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

[edit] 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

[edit] 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 Template: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, 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 {{Template: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.
  • You can also consider posting this same nomination to the article's talkpage, using the same code.

[edit] 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 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.

[edit] Frequently asked questions

[edit] 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).

[edit] 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.

[edit] Instructions for other editors

[edit] 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., July 2012. 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.

[edit] 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., July 2012. Then save the page. This has the effect of wrapping up the discussion on the DYK nomination subpage in a blue archive box and stating that the nomination was unsuccessful, as well as adding the nomination to a category for archival purposes.

[edit] 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

[edit] 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.

[edit] Nominations

[edit] Older nominations

[edit] Articles created/expanded on May 26

Barack Obama on Twitter

( Review or comment • Article history )

Barack Obama tweeting Barack Obama responding to tweets Barack Obama responding to tweets

Created/expanded by TonyTheTiger (talk). Self nom at 23:20, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

  • Let's not have any more of these unencyclopedic articles ("X on Twitter") on the front page. Drmies (talk) 00:33, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
  • You and your trivia are not the future of WP, Tony. I'm not going to AfD it, but I don't want this tripe on the front page. Drmies (talk) 01:55, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Yes, very much so. I understand you need to up your DYK count, but not with these articles. Drmies (talk) 02:57, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
  • So I go out of my way to create articles for two of the most important twitter accounts and all you have to say is a WP:ATTACK. Please make some sort of cogent statement or none at all.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:08, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Please attempt to muster all of your intellectual capacity and explain why this should not go on the main page after those have without attacking me.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:09, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
  • No personal attack here, Tony, unless you were calling me stupid. This should not go on the main page because it's a trivial article that shouldn't exist. That those other articles exist--surely you're familiar with WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. If there is anything worth noting it can get a paragraph in the main articles. What you and Laura Hale are doing is not beneficial to the project, and if it has to be, "because sources exist", then it still doesn't need to be in the window of the front page. That's a matter of editorial judgment; as a longtime editor and a frequent contributor to DYK, surely I am allowed to make judgment calls. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 04:49, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
  • That category is a great idea, almost as great as that list. As I said, I have no intention of starting an AfD though I invite other editors to give it a shot. I just don't want it on the front page. Drmies (talk) 14:07, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
  • You are not being cogent. You don't want these articles on the main page because you don't think these articles should exist (You described these as "trivial articles that shouldn't exist"), but are not willing to hold a discussion on whether they should exist. Let's either get this resolved or analyze whether they meet WP:WIADYK. You are WP:GAMING the system. Either WP:AFD these or analyze whether they meet WP:WIADYK--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:44, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Sorry--I did try and muster all my intellectual powers, but they may be limited. I have started a merge discussion. You are welcome to weigh in there, of course, if you are willing to stoop down to my admittedly low level of cogency. And in case I was too dense or obtuse: I don't want these articles on the front page because they are an embarrassment. How about that? DYK is a privilege, not a right. Drmies (talk) 17:09, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Pretending to think content should be merged into a place where it will be deleted is not a proper way to delete an article. As a WP veteran, you should know that WP:GAMING the system in that way is not sensible.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:27, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Symbol question.svg This seems to be written with in-world perspective: what on earth's a followee? Doesn't explain on this page or on the Twitter page. What's it all about? Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 15:29, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

But what's one of those? It doesn't say on Twitter; is a friend better than a follower or worse or what? Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 15:57, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
P.S. Perhaps a Venn diagram might help your readers? Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 16:07, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Symbol question.svg Also, I'm not sure this meets Supplementary Rule D7 re reasonable degree of completeness, on at least two grounds: (1) the title is "Barack Obama on Twitter" - but then the article seems to be about @BarackObama, although you say he uses @whitehouse (and also -bo); (is there any difference in the content posted on each? which does he use on what occasions? out of interest, which was he using for Townhall @ the White House?) presumably he also has a presence on Twitter beyond his own feeds? Perhaps that would also be relevant for inclusion under the article title; (2) with millions of followers it seems a notable social phenomenon - but the article lacks any kind of analysis; what is the impact of this, the political significance? sadly many of your best sources, such as Social Media Marketing for Dummies, give only the most trivial of mentions - can you find anything more insightful? Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 18:09, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

  • This genre of article is not well-established yet. It is not clear what is meant by Foo on Twitter. Certainly this could mean all accounts the person uses. I intended it to mean his dedicated profile. I am sure the FLOTUS, VPOTUS and others have issues on the @Whitehouse. I guess it is appropriate to clarify his use of the alternate account though I am not sure that is required at the DYK level. I am sure that there are many Foo on Twitter pages that would span many profiles. If there were a CNN on Twitter page I think it would include two of the top 100 accounts on twitter and several others. It is typical for a Miss USA to use the official Miss USA profile while in office. Thus, Rima Fakih uses @RimaFakih and while in office used @officialrima and @MissUSA. I have to think about what is meant by Barack Obama on Twitter.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:59, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
    • P.S. it is conceivable to me that he had a separate Senator twitter account in 2007, 2008 and 2009. I do not know what that account is. It would not be considered notable unless we could document it in WP:RS though.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:23, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
  • I am not sure what to present in terms of social significance. Are you looking for something like how social media has changed politics. There may be some articles. I am not sure. I could certainly use help finding them. I did find an article describing the demographics of his account.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:43, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for being obliging and I've had a little look as you asked (I'm afraid I have no idea as to the best places): this graduate school paper seems to have some useful data and directions - identifies Obama's Twitter activity as one element in his social network electioneering, alongside Facebook, YouTube, emails, sms, dedicated websites etc; also compares Obama with his rivals; I don't know if I can add much more, but you may have hit on something; what would be great is if you could improve it sufficiently for User:Drmies to be happy to ok it, thanks, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 23:01, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
Thank you, Maculoase, for your comments. This user is probably not going to be happy, but this DYK is not mine to decide. Drmies (talk) 00:48, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
  • FWIW, when someone states all "Foo on Twitter" articles are all unencyclopedic it seems to fly in the face of a recently emerging technology that has gone past the tipping point of mainstream acceptance. I feel the hook should refer instead to the town hall meeting in which Obama took a leading role. The fact that he did so also confirms that this is a note in history much like the town hall meetings that utilize YouTube, another much Wikipedia-discredited technology that also, alas, changed the way people communicate. Insomesia (talk) 20:38, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
    • While I think it is very relevant that he had a town hall, I don't envision much rubbernecking on that kind of hook. DYK's objective is to lure readers to articles. I think the proposed hook will generate the most interest.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:30, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
  • I would love some feedback on image preference.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:31, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
I like the first one, of him tweeting as opposed to the other two labelled as responding to tweets. Insomesia (talk) 23:39, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
Currently, the picture is not in the article because the infobox is in the midst of being constructed. I expect it to be returned to the article soon.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 02:06, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
Infobox is fixed and image is back in the article.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:35, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Putting a temporary hold on this pending the results of the discussion of the three-minute review of this DYK (and three others) at WT:DYK#Speed reviewing. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:36, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
  • I know you guys are short hooks with pictures. You could put this in a picture slot pending decision on which one. I only got one response on best picture. I was hoping for more opinions. I think the third one is the most recognizable, which might get us more pageviews.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:08, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
  • That's hugely speculative. Bieber and Gaga (with a Gaga picture) on the same topic got around 3,000 and 5,000 views each. (I've also yet to see a good analysis of what makes a DYK get more views or less. Lots of random things studied on Wikipedia, but that one not so much.) Besides which, I don't think page views should be a major motivator for picture selection. --LauraHale (talk) 03:30, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Well do you have an opinion on which picture to use or are we suppose to just leave it to the promoter?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:57, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
I'd refer to Wikipedia:Systemic bias and suggest no photo is needed of the current US president, as his face is more than likely familiar to readers already, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 17:05, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
The objective of DYK is to lure pageviews. I think a picture of the Prez doing something unusual will lure more pageviews than most alternatives. Obviously, the hook could be posted without a picture at the discretion of the promoters, however.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:15, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
Obama working on a computer is "unusual"? Is this the first time he's used a computer? – Lionel (talk) 21:20, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

