightly. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 20:06, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
I added "political" to the hook. Let's see if they garner any seats in the election. Yoninah (talk) 20:53, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Returned from prep. Let's see if they pass the threshold in the election before selecting a hook. Yoninah (talk) 17:50, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
  • OK, they're probably going to be in the opposition, so the first 3 hooks remain struck. ALT4 really doesn't say anything to an international readership. After you update the article with the election results, please propose a different hook with a little more meat to it. You may want to say it's a new political party, named after the Israeli flag, and mention some of their platform. Yoninah (talk) 17:34, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Suggesting new hooks since the election is over (ALT5 basically the original hook but in past tense):
ALT5 ... that the Blue and White, which was formed to compete in the 2019 Israeli legislative election, had promised to rotate the office of prime minister had they been elected?
ALT4a ... that the Blue and White political alliance, which competed in the 2019 Israeli legislative election, is named after the colors of Israel's flag?
These could probably still be reworded, or perhaps another hook could be suggested. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:56, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • @Narutolovehinata5: past-tense hooks like these really aren't interesting. I've struck ALT5 because it is so in the past. The fact is that the faction gained the same number of seats as its competitor (Likud) but will probably be in the opposition. The government won't be formed for at least another few weeks. The article must be updated with the election results to make it current and relevant, and then ALT4 could be adjusted, substituting the "which competed in the 2019 Israeli legislative election" clause with something more up to date. Yoninah (talk) 01:10, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on February 23

Ramesh Sumant Mehta

  • ... that Ramesh Sumant Mehta was the first chairman of the pollution control board of Gujarat state of India?Source: Parikh, Dinesh (January 2002). Thaker, Dhirubhai, ed. ગુજરાતી વિશ્વકોશ [Gujarati Encyclopedia] (in Gujarati). XV (1st ed.). Ahmedabad: Gujarat Vishvakosh Trust. pp. 527–528.

Created by Nizil Shah (talk). Self-nominated at 07:31, 23 February 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Can a better hook be proposed here? It's just not very interesting, to be honest. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:37, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5: It was difficult to find a good hook. Let me try with another one. Feel free to propose new hook.-Nizil (talk) 05:03, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed now that new hook has been proposed. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:09, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Article meets the general DYK article requirements and is free of close paraphrasing. ALT1 is interesting and cited to an offline source. This will be good to go once a QPQ is done. @Nizil Shah: Just a clarification though: is that municipal drainage system still the largest in India, or was it only at the time of his tenure? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:08, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
  • @Narutolovehinata5:, thanks for the review. QPQ added. I could not find which is the largest municipal drainage system in India now but assume that Delhi had the largest at the time of his tenure. Should we reword the hook?-Nizil (talk) 04:22, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
Yeah, I think the hook could be reworded. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:25, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
  • ALT1a: ... that Ramesh Sumant Mehta implemented the largest municipal drainage system in India as of 1958?
Reworded.-Nizil (talk) 07:00, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
@Nizil Shah: What about something like this?
ALT2 ... that during his tenure as chairman of the pollution control board of Gujarat, Ramesh Sumant Mehta implemented what was at the time the largest municipal drainage system in India?
The wording would of course depend on if the drainage system remains the largest to this day. I might also need to ask for a second opinion from another editor (preferably Indian) on this. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:55, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5: He implemented what was at the time the largest municipal drainage system in India in 1958 as the Chief Engineer of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi. He was appointed the first chairman of the pollution control board of Gujarat in 1975. So merging these two is a false statement. I believe that it must not be the largest drainage system anymore because it was built in 1958, 60 years ago. I have clarified it with as of 1958 in ALT1a.-Nizil (talk) 13:55, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
Would you be fine with this?
ALT2b ... that Ramesh Sumant Mehta implemented what was at the time the largest municipal drainage system in India?
ALT2c ... that while chief engineer of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Ramesh Sumant Mehta implemented what was at the time the largest municipal drainage system in India?
The "as of" wording feels awkward to me. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:11, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5: I am OK with both hooks. ALT2c is bit long btw.-Nizil (talk) 13:11, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg This will probably need a new reviewer then as I was involved in writing suggested hooks. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:21, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on February 24

View of Venice

View of Venice represents artistic culture as well as a map
View of Venice represents artistic culture as well as a map
  • ... that 1500AD View of Venice is "an achievement of astonishing visual and intellectual control"? Source: "the View remains an achievement of astonishing visual and intellectual control, demainding incredible patience and a notable ability to visualize forms from inaccessible viewpoints." (and [16] the source)
    • ALT1:... that ...? Source: "You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)
  • Comment: This article is older than 7 days. It was proposed as part of another DYK and languished so requesting an oversight on that basis to encourage further expansion of an interesting historical topic.
  • Reviewed:Template:Did you know nominations/Nickey Barclay

Created/expanded by Theramin (talk). Nominated by RTG (talk) at 13:37, 12 March 2019 (UTC).

Symbol delete vote.svg The article is new enough and long enough but ... it is nowhere near ready for primetime. Much of it is uncited; the list of references at the end is ... well, it gives me wikiflashbacks to 2006 or so when that sort of thing was acceptable. Daniel Case (talk) 05:39, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
lol, received and on todo for today or tomorrow. ~^\\\.rT'{~ g 08:10, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
@Daniel Case: Several of the resources are behind paywalls so I could not cite the whole article at this time. Apologies, ~^\\\.rT'{~ g 22:51, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Am just starting to read the Jstor listed art mag now, but there is another which only seems to exist in 4 or 5 countries in the world. The Jstor says it is 50 pages so I'm reading it, but slowly so answer maybe tomorrow, sorry for letting your request sit this time, ~^\\\.rTG'{~ 15:54, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on February 26

1 the Road

  • ... that artificial intelligences have have begun to write novels...? Source: "On March 25, 2017, a black Cadillac with a white-domed surveillance camera attached to its trunk departed Brooklyn for New Orleans. An old GPS unit was fastened atop the roof. Inside, a microphone dangled from the ceiling. Wires from all three devices fed into Ross Goodwin’s Razer Blade laptop, itself hooked up to a humble receipt printer. This, Goodwin hoped, was the apparatus that was going to produce the next American road-trip novel." (and link the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)
    • ALT1:... that at nine seventeen in the morning, the house was heavy...? Source: It is a partial quote of the AIs first words "The novel begins suitably enough, quoting the time: “It was nine seventeen in the morning, and the house was heavy.”" (and link the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)

Created by RTG (talk). Self-nominated at 06:52, 26 February 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg New enough, long enough, within policy, and the hook meets the hook criteria. Good to go. In my personal opinion, however (@RTG: this is more food for thought if anything) that the premise of the article is interesting enough as it is (the first book to be written by AI!) that it doesn't really need a super quirky hook like ALT1 to capture the reader's attention, and the primary hook might be a tad confusing as readers may think that it's an article talking about AIs writing novels in general when it's instead about a specific novel. I personally think something super simple like ALT2: "...that 1 the Road is marketed as the first novel to be written by an artificial intelligence?" would work best, but again, that's up to you Satellizer el Bridget (Talk) 10:32, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
Yes the primary is clunky. ~ R.T.G 11:29, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg New reviewer needed for ALT2. Yoninah (talk) 22:59, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg ALT2 is the best hook listed here. It is very catchy, properly cited and mentioned in the article. Accepting hook, with the rest of the review as per User:Satellizer above.Flibirigit (talk) 18:11, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Hi, I came by to promote this, but I don't find an inline cite for the ALT2 hook fact. I also don't think the article is start-class yet. It has a largely uncited lead section and one paragraph of authorship, also cited to a single source. Aren't there any production details or publishing history? Yoninah (talk) 19:46, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Sorry I musn't have pressed send. In fact the first article is called "The First Novel Written by AI Is Here—and It’s as Weird as You’d Expect It to Be" and it goes on to say, "1 The Road is currently marketed as the first novel written by AI." A quote from the AI creator Goodwin. ~^\\\.rTG'{~ 22:15, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
  • @RTG: OK, I moved the cite up to the first sentence in the lead. But the article still doesn't seem start-class. Yoninah (talk) 20:45, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
  • I must put it that this article requires the reader to scroll to finish reading. The subject is a book which makes no sense, is significant only in regard of its author, and has captured a lack of popularity which is both amazing and unsurprising at the same time. If 1 the Road was published in 2000, or even 2010, you could be telling us there was too much useless information in the article, but this is the future and the future is way more crap than advertised.
  • Sorry for the delays. I swear my ping system sometimes flashes up a ping then makes it disappear before I can read it. I must request somewhere that no notification ever be auto-deleted. ~^\\\.rTG'{~ 07:37, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on February 27

Six Motets, Op. 82 (Kiel)

Friedrich Kiel
Friedrich Kiel

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 16:54, 6 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Can another hook be proposed here? I'm afraid that it might be a bit too technical for people unfamiliar with classical music. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:51, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Suggest something, - off for vacation. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:59, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
Unfortunately I am currently unable to suggest alternative wording, as I can't seem to glean from anything that's in the article right now. @Yoninah and BlueMoonset: Any possible suggestions? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:27, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Giving this a stab: the hook below is a rephrasing of the original, to make it less technical and easier to read. I'm not sure if it's interesting enough to a broad audience and personally I don't find it too catchy, but for now it seems to be the best option forward.
ALT1 ... that Friedrich Kiel (pictured) set Psalm 130 and other psalms for choir a cappella in his composition Six Motets, Op. 82?
@Gerda Arendt: Are you fine with this suggestion? Because I took a look at the article and there doesn't seem to be much else that could work as a hook. The only other suggestion I can think of is how the work apparently focused on the dark themes of the psalms, but I'm not sure if that's hooky enough for DYK. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 08:25, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
Do you expect people to know by the number that Psalm 130 is a call from out of the depths? - I am on vacation. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:49, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
I removed the title because I didn't see it necessary to mention it in the hook, I will add it back if you think that it is needed. I will wait for your return and see what we can do from here. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:30, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
I believe the title is the one untechnical thing. Other titles mention "tears", "valley of death" and being forgotten, setting a mood. "Motet" is so awfully general. Will be back on Wednesday. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:09, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
Narutolovehinata5, back, I expanded a bit. I could add more, getting from a footnote that the motet highlighted is the only one performed in Vienna in the 1880s, also that he set it first as Op. 29. I'd prefer to stay with the hook we have, - the text must have been dear to him. - We might say that two choices of text are like those by Brahms in is famous Requiem, but what would that say about Kiel? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:58, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
I'm very sorry Gerda but I didn't really understand what you were trying to say in that comment: can you please explain in simpler terms? I am not very well-versed in classical music so when explanations are too technical, I find it difficult to understand. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:10, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
There's a footnote in the thesis, saying that Psalm 130 from the six was one of few works by Kiel performed in concert in Vienna after Kiel's death. Does that help (to explain that it is worth mentioning that particular one of the six)? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 00:43, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
Not really I'm afraid. And besides, the thing being discussed here is the hook wording, not the article content. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:08, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
That much I understood, so offered to add content in order to write a new hook based on it. Your answer is : not really, in which case I won't bother. How is this then (although I really love to begin with the bolded thing):
ALT2: ... that "Aus der Tiefe rufe ich" (Out of the depths have I cried) is one of six 1883 psalm settings by Friedrich Kiel (pictured), published as Six Motets, Op. 82? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:46, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
Narutolovehinata5, we sang it yesterday. Will you continue? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:28, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
I'm currently busy with some off-Wiki projects so I'm not sure if I will be able to continue reviewing this. But with that said, ALT2 is better than the other hooks, but I still don't really think that it's hooky. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:19, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

When the Moon Was Full

Iranian drama movie which is about terrorism
Iranian drama movie which is about terrorism

5x expanded by Forest90 (talk). Self-nominated at 17:58, 4 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg 5x expansion verified. New enough, long enough, adequately referenced. I did a thorough copyedit on the article to bring it up to English grammar standards, but it is still confusing to me. The two brothers have nearly identical names, and I wonder if one is being named in the article when it should be the other? We have articles on Abdolmalek Rigi and Abdolhamid Rigi. Please check my editing.
  • As it currently stands, the article is top-heavy on plot and awards. The Production and Reception sections need to be expanded. The quote from the producer doesn't read like English. It's unclear why the Aftermath section even belongs in this article about a film. The image posted with this nomination doesn't appear in the article per WP:DYK#Images.
  • Regarding the hook, Wikipedia standard is to say "film" rather than "movie". I think that once you add a little more detail to the article, you will find material for a better hook. No QPQ needed for nominator with less than 5 DYK credits. Yoninah (talk) 13:43, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
  • you edited correctly and use the brother names at correct places.
  • I don't have any suitable sources for expanding The Production and Reception sections. The quote from the producer wasn't in the English language, a website translated the producer quote to English only. The only existing film aftermath was that incident which mentioned section. And I think you deleted the Article Image instead DYK Image.
  • Ok, ThanksForest90 (talk) 17:01, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
  • I'm resolving issues which expressed by the referee.Forest90 (talk) 14:36, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Hi, in your recent edit you added mistakes in English grammar, which I corrected. There is still a tag in the first paragraph under Reception regarding which critic(s) said that. I still have a few questions:
    1. In the second paragraph under plot, you tell what became of Abdolmalek Rigi, but you don't say anything about what happened to Abdolhamid Rigi, who died the same year (2010). Does the movie discuss that?
    2. The Aftermath section doesn't belong in this article. The source ties them together, but I don't see the connection between a movie and this terror attack. I removed this section and replaced it with an Awards section.
    3. My original observation that the article is still mostly plot and awards still stands. Are you sure you can't add any more information about the production or reception from Iranian-language sources?
    4. I think you are making the Fajr International Film Festival and the 37th Fajr Film Festival two separate festivals, when they seem to be the same thing.
    5. I have restored the image to the article. Yoninah (talk) 19:00, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
    1. Hi Yoninah. thanks for helping me to improve my Article. I'm working in my mistake and will resolve them. I will work in the first paragraph under Reception regarding which critic(s) too.
    2. Abdolmalek Rigi was the terror group head and I will check about his brother, Abdolhamid, faith in movie.
    3. I will work about award section instead aftermath section which you deleted.
    4. I will resolve my mistake about the Fajr International Film Festival.
    5. Thanks for allow me keep the image.Forest90 (talk) 18:11, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Hi Yoninah. I change the Article. Please read again the Article and if need any changes, say to me. And I'm sorry about changing some of your work which did in Article. I hope you accept my apologize.Forest90 (talk) 19:05, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
  • @Forest90: thank you for the changes. Before I check it, I'd like you to file a request for copy-editing at WP:GOCE. Each time I've edited the article, I've fixed it up so it reads like English. Now it doesn't read like English again. Yoninah (talk) 19:08, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Virgin and Child (Sirani)

Created by JeBonSer (talk). Self-nominated at 19:59, 1 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Hi JeBonSer - the DYK check states this article isn't long enough - It's only 1449 characters in length. The prose for the most part isn't inline cited. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 12:37, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Unfortunately, this article has some very severe issues. The first is that the entire "Description" section is uncited, and its prose is highly problematic: ungrammatical, repetitive, and reads as if it were pieced together from various sources without regard to whether the sentences are workable. The entire "Legacy" section was copied directly from the Elisabetta Sirani article without credit, which is against Wikipedia rules—see copying within Wikipedia for what must be done when copying material from another article. Also, the description sourcing must be supplied and its prose greatly improved if this nomination is to succeed. Here's an improved phrasing for the hook:
@BlueMoonset: Nominator hasn't edited in two weeks and never responded, he also hasn't edited the article at all since last month. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 04:20, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol delete vote.svg Unfortunately, as the nominator never responded in this page and hasn't edited the article since he created it and nominated it, coupled with the fact that he hasn't edited in over two weeks, unless another editor is willing to adopt this, I am now marking this for closure. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:42, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Quick comment: the nominator has just added refimprove and copyedit tags to the article. I'm not sure if this means this DYKN should be disqualified or it's a sign that this should be put on hold until the issues are sorted out. @JeBonSer: Please leave a comment here explaining your edits, thanks. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:52, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
  • It should probably be noted than an article that was already too short is now even shorter: 1287 prose characters. There's no point putting an article on hold unless the nominator specifically requests it here. A copy edit is still badly needed. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:01, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
@BlueMoonset: It should also be noted that the nominator has never responded and in fact appears to have never actually replied to any messages left on their talk page. This makes it unlikely that they will ever respond here. I will give then a final message to respond here by Sunday, but if there is no reply forthcoming, I will close this. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:20, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
  •  Task complete. References improved
  • Not sure: Prose & grammar
  •  Question: Number of prose characters
JeBonSer (talk | sign) 05:40, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg The article is now long enough, but the prose remains a problem. BlueMoonset (talk) 13:00, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 3

The Immaculate Conception of Los Venerables

  • ... that The Immaculate Conception of Los Venerables (pictured) is exhibited at the Museo del Prado in Madrid, Spain, which was painted by a Spanish artist Bartolomé Esteban Murillo in c. 1678?
    • ALT1:... that the alternative name of The Immaculate Conception of Los Venerables (pictured) is "The Immaculate Conception of Soult" after Jean-de-Dieu Soult the Marshal who looted it from the Hospital de los Venerables? Source: "La relación de Soult con el Museo del Prado está motivada por el hecho de que algunas de las pinturas que fueron de su colección y que habían sido sustraídas en Sevilla han terminado formando parte de la pinacoteca madrileña. La primera de ellas es La Inmaculada Concepción de los Venerables, obra de Murillo, que había robado en la iglesia del hospital de dicho nombre en Sevilla y que se subastó en 1852 a la muerte del mariscal, y la adquirió el Musée du Louvre por 615 300 francos, la cifra más alta que hasta entonces se había pagado por una pintura. En 1940 el gobierno francés acordó con el español un trueque de obras de arte en el que se incluyó esta pintura que inmerecidamente se ha venido nombrando como «la Inmaculada Soult», sobrenombre indigno que debe ser sustituido por «la Inmaculada de los Venerables» en honor a su origen y en rechazo del infame robo perpetrado por el mariscal." Museo del Prado (in Spanish)

Created by JeBonSer (talk). Self-nominated at 04:00, 4 March 2019 (UTC).

