This page has a backlog that requires the attention of willing editors. Please remove this notice when the backlog is cleared.
Backlog-mode enabled
Please note that DYK is currently in backlog mode. This means that editors who have made at least 20 DYK nominations must review an extra article per nomination. For a link to the discussion, please click here. To look up how many DYK nominations you have, please click here.
DYK queue status
There are currently 4 filled queues. Please consider promoting a prep to queue if you have the time!
This page is to nominate fresh articles to appear in the "Did you know" section on the Main Page with a "hook" (an interesting fact). Nominations that have been approved are moved to a staging area and then promoted into the Queue. To update this page, purge it.
Successful hooks tend to have several traits. Most importantly, they share a surprising or intriguing fact. They give readers enough context to understand the hook, but leave enough out to make them want to learn more. They are written for a general audience who has no prior knowledge of or interest in the topic area. Lastly, they are concise, and do not attempt to cover multiple facts or present information about the subject beyond what's needed to understand the hook.
When will my nomination be reviewed?
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, 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 below). Because of WP:DYKTIMEOUT, a nomination should be reviewed within two months since the reviewer/promoter may agree to reject and close an unpromoted hook after that time has passed.
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.
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:
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.
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.
Check to make sure basic review requirements were completed.
Any outstanding issue following needs to be addressed before promoting.
Check the article history for any substantive changes since it was nominated or reviewed.
Images for the lead slot must be freely licensed. Fair-use images are not permitted. Images loaded on Commons that appear on the Main Page are automatically protected by KrinkleBot.
Hook must be stated in both the article and source (which must be cited at the end of the article sentence where stated).
Hook should make sense grammatically.
Try to vary subject matters within each prep area.
Try to select a funny, quirky or otherwise upbeat hook for the last or bottom hook in the set.
Steps to add a hook to prep
In one tab, open the nomination page of the hook you want to promote.
In a second tab, open the prep set you intend to add the hook to.
Wanna skip all this fuss? Install WP:PSHAW instead! Does most of the heavy lifting for ya :)
For hooks held for specific dates, refer to "Local update times" section on DYK Queue.
Completed Prep area number sets will be promoted by an administrator to corresponding Queue number.
Copy and paste the hook into a chosen slot.
Make sure there's a space between ... and that, and a ? at the end.
Check that there's a bold link to the article.
If it's the lead (first) hook, paste the image where indicated at the top of the template.
Copy and paste ALL the credit information (the {{DYKmake}} and {{DYKnom}} templates) at the bottom
Check your work in the prep's Preview mode.
At the bottom under "Credits", to the right of each article should have the link "View nom subpage" ; if not, a subpage parameter will need to be added to the DYKmake.
Save the Prep page.
Closing the DYK nomination page
At the upper left
Change {{DYKsubpage to {{subst:DYKsubpage
Change |passed= to |passed=yes
At the bottom
Just above the line containing
}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.-->
insert a new, separate line containing one of the following:
To [[TM:DYK/P1|Prep 1]]
To [[TM:DYK/P2|Prep 2]]
To [[TM:DYK/P3|Prep 3]]
To [[TM:DYK/P4|Prep 4]]
To [[TM:DYK/P5|Prep 5]]
To [[TM:DYK/P6|Prep 6]]
To [[TM:DYK/P7|Prep 7]]
Also paste the same thing into the edit summary.
Check in Preview mode. Make sure everything is against a pale blue background (nothing outside) and there are no stray characters, like }}, at the top or bottom.
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.
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.
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.
Comment The first two are somewhat tangential by naming the paramount leaders. The main subject is Wang Huning and his ideologies. I find it interesting they are named and linked because I'd never heard of the ideologies before. -- GreenC01:17, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Long enough, new enough. No QPQ necessary as you have less than five nominations. There are some very long sentences in here I'm surprised didn't get split at GA, but that's not a DYK criterion. Reading the article made me sleepy and I'll review copyright and the hook when I'm more awake.--Launchballer15:43, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"..considered to be..." suggests there are others who might disagree or this is only an opinion by someone. Why not just say "..is the..", because if this is not unambiguous it doesn't belong in DYK. -- GreenC15:43, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think I conducted a thorough review, as seen here. Most of the copyright violations I see are direct "quotes", but do you have any specific examples?
I don't agree with the DYK texts. As I myself wrote in the review, Wang Huning was not the principal architect of these ideologies. No party document states that. THe article does not state that either.
I added "ALT3" to get this moving along. It's from the lead section summary. I don't why anyone could disagree with these statements. -- GreenC17:09, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would recommend inspecting Earwig yourself, but to give examples, the sentences containing the words 'exposed' and 'elimination' need rewording per WP:CLOP.--Launchballer17:51, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, sorry, got a bit busy these days. I rewrote the sections to remove the possible Copyvios as much as possible except the quotations, which I assume to be fine. I also support the ALT3 proposal given by GreenC. The Account 2 (talk) 10:01, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:CLOP talks about 'superficial modification of material from another source'. Changing two words is pretty much that.--Launchballer11:10, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Overall: @Chomik1129: As you have done less than 5 DYKs you do not need a QPQ and the page was created two days before its DYK nomination. A quick check of the sources shows that all of them are from reputable sources. The first hook isn't interesting, but ALT1 is and I would suggest that is the one that is used. Jon698 (talk) 23:57, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies for my intrusion, but I do have some concerns. If this is all the sourcing that there is I am really not sure this is notable per WP:NEVENT? This is a very severe event and the coverage is somewhat in depth, but every source cited is in a time period of less than a month, failing WP:LASTING. Is there nothing else? Because if there isn't, should we really have an article on something that made the news for less than a month and then was never mentioned again? And, if the sources do exist but are not here, then I do not think we are getting a complete picture of the event as required for WP:DYKCOMPLETE. PARAKANYAA (talk) 07:49, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Source: "HHS Announces Transformation to Make America Healthy Again... The restructuring results in a total downsizing from 82,000 to 62,000 full-time employees... The restructuring plan will... includ[e] a new Administration for a Healthy America." [1]; "The Trump administration Thursday announced a major restructuring of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services that will cut 20,000 full-time jobs." [2]
Created by Antony-22 (talk) (both articles) and GeekInParadise (talk). (2025 reorganization article)
Number of QPQs required: 2. Nominator has 108 past nominations.
Looking more into the details, but it is immediately a bit of a flag that the hook is sourced to hhs.gov. This is a primary source, and the hook adds interpretation. The "firing 20,000 workers" for example, is in the source a result of the restructuring "combined with HHS’ other efforts", whereas the source directly says the restructuring will fire 10,000 workers. CMD (talk) 03:19, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, the 20,000 appears in an NPR source used in the article. Perhaps duplicate that one to the relevant locations? Both articles are new enough and long enough. QPQs are done.
2025 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services reorganization
The sourcing for the first paragraph of the Background section is not entirely clear, I am unsure how to draw the conclusions of the first paragraph from them. The first sentence of the second paragraph seems true, although not explicit in the sources. The rest of that paragraph is fully supported. The third paragraph is also supported, although determining what the "order required" would be better with secondary sources.
Provisions similarly is mostly sourced to the primary announcement. This is a better use for a primary source, but there is still a bit of interpretation, for example the hss.gov announcement doesn't state that NIOSH is moving from the CDC (although it does say something is moving to the CDC). This seems like the sort of text that could use quotation marks to directly convey part of the primary document. The final bullet point has secondary sources, but is also not something covered in the original press release or its associated "fact sheet" (which is about the same length as the press release), which does suggest that the restructuring goes beyond the press release and so more sources would be helpful to analyze it. (I also tried to do a bit of searching to figure out what the current "28" divisions are, I was unable to find something clear in a quick look.)
The "HHS is said" opinion should probably be attributed directly to Kennedy. Spotchecks in Reduction in force subsection found no issues. On Implementation, "the former being given extra time to scrutinize the firing plans" is not my reading of the source, which is light on details but might suggest it was the unilateral decision of the HHS officials rather than something they were given. I cannot find support for "Some employees cited fears about political interference in health data" in its attached source. CMD (talk) 09:26, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Administration for a Healthy America
This article is a bit short, especially as a lot of its current content is summaries of various agencies and departments. It is also very reliant on primary sources, especially outside of these summaries. However, it is only an announced agency, so more sourcing will likely become available with time, and given the length is a clear pass on the first article, I am inclined to pass this one on length alongside it.
Going back to the hook, another issue is that it is putting quite a lot of topics together: the reorganization, Kennedy's slogan, the new administration, and the firings. It would be better to refine to a couple of key points with clear links. CMD (talk) 09:40, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Chipmunkdavis: Thanks for the thorough review. I added the NPR article to the hook sources above, and I improved the sourcing in the Background section. In the Implementation section, the article reports that the cuts were made by DOGE and initially without HHS leadership input, although their sources conflict: see the two paragraphs starting with "The backlash reached a boiling point..." I removed the sentence about political interference, since that's a separate issue from the reorganization anyway.
More generally, one issue is that reorganizations don't take effect until they are published in the Federal Register, and I'm watching out for that. The press release clearly doesn't contain all of the details of the reorganization; it states the number of top-level units will be reduced by 13, but the changes actually listed would only reduce it by 10. (The list of 28 top-level units is here.) A few details have been reported by the press that are not in the announcement, such as the movement of the non-infectious disease CDC divisions into AHA, although NIOSH is explicitly mentioned in the announcement. Until there is a further announcement or Federal Register publication, these are the most reliable sources available.
For the hook, "Make America Healthy Again" is literally in the title of the announcement, as are the new agency and the magnitude of the cuts, and these elements are all reported on in independent sources, so there's no WP:SYNTHESIS here. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 00:27, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I did find that organizational chart, but it has 27 light grey boxes, and five blue boxes, so I'm not sure which ones they're counting to reach 28. "Make American Healthy Again" is in the title of the announcement, but it is not exactly framed in the same way, and this is again a primary source being weaved into this. Relying on further announcements and federal registers still leaves us with a reliance on interpreting primary sources. CMD (talk) 03:53, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have the same concerns regarding the proposed hook as I did before. On the article, where the text relies heavily or exclusively on primary sources, it would be better to have quotations rather than an interpretation. CMD (talk) 03:01, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Chipmunkdavis: I have added inline citations to secondary sources for all statements also sourced to the HHS press release. In any case, these statements do not contain any interpretation as they are routine paraphrases, and direct quotations would not be appropriate. For the hook, I'd like to clarify whether your issue is based on verifiability or on presentation. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 01:53, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The statements appear to be going beyond routine paraphrasing. As I mentioned, the initial position of NIOSH in CDC is not from that source (or the NPR one), similarly the Office of the Secretary is also an addition. The five original bullet points were shortened to three, and then a fourth new one was added to the same list from other sources, which changes the emphasis of the primary source. The concerns with the hook involve both, the presentation (if by that you mean the pulling together of different bits of content) is weaker because it is an interpretation of a primary source. CMD (talk) 04:12, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Chipmunkdavis: I've added refs for NIOSH being in CDC, and the three offices being under the Office of the Secretary, which was a very simple change to make. No, the five points are not collapsed to three; three of them are in the first block on new agencies, and the other two make up the block about existing agencies. Please read the article carefully in order to avoid mistakes like this.
There is no interpretation at all in this section, only routine paraphrasing and reflecting the due balance of the available reliable sources, which are expected for all Wikipedia article. Quoting large portions of a primary text in this situation is against policy, so if you continue to insist on it, we'll have to bring in a new reviewer to settle the matter. The hook is also not an interpretation, all its elements are directly stated in the same the primary source and confirmed by multiple secondary sources. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 22:18, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've read the article, thank you. Splitting one list into two based on your inferred context is another clear example of interpreting a primary source. CMD (talk) 02:45, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, that's routine copyediting, not interpretation. We will need a new reviewer to settle this, as we apparently do not agree on what Wikipedia policy is, or even on the definitions of basic words. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 03:20, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
... that Sri Jumahaliah Hanifa was the first woman to head the University of Indonesia law school? Source: Oppusunggu, Yu Un (1 January 2008). "In Memoriam Prof. Mr. Dr. Sudargo Gautama". Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan.
The article is new enough and long enough and adequately sourced. I did not find any close paraphrasing. All but one source is in Indonesian and offline so AGF. The picture is okay and properly licensed. However, while a QPQ has been provided, it is an incomplete review (it only checked for interestingness and length but not all of the criteria, whether explicitly or implicitly). The article does not mention her date of death, but apparently the obituary does give a date in 2008? My Indonesian is very basic and rusty, and the Google Translate translation is ambiguous: was the 2008 date her date of death, or when they learned the news of her death? Finally, I'm not really that big of a fan of the hook: is there nothing else about her that can be said? If there are no other options, we can probably go with it, but I just want to know if you have any other options. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:44, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5: Whew! Thank you for the very extensive and thorough review. I think I have to adress some of your points: regarding the QPQ, I've checked all references given, the shortness of the hook, and there aren't much to comment about other aspects of the article other than its interestingness and length. Regarding the obituary, it wasn't her obituary; it was another law professor's obituary. In the second-to-last page of the obituary, there is this statement: Sebagai seorang Guru Besar, Prof. Gautama memiliki sejumlah asisten. Di antara mereka adalah almh. Ny. S. J. Hanifah Wiknjosastro, S.H., yang menjadi dekan wanita pertama di FHUI periode 1978-1984 (As a Professor, Prof. Gautama had a number of assistants. Among them was the late Mrs. S. J. Hanifah Wiknjosastro, S.H., who became the first female dean at FHUI for the period 1978-1984.) Lastly, regarding the hook, I don't think there's any other options, since the article's size barely passes the DYK threshold. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael12:07, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For the QPQ review, please make the checks explicit in the nomination as a promoter or other editor could reject the QPQ as being insufficiently complete. I'm also not sure if the "- ?" thing in the lede is how we treat people with known dates of birth but no known dates of death, so I found that weird. If that's standard practice then I'll let it slide, and it's not really a DYK issue anyway. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:33, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5: Hi uhh forgot to follow up on this. The Eeringia DYK has appeared on the mainpage a week ago with all issues fixed. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael
Apologies for the delay. To be honest, I held back on approving this because I was confused with the statement above regarding Eeringia's running and I wasn't sure how that was related to this. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 22:48, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I see. I'm still not sure how to treat the lead though given that we have a known date of birth but not a date of death: asking RoySmith if he has any ideas. That is my last remaining concern so once that's resolved this nomination will be approved. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:38, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Being the first woman dean of the law school seems like a non-controversial statement. According to Faculty of Law, University of Indonesia, the law school was founded in 1909, so when she was appointed dean in 1978, the school was 70 years old, so probably they'd just had a handful of deans by that time so it's not hard to figure out which one was the first woman. I would, however, change the hook to say "first woman dean" instead of the somewhat ambiguous "first woman to head". What does it mean to be the "head"? Dean? Chair of the department? Provost? Just go with what the source says and avoid all that. RoySmith(talk)13:39, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@RoySmith: Actually, that wasn't my concern. My concern was how to treat the lead considering she is deceased but we only know her date of birth and not her date of death. Seeing "Sri Jumahaliah Hanifa Wiknyosastro (born 7 November 1924) was" feels weird to me and I'm not sure if this is the standard way of introducing deceased figures who have a known birth date but not a death date. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 15:10, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If she was reported dead, that should be added with a ref, and the date of the report (as we often say "baptised if we known that date but not the dob, see Beethoven). If there was no report, we should not speculate but leave as is.) --12:52, 24 May 2025 (UTC)Gerda Arendt (talk)
ALT2: ... that Carl Vincenti helped photographing dinosaur bones? Source: Vennen, Mareike (2018), "Arbeitsbilder – Bilderarbeit. Die Herstellung und Zirkulation von Fotografien der Tendaguru-Expedition [Working pictures - picture work. The production and circulation of photographs from the Tendaguru expedition]", in Heumann, Ina; Stoecker, Holger; Tamborini, Marco; Vennen, Mareike (eds.), Dinosaurierfragmente: Zur Geschichte der Tendaguru-Expedition und ihrer Objekte, 1906-2018 (in German), Wallstein Verlag, p. 57
Interesting life and work, on fine sources, no copyvio obvious. I prefer the original, as closely connected to the image which is licensed and gives a good idea of what he did. I suggest to add a year, to place it in time. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:37, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This also needs to be noted: the originally promoted hook was rejected after promotion per another WT:DYK discussion. It is now supposed to run with the following hook:
... that Carl Vincenti's posing of indigenous people in studio portraits (example pictured) contributed to the stereotyping of Africa and Africans?
Source: A study of racial stereotyping with reference to the territory of the modern state of Rwanda ... discussed a picture postcard published by Vincenti as an example. [3]
Per the consensus at the WT:DYK discussion, the old options have been struck and this will be the hook that will run once the issues are resolved. For what it's worth, I saw no issues with the original hook, but the consensus was to move away from it. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:25, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5:- Yes, I added a clear source to the "issue" that another user referred to more than a week ago, asking them, if this has resolved this issue. Since they have not replied, I think this nomination is ready to go. - Thanks for your assistance in promoting this DYK, that already had been cleared by more than one reviewer before. Munfarid1 (talk) 11:31, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What can I say? I liked the original hook better, and didn't quite understand the concerns. If not the original, I'd prefer something clarifying where he worked as what, instead of leaving only something that feels negative to me. The image is stronger than all these hook words. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:51, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Munfarid1: I can't remember if this was discussed in the WT:DYK discussion: does reference 31 in the article explicitly say that Vincenti's work contributed to the stereotyping, or was it a general statement that used Vincenti as an example? The article's current wording seems to suggest the latter and not the former, meaning that ALT as currently written may be inaccurate and thus may need a reword, unless the source is more explicit. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 06:07, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5: Thanks for having another close look at ALT and the source. You are absolutely right about the second meaning, but I don't think that we can keep the picture by rephrasing ALT. According to @Gerda Arendt:'s original review , I therefore suggest this
I'm afraid that ALT0 was explicitly rejected in the WT:DYK discussion, so as much as Gerda likes that particular hook, it can't be used. @Munfarid1: Do you have another wording that could be used? If the issue is the picture, then the hook can run without it. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 07:51, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5: I am afraid there may be a misunderstanding on your part: I have suggested another, completely different wording earlier on today, only called it ALT0 by mistake; so we better call it ALT3 ... that around 1900, Carl Vincenti took a studio portrait of a young Maasai man (pictured)? -. This is what Gerda Arendt referred to.-- Munfarid1 (talk) 08:20, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I see. However, it still largely deals with ALT0's hook fact, and that particular angle was rejected at the WT:DYK discussion, so that angle may have to be abandoned. For what it is worth, I was actually okay with ALT0 (and would be fine with ALT3), but the issue was that consensus was against that particular angle, so as much as I disagree with it too we have to abide by it, unfortunately. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:38, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the original ALT0 was rejected by a user, who was not the reviewer and said the fact that he looked straight at the camera was not interesting. - This is why I have suggested ALT3 with a different wording. If you think it can't be used, I suggest the following alternatives, hoping that you will find one that is ok. In ALT4, I am taking into account @Gerda Arendt:'s statement: "If not the original, I'd prefer something clarifying where he worked."
ALT4: ... that around 1900, Carl Vincenti photographed a colonial classroom (pictured) in German East Africa? For this, we can use this picture: File:Carl Vincenti Regierungsschule in Dar-es-Salaam.jpg
Thank you for trying, but none of the other pics is as great in stamp size. The rejected angle was the look into the camera, which is not part of ALT0a (ALT3). I feel not wanted here. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:43, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I fully agree, Gerda, and still hope that @Narutolovehinata5: might agree on the difference of the rejected ALT0 and our favourite ALT0a, as you explained. It is unfortunate that a user who did not review the article and only said, he doesn't think that ALT0 was interesting has caused us so much work. - Let us hope, this will finally see the green light. Munfarid1 (talk) 11:06, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I do wish I could approve the hook, but that would be going against the consensus established at WT:DYK. Approving the rejected angle would require that consensus being vacated, which means the editors objecting to it withdrawing their concerns. For what it's worth, I do think that a rewording of the stereotyping hook might still be a plausible option, or at least one that would best meet consensus. That is, if the source actually agrees with it. If it doesn't, I'm not sure.
The other hooks have a similar issue to the one raised for the original angle: their interest is dependent on getting the picture slot, and that's not exactly ideal. I don't really see ALT7 as that ideal as I don't know if Dobbertin is a significant figure, but it might be the best option here or at least the safest one since it is not reliant on having a picture, and it does raise curiosity for a non-specialist reader. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:17, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again, and thanks for your explanations. However, I don't understand why a hook for a photographer should not "be dependent on getting the picture slot". - Anyway, I prefer closing this nomination, and yes, Dobbertin is a significant figure. - The two were the only known professional photographers in German East Africa. Munfarid1 (talk) 11:38, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's a general sentiment and has nothing to do with Vincenti being a photographer. The idea is that if a hook is reliant on having a picture rather than being able to stand on its own, then that's usually not ideal. There are exceptions to this, of course, and I actually think this could have been one of those exceptions, but the idea is that a hook should be interesting or at least work regardless if it's in the picture slot or not. Having said that, would you be okay with ALT7 if it meant the article running? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:12, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You can approve that. Why should I when the image - for a photographer! - says so much more about what was important for the subject, and says it more directly? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:20, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. One last thing: per recently implemented DYK rules, it's encouraged for reviewers to ask for a copy or excerpt of offline/non-English sources to verify hooks (this replaced the old "assume good faith" approval). Will you be able to provide a brief excerpt of reference 3 and the part that talks about the suing? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:46, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To clarify, does the text say that it was Vincenti who brought him to court? The excerpt you gave doesn't seem to directly say it, but I'm willing to assume good faith here if necessary for the nomination to be approved. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 14:02, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the source refers to the court records as reason for their falling apart. But doesn't it seem logical that when a court sentenced Dobbertin for having stolen equipment from Vinceni this must have been based on Vincenti's having him taken to court? - There is one more source I have just added as ref 4: In this 1907 court document titled in translation "Penal procedure against photographer Walther Dobbertin in Daressalam" Dobbertin's first sentence for this robbery at Vincenti's studio from three days in prison plus the court's charges was reduced to a fine of 100 Marks. Munfarid1 (talk) 17:04, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I share your frustration, Gerda Arendt. After having had another close look at the article, I don't see how we can formulate an interesting hook w/out referring to his photography. After all, that's what makes him notable. If @Narutolovehinata5:, who also has spent much time on this, cannot accept one of the hooks, even w/out a picture, I am ready to withdraw this nomination. :( Munfarid1 (talk) 19:09, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In the interest of this moving forward, do you have a quote for reference 32 that talks about Vincenti and stereotyping? Depending on what the source says, maybe we can go with the original version of the stereotyping hook after all. I did say that I wasn't rejecting that angle, just that the wording had to be modified. ALT9 is less interesting, but it's a safe option and we can go with that if the stereotyping angle doesn't work out (it might need a reword since the article currently specifies one person using the photos for plant and agricultural studies rather than in general). Anyway, if you really still want to run the original hook or a variant thereof, I was not the one who objected to it but rather Amakuru and RoySmith, so discuss it with them and see if they can lift their objections. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 22:33, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the ping. I haven't looked at this in a while, but reviewing the nom, I now remember that this went off into aspects that were outside my realm of expertise, so I'll leave this for others to figure out. RoySmith(talk)22:36, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Amakuru I am appealing to you to consider lifting your objections against ALT1 or, alternatively, to endorse ALT3. The reason is that - after many attempts - we can't find a similarly interesting hook. User:Narutolovehinata5 wrote above: "I was actually okay with ALT0 (and would be fine with ALT3), but the issue was that consensus was against that particular angle, so as much as I disagree with it too we have to abide by it, unfortunately." - unless you lift your objection. - I don't see how we can formulate an interesting hook w/out referring to his photography. And taking a studio portrait of an African in a colonial setting and publishing it as a postcard for sale, is IMHO not a mundane fact. After all, that's what makes Vincenti notable. If we can't lift your objection, this long process of nominating will have to be abandoned. - For easier reference, here are the two hooks. Gerda Arendt, who reviewed the nom and I would like to use one of these alternatives, with the picture to complement the text:
*ALT0 ... that around 1900, a young Maasai man (pictured) looked straight at Carl Vincenti's camera?
@Munfarid1: Are you not open to the article running on DYK without a picture? If it's necessary for the nomination to move forward and be approved, we can always go with a hook like ALT9 which is not reliant on a picture but also does not raised the concerns that other editors raised. I'm also a bit confused about why you seem to be rejecting going with some variant of the stereotyping hook when all that is necessary is a reword and can still run with the picture. Something like:
ALT11 ... that commercial portraits such as those by Carl Vincenti(example pictured) contributed to the stereotyping of Africa and Africans?
