Template talk:Did you know

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Current (main page) (T:DYK)
Queue (T:DYK/Q)
Nominations (T:TDYK)
Discussion (WT:DYK)
Rules (WP:DYK)
Supplementary rules   (WP:DYKSG)
Reviewing guide (WP:DYKR)
Archive of DYKs (WP:DYKA)
Stats (WP:DYKSTATS)

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

Contents


Purge

Instructions for nominators

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

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

How to post a new nomination

For a simplified version of these instructions, see User:Rjanag/Quick DYK 2.
For a step-by-step guide to filling out the {{NewDYKnom}} template, see {{NewDYKnomination/guide}}.


Please read the following instructions completely before nominating an article. A nomination is not considered complete until all 3 steps of the instructions below are completed.

I.
Create the nomination subpage.

In the box below, enter the name of the article you are nominating (replacing YOUR ARTICLE TITLE) and click the button to create your nomination page. (For nominations of multiple articles together, you can write any or all of the article titles here.)
II.
Write the nomination.

On that nomination page, fill out the relevant parts of the pre-loaded {{NewDYKnomination}} template. See Template:NewDYKnomination for further information about filling out the template.

  • Please be aware that you do not need to fill out every line of the template; only fill out the lines that are relevant to your nomination. (For instance, if you are not nominating an image to go with your hook, there is no need to enter anything in the |image= line or related lines.)
  • Please watchlist your nomination page or check back for comments on your nomination. Responding to reasonable objections will help ensure that your article is listed.

After filling out the template, enter an edit summary such as "Nominated YOUR ARTICLE TITLE at DYK" and then save the page.
III.
Post at Template talk:Did you know.

After you have created the nomination page, list it at this page by finding the appropriate date and adding {{Did you know nominations/YOUR ARTICLE TITLE}} under that date at the top of the section (above all the other nominations, but below the section header and hidden comment).

  • The date to post your nomination under is the date when the article was created or the expansion of the article began, not necessarily today's date.
  • When saving your suggestion, please add the name of the suggested article to your edit summary, such as "Listed YOUR ARTICLE TITLE DYK nomination for discussion."
  • You may post (transclude) this same nomination to the article's talkpage, using {{Did you know nominations/YOUR ARTICLE TITLE}}, as well as to your own user talkpage to monitor the progress of the DYK nomination.

How to review a nomination

Main page: Wikipedia:Did you know/Reviewing guide

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

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

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

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

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

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

Frequently asked questions

Backlogged?

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

Where is my hook?

If you can't find the hook you submitted to this page, in most cases it means your article has been approved and is in the queue for display on the main page. You can check whether your hook has been moved to the queue by reviewing the queue listings.

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

Instructions for other editors

How to promote an accepted hook

  • In one window, open the DYK nomination subpage of the hook you would like to promote. In a separate window, open the prep area you intend to add the hook to.
  • Paste the accepted hook and the credit information (the {{DYKmake}} and {{DYKnom}} templates) into the prep area. Make sure to follow the guidelines at Wikipedia:Did you know/Preparation areas.
  • In the window where the DYK nomination subpage is open, replace the line {{DYKsubpage with {{subst:DYKsubpage, replace |passed= with |passed=yes, and for the |monthyear= fill in the month and year under which the nomination was posted (not the current date)—the format for the month and year should be, e.g., May 2013. Then save the page. This has the effect of wrapping up the discussion on the DYK nomination subpage in a green archive box and stating that the nomination was successful, as well as adding the nomination to a category for archival purposes.
  • In your edit summary, please indicate which prep area you are moving the hook to.

How to remove a rejected hook

  • Open the DYK nomination subpage of the hook you would like to remove. (It's best to wait several days after a reviewer has rejected the hook, just in case someone contests or the article undergoes a large change.)
  • In the window where the DYK nomination subpage is open, replace the line {{DYKsubpage with {{subst:DYKsubpage, replace |passed= with |passed=no, and for the |monthyear= fill in the month and year under which the nomination was posted (not the current date)—the format for the month and year should be, e.g., May 2013. Then save the page. This has the effect of wrapping up the discussion on the DYK nomination subpage in a blue archive box and stating that the nomination was unsuccessful, as well as adding the nomination to a category for archival purposes.

How to remove a hook from the prep areas or queue

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

How to move a nomination subpage to a new name

  • 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.

Nominations

Older nominations

Articles created/expanded on April 21

Geology of North America

The North American (Canadian) shield is shown in red colors.

  • Comment: Hook not directly sourced, but in context of all the sources used. It is a broad overview article which deserves a broad hook. But I'm open for suggestions :)

Created by Al Climbs (talk). Nominated by Tobias1984 (talk) at 06:58, 21 April 2013 (UTC).

  • The hook is not only "not directly sourced," it's not included in the article. It is contradicted by a caption, also. "The Canadian Shield can be seen on a map showing only metamorphic rocks. The shield is the large brown area in the northeast of the continent. A similar structure can also be seen with different rock types." A structure similar to a shield, or a similar structure, meaning another shield? This article has many other problems. However, if the hook is not only "not directly sourced," but does not appear anywhere in the article, that is a big front-page no no. The paragraph about the Canadian shield is also difficult to follow, and the title headings are confusing in this area. -68.107.137.178 (talk) 10:42, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Thank you for taking the time to review the article. The caption didn't contradict the hook, but was was a little too much jargon on my behalf. I reworded it. How does the hook "DYK that the Canadian Shield is the largest outcrop of metamorphic rocks on the North American continent" sound? I'm still going to look through the headlines and see if they are coherent. --Tobias1984 (talk) 11:23, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
  • I can't find that in the article, can you link to the appropriate section? -68.107.137.178 (talk) 23:16, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

There is some strange original research in this article; it does not belong on the main page. -68.107.137.178 (talk) 04:08, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

If you can't point out the sentences, then it is probably not a valid criticism of this article. --Tobias1984 (talk) 21:11, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
I have pointed out specifics, you just say I didn't instead of addressing them. Another editor just reverts. Article improvement sure isn't wanted, just a score! And I though it was an encyclopedia, not a playground. -198.228.216.153 (talk) 07:04, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
I am sorry, but I don't know where you pointed out a specific list of sentences that you think are OR. Can you post them here? --Tobias1984 (talk) 07:21, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
I am sorry, but I don't know where I said I pointed out a specific list of sentences that I think are OR. Can you post my comment here? This article is badly written, disorganized, confusing, contradictory, and it's owned by editors who are currently running random googlesearches to try to figure out an outline as they use a book they don't have and an obscure and unavailable book in German as the recommended reading for the article. It should not go on the main page. Wikipedia discredits itself too easily with bad articles on the main page, I template them, then someone gets irritated that an article with a template is on the main page, so I get told to work on them before they go on the main page, but DYK editors only welcome rubber stamps. I am far more irritated when bad science is paraded on the main page than anyone should be irritated that the bad science is pointed out to the world--it's better to spread it? So, Tobias, continue shooting the messengers. Not much I can do to stop that, when people with knowledge in specific areas are held in such deep disdain by people who are capable of doing multiple google searches and distilling that information into articles. Google away -68.107.137.178 (talk) 08:34, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
Are you actually reading the things you are writing here? You are criticizing everything about the article, but you can't point out a single section that needs improvement? The article has 42 sources and your accusing the author of "running random google searches"? Your calling a book "obscure" just because it is written in a language that you can't read? I nominated this lemma, because the author put a lot of work into it. It is simply unjust of you to write such accusations out of the safety of anonymity. And it seems you are doing everything out of spite: Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_100#Participating_in_DYK. --Tobias1984 (talk) 16:20, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

I point out plenty, but you cannot respond so you simply accuse. Who says I can't read German? What does my reading German or not have to do with anything? Oh, personal issue, removes topic from conversation, namely the bad article with Hawaii on North American Plate, craton section that does not say what craton is, etc., and changes topic to me. Who says it is obscure because it is in German? What is it about, anyway, why is its availability so limited, yet with hundreds of texts in English you pick low availability, obscure, German language text? Oh, wait, find something else about me instead of answering, because you have no answers to why this and the Geology of the United States place Hawaii on the North American Plate, describe geological history of the continent from a Cordillera without trend to the Canadian Shield, and then on to other places. So, let's discuss what other languages do I not speak? The article is bad and should be removed from article space since you are more interested in what languages I read than in putting Hawaii on the correct plate. It should certainly not be on the main page, the damage by spreading this all over the web via Wikipedia mirrors is bad enough already. -198.228.216.151 (talk) 00:02, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Your not actually pointing out anything. You are just calling the text bad and the sources bad. I am really not out to insult you, but I really need you to be specific. What is wrong with the Canadian Shield section? --Tobias1984 (talk) 07:38, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
As long as you keep insisting that Hawaii on North American Plate isn't anything there is no way that I can point out anything geological to you. You are unwilling to consider real geology, so there is no reason to read or respond to you. -198.228.216.175 (talk) 13:57, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
The word "hawaii" isn't even mentioned in the article. What lemma are you looking at? This is the DYK for Geology of North America. Why are you even reviewing lemmas without reading them? --Tobias1984 (talk) 14:01, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

With the rampant Randy in Boise time waste it does not seem likely this article will have sufficient quality edits to improve it for the main page. -198.228.216.175 (talk) 14:47, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Please point out a section that needs improvement. I will gladly review the sources and try to clarify it. I'm just glad we solved that "hawaii-mystery". --Tobias1984 (talk) 14:53, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, Randy, burn out from the game playing, you know. -198.228.216.175 (talk) 15:06, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
Well either you review the article or you don't, but I will defend the hard work User:Al_Climbs hat put into this article from unjust accusations and untruths. --Tobias1984 (talk) 15:11, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg While this looks to be a generally well-written and well referenced article, I have a few concerns. As the original review, way up there, comments, the hook is not appropriately referenced inline in the article, and in fact, I can't even find a direct mention of it. The hook doesn't make any grammatical sense to me, but that might just be a lack of understanding of geology holding me back, I'm unsure. The first paragraph of the "American Cordillera" section in unreferenced, contrary to DYK guidelines. The date of creation (move from userspace) and length both check out fine. At this time, no checks for copyvio or close para-phrasing have been carried out. Harrias talk 15:22, 22 May 2013 (UTC)


Articles created/expanded on April 23

Moon-eyed people

  • ... that the moon-eyed people could only came out at night as sunlight blinded them?

Created by Doug Coldwell (talk). Self nominated at 12:46, 23 April 2013 (UTC).

  • Reviewed Template:Did you know nominations/Maria de Wilde--Doug Coldwell (talk) 13:29, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Being a legend, you can't report its contents as if they were facts. If the "moon-eyed people" really existed, they were human beings like anyone else, and sunlight can not blind them. They may have preferred to be nocturnal for some reason, and the folklore added this fantastic feature, but it's just that, folklore fantasy. Cambalachero (talk) 13:11, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Sorry for the misunderstanding, I was talking about the hook, the question that will appear at the main page. It has no such clarifications, it plainly says as a fact that these people could get blinded by mere sunlight. Cambalachero (talk) 13:52, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
  • ALT1 "... that according to Cherokee folklore, moon-eyed people could only come out at night as sunlight blinded them?"♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 14:02, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
What Cherokee folklore? We can't claim this is Cherokee folklore without reliable sources and there aren't any. Note that this article is really a fork from Madoc and most of its content is not about these Mooneye people. Dougweller (talk) 14:23, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
I've fixed a lot of that, removing non-RS sources & adding one academic source. Actually, these seem to be another name for the Adena culture [1] so this might end up as a redirect (the culture the Cherokee met when they came to Ohio). They are referred to in Cherokee folklore but the sources were poor. I'll try to work on it more tomorrow. Dougweller (talk) 15:03, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
Some more research turns up what must be the original source of this story, a conversation in 1797 between one Colonel Leonard Marbury and Benjamin Smith Barton. "The Cheerake tell us, that when they first arrived in the country which they inhabit, they found it possessed by certain 'moon-eyed people,' who could not see in the day-time. These wretches they expelled." Barton considered them to be albinos. Since there is nothing in the report about skin color (although I can find 'fabricated' forms of this quote that mention skin color) he may have thought this because albinos are often sensitive to bright light. From there it seems to have grown wings. Can we call this Cherokee folklore on the basis of this statement by Barton? I don't think we can call this either folklore or tradition. Dougweller (talk) 11:07, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on April 24

Zeitgeber

  • ... that the disruption of a social zeitgeber such as a meal schedule or interaction with others has been linked to episodes of both depression and mania?
  • Comment: article expanded at least fivefold

5x expanded by Bpfeife1 (talk). Self nominated at 21:42, 24 April 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg An interesting article, well-written and with high-quality sources. Date of creation and length are fine. However, citations are unfortunately lacking in a number of places in the article; this needs to be fixed before it can be accepted. Specifically, there are no citations in the "Common examples of zeitgebers" section, and the final sentence of almost every paragraph in the following sections are uncited. Prioryman (talk) 18:07, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Paraphrenia

5x expanded by Epeter11 (talk). Self nominated at 19:57, 24 April 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Date of creation and length of article are fine; content is well written and drawn from very high-quality sources. I'd like to see one thing resolved before accepting this - the list of criteria under Diagnosis doesn't seem to have a citation, so could you please add one? Prioryman (talk) 18:12, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Mnemic neglect

  • ... that feedback from others is less easily recalled when it is negative in nature than when it is positive?

5x expanded by Tkcrown (talk). Self nominated at 19:48, 24 April 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Interesting article, well-written and with a lot of high-quality sources. Date and length are fine. However, the intro needs to be a bit longer (see WP:LEDE) and there are major gaps in the citations; in particular, citations are almost entirely missing in the sections titled "Limits of the mnemic neglect model: selective nature of self-protection", "Mnemic neglect and dysphoria" and "Mnemic neglect and anxiety". Please make sure that you add citations to these sections so that this article can be accepted. Prioryman (talk) 18:27, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on April 25

Chinaman (porcelain)

The result was: promoted by Allecher (talk) 3:04 pm, Yesterday (UTC−7)
...And umpromoted by Fram (talk) 2:11 am, Today (UTC−7)

The business card of chinaman William Hussey.

  • ... that an apprentice chinaman (business card pictured) only earned about £25 a year in the 18th century?
  • ...ALT1 that due to the collusion of chinamen (business card pictured) the bulk import of Chinese porcelain to England ceased in 1798?

5x expanded by Colonel Warden (talk). Self nominated at 12:39, 29 April 2013 (UTC).

  • Good references; no sign of bias. Prose and length is good also. Article was nominated 7 days after expansion of prose began. One suggestion: I think the hook should mention the time period that that wage was common. Otherwise I'd be happy for this to pass immediately. Freikorp (talk) 00:13, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the review. I have expanded the first hook and provided ALT1 as another option. Warden (talk) 19:51, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Symbol delete vote.svgI have undone the promotion of this article, and removed it from the queue. The hook is not supported by the article; the hook discusses the wages of an apprentice, the article the wages of a journeyman (which is the stage you reach after you have been an apprentice). (The article should also be edited to make clear which of the Young 1999 sources is meant, as there are two different ones from the same author in that year, but that is a more minor point). Fram (talk) 09:11, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

  • I have struck the first hook which I didn't much like, myself. ALT1 can now be considered instead. Warden (talk) 09:30, 24 May 2013 (UTC)


Lucky Guy (play)

Tom Hanks

Created by TonyTheTiger (talk). Self nominated at 06:50, 29 April 2013 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on April 26

Gerald V. (Vic) Hurley

  • ... that Vic Hurley's track record at UW was not beaten for forty-two years?