  • The information in the article does not have inline citations;
  • The text requires a bit of work also:
  • there are constructions such as "commissioned to" that are not used in English
  • the "History" section is one very long sentence
  • I cannot understand the passage: "since in Spain it had spread extraordinarily since 16th century the devotion for the Immaculate Conception of Mary, being also said country the main defender of the mystery and the one that fought with greater insistence until it became one of the dogmas of the Catholic Faith, although it would not officially occur until the year 1854."
  • The "Description" section at times refers to the Virgin Mary in the masculine ("his feet ... his eyes")
  • I think a more intriguing hook is required. It is not interesting that a painting is hanging in a particular gallery
More than happy to take another look at this one if the above is addressed. Thanks - Dumelow (talk) 12:24, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
  • The article, at 1146 prose characters, is too short for DYK. The minimum is 1500 prose characters, so the article needs significant expansion. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:43, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg I just discovered that JeBonSer had not been notified on their talk page about the issues with this nomination, so I have just done so. It has been over two weeks since they last edited on Wikipedia, and another DYK nomination has just been marked for closure due to a failure to respond. Allowing another seven days for a response, but if nothing is posted here or the article remains too short at the end of that period, the nomination will also be marked for closure. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:39, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
Hi BlueMoonset. I didn't post on their talk page but I did ping them above on 5 March. Happy to pick this up again if they get back with the required article improvements - Dumelow (talk) 09:54, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
Dumelow, JeBonSer has greatly expanded the article, which now more than meets DYK's length requirement. However, there are still three uncited paragraphs, and the prose is still problematic in places. A new hook has been provided. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:48, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
Symbol possible vote.svg Hi JeBonSer. Thanks for improving the article. I've gone through it to try to make the text sound more natural but there were some sentences I didn't understand and I do not, alas, read Spanish. Could you take a look or perhaps pass it by somebody else for a second opinion? Further to this the main stumbling block here is a lack of WP:references - as a minimum there needs to be one at the end of each sentence. It'd be great to see this featured on the main page in a DYK but the improvements need to be made (and relatively quickly) to get it there - Dumelow (talk) 07:36, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
No, as a minimum there needs to be one reference in each paragraph. Johnbod (talk) 23:58, 11 April 2019 (UTC)#
Thanks Johnbod, you are correct - I meant paragraph. Article at present just lacks a citation for "Soult left behind the frame of the painting which was preserved in Spain and was recently restored". It still needs work to the prose though, expecially the "Description" section - Dumelow (talk) 12:12, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 4

Werner Schneyder

Werner Schneyder in 2012
Werner Schneyder in 2012
  • Reviewed: to come Zond 5
  • Comment: our hook size is not compatible with him who described himself as allround amateur

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk) and Grimes2 (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 22:08, 5 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Full review to follow, but what do you think of the following ALT?
Looking at the article, it seems that he did both singing and sports commentating, but that contrast in careers might be more interesting to general audiences than performing cabarets alone. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:04, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
He was legendary in Kabarett, - is that different from cabaret? Should we change links? Sports was rather "also", therefore I won't go for ALT1. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:05, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
I'm not sure: as I mentioned before I am not very familiar with classical music, so I can't help out much on that end. With that said, you mentioned that you found that it would be difficult to emphasize his many careers in a hook. How about this suggestion then?
ALT2 ... that cabaret singer Werner Schneyder (pictured) also worked as a journalist, writer, actor, stage director, television presenter and sports reporter?
Readers might find it interesting that he had several careers, at least. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:19, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
I found that interesting, therefore I made the original hook, with a focus on two pinnacles, rather than a multitude. - Can you tell me if we should prefer to link to Kabarett? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 00:41, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
Not really sure but considering the lede only talks about cabaret, I suggest that the hook reflects that (meaning just stick to cabaret). Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:52, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
For expanding the lead, I need to know if I should better link to Kabarett, implaying political satire, nit just entertainment. I thought cabaret is just a translation, but it seems to have a different meaning. Nothing about him has connection to classical music ;) - Happy Bach's birthday! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:04, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
ps: do we have rules now which request that a hook fact has to be in the lead? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:15, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
Before I can return to him, I have a full day of RL, want to expand an article about a Bach cantata, have to nominate a DYK or it will be too late, and was shocked by another death, expanded his article from stub at least. Sorry. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:09, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
I reviewed now. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:59, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:10, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Article meets newness and length requirements. QPQ has been done, no copyright violations were found, and German sources are accepted in good faith. As I suggested hooks, the final decision on what hook to promote will be left to a new reviewer. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:32, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
I read the hooks and the discussion again. I came to think that we should say Kabarett (serious and political), not cabaret (light and entertaining), quote: "Unlike comedians who make fun of all kind of things, Kabarett artists (German: Kabarettisten) pride themselves as dedicated almost completely to political and social topics of more serious nature which they criticize using techniques like cynicism, sarcasm and irony." - I am sure that "singer" is misleading, - a master of the sharp written and spoken word he was, not a singer so much. Sorry for not noticing that sooner. So here's mine, revised:
ALT3: ... that Werner Schneyder (pictured) performed political kabarett programs with Dieter Hildebrandt and commentated on television on boxing at the 1984 Summer Olympics?--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:00, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 5

Mädchenkantorei Limburg

Limburg Cathedral
Limburg Cathedral
  • Reviewed: to come see below

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 21:14, 12 March 2019 (UTC).

QPQ: Red XN - Not done
Overall: Symbol question.svg A neat little article which is well written and fully sourced. I've made some stylistic tweaks and added a reference for the final sentence. I've also tweaked the hook slightly at ALT1 so that it flows better. Just needs a QPQ, then I'm happy to give it the green light. Bermicourt (talk) 21:42, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

I reviewed now: Template:Did you know nominations/Coccothrinax jimenezii. Thank you for the review. How is it the other way round, dropping "sacred" which is kind of redundant to "cathedral":
ALT2: ... that the girls of the Mädchenkantorei Limburg performed exclusively contemporary choral music in a 2019 concert at the Limburg Cathedral (pictured), joined with a women's choir? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:15, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
The English doesn't quite flow as smoothly as it should, especially "joined with a women's choir" which seems tacked on at the end. Here is a suggested minimal change. I can't really tell you why it sounds better; it just does.
ALT3: ... that the girls of the Mädchenkantorei Limburg, together with a women's choir, gave a performance of exclusively contemporary choral music in a 2019 concert at the Limburg Cathedral (pictured)? Bermicourt (talk) 21:33, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
If you say so, - why "gave a performance" vs. "performed"? I was a bit afraid that readers would not get to the "all contemporary" bit which is the most astonishing. I was there. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:04, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
It's just "performed exclusively contemporary choral music" seems rather complex phrasing to me and may not be easy to follow; even a little confusing. For example, does the adverb "exclusively" modify "performed" or "contemporary choral music"? In changing it, I was trying to give your main emphasis on "all contemporary" a bit of breathing space. It's the "contemporary" that's exclusive, not the performance and I wanted to stress that. I've run the sentences past my wife and she concurred that the original sentence was difficult to make sense of, whereas the modification flowed better in her view. I've taken "the" out as well, we don't tend to use the definite article before proper names like Limburg Cathedral. All that said, I'm very happy to have another editor comment. Amazing that you were there - it must have been quite an experience! :) Bermicourt (talk) 10:16, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
Understand, but how about shortening "gave a performance"? Could be "performed" or just "sang"? Trying.
ALT4: ... that the girls of the Mädchenkantorei Limburg, together with a women's choir, sang a concert of all contemporary music in a 2019 concert at Limburg Cathedral (pictured)? - I took "the" out, but think Limburg Cathedral is no proper name, just a bit sloppy for "Hoher Dom zu Limburg". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:08, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 6

C. W. Stephens

Harrods, c. 1905
Harrods, c. 1905
  • ... that C. W. Stephens was the architect of Harrods (pictured), Harvey Nichols, and Claridge's? Source: "In the 1890s Stephens was very active with big commercial projects – Harvey Nichols (1894) in Knightsbridge and Claridge's Hotel (1894-1898) in Mayfair ... Stephens became architect of Harrods from 1892 until his death" [18]

Created by Edwardx (talk), Philafrenzy (talk), and Whispyhistory (talk). Nominated by Edwardx (talk) at 00:08, 14 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg This article is new enough and long enough. The image is in the public domain, the hook facts are cited inline, the article is neutral and I detected no copyright issues. A QPQ has been done. My only quibble is that he does not seem to have actually designed Harrods building (rebuilt after being burned down in 1883), only taken over as its architect in 1892. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:37, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 8

British Rail Class 458

A South West Trains Class 458 which was converted from a former Gatwick Express Class 460. The unit number is 458533.
A South West Trains Class 458 which was converted from a former Gatwick Express Class 460. The unit number is 458533.

Improved to Good Article status by Pkbwcgs (talk). Self-nominated at 17:28, 8 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol voting keep.svg QPQ not needed. Promoted to GA on March 8. Hook is interesting. Article is NPOV with no obvious copyvio. Image is currently CC licensed. (I took the liberty of adding (pictured) to ALT-1.) The hook is inline cited using the term "reconfigured" instead of "converted" which I think is fine. The source used to cite that is offline (Modern Railways), however, meets what I would consider a reasonable definition of RS. All looks good. Chetsford (talk) 07:10, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
    Symbol question.svg Hi, I came by to promote this. I was wondering if it's obvious that the hook is referring to British Rail Class cars (it's not obvious to me). I also wonder if anyone cares. This is a GA; could you suggest a better hook? Yoninah (talk) 22:07, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
    @Yoninah: How about ALT3 which replaces "Class 460" with "trains" with a link to the article Class 460. Pkbwcgs (talk) 10:34, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
    @Pkbwcgs: I have a feeling you're so familiar with the subject that you can't see it like an outsider. I don't live in England. I have never taken a train. I'm afraid that ALT3 isn't even remotely interesting to me. What would make it interesting is adding another fact that I could relate to, like the cars were too squishy, or cars were eliminated in the process of renovation, or...? Yoninah (talk) 10:56, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
    @Yoninah: How about ALT4? Pkbwcgs (talk) 13:51, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
    @Pkbwcgs: Better, thanks! Please add an inline cite after that sentence. Chetsford could you review ALT4 please? Yoninah (talk) 15:10, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
    @Yoninah: This source. Pkbwcgs (talk) 19:49, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
    @Pkbwcgs: thank you. I meant you should add a cite to the article after this sentence: Six of the eight Class 460 trains lost three carriages in the process, leaving them as 5-car trains that were also reconfigured as class 458/5 trains. Yoninah (talk) 20:36, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
    @Yoninah: That is the best source I can find to give the general idea that the eight-car Class 460s were converted to six five-car Class 458. Pkbwcgs (talk) 16:41, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
    @Pkbwcgs: OK. So are you going to add the citation to the article?
    Meanwhile, I see someone else has deleted the part about losing 3 carriages. Yoninah (talk) 17:27, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
    @Yoninah: I reverted the edit as the previous version was more detailed. Pkbwcgs (talk) 18:43, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
    @Pkbwcgs: OK. Please add the inline cite to the sentence about losing three carriages. Yoninah (talk) 19:27, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
    @Yoninah: I can't find a citation that says that the Class 460s have lost three carriages. The best I could give was the website I have stated above. I may need help from another user who has expertise in British railways. Maybe User:Redrose64 could help. I have done a detailed search and the citation from railnews was the best I could find. Perhaps this citation could be better but it doesn't make a specific mention of the Class 460s losing carriages. Pkbwcgs (talk) 21:19, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
    @Pkbwcgs: OK. So from a DYK point of view, we need another hook. From a GA point of view, that sentence does need to be sourced, or deleted. Yoninah (talk) 22:10, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
    From what I understand, it goes something like this. Class 458 was originally 30 x 4-car units, total 120 cars; class 460 was originally 8 x 8-car units, total 64 cars; for a grand total of 184 cars. Of the 8-car units, six have been reduced to 5-car units and redesignated class 458, releasing (6 x (8-5)) = 18 cars; the other two 8-car units were disbanded, releasing 16 cars of which four have been stripped for spares and scrapped. This means that the cars released from class 460 units totalled (18 + 16 - 4) = 30 cars, exactly the number required to strengthen all of the 4-car Class 458 units to 5-car. The final tally is 36 x 5-car units, total 180 cars. So in terms of factual accuracy, ALT4 should have the word "each" inserted before the word "lost". But I don't have a source explicitly stating that. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 00:07, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
    The more I look at this, the more shaky ALT4 becomes. Having now analysed the individual car numbers allocated to the units before and after conversion (using various editions of the Platform 5 "British Railways Locomotives & Coaching Stock"), here is the breakdown:
    Former units 460001 and 460002 were entirely split up, each car ending up in a different unit, with six cars from each (12 in all) going to former 4-car units, three cars being redistributed among the other former Class 460 units, and one car scrapped
    Former units 460003 to 460008 were partially split up, with three cars from each unit (18 in all) going to former 4-car units, but the remaining five cars of each were not kept together:
    • 458531 includes two cars from 460008 and one each from 460002, 460003 and 460006
    • 458532 includes three cars from 460007 and one each from 460004 and 460005
    • 458533 includes three cars from 460003 and one each from 460006 and 460007
    • 458534 includes four cars from 460004 and one from 460008
    • 458535 includes four cars from 460005 and one from 460001
    • 458536 includes three cars from 460006 and one each from 460002 and 460008
    The four scrapped cars were one each from 460001, 460003, 460007 and 460008.
    So I find that there isn't a single instance of a class 458 unit containing five cars from the same class 460 unit, which is what we would expect if three cars had been removed from six of the 8-car units. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:50, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
  • @Pkbwcgs, Chetsford, Yoninah, and Redrose64: This has been stuck for over a month. Any updates? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 09:10, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
    I added a new hook above. Pkbwcgs (talk) 14:02, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 9

Susan Montgomery Williams

Though not the brand Susan used, the colors remain visually appealing
Though not the brand Susan used, the colors remain visually appealing
  • ... that Susan Montgomery Williams was not only the world record holder in blowing the largest bubble gum bubble, she was arrested at least three times for making "sound explosions" with the gum and while popping in the courtroom one day, the bailiff mistook the sound for a gun? Source: "Susan Montgomery Williams, 47, had TV fame from bubble-blowing". Press Telegram. 2008-10-08. Retrieved 2019-03-09.
    • ALT1:... that you can get arrested for making "sound explosions" with bubble gum as world-bubble-blowing champ Susan Montgomery Williams discovered during her career?
  • Comment: Please include this dyk in the April Fool's edition.