(still watching): I see all the stereotype hooks as needlessly narrow and negative about a person who had impact by his photography. I don't see why neutrally showing a photo would be a bad idea. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:20, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for ALT11, I have just added the source and a translation for this hook above. I agree this is the best way to go ahead and think that this source corresponds to the wording of ALT11. To make things easier, I can leave the choice of the picture to you and hope Gerda Arendt can also live with this solution. Munfarid1 (talk) 14:21, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
... that when the 3,400 m² St Peter's Cathedral was built on tiny 18 km² Likoma Island, it was believed to be the largest building in Central Africa?
Source: "It is about four and one half miles long and two and one half miles wide. Likoma and neighboring Chizumulu, seven miles farther west, are the only significant islands in Lake Malawi" (page 85)... "Together with its chapel, library, chapter house and cloisters, the building's area exceeded some 37,000 square feet" (page 93)... "Even in the 1920s, the cathedral was believed to be 'the single largest building in Central Africa' (Dale 1925, 195)". (pages 93-94) From The Steamer Parish, by Charles Good: https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Steamer_Parish/8y8XSs9xIEIC
ALT1 ... that when St Peter's Cathedral was built on tiny Likoma Island, it was believed to be the largest building in Central Africa?
Reviewed:
Comment: An alternative color image is available at .
Created by Dclemens1971 (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.
Overall: Article meets expansion and length criteria. All sources are fine, a few more wouldn't hurt though. Earwig picks up one paragraph that needs a bit more rephrasing, but it does pass, please do rephrase this one section. I fixed a small grammar issue with the hook. The historical image is nice. Please expand a bit more if you're able to make completely sure it passes the expansion requirement, its very close to the limit. John Cummings (talk) 09:41, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@John Cummings and Narutolovehinata5: Thanks for the review! I tried to trim slightly but the wiki markup for superscript still takes up characters. This is two characters shorter: "that when the 3,400 m2St Peter's Cathedral was built on tiny Likoma Island, just 18 km2 in Lake Malawi, it was believed to be the largest building in Central Africa?" I also looked at the Copvio Detector and everything it flagged was inside of three short quotations and thus should be in compliance with MOS:QUOT, but let me know if there was something specific you saw that wasn't in quotation marks. Dclemens1971 (talk) 12:44, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5: The interestingness of the hook, to me, is in emphasizing the mismatch between the large size of the building and the small size of the island. Obviously we could trim the hook by eliminating the references to the sizes of the island and building, but I do think it loses a bit of the punch. The alternative would be ... that when St Peter's Cathedral was built on tiny Likoma Island in Lake Malawi, it was believed to be the largest building in Central Africa?, which is 140 characters. I will leave to you and @John Cummings: to decide if that is superior to the version that includes size figures. Whatever you decide is fine with me! Dclemens1971 (talk) 12:56, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Dclemens1971 sorry I missed this, what do you think about... that when the 3,400m² St Peter's Cathedral was built on the tiny, 18km² Likoma Island, it was believed to be the largest building in Central Africa? (please excuse the lack of formatting). Also Narutolovehinata5 is it ok to use these abreviations for square meters at km in DYK? John Cummings (talk)
I'm not the reviewer, you are, so if everything looks good on your end and you've checked all of the DYK criteria, the work is that. Having said that, I'd advise going with only the shorter version and not the one with figures for reasons I said above. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:26, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Or we could just leave it to the promoter. From what I recall, it's actually rather uncommon for building hooks to include the figures unless the figures themselves were essential to the hook fact (and this arguably isn't). Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:42, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'd definitely go with the shorter version (Dclemens1971: it is convention at DYK to set off all suggested alternates in the "* ALTx:" style to make them easier to see and give them unique names to refer to later). As for the "East Africa" vs "Central Africa" part, I'm not too worried about that. It's a direct quote from the source, and we generally follow the source's lead. For all we know, in the 1920's, the terms "East Africa" and "Central Africa" may have had different definitions, or maybe no exact definitions at all. RoySmith(talk)15:28, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If a cyclist represents his country at these races, is there a reason why the nationality of each rider is omitted in this article? Flibirigit (talk) 02:57, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Overall: The article was moved to the main space on April 2, and nominated within one day for DYK. Length is adequate. There is one citation needed tag in the "Origin" section for a direct quote. The prose in the "Career statistics" section has no citations. Also, please clarify the source(s) for the results in the "General classification" and "Major championships" sections. The article is neutral in tone, and I found no plagiarism concerns. ALT0 is an interesting hook. It is mentioned and cited in the article and verified by the source. ALT1 is a bit confusing, since it is not clear with is "the top level", and I cannot find where it is mentioned or cited in the article. All of the images used in the article are in the public domain on the Commons. QPQ is not required. Overall, this is a good attempt for the first DYK nomination. Some attention to sourcing is necessary. I look forward to seeing this on the main page. Flibirigit (talk) 23:04, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your review! I believe I've fixed the two citation issues: the first was just my mistake in using quotes, I was trying to highlight that I was referring to the term Big Four, so I've replaced with italics, per my understanding of MOS:ITAL and WP:WORDISSUBJECT. For the "Career statistics" section, I've added references to the prose for the overall summary statistics, and references to a reputable cycling database (procyclingstats) for all four rider's results. For ALT1, by "top level" I was referring to the UCI WorldTour, which is the top level of men's cycling. I worried that using "UCI WorldTour" in the hook wouldn't be meaningful to a non-cycling audience, but it is the most explicit/verifiable phrasing. Please let me know if there's anything else to fix! Verylongandmemorable (talk) 00:53, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The source of the first sentence in the "Origin" section is still unclear. The only citation in that paragraph mentions the term Big Four, but it does not specifically state "began appearing in cycling media in 2024", nor does it state "particularly in the lead up to the 2024 Tour de France". If such a specific source cannot be found, I suggest rewording the sentence. It would also be beneficial to have more than one reliable source describing the Big Four, as opposed to just one article at this time. ALT1 still cannot be verified since there is no corresponding mention of "top level" in the prose. Without such mention, the hook will be rejected. The citations for the charts are helpful, but one paragraph in the "Career statistics" section has no clear source. Flibirigit (talk) 01:15, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Here are some suggested sources [6][7][8] which also mention the term Big Four, for adding into the "Origin" section. It is best to have mutliple reliable sources to define the term, which is the key point of this article. Flibirigit (talk) 01:42, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the source suggestions! I've re-written the Origin paragraph to be more neutral and have more references for early uses of the term. On your suggestion, I also added a note to the lead of the article, which has multiple independent sources both analyzing the term and showing widespread use in coverage of cycling. I will address the sourcing in "Career statistics" section tomorrow. I understand that ALT1 is not verifiable in its current form, that's my fault for bad phrasing. It seems like you are happy with the first hook though? If not, I can try to come up with more alternatives. Verylongandmemorable (talk) 06:28, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The changes look promising. Will review in more detail tomorrow. I have struck ALT1, but remain open to new hooks and ALT0. Flibirigit (talk) 14:07, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
... that the first known collaboration of Bach and Picander resulted in the Shepherd Cantata and, mostly with the same music, the future Easter Oratorio, first performed at St. Nikolai(depicted) for Easter 1725? Source: several
The currently proposed hook is somewhat complicated and hard to read. May I suggest a shorter and simpler hook?
ALT1 ... that in contrast to Bach's Christmas Oratorio, his Easter Oratorio has no Evangelist narrator providing Biblical text?
One of my other concerns with the original hook is that it is also reliant on knowing who Picander is; Bach is obviously a well-known name even to the general public, but Picander is less so. I'm trying to come up with a shorter/simplified version of ALT0 that's also less reliant on knowing who Picander is, but I'm drawing a blank, so if you don't mind, I'm asking 4meter4 or CurryTime7-24 to propose a shorter/simplified version of ALT0 for the benefit of the reviewer. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:40, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We would miss 1) the quirkiness that Bach found the same music suitable for shepherds male and female exchanging pleasantries and Biblical characters facing the empty tomb, 2) the 300 years anniversary, and 3) the first collab with Picander, the author of the St. Matthew Passion and probably the Christmas Oratorio, so good to know, - I didn't know. Also: ALT1 has no music whatsoever, just a dry formal aspect. Interesting? It also tells much more about the Christmas Oratorio than the other to those who didn't know that, and almost nothing to those who knew that already. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:26, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In ALT0, you might skip the church, of course, especially as it was performed in the other the same day, but it forms the link to the image. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:30, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Both factually wrong, sorry. How about reading the article (which isn't even GA yet)? Bach had no idea about any oratorio until 10 years after this happened. This piece was named oratorio 13 years later (and it's debatable if it even is one, - not much changed from the cantata is was in 1725, just the name and a bit of scoring). Collaboration wasn't yet frequent, and their greatest work together came three years later. This is the beginning! Which I believe is interesting! More interesting that they did something very clever: use the same music for both a scenic dinner entertainment about shepherds here and an Easter cantata there! This cleverness should show, and if you can word it better than I could you can make me happy. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:07, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5 and Gerda Arendt: Before this nomination can continue, I need to point out an issue with this article. While working to add new information, I discovered that the article conflates two related, but separate pieces of music: the Easter Cantata and the Easter Oratorio. The article appears to be about the latter, but the "History" is devoted solely to the former (and its secular model). If it's OK with Gerda, I may need to substantially modify the "History" section. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 19:05, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly: those two pieces are not very different. Secondly: it is mentioned in lead and history that in 1738, Bach wrote a new score, with a few modifications, and then called it Oratorio. The article title is the latter for several reasons: most recordings use that, it's less German, and it was the title when I met the article. - Go ahead, but please don't tell me it's conflating. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:14, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well, Gerda, they still are two different scores, composed for separate occasions, and with separate performance/reception histories. It's not me saying this (I'm, admittedly, not too familiar with a lot of Bach's music)—it's Christoph Wolff. While he does say that the modifications Bach made were relatively few, the ones he did make were, according to Wolff, "quite remarkable" and that it changed the character of the music from theatrical to devotional. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 19:24, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"from theatrical to devotional": that is his interpretation of Bach in 1938 omitting the names of characters and just assigning voice parts, which is in the article. Dürr says about the same. It doesn't change the music. It's still dance music. - There is no reception history of the cantata, as for practically all his church cantatas. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:29, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No ;) - I found and added a source that everybody can see, by Wolff, 2010, about a "trilogy of oratorios". It has the dates of two of them wrong (saying 1735 instead of current state of the art 1738). Bach Digital (not I) corrected Mr. Wolff. His ideas are interesting, but need to be put in perspective. As I tried to say: that Bach omitted the names is fact, that it means from theatrical to devotional is interpretation which I avoided. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:37, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@CurryTime7-24 What exactly is the issue here? Are you saying that Gerda is engaging in WP:SYNTH? Or are you saying the history section is WP:UNDUE or in error? If what Gerda is saying is true, then Bach merely recycled an older work and made modifications to it. This happened a lot in the baroque and classical eras, and we often cover pieces like this together in history sections in order to provide context. For example the article on the aria "Lascia ch'io pianga" also covers the earlier aria " "Lascia la spina, cogli la rosa" because they have almost identical music (some minor instrumentation differences), but different text, and it covers the even earlier instrumental sarabande from Almira from which the melody originated. This seems like a similar situation where an earlier piece was reworked and put in a new context. The newer piece evolved from the older one, and the history section should cover this. One can't understand the later work properly if one doesn't have the context of the older work from which it was taken. I'm not convinced that the history section as presented is either inaccurate or undue or original synthesis. Lastly, Gerda is extremely well read in Bach literature/scholarship, and is active performer in a Bach ensemble. Much of our coverage on Bach and his works has been written by her (particularly the many Bach cantata articles). So if she's saying something in a text is outdated or in error when it comes to a Bach related article I at the very least would stop, listen, and look at the evidence. Bach is her area of expertise.4meter4 (talk) 16:11, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. @Narutolovehinata5 and Gerda Arendt I think too many facts are thrown into the original, and that the alt hooks unfortunately are inaccurate because they miss the nuances of the way this work evolved over time and the extant to which Picander was involved with the work at different stages. I don't think mentioning the church is needed because its inclusion is not adding interest and is distracting from the article being featured. For classical musical buffs, we all know about Bach's lengthy tenure at the St. Nicholas Church and St. Thomas Church, Leipzig so it seems extraneous, and for those who aren't classical music buffs it seems trivial. I would oppose using this photograph as well because the image has nothing to do directly with the oratorio. The painting dates to nearly 25 years after the composition premiered, and is very nominally relevant to the oratorio. I propose the following hook below.4meter4 (talk) 21:46, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm confused with the above 4meter4: so basically, the article is just fine and there's nothing to worry about the issues CT raised, and instead the main issue here is the hook? Having said that, ALT0c sounds okay. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 22:39, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ALT0C is factually wrong because there was no Easter Oratorio in 1725. Bach's earliest oratorio dates from 1734. As the article says. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:18, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Gerda Arendt Than the info box in the article is either in error or confusing and needs to be fixed to say the premiere was in 1734. If you want to make a distinction with the cantata you need to make a clear differentiation in the infobox which is about the oratorio. @Narutolovehinata5 It just passed a GA review. I, nor the GA reviewer, am not seeing a problem. CT hasn't replied back here, and honestly I don't think that CT has truly read all of the literature here and is not necessarily forming an opinion based on all of the materials. The issue appears to be based on a single scholar's work, which apparently has been corrected as being in error in newer materials used by Gerda that has better more accurate scholarship. Best.4meter4 (talk) 00:38, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In any case, given the concerns raised with ALT0, I've struck it. Both commenters have suggested that a snappier wording is needed, possibly one that only mentions the essential details. @4meter4: Is the only issue with ALT0c what Gerda raised, or it's actually correct and it's the article that's currently wrong? If this is resolved, we can probably request a new review for ALT0c (or whatever revision to it). Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 05:47, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) I thought the development of the oratorios was clear now but will have to expand it further, also the infobox. It was the Christmas Oratorio, Bach's first oratorio, that premiered in 1734. The Easter Oratorio, under this name - well, actually in Latin - was premiered in 1938. However, the cantata premiered in 1725 was basically the very same music, which Bach was able to repurpose to the oratorio concept without major changes because, as the Shepherd Cantata, it had been theatrical from the start, and so was Bach's earliest oratorio (just not named so), before the St Matthew Passion even, with that same Picander.
Dropping the pic wish (motivated by the wish for both more prominence and a clear placement at a glance in the 18th century):
ALT0d: ... that the first known collaboration of Bach and Picander resulted in the Shepherd Cantata and, mostly with the same music, the future Easter Oratorio, first performed for Easter 1725?
The following might be clearer regarding the 1725 event being the future Easter Oratorio, but would miss saying that the 1738 music was still "mostly the same":
ALT0e: ... that the first known collaboration of Bach and Picander resulted in 1725 in the Shepherd Cantata for a birthday and for Easter, mostly with the same music, the future Easter Oratorio?
I thought about including that it was Picander who would write the St Matthew Passion, to clarify why he is important, but wasn't able to do that on top of the complexity that comes from three stages of the Easter music (well, actually four stages, the last with no more chorus, so more oratorio style even, not mentioned).
That's as concise as I can get including three stages of one music, important per music history and a high holiday and a centenary, and saying something about the early beginnings (two years before the St Matthew Passion) of Bach and Picander working together cleverly and the future Easter Oratorio. All sources call underrated. It should be known more. Improvement of hooka ia welcome, but not shortening to being wrong. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:19, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think the issues with ALT0d/ALT0e are: 1. they require familiarity with Picander; again, while Bach is reasonably well-known, Picander is less so, so at least some context as to who Picander is would be necessary, and 2. they don't exactly flow very well. It might be hard to understand for you as English is not your first language, but the grammar is a bit on the clunky side and also long. I still think ALT0c (assuming it has no more remaining factual issues, or is otherwise modified to address them) flows better and largely gives the same idea. @4meter4: can you please modify ALT0c to address any remaining factual issues, or perhaps you can edit the article to address any remaining concerns? Both CT and 4meter4 expressed concerns about hooks being too wordy, and ALT0c at least strives to address that concern. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:42, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ALT0c is wrong as it's written because there was no idea of any oratorio by Bach in 1725. Misleading. - You and I will not agree that any hook requires to be already familiar with anything linked, here Picander, just the opposite: he is mentioned to arouse interest in him, the person without whom we would not have the St Matthew Passion. (Did you see how many clicked on Pavarotti yesterday?) There is a link. Many will already know the name as he is supposed to have written the Christmas Oratorio also. The early collaboration, before all of the other masterworks, and then with the clever plan to use the music for both Shepherds' flattery and followers' missing of Jesus, is interesting, and for me the most surprising and good-to-know news there is about this piece. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:12, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I like the approach. I fixed the year to 1738. However, "recycled" isn't quite right to express that it seems to have been planned from the start that two very different texts should suit the same music for very different occasions, both in 1725, the year of the first collaboration. It's a problem that, while the Easter Oratorio was basically again the same music in 1738, it was already heard without that name for Easter 1925, which is the anniversary, not the other. - Any hook: we should pipe to Bach or J. S. Bach. Compare:
I still think Launchballer's wording is better: it flows better, it puts the Oratorio's name at the start, and "recycled" isn't inherently wrong since it doesn't necessarily mean he copied everything, just that he copied. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:57, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am not surprised. Could you perhaps also let others comment? Launchballer, for example. There was no "recycling", and certainly not in 1738, when Bach just wrote a new score. But even in 1725, there was no "recycling" (as I understand the word) but a clever plan from the start to use the music for two mightily different purposes. The oratorio has no tricentenary this year but in 2038, - saying 1738 only is misleading, especially regarding the beginning of the collaboration. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:28, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Re ALT0e. Content OK, but not snappy, and does not run smoothly.
Re ALT0f. Thanks for that, Launchballer, it might have been OK, but in this context "recycled" has a connotation of shabbiness or laziness. Can you find another word?
Re ALT0g. That would be OK, but it's a bit long and not snappy. Can we just list the new works and leave out the birthday and future?
Re ALT0h. That would run nicely and smoothly if you missed out "in their first known collaboration". The readers can get that bit when they read the article; they don't need it in the hook.
(commenting here at Gerda's invitation). I think the reason this is tricky is because we're trying to squeeze in a lot of interesting info into one hook. I think of all the options, I like this latest by Launchballer (Alt0j, tho I do not understand the numbering system here!) the best. It is the easiest to parse (i.e. not as clunky as some of the options), and does a good job of keeping the most important/interesting information, as well as efficiently clarifying who Picander is. The unincluded info is, IMHO, also interesting, but there's just too much of it (if DYK was 2 sentences I'd say include it, but it isn't). I don't really like the formulations that refer to Easter Oratorio as a relative "future" work; it's the targeted article. I prefer this formulation. FWIW. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:27, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ALT0j has a few problems:
Bach comes too late or would you think people would be interested in some Easter Oratorio without composer?
1738 comes too soon to understand it's 300 years, which was the only reason to expand that article now.
ALT0i has the problem that Picander can't be a subject for the verb "used the same music". Per your suggestion:
You don't think ... but I know that the article expansion happened only because Easter 2025 is 300 years after the first performance of the Easter music, not the Shepherd cantata, and that is missing in ALT0m. Instead, we are made believe that the oratorio was composed in 1738, but it was composed in 1725, - only renamed in 1738, which makes it the earliest-composed of Bach's 3 oratorios, and even earlier than the St. Matthew Passion. Which is interesting, I think. You are good in phrasing: can you try? - Any admin around? WT:DYK#Good Friday needs attention even sooner, like in a few hours. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:41, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think the main issue with these new proposals, particularly ALT0k and ALT0l is that they don't give any context as to who Picander is. It's been a recurring issue with your proposals and is something that isn't ideal, especially when neither Picander nor his frequent collaborations with Bach are necessarily well-known among the general public. For reference, WP:DYKHOOKSTYLE states Make sure to provide any necessary context for your hook; don't assume everyone worldwide is familiar with your subject. What may be obvious to you or indeed other classical music experts may not be common knowledge to the general public. I don't see what the issue is with ALT0j: to me at least, the opposition to it feels more like nitpicking rather than any actual hook errors. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 14:14, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's a recurring issue that you don't understand that if there is a link, readers don't have to know but can find out. We will have many readers who know who Picander is (or won't care anyway): why bore them in the few characters we have with who he is? It's not sure that he wrote the text for the music heard on Easter Sunday 1725, only most likely. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:52, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see the harm in at least explaining, even briefly, who Picander is, as part of introducing him. If the point of the hook is to introduce who Picander is, at least mentioning how he is relevant to Bach seems more ideal than just mentioning his name without context; not saying who he is would make readers care less about him. If it isn't sure that he wrote the music for the 1725, wouldn't that put the entire hook's viability into question? Asking 4meter4 again regarding the above claim to clarify if there are indeed concerns about if Picander was involved or not. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 22:54, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(I see how well you read by saying "If it isn't sure that he wrote the music" talking about Picander.) I came with a good unusual story, the original hook, which tells everybody without special knowledge that 1) there was a great piece performed for Easter 1725 (actually to become one of three oratorios by one of the most celebrated composers ever), 2) that there was some beginning of collaboration of two people, 3) that the piece shared music with another piece of different character, - I think that is interesting information enough, without needing to know who precisely these two people were. - I came to tell a good story for Good Friday (today) about Johannes-Passion (Gubaidulina). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:56, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the offer but - besides formatting - in 1725 their was no "oratorio" name attached to it. The whole idea of oratorios occurred to Bach only in 1732, when mourning for the elector interrupted his normal work for a year, and he had time to think about new things. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:33, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To be honest, had you agreed to ALT0f or even ALT0j, the hook would probably already be in Queue right now since multiple editors were fine with it and were ready to agree to it. The apparent nitpicking regarding hook wording, rather than going with an option that already had multiple editors open to it (ALT0j/ALT0f) is what is causing the nomination to get delayed. If the hook ultimately fails to run on Easter, it is not through the fault of editors who did their best to propose and discuss hooks that would have appealed to the general public while also not being too overly detailed or complicated. Considering how it is becoming less likely the nomination will be approved in time: 1. would you be open to agreeing to ALT0j given editor openness to it, so that the hook can run on time, or 2. would you be open to the hook running on any day other than Easter? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 07:06, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't like a hook that is factually wrong. Nothing was recycled or reused in 1738, it happened in 1725. You could still approve j, if you don't see that. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:24, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I was about to approve ALT0j, but right now there's an issue with the article. Actually multiple. Firstly, I can't actually see any sentence in the article, apart from the lede, that outright says the Oratorio reused music from the Shepherd Cantata. Instead, if my understanding is correct, Bach reused the Shepherd Cantata's music for the 1725 Easter Cantata (not Oratorio), which was then reused for the Oratorio. As such, the reuse actually seems to be indirect in this case rather than direct.
In addition, the "Oratorio (1738)" section also does not directly mention that he reused the Shepherd Cantata's music for the Easter Oratorio, but rather he reused the Easter Cantata for that purpose. The sentence stating this, "For Easter 1738, Bach could use the 1725 Easter cantata basically at it was." also lacks a footnote. There's also an inconsistency between the lede and the article: the lede claims that the Easter Oratorio was different from Bach's other oratorios in lacking an Evangelist narrator, but the article only compares it to the Christmas Oratorio and not in general.
Given the issues with the Shepherd Cantata/Easter Cantata angle, we may have to move away from that one. Depending on how the article and lede are reconciled, we could revisit ALT1 and have something like:
If that's not feasible, we may have to go with a completely different angle. I don't think we could go with the Duke's birthday angle as it's still ultimately tied to the Shepherd Cantata. ALT2 might not pass scrutiny as it's technically a hook about song lyrics, a hook format that has been discouraged at DYK due to the association with WP:DYKFICTION. Inviting 4meter4, CurryTime7-24, Launchballer, and Floquenbeam for feedback regarding possible new hook angles/wordings, as well as to address the concerns raised above. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:02, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Given the concerns raised above, I've struck all hooks reliant on the Shepherd Cantata angle; they can be revisited and unstruck on an individual basis once the issues I raised are resolved. ALT2 is left unstruck as it remains open as an alternative, especially if others disagree with the "use of lyrics in a hook" objection. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:17, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please read the article again. The music for the oratorio is the same (with minor scoring differences) as the cantata. Happy Easter - I celebrate until Tuesday. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:07, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I did, and other than the lede the connection between the Shepherd Cantata and the Easter Oratorio is indirect at best. That has to be made clearer in the article, that that the Oratorio used the Shepherd Cantata's music, rather than the current version where it says so in a roundabout way (it used the Easter Cantata as a basis, which itself used the Shepherd Cantata as a basis). Even if that was resolved, one of the sentences that verifies that fact, "For Easter 1738, Bach could use the 1725 Easter cantata basically at it was," lacks a footnote. Now that I think about it, several of the variations of ALT0 are unsuitable since they actually seem to be more about the Easter Cantata than the Oratorio itself, and generally we want to avoid hooks where the bolded article is only tangentially related to the main hook fact. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 07:56, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"For Easter 1738, Bach could use the 1725 Easter cantata basically at it was." - In the table of the music, how many changes are there, things in brackets that indicated differences to earlier versions? (... and one of the changes relates to a change in the 1740s, after oratorio) - I will try clarification, but not today or tomorrow. Church, going outoors and company. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:57, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Back to work. After we missed the chance to point at this work on the anniversary we can of course say things unrelated to the anniversary. I gave it a rewrite, with better sourcing. Pick what you like. Most beautiful score. "No Evangelist, no Biblical text, no chorale" if you have to say what it is not. I should probably unwatch ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:11, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Given the above, right now only ALT1a and ALT2 should remain in consideration as the concerns regarding the Shepherd Cantata angle remain unaddressed. I should point out that the Evangelist angle also still lacks direct referencing in the article, so that will need to be addressed before this is ready for a new review; pinging Grimes2 and Thoughtfortheday to address these concerns. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:36, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know what you expect. That there is no Biblical text includes that there is no Evangelist (who would report Biblical text). Do you need a ref for the other oratorio's having an Evangelist? That could be copied from the other articles. I just find poor to only say what it is not.