As I was asked to give an opinion on the picture, I am not some one who moves things to the prep area. My personal preference is no picture. Lots and lots of my DYKs with pictures go into the prep area with out pictures. I don't see it as a big deal either way. If the person moving it to the prep area as good to go needs a picture, they can chose whatever one they want. If they don't need a picture, then no picture. --LauraHale (talk) 21:34, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

My request was an opinion about which picture, if one is chosen.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:45, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
Do you really want to put Obama on the front page wasting time with twitter in these economic times? Are you working on the Romney campaign? – Lionel (talk) 22:04, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
@Laura---I always thought they never used my pics on DYK because they don't like me. – Lionel (talk) 22:09, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
@ Lionelt, about one in three to one in five of mine with pictures actually get used. It is completely up to the person who is moving them. If I was insistent that everyone I nominated with a picture got used, we'd still be waiting on half of mine. Pictures are nice if you can get them. I really appreciate when ones taken specifically for the article get used. Expectations that they get used? Not so much and rather annoying as this feels like a repeat where this has been explained to Tony before. tl;dr More people nominate with pictures than are can be used. Topic is irrelevant. --LauraHale (talk) 22:22, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
The last time (and one of the few times) I stronly suggested a picture be used, it got over 25K hits. I think that this one could also get 10-20K as well with a picture. That is why I am asking opinions on the picture.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:36, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
P.S. Laura, please don't make wild baseless accusations that I do this all the time when you know it isn't true. There is a word for stuff like that.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:40, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Symbol redirect vote4.png Given the responses above, which are two people (other than myself) in favor of the first image and two in favor of no image, we should just approve this and let the promoter choose between the first image and no image.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 11:27, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

As long as the approval explains what was actually reviewed, based on the DYK review criteria, I would have no objections. However, absent that list, I would object to a third "Good to go" from Presidentman for the reasons stated at WT:DYK#Speed reviewing. His first approval was even sketchier than the second, being part of a wave of approve-and-promotes on June 1 that had to be reversed. At this point, we need to get another reviewer who's willing to give this some quality time. BlueMoonset (talk) 12:14, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
I have to agree with Drmies, this is really trivial. There's lots more important stuff to both write about and put on the main page. — Puppy of Dog The Teddy Bear • WOOF • 20:40, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
There are certainly an enormous amount of content presented on the main page that are far less important than the most trivial activities of the President of the United States.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:49, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

There has been a discussion regarding fair use for the screencaps used in these articles and weather or not they qualify. Wikipedia:Non-free content review‎#‎File:@justinbieber screenshot cropped.jpg makes it seem unlikely they do. If the screencaps are in the article, this issue needs to be addressed to be sure they actually qualify under Wikipedia's Fair Use policy. --LauraHale (talk) 12:02, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

In that debate you have made no cogent argument as to why a picture of his moptop is preferable to a picture of his tweets.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:05, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
Furthermore the Bieber Twitter account has a copyrightable avatar making his page un-FUR-able.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:16, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Serious concern Can someone explain how this hook gives appropriate weight to the topic of the article and is not a transparent attempt to play political games on our front page? Hipocrite (talk) 12:17, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
    • There is no policy that a hook is suppose to be some sort of weighted summary of the article. Hooks are very commonly quirky tangential elements of an article that are most likely to cause internet rubbernecking.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:05, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
NPOV is a policy for every main space page. This is not that. Hipocrite (talk) 13:23, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
The hook is very NPOV and I could provide 5 citations that back it up. It is no more NPOV than to say that his popularity rose or fell in a particular poll or unemployment went up or down.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:15, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
It is substantially less NPOV than "Barack Obama's Twitter account had 16,505,044 followers,and has posted 4,239 tweets." It's is also not fully descriptive of why the followers were lost, and it's obvious that something untoward is here. Hipocrite (talk) 16:33, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
Hooks that are half the story is what DYK is all about. Your suggested hook would not cause any wonderment, which is desired in a DYK hook.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:00, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
@tiger: Tony, this has been around for a little while now, various issues have been raised, and in the interests of keeping things fresh - I don't know whether you'd be prepared to follow the example of the nominator one above you in the queue (here)? You may be right that there is something in all this, but perhaps a "subject matter expert" might be needed to show the way; D7 etc; and perhaps the same for the Ashton whateverhisnameis page one beneath this one? Thanks, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 19:18, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on May 27

Transformers G1: Awakening

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • Comment: Sourced to Kotaku "Seriously, I don't care if the game turns out to be Optimus Prime versus Soundwave Dance Party, as long as it doesn't feature the Michael Bay-bots and looks vaguely like it does in the screenshot, they have my unspecified amount of dollars."
  • Comment: Further sourced to Pocket Gamer "To be honest, the Transformers film was mostly a pile of rust cleverly disguised as a CGI extravaganza, so we were glad to hear Glu is returning to the classic originator of the franchise with the mobile game follow-up."