Created by Barbara Page (WVS) (talk). Nominated by Barbara (WVS) (talk) at 19:17, 9 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Drive-by comment: neither hook sounds suitable for April Fools methinks. ALT0 is too long, and ALT1 has possible BLP implications. Please suggest alternative hooks. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:47, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
There's not BLP issue since subject's been dead 10+ years. EEng 01:21, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
  • I don't see any value, really, in a joint nomination, and neither of the proposed hooks is April Fools material because they have no "fooling" quality and could run any day of the year. There may be some AFD potential in
ALT2 ... that champion bubblegum-blower Susan Montgomery Williams died when her aneurysm popped?
but honestly, even that one could run any day in the "quirky" slot. EEng 01:21, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
I don't see the problem. I wrote it specifically because it would be one of those topics that would make people wonder....? PPerfect for April 1st. I like the short alt2 version. I don't want to lose the arrests that she enjoyed but WP is all about consensus. Best Regards, Barbara 19:02, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
I don't know, while I think ALT2 works, in its form, it could work even as a hook on a quirky slot and not necessarily an AFD hook. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:57, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
To clarify, a full review is needed of the article and of the only remaining hook, ALT2. This is no longer eligible for April Fools' Day. Original hook has been struck as far too long (275 prose characters). BlueMoonset (talk) 15:06, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
Since this has been stuck for a while, I'll leave a comment for ALT2. The problem with it is that the "pop" wording is nowhere in the article, and while I understand it's a pun, it still means the hook wording doesn't exactly reflect the article text. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:20, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
That's silly. Dying "of an aneurysm" means the aneurysm burst; the article text doesn't have to literally say "burst" (much less "popped"). It's no different than if a watchmaker had a coronary and the hook said that his "ticker pooped out". EEng 14:39, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Mahendra Nath Pandey

Mahendra Nath Pandey in 2017
Mahendra Nath Pandey in 2017

5x expanded by Royroydeb (talk). Self-nominated at 16:00, 9 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Comment: According to the guidelines of DYK, hooks that focus on negative aspects of the subject must be avoided. Well, I am aware of it. But in this case, getting imprisoned during the emergency is not something "negative". Emergency is a period during which, civil rights were curbed amongst others. All those people who protested, who were imprisoned during this period are considered as "heroes" in India. So, imprisonment during emergency is not similar to imprisonment due to rape/loot/murder etc.
  • 1. Size check: Before expansion - 121 words. After expansion 379 words. This is not a 5x expansion. Please check and clarify.
5x character expansion and not word expansion. DYK tool shows "article is at 5x now". RRD (talk) 15:50, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
So on checking character expansion - Before - 121 words (Characters no spaces = 618) (Characters with spaces 731). After - 379 words (Characters no spaces = 1992) (Characters with spaces 2363). This is not 5x expansion even considering character count. Yes, the DYK tool shows "article is at 5x now" but is the DYK tool 100% accurate? Why am I getting different values? Why not just increase the article so as to make sure even on manual expansion the character expansion is correct? Maybe this difference could be because it is counting the date of 5x expansion from 9 March and not 2 March. If we have to consider 7 days from 9 March would 2nd March be included? DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 12:38, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Did you know/Supplementary guidelines#Supplementary article length rules - Character count includes spaces and excludes lists, tables etc. The most recent version ahead of expansion is this. It has 415 charatcers. The current version has 2293 characters. The ratio is 5.525. The tool User:Dr pda/prosesize.js also confirms the same. Also 2nd March is included. You can check here, the current active nominations run from 10 to 17 march (a difference of 7). RRD (talk) 09:20, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
  • 2. Spot copyvio check: Fine.
  • 3. It would be nice, if not required, to explain why he was imprisoned and when since the DYK is emphasizing this. The article only says "Pandey spent five months in prison during The Emergency." You have explained something in your comment, but the article of Mahendra Nath Pandey doesn't mention this, and we can't assume everyone knows this.
That is not given in the source. Also other sources say the same. RRD (talk) 15:50, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
Yes. This is what I mean too. Aren't there any other "older sources" about him describing his experience of the emergency? Or atleast add a note about it on the page for the line related to the emergency with a note with sources saying that "getting imprisoned during the emergency is not something "negative"" as you have mentioned in your comment. You are telling me this, but we can't assume the readers know this. DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 12:38, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
No. Sources only say that he was imprisoned during the emergency. Such a note in the main article is not required as it would bring bias in the article. Also emergency is linked in the article. RRD (talk) 09:20, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
  • 4. Why does the hook have to say he is 'BJP MP'? Why not just 'Indian MP'? I have no objections really to this, but since Wikipedia caters to an international audience, wouldn't "Indian MP" be better?
Ok. I have no problem in the change. RRD (talk) 15:50, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
  • 5. The DYK has an image, but "(pictured)" has not been added to the DYK text. Also the caption of the image is currently "Pandey in 2015". I think it would be better just to have his name "Mahendra Nath Pandey" in the caption.
Done.RRD (talk) 15:50, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
  • 6. The image of Mahendra Nath Pandey is just about ok according to DYK criteria "Consider the quality of the image, and its clarity at 100 by 100 pixels, the size at which DYK images appear on the Main Page." But there are more images of him in Wikipedia commons which can be considered and which are of higher resolution.
Done. RRD (talk) 15:50, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
  • 7. "He belongs to Bharatiya Janata Party".... belongs sounds weird. This sentence should be copy-edited and rephrased.
Done. @DiplomatTesterMan:. RRD (talk) 15:50, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 18:11, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
@DiplomatTesterMan: RRD (talk) 09:20, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg In good faith I will say that all the issues related to this DYK have been sorted out from my side, apart from point number 3. I request a new reviewer to go through it. DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 15:34, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Suggestion--For an even better hook, replace BJP MP with his' being a current minister. A minister who got imprisoned is definitely more hooky to an average reader than a random MP who got imprisoned. WBGconverse 06:25, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
ALT1:...that Indian minister Mahendra Nath Pandey was imprisoned during the The Emergency? RRD (talk) 14:26, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 10

Minnesota History (journal)

Moved to mainspace by Bobamnertiopsis (talk). Self-nominated at 02:44, 13 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg A better hook probably needs to be proposed here as, even as someone who is interested in academic research myself, this is rather bland. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:33, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
How are these? (courtesy pings @Narutolovehinata5:, @Bobamnertiopsis:)
= paul2520 (talk) 13:14, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
The new hooks are far far better (with a preference to ALT2 as it shows the contrast in topics in greater detail). My only concern though is if the mention that it was provided free to the MHS is necessary. That and that the notability tag has to be resolved first. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 21:12, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
Thanks Narutolovehinata5. We're working on dealing with the notability tag--we have some sources that will take a little time to track down because they're offline. In lieu of that, here's ALT3:
Thanks! —Collint c 01:55, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 11

Lady Ponce

Lady Ponce
Lady Ponce

Created by Toreightyone (talk). Self-nominated at 23:57, 18 March 2019 (UTC).

Policy compliance:

Image eligibility:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol question.svg Nominated on the 7th day, 1806 characters, Copycvio unlikely, 0% at EarWigs. Hook is 136 characters.
Issues: --- Coffeeandcrumbs 08:38, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

  • albums and singles unsourced, should be cited or can be commented out. Fixed --- Coffeeandcrumbs 23:20, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
  • the article focuses almost entirely on tabloid fodder. Can you add some info about her music. Since that is her basis of notability why is it not discussed. Why is she called "the queen of Bikutsi"?
  • I don't think this article demonstrates notability as written.
  • please add some location info to the hook, easiest way: "..her wedding in Les Clayes-sous-Bois a secret", either that or add "Cameroonian singer". I don't see any location marker to orient the reader. Fixed --- Coffeeandcrumbs 23:20, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
  • how do we know this photo was legitimately added to Commons. Anyone could have uploaded it

Sorry to do this. Please ping me and I will return. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 08:39, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Hey Coffeeandcrumbs, how does this hook sound?
  • ALT1: ... that Cameroonian singer Lady Ponce (pictured) invited the paparazzi to her wedding at 3:30 pm, but actually held it at 9:00 am to keep her wedding a secret?
As for the image, how does the one on the side look? I can message Sergelowe (uploader) with any questions you have. As it stands right now, the citations for the singles and appear at citation 16 on the discography box on the right. I can add info regarding her music and her nickname either today or tomorrow. Thanks, Toreightyone (talk) 21:14, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
Who is Sergelowe? The uploaders for the images are Rogeraepoh and Photokadaffi. I think we have to go with no photo. Her face is not visible in the other photo and I have suspect that the main photo is COPYVIO. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 23:42, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
Can you add some sentences about when she release the albums. Something like: "Lady Ponce released her debut album in ... Her second album, Le ventre & le bas-ventre, came in ..." I can not pass the article as neutral when it focuses so much on tabloid-y stuff. Right now, her biography is mostly rumours, weddings, and hoaxes claiming she died. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 23:42, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
Sergelowe is the uploader for the image I added. It may be possible to crop the one I added in a way that focuses on her face - but if it cannot, then no photo is fine with me. Toreightyone (talk) 00:50, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
Symbol possible vote.svg OK, both photos are no good. Moving on the article, it fails WP:NPOV and WP:UNDUE. It has an undue focus on the subject's personal life. It does not appear that the subject is only notable for her personal life.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 02:27, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

MLS Cup 1996

  • Reviewed: TBD
  • Comment: Article is still being expanded, so things are a bit fluid.

5x expanded by SounderBruce (talk). Self-nominated at 06:58, 12 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg @SounderBruce: This article is a fivefold expansion and is new enough and long enough. The hook facts are cited inline, the article is neutral and I detected no copyright issues. A QPQ has not yet been done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:22, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Deep water cycle

  • ... that recent research has shown the presence of a deep water cycle all the way down through the Earth's lower mantle?
    • ALT1:... that minerals in Earth's transition zone and lower mantle make up the deep water cycle and have the potential to hold large amounts of water?

Created by Smcminn1234 (talk) at 20:17, 11 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg large enough, written neutrally, sourced. Age ok. Can't use wikipedia as a source (footnote 1). Also, sources seem to call it "Deep water cycle", not "deep earth water cycle". Also, the sources seem to be less definite about the subject's existence than the article is...? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:50, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Neither the nominator nor RockMagnetist has been able to respond. This will be marked for closure if there's no response in a week. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 09:05, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol delete vote.svg I know it hasn't been a week yet, but RockMagetist edited a couple of days ago, and yet failed to respond to a talk page message inviting them to return here. Marking for closure for lack of responses from the nominator. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:00, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
  • @Narutolovehinata5: I didn't respond because I assumed that by "respond" you meant address the concerns that Casliber has with Deep water cycle. To do that, I need the time to read some of the secondary sources that I added to the reading list. Casliber is questioning the very existence of the subject! You promised me a week - please give me that week. RockMagnetist (DCO visiting scholar) (talk) 05:36, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Also, please note that RockMagnetist and RockMagnetist (DCO visiting scholar) are separate accounts. When logged in as RockMagnetist, I don't see messages for RockMagnetist (DCO visiting scholar). RockMagnetist (DCO visiting scholar) (talk) 05:56, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Morpeth, Northumberland

Improved to Good Article status by Dreamy Jazz (talk) and SkyGazer 512 (talk). Nominated by Dreamy Jazz (talk) at 12:20, 12 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Full review will follow later, but I think ALT4 has the best wording, so let's go with that. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:34, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 12

Media coverage of 2019 India–Pakistan standoff

Created by DiplomatTesterMan (talk). Self-nominated at 23:18, 16 March 2019 (UTC), co-nom by DBigXray 12:40, 22 March 2019 (UTC) .

  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed, since the nomination is continuing rather than being withdrawn. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:04, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Kate Gallego

Kate Gallego
Kate Gallego
  • ... that Kate Gallego (pictured) is the youngest and only female mayor of the ten largest cities in the United States? ABQ Journal
  • Reviewed: IOU and I know I'm behind on a few....
  • Comment: She'll be sworn in March 21. YMMV on the hook so please help me write a better one if you can.

Created/expanded by Muboshgu (talk). Self-nominated at 02:53, 16 March 2019 (UTC).

Symbol question.svg Interesting life, on good sources, no copyvio obvious. Th eimage is license and strong eve in small size, I am not happy with the hook, a sonstruction of some record. Sorry to have missed the day of her being sworn in. - How about something mentioning her position, but also that she was/is interested in air quality? I believe that ecological topics are welcome. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:52, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
  • ALT1* ... that among the current mayors of the ten largest cities in the United States, Kate Gallego (pictured) is the youngest and the only female? - more grammatical and perhaps more accurate. Johnbod (talk) 00:06, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Historical significance

  • ...that historical significance is subjective and open to challenge? Source: "But historical significance is often a subjective decision, something that makes it contestable (open to challenge)." (and [19] the source)
    • ALT1: ...that historical significance defines history books, street names, museum displays, pictures on stamps, bank notes, and television shows? Source: " Ideas about historical significance help to shape how the past is remembered and represented and influence who gets remembered and who gets forgotten and who and what gets included in history books, commemorated on bank notes, in the names of streets and squares, in museum displays, in television programmes, and so on" (and [20] the source)

Created by RTG (talk). Self-nominated at 13:23, 12 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Leaving aside a review of the article itself, I've corrected some grammar issues with the hooks; struck ALT0 as unsupported by the source ("often" ≠ always in all cases) which itself isn't remotely a qualified WP:RS for a point of that magnitude, however WP:BLUEy; and struck ALT1 as unsupported/ungrammatical/tautological. It isn't "defining" "pictures on stamps" or "museum displays" and, to the extent historical significance shapes others' inclusion in that laundry list, such reshaping is the very essence of the concept of historical significance. The hook essentially says "historical significance is historical significance", which fails the "be interesting" criterion for DYK. — LlywelynII 19:24, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
ALT3 seems bland but unobjectionable. ALT4 is a quote quoted by your source; Febvre's original work should be found and cited and it's just his opinion, not a fact. ALT5 isn't cited in the article. — LlywelynII 20:22, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
  • To check through the rest of the list, though, the article is timely but currently consists of an overlong intro from one source (WP:LEADCITE; WP:ONESOURCE) and three lists without commentary (MOS:LEADREL; WP:LISTDD); all three lists are theoretical and sourced to historians unimportant enough that they lack existing biography articles (WP:UNDUE, WP:FRINGE) rather than any discussion about the actual criteria used by major past or present historians; it's barely long enough (1520ish elig. chars.) but full of grammatical mistakes and needs a rebuild (e.g., the WP:LEADSENTENCE vaguely describes the topic instead of defining it) that will change that number; removing the current deadweight would put it under the requirement; Earwig finds no major copyvio, but the lists need an overhaul to make more sense even if they're found to be notable; QPQ done.

    At minimum, ♦ the lead sentence needs to define the topic; ♦ the lead section needs to be an overview of the body of the article, not the body of the article itself; as such, ♦ the running text in the body of the article needs to be (at minimum) 2–3 times longer than the text in the lead; ♦ the citations in the lead need to be moved to the body; ♦ the lists that are currently being used should have some indication as to who these people are and why anyone should care about their opinions on historical significance; ♦ the lists that are currently being used should be rephrased to explain exactly what each point means and how it is different from the other points, ideally with clear examples.

    I've often said that this is DYK, not GA, and that's completely true (a good article would include discussions of changing historiography over time discussing major international historians/schools from Sima Qian to hagiographers to Gibbon to the Marxists) but there are some minimum standards that aren't being met here that really should be. — LlywelynII 20:22, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
@LlywelynII: Thanks Llywelyn, I have added a separate short lead and I understand what you are saying about referencing the lists against each other, but these were simply the lists that seem to be used a lot in a relatively superficial search and read up on the topic. I will look into validating the lists a little better but it will be down to online availability. ~ R.T.G 21:16, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
Well, if you see what I'm saying, then you understand that online availability doesn't actually make these lists NOTABLE or non-FRINGE. There has to be some context that other people actually pay attention to these particular writers or that their ideas represent widespread consensus in the field, established practice among actually noteworthy historians, etc.

If that's really impossible to manage, then we're better off moving this to a sandbox for future work and redirecting to the good general treatment at Historiography or sth. — LlywelynII 21:21, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
I have expanded the article a little. Historians notoriously do not get the kind of recognition you seem to be trying to demand. I assure you, there is more than copy and paste going on here even if there is no FA yet, so I invite you to the articles talkpage to discuss further relevance of the lists.
I invite you to read historiography for that context, as I have done. This subject is widely published and is not covered on Wikipedia. I am sorry that you cannot bear start class articles, but that's where articles start. If you are offended by this article or believe it misrepresents sources, is based on unreliable sources or is unbalanced by fringe views, discuss on the talkpage or request deletion. DYK is asking for stub-class articles recently. Well, here's one both of us would have expected to be covered already. I've put it on the history project. Let's get it through the DYK and see if an article comes of it, ~ R.T.G 03:58, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
If you'd like to help, find me a connection that says Lis Cercadillo, Ministry of Education (ESP), various important university postings, is the same author. If she is not, why can I not find the Spanish Lis, referred to all over the place in English, who is? ~ R.T.G 04:50, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
@LlywelynII:, I invite you now to review the article again and remember, it is a start, and as such is written to encourage participation and interest, not instil authority, so I encourage you to help me improve the rationale of the lists as an important part of the subject rather than simply demand credentials. ~ R.T.G 14:54, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Konstantin Mihailov

Created by Flibirigit (talk). Self-nominated at 18:20, 12 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Long enough, new enough, neutral, well referenced, with no obvious copyvio. Great hook which is cited inline. QPQ is done. 97198 (talk) 12:40, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Hi, I came by to promote this. I don't understand why it's important to say he retired at age 49, especially as it seems he came out of retirement and really retired at age 51. I also don't see a cite for the age 49 retirement. Yoninah (talk) 21:23, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
The ages at which he stopped playing ice hockey and roller hockey respectively are cited in the "International career" section. The age is mentioned since it is well beyond a normal age of retirement for a competitive level hockey player. Flibirigit (talk) 03:48, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 13

Mary Stuart Fisher

Created by 97198 (talk). Self-nominated at 12:22, 13 March 2019 (UTC).