Created by Crazynas (talk), Charles Marlow (talk). Nominated by Crazynas (talk) at 17:28, 27 April 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg DYKSG:C2 asks for a level of explanation to be provided in the hook: reading this, I don't know what Hurley's track record is in, nor what UW is (though I appreciate that a link is provided). The hook itself is not referenced in the article, and I'm concerned about how vague the article is about what the record is in too. The article is generally poorly referenced, with many paragraphs lacking references, and one citation needed tag being in place. Much more work needed at the moment. Harrias talk 11:36, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on April 28

Klonoa

Created/expanded by NewFranco (talk), NewFranco (talk). Nominated by NewFranco (talk) at 02:52, 21 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol delete vote.svg NewFranco, DYK nominations have to be no older than 5 days for new articles, or expanded 5 times within the last 5 days for older articles. You left a message on my talk page that you didn't know what to do once you created this template, so I posted the template here. However, both articles referenced in this template are pretty old, and there is no clear date of expansion. And while you have listed yourself as the creator and nominator, I don't really see you listed in either article's history. I'm glad you want to participate in DYK. However, before you create another template, please study Wikipedia:Did you know for how to do that. You may post all the questions you want at Wikipedia talk:Did you know. Thank you for the interest in participating, and good luck with future nominations. — Maile (talk) 11:24, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol delete vote.svg Correcting how I phrased this. The 5-day rule means that the nomination needs to be created within 5 days of the article's creation, or expansion. Klonoa was created in 2004. There has been no significant expansion at all for years. Also, you seem to be confused by how you filled out this form. "Created by", means the person who actually did the work on the article, not the person who created the nomination, which is what "Nominated by" is for. Nothing in the article's history indicates you contributed anything to the article, so you cannot be the creator. The article itself is 9 years old and has not been expanded. If you have anything else to add, please post on this template, not my talk page. Thank you. — Maile (talk) 19:18, 21 May 2013 (UTC)}

Dejanović noble family

5x expanded by Zoupan (talk). Self nominated at 15:28, 2 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg This is an incredible piece of work, well done! A few issues with the DYK nomination however: the suggested hook is not appropriately referenced inline in the article, and there are a number of "citation needed" and "when?" tags that need to be resolved before this can be approved. Harrias talk 12:37, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Thank you! The issues have been taken care of.--Zoupan 04:16, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

The Negro Star

  • ALT2:... that despite running from 1908 to 1953, The Negro Star only had a sports editor from August 1934 to January 1935?
  • Reviewed: This is my first DYK nom, but I'll see if I can review someone else's soon.
  • Comment: Article created on April 28; I've been working on it ever since.

Created/expanded by Acdarden (talk), Ignatzmice (talk). Nominated by Ignatzmice (talk) at 04:14, 2 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg QPQ not needed; Length good (4000+ chars.); New enough (Created April 29). Written in a neutral point of view. No copyvio found. Issues: Can you at least provide one reliable source for the "Coverage section"? And something must be done about that annoying little orange tag. Best, ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 11:18, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
If the problems are fixed, I will give the tick to ALT1, which I find best. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 11:19, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
  • I added a source for the coverage, and removed the unsourced and crazy-high subscription prices. (Maybe they're sourced in one of the last two references? I can't access either....) I'm trying to find articles I can link from, but it's rather difficult, which isn't a good sign. I'm considering Wichita, Kansas#Media, but I feel even the briefest of mentions there would be WP:UNDUE. Ignatzmice•talk 12:56, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
Oh right, I was also going to say: I thought ALT1 was the weakest of the three! But you're the expert. Ignatzmice•talk 12:58, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on April 30

Roholte Church

Roholte Church

  • ... that a now nonexistent inscription of Jesus Christ in the Roholte Church (pictured), dating to the fifteenth century, is considered to be one of the oldest of such?

Created/expanded by Rosiestep (talk), Ipigott (talk), Bonkers The Clown (talk), and Nvvchar (talk). Nominated by Rosiestep (talk) at 21:05, 4 May 2013 (UTC).

  • To coincide with the revised version of the article, I suggest the following hook:
ALT1 ... that a now nonexistent sixteenth-century crucifix inscription in Roholte Church (pictured) is considered to have been one of the oldest of its kind? --Ipigott (talk) 13:18, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg I suspect there are some Danish-English translation problems here. I can work out most of the strange language, but I am clueless on the following: You write (in the lead) that the church "belonged to the Gavnø", but Gavnø is a piece of land and can't be its owner. The body isn't much help. What is intended to be said here? --ThaddeusB (talk) 03:52, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
When we say "belongs to country x", (I believe) it is not meant as in a nonliving territory owns this thing, rather that it means it is the property of any body representing country x, e.g. The Government. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 08:13, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
But Gavno is just an island, not a sovereign body as near as I can tell... What I am trying to figure out is how the ownership of the Gavno land became associated with the ownership of the church. The Danish in the online ref reads "Deres Datter Birgitte Charlotte Kruse blev ved Bryllup paa Lindersvold 3/10 1732 gift med Otto Thott, Ejeren af Strandegaard. Saaledes blev Strandegaard og Lindersvold forenede. Otto Thott købte 18/10 1737 Gaunø af sine Medarvinger, og saaledes har Roholte Kirke tilhørt Gaunø's Ejere siden 1737." A rough machine translation suggests Charlotte's family owned Lindersvold and Otto owned Strandgaard. They married in October 1732, tying the two land together. He then "bought Gavno of his heirs" (apparent translation error) later that month which apparently tied the church's ownership to the ownership of Gavno ("and thus has Roholte Church belonged Gaunø's owners since 1737".) If you could clear up what those two sentence mean in Dutch, I think the mystery may be solved. --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:54, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
Yes, it roughly means that, according to a family friend with some knowledge of the language. Sorry for the late response. So yes, I'd suppose purchasing the island would mean purchasing whatever's left on it... Just like if you find gold bars in a house you purchased entirely, then the gold bars are yours (I guess). Changes made. Please look at it again. Cheers, ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 13:47, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg on ALT1. I have copyedited the article, so we are now good to go. Fact is interesting and verified by provided citation. Length, newness, and general compliance with policy have been verified. I tweaked the wording of ALT1 to put the verbs in the proper tense and make it read a bit better, as per standard English usage. Also, 1555 is the 16th century, not the 15th. --ThaddeusB (talk) 21:40, 24 May 2013 (UTC)


Gisselfeld

Gisselfeld

Created by Rosiestep (talk), Ipigott (talk), Nvvchar (talk). Nominated by Rosiestep (talk) at 20:53, 4 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Pictogram voting keep.svg This article is new enough and long enough. The image is in the public domain and the hook fact is cited and accepted in good faith. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 15:27, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg I think the hook fact needs a little more than a brief mention in the lead paragraph. What is a "frog fountain"? --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 19:19, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
  • I've clarified the fountain feature in the article. Here's ALT1: ... that Gisselfeld (pictured), moated on all sides, features a frog-embellished fountain? --Rosiestep (talk) 23:31, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
    • Symbol possible vote.svg Not according to your source: Gisselfeld var på de tre sider omgivet af grave, pånordsiden af den såkaldte gårdsø. On three sides, not four. The hook (and the lead) are wrong. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:27, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
  • My collaborators and I are using at least 2 sources which mention a moat. I've done some c/e regarding the moat and I've added a quote from the English-language ref. I'm hopeful the moat issue has been clarified. I'm suggesting ALT2: ... that Gisselfeld (pictured) features a moat and a frog-embellished fountain? --Rosiestep (talk) 03:22, 24 May 2013 (UTC)


Spectroscopic line shape

  • Reviewed: Ossicle

Created by Petergans (talk). Self nominated at 08:03, 2 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg I couldn't confirm the hook. Online, the 3rd edition of Hollas only had a snippet view; the 4th has a preview, but a search on "Voigt" turned up nothing. Also "ideal function" is vague. RockMagnetist (talk) 15:56, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Overall, the article is well written and well sourced, and is potentially interesting, but many readers will probably be put off by the organization. Arguably the heart of the article is the set of three ideal line shapes, but these are presented as unmotivated definitions. If you hunt through the article, you can start to get a sense of why spectroscopists are using them. For the Lorentzian, "This follows because the Fourier transform of the exponential function that is measured in the time domain is a Lorentzian where the spectrum is observed, in the frequency domain." (So halfway through the article we finally find out that spectra are in the frequency domain.) The Gaussian function, apparently, has something to do with the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution; and the Voigt profile is the result of convolution when two broadening effects are combined.
The article badly needs a proper introduction that describes what a spectrum is how it is measured (here is where concepts like FWHM should be introduced); and then says a little about the general type of process that gives rise to each ideal line shape. RockMagnetist (talk) 16:32, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
  • In one of the notes, "It is unfortunate that use of the term deconvolution has become acceptable where the term that should be used is decomposition, resolution or fitting" violates WP:NPOV. Perhaps you can find a source for this judgement (see WP:SUBSTANTIATE). RockMagnetist (talk) 16:41, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
OK, I found it difficult to sequence the material. It's a chicken and egg situation as both "Definitions" and "Instances" depend on each other. I'll have a think about it.
Either way, a general introduction describing spectra shouldn't be a problem. RockMagnetist (talk) 17:20, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
Regarding the POV, there is no denying the fact that deconvolution is widely used for curve fitting and that deconvolution is a different mathematical process from curve fitting. The only POV is the word unfortunate, but I don't want to state that the term deconvolution is used without noting that this usage of the term is mathematically incorrect. That's not my opinion. It's a fact. Petergans (talk) 17:06, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
Ideally, you'll need some reference stating the relationship between the two uses of the term. Otherwise, it may be better to make a more neutral statement that avoids words like "incorrect" and states that in mathematics, deconvolution means something different. You'll still need a citation, though. RockMagnetist (talk) 17:20, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
All revised. I'd like to keep "ideal" as it contasts with "Actual" in the following sentence. Petergans (talk) 18:05, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Authoring Instructional Materials

Seal of the United States Navy

Created by OhioTechie (talk). Self nominated at 05:24, 30 April 2013 (UTC).

Symbol confirmed.svg This article appears to meet all of the DYK? criteria. Thus, I'd say that it is good to go right now. Futurist110 (talk) 01:58, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Symbol possible vote.svg Returned from Prep 2. I think this hook needs to be worked on for clarity before using. Is this 300,000 hours of material existing within the AIM system or is it 300,000 hours of output from users of the AIM system? Or possibly there is not a difference, but the clunky contrived wording seems to imply there is. SpinningSpark 11:15, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

You're right that the wording needs improvement. How about "... that over 300,000 hours of training materials are developed and maintained using the United States Navy's Authoring Instructional Materials management system"?--OhioTechie (talk) 01:43, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
"are maintained" works but "are developed"? So you mean "have been developed"? SpinningSpark 10:03, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
"... that over 300,000 hours of training materials have been developed and are maintained using the United States Navy's Authoring Instructional Materials management system"? Would that work?--OhioTechie (talk) 01:15, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg for that last hook. SpinningSpark 07:21, 25 May 2013 (UTC)


Wibault 9

  • ... that the Wib 9 was flown for the first time no earlier than in the mid-1926?

Created by TSRL (talk). Nominated by Josve05a (talk) at 23:26, 1 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg two minor issues - the hook doesn't scan well, why not something like the one I write below - also the wingspan is slightly different in the online source. Looks good otherwise Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:37, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
ALT1 ... that only one Wib 9 was built?

Articles created/expanded on May 1

The Assembled Parties, Vanya and Sonia and Masha and Spike, Lucky Guy (play), The Testament of Mary (play)

Tom Hanks

Created by TonyTheTiger (talk), Flami72 (talk). Nominated by TonyTheTiger (talk) at 16:23, 6 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Reviewed: 3rd of 9 QPQs against Template:Did you know nominations/Ashtabharya et. al..--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 07:59, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
    • It has come to my attention that since the four nominees got nearly 25k hits last year without any of them being featured in hooks at DYK to my knowledge and that since main hooks get about 3 or 4 times as many view as other hooks, that if we can get the foursome as a main hook, we might have the first 100k hook. This might be a bit of a shoehorn, but feel free to make a suggestion.
(ALT1)... that Lucky Guy, which is recently-deceased Nora Ephron's last play and Tom Hanks' (pictured) Broadway theatre debut, is along with The Assembled Parties, The Testament of Mary and Vanya and Sonia and Masha and Spike, a nominee for Best Play at the 67th Tony Awards?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:23, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
(ALT2)... that Lucky Guy, which is recently-deceased Nora Ephron's last play and Tom Hanks' (pictured) Broadway theatre debut, along with The Assembled Parties, The Testament of Mary and Vanya and Sonia and Masha and Spike, are the four nominees for Best Play at the 67th Tony Awards?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:23, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
(ALT3)... that recently-deceased Nora Ephron's last play and Tom Hanks' (pictured) Broadway theatre debut, Lucky Guy, is, along with The Assembled Parties, The Testament of Mary and Vanya and Sonia and Masha and Spike, a 67th Tony Awards Best Play nominee?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:23, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
(ALT4)... that the four Best Play nominees at the 67th Tony Awards are The Assembled Parties, The Testament of Mary, Vanya and Sonia and Masha and Spike and Lucky Guy, which is recently-deceased Nora Ephron's last play and Tom Hanks' (pictured) Broadway theatre debut?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 11:15, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
If worse comes to worse, we could just show off that we have new articles for all four nominees:
(ALT5)... that the four Best Play nominees at the 67th Tony Awards are The Assembled Parties, The Testament of Mary, Vanya and Sonia and Masha and Spike and Lucky Guy?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 11:40, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Business tourism

Created by Piotrus (talk). Self nominated at 07:14, 1 May 2013 (UTC).

  • As I suggested on talk, virtually everything at business travel is unreferenced and unless any refs are found, at this point a merge, per WP:V, would only redirect one to another. In other words, business travel is in such a sad state that I decided that most of the content there is worthless, and I wrote business tourism from scratch. Only one sentence was copied. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:05, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
I can not decide on the "new"ness and the community should take a decision IMO. So posted Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know#Template:Did_you_know_nominations.2FBusiness_tourism. Redtigerxyz Talk 18:45, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
Symbol delete vote.svg This should be rejected, merged with business travel, and if the newly merged article meets the criteria, it can be resubmitted to DYK. That is the only and only right order to do things. We cannot allow two articles on the same topic; that would not make sense in any encyclopedia. So it wouldn't make sense here either.—♦♦ AMBER(ЯʘCK) 06:32, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Since nobody is opposing the merge, I merged referenced content (what little there was) and removed the rest (per WP:V). Now as the merge has been completed, please review this nom again. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:07, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Still no, as per essence of AMBER's comment, which I agree with. The new article should be 2.7x5 KB to be eligible. Redtigerxyz Talk 15:30, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Uh, what? This is a new article. The content of the old one is irrelevant, it was not merged, it was deleted (per WP:V). This is a new start article. The fact that there was some unreferenced garbage at another entry is irrelevant. Or are you saying I should've AfD the old entry first, so that you'd have nothing to compare? PS. I am fully supportive of expansion rules, but expansion should be from good content; I don't think it's fair to blame editors for garbage content in an article that is irrelevant/impossible to ref/gibberish/copyvio/etc. Such content is removed, and if the article is expanded, it should not be counted. And in any case, I wrote this article before finding out there's a similar, crappy fork. So it was intended as new, and to repeat this the n-th time, almost nothign was worth of merger from the old one; so this article is new, barring one sentence, which I am pretty sure has been 5x-ed. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 15:41, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Symbol redirect vote 4.svg An independent opinion from an experienced DYK reviewer would be appreciated, in order to clarify how Wikipedia policy does and/or should treat these matters.—♦♦ AMBER(ЯʘCK) 13:40, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

  • There is nothing in the DYK guidelines or supplementary guidelines as currently written which would result in this being shot down. DYKSG A5 states: "If some of the text was copied from another Wikipedia article, then it must be expanded fivefold as if the copied text had been a separate article." (emphasis mine), which implies that verbatim copying is not counted. However, having similar content in other articles is not an issue. Before I expanded 1740 Batavia massacre there was related content in the Adrian Visscher article (which was unreferenced and which I did not consult). This should be worth a review.. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:18, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
    • I don't agree. It is a new article name, not a new article. With the performed merger, and looking at the way the article is worded, the two concepts Business travel and Business tourism are about exactly the same topic. That means there already was an article, and that means the tourism article needs to expand the travel article fivefold before coming to DYK. --Pgallert (talk) 08:31, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
      • But it does. Only one or two sentences were worth rescuing from the mess that was old article, and they were expanded more than 5-fold. Everything else was removed per WP:V and does not count. If an article is full with unreferenced gibberish, that gibberish should be removed and should not be counted towards anything. If a previous article was AfD, would you demand a word count on the AfD content? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:29, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
        • It is not me demanding that but DYKSG A4. The only exception mentioned there are copyvios. AfD is a hypothetical scenario but I doubt that Business travel would have been deleted. Someone would have added one more ref, and notability is obvious. But while we are at hypothetical scenarios, had you seen that a similar article exists you could have moved the article to its new position and then expand it. This would have produced the current result, even with a more consistent page history, and the case would have been clear that you would have needed to expand the existing text, no matter whether you kept any of it (quote A4). That your rewrite is of much higher quality than what was there before, is of course uncontested. --Pgallert (talk) 06:48, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
          • Hypothetical or not, I believe that expanded content should only be concerned with content that is encyclopedic. Per WP:V, unreferenced content can be deleted. I didn't see the other article before I mostly finished mine, but had I see it, I still would have deleted 90% of it and expanded what remained. DYKs should not be held hostage to the crap that exists in the article before the expansion, if it is going to be removed (and not missed) during the expansion. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:37, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
            • I agree with your suggestion, but that is not what DYKSG A4 currently says. I'll support a rule change but for this we are at the wrong venue. Any objections to copying over this discussion to WT:DYK to reach a wider audience? --Pgallert (talk) 12:45, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
              • Please do and ping me so I can chip in. A rule change seems like a good idea. Short version: an editor who is expanding an article and removes some content should not be held accountable for expanding the removed content, only for expanding the kept content. (Yeah, it can be gamed, but let's AGF this). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 14:17, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Symbol delete vote.svg I tend to agree with User:Piotrus about the calculation of expansion but there's a much bigger problem. The idea that business tourism = business travel seems quite incorrect and it is certainly not the common name for the latter. The OED defines tourism as "travelling for pleasure" and business tourism as "the practice of engaging in recreational tourist activities while on a business trip". I am going revert the merger which has been done, if I can, and will probably knock both articles down to stubs. When we have agreement at the stub level about the basic definitions of these topics then expansion can start again. Warden (talk) 08:12, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 2

LIM-49 Nike Zeus

Nike Zeus A being launched at White Sands Missile Range

  • ... that the US Army's Nike Zeus (pictured) was cancelled when serious questions arose over its ability to shoot down the enemy ICBM warheads it was designed to attack?