ALT3: ... that the autograph manuscript that J. S. Bach made in 1738 of music he had composed in 1725, calling it Easter Oratorio, has been described as one of his most beautiful scores?
Thank you for trying, but in 1725, there was no oratorio. (I guess it's the fifths time I write that in this thread.) It's remained the same music but the name came only in 1738, with that copy. I guess I'll have to write a still different lead. Or should I rename the article? See Ascension Oratorio which is only a redirect. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:19, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Beginning of the soprano aria, with the end of the first recitative
Thank you, modified for caution, quoting from the article. I don't think that someone not knowing what score means will find an answer in sheet music ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:31, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the modification. I linked "score(s)" to sheet music because the WP definition includes both handwritten and printed music in that - but mainly because I thought the great unwashed would probably think "score" meant sport/gaming scores, and would not connect it with the autograph manuscript at all. ;-) Storye book (talk) 11:37, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I like ALT3b, but I think it would be for the best for this to get a review from an uninvolved and unpinged/non-messaged editor. Having said that, among the available hooks, ALT3b is my favorite. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:26, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Grow up, Naruto. You frequently message CurryTime7-24, 4meter4 and others, openly on Gerda's nominations, for comments which may possibly back up your views, for example views on wordiness. So please stop making snidy, veiled aspersions about other people getting messaged. Note: I have no personal objection to Curry Time and 4meter4, or to their contributions, but if you block people messaged by Gerda, then in principle you are also blocking people messaged by yourself. Therefore I suggest that you withdraw the above comment about messaging. Storye book (talk) 08:38, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
take it easy, - I didn't even read it this way, I just grinned about generously inviting independent reviewers after having made a personal selection of possible hooks. Who knows, a different independent reviewer might have approved ALT0. Imagine ... --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:55, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Here's the thing: when I pinged 4meter4 and CurryTime to this nomination, I made it clear that it was only for hook suggestions, and not to review the hooks. Indeed, when I asked for a "non-messaged uninvolved editor", this includes both 4meter4 and CurryTime (as well as Launchballer for that matter), meaning someone who hasn't commented on the nomination yet and wasn't specifically invited to review the nomination. This is to ensure an impartial review regardless of what hook is ultimately picked; it's also one reason I begged off from giving a review myself. In any case, I suggest you modify your comment above as others may consider it as uncivil. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 14:12, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How could I see that it was for Storye book when you indented as a reply to me? I won't fix it now or my question would look silly. I fixed the bullet though, or my comment below looks silly. There's no rush. Once we missed the 300 years, a day more or less doesn't matter, - Eastertide until Ascension Day. I made my story today about Werner Thissen instead of the Johannes-Passion DYK which should have come on Good Friday, only to find out that his funeral was today, - good timing once in a month, per chance. The clergy was dressed for Easter. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:31, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I guess it could be inferred from context, but my intention was for the comment was to have the same indention as your comment that said "take it easy". I guess I accidentally inserted another colon. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 14:35, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I added an image which shows more than 1000 words. I know that sheet music is not ideal but this one looks interesting even when small, and would hopefully invite to look at it, which might be more educational than looking at the article. The caption is too long, feel free to trim. I took the liberty to add it next to ALT3b, and fix the ALT. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:33, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I was going to promote this because I think File:Nikolaikirche Leipzg 1749 (Kupferstich) Foto H.-P.Haack.JPG is a great image and wanted to use it. But I see ALT3b is the only hook approved and that uses a different image; one which I think won't work well at all on the main page. Also, I'm currently reviewing this for FAC; I don't think that disqualifies me from promoting it, but instead I'll just leave my comments and hope somebody can find a way to use the better image. RoySmith(talk)14:04, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
sorry (I meant to unwatch ...) to spoil the fun. ALT3c has the same problem that some earlier hooks had: when this music was first performed at that church (1725) it was not yet named an oratorio (1738), nor had Bach written anything named oratorio (1734). This would be good to know, but can't be seen in the short hook, and even could get us to ERRORS. Minor: when we have a pic of the church, I believe we can have its name (shorter) in German (also a little indication of where this plays, and perhaps include Leipzig). I try to avoid "St." for Protestant churches (as a little indication that this is Lutheran). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:10, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If we being pedantic over the current name being ahistoric to the time of a separately-specified manuscript, could the hook add "what became known as" - I too come here having wanted to promote the hook with the Nikolaikirche image (a lovely image for MP) and seeing it held up on technicality. Kingsif (talk) 01:03, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We could, please word it. I was trained to keep things short, and would much like to illustrate the hook with what it talks about than a connection that's far-fetched and unfair - the same music was played in the other church also, the same day. We could run the church image some other day with some other piece. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:52, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Beginning of the soprano aria, with the end of the first recitative
ALT4: ... that in 1738, Bach wrote a new autograph manuscript (page pictured) of music that he had performed in 1725, entitling it Easter Oratorio?
Too tired for more detail. The title was in Latin, as the first sentence says, but this is what it means. The pic shows rather objectively that it is beautiful. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:26, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
... that África Brasil was recorded with two drummers, two bassists, and many musicians that the producer had to take a crash program in the United States to learn how to record it?
Source: https://revistacontinente.com.br/secoes/resenha/africa-brasil-1 "O produtor afirmou que ninguém queria encarar a missão de gravar um disco com duas baterias, dois contrabaixos e mais um monte de músicos. Mazzola foi, então, fazer um curso de especialização nos Estados Unidos e pediu para Jorge esperar sua volta ao Brasil e a importação de uma mesa de 16 canais. Acabou cumprindo, também, o papel de técnico de som, pois o profissional designado não conseguia dar conta do novo equipamento."
Article expanded 5x within a week of nomination. QPQ good. Article is well-written and well-sourced, hook is interesting. Two things with the hook, though: it seems as if the hook should say "so many musicians", and the source and article seem to indicate "specialized course" rather than a crash course, as linked.~Darth StabroTalk • Contribs03:24, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Darth Stabro: Thanks for the review and sorry for the late response. I prefer not to use "so many musicians", since the emphasis is more on the unusual configuration (two drummers, two bassists, and others) than on quantity. Though I agree that "specialized course" could more match the source, I was wondering if it might be a little unclear to general readers. Would "recording course" or "technical course" work better for clarity while still staying true to the source? Cattos💭19:20, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Butting in to agree with Darth Stabro here; as written the grammar is off. If you want to keep away from the "so many" phrasing, you'll need to revise it. ♠PMC♠ (talk)22:53, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My suggested grammatical improvement: "that as África Brasil was recorded with two drummers, two bassists, and many musicians the producer had to take a crash program in the United States to learn how to record it?" (taking out that)User:D Kirlston - talk00:07, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Z1720: this still wouldn't satisfy the wording about a "crash program". @Cathodography: thoughts on this:
ALT1 ... that as África Brasil was recorded with two drummers, two bassists, and many other musicians, the producer had to take a specialized recording course in the United States to learn how to mix it?
ALT1: ... that the Dexcom Seven, launched in 2007, was the first CGM system capable of delivering continuous glucose data for a full seven days, doubling the lifespan of its predecessor?
Source: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8120065/ "...the STS-7, which was the first device to allow patients to continuously monitor their glucose levels for seven days as opposed to three."
ALT2: ... that Dexcom aired its first-ever Super Bowl ad in 2023, featuring Nick Jonas, who lives with type 1 diabetes and uses the Dexcom G7 CGM?
ALT3: ... that the Dexcom Follow app enables up to ten designated users—like parents or caregivers—to remotely monitor a person’s real-time glucose readings on their mobile devices?
Overall: So far so good, article passed minimum length criterion and newness. Source spot checks indicate good results, though I don't think every product name needs to be bolded? I would AGF on the interpretation that "first real-time factory-calibrated CGM system" means "without requiring calibrations". I also endorse the ALT0 hook, though I think it would be much more compact if you end the hook at "...calibrations" (no need for the "thereby eliminating the need for regular fingerstick blood tests?"). Approved! Regards, Jeromi Mikhael04:32, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
On second thought, I might have trimmed this a bit too much, at the expense of meaning anything to someone unfamiliar with the subject matter. Perhaps a mention or link to type 1 diabetes should find its way back into the hook somewhere. jlwoodwa (talk) 03:12, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Overall, the article is new enough (created on 8 April), is long enough, is NPOV, hook is cited to a RS and QPQ is done. Earwig shows a "violation unlikely" result with 2.0% similarity. Interesting article/subject and one that I would've thought would have been covered on Wikipedia a long time ago already. Cattos💭01:14, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Is there any remedy here other than to wait out the potentially months it will take for this merge discussion to be resolved? It's been open for a few weeks now and discussion has been pretty limited. Morgan695 (talk) 17:13, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: This is a first for me at DYK. I created this page as part of my disclosed paid editing work for ASU (User:Melted Brie). For DYK purposes, I am crediting my normal account as the sole author as I'm not doing DYK at ASU's direction and to streamline DYK credits.
Moved to mainspace by Sammi Brie (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 757 past nominations.
It feels like a violation of the spirit of Wikipedia. If this is allowed, then all properly disclosed paid editors could use the front page to promote whatever they wanted. Thriley (talk) 21:29, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For what it's worth, there's no blanket ban against DYK nominations where COI is involved. Things are treated on a case-by-case basis, rather than there being hard rules against it. We did have that issue with TonyTheTiger and his sister a while back, and that nomination was ultimately rejected, but again that nomination was discussed largely on its merits and not solely for being a COI. In this particular case, while Sammi did write the article on the direction of ASU, her nominating the article was done independently and was not a request by ASU. If it had been the latter, then perhaps this nomination would be inappropriate, but in this case, it's just an article she nominated that just happened to be one she made as part of her paid editing work, rather than her being paid to nominate it for DYK. I kinda doubt her ASU superiors even know what DYK is (please correct me if I'm wrong Sammi). Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 06:38, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There needs to be a community discussion on disclosed paid editors and DYK. I think it would be best to have a complete ban of paid articles on DYK rather than evaluating them on a case by case basis. Brie is an exceptional editor with a long history. To make an exception for her but not other paid editors opens up too many potential time consuming discussions that would be avoided with a simple ban. Thriley (talk) 15:56, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:QPQ not done (or not linked above), stalled till then, may be quick failed if not completed soon.
Note: I will most probably not be able to review this after QPQ is submitted as I just came across while patrolling. Others can definitely take over this review. ~/Bunnypranav:<ping>11:58, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: - @Sammi Brie: I've found many instances of repeating the same reference. Starting at the beginning of the article, I've made a few edits to the citations using "name=" in the ref tags. There are quite a few more in the article. It is challenging to assess the balance of citations with each instance being separate. Please see WP:REFNAME. - — ERcheck (talk) 01:23, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
QPQ: - Not done Overall: Article was expanded 5 times within 7 days of nomination. Article is more than 1,500 characters in prose and is written in a neutral tone. Earwig picked up an unlikely copyright violation of 30.6%, with most of it having to do with direct quotes from Cottrell himself. If there is a way to reduce those, that would be preferable. The hook is a "(subject) is..." quote, but I think it's still interesting because it's notable. National Football League should be wikilinked in the hook, though. A QPQ is still needed at this time. lullabying (talk) 09:01, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Source: https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/propk-great-highway-sf-19895246.php (A ballot measure to close a 2-mile stretch of San Francisco’s Great Highway passed with 54% of the vote in returns released Saturday afternoon. The controversial proposal, known as Proposition K, will ban vehicles on the city’s westernmost coastal boulevard between Lincoln Way and Sloat Boulevard.)
ALT1: ... that San Francisco's newest park is located on an oceanfront road that is now permanently closed to cars? Source: https://sfrecpark.org/1555/Sunset-Dunes (In April 2020, the Great Highway was closed to vehicles from Lincoln to Sloat to provide recreational opportunities and social distancing space during the COVID-19 pandemic. In August 2021, the Great Highway reopened to vehicular traffic on weekdays while retaining the weekend park usage. In December 2022, the Board of Supervisors passed legislation establishing the Great Highway Pilot, a hybrid usage plan that closed the road to vehicles on holidays and weekends and, during which, traffic and visitor data was collected on the Great Highway’s use as both a roadway and park. In November 2024, San Francisco voters approved the passage of Proposition K, which transforms the Upper Great Highway to a permanent 24/7 recreational public park for walking, biking, rolling and more.)
New: Okay: Article was created 9 April 2025, nominated 16 April.
Hook: Fairly interesting: in USA it is rare to replace a road with a park; and this particular park location is very noteworthy. Primary hook is superior to Alt2 hook, in my judgement.
Hook length is under 200 characters
Verifiable: All important facts in article have citations. I did a spot check of about half the cites, and they are valid.
Size: tool shows size is 2910 B (476 words) ... which meets the DYK requirements, I believe.
Source for hook: Yes, a source is provided, and I looked at it.
Plagiarism - I ran the Earwig copyvio tool and max % was 16%, which is within tolerances.
POV: Article is neutral and factual.
Images: article has one image, and it contains appropriate free use justification.
Quid Pro Quo - Nominator says they have NOT done it yet; Cannot approve DYK until that is completed.
Source: "MARVA NABILI, an immigrant film maker from Iran, has written and directed Nightsongs, a fictional portrait of Chinese immigrants in New York. Having spent several years living near and even working in Chinatown, she has compiled a haunting biography of outsiders trying to survive in a new environment. The slice-of-life details are depicted with the immediacy of a documentary using a hidden camera. Being presented as part of public television's American Playhouse series,"
One suggestion on the hook is to clarify which Chinatown ie "...the struggles of a family in New York's Chinatown." I know it's possible to hover over the link and identify which one it is but I think the additional specificity helps create curiosity. EEHalli (talk) 14:01, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Overall: Article is new enough and long enough, is sourced, neutral and plagiarism free. However the lead needs expanding, and I was confused by this sentence "In 1977, at the age of 36, Nabili became the second female director to make a feature film in Iran after Shala Riari's Marjan in 1956, a public failure at the time, of which no trace remains." - it seems to contradict the earlier paragraph about her return in 1975, nor does it specifiy the film. If its the Sealed Soil, then it need integrating into the paragraph on that topic and the chronology of production clarifying. Lajmmoore (talk) 19:24, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: @GeogSage: I'm seeing a lot of good, potential hooks in the article. Your section on "Early history and etymology" has quite a few. The material about Eratosthenes, the Ptolemaic tradition, and Islamic geographers could make separate hooks or could even be combined into one hook. Viriditas (talk) 01:43, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Viriditas:: Thanks for the feedback. This is my first attempt, and I've been trying to think of good ways to respond. Would I put a new one in the comments here, or edit the proposal? GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 02:20, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@GeogSage: You can shorten it much more, and others will ask you to do so. "... that while technical geography studies the applications of GIS and remote sensing today, it has origins in Ptolemaic and Islamic cartography?" That's 141 instead of 197 characters. Viriditas (talk) 22:46, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@GeogSage: I realize this is your first time at DYK. The process is fairly simple and transparent. The hooks should be easy to find in the article and the sources should easily replicate and support the info. These two things are difficult to determine for all three of your hooks. Sometimes, editors who are faced with this issue will simply kludge the hooks into the article with a cited source. You may find this the easiest option. For the reviewer, we like to see how the sources support the hooks in a fairly overt way. I don't see the exact hooks in your current article (I see parts of them here and there), and it isn't easy to determine if the sources support them. If the simple method I've described up above to kludge the hooks doesn't work for you, you can easily implement a second solution: write a new hook from the source directly and add it to the article, showing how the source directly supports it with a quote. Any way you do it, just remember the process should be fairly transparent for the reviewer so we can easily check the hook and the source. Viriditas (talk) 01:17, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Overall: Article is new (GA) and long enough at the time of nomination. Earwig report looks good. ALT2 is interesting. The "see also" borders on the absurd, so I think there is a fundamental misunderstanding as to how we use this section. Most of these entries should be deleted. Lead section may be satisfactory for DYK, but as a recent GAN, it should be rewritten to summarize the main points of the article, which at the moment, it does not do. Use of excessively long captions also deviates from best practices. Formatting of book titles, such as Cave 1749, require italics. The date is also wrong. The book was first published a decade earlier; 1749 refers to the second edition. You don't have to type out the entire 18th century title; Geography Reformed (1739) will do as a shortened title. Remove the stray comma from "1749,". The SAGE Handbook of Historical Geography says it was anonymously authored but published by Cave. Presentation is slightly hampered by textual issues with sentences such as "These frameworks were mostly advanced mostly by human geographers..." Also, "While when the term technical geography first entered the English lexicon..." Use of quotations of common words and phrases in the "Early history and etymology" section should be replaced with paraphrasing. Book titles like Geographia and Kitab al-Buldan use italics. You write "Geography has a history spanning cultures and thousands of years and is described as a "mother science" from which more specialized disciplines emerge..." I would want to see a quote from the source on that, as it sounds incredibly unusual. Philosophy and physics are most often described as the "mother science", not geography. Perhaps something was lost in translation here as it doesn't make sense. Copyedits needed. The section on "Quantitative revolution" is an example of WP:CITEKILL. You don't need or require six citations for two sentences. You can bundle citations or use footnotes if needed. One citation per sentence is generally recommened, two if needed. Update: I went ahead and made a series of copyedits.[9] My main concern right now concerns 1) the lead section, which does not properly summarize the article or its main points, but I think DYK allows for that, so it is not an issue that has any bearing on the success of this nomination, but it does personally bother me, and I wanted to express my concerns because there will be readers who will come here to learn more and will be turned away by the lead; I know I was. Please rewrite the lead to summarize the entirety of the subject you've presented, highlighting the most significant points. 2) I like ALT2, but I'm having great difficulty verifying it based on your citations (and it doesn't appear in whole in the article, just in parts). @GeogSage: Why don't you make this as easy as possible and mine Geographia Technica[10] for a good hook and add it to this article? I see an interesting one about how technical geography was used during the COVID-19 pandemic to analyze NO2 concentrations, showing that pandemic restrictions led to emissions reductions.[11] Alternatively, I see another good hook that is already in the article, but needs some work. The information about the Michigan-Wisconsin boundary Supreme Court case would make a good hook, but you will need to return to the source to flesh it out as it isn't all that clear. I combined ALT0 and ALT1 together to get ALT3, and added the cartography bit from the "Fundamentals" section, where ALT3 appears, but shortened the entire thing. Viriditas (talk) 23:43, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@GeogSage: This potential hook (which already appears in the "Fundamentals" section and elsewhere) could be vastly improved by adding additional features like forecasting and predicting future events and tracking diseases, but none of that appears in your current version. I'm tapping out now, because I created ALT3 based on the only sources I could find that support each other independently, with Haidu 2016 describing Ormeling 2009, which makes it verifiable and secondary in nature based on the primary. I originally wanted to add a hook about Geography Reformed, but I only found primary sources, with no referential secondary. Generally, with DYK, you want a hook that is supported by a source like Haidu 2016 referring to Ormeling 2009, and that's something you want to aim for so there's a layer of separation between the original statement and the source referring to the original statement. That helps avoid original research which is why I didn't submit the hook about Cave 1739, even though I liked that one. I will leave the final determination to others. Viriditas (talk) 23:43, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, you have now done so. GA, AGF on hook fact/ref (the hook is virtually a quote from the article). The hook is not very clear, but nor is the article, frankly. No qpq needed. The pic is ok, if rather tall, but the caption waaaay too long! You won't get more than say "Iblis (right) guards the Divine Garden. Johnbod (talk) 01:48, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Johnbod, this doesn't really strike me as a "yes". I agree the hook is unclear to the average reader. I think a clearer one should be promoted, and the image is not clear at displayed size. ꧁Zanahary꧂05:04, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It was a yes, but a clearer/snappier hook might be better. I don't feel qualified to suggest one, but as always, anyone else may do so. I can probably understand it better than many of our readers as I know what the Upanishads are, and who Dara Shikoh was. Johnbod (talk) 03:16, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure either. It passed review as far as I'm concerned. Perhaps one of those who like fiddling with hooks at the last minute will find a better hook after promotion. Zanahary? Johnbod (talk) 16:11, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just noting that the image is poor at thumb size, which is disappointing as it's a nice image overall and of a different art style than usually featured. If it's possible to isolate Iblis with a crop, that may make it clearer i.e. usable. Kingsif (talk) 01:06, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I could upload an isolated variant for the DYK, as I did with the blue angel on the mosaic in Sant'Apollinare Nuovo, Ravenna, in Devil in Christianity. Maybe give me time until weekend. I have not seen your request until now by the way. I apologize for that.
VenusFeuerFalle I'd like to double-check the hook fact. Could you send me a copy of the appropriate page from Barry 2004? I can get it on inter-library loan, but it would probably be a lot faster if you could send me a scan. Thanks. RoySmith(talk)17:42, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. I have been back to the library yesterday to take a photo of the page. Would you mind telling me how I sent it to you? RoySmith
Since I would like to reach a closure with this article, I would simply leave a quote for the relevant passage:
"The devil's defective spiritual vision is transcribed in medieval Islamic literature and art by various obvious symbols. Because he may only perceive and therefore only reflect God's transcendent aspect of wrath, and never God's immanent aspect of love, Satan is therefore nicknamed al-A'mash, the bleray-eyed or goggled-eyed (as he appears in Sultan-Muhammad's sixteenth century paintings), or he is called al-A'war, the blind in one eye (the distinctive attribute of the demon Dajjal the Antichrist, who thereby dooms to the same fate such as unwitting followers as the three damned "Calandar" princes in the 1001 Nights). Mystical treatises like Mahmud-i Shabistar's famous fourteenth-century manual of Sufism, the Gulshan-i Raz (Rose Bower of Mystery"), list whole series of various heresies or errorneous theological stands whose defenders are depicted as Satan's brood, and so variously described as one-eyed, bleary-eyed, too near-sighted, too far-sighted, or blind. Satan represents his own opague mental state in God's universe. But the devil is part of God's universe, not other. There is no reality other than God. Here is where Islam's relentless monotheistic drive, under the pends of such spiritual masters as al-Hallaj, 'Ayn-ul-Quzat, Sana'i, Rozbihan, 'Attar, Ibn 'Arabi, Rumi, and Jami independently carried Muslim mystical speculation to dizzy conceptual heights akin to the most rarefied summits of ndian cosmological thought. (...) Satan, unknowingly, therefore serves as God's mask. He is himself the veil (iltibas) which the Godhead weaves, as Rozbihan's glosses to al-Hallaj explain, and wherein the Godhead chooses to hide from all those unworthy to perceive the divine therein. That is, the cosmic veil is the visible universe itself, which reveals God's presence to those who known, but conceals God's presence from those who do not know. In this sense, iltibas [the veil], in Sufi speculation, may be regarded as virtually a symbolic equivalent to the traditional Indian concept of maya, the "veil of cosmic illusion." Such philosophical equivelance between Sufism and Hinduism came in fact to be perceived by a few scholars of both faiths when Sufism and Hinduism met on Indian soul, and enlightened thingers familiar with both traditions, like the seventeenth-century Mughal prince Dara Shikoh, sought to reconcile the essence of Ibn 'Arabi's teachings with the Upanishads. Indeed, Sufis's diabolic "Cloake One" also serves, like the maya which protects the secret nature of Indian divinities from the eyes of the profane, a positive cosmic function: the devil becomes God's warden, as it were, a ferocious temple guard or "keeper of the cutrain" who bars access by the unworthy unto the Godhead."