  • I will review this shortly. Adog (TalkCont) 21:36, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol confirmed.svg Article was a very good and intriguing read. No problems in terms of length (~1,955 characters) with page recently created (13 March 2019). Article itself is adequately sourced by reliable sources, neutral in tone, and free of any plagiarism/copyright/possible close paraphrasing. The hook is cited and interesting (an example of individuals discouraged from doing what they want to pursue, and in turn, become successful/notable for such (good on her)). Additionally, hook is sizable in length, in broadness interesting, and in proper format. No images and thus no problems in copyright. If I had to input something, I would add a small sentence about her death from the Radiology journal just to conclude with after her retirement so it wholly encompasses her life (in summation). Well done! Adog (TalkCont) 22:24, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

  • Symbol question.svg Hi, I came by to promote this, but it's unclear to me how she meets WP:BIO. Other than her write-up by the American Association for Women Radiologists, what did she do that is notable? (BTW that article speaks about a 50-year teaching career, which is not mentioned in the Wikipedia article.) Yoninah (talk) 20:28, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
  • @Yoninah: I believe the article meets WP:GNG as shown by the sources. Feel free to nominate for AfD if you disagree. 97198 (talk) 07:13, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
  • @97198: please add her notability to the lead. Yoninah (talk) 19:34, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 14

Orvar Swenson

  • Reviewed: Lu Xiaopeng
  • Comment: Note that congenital megacolon is synonymous with Hirschsprung's disease.

Created by 97198 (talk). Self-nominated at 12:01, 14 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Reviewing. New enough, copyvio ok. Will complete soon. Whispyhistory (talk) 23:07, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Hi @97198:. Did he do it solely or with Alexander Bill? All else ok.Whispyhistory (talk) 18:28, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
  • @Whispyhistory: From the sources it doesn't seem 100% clear. Bill and Swenson certainly developed and reported on the technique together, but whether Bill was in the operating theatre is unclear. That the surgery is known as the "Swenson pull-through" is maybe an indication. In any case, I don't think the hook is inaccurate – whether or not Bill was directly involved, Swenson certainly would have had assistance. 97198 (talk) 13:37, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Olivia Jade Giannulli

  • ALT1 ... that there has been a delay in the processing of the trademark for Olivia Jade due to "poor punctuation" on the application? [24] [25]
  • Reviewed: forthcoming / needed

Created by Chetsford (talk). Self-nominated at 23:40, 14 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Date, size (bare minimum but passes), copyvio check, neutrality, hooks, pass. QPQ review needed. But I also have one more concern that would be best answered by a second reviewer. The article is borderline with regards to WP:BLP - most of the content is tabloid-level criticism of the subject. I am unsure if it is due weight to discuss such incidents including the one the hook is citing. And frankly, removing even one sentence from this article could make it not eligible as it will be too short. Not sure if we want this type of content for the front page. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:06, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
The article is currently at AfD; therefore no decision on DYK can be made until and unless it is kept. Daniel Case (talk) 04:11, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
Outsider comment; courtesy ping to all parties as AFD is closed as keep and article has been further expanded. Review can be continued although the problem of recentism would need to be addressed per tag. Daniel Case, Piotrus, Chetsford. :) Adog (TalkCont) 15:29, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. Since the article passed AfD (which I have not been aware of), this suggests it is at least notable. It also has been expanded. As for the tag about 'being slanted towards recent events', I am not sure it is justified - is there any coverage of her that's not about 'recent events'? I am inclined to change my vote to GTG unless counter-arguments are presented (please ping me if anyone wants to address me). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:59, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Regardless of notability or recentism issues, the hook seems to be a BLP case and personally I don't feel comfortable using it. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:40, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
@Chetsford: Would you be able to propose an alternate hook? I'm concerned that the current one falls afoul of BLP. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew
Sure, Narutolovehinata5. Alt proposed, above. Chetsford (talk) 22:30, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. @Piotrus: Thoughts on the new hook? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:07, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
Ugh. Possible BLP issues... but I guess we can leave the choice of the hook to the closing admin, both are ok-ish, if we squint long enough... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:43, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Xing Shizhong

Created by Zanhe (talk). Self-nominated at 01:27, 16 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg This article is new enough and long enough. The hook facts are cited inline, the article is neutral and I detected no copyright issues. A QPQ has been done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:02, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Hi, I came by to promote this, but I don't see the hook wording in the article. The article cites Western imperialism as the source of instability, and the United States as the source of conflict. Aside from that, I think this reads like propaganda. Would you like to suggest a different hook about the subject himself? Yoninah (talk) 19:14, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
  • @Yoninah: Cause of conflicts is obviously also source of instability, but I've changed the hook wording to match the article and source exactly. Xing's view is obviously biased, but the hook itself is neutral because it uses in-text attribution, see WP:BIASED. Chinese propaganda is interesting and intensely studied by scholars. In fact, the immediate source of the hook is a scholarly work written by a Singaporean professor and published by the Cambridge University Press, and it devotes several pages to the analysis of Xing's opinion. That being said, I propose the following hook for your consideration, which is probably less controversial but also less interesting IMO:
ALT1 ... that General Xing Shizhong served as President of the PLA National Defence University, which trains China's top military officers? -Zanhe (talk) 23:36, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
  • @Zanhe: you're right, ALT1 is not interesting. But without calling the original hook propaganda, it just looks like U.S. bashing from a nation that has had plenty of criticism tossed its own way. I think you could develop a hook from the fact that the subject had a 50-year military career, with interesting facts in the second paragraph under Biography. Yoninah (talk) 00:29, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
@Yoninah: Sorry I got sidetracked by other stuff in the last few days and forgot to respond. How about this:
  • ALT2 ... that Xing Shizhong was promoted for his performance in the Sino-Vietnamese War and later served as president of a university that trains China's top military officers? -Zanhe (talk) 05:07, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 15


  • ... that the medieval Perso-Arabic legend of al-Nadirah was the source of Hans Christian Andersen's fairy tale "The Princess and the Pea"? Source: "The widespread popular legend about the Hatrene princess Nażira and her betrayal of the city for love is still lives on in the modern fairy tale (by the Danish author Hans Christian Andersen) “the princess and the pea”" [26]
  • Reviewed: coming soon

Created by ZxxZxxZ (talk). Self-nominated at 20:55, 15 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Thank you. The hook is excellent. The Princess and the Pea is one of my favourite tales and no doubt this information will be of interest to many. QPQ to do, copyvio okay, new enough, sourced and cited. One bare url needs a fix. Character count too low. Can you expand a bit more, maybe add the information of why it linked with the fairy tale? Another source [27]. Ping me when done. Whispyhistory (talk) 12:57, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
    • Whispyhistory, I get the character count of the prose at around 2,000, shouldn't that be enough? I think the hook needs to be reworded though: neither its source, nor the first relevant thing I could see in a quick search [28] suggests that the legend was the actual source of the fairy tale. All that is stated is that they share a theme, stopping short of implying a causal connection (which is likely but not certain and it would be otherwise quite difficult to establish). – Uanfala (talk) 09:03, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 17

Felipe Reinoso

Created/expanded by Vycl1994 (talk). Self-nominated at 22:46, 19 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg The lead is too short. In the original hook "state legislature" must be replaced by "state legislature of US". RRD (talk) 17:07, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
The article lede now mentions Reinoso's tenure on the Connecticut House, and his election to the Peruvian legislature. ALT3 above specifies U. S. state legislature in addition to the wikilink state legislature (United States) that was already present. Vycl1994 (talk) 17:39, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
@Vycl1994: The lead claims that he was born in circa 1950. However, there is no source for it in the article. I have also added a when tag to the article. The article needs a little copyedit also. RRD (talk) 07:04, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
@Royroydeb: The biographical sketch attached to Reinoso's interview with Reyes states "Reinoso was born in Peru and immigrated to Connecticut in 1969" Keating, Pazniokas, and Lender (2008) states "Rep. Felipe Reinoso, a Bridgeport Democrat, flew back from his native Peru - where he lived for 19 years before moving to Connecticut".... Both references are linked to the sentence "Reinoso and his family immigrated to the United States in 1969, settling in Bridgeport, Connecticut." at the moment. Vycl1994 (talk) 14:33, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 18

Chowkidar Chor Hai

  • ... that Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his ministers prefixed the name 'chowkidar' (watchmen) to their social media profiles in response to election slogan Chowkidar Chor Hai? Source: "In recent days, leaders and supporters of Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) have launched a coordinated effort to popularize his watchman campaign, with many changing their social media names to add the prefix ‘chowkidar’" Reuters, "Prime Minister Narendra Modi today changed his personal Twitter account name to -- Chowkidar Narendra Modi. Following Prime Minister, BJP president and other BJP leaders also changed their profile names to Chowkidar Amit Shah, Chowkidar Piyush Goyal, etc. The campaign has been launched to counter the Congress President Rahul Gandhi's " chowkidar chor hai" jibe against the Prime Minister."Economic Times, Telegraph

Created by DBigXray (talk). Self-nominated at 07:04, 24 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg I've modified the hook slightly to include "Narendra Modi" in it. The article is new enough and long enough, and QPQ is present. However, the article has some slight grammatical issues and most pressingly it is up for AfD. I'd like to reevaluate pending the result of the AfD. Raymie (tc) 17:54, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
  • "his ministers" seems quite strangely put. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 22:07, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
  • I'm assuming his government ministers? Not exactly a big leap of faith in a parliamentary democracy... Raymie (tc) 23:13, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
  • The article was kept at AFD, but the 2019 Indian general elections are currently ongoing, so in light of the rule at WP:DYKHOOK for avoiding articles featuring election candidates up to 30 days before the election, it would seem that the promotion at least will have to wait until they have concluded. – Uanfala (talk) 01:23, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
  • There's also an RM now on this page, as a note, requesting a move to Main Bhi Chowkidar. Raymie (tc) 22:34, 16 April 2019 (UTC)


Nakrajeny mazanec (4).JPG

Created by Bermicourt (talk). Self-nominated at 20:28, 18 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Can a better hook be proposed? The current one is very niche and I don't think that it could be interesting to a broad audience. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:40, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Really? I think it's quite eye-catching. People play games for money, for points, for chips and counters but never for currant buns! It's so unusual it's almost April Fool's Day worthy! Sometimes 'niche' is the new 'cool'! I've added an alternative which is a bit more succinct. Bermicourt (talk) 12:06, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
I don't think most people know what currant buns are to be honest (neither did I until this nomination). Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:07, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
I disagree. I can't speak for America, but in Britain and Europe everyone knows what currant buns are. But the name is also a real giveaway: it's a bun with currant in it lol!. Anyway the update now includes an image of a Hedewig a link to another new article which explains what Hedewigs are as well - so even more interest for the DYK reader! Bermicourt (talk) 13:50, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
Yeah I think the hook would only work if there's an image, otherwise it's not very eye-catching. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:58, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

High Orchard

Llanthony Provender Mill, High Orchard
Llanthony Provender Mill, High Orchard
Fielding & Platt 150-ton rivetting machine (1885)
Fielding & Platt 150-ton rivetting machine (1885)

Created by Philafrenzy (talk) and Whispyhistory (talk). Nominated by Philafrenzy (talk) at 21:28, 21 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg This article is new enough and long enough. The hook facts are cited inline, the article is neutral and I detected no copyright issues. A QPQ has been done. The image is in the public domain but I don't think it goes with the hook. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:42, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Hi, I came by to promote this, but I find the hook more a statement of fact than hooky. It's also not clear that High Orchard is an industrial area. Could you come up with something more attention grabbing, perhaps playing on some of the names or the incarnations of the area? Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 19:18, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
  • ALT1:... that an arson attack on Llanthony Provender Mill (pictured) in Gloucester's High Orchard area left it a "dilapidated shell"? Philafrenzy (talk) 21:21, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
  • @Philafrenzy: thank you for the alt, but isn't that an obvious result? I've combed the article for other hooks, but the material is very dry. Yoninah (talk) 13:15, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
I will have another look at my sources. Philafrenzy (talk) 13:19, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg That's interesting, thanks. Do you have a link for "rivetting machine"? Calling on new reviewer to look at ALT2. Yoninah (talk) 22:09, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
Linked, using British spelling. Philafrenzy (talk) 23:08, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg Honestly I don't really find ALT2 to be interesting. It seems rather dry, and perhaps a bit too complicated (it seems hard to tell if it's focusing on the industrial area or the machine). I think the original hook fact (about the area formerly being industrial but is now a shopping district) has potential: perhaps a new hook can be suggested based on that? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:53, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
@Philafrenzy and Whispyhistory: Could you suggest alternate hooks here? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:59, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Kamchatka meteor

Timelapse of the Kamchatka meteor's smoke trail by the JMA's Himawari 8
Timelapse of the Kamchatka meteor's smoke trail by the JMA's Himawari 8

Created by Exoplanetaryscience (talk). Self-nominated at 18:41, 20 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg @Exoplanetaryscience: New article, long enough, and within policy - although the references could do with improving. My main concern is with the hook. ALT1 seems a bit disparaging, so I prefer the first one. However, the diameter of the meteor seems to be 12 +- 2, not exactly 12 - it might be better just to say the name of it. Also, I don't understand where the 30 years number came from - it's smaller than the 2013 and 1908 ones, so shouldn't this be "the last 6 years"? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 22:21, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
Notice second largest in 30 years- a rather conservative estimate by the BBC source I gave first since we're only confident that similarly sized asteroids have only hit once in the last 30 years (the chelaybinsk event as you said) It wouldn't be supported by the source given, but I could say it was the third largest impact on Earth since 1900. I also chose to state the size of it over the name as I couldn't seem to fit both in without seeming overly verbose, or just the name without making the size of it seem rather meaningless. I might even say putting down the size range and risk getting verbose is better than not giving it at all. exoplanetaryscience (talk) 23:43, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
@Exoplanetaryscience: Sorry for the delay, I hadn't spotted your reply here. "third largest observed since 1900" might be easier to understand than "second largest in 30 years", since the latter presumably depends on an observational technique having changed 30 years ago (looking at the source for the BBC article at [32]). Perhaps "10-metre class asteroid" might be a way to avoid giving uncertainties on the diameter while not being overly precise. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 20:23, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
 Comment: I prefer the "third largest observed since 1900" with the keyword being observed. Given that "Events as large as this are statistically estimated to occur once every 20-40 years on average" it seems difficulty to justify that we know that it is the "third largest impact on Earth since 1900." --mikeu talk 21:27, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg Sorry for the delay with re-reviewing this. I think it's now good to go with the revised version of the first hook. I forgot to check for the QPQ earlier, but it isn't needed as it's your second DYK. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 18:26, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Hi, I came by to promote this, but the hook has too many numbers in it. Could you pare it down? Here's a suggestion:
  • ALT0a: ... that in 2018, the third-largest asteroid observed to impact Earth since 1900 fell over the Bering Sea near the Kamchatka Peninsula?
  • Also, why are you calling it an asteroid when the page name is meteor? Yoninah (talk) 19:37, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pinging @Exoplanetaryscience and Mu301. On 'asteroid', that's what it was before it fell into Earth's atmosphere (see Asteroid#Terminology), so that makes sense in the context: an asteroid fell and became a meteor. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 06:12, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Right, a meteor is the visible passage of an asteroid (or other object) thourgh the atmosphere. Asteroid is the "thing" and meteor is the impact "event". --mikeu talk 09:23, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
@Mike Peel: God, I'm horrible at being timely recently. Anyway, I think it would be good to include the size because otherwise you've just got "an unusually large asteroid" and nobody knows how big it is- is a golf ball particularly large for such an object? Perhaps an entire mountain? There's no good way to give reference save just giving a size. exoplanetaryscience (talk) 02:10, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
@Yoninah: see the reply from the nominator above. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 06:43, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
To explain "how big it is" I have a slight preference for TNT equivalent force as in ALT1. The primary notability of the event is that it released a great amount of energy when it detonated in the atmosphere.[33] A small mass moving fast or a large mass moving slow could have the same impact.[34] But, diameter is ok imo. --mikeu talk 13:23, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • @Exoplanetaryscience: all I'm saying is that the hook has too many numbers in it. If you want to keep the size of the meteor, then edit the hook so the size doesn't run into the date. Yoninah (talk) 14:26, 22 April 2019 (UTC)


Alright, here's a couple of proposed modifications, which do you like more? exoplanetaryscience (talk) 19:06, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • BTW the image is really too dark to be discerned at thumbnail size. Yoninah (talk) 20:26, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

J. H. Curle

  • ... that Scottish mining engineer and writer James Curle, estimated that he travelled about 1,850,000 miles during his lifetime?