Created by Maury Markowitz (talk). Self nominated at 11:51, 3 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Article new enough, long enough. Not fully referenced. Has insufficient citations tag. No QPQ done. Beautiful image that I'd like to use on the front page. On commons, so okay. Hook sourced to a broken link. Face-sad.svg So I've supplied a new link for it. You need to fix the other referencing problems. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:38, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
The cite-need tag is actually transcluded from another article. Simply remove tag? Out of curiosity, which is the broken link? I gather all the cites in the last couple of days, they should all be live. And yeah, cool pic eh? Got lucky with that one! Maury Markowitz (talk) 20:55, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
Ideally, a reference to the source of the date in the table. It's okay to just put a note down the bottom like:
Source:Markowitz (2013), p. 137
The broken ref is 23, "From Project Thumper to SDI"], Airpower Journal. You can view all your links here. Again, the article should really be fully referenced. Do you want me to put "citation required" tags on all the spots that need references? Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:28, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Okay, I have fixed up the references. A new reviewer is required. Hawkeye7 (talk) 23:59, 17 May 2013 (UTC)


Articles created/expanded on May 3

Siri Engberg

Walker Art Center in Minneapolis

Created/expanded by SusanLesch (talk). Self nominated at 00:54, 5 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svgArticle is new and big enough, contains references. However I am concerned at the excessive quote starting at "Trompe l’oeil". I did not see other plagiarism issues apart from this. This should not be copied like this from another publication. The hook is referenced and confirmed, and looks to be brief enough. QPQ fine. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:42, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
Graeme Bartlett, thank you very much for your review. The quote has been shortened to under half its previous length. I trust it is acceptable now? I've re-read WP:QUOTEFARM and agree that less works out just fine. -SusanLesch (talk) 01:50, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg picture is also free, But a picture of the curator would be better! I am happy with the quote shortening, as I don't think that we should use quotes to tell the facts. Good to go. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:24, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Graeme, thank you. Best I can do is "reqphoto" on the talk page. Flickr had nothing. -SusanLesch (talk) 15:13, 25 May 2013 (UTC)


Chris Perez and Shelly Lares

  • Comment:

Created by AJona1992 (talk). Self nominated at 10:03, 3 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Perez article was fivefold expanded, while the article about Laras is new. They are both long enough, but you to review another nomination as this is a two-article hook. I'll read through Perez' article later, but in Laras' article I find the lead too long, as most of the information in the second paragraph of the lead is just repetition of the prose and too specific to be in the lead. Could you try to move that paragraph to the body of the article? Mentoz86 (talk) 05:14, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
  • I think Perez' article needs a complete copy-edit, also try to wikilink everything once in the lead and the first time after the lead. As in the other article the lead is too detailed and should be trimmed, there is even some info in the lead that isn't in the body of the article. Mentoz86 (talk) 05:52, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
I have edited the lead and reviewed a second DYK. Best, jonatalk to me 00:36, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Preston Claiborne

  • Comment: Will try to rewrite that lead when I have more time and braincells available.
    • I had meant hook, not lead. Shows I was tired when I nom'd this. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:40, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Symbol question.svg Nom made May 3. Checking for verification. Editor DYK QPQ still pending. — btphelps (talk) (contribs) 00:56, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

  • Symbol question.svg Article's references check out, no copyvio, length is good, image is acceptable, hook is 161 characters. The only negative is that the hook is pretty luke-warm. Is there nothing more notable about this player? How about adding the fact that he's just joined the majors after 3 years in the minors? — btphelps (talk) (contribs) 01:11, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Imoro Yakubu Kakpagu

Created by Crosstemplejay (talk). Self nominated at 11:16, 3 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Article is long enough, it is (now) classified as start class, it has referencing in every paragraph, the hook is properly referenced, there appears to be no copyright violations or too-close paraphrasing, and the date is appropriate. The hook is the right length and format. Binksternet (talk) 20:08, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 4

Protected areas of Namibia

Protected areas of Namibia

Created by Nvvchar (talk), Dr. Blofeld (talk), Rosiestep (talk), Gilderien (talk), and Bonkers The Clown (talk). Nominated by Dr. Blofeld (talk) at 08:28, 9 May 2013 (UTC). Reviewed Template:Did you know nominations/Nature reserves in Poland

  • Symbol question.svgNew enough and big enough. Nominators are missing Gilderien in the first list. However many paragraphs in the table are uncited. Also "Protected landscape areas" has no citation. Picture seems to have no connection with the article, and has a typo in the caption, so I suggest we skip the picture. On the hook side, it is in article, short enough, cited, but I cannot confirm the book content. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:30, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
AGF then. Done, done, done. Cheers! ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 13:30, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Noemi Marone Cinzano

  • ... that Noemi Marone Cinzano's flagship wine Noemía de Patagonia has been included in the 1001 Wines: You Must Try Before You Die 2011?

Created by Bonkers The Clown (talk), Nvvchar (talk), and Dr. Blofeld (talk). Nominated by Dr. Blofeld (talk) at 18:06, 5 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Only 1,125 characters long; not nearly enough. Harrias talk 12:21, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
Now it is :) ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 12:30, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Reviewed Template:Did you know nominations/The Gaze of the Gorgon

List of awards and nominations received by Sugababes

  • Comment: 5x expansion

Created/expanded by Till (talk). Self nominated at 07:42, 4 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg 5x expanded on May 4 to 2156 characters, well referenced, and the hook source checks out. Well done expanding it! However, I think the current hook is a bit on the boring side. Perhaps find a more interesting one? Ruby 2010/2013 03:45, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 5

Portrait of Kitty

Created by Jambrown (talk). Nominated by Pigsonthewing (talk) at 10:57, 6 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Article is new and long enough, reliably sourced, interesting enough and is short and snappy.  — AARON • TALK 13:29, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
Unclear hook. Walsall means The New Art Gallery Walsall should be clarified here. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 12:06, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
No; The New Art Gallery Walsall did not exist at the time of the donation, which was made - as stated and cited in the article - to the town, not to a specific gallery. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:25, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
Thats even better reason why the hook needs to have clarity. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 15:11, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
I have added a link for Walsall, otherwise hook is fine. Johnbod (talk) 01:04, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
I'd prefer the former, unlinked hook, which thereby acts as an inducement to follow the main link to find out more. Of course, the house style should apply, but isn't that the point of DYK?.Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:51, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg Hook is fine. Good to go. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:22, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg Something freaky seems to have been going on behind the scenes here. The "paragraphs" are not paragraphs at all, but single sentences arranged close together. The first line "Portrait of Kitty 1948-1949, oil on board, 35x24cm, is a painting by Lucian Freud of Kitty Garman." looks like it could have been copied form an art catalogue. Referencing is subpar, and I've added about 5 CN tags. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:53, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
That's what we call a "new editor". Johnbod (talk) 04:00, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
The paragraphing, perhaps, and as it regularly stops at the period I'm leaning towards AGFing on that. However, referencing still needs to be brought up to DYK standards (rule of thumb is minimum one footnote per paragraph) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:02, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
It unsurprising that an art gallery curator writes in the style of an, er, art gallery curator. I've reformatted (this is a wiki; you can edit too!) and added some refs. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 07:36, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
  • I have done some (I rewrote that first sentence and tagged). Combining the paragraphs in the Wikitext has little, if any, effect on the readable text. The main thing here is referencing. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:45, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 6

Helmin Wiels

5x expanded by Xocoyotzin (talk). Nominated by Amberrock (talk) at 20:07, 8 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Wiels was a politician that liked to make provocative, interesting statements. I don't think that means he considers that the absolute truth. This seems to me one of those occasions, where he used this as a figure of speech to indicate that the relationship with the Netherlands was not his priority (on a different topic: he was critized for saying that all white dutch should be sent back to NL in body bags… and later on Dutch television said he had never meant to say that seriously).. So a different hook -also one that is a bit less "light" in view of the political murder that happened just a week ago- would be appreciated. L.tak (talk) 21:52, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
  • How about this?
Cheers.—♦♦ AMBER(ЯʘCK) 09:12, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Roberto Carnaghi

Created by Cambalachero (talk). Self nominated at 18:11, 8 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg New enough, long enough, hook is cited and present. I'm assuming good faith on the references as my Spanish is virtually non-existent. The only issue I see is that the award table needs a bit of reformatting, and could do with further citations for everything in it, as there's currently only one for the last entry—but the running prose is fine if you want to just take the award table out until it's sourced fully. GRAPPLE X 00:44, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
Also its not at all interesting as of now. Maybe you could add more to the hook on why winning this award is something special. Is it like the highest category? Because actors win awards and that's not hooky at all. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 11:58, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
ALT1: ... that Argentine actor Roberto Carnaghi worked with comedians Tato Bores, Guillermo Francella and Antonio Gasalla? Cambalachero (talk) 18:36, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
Alt is fine, though I don't see any problem with the original hook either (not every hook has to be, or even can be, written for maximum impact). GRAPPLE X 18:51, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
Wikipedia runs by consensus and 2:1 is a good enough consensus to pass the original alt also. I simply expressed by views on this less than mediocre hook. Rest you decide. You need not pay attention to us. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 19:28, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Slotted line

Created by Spinningspark (talk). Self nominated at 01:01, 6 May 2013 (UTC).

Hook is confusing, that's what makes it hooky! Yes, he does mean $100,000. SpinningSpark 00:11, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 7

Prostitution in Vatican City

Created by Dr. Blofeld (talk). Self nominated at 08:48, 9 May 2013 (UTC). Reviewed Template:Did you know nominations/Social Democratic Workers' Party of Germany

  • Symbol question.svg Would be ok, except that the title and lead appear misleading, as the article doesn't seem to contain any claim of actual "Prostitution in Vatican City" as opposed to "in Rome near Vatican City". If you've been there you'll know why. Suggest a rename. Johnbod (talk) 17:12, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Matador Automatic Radar Control

Created by 30 SW (talk). Nominated by Josve05a (talk) at 15:52, 8 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg This hook doesn't seem like it would have enough general-audience appeal to be great for the homepage; is there something unusual about it that might make it interesting to non-specialist readers who don't know much about missile technology? Dreamyshade (talk) 03:30, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Larry Itliong

Mural depicting Philip Vera Cruz and Larry Itliong in Los Angeles, California

Created/expanded by RightCowLeftCoast (talk). Self nominated at 07:31, 8 May 2013 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on May 8

Art Lassiter

Created by Mattgirling (talk). Self nominated at 13:37, 8 May 2013 (UTC).

Symbol question.svg Sorry! The hook is phrased in a way that it emphasizes Turner more than Lassiter. Please rephrase it. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 10:55, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
Didn't see a notice on Mattgirling's talk page about this, so I just left one. — Maile (talk) 18:23, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 9

Menander (gnostic)

Created by Menandrian (talk). Self nominated at 23:58, 13 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg This article is long enough and new enough, but I am not happy with the citations for the hook fact, and hence am not happy with the article. There are three citations on that sentence. All three of them do no more than state that Menander was a disciple, not the successor, of Simon Magus. The last of these [3] is an extremely bigoted first century source that can be considered neither reliable nor neutral, at least not without an assessment from a modern scholarly secondary source. Source [2] seems only to be saying that others identified Menandus as a disciple, not putting it forward as their own view. I may have overlooked something here, specific page numbers have not been given for any of them. Looking for a modern scholarly source that synthesises the ancient sources I came across this. Ferreiro says that Irenaeus (whom source [2] is quoting) "labeled Menander a 'successor'" (his scare quotes) because he thought establishing a parallel Gnostic succession would help in his efforts to legitimize a Christian apostolic succession. Ferreiro further says that Irenaeus "became the model for all future works in this genre". Which is basically saying that Irenaeus and his ilk are not to be trusted on this point, which would seem to include source [3]. Ferreiro speaking of original ancient sources "neither work specified directly that Simon Magus insired any sect other than his own."
Nor is this the only problematic thing in this article. "Satornilus on the other hand invented the concept of Christ as the savior and Son of God" is a highly controversial statement to make, at least amongst Christians. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary sourcing. The source [6] does not even mention Satornilus. Assuming Saturninus is the same person, I still do not see verification of this sentence, but again it is difficult to tell with the lack of page numbers. SpinningSpark 20:25, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment The source for the hook that gives Ireneus' claim of Menander as Simon's successor is the second of the three, page 144, third paragraph, first sentence. [2] Menandrian (talk) 00:51, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Fredrikke Marie Qvam

Fredrikke Marie Qvam

5x expanded by Iselilja (talk). Self nominated at 22:48, 13 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg The article is long enough, expanded fivefolds starting May 9 (I'm moving the nomination to that date, as it should be listed understhe date the expansion started, not when it was nominated), and nominated in time. The image is PD and looks good in small resolution, so it can be used. I've done some minor copyediting to the article. That she has an own road in Oslo, might not need a citation, (as it isn't many people named Fredrikke Qvam) but it is still unsourced - could you provide a citation for it? Either way, I don't think the claim is important enough to be in the lead, so I suggest moving it to the "Death and legacy" section. Mentoz86 (talk) 08:43, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
Thank you. You're right about the street info, and I have changed and added a ref. now. And thanks for copy-editing. I know the article could do with more copyediting, and I also plan to expand it. This is an article I had planned to write and when I saw someone else had started it, I started expanding it, but due to some unfortunate circumstances I didn't have the time and focus to write it as thorougly as I would have wanted. So, I have to admit, if this article been on my draft board, I wouldn't have nominated it quite yet. If it's ok with you I could copy-edit/expand today, and you can take a new look after that? Regards, Iselilja (talk) 09:36, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
That's fine with me, as long as you are done within a couple of days. You can reply here when you feel it is ready. :) Mentoz86 (talk) 11:54, 16 May 2013 (UTC)


Grotta di Lourdes

Grotta di Lourdes

Created by Dr. Blofeld (talk), Nvvchar (talk), Ipigott (talk), and Rosiestep (talk). Nominated by Dr. Blofeld (talk) at 13:23, 13 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Hook source and date both check out. Ready to go. -SusanLesch (talk) 01:59, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Reviewed Template:Did you know nominations/Kokila (film)

  • Symbol possible vote.svg As per this discussion, the hook fact used is false. The Lourdes Grotto in the Vatican and the Vatican Grottos (located directly beneath the Basilica) are two different locations. Pope JPII is buried in the latter location. Can someone suggest a replacement? —Bloom6132 (talk) 02:18, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg New hook checks out. Looks good to go! —Bloom6132 (talk) 19:47, 25 May 2013 (UTC)


Stuart Campbell (games journalist)

Created by Hillbillyholiday81 (talk), contribs. User:Steve. Self nominated at 07:17, 11 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg The article is most interesting, long enough and new enough. Most of the hook is fine too, but I just don't like the statement that SC "has been compared with Al-Qaeda" when the article merely states that SC is "Videogames journalism's answer to Al-Qaeda." Not the same thing at all in my opinion. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:08, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
  • I agree that the Al Qaeda quote is a little ambiguous, as was the original source. Not sure myself whether they saying he's like them or not. How about..
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Either ALT1 or ALT3 would be fine. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:13, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Birthplace of Simón Bolívar

The house where Simón Bolívar was born

Created by Ipigott (talk), Dr. Blofeld (talk). Nominated by Qwertyus (talk) at 15:16, 10 May 2013 (UTC). Reviewed Template:Did you know nominations/Strelitz Buildings

  • You've nominated this prematurely as Nvvchar and Rosie needed time to edit it. You haven't even done the QPQ which is required. Never mind I'll do it, I've credited them nonetheless.