Since it is almost a month old by now, and a thing supposed to be done within not more than 2 weeks, can someone just accept it by now? If still after 2 weeks none of the objectors replied, the objection cannot be that strong. And double check should still be possible as the quote has been made accessable for everyone here.VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 11:57, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Rhain: One reviewer's opinion about Pascal's performance in "Future Days" may well be fine, but I've added something in the filming section about Isabela Merced and Young Mazino unwittingly becoming [ronroco] thieves against Gustavo Santaolalla during filming: want to swap it out real quick?
No offense intended—I just don't quite see the interesting aspect or uniqueness in Pedro Pascal being generously lauded—so I offer note of the (accidentally) troublesome antics of the leading performers. BarntToust23:27, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, I don't think any of the proposed ALTs are interesting enough - the first two basically say DYK that a song was popular, and the third isn't about the song, but the singer. Any alternatives? Eddie891TalkWork10:11, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To me, this hook has a similar problem of interest- What is interesting about the fact that a singer performed one of their songs at a concert? Eddie891TalkWork06:31, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is not explained, but a "freshman team" seems to be a different team from the actual team competing in actual competitions that count. Varsity team doesn't explain this that well; the junior varsity term is explained extensively there but there seems to be subtle difference. It seems to be a kind of a reserve team. Howard the Duck (talk) 22:17, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Correct, its a type of reserve team. Can you think of a better way to word it in the hook? Perhaps "reserve team" rather than "freshman team"? BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:04, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'd rather link to "Freshman team" to Varsity team#North America, then change "varsity team" in the end to "football team" or even "varsity team". Adding "football" adds another can of worms on referring to what kind of "football" this is (LOL). Understanding this term is key in understanding the hook, and reserve team is mostly in the European POV where a team has a "second team" where it can tap players in cases of injury. This seems to be different as college football programs, while may have other teams, are not allowed to get players from those teams due to scholarship rules. The reader may have an idea where this guy started from the bottom and worked his way up. ALT1 doesn't really mean anything if you do not know who Don Hutson is.
Overall: As discussed earlier, the hook and article checks out, but non-American readers may not understand what "freshman team" means. I have suggested some options in regards to this earlier. If other reviewers disapprove of the original hook, ALT1 may be used, which also has the same problems (non-Americans may not understand it), but most people should get it (an upcoming player saw a veteran player, understood that the other guy was much better). Rest of the article checks out. Only thing holding out is my earlier suggestion on linking to Varsity team#North America. Howard the Duck (talk) 11:02, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Source: Times obituary subhead reads "Indomitable spirit who with the backing of Dame Sybil Thorndike became the first woman to build a new theatre in Britain." https://archive.is/JgL6t
Overall: Article is new, long enough, and well sourced. WP:DAILYMIRROR is no consensus for reliability, but an uncontroversial article from 1969 seems safe enough. The hook is an exceptional claim but it seems to be well supported by reliable sources, and it is interesting. qpq is not required because the nominator has less than 5 previous noms. BuySomeApples (talk) 10:26, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, it's well-sourced in the article, The Times put this fact as their subheadline. So it seems like either reliable sources got it wrong or Fram did. Not sure what the best course of action here is. —Ganesha811 (talk) 16:45, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps rephrasing as "...that actor manager Hazel Vincent Wallace became the first woman to build a postwar theatre in Britain?" The adjective postwar qualifies it (and works quite nicely with the uncompromisingly Brutalist design of the Thorndike).EEHalli (talk) 17:34, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That sucks, there's a lot of reliable sources reporting it but it clearly isn't true. The article should be edited to fix that too now. The rephrased hook sounds a little WP:SYNTHy. Is there any other hook we can use? BuySomeApples (talk) 05:14, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not a review, but the hook as currently written may not meet WP:DYKINT as being interesting to a broad, non-specialist audience. @Deiademian: Can you please propose additional hooks that would be more familiar to general readers either unfamiliar with or only have a basic understanding of Greek mythology? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 06:03, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Two points (not directed at the latter alternative in particular, but the overall wording in both): if I'm understanding the article correctly, the number of extant pieces seems not to be exactly sixty (the surviving fragments, which number about sixty), and I think it's worth considering that "in sixty pieces" could sound as though those sixty pieces constitute the complete relief. The latter would likely be remedied by the presence of the image (if it's used), though arguably one shouldn't need the image to avoid ambiguity. – Michael Aurel (talk) 14:54, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Seeing as there hasn't been any activity here since my last comment, I'll add that I think Deiadameian's first hook was the more interesting one. It was just worded in such a manner that it wasn't comprehensible to the average reader. How about something along the lines of "... that the Lacrateides Relief depicts gods from an ancient initiation cult?" – Michael Aurel (talk) 07:54, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Overall: Deiadameian I have tagged four things on in the article that require attribution. A QPQ is not needed. The picture isn't clear at a small size. SL93 (talk) 07:24, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately most other pictures available are not clear enough at 100px, except maybe this one which is probably the best alternative. As for the hook, since it was agreed to be changed to another contributor's suggestion ("... that the Lacrateides Relief depicts gods from an ancient initiation cult?"), does the initial nom need to be rewritten? Deiadameian (talk) 09:15, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Source: Video source "Eu fiz todos os retratos do Arnaldo, Brown e da Marisa com cordas, antes. Era para ser uma capa completamente diferente. Eram com cordas de cavaquinho [...] Era todo um desenho baseado em dobrar cordas de aço." --> "I made all the portraits of Arnaldo, Brown, and Marisa with strings, before. It was supposed to be a completely different cover. They were with cavaquinho strings [...] It was all a design based on folding steel strings."
The current wording seems to be a bit off since it seems to focus more on Muniz than the chocolate syrup aspect. How do the following rewords sound?
ALT0a ... that Vik Muniz used chocolate syrup to illustrate the cover for Brazilian supergroup Tribalistas' debut album after musical strings did not work?
ALT0b ... that the cover for Brazilian supergroup Tribalistas' debut album used chocolate syrup to illustrate the trio after an earlier attempt with musical strings did not work?
ALT0c ... that the cover for Brazilian supergroup Tribalistas' debut album used chocolate syrup to illustrate the trio?
Admittedly, the first two new options are slightly longer than the original, but they're more intended to put more focus on the chocolate syrup fact than Muniz. Of course, if you prefer the original wording then that's fine. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 06:09, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Cathodography: How does ALT0c sound then? Another issue I had with the original wording is that it wasn't clear what "trio" referred to (it's supposed to refer to the Tribalistas, but the hook did not make it clear that "Tribalistas" was also the name of the group). Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:29, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To be honest, I don't think substituting "trio" with either "members" or "artists" solves the issue because, ultimately, the problem is that ALT0 does not make it clear that Tribalistas is the name of both the album and the group. With regards to linking to linking to the group itself in ALT0b/ALT0c, there's really no need per WP:SEAOFBLUE. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 03:56, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
... that European broadcasters waived their rights to Brave Bunnies so that the children's series could be streamed ad-free in Ukrainian for refugees?
Source: Marian McHugh, Broadcast "Go Jetters helps launch Ukrainian-language YouTube channel", 16 June 2022, ProQuest2677615627. Quote: "A YouTube channel dedicated to entertaining Ukrainian children displaced by the war is to launch on 1 July [2022] ... offer pre-school and primary school-aged refugee children across the UK and Europe entertainment in their own language and will also house shows from Ukrainian producers, including Brave Bunnies ... The ad-free YouTube channel ... Everyone involved has given up their time and rights to their content for nothing ... It really shows that the creative industries can be a force for good." Also Connie Evans, The Herald (Glasgow) "YouTube's channel for Ukraine", 17 June 2022, ProQuest2677284195. Quote: "A non-profit YouTube channel created specifically for Ukrainian children displaced by the war is set to launch ... shows by Ukrainian producers with titles such as Brave Bunnies".
ALT1: ... that weeks after production of Brave Bunnies was suspended due to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, its production coordinator had become a war correspondent? Source: Natalia Yermak, New York Times "A Cartoon Producer Turned War Reporter: Times Insider", 1 June 2022, ProQuest2671841726. Quote: "the day before the Russian invasion began. I was working as a production coordinator at a company that produced a Ukrainian cartoon series for children called "Brave Bunnies." ... The “Brave Bunnies” team decided to put production on hold ... I started collecting and documenting stories as a form of volunteerism; I wanted to help share information about the war. Colleagues and friends connected me with various news media outlets. Soon, I was presented with an opportunity to work with The New York Times. ... About a month after my unexpected last day at "Brave Bunnies," I became a member of a team"
@Launchballer: Thanks for reopening this! @SounderBruce and Gatoclass: Per above, there was a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Did you know#Brave Bunnies (not sure how to permalink this before it is archived) in which Gatoclass objected to the hook, feeling that the hook fact was only weakly supported by the article/sources. Gatoclass later suggested that I write a secondary article, which I have done at Sunflower TV (2600 characters prose). I don't know where to take the nomination from here. Gatoclass, what was your idea for a double nomination? (I can provide additional QPQ as needed.) – Reidgreg (talk) 15:50, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies Reidgreg, I meant to get back to this today and clean forgot - unfortunately it will have to wait until tomorrow now. But I'm very pleased to read that you've added the second article! - it sounds like a very worthwhile topic and I look forward to reading it :) Gatoclass (talk) 15:58, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Reidgreg:, having read through some more of the sources, it appears that only content from the United Kingdom and Ukraine was broadcast. And the rights waiving appears to be from British broadcasters waiving rights to their own programs (see, for example, this source). That means the existing hook won't work. But a new hook is needed regardless in order to fit in the new Sunflower TV article, would you like to propose an alt or two for that? Thanks, Gatoclass (talk) 11:14, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sources say the initial content was UK and Ukrainian, though more may have been added, and even children's shows are increasingly becoming multinational productions. I may have taken too broadly the statement "Everyone involved has given up their time and rights to their content" in the context of the list of 20 companies named by Broadcast MagazineProQuest2677615627 and BBC Studios which 'leant support'. (Checking their Wikipedia articles these include: A UK studio, a UK programming block, 5 UK producer/broadcasters, 2 UK multinational producer/distributors, a Ukrainian multinational producer/distributor, a Ukrainian producer, a Ukrainian producer/broadcaster, a French multinational producer/distributor, a Canadian multinational producer/distributor, and 4 US multinational entertainment companies.) Granted, 'lending support' is not the same as 'waiving rights'; some of these companies apparently donated manpower, technical knowhow and other resources to set up the channel.
ALT2: ... that Brave Bunnies was among the Ukrainian children's series streamed ad-free on Sunflower TV for Ukrainian refugees across Europe, the United Kingdom and Ukraine?
Comment: Article has her listed as a possibly living person, but trawling social media reveals that she likely died in 2008. However, the NEA didn't have her marked as deceased in a recent publication, so I'm currently scouring the internet for a RS to confirm one way or the other.
Created by GreenLipstickLesbian (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 8 past nominations.
Overall: I have some concerns about the sourcing (outside the hook sourcing which is fine). 1. There are personal details sourced to a masters' thesis, which would not be considered a reliable source (see WP:SCHOLARSHIP). I looked into this a little as I was concerned that her husband and father have the same first name, certainly not impossible but it caught my eye. 2. Reference 6 makes mention of a piece of art depicting a logo for the, but I did not see this mentioned in the cited newspaper article. Perhaps one of the pictures shows this logo, but that would be original research. 3. Reference 8 is a clip from newspapers.com, but the clipping does not mention Volperian's work. 4. I also don't think it's necessary to cite her daughter's dissertation to indicate the family connection (reference 10).
The article has some sentences that could use editing. For example, 'She carried on embroidering in her adult life and after her move to the United States and, in 1986, took part in a folk arts program in Los Angeles', has and odd combination of 'and' and commas that make it hard to follow.
@GreenLipstickLesbian: - can you address these issues? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DaffodilOcean (talk • contribs) 12:24, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@DaffodilOcean: Urgh, computer crashed after I'd finished writing this. Hopefully I can re-construct my work:
Ah, I was wondering if somebody might bring this up! I agree that the fact it's a master's thesis isn't ideal, but if it helps, I'm not treating it as one - I'm treating it as the interview with Vorperian that it is. Crap for notability, obviously, but hopefully reliable enough for the uncontentious claims that Vorperian makes about herself and that were paraphrased by the student. So that means no claims about the impact of her work on Armenian art, no claims about who nominated her for the award, and no more broad facts about Armenian embroidery itself - but saying that she had three siblings, her parent's names and occupations, and who she married? Again, hopefully reliable enough, as long as I keep one eye on what is DUE given that is is roughly one level up from a SPS as far as that goes. The fact that her husband and father both had the same fairly common name doesn't raise any red flags for me, though the name is more typically romanized as Harutyun. Does this help?
Reference 6: Ah, you're totally right on this; accidentally swapped two sources! It was in the 1982-1996 biographies of award winners compiled by the NEA. PDF numbers are a little off (there it's listed as 54 through 55), sorry, but on a related note I actually managed to find a Facebook post by the ARS showing the embroidery itself! Sorry, I know one of your other concerns was over-referencing, but I mean... it's gorgeous and it has the date she made it.
Refence 8: Mind reading this again? Second column, second paragraph, lists Vorperian as one of the artists in the exhibit and details the time, location, and hosts that the other source omitted to mention.
Reference 10: I see your point here, and I can remove it if you'd like. However, I would prefer to keep it in, as it's just another source confirming that Rita and Lily are related. Not that I have a mistrust for passing mentions in the captions of newspaper photographs or anything...
And yeah I know my writing sucks, sorry. I attribute it the fact that I learnt half my English grammar from Spanish and Japanese classes, and the other half through osmosis. If I can figure out a less awkward way to put things, I'll try, but, being honestly, my ulterior motive for any DYK submission is that it gets me a few free copy editors. I've split the example you listed into two sentences, hopefully that makes it better? GreenLipstickLesbian💌🦋18:28, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
1. For the master's thesis, I would find better sources than that for the statement about 'several exhibits in the California area'.
2. Thanks for updating the reference for the logo. However, Facebook is not a reliable source, so I would remove that. Please also correct the sentence that now says '..though om 1990...'.
3. This is my mistake, I did miss the brief note about her exhibit.
4. I would remove the dissertation. Her daughter's dissertation has no bearing on Lily's work and its presence here just seems to promote Rita's work.
QPQ: Overall: Article 5x expanded. QPQ is not required as nominator has less than 5 nominations. Passes earwig, hook is interesting, cited inline, and verified. Good to go. Toadboy123 (talk) 14:19, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
comment: do we have a timeline for this? it doesn't say specifically in the source that he was still living with his parents when he created the album, nor is the word basement used in the citation. i'd also add that the article has citation overkill in the 'composition' section.--Plifal (talk) 12:32, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is a review on the content side and a proposition of new hooks on the hook side.
It was new enough with sufficient QPQ provided at the time of nomination.
There are two uncited passages, He conducted his first public and private audiences during the week before his inauguration, which included the press, the diplomatic corps, Eastern Churches, and heads of the dicasteries of the Roman Curia. and a Reactions item that leads to a listing article. I'd be fine with the latter. The former needs attention (and I understand this is a new part of the article comparatively).
ALT2: ... that between the time that white smoke was seen at the 2025 papal conclave and the announcement of a new pope, the crowd in St. Peter's Square swelled from 40,000 to approximately 150,000 people?
I did some minor cleanup of the article, mostly around quotations. I left an inline {{buzzword inline}} tag at "long-anticipated". We really shouldn't say thing like that in Wikipedia's voice. I would suggest removing it, or alternatively attributing it with something like "which according to Zach Simmons was long anticipated". Review to be forthcoming. – Reidgreg (talk) 16:18, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Query: Article is new enough (nominated four days after expansion from redirect), long enough, well sourced, and presentable. No neutrality, BLP or copyvio issues detected (Earwig for quotations and reference titles which get flagged from the extant reference style). No images and QPQ verified. The quote "belted out a Sam Cooke tune" from ALT0 is not in the article. Otherwise, each hook fact (0–2) is cited in article. AGF for ALT0. ALT1 checks. The ALT2 fact is from an interview and seems acceptable (DYK does not specifically require secondary sources, but as you commented that there are multiple sources for the nom it might be good to add cite an additional source there). Hooks are under the maximum length but ALT0 and ALT1 could be made more concise. – Reidgreg (talk) 19:29, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In ALT0, maybe it could lose some specificity to keep the hook short and punchy: ...that when he was five, Miles Caton sang a Sam Cook song at a local NAACP branch's annual Freedom Fund Awards Gala? In ALT1, performance ... was singled out and the quote part the one act are redundant; they say the same thing. Suggest changing: was singled out as → was called. – Reidgreg (talk) 19:29, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Added the word "American" to prevent ambiguity (BeanieFan11, I suggest doing this with all your NFL/American football hooks moving forward given our international audience: Wikipedia is not the USpedia). Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:04, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I think if knowing if its American vs. a different football would have no change in the 'interesting-ness' of the hook, it isn't absolutely necessary. I feel like adding "American" sometimes can make hooks too wordy... BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:17, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
But is specifying "American football" every time really something necessary for understanding all (American) football hooks? It'd be remarkable for someone to play for seven straight undefeated teams whether its Australian rules football, association football, or American football. BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:47, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's more for clarity sake. Remember that, for most countries outside the US, Canada, Australia, or Ireland, "football" refers to soccer. So saying that someone is just a "football" player without specifying which football is going to lead to confusion, especially if the rest of the hook does not make it clear that it's referring to American football. Sticking to just "football" and not "American football" would be a case of US-centrism. Arguably, even association football should not be referred to as just "football" in most cases especially when the context is unclear. Actually, the best way to address the issue is to write hooks that avoid using the word "football" entirely, but if it's unavoidable, then specify which one. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:14, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For what it's worth, this comment is not a case of anti-US bias. If the hook was instead about, for example, Canadian football, Australian rules football, or Gaelic football, I would have made a similar comment. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:53, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If that's to be the rule, and this is not anti-U.S. bias, we should likewise spell out association football, as 400 million American and Canadian readers will assume generic "football" refers to American football (which BTW is never referred to as "American football" in the US or Canada). Cbl62 (talk) 00:30, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Source: This is the first occasion that the scholarships, formerly known as the Yang di-Pertuan Negara Scholarships, are being awarded since Singapore achieved independence in August, 1965. The winners are...Koh Cher Siang, 20, (Outram Secondary and Raffles Institution)... "Nine top pupils receive the President's Scholarship". The Straits Times. 24 April 1966. p. 13. https://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/newspapers/digitised/article/straitstimes19660424-1.2.20.41
Reviewed:
Created by BenTanXiaoMing (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.
... that Emperor Yingzong of Ming abolished the practice of concubines committing suicide following the emperor's death?
Source: Goodrich, L. Carington; Fang, Chaoying (1976). Dictionary of Ming Biography, 1368-1644. New York: Columbia University Press. p. 293. ISBN 0-231-03801-1.
Reviewed:
Improved to Good Article status by Min968 (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.
GA date, length, close paraphrase check ok. No QPQ needed (only 1 prior DYK). But the hook fact doesn't appear clearly in the article. It mentions (with direct reference) ending practice of suicide of concubines, but not burying alive. Also, the image could be added (File:Ming_Yingzong_(1).jpg). --Soman (talk) 11:25, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Min968. I don't see any such edit in the article, but an edit to the nomination hook. Is Goodrich & Fang (1976), p. 293 the ref for the new hook fact? --Soman (talk) 21:19, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"A total of 40 egg capsules of V. ebraea were found attached to the green calcareous alga Udotia occidentalis A.Gepp and E.S. Gepp (Fig. 1 A and B) in the same place that V. ebraea adults were found (1 to 2 meters depth in sea grass beds off Paracurú beach, Ceará state, Brasil)."
Article is new enough and long enough, recently promoted to GA. I've made a small change in the hook ("Hebrew" is always capitalised). All material is cited to what appear to be reliable sources, and I can see no copyvio or BLP concerns: all images have appropriate licenses. The hook is interesting, though I don't think it fully appears in the article: we have the attachment of V. ebraea capsules to algae, rather than hard substrates like shells, represents a novel ecological observation within the family Volutidae, but I don't see "fan-shaped green algae thalli" anywhere, or indeed in the quotations pulled from the sources here. QPQ needs to be done.UndercoverClassicistT·C17:30, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ah yes, well spotted -- it does say so in the template. @Daniel Cavallari: we should therefore we good to go once the hook is in the article (and fully sourced). If it's already there and I'm just missing it, could you point me towards it? UndercoverClassicistT·C06:29, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
User talk:UndercoverClassicist I believe there's a misunderstanding. The references do not mention that the alga's thallus is fan-shaped; they only state that Voluta ebraea deposits its eggs on the thalli. This doesn't change the fact that they are fan-shaped, which can be visually confirmed by the illustration included in the article. This isn't a violation of the Manual of Style due to original research; it's merely a visual observation. If you still believe this is problematic, I can remove it from the hook, but I think it would lose a considerable part of its appeal to the general public. Nevertheless, it's your call. I'd be fine with any of these options. Daniel Cavallari (talk) 22:53, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure there is one -- I've just had a look through and can find the following:
This species is known to lay egg capsules only on the calcareous green algae Udotea occidentalis (Fig. 1B), usually one capsule per algae (18.2 – 2.63 mm in diameter)
Matthews-Cascon et al. (2010) observed 40 egg capsules of V. ebraea attached to the calcareous green algae Udotea occidentalis
However, I can't find any mention of thalli at all. Is "On algae thalli" just another way of writing "on algae"? As you note, the hook isn't strictly in the cited source, so I'd be inclined to rework it into something that is -- perhaps "on a single species of green algae"? UndercoverClassicistT·C05:38, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Arguably, if you examine the figures in both references, particularly fig. 1B in Meirelles (2024), you'll notice what appears to be an egg capsule attached to the thallus of U. occidentalis. While the thallus itself isn’t explicitly mentioned in the text, the structure shown in the figure is, in my view, unmistakably one. That said, I agree it’s wiser to adopt a more cautious approach and stick strictly to what the sources state. In that case, I believe "on the calcareous green algae" would be the safest and most accurate choice. Daniel Cavallari (talk) 12:11, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ALT1: ... that Jim Lankas began wrestling in Wichita, Kansas, after someone at a fight did not show up, and Lankas decided to take the wrestler's place? Source: Wichita Beacon
ALT1: ... that Elizabeth Ellis Hoyt's work on cost-of-living metrics is considered to have led to the creation of the Consumer Price Index in the United States? Source: https://historicexhibits.lib.iastate.edu/20thWomen/Listpages/hoyt1.html Elizabeth Ellis Hoyt (1893-1980) was a Professor of Economics (1915-1970) at Iowa State. She is best known for her association with early efforts that led to the creation of the Consumer Price Index, which is now used to gauge inflation and the cost of living.
The claim in ALT1 is far from uncontroversial. The Wikipedia article for Consumer price index doesn't even mention Hoyt, and if you ask the Internet who the inventor of the Consumer Price Index was, there are multiple competing theories. The claim that Hoyt is "considered the inventor" vs. "the inventor of a forerunner" isn't even consistent within the article itself. The article itself needs more work in order to be ready for the main page and scrutiny by thousands of readers. @CaptainAngus and SL93: Pinging. Cielquiparle (talk) 22:20, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Cielquiparle: Is your concern more about ALT1 or the article itself? I also struggled with how to interpret the claims made by multiple sources giving various forms of credit to Hoyt for the CPI (here, here, here, and here). The specific wording in the article ("[Hoyt] compiled cost-of-living metrics into what is considered the forerunner of the Consumer Price Index") was chosen to reflect the claims in the sources, and ultimately is not inconsistent with the American CPI article. Looking at ALT1 now, that wording would probably need to be softened, but it's not clear to me which hook is being used for the DYK. What are your thoughts? Thanks! CaptainAngus (talk) 23:02, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@CaptainAngus: The second sentence of the article still says, "She is considered the inventor of the modern day Consumer Price Index." Which is not the same thing. And it doesn't matter if another promoter selects ALT0. At minimum, that inconsistency should be resolved within the article. Even better would be to improve the article further. (I see you are a member of Women in Red; an editor there may be able to help.) Cielquiparle (talk) 12:44, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Cielquiparle: Ah, thank you for that catch! I made updates to both the article and ALT1. Would you help me better understand what the specific concern behind your request to further improve the article is? Every statement in the article is sourced, and I would contend that the article appropriately summarizes the majority of available source data on her--in fact, I wish there was more to cite! So, appreciate any further feedback! CaptainAngus (talk) 19:28, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The article has a good outline but seems rather superficial given the number of sources available about her. I will see what I can do to help. Either way, maybe another editor can promote it. Cielquiparle (talk) 19:41, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I only got through "Early life and education". It is going to take some time because there is so much information about her, even if historians wish there sere more. But in general my advice is to read the sources more closely for detail. Cielquiparle (talk) 01:58, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: It's kinda hard to balance between entertaining and accusatory. Main hook is safest, but I think ALT3 is most engaging. Worth noting that everyone involved here is a living person, so BLP applies.