5x expanded by Philafrenzy (talk) and Whispyhistory (talk). Nominated by Philafrenzy (talk) at 00:11, 24 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg The article's title is J.H. Curle but the hook uses James Curle. Also this reference shows that he travelled "about 1,85,000 miles". I think, it would be better if it is added in the article as well in hook. RRD (talk) 17:27, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Thanks, I added "about" to the article and the hook. Not sure about the name, I thought it read more smoothly with the name in full? Philafrenzy (talk) 19:22, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
@Philafrenzy: The last four publications are neither linked nor sourced. RRD (talk) 13:56, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
@Royroydeb: Done. Philafrenzy (talk) 07:24, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg Article expanded 5x times, QPQ done, cited and interesting hook, use of fair images, article follows all guidelines. RRD (talk) 08:26, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Thanks but now I look at it again the source also says he averaged 50,000 PA so that doesn't make 1.85m. I think I should come up with another hook. Philafrenzy (talk) 09:17, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
  • ALT1 ... that Scottish mining engineer in South Africa, James Curle, thought that the white race was being out-bred by other races?
  • ALT2 ... that Scottish mining engineer in South Africa, James Curle, questioned the future of the white race?
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Review needed of ALT hooks since original hook has been struck. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:47, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 19

Ehud Arye Laniado

  • ... that billionaire diamond trader Ehud Arye Laniado died during penis enlargement surgery? Source: "Billionaire Jewish diamond trader dies during penis enlargement operation. Belgian-Israeli Ehud Arye Laniado, 65, suffers heart attack after unnamed substance injected during cosmetic operation in France" ([35])
    • ALT1:... that ...?
  • Reviewed: not yet done

Created/expanded by Edwardx (talk), Philafrenzy (talk), and Snickers2686 (talk). Nominated by Edwardx (talk) at 23:50, 26 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol delete vote.svg The article is new and seems well referenced but does not come close to the minimum length required for DYK. Surtsicna (talk) 22:45, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
That's true, it's about 300 characters short. I expect Edwardx will expand it shortly. Philafrenzy (talk) 22:55, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
@Surtsicna:, it's now long enough. Please continue review. Philafrenzy (talk) 10:55, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
Philafrenzy "it's now long enough" - trust that is a reference to the article. Edwardx (talk) 11:01, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
I don't know what you mean. Philafrenzy (talk) 11:05, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg Oh yes, it's BBC quality now. The sources are all fine, the hook is excellent and referenced, but we still need a QPQ review. Surtsicna (talk) 11:19, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Pema Dhondup

Created by CAPTAIN MEDUSA (talk). Self-nominated at 21:35, 19 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg The article is too short, and contains less than 500 bytes of readable prose, which is all in the lead section. Please expand the article to have at least 1,500 bytes of readable prose. List and plot info do not count toward this total. —Ynhockey (Talk) 00:58, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
  • @Ynhockey: I've expand the article.___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 12:44, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
    • @CAPTAIN MEDUSA: Thanks, the length looks OK now, though I would still recommend expanding the article further. In any case, the article requires copyediting for grammar and style; I have added a relevant tag, this will likely be addressed by the guild of copyeditors. Feel free to post a request on their page to speed up the process. —Ynhockey (Talk) 13:28, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
    • @Ynhockey: I've fixed copyediting for grammar and style. ___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 13:24, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
      • @CAPTAIN MEDUSA: It seems that the article is still not well-written, and contains many English language mistakes. I see that you have requested a review at GOCE though, I think we can wait until they help you. I might be able to do so at a later time, but then another reviewer needs to look at the nom. —Ynhockey (Talk) 18:28, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
      • @Ynhockey: Article has been copy edited by Guild of Copy Editors___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 12:49, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Hook + source look good, article issues have been fixed. —Ynhockey (Talk) 13:44, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Hi, I came by to promote this, but I do not understand the hook. What is a "Nepalese Hollywood film"? The source doesn't call it that, nor does Wikipedia's article about it. Also, the hook seems to be implying that it is the first Nepalese Hollywood film, while the article says it is Dhondup's first Nepalese Hollywood film. I suggest you fix this description in the article and try a different hook. Mentioning his background or studies in Los Angeles might lend themselves to a better hook. Yoninah (talk) 20:10, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  • @CAPTAIN MEDUSA: you new hook doesn't make sense. "Between" implies a contrast between two things, not one. I also don't see the hook fact in the article. I fleshed out the biography and note that you are not making full use of your sources in writing the article. While I used his LinkedIn page for biographical details, you can look up these facts online and then credit them to other sources if you wish. Here is another hook idea:
  • ALT2: ... that Pema Dhondup studied filmmaking at the University of Southern California on a Fulbright scholarship so he could use the medium to tell the story of his "lost generation" of Tibetan youth? Yoninah (talk) 21:13, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 20

Coach's Corner

Moved to mainspace by Mindmatrix (talk). Self-nominated at 19:52, 20 March 2019 (UTC).

The "blood spray" hook is not an April fool's hook IMO and is not much of a hook either IMO. I would go with one of the other hooks for another day. Gatoclass (talk) 05:53, 25 March 2019 (UTC).

I agree that ALT2 is not great. The remaining three hooks are interesting. I suggest if possible though to tweak the remaining hooks to make use of the freely licensed photos of Don Cherry and/or Ron MacLean. The article currently has three areas with citation needed tags to be looked into. Flibirigit (talk) 23:52, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 21

Wolfgang Meyer

5x expanded by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 13:00, 24 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg I wonder if it would be a better option to split this hook into two separate hooks, it seems to be cramming too much information without really connecting either fact. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:41, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
  • I disagree: there are early music specialists, for whom the first half would be good. There are jazz clarinettists, for whom the second would be good. HE was both, and I'd like to show. RIP --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:13, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
I understand where you're coming from Gerda, but as of the moment the current hook is simply not working out. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 08:19, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
For you. Do you have a suggestion which shows his versatility differently? Putting him in a specialist corner wouldn't do justice to a great person. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:42, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
Here are some suggestions based on what I could glean at the article:
ALT1 ... that German clarinetist Wolfgang Meyer led masterclasses in Brazil, Canada, Finland, Italy and Japan?
ALT2 ... that German clarinetist Wolfgang Meyer was part of a chamber music ensemble together with his sister and his brother-in-law?
ALT3 ... that Wolfgang Meyer recorded Mozart's Clarinet Concerto on a historic basset clarinet?
ALT4 ... that reviews praised the performances of clarinetist Wolfgang Meyer for his "beautifully rounded, velvety tone" and for his voice being "always perfectly tuned and with extremely light articulation"?
If you don't like any of these suggestions, let's see what we can do with the original hook, but it won't work in its current form (it might work if rephrased, however). Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:58, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
Sigh. I asked you particularly for a hook showing his versatility, not a restriction to one small item. It's unuusal that a classical musician plays jazz!! None of your suggestions has anything about his broadness of approach, and the masterclasses are so boring that I strike them. Almost any classical musician with some standing does that, nothing unique to him. ALT2 might work if you name the sister (one of the most famous clarinetists there ever was, for her sensational entry as the fist woman with the Berlin Philharmonic), instead of playing down to someone making music with family. In ALT3, at least mention Harnoncourt, THE first promoter of historically informed performance. ALT4 is not wanted in general by the DYK crowd as possibly the view of just one critic, so I strike that also. I still like the original best. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:24, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Slight tweak to ALT2, what do you think?

ALT2a ... that German clarinetist Wolfgang Meyer was part of a chamber music ensemble together with his sister Sabine and his brother-in-law?
I really tried to make a hook that would be a summary or overview of his many activities, but it proved too difficult without making the wording awkward. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 21:02, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the offer. I don't remember asking for summary, just a hint at versatility. Someone else will have to review.
ALT4: ... that Wolfgang Meyer, who recorded Mozart's Clarinet Concerto on a historical basset clarinet, played his last concert with jazz saxophonist Peter Lehel? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:48, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed, including of the remaining ALT hooks. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:38, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Captain (2019 film)

Created by CAPTAIN MEDUSA (talk). Self-nominated at 19:18, 21 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Reviewed:Joravarsinh Jadav
  • Symbol possible vote.svg The hook is not interesting. The cast section is unsourced. There is one unsourced sentence in box office sub-section. RRD (talk) 13:57, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
  • @Royroydeb: I've added more alts and added refs to cast section and removed unsourced sentence in box office sub-section. ___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 13:14, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
I'd also like to mention that the article needs to be copyedited before it makes the main page, and have made a request over at WP:GOCE/R. I know that crore is linked in the article, but I'd also suggest that a conversion to USD be added to the article, if only for clarity (remember that not all readers are familiar with lakhs and crores). As the hook fact for ALTs 0 to 2 is no longer in the article, I've struck all of the above; @CAPTAIN MEDUSA: please suggest new hooks if possible, thanks. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:07, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
I would wait till the copyedit is over. RRD (talk) 11:36, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
Symbol possible vote.svg ALT1 still isn't a very good hook. And in any case, this can't continue until the copyediting is done, because right now there are several grammatical issues. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 04:11, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
The article looks better now but the hooks proposed here are still grammatically incorrect. Do you need assistance in fixing them? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:03, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5: yes please. ___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 12:54, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
ALT1a ... that Nepali Prime Minister Khadga Prasad Oli praised the 2019 film Captain for "delivering patriotism"?
Honestly I don't find the hook or the hook fact spectacular, but I'll let another reviewer take a look at this. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:04, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg This is probably worth giving a second look. Requesting a new reviewer. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:39, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 23

Ruth Hesse

  • Reviewed: Hermann Herlitz
  • Comment: Article comes with a rich list of roles and detailed recordings which I have no time to reference bit by bit.

Created by LouisAlain (talk) and Gerda Arendt (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 22:27, 29 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg There's just too much information being crammed here in the hook and it's rather difficult to read. I understand that you want to show the variety of roles she's had, but there might be another way to word the hook if you really wish to go in that direction. Will be suggesting alternatives below, the first based on ALT0 and the second is based on how she's performed internationally. I've also suggested an ALT3 but I honestly don't think it might appeal to non-classical music fans:
ALT1 ... that among the roles that mezzo-soprano Ruth Hesse has performed include the Nurse in Die Frau ohne Schatten and a part in the premiere performance of Henze's Der junge Lord?
ALT2 ... that German mezzo-soprano Ruth Hesse has performed at opera concerts in Spain, Sweden, Russia, the United States, South America, and Japan?
ALT3 ... that German mezzo-soprano Ruth Hesse was appointed a Kammersänger in 1982?
Another issue I have with the original hook is the words "created a role" - did she really invent the role or merely played it? I don't think I've ever heard the word "create" used in that sense. I will be leaving comments on article wordings later, including apparent typos and redundant words. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:07, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
You should know me for long enough not to waste time on proposals such as ALT2 and ALT3. A laundry list of places is not even wanted in articles of project opera, and the year of Kammersängerin says nothing if no birth date is supplied. ALT1 is possible but I don't see how not mentioning the highly notable and well-known places the things happened makes it better. Drop the ROH if you have to, - it was meant to illustrate that it's more than German speaking. The Salzburg performance, recorded, and alongside the most prominent singers of the time, should be mentioned, I'd say. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:22, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Remember that we are writing for a broad audience, and non-opera readers and editors are unlikely to see the significance of those factors. What may be obvious to those in the scene may not be to those who don't know. With that said, I can't really see any way else of moving forward here: suggesting more alternatives seems difficult considering the content in the article. Thus, I'll be requesting a second opinion here on ALT0 and ALT1. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:52, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Non-opera readers will not be interested in the article at all, and we should not lure them into it, imho. Readers can expect that something said in a hook has relevance, and if curious enough, they can click and find out the details. What we should not do is tell those who may be interested nothing more than a boring list of places without any music, and you can almost exchange the same list from one singer to the next. Remember ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:15, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Raja Koduri

Created by Feminist (talk). Self-nominated at 10:34, 23 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg I wonder if a better hook could be proposed here as, to be frank, neither are spectacular. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 09:00, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
  • I am open to hook suggestions. Do you have any ideas? feminist (talk) 05:14, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Maybe ALT2: ... that Raja Koduri heads a team of 4,500 people at Intel to design graphics processing units? Though I am not sure if relying on the interview (a primary source) for this is appropriate. feminist (talk) 05:31, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
@Feminist: From what I can tell, primary sources are accepted for stuff like personal information and uncontroversial statements. If you have concerns, you can always as WP:RSN. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:10, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, but my concern isn't with reliability per se (Barron's is certainly reliable for an interview), but rather whether it would be considered undue/promotional to use such a claim as a fact for DYK. It's, after all, a claim about a company division made by a company executive, and we have no way to verify this with a secondary source. Alternatively, ALT2a: ... that Raja Koduri says he leads a team of 4,500 people at Intel to design graphics processing units? feminist (talk) 13:51, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
I have concerns that that hook might be too promotional or too praiseworthy. Are there any other options? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 04:17, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
See, that's my point. feminist (talk) 06:53, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
I'm honestly not sure at this point. Apart from the one where he compared one of his companies to Pixar (which might also count as promotional), I don't really see anything else that's hook-worthy here. I'm starting to wonder if closure might be the ultimate option here: not every topic is meant for DYK unfortunately. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:38, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

───────────────────────── Does anyone else have ideas? Maybe ... that Raja Koduri joined Intel after working at its competitor AMD twice? This specifies the fact that Intel and AMD are competitors, highlighting the significance of him jumping ship. feminist (talk) 13:44, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

I don't know but that kind of sounds routine to be honest. People in business jump to rivals all the time. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 14:43, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
ALT4: ... that Raja Koduri developed hardware that enabled Apple to launch its Retina displays? I'll leave the choice to the reviewer/promoter. feminist (talk) 04:20, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
I think that would have actually been a good option; however the article only says that he worked on the development and that he didn't personally develop it or was involved in overseeing said development. If this could be clarified or the hook could be rephrased, this could be the best way to move forward. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:53, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
ALT5: ... that before joining AMD and then Intel, Raja Koduri worked on technology that allowed Apple to launch its Retina displays? I think this is the best way to combine the interesting aspects. If not, ALT4a: ... that Raja Koduri worked on technology that enabled Apple to launch its Retina displays? is a slight modification of ALT4. feminist (talk) 03:39, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
I suppose both suggestions are fine here (with perhaps a slight preference for ALT5). They're not really that spectacular, but the connections presented now look acceptable at the very least. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:44, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
So is this a tick? feminist (talk) 13:53, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed of nomination now that hooks have been settled on. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:49, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Oei Hui-lan

Madame Koo (then Mrs Caulfield-Stoker) with her eldest son, 1920
Madame Koo (then Mrs Caulfield-Stoker) with her eldest son, 1920

Improved to Good Article status by Clara dari Semarang (talk). Self-nominated at 13:26, 28 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Note: struck ALT1, which was 213 prose characters (including spaces). Also fixed up the original hook so the nominated article is in bold per DYK guidelines, and the "(pictured)" is included (which doesn't add to the hook's prose characters). Proposing a shorter version of ALT1:
  • Symbol question.svg Article is a recent GA, long enough, neutral, and well referenced. No copyvio detected. QPQ not required as it's the nominator's first DYK. There are problems with the hooks, however, as the supplied source says she was actually born in Amoy, China, not Dutch East Indies (or Indonesia, which is anachronistic). The image is PD, but does not show up well in small size. I suggest using the image in the infobox instead. -Zanhe (talk) 23:00, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Zanhe The quoted source, which is not an academic work, contradicts Suryadinata et al, who says that she was born in Semarang. Should I include another source?
  • I'm quite happy to use the Met exhibition quotation instead if you prefer.
  • How do I transfer the image to the infobox?

Clara dari Semarang (talk) 09:26, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

@Clara dari Semarang: You're right, Suryadinata 2015 says she was born in Semarang, and that's a far more reliable source than "Nee Hao". Still, I think "Indonesia" is anachronistic and should be changed to Dutch East Indies. As for the image, what I was suggesting is to use the photo currently in the infobox (File:Madame Wellington Koo (née Hui-lan Oei) with baby.jpg) for DYK, as that one shows up better in small size. -Zanhe (talk) 05:33, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Shah Jahan II

Shah Jahan II
Shah Jahan II

5x expanded by Royroydeb (talk). Self-nominated at 16:19, 23 March 2019 (UTC).

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol question.svg 5x expanded and nominated on time. The hook is boring. I understand it may not be easy to find an interesting hook here. I feel ALT1 that I proposed is slightly more interesting. Royroydeb let me know your thoughts on this. DBigXray 08:06, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Ok, I have no objection to the new hook. @DBigXray:. RRD (talk) 14:38, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg All right, ALT1 is good to go. striking ALT0. DBigXray 16:34, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg @Royroydeb: I find the article too confusing to promote this hook. I understand that little is known of the detail of Shah Jahan II's life, but there is confusion and contradiction over which brother is older "Shah Jahan II suffered from tuberculosis just like his elder brother" and "He was eighteen months older than his brother Rafi ud-Darajat" and the second statement even used "years" before I thought I could clear up the confusion by substituting "months". Please check the article carefully and match it up with the article Rafi ud-Darajat. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:44, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

I Admit (R. Kelly song)

  • Reviewed: This is my first DYK nomination, and is exempt from QPQ.
  • Comment: Sources:
    • "I Admit" is a 19-minute song by American singer R. Kelly.[1]
    • Despite the song's title and Kelly's repetition of the lyric "I admit it, I did it" in the chorus,[2] "I Admit" does not contain any criminal admissions.[3]
    • Several reviewers characterized "I Admit" as an act of trolling, since the name of the song overstates the magnitude of the admissions contained within the lyrics.[4][5][6]


  1. ^ Darrington, Julius "A&R" (July 23, 2018). "R.Kelly "I Admit"". SoundCloud. Retrieved July 23, 2018.
  2. ^ Ettachfini, Leila; Burke, Sarah (July 24, 2018). "R. Kelly's Victimhood Doesn't Excuse His Alleged Sexual Misconduct". Broadly. Retrieved January 8, 2019.
  3. ^ Gajanan, Mahita (July 23, 2018). "A Defense Attorney Listened to R. Kelly's 19-Minute Song 'I Admit.' This Is What She Thinks". Time. Retrieved January 7, 2019.
  4. ^ Britton, Luke Morgan (July 25, 2018). "R Kelly's 19-minute mea culpa 'I Admit', dissected and analysed". NME. Retrieved July 25, 2018.
  5. ^ Johnson, Kevin C. (August 12, 2018). "Muting R. Kelly: Our music critic is finished with the Pied Piper of R&B". St. Louis Post-Dispatch. Retrieved January 7, 2019.
  6. ^ Williams, Stereo (July 23, 2018). "R. Kelly's Delusional Response to Sex Cult Allegations in 'I Admit': I'm the Victim Here". The Daily Beast. Retrieved January 7, 2019.