Created/expanded by JohnnyMrNinja (talk). Self nom at 07:08, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg The hook is sourced and interesting, and the article has the appropriate length and date. Looks good to go. Ruby 2010/2013 04:01, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svgThe article only quotes one reviewer who said this, not multiple reviewers, let alone reviewers in general. This one reviewer apparently hadn't even seen the game yet.--Carabinieri (talk) 20:24, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
  • There are two quotes on this page that clearly support the hook (above). These are the most direct quotes, and I did not want to keep weighing the article down with this sentiment, but there is also:
  • "Finally! Optimus Prime in all his cel-shaded, Generation 1 glory. Boxy, colorful flat textures that make him pop off the screen like the action figure he was? Why did that take so long to get perfect in a video game?"[1] On the next page: "As this visual history proves, it's tough enough to create a decent Transformers game based on the great cartoons. But creating one as a supplement to the worst live action Transformers movie might be an even worse approach." [2]
  • The full reviews are more professional, but the sentiment is implied in these reviews:
  • "Every so often, you play a game that is so tailored to your interests that you have to wonder if the developer has been nosing through your emails or reading your journal. Glu's new Transformers G1: Awakening is just one of those games: it's Advance Wars, one of my favorite Game Boy Advance games, but it stars the Transformers. And not the Transformers of the recent movies, either. Glu enlisted the crew of the classic cartoons and comics that remain so beloved to an entire generation." [3]
  • "Anyone who holds the original Transformers as the pinnacle of the franchise is in for a treat here. The game looks and sounds like it fell right out of 1985... a surprisingly authentic piece of fan service for long-suffering fans of the original television series..."[4]
  • I can change the hook to "some reviewers" if that makes it better. The fact that those people hadn't played the game yet was sort-of the point. They didn't care what the game was like, they liked it already because it wasn't based on the film. I'd rather not add more negative content to the article just to support the hook, as I think it's supported as-is. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 21:22, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
  • First of all, I apologize for taking a week to respond. However, I'm still concerned that the only person quoted in the article as saying this is Spanner Spencer. If others agreed with him, I feel like this needs to be indicated in the article somehow for it to appear on DYK.--Carabinieri (talk) 19:15, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
  • The other quote is used in the first paragraph under Smartphones; Kotaku's Mike Fahey wrote that he eagerly awaited any game that featured the G1 Transformers over the "the Michael Bay-bots". ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 17:41, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote4.png Needs a new reviewer. Original reviewer has not been on site for 11 days. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:30, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Symbol redirect vote4.png Two-minute review has been questioned; absent a more thorough explanation of the criteria used, a new reviewer and subsequent approval is needed. BlueMoonset (talk) 12:43, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on June 4

Malayisation

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • ... that Malayisation has occurred in five Southeast Asian countries?
  • Reviewed: Not necessary per current DYK nomination.

Created/expanded by Orhanghazi (talk). Nominated by Annas86 (talk) at 09:11, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol question.svgLong enough, just about made the nom on the last possible day. References are either wikilinked or verifiable with ISBNs. Hook is sourced and interesting. Just a few issues/questions: "coastal-trading community with a fluid cultural identity" seems like an opinion, and thus needs the caveat who claims so; "Early History" first 2 paras need citation clarification there; "Later Malay sultanates" end of first para and last para/list needs the same; Malaysia needs on the end of list and third para; and end of Indonesia. most are simple oversights, i imagine, but the first needs some sorting. Otherwise remarkably well done NEW article (a barnstar is in order?) and could be GA or more soon.Lihaas (talk) 14:04, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
Mostly set, I jsut think that one isue in the lead needs to be npov/clarified and ready to post.Lihaas (talk) 12:43, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on June 5

2012 SCO summit

( Review or comment • Article history )

Chinese President Hu Jintao
Add caption text!

  • Reviewed: Samestate
  • Comment: The summit concludes on the 7th, and i dont expect itll get posted soon, so we could change the hook if anything special happens (or this doesnt happn). There also is the logo for the summit, if that image were to be used

Created/expanded by Lihaas (talk). Self nom at 12:00, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol question.svg New enough and long enough. Now that the summit is over, the hook and some of the article needs to be put into the past tense and be updated (I'm thinking particularly about the 'Agenda' section in the article). The lead is very short, and needs to be more like a summary of the article (per MOS:LEAD, not really a failable issue, but it would improve the readability of the article greatly). There is uncited content in the 'Agenda' section (second paragraph), there should be a citation for the quote by Cheng Guoping. I think that's it. Quasihuman (talk • contribs) 13:54, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
DoneLihaas (talk) 16:12, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
We still need a source that says that Afghanistan and Turkey were brought into the union in some way, the current source predates the summit, and just says that this is on the agenda. If this didn't actually happen during the summit, maybe a different hook would be better. Quasihuman (talk • contribs) 16:51, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
Feel free to suggest/change the hook.
Also updated.Lihaas (talk) 13:49, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Good to go, but I suggest the following change to the hook to bring it into the past tense and be more specific (still falling well short of the 200 character mark):
  • Alt1... that the 2012 SCO summit (host pictured) brought Afghanistan and Turkey into the supranational union as observer and dialogue partner respectively.
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Close paraphrasing concerns. Compare for example "the SCO would support a new security concept that would give its member states full control over maintaining its own interests, development trajectories according to each states' conditions and to counter "interventionism"" with "the SCO has advocated a new security concept that allows its member states to firmly maintain their interests, explore development paths that are suited to their individual conditions and fight against "interventionism"". Nikkimaria (talk) 03:02, 2 July 2012 (UTC)


[edit] Articles created/expanded on June 6

Bisbee Massacre

( Review or comment • Article history )