My hook suggestion would be ALT1: that although the Casa Natal del Libertador Simón Bolívar (pictured) in Caracas is the official birthplace of national hero Simón Bolívar, some claim that he was born in San Mateo, Aragua?♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 08:59, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

ALT2 ... that the house where Simón Bolívar was born (pictured) is now a national monument in Venezuela? ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 10:06, 11 May 2013 (UTC)


Kastrati (tribe)

Created by Antidiskriminator (talk). Self nominated at 22:02, 9 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Why did you use predominantly Serb sources? Most of them can't be confirmed by other scholars, but they're all refuted by them like the notion of Dragoslav Srejović that Kastrati "allied" with Montenegro in the siege of Shkodër. However, all non-Serb sources mention Kastrati's petition a few months later against the annexation of any region to Montenegro.--— ZjarriRrethues — talk 20:18, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Muslim and Christian members of Kastrati did not have the same position toward Montenegro, which is clarified in the text of the article and additional source.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:27, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Tweaked the hook. Please review my edits. Safetidhehyria (talk) 17:02, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Vahe Danielyan

  • ... that Vahe Danielyan was sentenced to 15 years of hard labor in Siberia?

Created by Proudbolsahye (talk). Self nominated at 05:15, 9 May 2013 (UTC).

  • The article is new and long enough.Symbol question.svg There are several unresolved issues which I tagged.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:25, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
The hook is not interesting. You should mention whats so interesting about Danielyan getting this sentence. Or else many people in this world are punished. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 10:22, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Bachata Romántica: 1's

Moved to mainspace by DivaKnockouts (talk). Self nominated at 04:21, 9 May 2013 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on May 10

Birmingham crisis

Wreckage near the bombed Gaston Motel

  • ... that two bombings in Birmingham, Alabama (effects pictured), on May 11, 1963, began an escalating crisis, culminating in an unprecedented military operation?
  • Comment: It would be great to act quickly on this one in order to run it on 11 May (perhaps in the evening) ... it's the 50 year anniversary. Otherwise, we could work out another relevant date in May to coincide. Feeling very flexible about text of hook.
    • Alt1: ... that two bombings (pictured) in Birmingham, Alabama, began an escalating crisis, which by May 18, 1963 involved 18,000 federal troops?

Created by Groupuscule (talk). Self nominated at 11:17, 10 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Pictogram voting keep.svg New enough and long enough. Image properly licensed. AGF on offline ref. Simon Burchell (talk) 15:11, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
User has asked for 18 May. PumpkinSky talk 09:53, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
  • I added two (mandatory) commas to the hook. But, I have to say, I don't like the diction in the hook. Crises can't really escalate--better to say something like caused a crisis in the city that culminated in an unprecedented military operation? "Begin" and "bombings" isn't a real happy combination either. One more thing: this is Alabama. The involvement of federalistas is a HUGE thing, still (we're kind of moronic that way), and that would make for a catchier and more appropriate hook than the rather neutral "military operation". So let me put all that together:
  • ALT2: ... that two bombings in Birmingham, Alabama (effects pictured), on May 11, 1963, caused a crisis in the city that led the federal government to have 18,000 troops at the ready in the Birmingham Army base? Drmies (talk) 04:11, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Also, I made a few minor edits to the article, but it needs another set of eyes, esp. with the "Black" and "White" word usage ("White" with a capital always looks funny to me). Drmies (talk) 04:11, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Please do whatever you want with the hook, Drmies (although I'm sad we may have missed the window for a "50 year" date). I use "Black" and "White" these days because (a) it distinguishes the terms from the colors black and white, making clear that they are used as euphemisms for brown and pink, and (b) that's the usage of the South Africa government that introduced these terms for its formal racial distinction. Yes, federal involvement was a Big Deal, that's why JFK tried to keep the whole operation on the down-low. :-) Peace, groupuscule (talk) 21:49, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Note: I have moved this hook back into the main list, as the requested dates, May 11 and May 18 have both now passed. Harrias talk 11:04, 19 May 2013 (UTC)


A Million Ways to Die in the West

  • Comment: Nominated for deletion, but nomination has been withdrawn and the AfD will soon be closed.

Created by Bonkers The Clown (talk), Captain Assassin! (talk), Pseudonymous Rex (talk), and Koala15 (talk). Nominated by Bonkers The Clown (talk) at 10:45, 12 May 2013 (UTC).

Symbol delete vote.svg Hook is not at all interesting. Article not reviewed. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 08:19, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
You aren't going to fully mark out this article just because it's not interesting? At least give a "?" review! ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 11:37, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
I'm not conducting the review, but might I suggest: Alt1: ... that A Million Ways to Die in the West is a Seth MacFarlane film about a sheep farmer due for release in 2014? Miyagawa (talk) 11:15, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
That's good... I was looking for something interesting. Cheers! ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 11:37, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
Still no. Another thing. Wikipedia:DYK#The_hook says, "If the subject is a work of fiction or a fictional character, the hook must involve the real world in some way." I don't count its-releasing-in-real-world as actual involvement. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 11:44, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
The film is real... Anyway. Using Alt 1... Is Seth MacFarlane not from the "real world"? Is the 2014 release not a "real world" occurrence? The focus is on the film as a real world thing and its release... And not much on its plot elements... ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 11:51, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
ALT2 ... that American comedienne Sarah Silverman has been cast as a prostitute in the 2014 film A Million Ways to Die in the West?♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 12:18, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
ALT2 is good and interesting. Nice. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 12:36, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
I still don't find any of it interesting. Film releases on DMY, films plot is blah blah, ABC is acting in film. Promotion of such hooks is a reason why many editors feel that DYK is a nonsense section on the main page. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 14:29, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
Then dear sir, would be so kind as to suggest your own interesting hook? That would be appreciated a lot. Currently, Blofeld's Alt 2 reads as interesting enough to me. Thanks, --☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 12:46, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Not every article has DYK material. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 16:34, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
I disagree. It's whether you are able to appreciate and see the interesting factor in the article. Who's to define what's interesting and what's not anyway. Who's to say whether the fried mongoose tastes nice or it tastes horrid. It's up to individual perspective. So there. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 10:30, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
You may request for another reviewer if you wish to. For me the whole article has nothing interesting in it. Also the article (exclusing lead) doesnt have long enough prose. And those baby sentences of ABC joined film on DMY and PQR joined on DMY are horrible. But Wikipedia work by consensus and if someone finds it interesting, who am i to stop? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 11:42, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
Personally, the tile itself is interesting enough. Well, whattya expect... It hasn't even been released that's the best we can do. So... Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Second pair of ears, please. Cheers, --☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 13:00, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Bancroft Shed

Created by ClemRutter (talk). Nominated by Pigsonthewing (talk) at 14:20, 10 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg I have had an initial look at this article and DYK suggestion and have the following comments/queries:
  1. As you are using "kissing" in the proposed hook, the expression ought to be defined, either in the article or in a separate article. At present Kissing shuttle is a redlink. Incidentally, if a separate article is to be written, it ought to be in the singular.
  2. There are several other redlinks, especially in the "Equipment" paragraph, which detract from the article. A few stub articles to briefly explain the terminology would make this section easier to understand.
  3. The whole article could do with a copy edit. For example, there are several words which start in Upper case but ought to be in lower case (e.g. Drawing-in frame, Self-threading shuttles, One weaver}
  4. Numbers under ten should generally be spelled out while numbers 11 and over should be written as numbers.
  5. Several sections/paragraphs are entirely unreferenced.
  6. While it is not relevant to DYK, there appears to be a typo in the plan included in the article. This is headed "INSURNCE PLAN".

Once you have dealt with these points, I will review the article again. Cheers. -- Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 06:39, 11 May 2013 (UTC) ┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

  1. The plural terms are already linked to singular articles. Are red links a block to DYK? I would have thought they're a good inducement to turn readers into contributors.
  2. Ditto.
  3. I've fixed what I can. I'm not clear why you didn't?
  4. Ditto.
  5. I trust that the original author can oblige.
  6. I can see no such phrase.

Thanks, Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:36, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

  1. is now resolved. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:22, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Texas gubernatorial election, 1998

5x expanded by 12george1 (talk) at 02:16, 10 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg The hook is factually incorrect. GW Bush was elected in two consecutive elections, but he only served Jan 1995 to Dec 2000, resigning to run for President. John Connally also was elected in two consecutive elections, and served longer than Bush. Allan Shivers actually served longer as Governor than either Connally or Bush, July 11, 1949 – January 15, 1957. But in the case of Shivers, his first term was when as elected Lieutenant Governor of Texas, he assumed the governorship six months into that upon the in-office death of Governor Beauford Jester. (Governors of Texas)— Maile (talk) 00:17, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Maybe I could say the "first person elected to serve two consecutive four-year terms...", as four-year terms did not begin until the election in 1974?--12george1 (talk) 00:23, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
  • That's probably more accurate. But since you did this as a 5X expansion instead of writing it from scratch, I'd advise running Duplication detector on each reference in there. (Duplicator Detector seems to be down at the moment) That particular phrase you propose using for the hook, while sourced and in the article, is almost identical to the wording in the source. If that one is, perhaps there are other copyvios or close paraphrasing that happened before your expansion. Good luck. — Maile (talk) 00:40, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg I ran Earwig @ Toolserver, and it cites numerous copyvio problems. However, if I am reading this correctly, what it is saying is the source is actually a Site that is merely a link to the Wikipedia article. Other eyes probably should weigh in on this. — Maile (talk) 21:12, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 11

Siti Nurhaliza filmography

Created by Syfuel (talk). Self nominated at 05:30, 13 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol delete vote.svg Prose is too short by half. Text in tables does not count towards the 1500 minimum. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:11, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg Notified nominator/creator on their talk page. — Maile (talk) 16:38, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
This simply fails the criteria and I will continue to object. Unless of course the author wants to make a five-fold expansion of the prose with the current version as the baseline. That would of course be valid. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:15, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
I knew why. But it just seemed a good idea to let the creator know. — Maile (talk) 20:09, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
You're right. I should have done it myself. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:14, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the review guys. My bad, I honestly didn't know that texts in the table are not counted. Thanks again. :) SyFuelIgniteBurned

Articles created/expanded on May 12

Coffee production in Venezuela

Coffee production

Created by Nvvchar (talk), Rosiestep (talk), Bonkers The Clown (talk), and Dr. Blofeld (talk). Nominated by Dr. Blofeld (talk) at 17:20, 16 May 2013 (UTC).

Symbol question.svg Excellent article. I feel the wording of the hook is a little too much like the wording in the original reference, though. The photo isn't very clear, either. -Tortie tude (talk) 22:21, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Gurlen, Cotton production in Uzbekistan

Cotton picking (Uzbekistan)

5x expanded by Dr. Blofeld (talk), Nvvchar (talk), Rosiestep (talk), and Ymblanter (talk). Nominated by Dr. Blofeld (talk) at 17:11, 16 May 2013 (UTC).

Melvin Bliss, Synthetic Substitution

2x expanded and sourced (BLP) by Launchballer (talk). Self nominated at 08:18, 13 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Um, DYK requires that the articles each have a minimum of 1500 characters of prose. Currently, the song has 426 and the singer has 390. They will need to be expanded significantly from their current states. Chris857 (talk) 22:33, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
I've expanded the song with examples of songs that sampled it; how's it looking now?--Launchballer 09:29, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Song is now 1224, singer is 1140. Still short. Chris857 (talk) 14:51, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
How are they looking now?--Launchballer 19:00, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Manhunt: The Search for Bin Laden

Moved to mainspace by Vivvt (talk). Self nominated at 23:07, 12 May 2013 (UTC).

Chhota Bheem and the throne of Bali

  • Comment: Article rescued/expanded from a redirect end.

Created/expanded by Manojasokan (talk), Bovineboy2008 (talk), Titodutta (talk). Nominated by Titodutta (talk) at 10:13, 12 May 2013 (UTC).

Symbol question.svg Per rules, "If the subject is a work of fiction or a fictional character, the hook must involve the real world in some way." Need another ALT to proceed. The mention of Bali, Indonesia is not applicable. - Vivvt (Talk) 11:29, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
Is Rajiv Chilaka having any special recognition than any other directors? Every film is directed by some director. Not so hooky. - Vivvt (Talk) 11:33, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Why TOI reviews are special? They review lot of things. Why should we be giving them and their review a mention on the main page? - Vivvt (Talk) 11:33, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
The name ToI can be removed from the hook! --Tito Dutta (contact) 11:43, 14 May 2013 (UTC)


--Tito Dutta (contact) 16:19, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Anything "second" is not hooky. - Vivvt (Talk) 03:28, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
I am checking and will try to expand the article a bit more in next 1—2 days(s)! --Tito Dutta (contact) 22:47, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
  • I don't know what to do, an editor has moved the article. But, I feel that move was inappropriate, so don't want to change anything here in this DYK. I have started an RM to move back. Now the editor is inactive! --Tito Dutta (contact) 21:51, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

New Year (song)

  • Comment: 5x expansion

Created/expanded by Till (talk). Self nominated at 05:02, 12 May 2013 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on May 13

Acanthogobius flavimanus

Acanthogobius flavimanus, also known as Yellowfin Goby or Japanese river goby

  • ... that the possession or sale of the Japanese river goby (example pictured), the largest species of goby found in estuaries of California, is illegal in Australia?
  • Comment: Not a self-nom. --PFHLai (talk) 12:32, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Created by Tortie tude (talk). Nominated by PFHLai (talk) at 12:32, 19 May 2013 (UTC).

  •  :The following has been checked in this review by Maile
  • QPQ not necessary, not a self nom
  • Article created by Tortie tude on May 13, 2013 and has 4,189 characters of readable prose
  • Earwig @ Toolserver run, no copyvio
  • All paragraphs sourced
  • Image is freely licensed on Commons
  • Symbol question.svg I find this to be a well-sourced and interesting article. However, the properly sourced hook needs to be adjusted. The article and its sourcing is very specific that the sale and possession is illegal in the state of New South Wales, not the whole of Australia. — Maile (talk) 17:11, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
Good point. It was NSW indeed. Thanks.
--PFHLai (talk) 09:46, 21 May 2013 (UTC)


Greeley House (Chappaqua, New York)

Greeley House from across King Street (NY 120), 2012

5x expanded by Daniel Case (talk). Self nominated at 15:33, 18 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg 5× expansion completed from 674 characters before May 13 to over 13,000 characters (present version from May 17). Article is well-sourced. Refs 2 and 10 (sourcing the main hook and ALT1, respectively) are both reliable. Both hooks are under the 200 character requirement (main is 108 characters, while ALT1 is 140 characters long). QPQ done. Image is free, utilized in the article and is clear even at small size. Looks good to go! —Bloom6132 (talk) 04:15, 21 May 2013 (UTC)


Adrian Schoolcraft

2x expanded and sourced (BLP) Expanded by Groupuscule (talk). Self nominated at 08:21, 17 May 2013 (UTC).