Improved to Good Article status by Newslinger (talk). Self-nominated at 03:06, 24 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Good article, in time, long enough, sourced, inline hook citations check out, QPQ not needed. --Usernameunique (talk) 18:59, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Hi, I came by to promote this. While you've provided a lot of alts basically saying the same thing, I think you're assuming that most readers know about Kelly's background and can therefore understand/appreciate these hooks. Personally, I've never heard of him. I think you would do better by adding more background to the hooks, like that while admitting to X, Y, and Z in his song "I Admit", R. Kelly makes no criminal admissions, or that in response to the song "I Admit", R. Kelly's ex-wife sang her own song, "Admit It", or that a critic compared the song to O. J. Simpson's book (this last one will for sure draw readers). Yoninah (talk) 23:08, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Pan Inuit Trails Atlas

Moved to mainspace by Mindmatrix (talk). Self-nominated at 16:33, 23 March 2019 (UTC).

Symbol confirmed.svg Interesting database, on good sources, no copyvio obvious. How about saying "database" somewhere in the hooks? I was surprised ;) - How do you feel about an infobox? - I think the original hooks is stronger about what the atlas is, also think some readers will need the link to Inuit, therefore striking the other, but open for changes. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:08, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
@Gerda Arendt: Thanks for the review. The most appropriate infobox I could find was {{Infobox collection}}, which I've added but seems somewhat sparse. I've also added info about funding, source materials, and the database. Mindmatrix 14:54, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Hi, I came by to promote this, but I don't see anything about a database in the hook. Also, the article is an orphan; please link it in at least one other Wikipedia article so it won't get an orphan tag. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 23:00, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 25

Golem (Casken opera)

  • ... that John Casken's 1989 opera Golem received the first Britten Award for Composition? Source: book source

Created by Marosc9 (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 16:35, 1 April 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg - new and long enough (barely). Inline citations checks. Review made. No image to review. Hook looks interesting enough for inclusion. BabbaQ (talk) 22:10, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg What is this award? If it's notable, can a page be started to link it? Yoninah (talk) 21:54, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • No idea. Midnight, and Easter for 2 days. Patience please. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:04, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • I would have created a page on the Britten Award for Composition myself but research on the internet came up with almost nothing on it beyond John Casken being the first winner for Golem and Philip Cashian being the second winner, though I don't know what the composition was in his case. I've emailed the Britten Pears Foundation today who, if anyone should, should have more information. Let's see what they come back with. --Marosc9 (talk)
  • @Marosc9: thank you. But if it's not a notable award, why are you using it as a hook fact? Could you suggest another hook? Yoninah (talk) 22:48, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • I think you need to ask those questions of the nominator Gerda Arendt. I'm hoping the Pears Britten Foundation will be able to provide enough of a lead so that I can write an article on the award.
  • Suggesting ALTs below, might work better since the award in question does have an article (which says that it is considered the Oscars of classical music):
ALT1 ... that John Casken's 1989 opera Golem won the 1991 Gramophone Classical Music Award for Best Contemporary Recording?
ALT2 ... that John Casken's 1989 opera Golem is a recipient of a Gramophone Classical Music Award, often considered as the "Oscars of classical music"?
@Gerda Arendt, Marosc9, BabbaQ, and Yoninah: Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:06, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for offering. ALT1 is fine by me. ALT2 has too much focus on the award for my taste. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:10, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Julie Packard

  • Comment: I have 3 DYK credits, but may review a nomination later.

Created by Rhinopias (talk). Self-nominated at 04:20, 2 April 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg The article is new and long enough. It is impeccably referenced, neutral, and free of any copyright issues. The hook is concise, appealing, and referenced. I have found a photograph on FlickR (and there are more, if we ask for permission). I would suggest including the picture in the hook as well, but then another reviewer would have to approve it. It's a shame we do not have an article about her sister; it would have made a nice double hook. Surtsicna (talk) 15:03, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Packard at a seminar
Packard at a seminar
  • That is a great photo! I assumed there wouldn't be any with an appropriate license. A staff member at the aquarium is aware of the article's creation and told me they are hoping to release the copyright of a portrait of her to Commons, but who knows how long that would take, so this picture definitely works if you think one should be included. So that would make the hook this, if you like the full species name in it. Assuming the caption would need to be as short as this one.
  • Alternatively, I could contact the copyright holder of these photos of the coral species and see if they'd release one to Commons? Although, it'd be hard to see it with such a small thumbnail so maybe not. Rhinopias (talk) 23:40, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
  • It probably would be too small to see, but I think you should ask for it anyway. One day we might have an article about the coral, so the picture would come in handy :) Surtsicna (talk) 07:17, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
  • I shot them a message! I could create the article rather quickly I'm sure. Rhinopias (talk) 03:10, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
  • I have written an article about the coral (Gersemia juliepackardae) and linked it in the hooks. Would somebody like to review the new article? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:14, 21 April 2019 (UTC)


Packard at a seminar
Packard at a seminar
ALT4 is ~180 characters. I don't how long the image caption can be – "Packard speaking about ocean conservation in Chile" would be a long one. Rhinopias (talk) 18:28, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 26

Sylvia Geszty

Sylvia Geszty as Cleopatra in Handel's "Giulio Cesare", 1970
Sylvia Geszty as Cleopatra
Sylvia Geszty as Cleopatra in Handel's "Giulio Cesare", 1970
Sylvia Geszty as Cleopatra
Sylvia Geszty as Cleopatra in Handel's "Giulio Cesare", 1970
Sylvia Geszty as Cleopatra

Created by LouisAlain (talk) and Gerda Arendt (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 10:54, 2 April 2019 (UTC).

I guess the image would be better if cropped for this purpose, not for the article. What do you think, David? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:52, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Agreed. I've uploaded a cropped version. —David Levy 02:47, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Alternatively, here's a square crop. —David Levy 05:52, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed now that images are set. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:52, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg The article meets DYK requirements, no close paraphrasing was found, and a QPQ has been provided. The roles section currently lacks references, so that has to be resolved first. While the hook fact is cited inline, I find the wording a little clunky and could be written better. Perhaps something like:
ALT0a ... that the Hungarian coloratura soprano Sylvia Geszty (pictured) started her international career as a member of the East Berlin Staatsoper?
With that said, I honestly am not sure if that's even interesting (either the original or my own rewording). Another option could be a more minor rewording of the original hook, something like:
ALT0b ... that the Hungarian coloratura soprano Sylvia Geszty (pictured) was a member of the East Berlin Staatsoper before joining the Stuttgart State Opera?
Which doesn't really resolve the hook interest issues, but personally I think that a Hungarian joining both East and West German musical groups does sound intriguing. In case that doesn't work out, perhaps:
ALT1 ... that Sylvia Geszty's portrayal of the role of Zerbinetta in the opera Ariadne auf Naxos was described by a critic as the "most emotional, multi-faceted and human of all"?
Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:45, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for offering. I didn't dare to suggest ALT1, because it's one critic's pov, - beautiful as it is. Where would "pictured" go? East-West is something specific to her career, - they changed record covers when she dared to leave the Berlin Opera. ALT0a is boring, therefore, showing only one side. In ALT1b, where would "pictured" go? It's East style which needs to show. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gerda Arendt (talkcontribs) 14:01, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • ALT1a ... that the portrayal by Sylvia Geszty (pictured) of Zerbinetta in the opera Ariadne auf Naxos was described by a critic as the "most emotional, multi-faceted and human of all"? —BlueMoonset (talk) 14:29, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Croydon Aerodrome robbery

Unloading gold bullion at Croydon Aerodrome
Unloading gold bullion at Croydon Aerodrome

Created by Whispyhistory (talk), Philafrenzy (talk), and Redrose64 (talk). Nominated by Whispyhistory (talk) at 16:14, 1 April 2019 (UTC).

  • Added pic, it's a year earlier but might work. Philafrenzy (talk) 17:14, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment, not a review. Good subject, but various sloppy language points - needs a read through. Especially around the 4 am bit. How much is £21K today? Not sure if "came before the House of Lords is hooky intriguing or just mystifying to even younger Brits, never mind others. Johnbod (talk) 00:14, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
    Will look, struck the first hook. Philafrenzy (talk) 09:19, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
    Will check over thx Whispyhistory (talk) 06:28, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
    Thanks for questions which have instilled much thought. With regards to price conversion. Please excuse lack of knowledge here. The matter is complex and is not a simple conversion of price then and price now. It depends how much of the original £21,000 was in gold bullion and how much in dollars (I’m not sure what eagles are?). And how the part that was in dollars was invested after 1935. If it was all invested in gold the numbers are: 1935: £21,000 worth of gold = $105,000 dollars worth = 3,000 ounces. Now: 3,000 ounces of gold = $3,000,000 dollars worth = £2,222,222. If it was all invested in dollars the answer will depend on what happened to the dollars in the time 1935 to now. The biggest part of the increase would come down to how it was invested in the meantime. If you pick the US stock market see this article [41] which implies $1m invested in 1935 would today be worth about $2.4 billion – a return in excess of 10% pac. So $105,000 dollars in 1935, if it had stayed invested throughout the period (including reinvesting any income) would get to about $250,000,000 today or about £185,000,000. The UK stock market will be different and I don’t have a figure to hand but would guess it would still be a very big number. The point is you would have been better off in the stock market than in gold. If the money were left on deposit I think the answer would be a lot lower. The papers (quoting 12 million) may have assumed something else. The point is it would be a lot more money than it was then however it was invested. I didn't include in the article because we don't know.
    With regards to 4am...different sources give varying times...therefore I did not say precisely. I could change it to "in the early hours of the morning".
    With regards to sloppy English...I re-read and don't understand what to change. Will leave to @Philafrenzy:.Whispyhistory (talk) 20:28, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
    Yes, that sounds best. If you don't see any problems with, eg "The vault was at the time, locked.[1][4] [para] A few hours later, an unlocked strong room with £21,000 worth of gold bullion, gold sovereigns and gold US dollars, was discovered to be stolen...", I hope he will. Currency conversion is always rough and ready - if you think 1935 is difficult, try the 18th century. Nonetheless we have standard ways of handling it. Johnbod (talk) 20:52, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Strong and stable

'Strong and Stable' sign in Shoreditch, London
'Strong and Stable' sign in Shoreditch, London

5x expanded by Ritchie333 (talk), Philafrenzy (talk), and Edwardx (talk). Nominated by Ritchie333 (talk) at 15:46, 26 March 2019 (UTC).

Any ideas for hooks, anyone? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:48, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

  • Added an ALT2, but is it stronger or weaker? Edwardx (talk) 13:52, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Reviewing...expanded 5X, enough sources, cited. Will complete soon. Whispyhistory (talk) 14:45, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Regrettably I have just nominated the photo for deletion at Commons as there is no freedom of panorama for graphic works in the U.K. and it seems to go beyond simple text that is not eligible for copyright. Many of my photos of signs and graffiti have been deleted on the same grounds. Feel free to disagree with me at Commons. Philafrenzy (talk) 10:26, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

In the light that Theresa May has just announced her (possible) resignation, this DYK might be a bit politically sensitive. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:28, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

  • It wasn't before? I don't really see this DYK influencing the course of British politics. Philafrenzy (talk) 20:03, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
Added Alt4 which is more even-handed? Philafrenzy (talk) 20:23, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svgFew points
  • Clarify the source for the lead sentence "in contrast to the "coalition of chaos"" is followed by citation [45]. I can't see this in the reference cited.
I think this was in the original stub, but I'm not sure why it's in here. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:53, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Consider expanding explanation of phrase...Professor David Cutts, Professor of Political Science explains it as an example of to compress information providing helpful cues to voters therefore reducing the cost of acquiring information. Therefore the ‘strong and stable’ message whilst ridiculed for its repetitive use serves an important purpose. Firstly, it fits the heuristic short-cut narrative….[46]
Done, also put in David Cutts as a redlink as given he would appear to meet WP:PROF, he should probably have an article. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:53, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
Done (though I do confess that when people start discussing the finer points of detail of citation template parameters, I look outside the window and wonder if there's a patch of grass I could watch growing) Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:54, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
  • In background, I think Strong and stable is phrase much older... what';s its origin?
  • ?Sir Lynton Crosby's role in keeping the phrase- this is in the Metro [49] which also links to an article [50] written by Tim Shipman.
  • Have you seen [51] by John Crace?
  • Regarding image..it fits dyk rules If there is an image, but is a reflection of one view and I agree with you that it maybe politically sensitive and not encyclopaedic for a front page but okay on article as Wikipedia:NPOV means neutral editors, not neutral content. Then I saw this [52]. Any views from others appreciated here. My view..not okay to use considering language on it.
  • I think you have done well to clarify what is opinion and what is fact, but double check it.
  • I prefer ALT4 but is 'strong and stable' a description of May or the party and can you include this hook in article with citation?
  • Any other hook recommendations? Thank you Kindly Whispyhistory (talk) 02:42, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
Drive-by comment, but is there a reason why we couldn't just use a picture of May? If it's a BLP issue than I guess that's understandable, but a clarification on that end would be nice. With that said, while Wikipedia is not censored, considering Brexit negotiations is currently in the Current events section, it might be a better idea to hold this off for now. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 14:47, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
  • I prefer ALT2, it's more humorous. I also don't think there would be an issue using a picture of May, it is closely linked with her whatever the response. Kingsif (talk) 20:06, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
  • As cute as ALT2 might be, it's making a direct statement in Wikipedia's voice, asserting that the claim is true, which is a clear violation of the neutrality required of hooks and of BLP rules, among others. I've struck it. ALT1 is questionable, though not as blatant a problem. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:21, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:40, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
    • Symbol confirmed.svg I'll pick this up. Date and length fine. I think that ALT4 is probably the most accurate and balanced of the hooks as it avoids the partisanship implications of some of the others. Whether this falls under the elections moratorium due to the UK local elections on the 2nd of May and potential EU elections on the 23rd, I don't know but will let the promoter decide. The picture is adequately licenced, again up to promoter to decide whether to use it. QPQ done, no close paraphrasing. Good to go. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 07:42, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Ruth Hanna McCormick

Improved to Good Article status by Knope7 (talk). Self-nominated at 03:01, 29 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Article was promoted to GA status within the last seven days, is over the required prose size and has no copyvio concerns. Both hooks are interesting and supported by reliable sources with inline citations. User has provided a QPQ review to meet the requirement, good to go. Kosack (talk) 07:27, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Hi, I came by to promote this, but I find both hooks pretty pedestrian. This is a GA; can you provide a juicier hook? Yoninah (talk) 20:24, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
I'm perplexed by this. Would it help to trim hook 1? The first woman to receive a major party's Senate nomination is a huge achievement and hook worthy to me. The fact that she defeated a sitting senator to win the nomination underscores the difficulty of what she did but it's not crucial. Knope7 (talk) 21:51, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
I forgot to ping @Yoninah: earlier so I am doing it now. Knope7 (talk) 04:02, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  • @Knope7: it's interesting to you because you're American, right? But it's not going to be interesting to readers in other countries, and frankly, we've had our share of women "firsts" at DYK. It's also very wordy. The best you could shorten it to is:
  • ALT2: ... that Ruth Hanna McCormick was the first woman to run on a major party ticket for the United States Senate? -- which isn't so interesting, is it? Are you sure you can't pull something else hooky out of the article that will entice readers? Something about her relationships with major American political players? Something about her own family's immersion in politics? Something else? Yoninah (talk) 16:29, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
@Yoninah:Not quite. It's not that she just ran, it's that won a primary to get there. It's pretty clear we have a different interest in celebrating the achievements of groundbreaking women, which is fine. If there are a lot of women "firsts" at DYK, that's probably a sign I'm not alone in finding them interesting. I'll note ALT1 does not rely on her being a woman. I would not support a hook that relies on her connections to major American politicians because of how that feeds into a larger problem for how women's biographies are often presented on Wikipedia. Tying her to American political figures does not solve one of the reasons you have rejected my prior hooks, that it won't interest readers in other countries. With all that being said, here are two attempts, below. Knope7 (talk) 00:38, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 27

Samra (rapper)

  • ... that Samra, a male German rapper, performs under a feminine Arabic pseudonym?
    • ALT1:... that a German male rapper's pseudonym is an Arabic feminine name that means "Dark"?
    • ALT2:... that a German male rapper takes an Arabic feminine name as his pseudonym?
    • ALT3:... that Samra, a German male rapper, takes an Arabic feminine name that means "Dark" as his pseudonym?