Boot Hill grave marker of Bisbee Massacre murderers

Created/expanded by $1LENCE D00600D (talk). Nominated by Maile66 (talk) at 18:22, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol question.svg I see that the article passes the 1,500 minimum, excluding the newspaper clippings. Nevertheless, I wonder if the newspaper clippings must be transferred to http://en.wikisource.org/, as they are out of copyright and either are too big for any Wikipedia article or must be trimmed down to more relevant passages. --George Ho (talk) 19:05, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
  • I left a message on the editor's talk page. I see what you mean about those clippings. Maile66 (talk) 19:19, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
  • After 10 days, the editor has not responded. This is an editor who looks to be active on a daily basis. Maile66 (talk) 21:11, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Agree with George, that needs to be done. Maile, you could do it yourself. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:47, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
I agree with George, too. But I'm not comfortable working with Wikisource. Needs to be done by someone else. Maile66 (talk) 11:13, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
I've uploaded the NYT source to Wikisource and pared down first paragraph, but I unfortunately don't have access to the original version of the Tombstone Epitaph source. I can't upload it when the only version references a blog. Since it is referenced to a blog only, I would remove it for now and find some other print source about the hangings. Froggerlaura ribbit 01:15, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Symbol redirect vote4.png This article still meets minimum without quotes, including long ones. However, if quotes do not need to be skimmed down, so be it. Let's have another review take care of this. --George Ho (talk) 04:46, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Goéry Delacôte

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by Trevj (talk). Self nom at 15:28, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol possible vote.svg I count 1076 characters of prose text, well short of the bare minimum of 1500. Is any more expansion possible? Also, is it possible to give a more descriptive and less subjective adjective than "successful"? By what metric? Savidan 16:18, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
    Thanks for looking at this. Very sorry - I did it in rather a rush, so will have a further look shortly. -- Trevj (talk) 18:16, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
    I've expanded it (based mainly on one interview, but carefully paraphrased and also drawing on other sources) and now get a "readable prose size" of 3533 bytes. I've also added a couple of ALTs. -- Trevj (talk) 09:38, 7 June 2012 (UTC) For info, I've also unsuccessfully searched for free photos of Delacôte. -- Trevj (talk) 09:40, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
  • OK, I've struck through the original hook as the ALT1 is just restating that without the contentious word 'successful'. I've tweaked the ALTs for the spelling of centre (he was French and that is the spelling in the article) and I've reworded grade skipping in ALT2 (but kept the internal link) and been more specific about how many years he was moved up. Assuming those minor changes don't disqualify me from carrying out the rest of the review - I'll do that within the next few hours. Mikenorton (talk) 19:01, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
    Face-smile.svg Thank you -- Trevj (talk) 19:39, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svgThe length, date and sourcing of the article are fine and there are no plagiarism/copyvio concerns (I made one very short passage into a quote, just to be sure). All the ALTs are short enough and are supported by cites and the relevant sources. Of these, I prefer ALT2 as the most interesting (to me). Mikenorton (talk) 21:09, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg I'm concerned that some of the phrasing used in this article might be too close to that of its sources. Compare for example "he wasn't mature enough to appreciate the literature and poetry studied" with "I wasn't mature enough to really appreciate the literature and poetry taught", or "he further developed their already strong exhibit designs for exploring scientific concepts" with "I developed the strengths they already had in designing exhibits to explore scientific concepts". Nikkimaria (talk) 02:41, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for having a look. If any of the paraphrasing is too close then I apologise profusely. Coincidentally, I did my first ever bit of copyright investigation on 11 June (shortly after this nomination)... and your comment now makes me realise that I should have increased awareness of the policy and cited examples than when I wrote the above article. I'll be happy to check this over the next couple of days. If this nullifies the nomination, so be it. The speedy expansion I did because I cocked up the initial size count obviously wasn't a good idea. Sorry. -- Trevj (talk) 04:01, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
My apologies for failing to pick those up in my review. I suggest that you handle those by turning them into direct quotes. There should be no problem about the nomination once these and any other such problems that might have missed the net have been addressed. Mikenorton (talk) 07:00, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
Crystal Clear app clock-orange.svg In progress -- Trevj (talk) 00:37, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
Apologies for the continuing delay with this. I decided that the easiest way for me would be to work from paper copies. I have these but haven't yet found the time to finish the comparison I started. It's coming, and I'll then reword the article text if necessary. -- Trevj (talk) 08:09, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on June 9

Un Lujo

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • ... that Un Lu*Jo is an album titled after the name of its performers? Created/expanded by Jaespinoza (talk). Self nom at 18:18, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg Length fine. I don't know Spanish, so I'm assuming good faith that the refs are reliable with no copyvio issues. I recommend using another hook, since there's no specific reference that supports it. I realize that it's self-evident, but it's better to be safe than sorry. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 20:06, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
ALT1: ... that Un Lujo is the third collaboration between Lucero and Joan Sebastian? Jaespinoza (talk) 17:50, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
I think this hook (ALT1) needs to be more 'hooky'. It doesn't grab my attention. Secretlondon (talk) 04:04, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
Do you need a QPQ? Secretlondon (talk) 04:06, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Concussions in American football

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • The date for the new article criteria is going to pass after today, and I nominated this page for the new article reason. ZappaOMati 19:33, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Looks like it passed. ZappaOMati 15:24, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
  • The newness factor is for nominating, not reviewing. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:06, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Symbol possible vote.svg Junior Seau doesn't belong in this hook, at least not worded this way. He was not known to have suffered many concussions while playing and the results of his brain examinations are not in yet, therefore it cannot be said that PCS was a factor in his death. The article, in fact, doesn't say this, and the hook shouldn't, either. Daniel Case (talk) 16:56, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Until I fix this, I came up with 2 alternates (one without Seau's mention and the other without him altogether):

ALT1: ... that eight NFL players have died (with five of them being suicides) due in part to concussions having affected their playing careers and later life?
ALT2: ... that seven NFL players have died (with four of them being suicides) due in part to concussions having affected their playing careers and later life? ZappaOMati 22:08, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Still not really sure about this. From what I have read, the link between football-induced CTE and suicide isn't conclusively established, especially since there are so many other risk factors, and the article seems adroitly to avoid saying this. The hook shouldn't either. Daniel Case (talk) 00:59, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
How about I remove the player suicide hook altogether and go with these?:ZappaOMati 15:36, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on June 10