Chua Soo Bin

Created by Bonkers The Clown (talk). Self nominated at 09:14, 13 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Date, size, refs are fine, but I have concerns over the hook neutrality. Focusing on someone's personal wealth is problematic, particularly if this is not the main thing he is know for. I'd ask for another hook, or we can defer this to WP:BLPN or a second reviewer. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:54, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
While I have no qualms over suggesting an alt, I do feel that the current hook is the most interesting... Furthermore, it is not slanted in perspective and it is neutral, in my opinion – merely reporting valid facts reported by a reputable and reliable source. Very often the "interesting" aspects of people are the things they are not widely known for. For instance, did you know that Hitler only had one testicle? Something along that line... A second reviewer would be good, yes. Thanks for reviewing anyway. Cheers, --☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 12:44, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
I see your point, and I agree that the current hook is interesting, but nonetheless many see wealth as something bad, and this is drawing attention to this aspect of the BLP. Perhaps I am overreacting, that's why I am asking for a 3O. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:38, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
If i am the third opinion, i am rejecting it too. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 05:03, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Alright then. Of you really insist, how about... ALT1: ... that Singaporean photographer Chua Soo Bin has been cited as "one of the most sought-after commercial photographers" in Singapore? ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 06:04, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
Isn't that just a point of view of a newspaper reporter rather than a fact? And also its little interesting to me. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 06:26, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
Hence the keywords cited and the quotation marks. A similar nom that successfully made it on the main – Template:Did you know nominations/Tang Qunying. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 06:47, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
That's no reason to justify that it should be done again. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 07:17, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
And Template:Did you know nominations/Tang Shu-wing, Template:Did you know nominations/Akokan (album), etc. etc. Seriously... OTHERCRAP is an essay, not a policy. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 07:55, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
I am not giving it a green tick even if you sit and write an FA on how POVs are promoted as DYK. Some news reporter's opinion is simply not interesting enough and not notable also to feature on main page. Rest Piotrus can decide. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 08:12, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
I do not see eye to eye on that with you. Somebody propose a resolution... Quick! ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 08:30, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 14

Alasinga Perumal

Alasinga Perumal

5x expanded by Titodutta (talk), The Interior (talk). Self nominated at 22:37, 16 May 2013 (UTC).

Ranjit Sinha

5x expanded and sourced (BLP) by Ralfan (talk). Self nominated at 19:09, 15 May 2013 (UTC).

Cathreim Thoirdhealbhaigh

  • Comment: The hook could probably use some work; suggestions welcome.

Created by Writ Keeper (talk). Self nominated at 20:03, 14 May 2013 (UTC).

  • The hook: the contrast between historical accuracy and banshees is great, a very alluring hook. But the work isn't widely known (unless that's just my ignorance), so I think it might want some framing. How about ... that the Irish 14th-century Cathreim Thoirdhealbhaigh, an account of the wars of Thomond, is noted for its historical accuracy but also for its vivid description of banshees? (Would also avoid the slightly paradoxical question "Did you know.. that it's known for".) Too heavy? Bishonen | talk 23:21, 14 May 2013 (UTC).
    • Hmm, that definitely has promise. How about something like ... that Cathreim Thoirdhealbhaigh, an account of the wars of Thomond in 14th13th-century Ireland, is noted for its historical accuracy and also its vivid descriptions of banshees? I'm trying to suggest the contrast rather than point it out directly, if you know what I mean. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 02:00, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
      • Right, good point. I worried a little about the way it's a 14th-century work, but the wars of Thomond were actually mainly in the 13th century (1194 to 1318). Perhaps it doesn't matter. Bishonen | talk 10:05, 15 May 2013 (UTC).
        • Well, I was thinking that a lot of the actual action in the book takes place around the end of the 13th and beginning of the 14th century, but 13th is probably a closer approximation. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 15:33, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Rob Howell

  • Reviewed: not a self-nom

Created by Flami72 (talk). Nominated by TonyTheTiger (talk) at 21:00, 14 May 2013 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on May 15

Women in photography

Margaret Bourke-White in 1964

Created by Ipigott (talk). Nominated by Dr. Blofeld (talk) at 12:04, 20 May 2013 (UTC). Reviewed Template:Did you know nominations/Ramli Sarip

  • Symbol voting keep.svg The source actually identifies her as Life's first female photojournalist, which seems a little different from "photographer". Would suggest making that change. Other than that, it's fine (huge expansion in last few days, hook well under limit). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Piledhigheranddeeper (talk • contribs) 13:19, 21 May 2013 (UTC)


LocalWiki

Created by Mattsenate (talk), Dreamyshade (talk). Nominated by Dreamyshade (talk) at 03:32, 19 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article date and length check out, but I'm not so sure about the hook. LocalWiki is an expansion of DavisWiki. Since, LocalWiki didn't exist at the founding of DavisWiki, DavisWiki couldn't be a project of LocalWiki. Open to a reword, or a different suggestion. --ThaddeusB (talk) 04:34, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Hmm, yes, stretching a bit to find an interesting hook. Maybe this would be more accurate wording: ALT1: ... that the project that inspired LocalWiki, DavisWiki for Davis, California, is used by at least half of area residents? Or a more direct option: ALT2: ... that LocalWiki's wiki software includes features for helping communities build collaborative maps? Dreamyshade (talk) 21:14, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Cool, that phrasing makes sense to me. The DavisWiki article could use some improvement though before it gets a spotlight; I'll try to work on that. Dreamyshade (talk) 21:59, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

2005 Dickies 500

Created by ZappaOMati (talk). Self nominated at 02:24, 16 May 2013 (UTC).

Kissing the shuttle

Created by ClemRutter (talk). Nominated by Pigsonthewing (talk) at 23:12, 15 May 2013 (UTC).

  • So Nepal's Parliamentary Committee has stopped shuttle kissing? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 04:47, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
    • No, a Parliamentary Committee did. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:02, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
      • Yeah! But which government's parliament's parliamentary committee did it? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 10:27, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
        • You need to click on the link in the hook to find out. Isn't that the point of a cryptic link? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:29, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
          • The lead doesnt say anything about which one stopped it. Or is that also in disguise and you want people to see that in Google? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 10:47, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

What an interesting diversion, at the time in question under the Sugauli Treaty Nepal has been divided- the larger part was in the kingdom of Nepal which didn't has a representative assembly, while the smaller part was controlled (occupied) by the East India company which was nominally answerable to the United Kingdom parliament- so in effect the parliamentary committee would be responsible for both Lancashire and Nepal. I suspect that this was not the point you were trying to make. When the Lancashire industry rationalised, the looms were moved to India but it would take someone with Hindi to be able to write authoratively on the Indian cotton industry. There is need for many articles on the economics, architecture and organisation of cotton districts and notable mills. User:Dharmadhyaksha are you up for the challenge? GLAM:QSMM is a project to increase the quality of coverage of this industry in Lancashire- but if you are willing to start writing some equivalent articles in India, I would glad to help you. Please feel free to put some changes into the article we can always do a good faith revert if it is not appropriate- I would particular like help with references for shuttle catalogues with illustrations so I can do a SVG.-- Clem Rutter (talk) 19:17, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Lucky coincidence. Nepal was just a random name that i had picked. What i wanted to point out is that the lead doesn't clarify which country's parliamentary committee had banned it.
And we already have an article called Textile industry in India. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 07:57, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
  • The article is pretty rough right now. It's a good topic, though. After the article is fixed up a bit, I think that there are some ALT hooks that will be plenty interesting:

Articles created/expanded on May 16

Golden Eagle Regional Park

  • Comment: Not a particularly strong article but a good first DYK nomination I suppose. Thanks. Also, the 'hook' could incorporate the 1.2 million square feet figure somehow.

Created by Phaedrx (talk). Self nominated at 21:44, 22 May 2013 (UTC).

La Cuidad Blanca

  • Comment: I may take this is GA, so any suggestions for improvement are welcome

5x expanded by ThaddeusB (talk). Self nominated at 04:52, 22 May 2013 (UTC) Also expanded by Hoopes (talk).

Michael Dormer (Lord Mayor)

  • ... that 300 years after Sir Michael Dormer purchased property which became a free school in Horsham, it was found that the school belonged to his heir at law?

Created by NinaGreen (talk). Self nominated at 18:39, 21 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Date and length OK. I would suggest the hook would be better if it said "the property" rather than "the school" as it wasn't a school when he bought it. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 16:32, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Idiom dictionary

  • ... that the first major idiom dictionary of American English was created for deaf people?
  • Reviewed: tbd

5x expanded by Colonel Warden (talk). Self nominated at 12:52, 21 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg I guess this has been nominated as a 5x expanded article. The current size is around 5000 chars, while it's earlier version was around 3.4k chars. —Vensatry (Ping me) 07:48, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
  • When it was nominated for deletion on the 15th, the prose text was 600 chars by my count (ignoring templates and other structural stuff). On the 16th, the prose text was expanded to 3597 chars. 3597/600 = 5.995. If that's not enough, on the 21st, it was expanded further to 5348 chars. Note also that the AFD has now been closed as keep, so that's out of the way. Warden (talk) 13:34, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
Warden's numbers check out, except 5348 chars includes table of contents? Not a big deal. CallawayRox (talk) 17:57, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Present size of the article: – 5094 chars
  • Size on 4 September 2012 – 3834 chars
To satisfy the criteria, it must be expanded to 15k chars at least. —Vensatry (Ping me) 15:47, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Tomb of King Tongmyong

Tomb of King Tongmyong

Created by Nvvchar (talk), Rosiestep (talk), Bonkers The Clown (talk). Nominated by Dr. Blofeld (talk) at 12:34, 20 May 2013 (UTC). Reviewed Template:Did you know nominations/Carlos Echazarreta Iñiguez

  • Symbol question.svg The article is new enough (5x expansion on May 17), long enough, and well-referenced. The photo is free of license issue. Question about the hook though: are you certain the tomb actually contains the remains of the king? King Dongmyeong died in 1st century BC, but the tomb was built in the fifth century AD after the capital was moved to Pyongyang. I may have missed it, but I couldn't find any source that explicitly says the king's remains are in the tomb. -Zanhe (talk) 14:54, 22 May 2013 (UTC)


La Asunción, Catedral Nuestra Señora de La Asunción

Catedral Nuestra Señora in La Asunción, Venezuela

Created/expanded by Gilderien (talk), Nvvchar (talk), Rosiestep (talk). Nominated by Rosiestep (talk) at 21:05, 19 May 2013 (UTC).

List of awards and nominations received by Romeo Santos

Moved to mainspace by Magiciandude (talk), DivaKnockouts (talk). Nominated by DivaKnockouts (talk) at 04:18, 19 May 2013 (UTC).

Liu Zihou

  • ... that after Governor Liu Zihou was captured by the Red Guards and rescued by the army in 1967, rival army factions armed his supporters and opponents, who fought and killed each other for years?

Created by Zanhe (talk). Self nominated at 09:06, 18 May 2013 (UTC).

Keith Davis (rugby union)

  • Comment: Moved from userspace on 16 May

Created/expanded by Shudde (talk). Self nominated at 07:23, 18 May 2013 (UTC).

Old Nassau

Created by TonyTheTiger (talk). Self nominated at 01:28, 18 May 2013 (UTC).

Exclusion of judicial review in Singapore law

  • Comment: The article was created on 16 May 2013 by moving it from a sandbox. The hook is referenced by footnotes 59–62 and the accompanying text.

Created by Huimin.law.2010 (talk), Linus.koh.2010 (talk), Yisiong.sui (talk). Nominated by Smuconlaw (talk) at 08:43, 16 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol voting keep.svg This substantial article is both new enough and long enough. The hook is well sourced. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:32, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
I removed the {{fact}} tag as I feel a citation at the end of the paragraph you added it to is unnecessary. As the text of the paragraph indicates, the information is from sections 8 and 10 of the ISA. A footnote is unnecessary because it would simply repeat that information. — SMUconlaw (talk) 00:41, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Then it would not be consistent as you have cited the part on Section 8(1) of the ISA. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 09:08, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean. — SMUconlaw (talk) 16:50, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 17

Palacio de la Legislatura de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires

Pink Room of Eva Perón

  • ... that following right to vote given to women in 1947, and their entry into the legislative system, the First Lady, Evita, established the Pink Room (pictured) and the Eva Perón Foundation in the palace?

Created by Rosiestep (talk), Bonkers The Clown (talk), and Nvvchar (talk). Nominated by Nvvchar (talk) at 03:35, 22 May 2013 (UTC).

Palacio de la Legislatura de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires


Palacio de San Carlos (Bogotá)

Simón Bolívar

  • ... that the palace was the scene of an assassination attempt on President Simon Bolivar (pictured) in 1928 while he was taking bath and he escaped through a window after his friend tipped him off?

Created by Ipigott (talk), Dr. Blofeld (talk), Nvvchar (talk). Nominated by Nvvchar (talk) at 03:12, 22 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg This article is new enough and long enough. The image is in the public domain and the hook is sourced. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:25, 23 May 2013 (UTC)


1987 Major League Baseball Draft

Created by Albacore (talk). Self nominated at 14:48, 21 May 2013 (UTC).

Francisco Esteban Gómez

Francisco Esteban Gómez

Created by Rosiestep (talk), Nvvchar (talk), Dr. Blofeld (talk). Nominated by Dr. Blofeld (talk) at 12:59, 20 May 2013 (UTC).

  • "Today" means a particular day when you want this DYK to feature or just present days? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 05:46, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
Grammar tells you it's the latter. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 14:10, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
No it doesnt. This would mean the day it features on main page. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 14:51, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
There is no ambiguity, in my opinion. If it were to be July 31, it would be written as "is being honored" (they just decided to honor him today) or "was honored" (anniversary in which he had already been honored). "Is honored" would not be correct for your context. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 22:58, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
The trouble with "today" is that it is either yesterday or tomorrow somewhere in the world. And some people, like me, are not always sure what the date is. Presumably the Margariteñas honor Gómez all the time, but more on 31 July, like Germanus of Auxerre. "Is honored every 31 July" is supported by the battle article, but I don't think anyone wants the nomination held to 31 July. ALT1 skips the issue and is shorter, so better. Aymatth2 (talk) 00:55, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
It seems ambiguous to me too. Assuming Dr. B. does not want to hold it until 31 July, the anniversary, I suggest dropping "today" to give ALT1 below:
Aymatth2 (talk) 16:42, 21 May 2013 (UTC)


The Joy Luck Club (film)

  • Comment: Is there a nearby relevant Asian celebration? If so, can you reserve it for that date? Almost forgot: I'm still expanding. I will add more hooks if interesting.

5x expanded by George Ho (talk). Self nominated at 07:00, 20 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Crediting Bede735 for expanding awards and nominations, although I added reliable references. --George Ho (talk) 08:43, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

More hooks below: --George Ho (talk) 06:28, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Oliver Stone, one of executive producers of The Joy Luck Club


Wayne Wang, the director and one of producers of The Joy Luck Club





Leonid Khrushchev

Moved to mainspace by 069952497a (talk). Self nominated at 00:50, 17 May 2013 (UTC).

Symbol possible vote.svg Findagrave isn't a reliable source; barring things that are shown in photos, such as "Memorials to him have been placed in ___", it shouldn't be used as a citation. On a less difficult note, you're missing full citations for your offline sources — you put in shortened footnote templates for Birch 2008, Taubman 2003, and Tompson 1995, but you forgot to give the complete citations in a "Bibliography" section. Nyttend (talk) 21:28, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 18

María Gómez Carbonell

Created by Rosiestep (talk), Nvvchar (talk), Bonkers The Clown (talk). Nominated by Dr. Blofeld (talk) at 13:07, 23 May 2013 (UTC). Reviewed Template:Did you know nominations/Meghe Dhaka Tara (2013 film)

  • Symbol question.svg Date and size ok. The main part of the hook ("She was one of the first women to earn a Ph.D. from the University of Havana") is cited in the article and verified in online reference. That she was an "educator and attorney" is also taken from the article, but not cited. Can this either be cited or removed from the hook? Spot check for close paraphrasing and copyvio check did not reveal any problems. Oceanh (talk) 22:42, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
Lead sentences need not to be cited in cases like this. Removed educator as it wasn't her main thing. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 08:27, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Wildlife of Haiti

Hispaniolan Trogon

Created by Rosiestep (talk), Nvvchar (talk), Bonkers The Clown (talk). Nominated by Nvvchar (talk) at 00:50, 23 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Very nice article. New, interesting, well referenced. Interesting hook, hook facts are cited in the article and verified in cited reference. Picture license good. "Copyvio tool" run: No violations. Oceanh (talk) 21:40, 23 May 2013 (UTC)


Oslo breakfast

Oslo breakfast served in Oslo

  • ... that the Oslo breakfast (consumption pictured) was provided free of charge to all primary school children in Oslo from 1932?
  • Reviewed: Not selfnom.

Created by FeydHuxtable (talk). Nominated by Oceanh (talk) at 19:57, 18 May 2013 (UTC).


1919 English cricket season

5x expanded by Harrias (talk). Self nominated at 15:12, 18 May 2013 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on May 19

Cinderella (2013 Broadway production)

  • Reviewed: Not a self nom

Created by Ssilvers (talk). Nominated by TonyTheTiger (talk) at 12:23, 23 May 2013 (UTC).