Created/expanded by Moscow Connection (talk). Self-nominated at 23:59, 3 April 2019 (UTC).

  • I'll review this one. The review will be up in the next day. -Bryanrutherford0 (talk) 00:12, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Policy compliance:

  • Adequate sourcing: Red XN - The article should be edited to clarify that the weapons he was arrested with in Prague were non-functioning; as it stands the article gives the misleading impression that he was caught with working military-grade weapons.
  • Neutral: Red XN - The language is sometimes excessively promotional (particularly "at age 23, Samra scored his first solo number one" and "set for release on April 26") and needs to be cleaned up. You can state that his EP will be bundled with this other album without sounding like you're trying to get readers hyped for the release date. There's also no reason to have a floating link to his music video; any reader who can use Wikipedia can find a music video on YouTube without our help.
  • Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing: Green tickY
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol question.svg Article was new enough when nominated, is just long enough (~1900 characters of readable prose), and shows no signs of plagiarism of online sources when run through Earwig's tool. There are citations to support the article's claims throughout. The language is sometimes excessively promotional and needs to be cleaned up. The hook proposals are all variations of the same thing, which is interesting and is supported by a citation; I like ALT0 the best and am lightly editing it for clarity. Bryanrutherford0 (talk) 00:50, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 29

Noel Marshall

  • ... that Noel Marshall directed Roar, a 1981 film that was notable for injuries that affected 70 people who worked with over 132 lions? Source: [53]
    • ALT1':... that Noel Marshall directed and starred with his family in Roar, touted as "The most dangerous movie ever made", for its many on-set injuries to the cast and crew working with 150 big cats? Source: [54]
  • Reviewed: Forthcoming

5x expanded by NowIsntItTime (talk). Self-nominated at 03:09, 1 April 2019 (UTC).

Sword of State of South Carolina

  • Reviewed: forthcoming

Created by Chetsford (talk). Self-nominated at 00:10, 30 March 2019 (UTC).

QPQ: ????
Overall: Symbol question.svg QPQ pending. I'm curious why the article has a link to the original and to a replacement, but doesn't have a copy of them to display - aren't they equally subject to image use rules? DannyS712 (talk) 05:11, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Amazing Grace (2018 film)

Aretha Franklin
Aretha Franklin

Created by CAPTAIN MEDUSA (talk). Self-nominated at 13:58, 29 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg I would use the following: (... that the film Amazing Grace shows Aretha Franklin (pictured) recording the 1972 live album of the same name, which became the highest selling gospel album of all time?) instead of the first hook as it shows the full context of why it is important. The second hook would not work because it implies that Franklin shot/directed the film, but that is not the case. Aoba47 (talk) 22:35, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg The date, length, hook, and age check out to me. Aoba47 (talk) 18:11, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
  • @CAPTAIN MEDUSA: please do not edit over previous hooks; it makes it impossible for the prep promoter to follow the discussion. I have restored the thread and added (and struck through) the additional hooks.
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg @Aoba47: Per Rule H2, you cannot approve your own hook. Another reviewer is needed for ALT2. Yoninah (talk) 17:04, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
  • That is what I thought. Thank you for the clarification. Aoba47 (talk) 17:55, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 30

János Gerendi

  • ... that the Transylvanian nobleman János Gerendi refrained from eating blood and strangled animals, but did not keep all the Old Testament laws around 1585? Source: "Around the middle of the 1580s it was known that ... certain rules - though only a few - were followed with respect to diet and the slaughtering of livestock. The innovation-friendly nobleman had introduced some Old-Testament laws..." [56] "At the beginning of 1585, Christian Francken, in a letter to János Gerendi, criticized the ideas of the Gerendists, as István Szántó Arator, the Jesuat, called the Gerendi-circle. It turns out from this letter that at the beginning of the 1580s, the Gerendists kept from the Law the forbidden eating of blood and strangled animals." [57]
    • ALT1: ... that the Transylvanian nobleman János Gerendi refrained from eating blood and strangled animals, but did not keep all the Old Testament laws? Source: "Around the middle of the 1580s it was known that ... certain rules - though only a few - were followed with respect to diet and the slaughtering of livestock. The innovation-friendly nobleman had introduced some Old-Testament laws..." [58] "At the beginning of 1585, Christian Francken, in a letter to János Gerendi, criticized the ideas of the Gerendists, as István Szántó Arator, the Jesuat, called the Gerendi-circle. It turns out from this letter that at the beginning of the 1580s, the Gerendists kept from the Law the forbidden eating of blood and strangled animals." [59]

Created by Borsoka (talk). Self-nominated at 04:19, 31 March 2019 (UTC).

  • Comment, not a review. It's not obvious that the ref as quoted supports the hook! "around 1585" should be placed earlier, if that is the actual dqate. Johnbod (talk) 00:19, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
@Johnbod:, thank you for your comment. Why do you think that the refs do not support the hook? Borsoka (talk) 06:47, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
The vnew hook is better, & I'll leave the reviewer to worry about that if you don't mind. Johnbod (talk) 09:45, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 31

Miriem Bensalah-Chaqroun

Photo of Miriem Bensalah-Chaqroun
Photo of Miriem Bensalah-Chaqroun
  • Reviewed: Coming soon

Created by Toreightyone (talk). Self-nominated at 22:28, 7 April 2019 (UTC).

  • Doing... starting review for nomination. Flibirigit (talk) 23:20, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Hook eligiblity:

  • Cited: Red XN - ?
  • Interesting: Red XN - ?

Image eligibility:

QPQ: Red XN - ?
Overall: Symbol question.svg Nomination submitted seven days after creation of the article. Length and sourcing are adequate. Article is neutral in tone. No plagiarism issues detected. The hook is reasonably interesting, and properly cited, but it currently links twice to 2017 G20 Hamburg summit. It needs to be reworked, and I recommend trying fewer blue links to avoid WP:SEAOFBLUE. Photo is properly licensed and used in the article, but I recommend using a slightly cropped version to make it more clear. Perhaps just the upper portion of the photo is best for this nomination, and the full photo can remain in the article. QPQ requirement is outstanding. Flibirigit (talk) 23:37, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Tiny the Wonder

Tiny the Wonder rat-catching at the Blue Anchor Tavern
Tiny the Wonder rat-catching at the Blue Anchor Tavern
  • ... that Tiny the Wonder (pictured) could kill 200 an hour in London's rat-baiting pits? Source: "Rat-Catching at the Blue Anchor Tavern, Bunhill Row, Finsbury. A Manchester terrier called Tiny the Wonder is shown attempting to kill 200 rats in under an hour at a tavern in Bunhill Row, Finsbury. He achieved this feat twice, on 28 March 1848 and 27 March 1849, "having on both occasions time to spare". ([60])
    • ALT1:... that ...?
  • Reviewed: not yet done

Created by Edwardx (talk) and Philafrenzy (talk). Nominated by Edwardx (talk) at 20:26, 7 April 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Nominated within seven days of creation and meets the length guidelines. Article is neutral with reliable sources cited in every paragraph. Earwigs showed a low chance of a copyright violation and there is no close paraphrasing or plagiarism. Hook is fascinating neutral and cited to a reliable source. Image is suitably licensed and appropriate. Awaiting the QPQ review. MWright96 (talk) 19:48, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Pavlos Kouroupis

5x expanded by Dr.K. (talk), Alexikoua, and Davidgoodheart. Nominated by Dr.K. at 03:42, 5 April 2019 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on April 1

William Marshall Cazalet

William Marshall Cazalet, John Singer Sargent, 1902
William Marshall Cazalet, John Singer Sargent, 1902
  • Reviewed: not yet done

Created by Edwardx (talk). Self-nominated at 20:39, 7 April 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Length, newness, policy compliance verified. Hook interest, and fact verified. Missing citation for wife, and qpq. Dr. K. 08:20, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
I don't think the hook right now is really spectacular: could a new hook be suggested, or something be added to it? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:40, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
@Edwardx and Dr.K.: The current hook seems rather pedestrian. Suggesting alternatives below: are these alright or should we try a different direction?
ALT1 ... that William Marshall Cazalet (pictured), a real tennis player for Great Britain at the 1908 Olympic Games, was friends with Rudyard Kipling?
ALT1a ... that William Marshall Cazalet (pictured), who played real tennis at the 1908 Olympic Games, was friends with Rudyard Kipling?
ALT2 ... that a painting of British socialite and real tennis player William Marshall Cazalet (pictured) was sold at a 2007 Christie's auction for an estimated US$2–3 million?
Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:15, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Thank you, Narutolovehinata5. The first hook might have been a bit better before someone linked "real tennis". I like ALT2, but "US$2–3 million" was the estimate. Going out now. Will look again later. Edwardx (talk) 12:21, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Thank you Narutolovehinata5. Your suggested hooks look good to me. I like ALT1 in particular. When a final hook is agreed by Edwardx please let me know. Dr. K. 17:26, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Raid on North Korea's embassy in Madrid

Created by Serial Number 54129 (talk). Nominated by Coffeeandcrumbs (talk) at 05:48, 2 April 2019 (UTC).


The five Old Ones – the top trumps in Knüffeln
The five Old Ones – the top trumps in Knüffeln
  • ... that the national card game of Frisia, Knüffeln, was already being played in Martin Luther's day?
    Sources: "...so paßt diese Darstellung auf das altfriesische Nationalspiel, das Karnüffeln oder kurzweg Knüffeln, durchaus nicht." from Bernhard, J. F. (1924). "Das Karnüffeln (Knüffeln): Ein friesisches Kartenspiel" in Das Heimat, Vol. 34, pp. 70-72; and "Das Knüffeln ist ein uraltes Kartenspiel, das schon zu Zeiten Martin Luthers gespielt wurde..." from "1. Bohmstedter Knüffel-Event" in Wir im Mittleren Nordfriesland: Dit un Dat ut de Region, Issue 6, 2018 (22 Sep – 08 Nov 2018).
    • ALT1:... that the top trumps in the centuries-old, national card game of Frisia, Knüffeln, are the five Old Ones?
      Sources: as above plus "Die höchsten, immer selbstehenden Trümpfe sind die „5 Alten“, das sind Coeur 2, Treff 4, Pique 8, Coeur 8 und Carreau 9." from Bernhard.
      • ALT2:... that the centuries-old, national card game of Frisia, Knüffeln, has cards with special properties and the surprising feature of two trump suits?
        Sources: as above plus Dummett, Michael (1980). The game of Tarot: from Ferrara to Salt Lake City, Duckworth, London. ISBN 9780715610145, pp. 185-187.

Created by Bermicourt (talk). Self-nominated at 19:58, 1 April 2019 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on April 2

Five precepts

  • ... that ethicist Damien Keown described the relationship between the five Buddhist precepts and human rights as "to what one is due to do, and to what is due to one"? Source:Keown, 2012, pp.20-22, 33, "He suggests that in these cases the best English translation in these cases is 'due' because 'due' looks both ways along a juridical relationship, both to what one is due to do, and to what is due to one ... From this it would seem that Dharma determines not just 'what one is due to do' but also 'what is due to one' ... Human rights can be extrapolated from Buddhist moral teachings in the manner described above ... A direct translation of the first four precepts yields a right to life, a right not to have one's property stolen ...", etc.
    • ALT1:... that peace studies founder Johan Galtung describes the five Buddhist precepts as the "basic contribution of Buddhism in the creation of peace"? Source:Yeh 2006, p.100, "Galtung (1993: 117) contends that the absolute rejection of committing direct violence as prescribed in the Five Precepts is the 'basic contribution of Buddhism in the creation of peace'."
    • ALT2:... that Buddhists consider the precept against killing any living being the most important of the five basic ethical precepts? Source:Ledgerwood 2008, p.152, "In her research the first precept against killing was viewed as the most important", Harvey 2000, "The first precept corresponds to the Hindu and Jain concept of ahiṃsa, 'non-injury', and is generally regarded as the most important one".

Improved to Good Article status by Farang Rak Tham (talk) and Larry Rosenfeld (talk). Nominated by Farang Rak Tham (talk) at 22:19, 2 April 2019 (UTC).



5x expanded by Royroydeb (talk). Self-nominated at 10:33, 2 April 2019 (UTC).

Shirou Emiya

  • ... that Shirou Emiya was originally conceived by writer Kinoko Nasu in his spare time as a high school student years before the making of the visual novel Fate/stay nightType-Moon (2006). Character Material (in Japanese). Type-Moon. p. 12.? Source: "You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)
    • ALT1:... that Shirou Emiya was initially conceived as a woman but became a man in order to fit the demographic of the visual novel Fate/stay night? Nasu, Kinoko; Takeuchi, Takashi (2006). "The Fate/stay night Staffs Interview". website (Interview). Dengeki Online. Archived from the original on June 12, 2018. Retrieved August 27, 2018.
  • Shirou Emiya's characterization was changed for the Fate/stay night: Unlimited Blade Works to appear as a more cheerful person in contrast to his original persona. Fate/stay night Unlimited Blade Works Blu-ray Disc Box I Booklet. Type-Moon. 2015. p. 5.

Improved to Good Article status by Tintor2 (talk). Self-nominated at 01:07, 4 April 2019 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on April 3


  • ... that ancient trees of the olive cultivar Bidni have been recognised as "national monuments" in Malta?
    • ALT1:... that ancient trees of the olive cultivar Bidni have been found to date back to the 1st century AD?

Improved to Good Article status by PolluxWorld (talk). Nominated by Cwmhiraeth (talk) at 09:13, 4 April 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article is new enough (recent GA), long enough, neutral, and well referenced. Both hooks are interesting and verified with inline refs; the main hook is more interesting to me. QPQ is done. Just one small paraphrasing issue: the sentence "as a Tree Protected Area, in accordance with the provisions of the Trees and Woodlands Protection Regulations, 2011." too closely resembles the source. -Zanhe (talk) 16:28, 4 April 2019 (UTC)


Created by Royroydeb (talk). Self-nominated at 08:35, 3 April 2019 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on April 4

Proposed 2019 amendment to the Constitution of Malaysia

Created by Night Lantern (talk). Self-nominated at 09:00, 10 April 2019 (UTC).

  • Will be claiming this for review; I have struck ALT1 as being too long and too winding. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:42, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Took a quick look at it and the article is a bit long for a short review, but right now my concern is the "Background" section. It doesn't seem to present the material in a neutral way, and even seems to use some POV-ish language. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 04:21, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi there! Thanks for the review Mr. errr.. Naruto? 😅 Regarding the "background section", do you mean the POV on word such as "ignorance"? Seems I don't have idea on what choice of words that are very suitable for the replacement, mind to share some suggestion? Night Lanternhalo? 08:28, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
This would include words that "Among the very sensitive breached agreement", "negligence", "cannot appreciate the diversity and decentralisation were connected in the process aside from the ignorance", which are not suitable for Wikipedia in their current form. One suggestion I could give could be to request for a copyedit of the article over at WP:GOCE/R; this could also prove useful as there are also quite a few grammatical errors in the article. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 08:38, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Symbol possible vote.svg I've gone ahead and requested a copyedit; this nomination should be put on hold until that is finished. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:46, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Thank you Mr. Naruto. ☺ Night Lanternhalo? 02:25, 23 April 2019 (UTC)


  1. ^ Adam Aziz (9 April 2019). "No two-thirds majority for Bill to make Sabah, Sarawak equal partners". The Edge Markets. Retrieved 10 April 2019.
  2. ^ "Status of Sabah, Sarawak stays". Bernama. Daily Express. 10 April 2019. Retrieved 10 April 2019.
  3. ^ "Bill to make Sabah, Sarawak equal partners rejected in Malaysia parliament". Bernama. Channel NewsAsia. 10 April 2019. Retrieved 10 April 2019.

Xiuxiong Chen, Song Sun

Created by Zanhe (talk) and Dennui (talk). Nominated by Zanhe (talk) at 03:53, 10 April 2019 (UTC).

Revolution of 1719

John Rutledge
John Rutledge
ALT1 ... that, almost six decades after the Revolution of 1719, John Rutledge (pictured) was elected the first President of South Carolina? [63].
  • Reviewed: forthcoming

Created by Chetsford (talk). Self-nominated at 02:22, 4 April 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Date, size, refs, hook, neutrality, copyvio spotcheck, all GTG. Nice historical article. 1st hook is more interesting IMHO. I've added one sentence copied from the parent article, please reference. Next, the article suggests the revolution was bloodless and that there was no fighting; is this correct? No fatalities, no violence? In either case this should be clarified in the article if possible. Also, the article is almost an orphan, only two other articles link here - can you fix this? Once the ref is added and the article is linked from several more other articles, this can be fully GTG - ping me when this is done so I will update the review. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:48, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on April 5

Palmer Street

Cypher by Tim Morgan
Cypher by Tim Morgan
  • ... that Palmer Street was the location of the London office of the British spy agency GCHQ, and a sculpture by Tim Morgan titled Cypher (pictured)?