Improved to Good Article status by Chlod (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.
What I said on ERRORS was that I was afraid something like this would happen. How is that interesting? I don't believe he would have been awarded "best staging of the year" for something that harmless. Matthew told a complex (fictive but based on real lives) story of a man fleeing the Nazis, becoming a Pulitzer Prize-winning author and professor of literature in California c. 1960, suffering a creative crisis and leaving everything, returning and then coming out causing a scandal at that time. This complex story-telling in analogy to the medieval character in a crisis and expelled by society (invented in the 19th century) won him the award, but is too complex for DYK rules. Therefore I intentionally did not nominate. Readers might rather be interested in Wild coming from from South Africa and the production at the Frankfurt Opera, again voted "best opera house". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:46, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Source: #1: "The first chocolate crinkle cookie recipe can be traced to a woman named Helen Fredell in St. Paul, Minnesota in the early 1950s. The recipe was originally published in a Betty Crocker cookbook, which explains that it was a cookie Mrs. Fredell served in her home, and guests couldn’t resist taking the recipe home and trying it for themselves." Betty Crocker; #2: "Credit for the original chocolate crinkle cookie recipe goes to Helen Fredell of St. Paul, Minnesota; it was published in a Betty Crocker cookbook in the early 1950s." Taste of Home
Reviewed:
Created by MaPhilIndo (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.
I'm convinced there is a lot of room for improvement in this hook. Most types of food were invented by someone and ended up in cookbooks. (t · c) buidhe22:36, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ALT2 ... that although the chocolate crinkle(pictured) was invented in Minnesota, it is more popular in the Philippines?
ALT1/ALT1a is technically imprecise as it is not the DOST itself that made a study about it but rather one of the agencies under it: I will leave it to you if ALT1/ALT1a remain suitable or not. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:25, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Source: 1) McCusker, Kate (10 April 2025). Sledgehammer-wielding Musk critics smash up Tesla in London art project. The Guardian. Archived from the original on 10 April 2025. Quote: "Protective helmets were donned and sledgehammers wielded as Elon Musk critics vented their frustration at the Tesla boss and billionaire by smashing up a disused Tesla bound for the scrapheap. ... The destroyed electric vehicle, which retails for about £14,000, will be auctioned in the next few weeks, with all proceeds going to food bank charities." 2) Campbell, Hebe (11 April 2025). Tesla smashed to pieces in London protest against Elon Musk. The Independent. Archived from the original on 11 April 2025. Quote: "A Tesla was destroyed in London by protesters targeting billionaire Elon Musk and his ties to Donald Trump on Thursday, 10 April. The second-hand car, originally destined for the scrapheap, was smashed as part of a 'public art piece' according to the group Everyone Hates Elon, who organised the stunt. The group says it offers people a way to 'safely and legally' destroy a Tesla. The installation will be auctioned to raise money for local food banks."
Comment: This is my first DYK nomination, so not very confident! More than happy for the hooks to be reworded etc as needed. I've also reached out (per WP:REQFREE) to Everyone Hates Elon regarding images for the article; they have said they will release some of their images under CC and upload them to Wikimedia Commons, so depending on timescale and relevance of available images, an image could be included alongside this DYK if it's accepted.
This is not a review of the nomination, but I do think we should be aware that whatever the hook is, there is a good chance that Elon gets on Twitter and writes about the hook, and then it makes the news. There's two things to note: first, future commenters/reviewers, your behavior in this very discussion may be scrutinized. That doesn't mean "walk on eggshells", but it does mean "think twice before you click publish changes". Second, we should notify—not ask permission from—the WMF press team (comcomwikimedia.org) with ample warning. It's the right thing to do; they should not be blindsided by this. Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they)05:06, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
... that football players Tommy Akingbesote and Kyonte Hamilton grew up in the same community, play the same position, and were both selected in the seventh round of the 2025 NFL draft?
Source: NYT (paywalled - can email you the password if you need to verify it)
Date, size, neutrality, copyviospotcheck, etc. all fine. There are, however, two problems. First, the hook is pretty boring, although I cannot come up with anything more interesting. Closing admin - or double checking one, whom we seem to have more these times - can offer a 3O if necessary. More serious is the article itself, which I've tagged for notability and started a talk discussion (frankly, I feel this should go to AfD to gauge a wider consensus). Sorry, Soman - your work is usually stellar - but this time I feel we need to think more about this one. PS. The two problems above are somewhat connected: it's hard to come up with an interesting hook on a uneventful election that itself may not even be notable (a student union election at a Nepalese university, with that union not even having an article right now).--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here03:46, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Passing comment: Hi Gerda, nice article once again. But I'm afraid most readers will have no idea what is going on in the hook. Bremps...17:01, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This song was believed to been medieval but actually was a 19th century paraphrase, which became popular with the Youth movement (1920s) and - most surprising - is still popular today. Sorry that it is complex. I see a double quirkiness in it - the belief that is was medieval (but still popular today) and the unexpected interest in the 1920s (but still popular today). When a topic has a complex history why not speak/teach about that? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:26, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That information about it being a paraphrase is not currently in the article. If it's added to the article and a clear non-technical hook based on it is proposed, I think it could work. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:37, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In the article: "Ströse published a poem collection in 1878, Deutsche Minne aus alter Zeit – ausgewählte Lieder der Minnesänger des Mittelalters, presenting medieval poems in his free transcription." - bolding by me. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:33, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Trying to please, I changed the verb to "paraphrased" in the sentence regarding this paticular song, one from that collection. Please help wording a hook, - perhaps you are able to word that for a long time it was still believed to be medieval. The 1920 youth movement should be present to connect to the image, also it seems worth knowing that for decades, the song remained in the background, but then hit some nerve. Please let's get this up soon, or spring will be over. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:43, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I bet that will land at ERRORS for saying "inspired" instead of "paraphrased", and you left out the quirky possibility that it was taken for medieval. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:00, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
... that Jilly Cooper based one of her characters in Octavia on a former lover? Source: Hanks, Robert, "First Lady of Rutshire", The Guardian (1959–2003); 18 March 1996; ProQuest Historical Newspapers: The Guardian (1821–2003) and The Observer (1791–2003) pg. A4
I'm uncomfortable with your basis for stating that the film hasn't been released yet: absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence. Does this count as a review? DS (talk) 19:17, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Me too tbh - I did see the Letterboxd review, and it is from 2021 but I am still skeptical, as I can't find a reference to it being screened 2010 to today and there would be digital traces, beyond that single review. I'm happy to scratch the ALT as I do realise absence of evidence isn't evidence! It is a mystery though: the Times says it was broadcast in 2009 - but they why doesn't the person in the forum linked above (who posted three times) know that? This just increases my scepticism. Maybe I should write to ITV! (But not for this DYK nomination) Lajmmoore (talk) 22:50, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not a review, but I'd like to point out some things for the benefit of the first-time nominator here. The article in question is linked in bold from the hook, which I've done. Thegoofhere, there is also a failed verification tag that will need addressing before the page is passed. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 22:58, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I was about to review this, but the article is in dire need of a copyediting. Pinging our resident soccer expert SounderBruce to take a look at the article, or perhaps asking for help from sports expert BeanieFan11 in helping copyedit the article. FWIW, if this is to proceed, ALT2 sounds okay, but it might be a good idea to either link or explain "relegated" for the benefit of our non-soccer fan readers. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 14:40, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ping SounderBruce, I think Saigon Port FC should be split from HCMCT FC and have its main article, as this club was regarded as one of the best most notable clubs in Vietnam around the 90s, many sources that talk about this club before and after it dissolved [12][13][14][15], what do you think? KhoaNguyen1 (talk) 05:13, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This doesn't seem like a case of a phoenix club or spinoff, and if Ho Chi Minh City FC is claiming pre-2009 titles then they are a continuation and thus would include the full history of Saigon Port FC in their article. I won't be able to provide further input, as I am very busy, so I'll be dropping out of this conversation. SounderBruce05:20, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
... that doctors stationed in India, like Eileen Niedfield MD of the Medical Mission Sisters, trained nurses for Mother Teresa's Missionaries of Charity, and sometimes they trained each other's teams?
ALT1: ... that [Medical Mission Sisters
Reviewed:
Comment: I'm not sure if I'm supposed to include links and formatting, so I did. Thank you!
Improved to Good Article status by Oh-Fortuna! (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.
@Buidhe:I think the hook stripped out because I added formatting, so just now I put it back without formatting, and cut it down to one hook. If you want formatting I can send a version with that. Oh-Fortuna! (talk) 16:30, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There's a ton of great DYK material in the article, I'm quite sure we can do better than that. Something about being invited to Bhutan, belonging to a Catholic religious order while helping Muslim and Christian women, etc. (t · c) buidhe04:33, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, how about this? ... that Eileen Niedfield MD, a Medical Mission Sister in India from 1955-1992, treated rural Muslim women who could not afford care and whose fathers or husbands would not let them consult male doctors? Oh-Fortuna! (talk) 19:01, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Shorter is better when it comes to hookiness. I see this is your first DYK so if you don't mind let me propose an alt. Also, please remember to boldface and link the article in question.
I wanted to promote this but when I checked the article, the hook fact is sourced to the Gazette of India which does not back up the claim at all. @Oh-Fortuna! and Buidhe: Perhaps you meant to cite a different source? In any case, there is a {{failed verificaton}} tag within the article now that needs to be resolved. Cielquiparle (talk) 22:39, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Source: "When the producer then suggested getting a hooker in to give Morrison a blow job, while he did the vocal, things did not go so well though. 'We went with a later take', Densmore concludes diplomatically" - Wall; "According to the legend, Morrison's 'cosmic mate', Pamela Courson, gave him a blow job while he overdubbed the vocals for 'You're Lost Little Girl'". - Weidman
Overall: Article is new enough, long enough, no apparent copyvio. The hook is kind of racy but doesn't break guidelines and it's well sourced. This nom looks good to go. BuySomeApples (talk) 04:02, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think the ALT hook would address any issue with the original hook, but if there is an objection that can be discussed. Rlendog (talk) 13:28, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The first hook may be WP:GRATUITOUS, but the ALT uses technical terminology and should be ok. But if the admin promoting the hook disagrees, an alt could be:
... that Jessica Rabbit's costume designer wanted a fully sequinned dress but it was too expensive to animate?
Source: Johnston's original design for a fully sequinned dress was too expensive to animate, so it was changed to a solid red colour gown [Costume Design in TV and Film, Nancy Capaccio]
ALT1: ... that Forrest Gump's blue shirt was custom-made to look cheap? Source: "I wanted all the plaid mismatching and one side of the collar slightly longer than the other so it looks cheap" - quoted in Los Angeles Times article, 1994.
Reviewed:
5x expanded by FilmCostumes (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.
I am concerned about the source to text integrity in this article. The wording also borders on non-neutral at times.
The first two sentences of the first paragraph of "Costume career" was referenced to this article, which does not mention 1977, Bermans & Nathans, or freelance work. The last sentence had no reference at all. I've added CN tags.
"Many costumes from Johnston's early collaborations with Zemeckis have been dubbed "iconic"" - referenced to [16], which does not use the word "iconic" and does not mention Johnston. I've added a CN tag.
"Joanna Johnston coined the term "Hollywood Lift"" - while "lift" or "lifted" appear as adjectives in the source, the term "Hollywood Lift" does not, nor does it say anything about Johnston coining it. I've removed this and revised the sentence.
For The Witches, this ref supports that she used Powell as inspiration, but does not mention Cruella de Vil or 101 Dalmations. Removed also.
It's a very bad sign for there to be this many issues not even halfway through the article. Respectfully, FilmCostumes, I have to ask - did you use AI to generate your version of this article? Some things are accurate to the source, but there are other statements that are so off that I have to wonder how they came to be. ♠PMC♠ (talk)00:56, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the feedback - PMC no, it's not AI generated! I did do it in a bit of a rush, and re-structured it from chronological to thematic, so clearly I need to tidy up my references better and remove some of my own interpretations. Apologies - will work on improving it! FilmCostumes (talk) 08:14, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, wow, yeah, you need to remove anything that's your own interpretation, in any article you've written. We have to limit ourselves to reflecting what's in reliable sources, per our policy on original research. It's an improvement, I still have some concerns about neutrality in the current version. There are quite a few quotes that seem unnecessary and create an editorial rather than a neutral, encyclopedic tone. For example, we don't need to quote a film blogger calling Hellraiser an "iconic nightmare of 1980s cinema". It doesn't add to the understanding of Johnston's role as a costume designer, but distracts from it by switching focus to some guy's description on the film. A few other issues on further reading:
"Forrest's costumes were praised for their "consistency through the decades"" - "were praised for" makes it seem like lots of critics said similar things, but you've only cited one
"For the infantry, they had about 800 costumes made specially, so they could be distressed and broken down" the source supports the number of uniforms, and it supports that the costumes were altered to reflect the ongoing war, but I don't see that the source necessarily connects the number of the costumes to the distressing process. It doesn't really talk about the infantry costumes in the paragraph that's about the breakdown - it's about Albert and the officers.
Why is Lincoln introduced after it's first mentioned?
"The "fashion forward" wedding dress" editorializing quote, at the least it needs attribution
"withstand the impact of high-altitude stunts" - the source seems to suggest it was just the one stunt, but you could also mine the detail about the stuntman's disintegrated off-the-rack suit
While I'm here...I'm trying to limit myself to DYK-level critiques, but from a reader's perspective I think the thematic rather than chronological organization of the article is frustrating. It puts things out of order (why are we seeing her second Oscar before her first?) and intermixes analysis (ex. from Landis) with the biography. I'm not asking you to tear the whole thing up here and now, but I think it's worth pointing out. I apologize if I'm coming off as harsh. Genuinely, I think what you're writing about is important and interesting (I'm known for my own work on fashion articles). If I didn't think it was worth doing right, I'd have complained and moved on. But I think you potentially have the bones of a Good Article here, not just a DYK, so to me it's worth identifying. ♠PMC♠ (talk)02:43, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ALT1: ... that Franklin Sonn was a regular correspondent of Nelson Mandela during his imprisonment? Source: Ebony Magazine, December 1995 "His personal contributions to the struggle did not go unrecognized by future President Mandela, who in a letter written from his prison cell to Sonn in the late 1980s applauded his efforts. The two remained in regular contact throughout those difficult years."
ALT2: ... that despite marching alongside Desmond Tutu, Franklin Sonn only joined the African National Congress after the fall of Apartheid? Source: Ebony Magazine, December 1995 "And I never hesitated to lead marches with Archbishop Tutu" … "Even though Sonn did not join the ANC until much later"
Reviewed: [[]]
Comment: Maybe one could combine hook 1 and hook 2.
Created by Slashme (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.
ALT2: ... that the screenplay for Smashing Frank was developed from an assignment in a filmmaking course? Source: [3]
ALT3: ... that Fruit Chan was slated to produce the crowdfunded film Smashing Frank, but had to exit because the limited budget could not cover him? Source: [4]
^吳霆俊 (11 April 2025). "搗破法蘭克｜談善言林家熙楊偲泳大爆兒時反叛史 岑珈其為易角疑雲解畫". Hong Kong Economic Times (in Chinese). Retrieved 1 May 2025. 《搗破法蘭克》作為首部眾籌成功的電影，有望為電影發展殺出新血路。 [As the first successfully crowdfunded film, Smashing Frank is expected to pave a new path for film development.]
^鄭思珩 (7 May 2022). "《搗破法蘭克》以眾籌抗主流 奪回創作話語權【專訪】". The Culturist (in Chinese). Retrieved 1 May 2025. 劇名中的「法蘭克」源自電影《捉智雙雄》（Catch Me If You Can）中狄卡比奧所飾演的少年詐欺犯法蘭克（Frank Abagnale） [The "Frank" in the title comes from the character Frank Abagnale, a young con artist played by [Leonardo] DiCaprio in the film Catch Me If You Can.]
^馮曉彤 (30 April 2022). "專訪《搗破法蘭克》編導蔡康凝——眾籌拍戲，講香港年輕人的憤怒與反抗". Hong Kong Inmedia (in Chinese). Retrieved 1 May 2025. 《搗破法蘭克》最初是導演班的功課，經過導師陳果多番指點修改，最終在2019年頭寫成。 [Smashing Frank was originally a course assignment for the director, and after multiple revisions guided by mentor Fruit Chan, it was finally completed in early 2019.]
^嚴嘉栢 (18 April 2025). "《搗破法蘭克》換角、資訊發布惹議 眾籌開戲變數多 「不敢說是一條新路」". Ming Pao (in Chinese). Retrieved 1 May 2025. 2022年眾籌時，陳果陪同蔡康凝接受媒體訪問，並表示擔任監製；惟今年3月公布上映消息後，才發現監製不再是陳果。蔡康凝解釋，陳果在開拍前一星期仍給予意見，幫忙修改劇本，「如果我們本身籌了整個項目450萬（港元）的話，我們找阿果（陳果），其實他就可以完全掌控這件事。但是到了現在是一半一半，如果我們想阿果做監製，我們都需要出份糧給他，但是錢不夠，還有那時候阿果有很多其他commitment」。 [During the crowdfunding in 2022, Fruit Chan accompanied Trevor Choi for media interviews and stated he was serving as a producer; however, after the announcement of the release in March this year, it was revealed that Fruit Chan was no longer the producer. Trevor Choi explained that Fruit Chan was still providing feedback a week before shooting began and helped revise the script. "If we had originally raised the entire project budget of HK$4.5 million, we could have had Fruit completely in charge. But now it’s half and half. If we want him as a producer, we need to pay him, but the money isn’t enough, and at that time he had many other commitments."]
^嚴嘉栢 (18 April 2025). "《搗破法蘭克》換角、資訊發布惹議 眾籌開戲變數多 「不敢說是一條新路」". Ming Pao (in Chinese). Retrieved 1 May 2025. 蔡康凝表示，《搗破法蘭克》眾籌做法參考對象有二：美國影評YouTuber斯托克曼（Chris Stuckmann）及香港導演趙羅尼。斯托克曼的頻道訂閱數字目前約200萬，2022年3月宣布眾籌拍電影Shelby Oaks，僅用文字和短片講解概念，24小時內達成眾籌目標25萬美元（約195萬港元），最終超額，籌得逾139萬美元（約1084萬港元），2024年電影上映，比原定計劃遲一年。 [Trevor Choi stated that there were two references for the crowdfunding approach of Smashing Frank: American film critic YouTuber Chris Stuckmann and Hong Kong director Ronnie Chiu. Stuckmann's channel currently has about 2 million subscribers. In March 2022, he announced a crowdfunding campaign for the film Shelby Oaks, using only text and short videos to explain the concept. The campaign reached its goal of $250,000 (approximately HK$1.95 million) within 24 hours, ultimately exceeding expectations and raising over $1.39 million (approximately HK$10.84 million), with the film set to be released in 2024, a year later than originally planned.]
... that Civilization was almost called “Fame Whores of Hedge Fund City”? Source: Newest York interview "it may be called BORED, it may also be called MOTHERFUCKER, or FAME WHORES OF HEDGE FUND CITY" – which is actually still a quite good name."
ALT1: ... that Civilization was supposed to be horrible, unlikable and partly AI-generated? Source: Print magazine on issue #6 "What is the reason for your up-yours-design? —To do something unlikable, repellent, horrible, ugly." Its Nice That article on issue #6 "And in some areas the human element was rejected entirely with Richard sharing that over half of the issue was made using AI writing tools."
ALT2: ... that Civilization began in New York City? Source: Its Nice That interview "I went to BJ Magazines on Varick Street at lunch – one of the better places to get magazines [in New York], but somewhere I’ve been going less and less,” recalls designer and art director, Richard Turley, of the day back in January he decided to create his latest project, Civilization."
ALT3: ... that Civilization responded to the COVID-19 pandemic by mailing letters? Source: The Guardian article "in 2020, as coronavirus rages through the city, the people behind Civilization – a singular print publication stuffed full of the musings of random New Yorkers – are reviving the concept. For $3 (£2.40), which you pay through their online store, they’ll send you a personalised letter."
Comment: ALT2 is funny as a rug-pull for readers who think it's talking about "civilization" and not Civilization but I'm ok with not using it since it's the blandest of the 3.
Created by BuySomeApples (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 47 past nominations.
I find the wording of this hook to be problematic. The sources say the "most significant impact" of the 2011 Christchurch earthquakes was "psychological". To me, this is not exactly the same as saying "mostly psychological", which could be read as "it's all in your head". The former expression suggests that the psychological impact could be "significant", meaning it needs to be taken seriously. (Others' interpretations may vary but to me it really sounds like an inadvertant minimization of the issue while trying to "paraphrase".) @Panamitsu and Dracophyllum: Pinging. Cielquiparle (talk) 18:54, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As flagged at WT:DYK, I am uncomfortable with the sourcing for this DYK hook. It's hardly a "hypothesis" but rather more like an "urban legend" that no one will seriously "test". When you go back to the sources, they discuss the claim very vaguely and unconvincingly. This is precisely the kind of claim that lands at WP:ERRORS. It's really confusing within the article itself as well – are we saying that the cake originated in Capri, but that it's possible the Italian-American mafia might have invented it in the United States? @Vacant0, BeanieFan11, History6042, and Chiswick Chap: Pinging. Cielquiparle (talk) 21:34, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: This was submitted a little over a week (created on May 4 but submitted on May 12) but I wasn't sure was any flexibility on that. But it has expanded 5x since May 5 so maybe that is good enough to qualify.
Created by Remember (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.
Careful. You cited page E11 in the article, but dodgeball is only mentioned on page E10. Also, "the congregation" was (at the time the source was published) 49 nuns, but only 6 nuns worked at the school. Also, the traffic isn't interesting. How about, more simply, ALT0: that the nuns of Daughters of Mary, Mother of Our Savior have played dodgeball in their full black religious habits? DS (talk) 16:47, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@DragonflySixtyseven: Both pages E10 and E11 are used to cite different information in the sentence talking about (among other things) dodgeball causing traffic in the article. Two sentences later, the article states that "In 2006, the school consisted of 60 students and seven sisters", not 6 nuns, so I'm unsure what your concern was in either of these cases. As for the new ALT0, that's fine if you you think that's better! Cheers! Johnson52405:00, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To be more clear: regardless of whether the school employed 6 nuns or 7 nuns, they did not employ the congregation of 49 nuns. DS (talk) 14:42, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm still confused, sorry. Nowhere in the article does it say the congregation "employed" any nuns, that doesn't make sense. The only part of the article that mentions 49 members is at the top of the history section, where it briefly mentions in 2006 the "total numbers of members [had] increased" since the last count in 1988. I don't see where in the school section this issue is present. Johnson52418:32, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please read more carefully. At no point did I make any statement about the congregation employing nuns. I made a statement about the school employing nuns. I stated that the nuns who were employed by the school, did not represent the full congregation. They merely represented part of the congregation. The number of nuns employed by the school was less than the number of nuns in the congregation.
"The congregation" is the set of all nuns belonging to "Daughters of Mary, Mother of Our Savior". The set of nuns which the school employed is a subset of "the congregation".