Lesotho women's national football team, Lesotho women's national under-20 team

( Review or comment )
( Article history links: Lesotho women's national football team • Lesotho women's national under-20 team )

Created/expanded by LauraHale (talk). Self nom at 09:41, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Symbol possible vote.svg Sorry Laura, but the prose component of Lesotho women's national football team has only increased slightly, which isn't sufficient to meet the DYK criteria. The Lesotho women's national under-20 team nominally meets the criteria, but most of its content is boilerplate-type text which probably best belongs in a Women's soccer in Lesotho-type article as it's not tied into the material on this team. The length of the prose on this team specifically is only 1095 B. Nick-D (talk) 00:48, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
Commenting: Organisation has been used for several articles so not an issue of putting on Women's football in Lesotho because standard format. In any case, can be withdrawn if it doesn't look eligible. If Lesotho senior women's team alone is eligible, would like it if possible as a stand alone would be good. --LauraHale (talk) 10:24, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

National Strategy for Suicide Prevention

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • Comment: I'm open to any hooks that seem better!

Created/expanded by Insomesia (talk). Self nom at 08:25, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

I just think that would really catch my eye, FWIW. Good luck with it. Tlqk56 (talk) 23:15, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
I retweaked it to -
... that the National Strategy for Suicide Prevention aims to reduce rates of attempted suicides and deaths from suicide in the United States including redesigning autos to avoid carbon monoxide poisoning by asphyxiation?
I think it is better, I like the final retweaked version as its clear that redesigning cars is only a part of the overall plan, not the whole plan.Insomesia (talk) 23:43, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Yes, that's clearer but I don't like the use of includes twice in one sentence. How about saying "by redesigning autos"? It makes it clear the plan only includes that, but doesn't repeat the word. Tlqk56 (talk) 01:43, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
OK, how about ...
... that as part of the National Strategy for Suicide Prevention to reduce rates of attempted suicides and deaths from suicide in the United States, autos are redesigned to avoid carbon monoxide poisoning by asphyxiation?
Better?Insomesia (talk) 02:50, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
well, "are redesigned" implies they they are being redesigned already. If that's true, OK. Otherwise, maybe "would be"? But I know this is nit-picking. I'd just like to see the hook as clear and catchy as possible. :) Tlqk56 (talk) 22:25, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
Some have been redesigned already and I think the rest either already are or are in process. Many design regulations go into auto design and they are continually updating regulations. Insomesia (talk) 23:41, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on June 11

Alfredo Zalce

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • ... that Mexican artist Alfredo Zalce had such an aversion to self promotion and public honors that he had to be tricked into attending Morelia, Michoacán's renaming a museum to honor him? Created/expanded by Thelmadatter (talk). Nominated by Maile66 (talk) at 22:28, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg Interesting, substantial, well sourced, Spanish source accepted AGF. The prose: sometimes a bit longish: "Zalce is not as well known as other Mexican muralists because he avoided promotion, unlike most other artists." A sentence like "Exhibitions of his work have been held in many countries of the world." tells me about nothing. To the hook. The genitive construction of the town/museum/state seems strange to me, and I would not know where to place the "'s' ;) therefore ALT1. I could imagine something easy about his art, ALT2. The latter would need an inline citation. I would love to see a pic but don't know enough about licensing.
ALT1: ... that Mexican artist Alfredo Zalce had such an aversion to public honors that when the museum of Morelia, Michoacán, took his name he had to be tricked into attending the opening?
ALT2: ... that many murals of Mexican artist Alfredo Zalce contain morals? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:45, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
  • I'm fine with either hook. I've put a notice on the author's talk page, so she can address the prose. I, too, would love to see the image in the DYK. Like you, I'm not that knowledgeable about copyright issues. However, based on the Achelous and Hercules DYK talk about copyrights, this might not be viable. Perhaps author Thelmadatter could check out the copyright for us on the lead image used in the article. Maile66 (talk) 13:56, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Thanks, no rush, will ask the pic question on the general talk, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:34, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
Somebody over at Commons nominated it for deletion within the last few minutes: Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Fragmento Mural Alfredo Zalce 6 063.jpg Maile66 (talk) 23:54, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
Pictogram voting keep.svg ALT1 then (ALT2 lacks an inline citation after the fact), no pic, please improve the prose until it appears ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:46, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg The article has a significant number of phrases found by the duplication detector as being identical to those from this source; the longest include "when the government of michoacan changed the name of its museum of contemporary art to", "he had to be tricked into attending the inauguration ceremony", and the list of media he works in. There are also changes of a word: "shows lawyers hiding their faces as they [uncaringly] step over the body of a losing client" merely omits the word "uncaringly" from the source. There are well over a dozen from this one source; I have not checked others. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:37, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
  • My slip up, to some degree. When I nominated this, I thought all the references were in Spanish, which is why I didn't check them first. Apparently, as you noticed, one is in English. I've put a second notification on the author's page. Not being familiar with the genre, even in English, I'm a little uncomfortable trying to rework this myself. I don't know who wants to wait on the author, because I've seen no response to my talk page message a week ago. The author continues to be active, just not here. Maile66 (talk) 00:51, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Perhaps a notice on the author's page that many serious close paraphrasing segments have been found in the article that need to be addressed immediately might get said author's attention. In addition, should some template be put on the article itself, or something inserted on the article's talk page? BlueMoonset (talk) 01:09, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
Ive stopped nominating my articles for DYK because the process has become to convuluted and too many people complaining about little stuff. You can drop the nomination if you wish.Thelmadatter (talk) 02:13, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
I'm very concerned that you do not seem to view the copyright violations in your article as serious. They're not "little stuff" at all, but a very serious matter on Wikipedia. I checked with a more experienced editor, and she has removed the improperly used material from the article, along with sentences that were problematic as close paraphrasing.
  • Symbol delete vote.svg Under the circumstances, I think it's best to end the review at this point. The hooks were all dependent on prose that has been deleted due to the above concerns, and we have no way to check the sources in Spanish against the article. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:55, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
  • reviewer back to this, sorry that my understanding of "close" is still not developed enough. I am quite determined though to save this important artist who shoulb be known, please hold. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:52, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote4.png ALT3: ... that Mexican artist Alfredo Zalce, in 1933 a founder of a revolutionary artists' league, showed in his art gestures of the oppressed and the powerful? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:09, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Gerda, I agree that Zalce deserves to be known, but this remains a highly problematic article. Under the circumstances, the article needs to be rigorously checked for close paraphrasing from the Spanish to the English, and unless we can find someone to do that—interlanguage close paraphrasing and, yes, copyvio, is a legitimate problem—we cannot simply assume that there is none: we found major violations in material from the English source. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:04, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Do you know someone who could do that? I don't, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:06, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