Gender inequality in the United States

Created by Piotrus (talk). Self nominated at 01:43, 23 May 2013 (UTC). Symbol possible vote.svg A better hook please.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 13:30, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

  • Comment: The gender "pay gap" exists in most of the world, it's over 17% among EU countries. In the end, it seems like most people already know that gender inequality exists so it's not much of a DYK/hook (it's just stating the obvious). My 2 cents for what it's worth. Coinmanj (talk) 20:25, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
ALT2 ... that the United States is one of the few countries which have not ratified the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women? 069952497aComments and complaintsStuff I've done 23:59, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

José Acevedo y Gómez

José Acevedo y Gómez

  • ... that José Acevedo y Gómez (pictured) was one of the group of patriots of Colombia who met on 20 July 1810 and made a proclamation of independence at the Viceroyalty of Mueva Granda?

Created by Rosiestep (talk), Dr. Blofeld (talk), Nvvchar (talk). Nominated by Nvvchar (talk) at 00:05, 22 May 2013 (UTC).


Wikipediocracy

  • ... that Wikipediocracy, a weblog and forum, is dedicated to criticizing Wikipedia?

Created by Volunteer Marek (talk), Alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk). Nominated by Reaper Eternal (talk) at 16:12, 21 May 2013 (UTC).

Updated section name: Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know#Nomination_of_Wikipediocracy NE Ent 11:23, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
  • I think this needs a slightly more catchy hook. Right now, it's rather dull. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:15, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Doing... --Tito Dutta (contact) 16:19, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
Well, mentioning the assistance in research for the Salon article would make the hook more interesting.Volunteer Marek 17:07, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
I was thinking the same thing.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 17:13, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Can you add another source for 'Wikipediocracy is a website for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia and other Wikimedia Foundation sites. or mention which part of this article verifies it! --Tito Dutta (contact) 16:31, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
"But two weeks after my story was published, a group of Wikipedia editors affiliated with the Wikipedia criticism site Wikipediocracy approached me." —Andrew Leonard, on Salon.com. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:45, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
I was actually thinking something more along the lines of
  • ... that Wikipediocracy, a weblog and forum, is dedicated to critiquing Wikipedia, including this very DYK section?
However, I couldn't find much mention of the GibraltarpediA controversy with respect to Wikipediocracy in reliable sources. For the hook, we definitely need a non-primary source. Reaper Eternal (talk) 18:50, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
The suggestion I made would be backed by secondary sources. :) --The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 19:01, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
No, definitely not. Way too self-referential and inside-baseballish. The vast majority of readers (including many Wikipedians) won't know what it refers to. Prioryman (talk) 23:44, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Musical interlude


  • I don't think making up terminology like the "Qworty saga" is very appropriate. SilverserenC 20:06, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales has yet to comment on the record to Salon, but on his own Talk page he quoted my story:
"For those of us who love Wikipedia, the ramifications of the Qworty saga are not comforting." That sums it up for me. More thoughts soon. I would have banned him outright years ago. So would many others. That we did not, points to serious deficiencies in our systems. — Jimbo Wales (talk) 20:34, 19 May 2013 (UTC) -- Hillbillyholiday talk 20:17, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
Definitely no to this hook. Far too self-referential, and in all honesty it's hardly a "saga". It's also certainly not a good or ethical idea to use DYKs to go after particular named individuals in this way. Qworty may have become a hate figure in certain quarters but that's no justification for going after him on the Main Page. Prioryman (talk) 23:44, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
No per Dr. Sanger's statement here [3]. Ripberger (talk) 01:59, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Per my comment above I think that is just hooky enough. I would prefer to not go after Young with a DYK.--The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 20:24, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
  • This seems like a much better method to go about it. And it gets to link to a much better and more relevant article. SilverserenC 20:29, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
  • My suggestion wasn't intended to go after "Qworty", just draw attention to the problem, and that is the reason the article is here now after all. I think that mentioning Sanger adds interest. -- Hillbillyholiday talk 20:31, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
  • I agree with Silver seren. Frankly I'd prefer we didn't have an article on the Fuckwit Forum at all, but if we're going to be lumbered with one, this is the least awful hook proposed so far. Prioryman (talk) 23:44, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
  • I agree with Prioryman Silver Seren. --SB_Johnny | talk✌ 00:11, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
  • LOL! That makes me wish there were some way to animate the edit history. One edit a second with the Flight of the Valkyries playing and that strikethrough would be better than Harold Lloyd.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 00:58, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg This hook has been checked and is all right! Other hooks are being checked. New alts can be suggested too! --Tito Dutta (contact) 23:49, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
Bong alternative
Alternative

This picture was censored from Russian Wikipedia


RfC suggestion

OK, look. This is a very contentious nomination. What I suggest is this be put on hold for awhile, and an RfC run to get general input from the wider community. The question here is not whether the DYK is in and of itself a good or bad DYK, or that the hook is a good or bad hook, or whether the nominator is trolling or not (I see that the nominator, User:Reaper Eternal, has prominently displayed on his userpage the legend "Make articles, not drama", which is an interesting data point). The central issue is is that justified or not, many in the community would find this contentious, and it therefore must go through RfC per common sense and common courtesy, rather then being slipped in as a surprise, and for general community discussion to begin after it's already appeared on the main page. There's no hurry. Let's back off and slow down for a bit and see what the community thinks. Herostratus (talk) 14:11, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

I've opened an RfC, here. That supercedes this discussion which should now be hatted. Herostratus (talk) 14:31, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

It does not supersede any such thing, I have re-opened this. Is there any actual objection to ALT2? It seems to very neutral all-around, and acceptable to all concerned? Tarc (talk) 14:59, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I have an actual objection: I am seeing exactly zero references in the article that are independent and significantly cover the website itself. The few that even mention Wikipediocracy at all are trivial, and a Google search is not turning up anything else. As it is, this article is nothing more than a WP:COATRACK, and is not suitable for DYK until evidence of notability is shown. Resolute 15:04, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
Er, this isn't AfD; those sorts of arguments appear to have been brought up an rejected at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikipediocracy which closed as a snow keep. You don't get to re-argue a lost position at DYK, a consensus of Wikipedia editors has already established that it satisfies notability guidelines. Tarc (talk) 15:08, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
No, it isn't AFD, and alas, I was out of town when people managed to get that AFD shut down. None the less, there remains no significant, reliable, independent sources in the article, it remains a coatrack, and it remains unsuitable for the main page until such time as these issues are resolved, in my opinion. I have no issue with an article dedicated to criticism of Wikipedia appearing on the main page, but lets at least be professional enough to use an article that actually meets Wikipedia's guidelines. Resolute 15:14, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
It does meet Wikipedia's guidelines. WP:CONSENSUS and all that. Tarc (talk) 15:49, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
I doubt you rush to that defence when some random news story survives an AFD for the same reason. But yes, the article won a vote count at AFD. I am not disputing that. However, due the the actual lack of source material, the one and only thing that could possibly be said about Wikipediocracy in a DYK entry is "... that Wikipediocracy exists to criticize Wikipedia?" Everything else in the article, and on the net, is about other issues. The site got a passing mention a few times, but if we're going to promote an article on the main page, one would expect that something more than a single sentence can actually be said about the actual subject. Resolute 23:36, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
Resolute, see the Salon article. There is plenty of detail there and ALT2, the current favorite of the hooks, says more than that.--The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 01:20, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
I have, actually. It is a good piece about Qworty and his interactions with Wikipedia. It is not, however, evidence of Wikipediocracy's notability as Wikipedia defines it any more than a political candidate receiving a mention in an article about an election makes them notable. That is a trivial mention, and there simply is no significant, independent coverage of the site. Though I am sure you guys can change that by begging someone long enough, though at that point, the independent part of the coverage becomes questionable. But hell, I am a big fan of irony. And I love that for all your article is a coatrack designed to give you an internal platform to rant and rave against Wikipedia, the true failing exposed here is how easy it is to get articles on not-yet-notable subjects to stick if your cabal is large enough. Resolute 03:31, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
I support ALT2. Notability is shown by the fact that the article survived an AfD discussion. This was already discussed and settled above.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 15:08, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
I don't see anything contentious about the nomination itself (two prominent opponents approved so we must have something right). What I see are a lot of people who have feuds with WO getting their licks in and not actually addressing the nom.--The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 16:01, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
"...whether the nominator is trolling or not..." Uhh, no. My nomination is to help two editors who worked together to put together an article get it placed for a short time on the main page. One, Marek, probably would not have nominated per Alf doing a large portion of the work. Alf, as he said on his talk page, was too shy to nominate it himself. Thus, a well-referenced new article would not have ever had the chance had I not nominated it, since two more days would have placed the article beyond the five-day limit for new articles.
With regards to your comment on my userbox, I am not the one generating the drama here. As I mentioned before, I nominated an article written largely by a lesser-known editor solely to help him out. Titodutta (talk · contribs), a completely uninvolved editor, reviewed the nomination and largely approved it, pending the introduction of a better hook. Others are causing the drama with unnecessary RFCs and AFDs on this nomination.
Furthermore, I must strongly object to your filing an RFC on this nomination and then opposing and attempting to close it down "on purely procedural grounds". There are other procedures that come into play if you require me to file another nomination, namely, that the article would no longer be within the five-day period from its creation, preventing it from becoming a DYK article. That sort of behavior is stonewalling of the process until it technically fails, and I sincerely hope that was not your intent.
Finally, in contrast to what some are saying, I can hardly be regarded a Wikipediocracy contributor when I have made a grand total of nine posts, most of which are disagreeing with or tongue-lashing the other Wikipediocracy members. Reaper Eternal (talk) 17:53, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
OK, relax. No one is trying to hold the nom up until it expires. I specifically put in a note in the RfC that time that the RfC is opened shouldn't count against the aging of the article or RfC. If the DYK mavens are unable to adjust their rules to allow for that, they're being overly pedantic in my opinion and I can't help that.
As to your other point, since I'm seeing this late and the thread has moved on, I'll respond privately on your talk page. Herostratus (talk) 20:31, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose nomination altogether on purely procedural grounds. There is an open community RfC (here) which supercedes this local discussion. I hatted this discussion (just for the duration of the RfC), since it is no longer the controlling discussion, but an editor didn't accept that. I leave it as an exercise to the reader why that might be so. It looks like we have two options on the table here:
  1. Running the community RfC to see if the community as a whole wants this DYK to appear on the page. If the DYK is accepted, there should be no problem, so nothing is lost except a bit of time.
  2. Creating a huge problem in order to push through a proposal before the community has a chance to consider it, rending the matter moot.

I kind of like #1 better. I don't have a strong opinion on the merits of the DYK. I do have a strong opinion on whether purely local discussion trump community RfCs. This sort of thing comes up all the time, with small groups of editors proposing some idiosyncratic spelling or whatnot. That's fine when it's not contentious. This proposal is. It needs to be discussed more widely. This discussion is not operative at this time. The RfC is. Herostratus (talk) 15:49, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

The problem hers is that running to a RfC was extremely premature. Site-wide RfCs should be called on to solve protracted and difficult disagreements, and I really don't see anything remotely of that nature here after several days of discussion. This is like if your neighbor's dog has shat upon your driveway, and you file a complaint with the Supreme Court. As noted above, some critics of this external website came here to get their licks in, and now that that is spent there shouldn't be much contention, just get back to a normal DYK discussion. Tarc (talk) 16:28, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
I don't think it was premature because, unlike (say) articles where we have all the time we need to thrash it out, this is a time-sensitive matter. If attention to matter wasn't brought quickly, the (relatively few) watchers of DYK would have the decision, the matter would have become moot, and the DYK would have appeared on the main page. This could give at least the appearance of a coupe de main and I don't see how anyone could support that. As to the other point, if as you say there shouldn't be much contention, then the RfC will be answered overwhelmingly in the affirmative, so don't worry about it. Herostratus (talk) 01:33, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Your continued retorts to this are bordering on disruptive WP:IDHT; it doesn't matter one whit whether it would be "overwhelmingly in the affirmative", it never should have existed in the first place. The RfC creation was a very bad judgement call on your part, borne out by the fact that NO ONE has has actually "voted" in the affirmative or the negative; the entire discussion is on your poor filing. Man up and withdraw it. Tarc (talk) 02:23, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
I'd rather characterize my posts as replies rather than retorts. How disruptive they are is not for me to judge, but I'm trying to hear you. I get that you think the RfC was a very bad thing. I hear you. I assume that is not related to the content of this particular DYK but either to the idea of an RfC being run on any DYK, or the particular way this one was created. Am I right so far? If not please help me to understand better. If the problem is the former, I've opened a thread here: Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment#Question re RfC on main page issues. It may be too late to affect the RfC already opened, but at least it gives editors the chance to prevent this sort of thing in future, assuming that they want to. Does that help? Is the problem is with the structure of the RfC, e.g. that the question is not worded neutrally? If this is your objection, it's not clear to me (admittedly, I may be obtuse).
I hear you about the timing being premature. I don't know what to say about that; I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, as I've explained before, I believe there are a couple of constraints -- time being one, the focus of the DYK vetting process mostly being deliberately (and properly) on purely mechanical issues (Is the hook short enough? Is the article not too old? Is the article properly referenced? and so on) being another -- that don't allow us the luxury of that we have in articles of kicking things around for a few weeks or months before going to RfC. If an RfC is ever legitimate on a DYK, would it make sense to run it after the DYK has appeared on the main page? That would not seem useful to me. You don't have to agree, but that seems at least reasonable, to me.
As far as process, I always thought that RfC is the next step (if WP:3O doesn't apply, as it doesn't here) after talking about it. I'm not sure what steps I should have taken before initiating the RfC. If you could describe them more precisely, that would help me. RfC is not punitive, and not usually a ploy (it can be). I do want to hear other voices on the question, and I don't greatly care which way it goes.
As to withdrawing the RfC, sorry, but I can't do that now even if I wanted to. It doesn't work like that. (It's true that, as a courtesy and expedient, we sometimes allow nominators to withdraw some proposals, but only if no one else or hardly anyone else has contributed, or if new information or a clear voting trend points to a WP:SNOW endgame. None of that applies in this case.) Herostratus (talk) 16:42, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
  • On hold I am keeping this review on hold until the WT:DYK discussion finishes! --Tito Dutta (contact) 16:05, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Symbol possible vote.svg Right now it is nominated for deletion. If consensus agrees to delete, then I could reject the nomination. However, there is deletion review. Keep your fingers crossed, especially if the closure rationale does not match the consensus. --George Ho (talk) 08:14, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

  • Oppose Nomination Given that an AFD (Potential COI note: I did vote "delete" at the AFD) on this subject is in effect and the current back-and-forth on this very page is getting heated, I think that adding this article to DYK at this time would not be productive due to instability. How many discussions about this are going around? I'm getting confused! Ripberger (talk) 08:26, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
  • The heat has nothing to do with the nom really. Some people are just getting bent out of shape over WO itself, rather than the article. Overall, the article is stable and the current AfD is likely to be closed as keep as well.--The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 15:39, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
  • The second AfD (initiated like two days after the first one was closed as keep) is spurious - essentially a cynical tactic to scupper this nom. It's WP:GAME and shouldn't affect this nomination particularly since, as DA says above, it's probably gonna get closed as keep.Volunteer Marek 16:13, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Who exactly is responsible for creating the controversy again? Most people who are ambivalent on WO see no serious issue with the article or nom. A DYK shouldn't be declined just because a few people vehemently disagree with what the subject of the article does, as opposed to actually pointing out a serious issue with the article or nom itself. Many DYK entries go through the deletion discussion ringer and get on the main page.--The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 01:03, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
  • It wasn't. - No, it actually was. And to the extent there's some controversy here is because you and one or two others are working very very hard to create it. A single legitimate reason for not running this has not been provided and you yourself seemed ok with the above hook just short while ago.Volunteer Marek 02:34, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
I suspect paid editing. In fact I'm accusing wikiocracy of paid editing, could you imagine how scandalous that would be LOL. Is Alf.laylah.wa.laylah Eric Barbour's middle eastern alias? I'm kidding BTW as they're hypersensitive of paid editing on wikipedia..♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 18:07, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
Did you [all] know that WP:Dispute resolution is that a way? Sigh. Ripberger (talk) 02:03, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Elder Village

Created by Piledhigheranddeeper (talk). Self nominated at 13:01, 21 May 2013 (UTC).