This is gonna be embarrassing if I still don't understand you, so please bear with me. Are you referring to the wording of the ALT0 hook and not the article itself? That wasn't clear to me, but would make so much more sense. In that case you're right, and I've made an ALT0a correction to change the word "congregation" to "convent", seeing as the school location is also its own convent in the congregation. Cheers! Johnson52404:04, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Source: "This holds from the era of zoot suits, as worn by a young Malcolm X, to Langston Hughes’ Harlem Renaissance tweeds, to the berets of Black Panthers like Huey P. Newton, to Jidenna’s contemporary classic man. And while the focus at this year’s Met Gala is on menswear for the first time since 2003, it’s also on Janelle Monáe’s tailored suits, Missy Elliott’s Afrofuturism and Grace Jones’ avant-garde androgyny." (https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/met-gala-theme-black-fashion-dandyism-superfine-rcna204417) / "The contemporary Black dandy, Miller said, is not confined by stereotypes or labels. He is Chadwick Boseman sporting a holy Versace cape to the 2018 Met Gala. They are Kai-Isaiah Jamal, the first Black trans model to walk for Louis Vuitton, wearing an Abloh-designed zoot suit in 2021. She is Doechii winning Best Rap Album at this year’s Grammys in a superfine Thom Browne suit-gown. He is the cohort of style figures hosting this year’s Met Gala — Pharrell, A$AP Rocky, Lewis Hamilton, Colman Domingo, and honorary chair LeBron James — all of whom have played pivotal roles in reshaping what it means to be masculine and fashionable." (https://hypebeast.com/2025/5/the-met-costume-institute-superfine-tailoring-black-style-contemporary-designers-monica-miller-curator-interviewer-dandy)
ALT1: ... that the style of Black dandyism flourished during and after the Harlem Renaissance as a means of self-expression in the African American community through fine European tailoring? Source: The roots of Black dandyism lie in the intricate weaving of Black culture with European-style fashion—beginning in the post-Emancipation period, but coming into full force during the Harlem Renaissance. In the 1920s, Harlem became the epicenter of Black intellectual and artistic thought. Figures like Langston Hughes, Josephine Baker, and Zora Neale Hurston were breaking barriers with their literary and artistic contributions. But equally important was the cultural revolution taking place in fashion. The Black dandy of the Harlem Renaissance was someone who used dress to assert themselves in a world that often denied them dignity. Just as dandyism had once represented defiance against the traditional aristocracy, it now became a way to reject the limitations placed on Black people in America. The sharp suit, the polished shoes, the bow tie—these were not just fashion choices; they were ways of asserting one’s right to exist on their own terms. In a racially segregated America, the Black dandy’s outfit became a form of resistance, an elegant middle finger to a society that sought to define them by race, not character. (https://www.vogue.com/article/what-is-black-dandyism)
Comment: Earwig shows a higher percentage of copyright violation because of a few reasons: 1) a Reddit post citing the lede in a blockquote and 2) a book title by Monica L. Miller that virtually every source names in full. If there are other pressing copyvio concerns, however, I would be more than happy to revise the page to address them.
Created by Phibeatrice (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 10 past nominations.
QPQ: - ? Overall:
Overall, looks good. Hook could be more interesting -- Maybe ** ALT1': ...that the now-derelict Opiki Toll Bridge(pictured) was once the longest suspension bridge in Australia?
I personally found 'the bridge is also heritage listed by the Manawatū and Horowhenua District Councils' quite interesting but the source cannot clarify any further information. Is the bridge located between the two districts? Unfortunately without knowing if the 'heritage list' in question is the Built Heritage Inventory that information is hard to gloss. Traumnovelle (talk) 07:24, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
May I please point out that it's not anywhere near the longest bridge in New Zealand? It may have been the longest suspension bridge when it was built – I don't know. New Zealand's longest bridge in the Rakaia Bridge. That article tells us that the initial bridge, built in 1873, was 1,370 m long. Schwede6608:38, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for noticing that, Schwede66. I've had a closer look at the source and it says it had the longest "main span" which clearly does not mean longest bridge. I've modified the hook and article but will have a closer look tomorrow. ―Panamitsu(talk)09:22, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ALT3: ... that the Opiki Toll Bridge(pictured) was placed on New Zealand's national heritage register decades after the bridge deck had been removed?
@BeanieFan11: Could we slightly reword hook to ALT1 "... that German athlete Leander Wiegand received a scholarship to play American football at an American college that had never seen him play?" "German American football player" reads a little ambiguous; reads like "German-American". This is also more concise I think. QPQ done, article long enough, reliably sourced, hook reliably sourced, no copyvio, article new enough at time of nom, no subjective issues with article I can spot. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 01:12, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@BeanieFan11, grapesurgeon (fantastic username), and AirshipJungleman29: I've pulled this hook partially because there's a fatal defect with the hook itself and partially because I'm not comfortable with the article's current sourcing. First, the hook is sourced to a the player's self-proclaimed mentor giving an interview to a league they've both played in. Interviews can be reliable, but I don't see how this one can be given that the interviewer isn't a professional journalist, the publication isn't independent, and the interviewee is essentially self-publishing claims about a living third party. Second – and this is more subjective – articles should be based on independent sources, but I'm seeing more citations to league publications than I am actual independent publications (and that's before we get into the fact that apparently, the fantastically-named Hamburger Morgenpost disappointingly uses AI in its editorial work). So, sending this back here for more work – hopefully there's a better source to back up the hook, or another hook that can be found? theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 06:54, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment — Uninteresting as written when it's well known that his leg was fused as a result of the tuberculosis and he still went on win tons of competitions in spite of the disability. Also, using a paid obituary for the source when there's seemingly no end to actual reliable sources discussing his life? Similarly, using a non-free image scavenged off the web when there are numerous publications with expired copyrights containing photos of Attla? To the latter point, as we continue to claim to be a collaborative environment, all you had to do was ask. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 02:30, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I added a different source, there are plenty. Perhaps you can find an image? This is, as you pointed out, a collaborative project. I did not find numerous publications where the copyright had expired and so left the image placed by a previous editor. Annwfwn (talk) 10:40, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ALT1: ... that Ann Hui (pictured) interviewed two poets who got into an argument in unused footage from Elegies? Source: [2]
ALT2: ... that the shoot for Elegies in Taiwan was almost canceled despite Ann Hui (pictured) already being there, as it was during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic? Source: [3]
ALT3: ... that Ann Hui (pictured) allowed the editor to work independently on Elegies? Source: [4]
ALT4: ... that director Ann Hui (pictured) worked for free on Elegies? Source: [5]
ALT5: ... that Ann Hui (pictured) intended to make a documentary about poetry back in 1976 before began working on Elegies in 2020? Source: [6]
ALT6: ... that the title of Elegies comes from a suite of poems that Ann Hui (pictured) read during the film's pre-production and found touching? Source: [7]
^黃保慧 (13 March 2024). "男主角演戲份被剪光 名導許鞍華透露：他演得很差！". United Daily News (in Chinese). Retrieved 4 May 2025. 許鞍華在片中以戲劇形式重現黃燦然的多首經典詩作，其中一首詩卻因為由黃燦然親自演出，反而害得整首詩全被剪光。許鞍華直言：「他演得很差！連走路都不自然，後來只能忍痛把整首詩都剪掉了。他是勉強地演了，可是他真的不是演員。」 [Ann Hui visualizes several poems by Huang Canran in dramatic form within the film. However, one poem had to be completely cut because Huang performed it himself, which was detrimental to the overall piece. Ann Hui candidly remarked, "His performance is very awful! Even his walking was unnatural, so in the end, I had to painfully cut the entire poem. He performed reluctantly, but he really is not an actor."]
^余婉蘭 (22 November 2023). "許鞍華、廖偉棠對談：香港經此世變，詩是高度痛感｜金馬入圍紀錄片《詩》". Initium Media (in Chinese). Retrieved 18 February 2025. 其實我還訪問了兩個詩人，那個訪問挺精彩⋯⋯因為他們兩個吵起架了，是熒惑和洪慧。但如果我們放進這部分，就多了一隻「腳仔」（支線）。當作之後還有一集。 [Actually, I also interviewed two poets, and that interview was quite exciting... because they got into an argument, they are Jacky Yuen and Hong Wai. But if we include this part, it adds a "subplot". [I will] Consider it for a sequel.]
^項貽斐 (22 March 2024). "【專訪3】不以地域界定香港詩人 黃燦然「經濟流亡」深圳、廖偉棠移民台灣". Mirror Media (in Chinese). Retrieved 18 February 2025. 疫情期間拍攝，許鞍華無論去深圳、台灣都得隔離，還因疫情的緊張、和緩讓隔離天數有時變長、有時變短，尤其來台拍廖偉棠時，忽然疫情升溫，製片擔心危險，不想造成工作人員或廖偉棠家人的困擾，希望許鞍華在台隔離結束就回香港。但是她認為，人都來了，就拍一點，盡量小心。 [During the filming period of the pandemic, Ann Hui had to quarantine whether she went to Shenzhen or Taiwan. The duration of the quarantine varied because of the fluctuating intensity of the pandemic. Especially when she came to Taiwan to film Liu Wai-tong, the pandemic suddenly intensified. The producer was worried about the danger and did not want to cause any trouble for the staff or Liu Wai-tong's family, wanting Ann Hui would return to Hong Kong as soon as her quarantine in Taiwan ended. However, she believed that since everyone was already there, they should film a little, while being as careful as possible.]
^余婉蘭 (22 November 2023). "許鞍華、廖偉棠對談：香港經此世變，詩是高度痛感｜金馬入圍紀錄片《詩》". Initium Media (in Chinese). Retrieved 18 February 2025. 剪接時，我們跟剪接師說，我想怎樣，這件事怎樣，其實說得很抽象。我們拍的東西不是很多，他就關上房門，自己自彈自唱，搞了差不多四五個月。 [During the editing process, we told the editor what I wanted and how we envisioned things, but it was quite vague. We did not have a lot of footage, so he closed the door and worked on his own, "playing and singing" for nearly four to five months.]
^余婉蘭 (22 November 2023). "許鞍華、廖偉棠對談：香港經此世變，詩是高度痛感｜金馬入圍紀錄片《詩》". Initium Media (in Chinese). Retrieved 18 February 2025. Alice、 Ken和我都是無償沒計薪的，如果一計就不夠錢。 [Alice, Ken, and I all worked without pay, because if we accounted for it, there would not be enough budget.]
^蕭采薇 (20 March 2024). "「金馬紀錄保持人」許鞍華76歲不退休！ 鄭少秋換周潤發內幕曝光". ETtoday (in Chinese). Retrieved 18 February 2025. 許鞍華表示，最早在1975年、1976年間在TVB拍《獅子山下》後，就非常想拍古詩紀錄片及張愛玲的小說《傾城之戀》。雖然當時沒拍成，但這個想以詩為主題的創作熱情卻一直放在心裡等待機會。 [Ann Hui stated that after filming Lion Rock at TVB in 1975 and 1976, she had a strong desire to create a documentary about classical poetry and a novel adaptation on Eileen Chang's novella Love in a Fallen City. Although she did not manage to make [the documentary] at that time, her passion for poetry-themed creations remained in her heart, waiting for an opportunity.]
^項貽斐 (22 March 2024). "【專訪4】詩作影像節奏拿捏有「禪意」 心有所感「哀歌」成「詩」". Mirror Media (in Chinese). Retrieved 18 February 2025. 至於紀錄片《詩》的英文片名為《Elegies》（哀歌、輓歌之意），是源於黃燦然90年代由七首詩組成的《哀歌》組詩。許鞍華說：「這應該是他最有名的作品、也是我第一次接觸到他的作品。那時我不認識他，是在一本詩選集裡看到其中一首，覺得很感動，所以籌備時就暫名《哀歌》。 [As for the documentary Elegies, its English title is "Elegies", which refers to Huang Canran's suite of seven poems from the 1990s also titled Elegies. Ann Hui said, "This should be his most famous work, and it was my first encounter with his writing. At that time, I did not know him; I saw one of the poems in an anthology and felt very moved, so during the pre-production, I use "Elegies" as the working title."]
Comment - whoever reviews this, please see Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know#Moratorium_on_"first"_hooks?; while the project hasn't yet enacted any sort of restriction on "first" hooks, this is going to be under scrutiny so the sourcing and the evidence for the above claim will need to be strong (I haven't looked yet so I have no idea if it is or not). Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 21:46, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Based5290, article is new enough, long enough and QPQ is unnecessary. Violation is unlikely as Earwig found 14.5% plagiarism, but I believe this close paraphrasing should fixed, "provides the kind of empathetic and insightful commentary that should be exemplary to critics on YouTube and beyond", quoted from Indy Film Library. I also don't find the hook interesting, or is it just not clear enough? I guess I'll leave the hook to more experienced reviewers. dxneo (talk) 21:56, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies. However, I still don't feel like the hook is "wow". Everyone cover world news nowadays, so how is this any different? It fails WP:DYKINT. A new hook, from a different angle is required. dxneo (talk) 06:00, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ALT2, any reason why the f in "flat Earth" is in lowercase? And in the article, the a in "In Search of A Flat Earth" is supposed to be in lowercase per WP:MOS. Polygon does not directly say anything about landscapes and this hook does not appear in the article, making it fail WP:WIADYK. Moving on to ALT3, a comment made by a non-notable individual, still not interesting enough. I guess other reviewers might say different, so I'm requesting a second opinion. dxneo (talk) 15:32, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ALT2: Polygon article: "The video is shot beautifully, with loving and reverent shots of nature that not only contribute to the video’s content and concepts, but also capture a sense of still beauty." The claim does appear in the article in a slightly different form: "Williams and Jef Rouner of Datebook noted the video's shots of the Canadian landscape as beautiful." The f if "flat Earth" is lowercase because that's how the Flat Earth article treats it. ALT3: As far as I can tell, comments by non-notable reviewers are entirely fair game for hooks unless there is a dispute about the reliability of the reviewer (or the comment itself is uninteresting). See Template:Did you know nominations/Fedora (short story), Template:Did you know nominations/Polo (novel), Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Life_Till_Bones. Based5290 :3 (talk) 22:39, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just noting that the GA review that admitted this was woefully inadequate and is being challenged at WT:GA, so I'm putting this on hold until someone does a proper job.--Launchballer03:32, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
... that the Bishop of Chiclayo, Edinson Edgardo Farfán Córdova, said his predecessor, the future Pope Leo XIV, formed his identity while riding horseback through mountainous communities in northern Peru?
Source: "In his opening greeting, the first American pope broke from his Italian remarks to speak — not in English, but in Spanish — to his “beloved diocese of Chiclayo in Peru.”
The diocese, in a northern Peruvian city with a population of about 600,000, is celebrating the election of one of its own. In a news conference Thursday, the bishop of Chiclayo, Edinson Edgardo Farfán Córdova, described Pope Leo XIV as “our brother,” a former bishop of Chiclayo who spent much of his ministry in northern Peru. Farfán described the pope’s time in northern Peru — riding horseback through mountainous communities — as formative years for Leo. By mentioning Chiclayo in his first remarks, Farfán said, Leo is signaling the importance of reaching out to the margins. He is following in the steps of Pope Francis, Farfán said, supporting “a church with open doors, a church that reaches out and welcomes everyone,” with an emphasis on helping the poor." Washington Post
Thank you for the article about who succeeded the Pope in his former position, on fine sources, Spanish sources accepted AGF. I like the hook idea! I believe, though, that we can't say the Pope was formative, because at that time he wasn't yet Pope, and the articles doesn't say (but should) that these rides were formative for him. I wouldn't mind a bit more prose, because in my (rather small) display the infobox is longer than the article ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:36, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That is better, but - comparing to the source more than before - I see that I misunderstood, because I thought that "his" meant the new bishop. How about first the name, then the position, to connect to the former one on the post more easily? ... and perhaps use the wording from the source that seems clearer? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:46, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
that is better but still unclear about who is meant by "his". Trying:
ALT0b ... that Edinson Edgardo Farfán Córdova, the Bishop of Chiclayo, said that the years that his predecessor, the future Pope Leo XIV, spent there, riding on horseback through mountainous communities in northern Peru, were a formative time?
Comment - @BeanieFan11: you really like your "first" hooks, don't you?! 🤦 I suppose this one is probably true, it's hard to find a counterexample although it's also hard to prove unless you can list all head coaches in all UD's sports through history. I suppose the fact that the college says so is reasonably powerful though, presumably they know... — Amakuru (talk) 21:55, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think I nominate that many 'first' hooks. This is the only 'first' hook out of my last 30 noms (I do nominate a lot of articles). Also, I'm pretty sure the school would know, given that they have decent records of their history, and other sources have noted the fact as well, e.g. this. BeanieFan11 (talk) 22:05, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
... that businesses owned by Yao woman Wang Yungui lifted 12,000 people out of poverty? Source: 到2018年，金秀共脱贫3345户1.2万多人，摘帽14个贫困村，贫困发生率降至2.496%。[translation: "By 2018, Jinxiu had lifted 3,345 households and more than 12,000 people out of poverty, and 14 poor villages were lifted out of poverty, with the poverty incidence rate dropping to 2.496%."] https://v.gxnews.com.cn/a/19780677
ALT1: ... that to promote her speciality foods business Yao woman Wang Yungui streamed content in traditional costume? Source: "... 2016, she set up a tea processing plant with an annual capacity of 1,500 kilograms. She began livestreaming to publicize tea picking and making in Liuduan. The traditional Yao costumes and cloud-shrouded mountains captured public attention ..." https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202106/07/WS60bd7201a31024ad0bac3f6d.html
Comment: 1) I started the draft back in February, but only got round to publishing it on 8 May.
2) I checked WP:RS for the China sources and they all seem either not yet evaluated or come under WP:MREL e.g. WP:CHINADAILY. In all cases as they are biographical facts about a businesswoman I think they can be considered generally reliable.
Created by Lajmmoore (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 140 past nominations.
Before I go into all the details of the review, I want to discuss notability, because I am concerned that the moment this article is linked in the DYK section, someone will nomination it for deletion. Your second comment seems to be written to anticipate this. Can you further explain why the article subject is notable referring to specific notability guidelines and why for instance the coverage of her business is not just short-term interest as a result of a marketing campaign? – Editør (talk) 18:06, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Editør - just to speak to my second comment - that was not at all written with potential deletion in my, more to indicate to reviewers that I had already checked their suitability for inclusion, and to point them to the relevant guidelines that I'd looked at. Just trying to save some effort!
To speak to the notability guidelines, I was following GNG, here is my assessment:
Ref 1= cunguan.youth.cn
Sept 2021, Used once in article, for DOB. China Youth Daily (which is run by Communists Party) is subject on a long thread where discussion seems to indicate that its useful for some facts, and can also be used to source its own views on topics. Contributes to notability? No
Ref 2= v.gxnews.com.cn
Aug 2020, News outlet for Guangxi region, not listed in WP:RSP. Contributes to notability? No
Ref 3=en.people.cn
July 2022, Source can be used for news about mainland China with care WP:CHINADAILY. Contributes to notability? Yes
Ref 4=chinadaily.com.cn
June 2021, Source can be used for news about mainland China with care WP:CHINADAILY. Contributes to notability? Yes
Ref 5=gx.cnr.cn
October 2023, China National Radio - still state-controlled media, but I would expect it to also come under WP:CHINADAILY. Contributes to notability? Yes
Ref 6=thepaper.cn
June 2022, The Paper (China) owned by Shanghai Media Group, but I could only see Sixthtone as deemed unreliable at WP:RS. Contributes to notability? Yes
To my reckoning sources 3, 4, 5 and 6 contribute to WP:GNG for the subject - they are spread across several years, so do not indicate a short term marketing campaign. They are sources where the subject is central, each with a slightly different focus (so not the same press release repeated). There are issues with all sources from China, but none of those cited here are deprecated and there seems to be a consensus of 'proceed with caution'. The two additional sources are from regional news outlets. All are independent of the subject. The subject has won several awards, of which I think the national one contributes to notability the most, in addition to the coverage across national media. Happy to answer further questions Lajmmoore (talk) 20:10, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your response. Looking at the Wikipedia article again, I think that Wang's business ventures alone don't necessarily establish her notability. Her national award makes it more interesting, but it is still an award given to 98 other people on that occasion alone, so it is far from a unique honor that establishes precisely Wang's notability in this field. Then there is the claim in the hook, lifting 12,000 people out of poverty seems like no small achievement, but the source doesn't directly attribute this fact to Wang personally or to Wang's businesses. The article describes it as a development in the area: "In recent years, Liuduan village has been relieving poverty by developing rural tourism. By 2018, Jinxiu Yao autonomous county had lifted 3,345 households -- more than 12,000 people -- out of poverty, and the rate of poverty dropped to 2.496 percent." So my concerns have not been taken away. I will think about this some more and I'll come back to you. – Editør (talk) 21:14, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just to add a note there is also an ALT1 to consider. There's four sources that meet WP:BASIC and in terms of the award, it's a national award in China, which has a lot of people, so I would be less concerned that there is a field of awardees, than say in a much smaller country. Lajmmoore (talk) 21:42, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think that in some way the content of ALT1 reflects my concerns about notability, it is not clear how someone promoting a business by dressing up and streaming this on the internet is notable. — Editør (talk) 22:52, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think that's precisely why she is notable, with coverage across several years, despite being relatively young and from the Yao ethnic minority. The point is that she has established several businesses that are based on the culture of her under-developed region, This has been nationally recognised, which we can see in at least 4 of the sources in the article, further supported by a national award. Lajmmoore (talk) 07:39, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The article is new enough (moved to mainspace on 8 May 2025), is long enough (2060 characters of prose), has no apparent sourcing or copyright issues (sources #3 #5 checked and per above discussion of sources), and is presentable (per readthrough and above discussion of notability). The hook is short enough, interesting enough, and cited, but the source doesn't fully support the claim in the hook. ALT1 is short enough and cited, but I find it not interesting enough in its current form. QPQ is done.
The article is about Wang's entrepreneurship and its effects on the community in Jinxiu, and I think that's what got her the national media attention and award. The first hook connects the two directly, but this direct connection is not really supported by the source. ALT1 doesn't make an explicit connection, and I think it doesn't work because of it. If you can provide a reliable source supporting a direct connection, then I believe this approach could work. It may be hard to directly connect the actions of an individual to the effects in a community though, in general. Could you provide a better source to support the first hook? Or could you come up with an alternative hook making an explicit connection between Wang's businesses and the effects on the community? Or could you come up with an alternative hook with a different approach, like a remarkable fun fact? – Editør (talk) 11:12, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ALT2... that Wang Yungui set up a bottled water business to complement the traditional tea she sold?"In 2019, Wang Yungui received feedback from a buyer that the taste of the tea brewed at home was not satisfactory and was not as good as the one brewed in Liuduan Village. After much investigation, Wang Yungui suggested that the buyer go to the supermarket to buy spring water for brewing. The customer praised the taste after trying it, so Wang Yungui came up with the idea of turning spring water into a brand. Relying on the indomitable fighting spirit of the Yaoshan people, Wang Yungui finally raised funds in 2019 to comprehensively carry out the construction of the water plant, integrating catering and homestays that are compatible with cultural tourism, and building the water plant into an industrial tourism demonstration site." https://web.archive.org/web/20250508170602/https://www.thepaper.cn/newsDetail_forward_18614582
ALT3... that find suppliers for her specialty foods company Yao woman Wang Yungui had to knock from door-to-door? "At the beginning, villagers didn't trust Wang to sell their produce, so she went door to door, talking to them in person and collecting their produce, which she later sorted, packaged and photographed, before displaying it online."https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202106/07/WS60bd7201a31024ad0bac3f6d.html
Thank you for these alternatives. While such lines are alright in the article itself, I find ALT2 and ALT3 not interesting enough as DYK hooks. ALT2 seems like a common business decision and development, ALT3 seems like a common-sense approach for someone starting out. Maybe ALT3 could work if it is contrasted with big commercial success (did you know that millionaire Jane Doe went door to door when she started out with her first business?). Do you want to try something else, do you want me to ask for a second opinion, maybe someone else has some ideas that might work, or do you want me to close the nomination? Feel free to sleep on it if you'd like. – Editør (talk) 18:19, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My alternate proposal is:
ALT4: ... that after lifting her family out of poverty, Yao businesswoman Wang Yungui helped do the same for hundreds others in her home village?
Source: "更多资讯请下载学习强国客户端". Chinese Volunteer Magazine (in Chinese). Retrieved 27 May 2025. 仅一年时间，汪云贵让自己家的收入翻了几番，2016年顺利脱贫。...政府的政策扶持再加上汪云贵姐妹俩的宣传带动，六段古瑶寨的人气越来越旺，为了改善当地群众的居住条件，政府还就近建设了一座新村，六段古寨不仅完好地保存下来，村民家家户户还住上了新房。2019年六段瑶寨全村共吸引3万多人次游客观光，4年来共带动六段村151户578人脱贫。 [In just one year, Wang Yungui increased her family's income several times and successfully lifted them out of poverty in 2016.... With the support of government policies and the publicity of Wang Yungui and her sister, Liuduan Ancient Yao Village has become more and more popular. In order to improve the living conditions of the local people, the government has also built a new village nearby. Liuduan Village has not only been well preserved, but every household in the village has also moved into a new house. In 2019, Liuduan Village attracted more than 30,000 tourists, and over the past four years, it has helped 151 households and 578 people in Liuduan Village get out of poverty.]
Notes:
Wang did not lift 12,000 people out of poverty; that figure was for the entire county (to which Wang's home village of Liuduan belongs) and about poverty alleviation through rural tourism in general. This new source I read, however, credits her efforts, alongside the local government's with helping 578 people in her village specifically.
Wang did not lift people out of poverty all on her own; it was a joint effort with local authorities, as well as the people she assisted themselves. However, I therefore don't think it's a stretch to say she helped.
The new source makes it clear that there is a connection between Wang's initiatives and other households in Liuduan getting out of poverty.