The Mountain Road

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • Symbol delete vote.svg Article has been created on 2006, and it is old. Sorry, it fails DYK check. Dipankan (Have a chat?) 09:22, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote4.png This article is elibigle under 5X expansion that began June 11, 2012, according to DYKCheck. Maile66 (talk) 12:24, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
  • The information cited to it has been confirmed with an additional reference. - The Bushranger One ping only 18:38, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Symbol redirect vote4.png I might have doubts about the DVD cover and HKMDB, but someone else might not. I'll leave this to another reviewer then. --George Ho (talk) 15:39, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

  • For non-controversial information, the DVD cover should be fine (especially for features!); see Ruma Maida for an FA which cites a DVD cover. For the database, without looking at this particular database I should note that some are not user-generated. filmindonesia.or.id, which I use a lot, is published by the National Library of Indonesia and the film archive Sinamatek, while its content is generated by paid staff with a background in film. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:53, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
  • You could simply remove the HKMDB reference. It does look redundant. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:37, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on June 12

Minuscule 852 (Gregory-Aland), Minuscule 994 (Gregory-Aland), Minuscule 1073 (Gregory-Aland), Minuscule 1074 (Gregory-Aland), Minuscule 1080 (Gregory-Aland), Minuscule 1093 (Gregory-Aland), Minuscule 1216 (Gregory-Aland), Minuscule 873 (Gregory-Aland), Minuscule 905 (Gregory-Aland)

( Review or comment )
( Article history links: Minuscule 852 (Gregory-Aland) • Minuscule 994 (Gregory-Aland) • Minuscule 1073 (Gregory-Aland) • Minuscule 1074 (Gregory-Aland) • Minuscule 1080 (Gregory-Aland) • Minuscule 1093 (Gregory-Aland) • Minuscule 1216 (Gregory-Aland) • Minuscule 873 (Gregory-Aland) )

Created by Leszek Jańczuk (talk). Self nom at 09:53, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Note that, although {{DYK nompage links}} only displays eight Article history links above, there are nine articles nominated. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 00:41, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Perhaps these could be reviewed one by one? I've had a look at the first - was just unsure about the meaning of "no complex contents": does this mean there are no thorny theological problems in the text it includes, or is this a technical term relating to MSS? Thanks, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 01:13, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
It means "it has not survived in complete condition". Leszek Jańczuk (talk) 08:23, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Shimao Wonderland Intercontinental

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by Lihaas (talk). Self nom at 12:41, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol question.svg Date and length fine. No photo to check. Thorough inline citations. However, sources a bit of an issue. #1 gizmag - appears to be a newsletter or blog. It calls itself an "email newsletter." Do we have a record of having used it previously? #2 and #3 both appear to be reliable sources, the company website. But, both refs just lead to a general page which then would require the reviewer to hunt through the website to try to find the information. You need to give more specific links to the information. Anne (talk) 18:48, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
2 comes up immediately for me. Gizmag wording seems reliable from the pics, S shape, etc. The 555milion was also mentioned elsewhere. I added the other source ofor 555 million abut left the mention of who is putting it as the source explicitly mentiosn where it came from and its a wikilink here so seems notable enough, i believe. And the opinion was mentioned as coming from them not as a gospel fact. (took care on that potential npov). Only 380 room was dubious as not corroborated, but i put it in as a range. Removed the room range to the other source, seems to be mentioned elsewhere too.
3 needs to click the "+" sign but i dont know how else to cite that, its not too complex. I could put a "small" wording in the refs perhaps?Lihaas (talk) 19:13, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg The subject of this article is not only notable, but fascinating. The images in the accessible sources are gorgeous. We still need to work out the source issues, however. Source #1: reliable, accessible. #2 and #3: reliable, not accessible. Links lead to nearly blank "projects" pages. #4: (iDesignArch) Images are great, but I'm not sure what this site is, or what category it falls into. #5: Gizmag, which describes itself as an email newsletter. I would be willing to consider it reliable, but others may disagree with me. Please see discussion about newsletters at Template:Did you know nominations/Sydney March. Also, while I don't want to get too much into the details of the article until source issues are worked out, there are some copyvio issues. One example: Compare your "a green hill cascades across the face of the rock as representative of a series of terraced landscaped hanging gardens. A vertical circular atrium connects the base of the quarry to the ground level (above the hotel) as a transparent glass waterfall. There are curved wings on the main body of the guest rooms that would enclose the atria using the pre-existing rock face" to source #1's "a green hill cascading down the rock face as a series of terraced landscaped hanging gardens. The central vertical circulation atrium connecting the quarry base with the ground level is in the form of a transparent glass 'waterfall',. Curved wings of the main body of the guest rooms will enclose internal atria which will utilise the existing rugged rock face." Also, some grammar/factual issues. One example: Your sentence "Though there is a 32 metre aquariam." technically isn't a sentence. Aside from the spelling issue, the sentence/phrase doesn't make sense in the context of the article. Also, it's factually incorrect. The source indicates "32-feet deep aquarium." Anne (talk) 14:44, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
I retried #3 and would need help to how to make it more accessible. Can i put a "note" by the ref? #2 comes straight up for me again, so im not sure what to do. No probs there. Nothing to click before reading the info. #4 "about us" says that "iDesignArch.com is an Interior Design & Architecture eMagazine". On #5, again, i have cut down the stand alone refs and only left the ones that are verifiable and the one instance which explicitly mentions it as cited to Gizmag. (although since the other first instances are corroborated elsewhere it seems reliable.
Will reword the copyvio concern. I misread the 32 metre/feet. Will correct that too.Lihaas (talk) 18:49, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
Let's finish addressing sources. I am willing to consider all your sources reliable. If that's challenged, we'll deal with it. Good news: I don't know whether you changed the URL slightly or if the website is merely more functional, but #2 is completely up and running now. So, we only have to deal with #3. That looks much better as well. It appears to be a home "projects" page and the "+" that you mentioned is now visible. When I click on it, there are two short paragraphs. (I would put "click on +" into the ref.) Since all sources are accessible now, go ahead and finalize your writing of the article, and I'll take another look at it tomorrow. Anne (talk) 23:34, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
Done the ref bit. Getting to the writing.Done: [5][6]/[7]?Lihaas (talk) 02:08, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
Symbol possible vote.svg There's still far too much similarity between the wording in the article and the sources. You need to do a "comb through," looking at your article and your sources side by side. Aside from that, I have some specific suggestions for you: 1) In your info box and the body of your article, your sources are switched for 380 and 400. 2) I would eliminate your sentence, "There will also be curved "wings" using the pre-existing rock face from the rooms that would enclose the atria." Even in the original source, it was difficult to visualize. Switching around the order of the phrasing just makes it more confusing and misleading. 3) Instead, I would discuss the waterfall more. Your only mention of it is, "Gizmag called the waterfall the pièce de résistance of the project." The sentence alone doesn't make sense without a previous reference to the waterfall. 4) There is a second "waterfall," the atrium. However, the word in the source is circulation, not circular, with two different meanings. 5) The climbing and jumping aren't cantilevered, the centre containing them is cantilevered. Once you're closer to being finished, I'll help you with copy edits. Good luck. By the way, your source #2 is down again today, with a nearly blank page. Anne (talk) 03:55, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
Source 2 is working fine for m e again (and have a slow connection). I can see the data straight uo in front of me
better?