  • I'm currently reviewing this article. I'll be back soon with any suggestions or comments! Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:21, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg I've completed the copyright check and corrected a slightly too close paraphrase in one spot. However, there is a {{citation needed}} on the hook fact, which will need to be corrected before this can be featured on the main page. Additionally, the final sentence, "Established jointly by NCB Capital Impact and Beacon Hill Village, and developed in response to requests from Villages nationwide, the VtV network serves as a clearinghouse for inter-Village communications and helps communities establish and operate their own Villages", looks slightly too promotional for an article that will be featured on the main page. Once these two issues are corrected, you should be good to go. Good luck! Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:39, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
  • The "citation needed" was actually for the last line of that paragraph, now removed; final sentence re-written.--Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 17:04, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Douglas Maclean

Sir Douglas Maclean

5x expanded by Schwede66 (talk). Self nominated at 02:01, 21 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg All looks good. Over 5 times expanded; long enough; within policy; Non BLP; Good Hook. -Good to go. Rushton2010 (talk) 00:37, 22 May 2013 (UTC)


C. Daniel Clemente

  • ... that Dan Clemente developed and built the first residential condo complex in Virginia, which sold out before construction finished?

Created by Ip208man (talk). Self nominated at 16:59, 19 May 2013 (UTC).

  • The article is new and long enough (6,114 characters). It is within policy, tagged within BLP. The hook is not too long (130 characters). Its interesting and cited in the text of the article. Since the nominator still did not have more than 5 DYK nominations they are not required to review another nomination. I AGF that this condo complex was sold out before construction was finished (source is not available online). The nominator did a very good job for somebody who has less than 500 edits on wikipedia. Symbol voting keep.svg --Antidiskriminator (talk) 07:18, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Current nominations

Articles created/expanded on May 20

Palacio Municipal de Caracas

Lighted night view of Palacio Municipal de Caracas

  • ... that the edifice (pictured) was the focal point for the Constitutional Convention and signing of the Declaration of Independence of Venezuela in the nineteenth century hence known as the "cradle of independence”?

Created by Ipigott (talk), Nvvchar (talk), Dr. Blofeld (talk). Nominated by Nvvchar (talk) at 04:08, 25 May 2013 (UTC).

Chełmno Trials

Łódź District Court

  • ... that the Chełmno Trials held in Poland and Germany (location pictured) of the Chełmno extermination camp personel, took place almost twenty years apart, with the final conviction 12 years ago? (see ALTs)

Created by Poeticbent (talk). Self nominated at 14:58, 23 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg A substantial new article - well done. Some copyvio spot checks returned clean results. I have indicated where additional citations are needed and I suspect, by looking at the text version in the edit window, that this can be fixed by simply repeating references that are placed at the end of the next paragraph. QPQ done. I'm not sure about the hook, though, as it's a bit confusing. With the final conviction in 2001 and the 20 years between trials, the hook implies that the trials started in 1981, which is not the case. Maybe that could be avoided by simply dropping the 20 years apart bit, or alternatively by dropping the final conviction part. Personally, I find the 2001 final conviction the more interesting part, as it's 56 years after the war finished! The picture description is also not unproblematic, as 'location pictured' appears immediately after 'Germany', whereas it is the Polish court building. None of this should be hard to fix, though. Schwede66 19:48, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
Always a pleasure working with you, Schwede66. I added a few more anchors per request and fixed the umlauts in the German ranks of the SS. Please take a look at a couple of ALTs below. Poeticbent talk 04:06, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Both ALT1 and ALT2 are good to go. My preference is for ALT2. Schwede66 06:01, 24 May 2013 (UTC)


List of awards and nominations received by S. P. Balasubrahmanyam

5x expanded by Vensatry (talk). Self nominated at 07:49, 23 May 2013 (UTC).

Great northern tilefish

Tilefish digging tunnel

Created/expanded by JackFrost2121 (talk). Self nominated at 21:07, 21 May 2013 (UTC).

Symbol question.svg Wondering if that G should be capitalized. In some parts of the article, the whole common name is lower case; in others, it's all upper case (thought we only did that for birds). I think some people capitalize the first letter, I personally leave them all lower case... I don't know what the official rule is. Should be uniform throughout the article at any rate. Sorry for babbling, just a nitpick. Thx.Tortie tude (talk) 20:09, 22 May 2013 (UTC)


William Post

Created by 069952497a (talk). Self nominated at 13:49, 20 May 2013 (UTC).

Symbol question.svg Date, size are fine. I have some notability concerns, however, and I'd like a second opinion from another reviewer whether we shouldn't AfD this first. Also, the hook could be improved, something about him being included in the list(s) of most unlucky lottery winners would make a better one than about being sued. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:47, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
ALT1:... that William Post, who won $16.2 million in the Pennsylvania Lottery, has been one of the unluckiest lottery winners, eventually ending up $1 million in debt?
I've had a look and my gut feeling is that it'll pass (just). There's no harm to prod it, though, and take it through to AfD if somebody deprods it (which is likely). Then we'll know for sure. Schwede66 06:11, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
I don't think there are any notability problems; Post has been covered by multiple independent, reliable secondary sources, including Time, Forbes, the Washington Post, and the book Vitally Useless Information. Admittedly in many of them he is not the main subject; however, he receives much more than just a passing mention in the references provided in the article. 069952497aComments and complaintsStuff I've done 20:38, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
Ok, we have an article with a notability template and as such, it can't go onto the front page. What do we do? Piotrus, do you want to put it up at AfD so that we know, once and for all? I'm not sure that I myself could or should start an AfD process, given that I said above that "my gut feeling is that it'll pass (just)." Schwede66 23:50, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

T-Dog (The Walking Dead)

  • ... that IronE Singleton's stint as T-Dog in The Walking Dead was only supposed to last a few episodes, but ended up spanning three seasons?

5x expanded by BOZ (talk). Self nominated at 22:39, 22 May 2013 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on May 21

Lettuce production in China

Stem lettuce a popular variety in China
  • ... that China is the world's leader of lettuce production, (pictured) producing approximately half of the world's lettuce?

Created by Rosiestep (talk), Nvvchar (talk), Bonkers The Clown (talk), and Dr. Blofeld (talk). Nominated by Dr. Blofeld (talk) at 17:23, 25 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg The article generally seems ok but it could use some polish. For example, the hook phrase in the article — "The country has long been the leading lettuce producer in the world" — is sourced to a marketing organisation which is focussed on the USA, not China. That seems weak when one can find a better source like this instead. The hook also seems a bit ungrammatical and the article could use some copy-editing — for example, paring not pairing. Note also that the lion dance involves "plucking the greens" which, in my experience, is usually lettuce. Perhaps there's a better hook there? Anyway, please consider these points and then I'll re-review. Andrew Davidson (talk) 18:24, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Reviewed Template:Did you know nominations/Syair Siti Zubaidah Perang Cina

Transdev Melbourne

  • ... that Transdev Melbourne will take over operation of 30% of Melbourne, Australia's bus network in August 2013?
  • Reviewed: I have not reviewed another article.

5x expanded by Mo7838 (talk), Liamdavies (talk). Nominated by Liamdavies (talk) at 13:27, 25 May 2013 (UTC).

Palacio de las Academias

Palacio de las Academias

  • ... that the modifications and additions made in Neogothic style with spires presented the façade of Palacio de las Academias (pictured) with forty windows and doors?

Created by Ipigott (talk), Nvvchar (talk), Rosiestep (talk), Bonkers The Clown (talk), and Dr. Blofeld (talk). Nominated by Nvvchar (talk) at 12:12, 25 May 2013 (UTC).

Symbol confirmed.svg very nice PumpkinSky talk 13:23, 25 May 2013 (UTC)


Gene Venzke

Moved to mainspace by Sideways713 (talk). Self nominated at 20:41, 24 May 2013 (UTC).

Arunima Sinha

Created/expanded by Ralfan (talk). Self nominated at 14:57, 24 May 2013 (UTC).

Symbol confirmed.svg Good to go, new and long enough, a very interesting subjet. Congrats. Javier Espinoza 03:11, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, Javier! -- Ralfan (talk) 15:35, 25 May 2013 (UTC) 11:27, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

New York City FC

Created by Falastur2 (talk), Mosmof (talk). Nominated by The C of E (talk) at 17:08, 23 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Comment: Don't obfuscate the article link with a different subject. I've proposed ALT1 below to resolve this issue. Mindmatrix 18:58, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
  • ALT1: that the New York Mets objected to the plans by New York City FC to build a new stadium within sight of Citi Field?
  • Comment: I was going to nominate this myself until I realised it was already nominated. Personally I would've gone for a pull just about NYCFC being MLS' 20th franchise, and possibly mentioning its ownership. Seems more broad and defining than a comment about the Mets opposing stadium plans, but that's just me. Falastur2 Talk 23:16, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment: ...not to mention that shouldn't it refer to the "FC" on the end? Anyone who hasn't heard of the team launch will not understand why the City itself needs a stadium? Falastur2 Talk 08:20, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
  • I read it yesterday, but I admit I came back to this page and then realised I was in a rush to leave home to go out (I forgot I would have internet access here as well) and I clearly paid no attention to the alt when I wrote that last comment. You have me, I withdraw the last comment, though I still wonder whether the alt would serve better by commenting on the founding of the club, which is an event which has generated a lot of interest as well as controversy in and of itself. I don't want to make this sound like I'm absolutely fixated on this though. If it ends up being about the Mets and Citi field then so be it. I just wanted to throw out the alternative. If you disagree, or even aren't sure, then by all means choose to disregard my suggestion. It was only ever intended to be a suggestion. Falastur2 Talk 08:41, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
I also think there's better possibilities for a hook, to me the Mets thing is a peripheral issue. Particularly as the NYT reference used says "Mets officials declined to comment on the deal". Two alts suggested below. Oldelpaso (talk) 11:20, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

John Hales (died 1608)

Created by NinaGreen (talk). Self nominated at 21:14, 21 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Article new enough, long enough, and adequately cited. Hook short enough, interesting enough, and also cited. Article appears to be neutral and free of copyright violations and plagiarism. Cheers!♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 10:23, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg Which mark? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 04:14, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Good point. I've added a clarifying link to the hook. NinaGreen (talk) 16:54, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Its still not clarifying enough. Mark was a currency used in various countries. Estonian mark, Polish marka, Deutsche Mark, and more. Plus the subject was in England and was mark any kind of currency used there too? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 17:33, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
If you click on the link, it defines it (i.e. in England the mark was a unit of currency, but never appeared as a coin). NinaGreen (talk) 18:29, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Passing per Doc's review if this is the best we can clarify. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 04:34, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Carlos Rojas Pavez

Carlos Rojas, 28th Mayor of Pichilemu

  • Comment: May give translations if requested.

Created by Lester Foster (talk). Self nominated at 01:06, 21 May 2013 (UTC).


Glenford Bank

A brick building with large arched windows

  • ... that the Glenford Bank (pictured) has been converted into a house?

Created by Nyttend (talk). Self nominated at 05:14, 21 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Refs, length: everything checks out, nice article! Lester Foster (talk | talk) 20:42, 21 May 2013 (UTC)


Echolocation jamming

Moved to mainspace by Shii (talk). Self nominated at 11:03, 21 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Added Ajcoyote as also major contributor. --George Ho (talk) 21:44, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Bertholdia trigona

  • Symbol question.svg. Nice article. Length, date and references verified. No copy vio. I would suggest an ALT 1 hook as below as it covers bats also and an img could be fitted. Img is freely licensed.--Nvvchar. 14:04, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
  • ALT 1 Hook ... that the tiger moth Bertholdia trigona (pictured) produces clicks at a very high rate (up to 4,500 clicks per second) to jam bat echolocation?
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Good 2 go. No QPQ necessary. Both hooks are sourced within the article, specifically and generally in numerous places, since the jamming is the article's entire content. — Maile (talk) 13:22, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 22

Siskiyou Summit, Siskiyou Pass

Snow clearance on Siskiyou Summit

5x expanded by Nvvchar (talk), Rosiestep (talk), Dr. Blofeld (talk). Nominated by Dr. Blofeld (talk) at 19:19, 25 May 2013 (UTC). Reviewed Template:Did you know nominations/St Helen's Priory, Derby, Template:Did you know nominations/Panamericana Suite

Valisia LeKae

  • Reviewed: not a self-nom

Created by Flami72 (talk). Nominated by TonyTheTiger (talk) at 14:00, 25 May 2013 (UTC).

Marvin Miller Man of the Year Award

Created by Go Phightins! (talk), AutomaticStrikeout (talk). Nominated by AutomaticStrikeout (talk) at 02:37, 25 May 2013 (UTC).

John C. Handy

Dr. John Handy

Created by Btphelps (talk). Self nominated at 23:26, 24 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Article is new enough, long enough, fully referenced. Hook 199 characters long without the "(pictured)", verified against online source. Image copyright fine. QPQ required. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:18, 25 May 2013 (UTC)


Mari Gerekmezyan

Created by Proudbolsahye (talk). Self nominated at 01:28, 23 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol voting keep.svg New enough, sources look good (English sources are a museum and a seemingly major publication; the Turkish sources look reliable), length is 62% past the minimum, hook is in article. I was concerned about copyvio/close paraphrasing at first, but on reconsideration I realised that it's not a problem; you're copying things like the names of awards, the names of artworks, and lists composed in an unoriginal fashion, so you're fine. Either the long poem is PD, or it's a good fair-use candidate, since it's apparently highly relevant to her life. Nyttend (talk) 04:44, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Rothley Temple

Rothley Preceptory Chapel

5x expanded by Rushton2010 (talk). Self nominated at 00:08, 23 May 2013 (UTC).

  • The following has been checked in this review by Maile
  • QPQ By Rushton2010 on May 22, 2013
  • Article is well sourced
  • Image used is licensed on Commons by its creator
  • Eagwig @ Toolserver run, no copyvio
  • The hook is short enough and properly sourced online 1 and 2
  • Article created by 62.254.64.14 on August 14, 2005 with pre-expansion Stub size of 948 characters of readable prose
  • DYK Check confirms expansion by Rushton2010 began May 23, 2013 and is currently at 3,396 characters of readable prose, falling short of the 4,740 characters needed.
  • I am placing a notice on the Rushton2010's talk page, for further expansion. — Maile (talk) 14:15, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
I've lengthened it from 8,308 bytes ((1,631 when I started few days ago) to 11,726 bytes; so hopefully that should do the trick. :) Rushton2010 (talk) 15:33, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Good 2 Go. DYK Check confirms the readable prose is now 5,742 characters of readable prose. Good job. I enjoyed reading this article. — Maile (talk) 15:48, 25 May 2013 (UTC)


Syair Siti Zubaidah Perang Cina

Created by Crisco 1492 (talk). Self nominated at 15:19, 22 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Article new enough, long enough, and adequately cited. Hook short enough, interesting enough, and also cited, original hook preferred. Article appears to be neutral and free of copyright violations and plagiarism. Cheers!♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 17:25, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Jaws' Teeth

Moved to mainspace by The C of E (talk). Self nominated at 08:18, 22 May 2013 (UTC).

Symbol question.svg Hold on till the merger discussion at Talk:Jaws_(James_Bond)#Merger_proposal ends. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 18:31, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 23

Laryngeal tube

A photograph of a standard Laryngeal tube (disposable) size 5

  • Comment: The source of the hook fact is found in the last two sentences of the section ==Use and Efficacy==

Created by Ochiwar (talk). Self nominated at 11:10, 25 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg. Length, date and hook reference are all fine. Img is freely licensed. But the hook lenght is slightly longer by 3ch. Pl reduce to 200ch or less.
  • Thanks for the review. Have shortened the hook a little. Should be under 200ch now. Ochiwar (talk) 15:13, 25 May 2013 (UTC)


Men's parking space

  • Comment: quirky enough? - first DYK of author, may need care and advice in reviewing

Created by Serten (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 11:05, 25 May 2013 (UTC). I liked the indian perspective hereSerten (talk) 11:21, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

ALT1
  • ... that Times of India quoted the Mayor of tiny Triberg, Germany, complaining about his secretary's failure to park her car in the 'men only'", men's parking spaces, but invites women to take the challenge anyway?
ALT2
ALT3
I copyedited the main and alt1 hooks. I like ALT1 the best. PumpkinSky talk 11:33, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
  • I don't think to link from within a quote is wanted, especially not for the article in question, but would like to learn differently. If we do it we do it as I tweaked further, because the article is not about "men only" ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:40, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Fish soup bee hoon

A glass of cognac, an ingredient used to make fish soup in Singapore

Created by Bonkers The Clown (talk). Self nominated at 13:34, 24 May 2013 (UTC).