Sentences cited in the Wikipedia article are: "By 2016, Wang had been able to lift her family out of poverty; this inspired her to attempt to do the same for her village.... Local authorities credited her initiatives with helping to lift 151 households and 578 people in Liuduan out of poverty."
The outlets cited for this article are to be cited with caution, per community consensus. It's difficult to find sources published outside of China about a Chinese person who made national headlines in China, and the rule of thumb is usually look at what is being claimed and take it with a grain of salt, as almost all the sources given have some link to Chinese authorities. That being said, I don't think any of the claims made in the article are particularly extreme or questionable.
Source: https://www.maxim.com/entertainment/last-tango-brando-island (note that Sancton refers to "Jacques-Denis Drollet": when Drollet was involved in politics, he was just "Jacques", so that's what I called him when writing the article, but after he retired, his nephew Jacqui Drollet got involved in politics too, so people started referring to the older one as "Jacques-Denis". It's the same person.)
New enough and long enough. QPQ present. Wow, what a story this is part of, though maybe "the actor" could be added to the hook in case people don't know who Brando is (promoter's option). No textual issues. Good to go. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 05:51, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just passed GA, so the timing checks out. It's definitely long enough, well-sourced, hook and QPQ are done, and no copyvio issues popped up. ALT0 probably reads better for general readers, but ALT1 feels more interesting to me, it's a bit less dry and sparks more curiosity. We're good to go! Mariamnei (talk) 09:26, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Pulled. This will take essentially a complete rewrite to adequately address the sourcing problems, so calling this {{DYKno}}. See my analysis at FAC for details. RoySmith(talk)20:46, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'll leave that for others to address; I'm not the gatekeeper of what's allowed or not allowed. But I will say that I'm more concerned about putting out a good product and not getting dragged to WP:ERRORS than I am about what awards you qualify for. RoySmith(talk)10:33, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ALT2: ... that the 16.9 kilometres (10.5 mi) tracks at the Singapore Rail Test Centre is compatible with various types of signalling systems and is powered by both direct-current third rail and alternating-current overhead catenary? Source: International Railway Journal
Comment: according to the page bytes, the article is only 2x expanded, but I also removed much of the original page when I redid it, and had I done this in separate steps, the new page would be 5x expanded
5x expanded by Gb321 (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.
Long enough: - Yes, per below discussionUnfortunately, this is still not long enough. We count expansions by prose size, not by raw text size. Even so, the version prior to expansion includes 1,613 bytes of prose (if the block quote is included). The current version of the article has 5,868 bytes of prose. The article would be eligible for DYK if the block quote wasn't included, as the previous version minus the block quote is 1,026 bytes, but I don't know whether block quotes should be counted here. Other DYK regulars (pinging @DYK admins: ) might be able to advise.
Other problems: - There is a {{One source}} tag. It should be resolved before this appears on the Main Page, if it is eligible. Since the source in question is a reliable source, though, I think it can be removed. (See Amakuru's comment below; this must be resolved, even if you were the editor who added the tag.)
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
I'm not sure the "one source" template should be removed or ignored, even though it was apparently put in there by the nominator... the fact that there are no other sources used for that section means it's almost certainly close paraphrasing, and an orange-tag issue should be resolved properly. — Amakuru (talk) 13:23, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I do not think we should count the quote for the pre-expansion size. My prosesize tool does not and I think this meets the 5x expansion test. —Kusma (talk) 13:28, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The DYK admins template should only be used for emergencies, but prose is measured by characters not bytes and the blockquote isn't counted towards character count, so this is (at best) a 4.16x expansion, from 1409 to 5868. If you can resolve the tag and any/all close paraphrasing, WP:GA is that-a-way.--Launchballer13:34, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm using DYKcheck, which shows 1409/188 even after editing the previous version to remove the blockquote and showing preview.--Launchballer13:55, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My bad. Next time I'll post on WT:DYK instead, I didn't realize that template was not a general-use template for pinging DYK admins or regular users. That being said, I came to the same conclusion as Kusma regarding the prose size; I just thought the block quote in the previous version of the article might pose some problems if it were treated as prose. Epicgenius (talk) 13:56, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
thanks for the feedback everyone. I'll work on getting that 'one source' tag removed
2025 Philippine barangay and Sangguniang Kabataan elections
... that after the postponement of the 2023 barangay elections were declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, new bills postponing the 2025 elections to a later date were still filed?
Comment: This was created on May 11, 2025 in my time zone, but Wikipedia thinks I am a time traveler. The QPQ review will be done after the 2025 Philippine general election. Explanation on the hook:
2023 barangay elections was supposed to have been held in 2020, but was postponed (not due to COVID) to 2022, then to 2023.
The Supreme Court ruled the law postponing the 2022 election to 2023 as unconstitutional. The 2023 elections proceeded as scheduled.
Now, there are now several bills postponing the 2025 barangay elections to a later date.
Created by Howard the Duck (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 26 past nominations.
This is not a review, but how well-attested is the claim that the novel was the first Ukrainian-language sci-fi novel? That's quite a bold and exceptional claim, and per the guidelines such claims require exceptional sourcing to make sure that it's actually true. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 14:58, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5: I agree the current sourcing is so-so; the cited source (FantLab) is not listed as unreliable, but it also does not strike me as scholarly. Unfortunately, if better sources exist, they are in Ukranian/Russian, and searching in these languages is hard for me (I've asked AI to search for scholarly sources in ru/uk; if I find anything better I'll update this post). I've proposed a safer ALT1 below, backed up by a reliable English ref. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here09:27, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Overall: Article is generally in good shape and expanded more than 5x during the window. All hooks are sourced; I think ALT2 is the strongest of them. Two images have free licences which check out; the main portrait is used under fair use; we should really give some detail of the efforts taken to find a free-use image rather than simply asserting that none probably exist, but I'm not going to be too insistent on that here. QPQ is done. There are quite a few passages which seem to closely paraphrasethis obituary; this needs to be addressed before the article can hit the main page. For the benefit of (perhaps far) future readers, I would consider explaining why his funeral was held virtually -- hopefully, we will soon get to the point where readers need reminding of the exact dates of the pandemic. UndercoverClassicistT·C20:54, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@UndercoverClassicist: Thanks for the review! Given that I only cited Ross & Blust once (which re-reading it, I should have used more), would you mind pointing out some of the CLOP issues? I tried really hard to avoid them with Geraghty & Pawley (2021) in particular, so I must've accidentally fallen into Ross & Blust in error. Earwig basically just spit out a concern because of the biblio and because I like to spell out the names (e.g., of universities) in full. As for the funeral, I almost put in that it was because of COVID... but I couldn't confirm that; his four brothers lived in Australia and I couldn't confirm that it wasn't because of some other reason (e.g., they couldn't afford to fly out) without dipping into a WP:OR issue. ThaesOfereode (talk) 23:47, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't help that the two sources are very similar indeed (to the point where I'd certainly raise concerns if they were Wikipedia articles!), so I can see how you've ended up very close to one without using it heavily. Actually, it's clearer to use Geraghty and Pawley directly to show the issues. A few examples -- source text first, article text follows:
(Geraghty and Pawley): In 1958 the Lynches moved to Melbourne, where John attended the Jesuits’ Xavier College. ... In his high school years he studied Latin, French, Greek and German — in fact the school didn't offer German so he taught himself and was tutored by the Austrian wife of one of his teachers, and he passed the German exam too in his final year: versus The Lynches lived in Wahroonga, a suburb north of Sydney, until 1958 when they moved to Melbourne. There, John attended Xavier College, a boarding school run by the Society of Jesus, during which he studied Latin, French, Ancient Greek, and German. Because the school did not offer German as a subject, he taught himself before being tutored by a member of the staff's Austrian wife. The structure is identical, with some phrases lifted verbatim, and others lightly rearranged (e.g. "a member of the staff's Austrian wife" for "the Austrian wife of one of his teachers".
(idem) In 1964 John obtained a Commonwealth Scholarship and began an honours degree in Arts at The University of Sydney, graduating with first class honours in 1968. ... His sole linguistics teacher during his four years at The University of Sydney was Rev. Dr. Arthur Capell versus Lynch began his undergraduate studies in 1964 after receiving a Commonwealth Scholarship. He attended the University of Sydney, receiving a degree in anthropology and a linguistics distinction with first-class honours in 1968. At one point the only student in the honours linguistics program, Lynch's only linguistics professor was Arthur Capell
(idem) For the next few years he divided his time between teaching at UPNG, taking courses at the UH, fieldwork on Tanna, writing his doctoral thesis, and taking over the editorship of Kivung (later renamed Language and Linguistics in Melanesia) ... Lynch was editor of volumes 7 to 11 from 1974 to 1978, then review editor from 1982 to 1986, and an associate editor or editorial board member from 1986 onward versus During this period, Lynch both taught at the University of Papua New Guinea and took classes back in Hawaii while writing his dissertation. He also assumed the chief editing role at the academic journal Kivung (now Language and Linguistics in Melanesia) ... Lynch was chief editor between 1974 and 1978, though later served as a reviewing editor from 1982 to 1986. From 1986 until his death, he served as either an associate editor or as a member of the journal's editorial board
(idem) After twenty-one years, John’s stint at the UPNG came to an end. ... he and his wife Andonia Piau-Lynch (known to all as Andy) and their two young sons moved to Vanuatu, where Andonia forged a career first as an educational psychologist (the only degree-holding psychologist in Vanuatu) and later as an advocate for the rights of people with disabilities and for women’s rights.After twenty-one years at the University of Papua New Guinea, Lynch left to begin work at the University of the South Pacific's Emalus campus; he, his wife, and two young sons moved to Port Vila, Vanuatu, towards the end of 1991. While there, his wife worked as an educational psychologist on the island and was the nation's only psychologist with a degree. She was later an advocate for women's rights in Vanuatu, as well as for those with disabilities
You've clearly made efforts to rephrase, but fundamentally these are minor variations keeping the same selection and arrangement of facts, which is a copyvio concern. UndercoverClassicistT·C05:31, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Admittedly it was a bit difficult, but I think I've shuffled things around and rephrased them enough to avoid copyvios. Please let me know if there are any other areas of concern; I didn't realize how much of the copyvio stuff I was flatly ignorant on, so apologies. ThaesOfereode (talk) 01:43, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've put a few copyedits in, but I think the article now needs a good look for comprehensibility and grammar -- I'd suggest reading each paragraph, going away for a minute, then trying to re-write the same ideas without looking at it. We're in an awkward place at the moment where the writing is trying to contort itself to get away from the original sources, leading to awkward phrases which don't always say what we mean (I've removed "languages such as...", for example, as that was very much not supported by the source), or are otherwise rather strained: see Although German was not available as a class outright, he had success teaching himself the language. Eventually, he was tutored by a local Austrian native who was married to one of the schoolteachers and passed the final exam. UndercoverClassicistT·C08:33, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Cited: - If we are being precise, the source does not say nucleariids are the closest relative of fungi; it says they "form the earliest branch in the holomycotan clade (fungi and closest relatives)". The source cites research that notes they are close relatives, but the source does not say they are the closest relatives.
Interesting:
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Overall: Some alternative hooks would be good. It would be better if it said that nucleariid amoebae are among the closest relatives of fungi. Aneirinn (talk) 23:23, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well, mycologists agree that Rozellomycota are fungi, same with Aphelidiomycota (see for example this ref, which is the outline of fungal classification). While it is true that these "lower fungi" were often traditionally studied by protistologists as protists, modern protistologists agree that they belong to the Fungi (see doi:10.1111/jeu.12691 for the scientific consensus of protistologists). If you still don't change your mind, I'll re-write it. — Snoteleks (talk)01:21, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, the scientific consensus does seem to be that they are fungi. I still am unsure if nucleariid amoebae are the closest relatives of fungi. I have looked for it but have not been able to see where it says that in the source. Aneirinn (talk) 17:45, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Aneirinn: The source has a cladogram depicting the relationship, and it shows nucleariids ("kingdom Nucleariae") as the sister group of the kingdom Fungi. This relationship is also explained in the taxonomic section, where the two kingdoms are grouped within superkingdom Holomycota. There are no other kingdoms included there. — Snoteleks (talk)21:33, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Narutolovehinata5 I proposed this one (which I agree is a bit dull) as I got nervous about proposing other hooks based on her feminism. That said she is a prominent figure, so perhaps I am being too overly cautious? What about:
ALT0a ... that in 2022, the Georgian Philharmonic Orchestra performed a solidarity concert with Ukraine featuring music by Ukrainian and Georgian composers?
I think a centenary is worth mentioning. I also would like to point at how immediately after the invasion that was - perhaps you have an idea. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:16, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The primary hook fact is that they performed a solidarity concert following the invasion of Ukraine. Them being founded in 1925 is irrelevant to that. Again, WP:DYKTRIM applies: ...don't be afraid to trim hooks of extraneous information and clauses... In general, the shorter and punchier the hook, the more impact it has. If your desire is for the hook to run on the orchestra's centennial year, just it being approved and running is all that's needed. No need to mention the year since it's irrelevant to the hook fact. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:24, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ALT0b ... that following Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the Georgian Philharmonic Orchestra performed a solidarity concert featuring music by Ukrainian and Georgian composers?
I think that our readers, who are expected not to know this orchestra even existed, get valuable extra information by telling them (in a short phrase) about the groups's long history, - a background giving the fact more depth. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:22, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Source: "As the 10 billion baguettes sold each year in France indicates, some cultural clichés stem from reality. The French truly do have bread at every meal; it’s the most fundamental element of sitting down to eat, whether you’re invited to someone’s for dinner, or ordering lunch at a bistro. But it was still remarkable to see, on a recent gray spring afternoon in Paris, a line of boulangers snaking up the stairwell to the second floor of the Chambre Professionnelle des Artisans Boulangers-Pâtissiers, all carrying what they hoped would be awarded this year’s Grand Prix de la Meilleure Baguette de Paris — otherwise known as the official “Best Baguette in Paris” competition. Held annually since 1994, the competition is a badge of honor and warrants serious bragging rights. Moreover, the contest carries real consequences: The winner provides baguettes to the French president for the calendar year, gets a 4,000 Euro prize, and — perhaps most important — sees a lasting bump in business." Grub Street
@Thriley: Note that July 14 is over six weeks after May 16, or more specifically it's over eight weeks. As such, per WP:DYKSO you will need to make an IAR exemption request at WT:DYK for the special occasion hook to be allowed to run. Otherwise, are you okay with it running as a regular non-SO hook? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:15, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The page was created as a draft in 2022 but was not moved to mainspace until May 13, 2025, so it meets the newness guidelines. It is also long enough. A QPQ has been done. I'm getting a 55.9% Earwigs hit with this link, although it's mostly to do with the list of awardees. Moreover, the list uses French quotation marks instead of English ones, so that will need to be fixed. The hook is also not directly supported in the article: nowhere in the article says it is "yearly", only the fact that the competition exists and has a jury. A new hook will be needed.
As a note to the promoter: unless this nomination gets an exemption at WT:DYK, please do not hold it until July 14. However, if such an exemption is granted, then by all means put it in the Special occasions section. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:31, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Nikkimaria:This is the link in question, and according to Earwig the main hits involve the names repeating in both lists. Should that be okay or not? I did notice though that the Wikipedia list includes items with French quotation marks. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:11, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I really can't say whether it's okay or not - an Earwig result is only a marker, you'd have to assess the source phrasing either way, and in this case I cannot. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:18, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Nikkimaria: Oh, I see what you mean now. From what I can tell, I think the list in the article was directly copied, word-for-word, from the link (although another editor has since edited the list so that the French quotation marks were replaced with English ones). The question I have is if this would still count as a copyvio or at least close paraphrasing, or if it might be allowed per WP:LIMITED. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:25, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Are you talking about this 2021 article:[25]? If you look at the edit history of the French Wikipedia article which I got the list from, it existed before that 2021 article was published. Thriley (talk) 00:33, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Given that there has been no response to the hook and sourcing concerns despite a ping and a talk page message as well as activity elsewhere, marking this for closure. The nomination can resume if those are addressed. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:21, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Reviewed: Reviewing... I will be reviewing this nomination. I am a new reviewer, so I will need a second opinion. NeoGaze (talk) 13:08, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Overall: The article was moved to mainspace on 13 May 2025, and was nominated for DYK the next day. Length is adequate and the hooks are both interesting and properly backed by sources. No image is used and a QPQ is not required for this nomination. The main issue is sourcing beyond the mentioned hooks; A whole section has no sources (Background), but it could use some of the main article it links to. In the list itself, there are several sightings with no backing sources, a case of a failed verification and broken youtube link, and a few uses of twitter/X being used as a reference, which should be replaced for better alternatives if possible. I added several templates and tags to clearly point these issues. Once everything is fixed and double-checked, I will request a second opinion from another editor. NeoGaze (talk) 19:09, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your review! I added some references to the background section, and am currently working on cleaning up the list portion of the article. I apologize, as I admit that I should've gone further with verifying the references before reviewing this page and nominating it for DYK. Thank you again for volunteering at DYK, I will attempt to address the issues with the article at this time. -Samoht27 (talk)20:05, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Source: https://www.med.kobe-u.ac.jp/journal/contents/61/E132.pdf "It also reportedly has high therapeutic effectiveness for muscle cramps in patients undergoing dialysis, patients with diabetes or liver cirrhosis, and patients with dysmenorrhea"; "Shakuyaku-kanzo-to consists of a combination of P. lactiflora and Glycyrrhiza."
@Narutolovehinata5: why do you say that? Almost all sources, including the cited hook, have a PubMed ID, which is especially reliable, According to MEDRS. I see no reason to question their reliability. Cattos💭09:41, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ALT1: ... that in Fuuto PI the lead character Shotaro has a more prominent role than fellow character Philip, leading to more explorations of the protagonist's past than in Kamen Rider W? Source: [2]
ALT2: ... that Fuuto PI was originally going to be a short manga but it was extended due to positive sales in Japan? Source: [3]
Reviewed:
Improved to Good Article status by Tintor2 (talk) and Xexerss (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 19 past nominations.
Quick note, respectfully I don't think any of the proposed hooks are particularly interesting. All of those things are very typical of other media series. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 16:17, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Grapesurgeon: Giving this a shot. How do these sound?
ALT3 ... that Fuuto PI'smanga format allowed the series to not be constrained by the Kamen Rider franchise's live-action special effects?
ALT4 ... that the manga series Fuuto PI used Die Hard and Blade Runner as inspirations in the creation of its villains?
It's similar to the main hook but has those eye-catching phrases. I'm still not in love with it but can't think of anything better. @Tintor2: what do you think of the above hook?
Rest of the review: GA just before DYK nom, long enough, presentable, no significant issues, article is sourced, no copyvio in text or images. QPQ does not appear to have been done. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 17:30, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
While it's ok to not be skilled at things, the review is excessively carelessly formatted; feels a bit disrespectful to others' time. I will not approve this DYK until you reformat it; I won't do the reformatting for you, I think you're able to do it on your own if you take more time looking at other reviews and reading how that template you used works, but if you really really need help you can ask me specific questions on how to fix it. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 19:33, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Tintor2: Given the issues raised with the provided QPQ, you will either need to provide a new one or fix the existing one. The current QPQ will not be accepted as it is considered inadequate, and the nomination may be closed for lack of a QPQ if this is not addressed. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:03, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
An excellent article - newly moved to mainspace, plenty long, and well-written. (It would not require much to pass a GA review.) No copyvio or sourcing issues found. Image is freely licensed, works at this scale, and used in the article.
All three hooks are short, interesting, and properly cited. I think ALT0 is the most interesting and would recommend it. If so, I would link "hack" and "Montmartre" as are done in the article. (Regarding that: should "hack" link to hack (horse), as it currently does in the article, or hackney carriage?) Pi.1415926535 (talk) 03:43, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5: Is this 24-hour rule outlined anywhere? I have not seen it being enforced on other nominations this strictly. Frankly it is far too short of a deadline and seems to encourage shoddy and quick reviews rather than proper vetting. SounderBruce05:49, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's an application of WP:QPQ (emphasis mine): Your QPQ review should be made before or at the time of your nomination. A nomination which doesn't include a QPQ (and is not from an exempt nominator) may be closed as "incomplete" without warning. You did not provide a QPQ at the time of the nomination, which makes it liable to be closed. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 07:07, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The rules need to be revised to reflect the common practice of not having a QPQ on hand at the time of nomination. With the difficulty in finding suitable nominations to review without committing to a potentially time-wasting set of interactions, I do not think it is wise to punish active contributors who would otherwise not make the 7-day nomination window and drop out of the process. SounderBruce07:13, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It is a practice that DYK is actively discouraging now, especially with there being large backlogs and a need to encourage not just helping out backlogs but also weeding out unsuitable nominations. It may have been acceptable in the past to have a delay in providing a QPQ, but DYK has moved away from it now. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 07:15, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: To do QPQs within a day or two. Two days late (in part due to an AFD), requesting an extension per WP:DYKG: The seven-day limit can be extended for a day or two upon request. Also, while there has been some debate over "first" hooks, this one is clearly true.
5x expanded by BeanieFan11 (talk) and Habst (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 2. DYK is currently in unreviewed backlog mode and nominator has 368 past nominations.
Hello, Thanks for your query. I am an Oceanic scholar, well familiar with this book (one of its authors gave it to me when it came out); I also know this academic domain (Oceanic linguistics) more generally. Frankly, I am a bit puzzled that a DYK would be dedicated to just a scholarly book, when so many DYK could be created about the languages themselves. (things like “DYK that the Pacific area hosts 19% of the world's languages, even though their speakers form 1% of the world's population?”) Lynch et al.'s book is a useful synthesis of knowledge, alright. But it is just one scholarly publication among many; I am not convinced it deserves a whole Wikipedia entry in and for itself. (I do appreciate your massive work on it though -- thanks.) The book is recommended to students because it's a useful synthesis of the field (like many academic handbooks), but it is not really a remarkable volume of new research strictly speaking; only marginally so. I believe the six volumes of the POc lexicon, which are truly a remarkable feat of new scholarship, would have been much more worthy of a Wikipedia entry (and of a DYK), among others. To come back to your DYK query:
main proposal: I don't think it's necessarily interesting, or true; I, for one, have never referred to the volume as "the blue book", and only heard it called this way once. So, my vote: →Maybe
ALT1 is irrelevant to this particular book, as it describes a fact about the sociology of academia in general; → Not approved
ALT3 is super uninteresting: a review will always say good and bad things about the book they're reviewing, that's part of the reviewing genre; the passages you quote are really not worthy of a DYK! - especially knowing how Blust's review was noticed for totally different reasons (hypotheses Blust made on the peopling of the Pacific...); → Declined
ALT2: that's true indeed. This is not so surprising to academics in the field, because every year we see publications with data-published-on-language-X-for-the-very-first-time-in-history. But I guess it might be of interest to a wider audience, and somewhat a significant fact about the field of Oceanic linguistics as a whole. →Approved.
... that James Patrick Shea thought a 2008 invitation to meet with Benedict XIV at the White House was a hoax and "put it in the same place I put emails with offers for Viagra"?
... that the Rephaim text, a 14th-century BCE Ugaritic poem, tells of divine warrior beings who ride for three days to a threshing floor - only to spend the next seven days eating there?
Source: L'Heureux, Conrad (1974). "The Ugaritic and Biblical Rephaim". The Harvard Theological Review. 67 (3): 265. [27], Coogan, Michael David; Smith, Mark S. eds. (2012). Stories from ancient Canaan (2nd ed.). Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press. pp. 60-63.
Reviewed:
Moved to mainspace by Moonshane1933 (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.
Cited: - "beings who ride for three days to a threshing floor - only to spend the next seven days eating there." is verified. "14th-century BCE" is unverified. "divine warrior beings" is unverified. rp'm can be deities, the dead, the king's men.
... that male fish in the subclass Holocephali often have special organs on top of their head that are used to grab females while mating?
Source: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1046/j.1365-2451.1997.00013.x "Sharks sometimes resort to biting in order to gain a firmer grip while mating, but chimaeroids apparently achieve the same end by means of a variety of accessory clasping organs. These can be located in a number of positions including the snout (Fig. 4a,c). A range of Palaeozoic chondrichthyans carry large and bizarre outgrowths on their heads, which we interpret (sometimes from direct evidence; Fig. 2b,c) as accessory claspers" (Ahlberg & Coates, 1997)
Excellent job on expanding the article. Image appears to be freely licensed. No copyvio detected, no QPQs needed. A few issues: WP:DYKHOOK rules state that each hook must be claimed in the article. In ALT0, you state "often have special organs" when the article just stated that modern chimaeras have the claspers - no "often" about it. Also, ALT1 seems to be more about Symmoriiformes than Holocephali. ALT2 should also probably have "were much more" rather than "was". I do like ALT0, especially in conjunction with the image. ~Darth StabroTalk • Contribs00:38, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've swapped out the source used for ALT0, the use of the non-comprehensive modern animal paper was a mistake on my part that resulted from rewriting that hook's contents and forgetting to update the source. I've also provided a supporting quote from the new text since this one is not freely available online, although the author goes into more detail about the features in the article itself. I've reworded ALT1 to put more emphasis on Holocephali, and I've made the requested change to ALT2. As for being stated in the article, Alt0 is stated in the "Reproduction" subsection, ALT1 is stated in the second paragraph of the lead and in the "Modern classifications" subsection, and Alt2 is stated in the first paragraph of the lead and in the "Decline" section (although less concise in the latter). Are the provided hooks close enough to the statements in the article's text? Let me know if there are any further issues or adjustments you would want made. Gasmasque (talk) 02:07, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
... that Kelston toll road was the first of its kind in over a century when it operated for fourteen weeks in 2014?