Symbol possible vote.svg 1) I've gone through your article in detail again this morning, and I've done copy edits for grammar, spelling, and citations. 2) As I mentioned previously, your citations for number of rooms were incorrect. Since they were already cited in the body of the article, I removed the citations from the info box, and corrected the ones in the body of the article. I altered others where needed. 3) "They will utilise green roofing, and intend to use the geothermal energy from the artificial lake to generate both electricity and heating. The project was also intended to symbolise low carbon design using passive sustainable features such as orientation, microclimate of the quarry rock face and low wind resistance." This section has citations 1 and 5, and the info for the first sentence is found. However, I have not found the info for the second sentence in either source. 4) As I mentioned before, you've replaced "vertical circulation atrium" with "vertical circular atrium." However, circulation and circular have two different meanings. I've deleted circular. 5) The sentence "The architects chose to use curved "wings" using the pre-existing rock face from the rooms that would enclose the atria" still make no sense. It's because you juggled the original phrases instead of rewording. 6) Which brings us to the persistent problem of copy vios. Examples:

  • "a separate outbuilding for the lobby that was built to replicate a flying saucer descending into the quarry" (yours)
    "A separate outbuilding (the entrance lobby) resembles a flying saucer descending into the quarry." (original)
  • "a grass hill will cascade across the face of the rock in order to appear as a series of terraced landscaped hanging gardens" (yours)
    "a green hill cascading down the rock face as a series of terraced landscaped hanging gardens" (original)
  • "A vertical circular atrium will run from the base of the quarry to the ground level (above the hotel) disguised as a transparent glass "waterfall." " (yours)
    "The central vertical circulation atrium connecting the quarry base with the ground level is in the form of a transparent glass 'waterfall' " (original) Anne (talk) 15:48, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
Thanks,and done. Obviously though some keywords from the list have to stay, no?Lihaas (talk) 11:19, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on June 13

Ballpoint pen artwork

( Review or comment • Article history )

Lennie Mace, "Mona a'la Mace" (1993), ballpoint pen on paper.

  • Comment: among the various art-related wikipedia articles i've authored and edited, i find this artwork to be high-quality and of notable interest.

Created/expanded by Penwatchdog (talk). Self nom at 16:03, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol redirect vote4.png As I'm reading the history log, there have been no edits on June 17. Therefore, I will move this to May 30 log because it's the date that the draft was moved into article namespace. I hope it's not too late. --George Ho (talk) 18:02, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
  • i hope not too late~! yeah after i submitted the nom i realized i may have overlooked the dating issue. may the wiki-gods shine down on me, this my first time DYKnom~ elsewise, after skimming other DYK-talk-points, i went back to the article and did some editing to insure acceptance. any&all suggestions & assistance appreciated~ Penwatchdog (talk) 02:27, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol delete vote.svg Age issues. 18 days is pushing it quite a bit. Under 10 I'd consider it, but... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:53, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Anyone else care to weigh-in briefly? i really dropped the ball on this nom, just say the word and i'll quietly walk away with my tail between my legs.58.156.24.110 (talk) 00:51, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg ALT proposal: this ballpoint-Mona-Lisa was also part of a massive revision of the Ballpoint pen artwork article, which i believe was uploaded much more recently (& within age-range limits?). In fact, it may have been the BPpen-artwork article which i meant as the nom in the first place. How about re-directing the nom to Ballpoint pen artwork article INSTEAD of Lennie Mace? Penwatchdog (talk) 01:29, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg That would be fine. The ballpoint pen artwork article is very promotional though, that needs to be fixed. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:42, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Thanks Crisco... any specif's that would make an immediate difference? ALSO: can someone out there please MAKE the above-mentioned article-switch to the Ballpoint pen artwork? Too new at this to deal with that right now~ Anyway i'll edit the article right now; clocks ticking! Anyone else?Penwatchdog (talk) 05:02, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
  • yellow tickY I will move this nom to another date: June 13, 2012. --George Ho (talk) 05:05, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
  • YES, George, Ballpoint pen artwork would be the article, with the hook referring to Lennie Mace's ballpoint Mona. THANKS for helping! Meanwhile... i've re-read that article several times and can't personally find direct instances of "promotion." The article is merely just offering what information is available AND verifiable. I'll gladly work on whatever need's reworking, IF someone can point out what may require reworking (including the hook!). Thanks everyone.Penwatchdog (talk) 05:55, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
  • George, just so you know in future: you are not supposed to rename DYK templates. It specifically says not to in the DYK instructions. You just use the subpage parameter in the DYKmake template to make sure it points to the right place. Renames tend to make a mess, and the main "comment" link for this from T:TDYK no longer works, which is unfortunate. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:28, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
  • ALT1: ... that artists have used ballpoint pens to create replicas of Renaissance masterpieces, such as Lennie Mace's Mona a'la Mace (pictured)? Penwatchdog (talk) 06:36, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
    • Bolded link to target. --George Ho (talk) 06:39, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
  • While awaiting constructive criticism/suggestions, i've been re-reading the article and... personally (& maintaining neutrality) i can't find instances of promotion as implied above. If anything, i can only wonder if it's my direct use of certain artist's names within the article which may be against rules. If so, i can easily edit as necessary BUT... i think my usage of names is fair especially in relation to specific quotes by those specific artists of the genre which are noted in the article (which are from reputable source material, i think) of which more than one person or Company is named. IF, for some reason, the inclusion of the "notable artists" list altogether may be a cause of concern, i don't find the list itself to be problematic (those are the notables from among a mass of doodlers filling "ballpoint art" search-lists). Meanwhile still waiting for feedback.Penwatchdog (talk) 08:18, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
  • P.S. George THANKS for that name-transfer, i hope it doesn't cause you(us?) more trouble than it's worth! By the way, italics" noted commented upon in a seperate DYKtalk were just a typing error of my own, not meant to imply any "tone"!Penwatchdog (talk) 08:18, 21 June 2012 (UTC)