  • This article appears to meet most of the criteria, however the "Preparation" section looks a bit brief to me and I would like to see a little more detail there before giving this a pass. Gatoclass (talk) 14:55, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the review. Much appreciated, but is it really a must? I really can't find more. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 15:14, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Well, one source at least states that the fish head/fish bones are boiled "for hours" to give the dish a somewhat creamy consistency, you could add that to start with. Gatoclass (talk) 15:19, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Done as requested. Hope it's alright now. :-) ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 08:03, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
I've given it a tweak myself, however, now I'm not sure about the hook as only one establishment is known to make the soup with brandy and it doesn't use fried noodles, so a new hook may be necessary, but I can't think of one right now. Gatoclass (talk) 11:04, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
Actually, I know at least four other stalls which use brandy, but I can't add that it. Well, the hook doesn't suggest that it's consumed together, so I guess it's okay. I want it to sound quirky, you know, like milk with fried noodles (?) ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 11:07, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
Quirky is fine but incorrect is not. I guess the existing hook might work with the addition of a phrase such as "a range of ingredients including ...". Gatoclass (talk) 11:17, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
Okay, implemented. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 13:32, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Okay, I have verified the article, all that is required now is for someone to verify the hook. Gatoclass (talk) 15:07, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg The image of brandy is not in the article. Also, I don't think an image of brandy would make any significance whatsoever, as brandy may be replaced with a substitute by someone else. Haven't check the article yet. --George Ho (talk) 16:47, 25 May 2013 (UTC)


Tygodnik Ilustrowany

Cover of Tygodnik Ilustrowany nr 121/1862r

Created by Piotrus (talk). Self nominated at 06:25, 24 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg The article is great. I enjoyed reading it. Image is GTG. However, I found the hook to be a little bland. Any newspaper that has made it to Wikipedia is "major" in one way or another. I just don't think the hook is at par with what the article truly deserves. I did find some other interesting potential hooks like "It was the oldest cultural periodical published in Warsaw" or "It is credited with popularizing woodcut illustrations in Poland". Hooks in these regards may catch the eye of the reader better. Maybe you can provide some alternative hooks and we can go from there? Proudbolsahye (talk) 03:09, 25 May 2013 (UTC)


MIM-4 Nike Ajax

Nike Ajax in firing position

Created by Maury Markowitz (talk). Self nominated at 21:27, 23 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg By my count, you have nominated more than five DYKs without a QPQ. Please review another nomination. Once you have done so, I will AGF on the offline source, and we are good to go. Nice article, by the way. Go Phightins! 00:53, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
    • The article is nor fully referenced. How about adding the missing references? Hawkeye7 (talk) 09:59, 25 May 2013 (UTC)


Cyril Smart

  • ... that Cyril Smart, an English cricketer, was such a powerful hitter than he once took a world-record thirty-two runs off a single over, and held the record number of sixes for his club, Glamorgan?

Created/expanded by SGGH (talk). Self nominated at 15:58, 23 May 2013 (UTC).

Sambal stingray

Barbecued stingray with sambal chilli paste

Created by Bonkers The Clown (talk). Self nominated at 15:31, 23 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg The sugar claim is cited by a book (that I am not able to access) while the peanut claim is supported through the source. However, the sentence (nor does the ref) states that it is a dish eaten by Singaporeans.
The title of the book is Singapore Food and the peanut claim is supported by a recipe linked to an article talking about food in Singapore... What more can I say? (Just had some two days ago.) ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 04:43, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg DYK is ready to go. Best, jonatalk to me 13:40, 24 May 2013 (UTC)


Panggilan Darah

Soerip, 1941

  • ... that both stars of the 1941 film Panggilan Darah (Soerip pictured) continued to act until 1990?

Created by Crisco 1492 (talk). Self nominated at 15:01, 23 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Length, date, hook reference are all in order. No copy vio. Img is freely licensed. Good to go.--Nvvchar. 18:13, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg Its very common for actors to be acting for 50 years or so. Whats so interesting about it? Also, why is this film's article talking about what the actors did in future? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 03:57, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Well, Dharmadhyaksha, I thought it was interesting that both leads did it, and both stopped in the same year. This article is providing some historical context, as in where this film sits in their individual filmographies. Such a legacy section has been accepted in featured articles like Terang Boelan or good articles like Gagak Item, so no compelling reason not to have it. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:28, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg I still don't find it interesting but reinstating green signal given by Nvvchar. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 10:55, 25 May 2013 (UTC)


Kanamori Tokujiro

Created by Yunshui (talk). Self nominated at 13:22, 23 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg New enough, long enough, well referenced to reliable print and online sources, no evidence of plagiarism or overly close paraphrasing. Hook short enough, interesting enough, accurate and inline referenced to reliable source.

    For the benefit of the general reader with no knowledge of Japanese constitutional history, it might be worth adding to the article a few words to explain what the "emperor organ" theory was: perhaps abbreviate/paraphrase para 2 sentence 2 of Tatsukichi Minobe#Biography. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 13:53, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Pteraster militaris

Created by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self nominated at 09:57, 23 May 2013 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on May 24

Benjamin Odeje

Created by MrStoofer (talk), Struway2 (talk). Nominated by Struway2 (talk) at 11:26, 25 May 2013 (UTC).

Parvulastra parvivipara

Created by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self nominated at 06:20, 25 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Article new enough, long enough, and adequately cited. Hook short enough, interesting enough, and also cited. Article appears to be neutral and free of copyright violations and plagiarism. Cheers!♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 12:31, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Hasan Cemal

Created by Proudbolsahye (talk). Self nominated at 03:11, 25 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Support it, a good and new article about an interesting person. 1,500+ characters and new enough.--Chauahuasachca (talk) 08:10, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Fallout: Equestria

Created by Intelligent Deathclaw (talk). Nominated by ViperSnake151 (talk) at 01:52, 25 May 2013 (UTC).

In the Hands of the Prophets

5x expanded by Miyagawa (talk). Self nominated at 22:09, 24 May 2013 (UTC).

St Catherine of Siena Church, Cocking

Cocking church from the south

  • Reviewed: QPQ to follow.

Created/expanded by Daemonic Kangaroo (talk). Self nominated at 15:16, 24 May 2013 (UTC).

Flag of Senegal

Flag of Senegal

5x expanded by Bloom6132 (talk). Self nominated at 11:26, 24 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Article was expanded 5x by Bloom6132 on 24 May. (From two lines of text to a substantial and interesting article! Bon travail, merci!) It's long enough, well written, and well sourced. (Compare Drapeau du Sénégal!)
  • Hook is interesting, appropriate, of proper length, and verified ici et ici (although pour les autres, chrétiens et animistes, l'etoile peut representer des valeurs alternatifs).
  • Wikilinked Islam in Senegal in the hook, since this article seems highly relevant. (Consider also linking from article.)
  • Picture is legally usable and (unlike many) would be well visible on the front page.
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Primary hook, good to go! groupuscule (talk) 10:17, 25 May 2013 (UTC) et pardon mon francais mal, svp.


Crurifarcimen

Created by Yunshui (talk). Self nominated at 08:27, 24 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Looks good to go: New article; long enough prose; within policy and fully referenced. Interesting Hook with 2 online sources. No image to worry about. Rushton2010 (talk) 15:43, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Fortifications of Gibraltar

5.25-inch dual purpose gun at Princess Anne's Battery, Gibraltar

Created by Prioryman (talk). Self nominated at 08:21, 24 May 2013 (UTC).

Notification to reviewers
Per the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Did you know/GibraltarPediA Options, Gibraltar-related articles are temporarily being reviewed by two individuals. In addition to the regular DYK criteria, at least one reviewer should also indicate whether they perceive any conflict of interest or promotional concerns about the article under review. IP addresses and Victuallers are not allowed to do the reviews. When you have completed a review, please update the respective table below to change the background color to green and note that the review has been completed.
First review required
  • As far as I can see, this claim is said to have been made by John Chapple, but no source for his quote is provided. Fram (talk) 09:24, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
    • You're quite right, I had meant to add this citation but forgot. It's resolved now. Prioryman (talk) 10:32, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Second review required



Viva Móvil by Jennifer Lopez

Created/expanded by Status (talk). Self nominated at 01:10, 24 May 2013 (UTC).

  • I moved the name to "Viva Móvil"; hopefully, it is commonly used in sources. --George Ho (talk) 01:47, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
  • For what reason? The service is called Viva Móvil by Jennifer Lopez (obviously in a maneuver to use her name to get people to buy it).  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 01:50, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Someone else moved it back to the short title based on WP:AN (not ANI). --George Ho (talk) 16:20, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 25

Notre Dame Cathedral, Taiohae

Façade of the old Notre Dame Cathedral now preserved as the entrance

5x expanded by Bloom6132 (talk). Self nominated at 20:48, 25 May 2013 (UTC).

David Jay Brown

David Jay Brown in 2009

Created/expanded by Binksternet (talk). Self nominated at 20:16, 25 May 2013 (UTC).

En Canot, Im Boot (Metzinger)

Black and white reproduction of En Canot by Jean Metzinger

  • ... that Jean Metzinger's painting En Canot (black and white photo pictured) was listed in the Nazi's Degenerate Art exhibit catalog with the notation "Even this was once taken seriously and bought for good money!"?
  • Reviewed: Not required (not a self-nom), but I sorta reviewed Atlanta Braves
  • Comment: The image is public domain in the US, which I think is sufficient for DYK.

Created by Coldcreation (talk). Nominated by Mandarax (talk) at 19:17, 25 May 2013 (UTC).

St Helen's Priory, Derby

Created by Rushton2010 (talk). Self nominated at 15:49, 25 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Article new enough, long enough, and adequately cited. Hook short enough, interesting enough, and also cited. Article appears to be neutral and free of copyright violations and plagiarism. You could expand the lead to summarize the article though. Cheers!♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 19:31, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Panamericana Suite

Created by Jaespinoza (talk). Self nominated at 01:27, 25 May 2013 (UTC).

Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Arunima Sinha. Javier Espinoza 03:12, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Article new enough, long enough, and adequately cited. Hook short enough, interesting enough, and also cited. Article appears to be neutral and free of copyright violations and plagiarism. Cheers!♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 19:31, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Special occasion holding area

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

May 27 (Memorial Day)

Arlington Memorial Amphitheater

Aerial view of the Arlington Memorial Amphitheater

  • Comment: For use on Memorial Day, May 27th. --PFHLai (talk) 10:55, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

5x expanded by Tim1965 (talk). Nominated by PFHLai (talk) at 10:55, 21 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg 5× expansion completed from 1,465 characters before May 14 to 32,000+ characters on May 16 (and presently). Article is well-sourced, with at least one ref per paragraph. Hook is just under the max 200 characters at 198 (excluding the (pictured) part), is interesting and is supported by inline ref 42. Ref AGF since this is an offline book source. No need for QPQ, since this isn't a self nom. Image is free and looks good even at small size. Looks good to go! —Bloom6132 (talk) 20:43, 23 May 2013 (UTC)


4 June

Ajit Singh of Khetri

Ajit Singh Ajit Singh

  • Comment: 5x++ expanded!
  • DATE PEFERENCE: 4 JUNE 2013 SECOND OR THIRD INDIAN SLOT On that day 's evening (Indian Standard Time, year 1891) Vivekananda first met Ajit Singh.

Created/expanded by Titodutta (talk), WhisperToMe (talk), TheMandarin (talk). Nominated by Titodutta (talk) at 22:42, 12 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Citation needed tag, seems to need a bit of a copyedit (fixed a blatant typo just now). License of the image in its description box and template don't match. What year was this published, and why is it public domain? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:53, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
Update: Fixed license, the image was taken on 18 June 1897 at The Lafayette Studio, 179 New Bond Street, London, W and was circulated at the same time. Added citation. --Tito Dutta (contact) 14:14, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Do you have proof of publication? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:18, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Swami Vivekananda, The Friend of All, by RKM, Institute of Culture, Kolkata has some information. Similar information has been provided by Bengali writer Sankar. On that day, multiple images of Singh were taken. Another image with same attire can be found here. Doing copyedit works! --Tito Dutta (contact) 14:31, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Still some issues: statements like "was famous for his patronage of real talent." aren't neutral. What makes RKMission Khetri, lafayette.org.uk, and Vivekananda Online reliable sources. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:25, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Removed that line, but, he was famous for that. Lafayetter is an archive museum of UK, RKMKhetri is official Khetri branch of Ramakrishna Mission and preserving heritage of Ajit Singh, they have an Ajit Singh museum too, for Vivekanandaonline, actually there Wikisource is the primary source, Vivekanandaonline is supporting Wikisource ref! --Tito Dutta (contact) 22:37, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
  • If they're the same letter no need to send people to some unknown site. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:52, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
  • I have removed that source. I can add a second source there if needed! --Tito Dutta (contact) 23:01, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg That should be fine. Everything checks out now: new enough, long enough, AGF on one offline source. No close paraphrasing found, image is fine. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:04, 21 May 2013 (UTC)


67th Tony Awards June 9 and 10

The 67th Tony Awards are set to occur at June 10 0:00 UTC. I am requesting that the first four hooks chosen from this section be placed in the June 10 0:00, June 10 8:00, June 10 16:00, June 9 16:00 queues. If we get 8 or fewer hooks, I am hoping maybe a second hook can be put in each of these queues since these are the times when we are most apt to get readers to review this content. However, if we get more than 8 hooks, I know you will have to spread them out. I also understand that two hooks per queue might be undesirable. Let's see how many hooks we have.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:55, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

A Christmas Story, The Musical

Created by Flami72 (talk), TonyTheTiger (talk). Nominated by TonyTheTiger (talk) at 06:13, 7 May 2013 (UTC).

(ALT1)... that 67th Tony Awards Best Musical nominee A Christmas Story: The Musical was adapted from a 1980s film and Best Revival of a Play nominee The Trip to Bountiful was adapted into a 1980s film?--06:42, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Hook facts are directly cited, article is new and fully referenced. All good to go to be saved for June 10th. Only minor non-DYK quibble is that you've got a couple of different date formats in the citations. But that is absolutely nothing to do with DYK, and so I'm giving this a big old tick. Miyagawa (talk) 08:41, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Let me know when you've finished with that article and I'll conduct the review. Miyagawa (talk) 17:21, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg The Trip to Bountiful (play), reviewed. All looks good for DYK, although from a reader's perspective I'd suggest moving the Play section to the first section so that the article doesn't start with a table directly after the lead. Good to go for DYK, and as it is included in the alt, that is the one I'd suggest be moved to prep as otherwise it'd miss out. I'll leave it up to Tony if he wants to strike out the original hook or not. Miyagawa (talk) 11:23, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Lauren Ward

  • Reviewed: Not a self-nom

Created/expanded by HesioneHushabye (talk), Flami72 (talk), TonyTheTiger (talk). Nominated by TonyTheTiger (talk) at 05:46, 7 May 2013 (UTC).

Symbol confirmed.svg Hook source checks out and so does the date. Ready to go. Tony, if you are nominating this for a specific date, what about putting it there? -SusanLesch (talk) 15:47, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
Moving it now.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:46, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Rob McClure

Created by Flami72 (talk). Nominated by TonyTheTiger (talk) at 03:49, 12 May 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Expanded in time, fairly neutral, I corrected some minor formatting errors, Duplication Detector sees no copyvio. If you could find an image before the awards it might be nice, or maybe Infobox actor?--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 21:07, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Vanya and Sonia and Masha and Spike

Created by TonyTheTiger (talk). Self nominated at 06:55, 29 April 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Well, I can approve this article, whether or not it goes up on its own or in a multi-hook. Personally I think it's better to go with separate hooks, so more attention is drawn to each article. Hook fact is verified in this source[4], though it's written more as a throwaway line in the article. I'd recommend a slight rewrite to the hook:
  • And definitely support holding this for June 10. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:30, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
  • The only way I would go with this as a separate hook is if the others are not approved. I am going for the record.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:01, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Are the multi hooks really that confusing? They don't seem any worse than say the one at Template:Did you know nominations/Ashtabharya et. al.‎ P.S. I just added a new alt4 and a simpleton alt5.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 11:17, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
  • The alt5 there is definitely the most understandable. Because the play titles look like chunks of English text they make the sentences in the hooks tricky to understand. So if you say a lot, the meaning will be lost to the rapid reader. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:40, 22 May 2013 (UTC)