Created by Philafrenzy (talk), Whispyhistory (talk), and Edwardx (talk). Nominated by Philafrenzy (talk) at 12:18, 6 April 2019 (UTC).

Symbol question.svg Solid article on good sources, offline sources accepted AGF, no copyvio obvious. The image is licensed and shows well, but I don't believe it's typical for that street, rather the exception, and as long as the sculptor has no article not necessarily worth mentioning. Another little problem I see is grammar, because I get the impression that the sculpture is still in place, so "was the location" doesn't fit. How about the more typical building pic? Or stop after the spy agency, which might be interesting enough? (And have the sculptor image with the artist's article?) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:17, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
I will look at those things Gerda. Did you get that the spy building has a sculpture named Cypher opposite it (installed before the spying nature of the building was officially revealed)? Philafrenzy (talk) 20:40, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
No, the hook doesn't say that, and for me, who had to look up cypher in a dictionary, the two things were not connected. Perhaps clarify that yes they are unconnected, but secretly look related ;) - more important than the sculptor's name. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:28, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
I don't think it's coincidence. I will look at doing the sculptor too. Here are spying Alts:
  • ALT1... that Palmer Street was the location of a secret British spy base that intercepted the communications of London's embassies?
  • ALT2... that London's Palmer Street was the location of a secret "Dictionary" run by spies? Philafrenzy (talk) 22:16, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
I like them but think a link to the office would be helpful. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:26, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
  • ALT3 ... that the London office of the British spy agency GCHQ was in Palmer Street, opposite a sculpture by Tim Morgan titled Cypher (pictured)?
We have no picture of the offices. Philafrenzy (talk) 08:03, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
Symbol voting keep.svg that's it! ---Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:10, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Returning from prep for further work. If the image is to be used, perhaps write a stub article about it so we can link it. Alternately, I'm un-striking ALT1 and ALT2 for reconsideration. Yoninah (talk) 19:44, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Artist has an article, and his own DYK, but Cypher doesn't really qualify for an article of its own. Philafrenzy (talk) 19:51, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
ALT1 & ALT2 are more interesting, you could link "secret British spy base" and "Dictionary" to GCHQ if you think it's an issue, but the hook is about how quirky Palmer Street is, not anything else, and finding out about the spy base may be incentive to click the intended target link. I'd think the word cypher, since it's a very common noun in British English, is obvious enough that the original can be used and needs no explanation, surely. Kingsif (talk) 20:00, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

Ibrahim Ali Khan

Ibrahim Ali Khan
Ibrahim Ali Khan

Created by Royroydeb (talk). Self-nominated at 17:38, 10 April 2019 (UTC).

  • Reviewing, interesting, well written, no copy vio issues (just names), new enough, QPQ needed, will complete shortly. Whispyhistory (talk) 05:52, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg hook in article and in source, most sources offline, just QPQ needed Whispyhistory (talk) 14:49, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

2019 Hong Kong Sevens

  • Comment: I don't know what to think about this so hopefully it would be good enough

5x expanded by Matt294069 (talk). Self-nominated at 04:40, 8 April 2019 (UTC).

Ruth-Margret Pütz

  • Reviewed: Marni Abbott-Peter
  • Comment: ... a well-received Recital, but lovely comments seem a bit too long to be mentioned in the hook

Created by LouisAlain (talk) and Gerda Arendt (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 12:22, 7 April 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Saying "art" suggests physical art, where you could have used the word "songs" or "performances". Removing all the jargon leaves you with "A singer released a CD 50 years after her main success", which is quite plain. Apart from that, article new and good, well cited, no copyvio apparent, hook is cited but full of jargon, and not broadly interesting — and badly phrased throughout even if it could be used; needs a new hook. Kingsif (talk) 19:49, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Sorry, English is not my first language. What do say for the remarkable performance of a remarkable singer? "artistry"? Help needed. The singer did nothing. It was done to honour her, and happened just in time for her to hear it before she died. All critics agree that her singing was surprisingly "modern". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:56, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • There's not really a word for that, not that heaping praise really appears in DYK unless that's the main aspect of the hook. You would have to make it clear in the article that someone else released Recital, because it wasn't clear when I read it. If you'd be happy to update the article, you could suggest a hook based on the fact she heard what was effectively a Greatest Hits collection someone did just before she died, that's interesting. Kingsif (talk) 23:58, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
You misunderstood. In German, Kunst = art is used for all the arts, including music, theatre ... - If in English, art is only for what youcan see, what is the word for music? Has nothing to do with heaping praise, just factually describing that it is artistic, opposed to scientific, technical, you name it. There is "performing arts", so somewhere the concept that theatre and music are art seems to be present. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:51, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
Music is a form of art, but they are generally distinguished by form (e.g. music, painting, sculpture, with 'art' alone most commonly meaning paintings; especially where DYK calls for clarity). So you could say "... that the music of...", but it is still an odd sentence formation, so you probably wouldn't. Kingsif (talk) 14:03, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Mykola Semena

Created by Piotrus (talk). Self-nominated at 09:57, 5 April 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Lead must be expanded. RRD (talk) 16:42, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on April 6

Amy Wax

Created by Mhym (talk). Self-nominated at 02:43, 6 April 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Comment. There was an earlier (first paragraphs nearly identical, except for some deletions by the nom in this second one) version of this page at AFC by an editor other than the nom here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Amy_Wax&action=edit&redlink=1 In some ways that earlier version was better -- it had footnotes for every assertion in the first few paragraphs, while in this version nom took them out. This version also needs grammar cleanup - "the" and "a" and similar words were dropped from the first version, where needed. Also, some facts, like that the subject attended Harvard Law School, were deleted for some reason. I think if the first version is made viewable and this one is improved along these lines this will be better for approval for this category. Also, when in this version nom writes "Amy Wax has been called "notorious..", maybe it would be an improvement to say by whom. Also, it may be a good idea to have the controversy paragraph, which presents only one side, instead comply with wp:npov (representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all of the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic; and switching out "claimed" for "said"; etc.).2604:2000:E010:1100:A066:E3A3:DD44:3FFC (talk) 17:02, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
  • This is a stub, not a WP:GA. I agree it can use some work. That's part of the purpose of DYK - to bring attention to new or newly revised article, if I remember correctly. As to your assertion - I did not copy anyone's previous article but wrote from scratch instead. Some technical wording is copied from Wax's CV, which may explain similarities. I don't think terminology and official award titles are a copyvio. Please fee free to improve the article and/or the hook. Mhym (talk) 07:12, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Thanks. First, can an admin please make available the article that was hidden from view here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Amy_Wax&action=edit&redlink=1 ? It has important information that should be in this article, for one thing. Its was created before this draft, its deletion followed shortly (by mere hours) the submission of this article, and its deletion is not un-controversial (which was the asserted basis for its deletion).
Second, I agree a stub is fine. But for an article to appear at DYK on the main page, I think we should be careful to have footnotes for every assertion. The deleted draft had them - for the same information where the footnotes are missing here. One of the reasons I have asked for the deleted draft page to be restored.
The prior version also has fixes to the grammatical problems of missing words that I noted we have in this second version. For the main page, I do not think we want such errors.
Also, you did not say anything about the problem I pointed out with the controversy paragraph you drafted. It presents only one side. I think for the main page in particular, we would want to comply with wp:npov. This does not. To do that we would have to represent fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all of the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on the topic. We would also switch out "claimed" for "said", as wp:npov suggests.2604:2000:E010:1100:CD84:F876:2C42:BC9E (talk) 22:08, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
  • As far as providing all the refs and links - I don't have access to those which used to be there. Please help me with this if you have them. I guess I don't see any vio of WP:NPOV. Basically, it's all biographical, no opinion based. As in she said something. Others didn't like it. Some people called on UPenn to fire her. UPenn didn't. What exactly is non-neutral here? Reporting groundswell of support of Wax? I don't know if that happened. Mhym (talk) 01:30, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Happy to help. I've now twice asked the editor who deleted it to restore it (in addition, it its deletion is not controversial, the reason given for deleting it). I've also asked here - maybe an admin here will help. It has more information (her attending Harvard Law, family background, etc). If you read NPOV, you will see that the cherry-picking of those with one view of her statement, while leaving out completely those who support her statement (or her right to make it), is something we are supposed to try to avoid. There are a number of articles pointing out the other camp; in your research you would have seen them. If you want me to, I will do the work. Also, saying "claimed" instead of "said" - as the guideline states - is a sign of not being sensitive to the need for npov. The guideline explains why. Anyway, once we get the original draft, which was more complete and had all the references that are missing, I will be happy to help you get this promoted. BTW - what inspired you to write this article just now (unless it was coincidence), while there was another draft article awaiting promotion (that incident was in the news, but quite a while ago)?2604:2000:E010:1100:B951:7500:D62B:D57A (talk) 00:53, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Glad to hear you can help. I came across critique/praise of her research work, tried to look her up and found no WP article. I don't care for the controversies and didn't hear them at the time. But they clearly make her notable, probably more than her research work, unfortunately. Thus I included the section. AFIK, the wording can be massaged and improved in any way. That's also why I made a DYK nom - so that other editor help improve on the article while I am no longer very involved. Mhym (talk) 05:06, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Great. I am happy to help you improve this article as soon as an admin helps us by restoring for reference the draft that preceded this one, with the relevant text and footnotes that this later version is missing. It was deleted as a "non-controversial" deletion, but since there is now controversy about it being deleted, I hope an admin can restore it (at least long enough for us to look at it to improve this one). Then we can improve this, improve the npov issue, and put this in shape for a DYK for you. 2604:2000:E010:1100:B951:7500:D62B:D57A (talk) 05:26, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
Here, see why this was so weird! Just when the draft of this subject was cleared of any question of copyvio, after it had been sitting awaiting for a couple of days for all to see, as it awaited promotion to article status -- that was the very same day of all days that your article was created! [65] And its not as though she was in the news that day, or week, or month. And as you can see, the article that had been put up for review prior to your draft is very similar (except for the last paragraph that yours added). [66] I will work now to help you to make your draft better, adding the omitted footnotes, etc.2604:2000:E010:1100:D0B2:B1DE:173C:580 (talk) 17:08, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for your work! The article is in a good shape now and ready for review. Mhym (talk) 19:21, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Drive-by comment: I would recommend against using the word "controversial" in a hook without explaining how she has been controversial. feminist (talk) 06:34, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Alisa Takigawa

  • ... that Japanese singer and guitarist Alisa Takigawa initially aspired to be a drummer, until she was told by a school clubmate to focus on the guitar instead? Source:[67] ("軽音楽部にドラマー志望の子がいっぱいいたので(笑)。先輩から「ドラマーはいっぱいいるけど、ボーカルが足りてないんだ」って言われて、まあ一度挫折しているとはいえ歌うことは好きだったし、ギターは1年前からやってるしってことで、ボーカル&ギターになりました。")
    • ALT1:... that Japanese singer Alisa Takigawa's debut song "Season" was originally a demo that was not intended to be her debut release? Source: [68] (page 3) ("この曲はデビューのために書いたものではなくて、もともとデモとして提出していた曲だったので、「Season」っていう曲を作るっていう意味では特に悩んではいないですね。")
    • ALT2:... that Japanese singer Alisa Takigawa made her music debut in 2015 after being scouted at a rock festival in 2009? Source: [69]

Created by Narutolovehinata5 (talk). Self-nominated at 08:55, 6 April 2019 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on April 7

Deadliest Enemy: Our War Against Killer Germs

Created by Whispyhistory (talk) and Philafrenzy (talk). Nominated by Philafrenzy (talk) at 19:12, 14 April 2019 (UTC).

Ranbir Singh of Jammu and Kashmir

Ranbir Singh
Ranbir Singh

5x expanded by Royroydeb (talk). Self-nominated at 06:14, 13 April 2019 (UTC).

  • Not hooky enough. Propose a new hook, please. WBGconverse 05:03, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
  • I think it is quite hooky: of course, the main interest isn't in so-and-so having done such-and-such, but in the fact that this such-and-such exists: it's generally interesting to find out that one territory of a country could have a different criminal code from the rest. – Uanfala (talk) 09:13, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Too many links are distracting and our article about RPC is shoddy. Also, the uniqueness is mentioned. WBGconverse 13:55, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Rita Freeman

  • Reviewed: 2019 Tour Championship
  • Comment: Not sure which hook is best so they're in order of writing rather than preference. Feel free to edit any of the hooks, or suggest a brand new one!

Converted from a redirect by Soaper1234 (talk). Self-nominated at 17:59, 8 April 2019 (UTC).

Tim Morgan

  • ... that Tim Morgan's Veins are made of steel and glass?
    • ALT1:... that ...?

Created by Philafrenzy (talk), Edwardx (talk), and Whispyhistory (talk). Nominated by Philafrenzy (talk) at 07:46, 8 April 2019 (UTC).

  • @Philafrenzy: Not a full review, but it seems to me that the hook is worded in a way so that it's deliberately confusing to the reader, especially because it uses "Veins" in plural when it fact it was just one structure. Obviously Morgan's veins are not really made of steel and glass and the fact that a structure is made of steel and glass doesn't seem that interesting. Would it be possible to suggest a new hook that would be interesting to the reader without the confusing wording? It does look like a well-written article! Cheers, --SkyGazer 512 My talk page 13:50, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Also, if I recall correctly, an"April-Fools-like" hook was either pulled from the main page or queue or reworded so that it was no longer interesting a few months ago.--SkyGazer 512 My talk page 13:52, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
I think you are worrying uncessarily. It's intended for the last "quirky" slot where people are expecting a bit of a joke. I think people will easily understand that veins can't really be made of steel and glass and this is already indicated by the fact that the first letter is capitalised and the word is in italics indicating a creative work of some kind. Philafrenzy (talk) 14:00, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for responding. I've always thought of the quirky slot as an unusual piece of information, rather than a joke. I particularly think that using Veins in plural is technically inaccurate; something like "made a Vein of steel and glass", but I still think a hook that relies on interestingness in itself, rather than confusing wording, would be better. Pretty much all readers will of course know that veins can't really be made of steel and glass; but then the hook isn't interesting, because it's not particularly unusual to have a building made of steel and glass. For what it's worth, the rewording of another hook a few months ago that I was referring to was discussed here and here. It's certainly possible that I'm worrying unnecessarily and I'd be happy to request a second opinion or ask at WT:DYK if needed. Best, --SkyGazer 512 My talk page 14:12, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
I think you have already asked as plenty of people read the list of hooks awaiting review. P.S. It's not one structure, it's multiple pieces. Philafrenzy (talk) 14:35, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Well, I'm not planning on doing a full review of this anyway so I suppose we can go ahead and have someone else check this out. By asking at WT:DYK, I was more thinking about hooks like these in general (e.g. only interesting because of confusing wording) outside of April Fools Day, apologies for being unclear. Thanks for your comments. Best, --SkyGazer 512 My talk page 13:49, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Apologies for intruding on this discussion, but I agree with SkyGazer 512 that this hook is deliberately misleading. It may be multiple pieces, but according to the article, the sculpture is only known as Vein. It is never referenced as Veins in the article in the article. Calling it Veins in the hook would be factually incorrect according to the article. I could understand something being quirky or fun for a DYK, but at the end of the day, it should be factually correct. Aoba47 (talk) 21:40, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Each one is known as a Vein but it's an edition of 40. And here is the artist's web page showing them in different numbers at various locations. This is how he works. Cypher, for instance, is an edition of three. Philafrenzy (talk) 23:20, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for the clarification. My issue though is that is not made clear in the article itself. If I clicked on the link from the main page, I would expect to see the word Veins somewhere in the text, and that is not the case. In my opinion this should be clarified in the article itself as not everyone that clicks the link on the main page will read either of these sources. Aoba47 (talk) 00:00, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
Amended the article to make it clearer. Philafrenzy (talk) 00:12, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for the clarification in the article. I think that fixes the issues raised above, but I think it would better to have this looked at by a more experienced editor than myself. Aoba47 (talk) 02:09, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
  • I suppose the hook could work. However, in the article, I am confused by the part which goes His Vein (2008) consists of glass rods, held in compression between long steel blades. There are 40 Veins, some of which are on display at the Cass Sculpture Foundation at Goodwood. Is there only one sculpture called Vein, are there multiple ones, or was it one sculpture called Vein which was composed of several parts? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:21, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
As I understand it, each one is a sculpture named Vein that is made of glass rods in a sandwich of steel blades, and he made 40 of them according to the source. Clearly, however, they are designed to be displayed more than one at a time to make an installation and that is reflected in the pictures. Philafrenzy (talk) 15:41, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Nels Bruseth

  • ... that forest ranger Nels Bruseth turned down an offer to become mayor of Darrington, Washington, due to his ineligibility as a federal employee? Source: The Seattle Times (January 24, 1950)
  • Reviewed: TBD

Converted from a redirect by SounderBruce (talk). Self-nominated at 02:53, 8 April 2019 (UTC).