Source: this for "the UK's first new private toll road to open in more than 100 years" and this for "The toll road operated for 14 weeks"
ALT1: ... that when it operated for 14 weeks in 2014, the Kelston toll road was the first of its kind in over a century? Source: this for "the UK's first new private toll road to open in more than 100 years" and this for "The toll road operated for 14 weeks"
ALT2: ... that the Kelston toll road was the first of its kind in over a century? Source: this for "the UK's first new private toll road to open in more than 100 years"
Reviewed: [[]]
Comment: Sorry that this took nine days but I am quite busy at the moment and expanding this topic from 484 to 2500 words was an absolute mammoth task. I will admit the page is not quite perfect yet but the sources are definitely reliable per WP:GUARDIAN and WP:RSPBBC. Also, the DYK check tool seems to reject a 5x expansion but it definitely is; this diff is a 5.17x expansion according to the page sizes listed by DKYcheck, and a 5.21x expansion according to the Page Size tool. I would also appreciate if the reviewer could do me a favour and tell me if the article looks like a possible GAN submission as ORES has suggested so for a long time but isn't very reliable for this and I personally have no idea myself.
5x expanded by JacobTheRox (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.
ALT1: ... that the khachkars at Aprank monastery are the tallest in the world? Source: "Աշխարհի ամենամեծ երկու խաչքարերու կրկնօրինակները պիտի տեղադրուին Մայր Աթոռին մէջ [Replicas of the world's two largest khachkars to be installed in the Mother See]". Horizon Weekly (in Armenian). March 23, 2015. https://horizonweekly.ca/en/64304-2/ "Ս. Դաւիթ մատուռը, որոնց մօտակայքը կը գտնուին աշխարհի ամենաբարձր` աւելի քան 6 մեթր բարձրութիւն ունեցող հրաշալի երկու խաչքարեր" (="two of the world's tallest magnificent khachkars (cross-stones)")
Image is freely licensed and works at thumbnail size. QPQs good, copyvio is mostly good except for an inscribed stone panel decorated with crosses and bearing two inscriptions, one with the date 1854 and Their height and prominent position as direct quotes that should by rephrased. Article recently created. My main issues here are with the hooks: ALT0 says "the largest" while the source says These are said to be the largest, and ALT1 claims "are the tallest" where the source says two of the world's tallest. The hooks, per WP:DYKDEFINITE, need exceptional sourcing to make such claims as "largest" or "tallest", and the sources included do not back it up. The hooks could be rephrased to match the sourcing, perhaps:
I'm rephrased the two problematic passages to avoid copyvio.
Agree with the first hook (and have accordingly rephrased the quote within the article). As for ALT1, Horizon Weekly's text actually translates to "the world's tallest — two magnificent khachkars" not "two of the world's tallest". The original translation is a bit off. It explicitly calls them "the tallest in the world" (աշխարհի ամենաբարձր).
If that's still questionable, we can go with this:
@Buidhe: Not a review, but the article only has three sources, all physical books, and they're all from the same publisher. Do you have any other sources to prove notability for this subject? As is, it looks like a prime target to be merged into Snowpack. Departure– (talk) 02:14, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Departure– There are actually four sources cited, and I would disagree with any merger, because this would be UNDUE in the snowpack article because the types are mostly distinguished for the purpose of avalanche forecasting in North America. (t · c) buidhe02:19, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Buidhe: They're all published by Mountaineers Books, which is my point. Snowpack types, while well cited, is longer than Snowpack, and could very easily be merged there unless either one has enough specifically on them to prevent such (speaking from someone from Wikiproject Weather, where a lot of articles get merged like this). Just a heads-up that you may have an uphill battle before this ends up on the main page; I have nothing against this being promoted if there truly is a reason to keep the pages separate. Departure– (talk) 02:23, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The fact that it's more detailed than the general article is actually a strong indication that the material would be UNDUE if merged. You didn't bother to look for other sources which certainly exist, but simply assumed it's not notable. If you don't have anything against the promotion of the article why are you posting here? (t · c) buidhe02:26, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Source: Frappier, Jean (1936). Étude sur la 'Mort le roi Artu', roman du XIIIᵉ siècle : dernière partie du Lancelot en prose (in French). Geneva. p. 348. "Au Moyen Âge, l'emploi du procédé [de l'entrelacement] ainsi que la formule de transition rudimentaire (Le conte cesse de parler d'un tel et parle maintenant de tel autre), ne semble pas antérieur au Perceval de Chrétien de Troyes."
Reviewed:
Created by InfernoHues (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith
Interesting:
QPQ: None required.
Overall: New, interesting, seems to be no copyvios, and with a source accepted AGF (offline). Two minor quibbles: one is that only Frappier is cited here and it seems to be his opinion alone, rather than a citation indicating that more than just him are saying that many literary historians say so. Could we consider:
Feel free to suggest other rephrasing. Two is that the lede should describe, briefly, what entrelacement is. If it's cited in the body, you don't need to re-cite it in the lede, but it does need to be present for the passing reader. That said, great article and welcome to Wikipedia, InfernoHues! ThaesOfereode (talk) 00:48, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@ThaesOfereode I've added a citation that shows that it is the opinion of literary historians in general and added to the lead somewhat (citation 3 and 4 are basically the same but I don't know how to combine them)
Source: Davies, Gwyn (2023). "Stamping Out the Embers: Roman "Mopping-Up" Operations at the End of the First Jewish Revolt". In Mizzi, Dennis; Grey, Matthew; Rassalle, Tine (eds.). Pushing Sacred Boundaries in Early Judaism and the Ancient Mediterranean. Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism. Vol. 208. Brill. pp. 101–101; Rogers, Guy MacLean (2022). For the Freedom of Zion: The Great Revolt of Jews against Romans, 66–74 CE. Yale University Press. p. 368; Goodman, Martin (2004). "Trajan and the Origins of Roman Hostility to the Jews". Past & Present (182) pp. 3–4; Price, Jonathan J. (1992). Jerusalem under Siege: The Collapse of the Jewish State, 66-70 C.E. Brill's Series in Jewish Studies. Vol. 3. Brill. p. 172
ALT1: ... that after destroying Jerusalem in the First Jewish–Roman War, Titus refused demands to expel Antioch's Jews, saying their homeland was destroyed and nowhere else would take them? Source: Andrade, Nathanael J. (2013). Syrian Identity in the Greco-Roman World. Cambridge University Press. p. 115; Smallwood, E. Mary (1976). The Jews under Roman Rule from Pompey to Diocletian. SBL Press. pp. 363–364
ALT2: ... that an estimated quarter of Judaea's Jewish population died in the First Jewish–Roman War, and a further tenth was taken captive? Source: Herr, Moshe David (1984). "פני התקופה: ארץ-ישראל באימפריה הרומית אחרי חורבן בית שני". In Stern, Menahem (ed.). The Roman Byzantine Period: The Roman Period from the Conquest to the Ben Kozba War (63 BCE – 135 CE). The History of Eretz Israel (in Hebrew). Vol. 4. p. 288
ALT3: ... that during the First Jewish–Roman War, thousands of Jewish slaves were sent to Italy, and several thousand reportedly to Greece to work on the Corinth Canal? Source: Rocca, Samuele (2022). In the Shadow of the Caesars: Jewish Life in Roman Italy. The Brill Reference Library of Judaism. Vol. 74. pp. 41–42; Rogers, Guy MacLean (2022). For the Freedom of Zion: The Great Revolt of Jews against Romans, 66–74 CE. Yale University Press. pp. 247–248
ALT4: ... that to celebrate their victory in the First Jewish–Roman War, the Flavians minted Judaea Capta coins depicting a mourning woman beneath a date palm—symbolizing Judaea and its defeated people? Source: Magness, Jodi (2012). The Archaeology of the Holy Land: From the Destruction of Solomon's Temple to the Muslim Conquest. Cambridge University Press. pp. 166–167
Comment: It is kind of hard to pick the best option, there's just so much that's interesting and could spark curiosity. Sharing a few options below, let me know which ones you think work best!
Improved to Good Article status by Mariamnei (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 10 past nominations.
QPQ: - One QPQ is needed Invalid status "One QPQ needed" - use one of "y", "?", "maybe", "no" or "again"
@Tintor2: This review was not properly formatted; there's enough sloppiness here that it borders on a lack of caring. I think you should be able to fix it on your own; I recommend you slow down and read how that template you used works and look at other reviews for inspiration. Not counting this as a QPQ until this is fixed. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 19:31, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for the delay. I was to into a GA review. The big problem this article has is its size. 177,768 bytes is too much. Is it possible to split some parts into subarticles that follow different periods? If they were already split, then I recommend cutting content and remove excessive free images that bother prose. At will make navigation easier while the main article will be easier to follow. The infobox is just meant to be an introduction that will be explore more deeply in the body so I recommend cutting parts. Another advise is tonning down the amount of notes used for references as it looks like a refbomb issue. A usage of 580 citations is another example of undue weight.Tintor2 (talk) 19:21, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
... that the artist Cady Noland was sued by two different collectors of her work after she "disavowed" artworks that she no longer considered genuine because they were damaged or altered?
Source: Julia Halperin (Oct 4, 2024), “Just How Much Control Can an Artist Have Over Their Work?”, T Mag (New York Times Style Magazine): “The Swiss art dealer Marc Jancou sued Noland and Sotheby’s after the artist disavowed a work that he wanted to sell at auction. […] Noland visited Sotheby’s to view it, along with two other works destined for the block that season, and found its corners so damaged that she considered the work totaled. Sotheby’s called off the sale. [...] But it was hardly the last time that Noland would defend her art’s honor. There was a series of lawsuits over ‘Log Cabin Facade’ (1990), a life-size wooden sculpture that the artist disavowed after its previous owner allowed it to be installed outdoors for over 10 years and then replaced the rotted wood with new logs. ‘This is not an artwork,’ she said in a handwritten fax addressed to its new owner, the Ohio-based collector Scott Mueller”
ALT 1 (added after discussion below): ... that the artist Cady Noland has "disavowed" several artworks that she no longer considered genuine because they were damaged or altered?
Reviewed:
Comment: First ever DYK nom, please advise if I mis-formatted anything. Thanks!
Improved to Good Article status by 19h00s (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.
@19h00s: Hello and welcome to DYK. I don't plan on reviewing this any time soon as I have a policy of reviewing oldest first, but I can tell you the hook won't fly as it is unduly negative. Also, and these are not DYK issues, the image fails WP:IMAGERELEVANCE as you can't see her properly and the sections badly want breaking up.--Launchballer20:22, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, makes sense on the negativity front. I'd disagree on the image front, as detailed in the article and discussions on the talk page (long story short: she doesn't allow images of herself to be created or circulate, this image where she hides her identity has been widely discussed and is discussed in the article). Don't necessarily disagree on the breaking up of the sections, but a biography article necessarily requires a more cogent narrative structure that is extremely difficult to achieve when you spread everything out into sections that break up the chronological flow. Happy to retract this nomination or you can just fail it. 19h00s (talk) 20:34, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A nomination doesn't fail just because one hook doesn't work. You could probably get away with ALT0a: ... that Cady Noland "disavowed" some of her artworks?, though I'll let a reviewer adjudicate on that.--Launchballer20:47, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Learn something new about Wiki processes every day lol, just assumed this was DOA if the hook was out of bounds as written. Just added an alt version. Thanks for the tips. 19h00s (talk) 22:23, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ALT1: ... that the brother and mother of Delaware state golf champion Chris Anderson also won state championships, while his father played Major League Baseball? Source: same as above plus this ("He joins his father, former Philadelphia Phillies baseball standout Harry Anderson (Class of 1992), in the DSMHOF.")
ALT2: ... that golfer Chris Anderson, the sixth amateur to win the Delaware Open, won the title seven times? Source: sixth + seven
Comment: Realized I'm a bit late (two days) with this, hoping for an extension per WP:DYKG: The seven-day limit can be extended for a day or two upon request. To do QPQs within a day or two.
Moved to mainspace by BeanieFan11 (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 2. DYK is currently in unreviewed backlog mode and nominator has 369 past nominations.
Moved to mainspace by TonyTheTiger (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 2. DYK is currently in unreviewed backlog mode and nominator has 375 past nominations.
Adequate sourcing: - Two paragraphs in the "Pagan era" section and a single-sentence paragraph about historical records in the "Konbaung era" section currently have no citations.
Overall: The article is new, long enough and neutrally worded. It appears to be plagiarism-free, judging from a couple machine-assisted spotchecks (Earwig can't tell because the sources are all in Burmese). The hook is interesting and the picture is freely licensed, used in the article and clear at a small size. The only issue is the citations, as there are a couple sections with uncited information. Once citations are provided for these paragraphs, I'll be happy to pass this review. Grnrchst (talk) 12:04, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Moved to mainspace by Premeditated Chaos (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 2. DYK is currently in unreviewed backlog mode and nominator has 63 past nominations.
Ref 7 changes The prisoners shared the same cell in an underground prison beneath the headquarters becoming "All 23 individuals shared the same cell in an underground prison beneath the headquarters.".
Ref 18b changes reshuffled by Yemeni authorities and the prison chief and his deputy were both dismissed to "the prison officials were reshuffled by Yemeni authorities and the prison chief and his deputy were both dismissed".
Ref 39 changes security forces have detained more than 80 people in connection with the breakout. They include the prison warders, relatives of the fugitives and members of Islamist groups to "More than 80 people were detained for the investigation, including prison officers, relatives of the fugitives and members of Islamist groups". This one is more borderline than the rest; I guess "more than 80" could become "over 80", but that is close to WP:LIMITED.
Ref 43 changes sentenced 12 intelligence officers to prison terms ranging from eight months to three years to "the court gave sentences to the 12 men ranging from 8 months to 3 years in prison"
Ref 44 changes were all dismissed from their jobs [...] retirement payment and remunerations to "were all dismissed from their positions, but kept their retirement payment and remuneration".
Hook eligibility:
Cited: - The source is hedging its bets: The plotters also had a soccer ball that they kicked around indoors, apparently to make enough noise to drown out the digging. We need either a source confirming the purpose of the football or similar language hedging our bets. (Note that Newsweek is generally reliable for articles, such as this one, published before 2013—therefore this is a reliable source.)
Interesting:
QPQ: None required.
Overall: @Hsnkn: There is some really extensive CLOP, to the point that every single ref I have spot-checked contains some. I am taking this to WP:CP and, depending on how that goes, GAR. I obviously hope GAR can be avoided, but there is some serious work that needs to be done on this article to fix close paraphrasing. I am not an expert, but I really hope this doesn't discourage you; close paraphrasing is one of the most tricky parts of writing. There is some advice for fixing close paraphrasing at Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing § How to write acceptable content. Best regards, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they)03:14, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Thehistorianisaac, welcome to DYK. I have formatted the original hook and removed the repeated hooks. Regarding your questions:
1. "border police officer" may be sufficient for the hook in line with the lead of the article.
2. No, you have multiple DYK nominations running in parallel.
3. Non-free images cannot be used in DYK.
Cited: - The reference is in Chinese. From Google translate, it seems that news agencies are saying as per the viral video, the dog is waiting for his master even after 10 years; rather than an independently verified fact that the dog is waiting. The article and the hook needs to be reworded. If my understanding is incorrect, please clarify.
Interesting:
QPQ: None required.
Overall: The article is currently at AfD. We will have to wait for the same to conclude, before approving the hook. Most of the references are Chinese news sites, private or state-owned (from Neutrality perspective). RedtigerxyzTalk12:22, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
... that actor Ralph Riggs(pictured) made his professional stage debut when he was a baby?
Source: Associated Press (September 17, 1951). "Ralph Riggs Dies; Dancer and Actor". Daily Press. p. 11. Born to the stage, he was less than a year old when he gave his first performance. His mother Rose Stillman was heading her own Uncle Tom's Cabin troupe when he was born at St. St. Paul, Minnesota. Six to eleven months later–he was uncertain as to the exact time–he made his debut in the play as Eliza's baby.
Article is long enough and was moved to mainspace six days before nomination. Hooks are cited - I like ALT0 but I don't find ALT1 particularly interesting (books set in the past are not unusual). ALT0 has some wording issues (first use of "showed" does not fit), and "children's" probably shouldn't be capitalized. QPQ is done, so just that to fix and we should be good to go. (Not required for DYK tick: "tuberculosis" doesn't need capitalization in the article.)PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 16:13, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Do not nominate articles in this section—nominate all articles in the nominations section above, under the date on which the article was created or moved to mainspace, or the expansion began; indicate in the nomination any request for a specially timed appearance on the main page.
Note: Articles intended to be held for special occasion dates should be nominated within seven days of creations from the start of expansion, or promotion to Good Article status. The nomination should be made at least one week prior to the occasion date, to allow time for reviews and promotions through the prep and queue sets, but not more than six weeks in advance. The proposed occasion must be deemed sufficiently special by reviewers. The timeline limitations, including the six week maximum, may be waived by consensus, if a request is made at WT:DYK, but requests are not always successful. Discussion clarifying the hold criteria can be found here: Hold criteria; discussion setting the six week limit can be found here: Six week limit.
@The Account 2, GreenC, and TheUzbek: I see phrases that are straight out of sources and these should have been spotted at GA, so pinging its reviewer as well. All three sources used for ALT2 are paywalled, so AGFing, although the hook wants trimming to ALT2a: ... that Wang Huning is considered to be the principal architect of three Chinese Communist Party ideologies?--Launchballer 17:18, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
The nominator hasn't edited since the 21st and did not respond to the above concerns. Unless someone could address the issues then this is now marked for closure per DYKTIMEOUT. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:28, 27 May 2025 (UTC)
@Chomik1129: As you have done less than 5 DYKs you do not need a QPQ and the page was created two days before its DYK nomination. A quick check of the sources shows that all of them are from reputable sources. The first hook isn't interesting, but ALT1 is and I would suggest that is the one that is used. Jon698 (talk) 23:57, 29 March 2025 (UTC)
Seems like this one isn't ready for promotion yet. @Chomik1129: would you be able to incorporate some of the newfound sourcing into the article? theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 14:21, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
Going back to the hook, another issue is that it is putting quite a lot of topics together: the reorganization, Kennedy's slogan, the new administration, and the firings. It would be better to refine to a couple of key points with clear links. CMD (talk) 09:40, 21 April 2025 (UTC)
I'm sorry, that's routine copyediting, not interpretation. We will need a new reviewer to settle this, as we apparently do not agree on what Wikipedia policy is, or even on the definitions of basic words. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 03:20, 3 May 2025 (UTC),_p89.jpg)
Interesting life and work, on fine sources, no copyvio obvious. I prefer the original, as closely connected to the image which is licensed and gives a good idea of what he did. I suggest to add a year, to place it in time. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:37, 7 April 2025 (UTC)
.jpg)
.
Reviewing... it's been two weeks without comment, so I will do the review myself. Flibirigit (talk) 22:42, 5 May 2025 (UTC)
- ?
The article was moved to the main space on April 2, and nominated within one day for DYK. Length is adequate. There is one citation needed tag in the "Origin" section for a direct quote. The prose in the "Career statistics" section has no citations. Also, please clarify the source(s) for the results in the "General classification" and "Major championships" sections. The article is neutral in tone, and I found no plagiarism concerns. ALT0 is an interesting hook. It is mentioned and cited in the article and verified by the source. ALT1 is a bit confusing, since it is not clear with is "the top level", and I cannot find where it is mentioned or cited in the article. All of the images used in the article are in the public domain on the Commons. QPQ is not required. Overall, this is a good attempt for the first DYK nomination. Some attention to sourcing is necessary. I look forward to seeing this on the main page. Flibirigit (talk) 23:04, 5 May 2025 (UTC)
_Foto_H.-P.Haack.JPG)
.jpg)
Comment: @TarheelBornBred:The hook is not supported in the article, in particular the phrase "Don't visit Myanmar" does not appear in the article. — ERcheck (talk) 15:11, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
- Not done
Article is new (GA) and long enough at the time of nomination. Earwig report looks good. ALT2 is interesting. The "see also" borders on the absurd, so I think there is a fundamental misunderstanding as to how we use this section. Most of these entries should be deleted. Lead section may be satisfactory for DYK, but as a recent GAN, it should be rewritten to summarize the main points of the article, which at the moment, it does not do. Use of excessively long captions also deviates from best practices. Formatting of book titles, such as Cave 1749, require italics. The date is also wrong. The book was first published a decade earlier; 1749 refers to the second edition. You don't have to type out the entire 18th century title; Geography Reformed (1739) will do as a shortened title. Remove the stray comma from "1749,". The SAGE Handbook of Historical Geography says it was anonymously authored but published by Cave. Presentation is slightly hampered by textual issues with sentences such as "These frameworks were mostly advanced mostly by human geographers..." Also, "While when the term technical geography first entered the English lexicon..." Use of quotations of common words and phrases in the "Early history and etymology" section should be replaced with paraphrasing. Book titles like Geographia and Kitab al-Buldan use italics. You write "Geography has a history spanning cultures and thousands of years and is described as a "mother science" from which more specialized disciplines emerge..." I would want to see a quote from the source on that, as it sounds incredibly unusual. Philosophy and physics are most often described as the "mother science", not geography. Perhaps something was lost in translation here as it doesn't make sense. Copyedits needed. The section on "Quantitative revolution" is an example of WP:CITEKILL. You don't need or require six citations for two sentences. You can bundle citations or use footnotes if needed. One citation per sentence is generally recommened, two if needed. Update: I went ahead and made a series of copyedits.[9] My main concern right now concerns 1) the lead section, which does not properly summarize the article or its main points, but I think DYK allows for that, so it is not an issue that has any bearing on the success of this nomination, but it does personally bother me, and I wanted to express my concerns because there will be readers who will come here to learn more and will be turned away by the lead; I know I was. Please rewrite the lead to summarize the entirety of the subject you've presented, highlighting the most significant points. 2) I like ALT2, but I'm having great difficulty verifying it based on your citations (and it doesn't appear in whole in the article, just in parts). @GeogSage: Why don't you make this as easy as possible and mine Geographia Technica[10] for a good hook and add it to this article? I see an interesting one about how technical geography was used during the COVID-19 pandemic to analyze NO2 concentrations, showing that pandemic restrictions led to emissions reductions.[11] Alternatively, I see another good hook that is already in the article, but needs some work. The information about the Michigan-Wisconsin boundary Supreme Court case would make a good hook, but you will need to return to the source to flesh it out as it isn't all that clear. I combined ALT0 and ALT1 together to get ALT3, and added the cartography bit from the "Fundamentals" section, where ALT3 appears, but shortened the entire thing. Viriditas (talk) 23:43, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
Looks good to go, ALT0 is interesting and a well-formatted hook. AGF on the paywalled source. SounderBruce 04:03, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
.jpg)
.jpg)
wikimedia.org) with ample warning. It's the right thing to do; they should not be blindsided by this. Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 05:06, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
.jpg)
Fail, per expansion within 7 days not 5x ( went from ~500 words to ~900 words). Still a nice article though. Dracophyllum 05:09, 3 May 2025 (UTC)
_(cropped).jpg)
.jpg)
Maybe
Not approved
. JacobTheRox(talk | contributions) 18:34, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
_near_Surb_Hovanes_Church_%5E_Surb_David_Chapel_-_panoramio_(1).jpg)
_Arch_of_Titus,_Looting_of_Jewish_Temple_in_Jerusalem,_70_AD_(48417093737).jpg)
@Hsnkn: There is some really extensive CLOP, to the point that every single ref I have spot-checked contains some. I am taking this to WP:CP and, depending on how that goes, GAR. I obviously hope GAR can be avoided, but there is some serious work that needs to be done on this article to fix close paraphrasing. I am not an expert, but I really hope this doesn't discourage you; close paraphrasing is one of the most tricky parts of writing. There is some advice for fixing close paraphrasing at Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing § How to write acceptable content. Best regards, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:14, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