[edit] Articles created/expanded on June 14

Drowned God: Conspiracy of the Ages

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by Torchiest (talk). Self nom at 03:34, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

  • How did you make that calculation? I used the DYK check script on the two versions in that diff you linked, and it counted 9516 characters after my last revision, and 1830 for this revision, which looks like 5.2 exactly. The prose size script says 1595 and 304 for the newest and June 8 revisions, respectively, a ~5.25 expansion. Am I calculating incorrectly? —Torchiest talkedits 11:46, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Under either WP:DYK or WP:DYKSG, I don't count the reference brackets (e.g. "[3]"). I only count the prose without them. Also, I used plain ol' notepad and calculator to give me calculations rather than a script that I don't know how to use and don't have. --George Ho (talk) 13:05, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
  • I have expanded the article further, giving 10191/1830 = 5.57 by character count, and 1716/304 = 5.64 by word count, according to my math. —Torchiest talkedits 12:43, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote4.png No, you didn't calculate incorrectly. You were right; I must have missed parts. Because of that, you have expanded based on my review that I stroke out. I apologize for all of this, so I don't know what to say. --George Ho (talk) 13:35, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Note: I have removed the "stub" template and upgraded the article classification to Start (though it may deserve "C"; I'm not familiar with the requirements for that particular WikiProject). The "Gameplay" section will require sourcing before this DYK nomination can be approved by the person who reviews it. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:27, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Thanks. I added a reference to that section. —Torchiest talkedits 17:39, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Symbol redirect vote4.png Still needs a reviewer! BlueMoonset (talk) 02:01, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

National Suicide Prevention Week

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by Insomesia (talk). Self nom at 18:20, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol question.svg Still needs a lot of style work. For example, this is specific to the United States, but the country isn't mentioned until the end of the second paragraph and then it is abbreviated as "U.S."; the second sentence begins with "they" but it isn't clear to whom this refers; the article gives statistics such as "suicide is the 11th leading cause of death" without saying whether that is a U.S. ranking or a global ranking; etc. Really should get a good going-over before it is displayed prominently as a DYK. - Jmabel | Talk 03:49, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
    • Thanks! Great eye, I usually am re-reading and catching that stuff, but it should be clear all information is US specific. I guess in an effort to avoid repeating it I failed to mention it enough. I've taken another pass at it to address these issues, if you don't mind could you see if these have been amended so they are clear? Thank you for your time on this! Insomesia (talk) 09:59, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
      • I just made a copyediting pass. I'm neutral on this one, and someone else ought to make the call. My biggest remaining negative is that I'm not sure I see a strong connection between the content of the section Subgroups and the ostensible subject of the article. It seems more to belong in the (so far rather anemic) Suicide in the United States than in the present article. Don't misunderstand me: it's good content, I'm just not sure how cohesive this is as an article on its ostensible subject. - Jmabel | Talk 23:41, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
        • Fair enough, I just followed what sourcing I had to the main subject. There is a lot of overlapping content in the suicide article so I aimed to just get the one I was doing as correct and sourced as possible. I could see repeating the same information on Suicide in the United States and let the main editors working on that article trim away what's not needed. I'll look at that now. Insomesia (talk) 23:45, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
          • The change someone recently made removing "suicide in the United States" from the external links and relinking on the phrase "there are over 4.6 million survivors of attempted suicide in the United States" at least borders on an Easter egg link. "Attempted suicide" is much more tightly grammatically bound in this phrase than "suicide in the United States". I'd really suggest reverting that, and restoring the more relevant link to attempted suicide. - Jmabel | Talk 23:48, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
            • YesY Good call! I moved it to the following sentence paragraph. Insomesia (talk) 21:30, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Good hook; good article; good-to-go i think BUT... i just had a nice rythm going, copyediting the article, but the inline citations tied me up, then suddenly something came up personally so unfortunately i had to stop for now. really sorry, i'll have another go at it soon as possible; made edits halfway thru the article til stopping but i know it needs a little more. one note : the date of "September 10" as noted: is it annually on the 10th or just this year(2012)? i'll be back! Penwatchdog (talk) 19:36, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
    • World Suicide date is always the 10th, I appreciate the edits so far, thank you! Insomesia (talk) 21:13, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Hey Insomnia i'm sorry i haven't had the time to get back to tighten-up the article... even now, i'll skim over it but i don't have the time i'd like; have a house-full of life to relocate this week... i'll check back soon as i can and make it better than brittania! maybe someone'll beat me to it? talk to ya soon! Penwatchdog (talk) 17:17, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
  • me agin; just made a quick edit. that'll be all i can help with until next week but i'll come again then! There's a very important editorial question i'd like to pose, though: i'm wondering if it's proper for wikipedia to be listing actual dates of THIS years NSPW event; makes it seem more like an event preview than an encyclopedic entry... may it be enough that it's already described as "occurring during the week of Sept. 10th, or is this an exception?" Penwatchdog (talk) 18:23, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
  • I don't see an issue with it. We're documenting when the week is happening, I think it was even in the source. If the week wasn't preset for future years it would be an issue. Insomesia (talk) 00:45, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on June 15

Konstantin Krasavin

( Review or comment • Article history )

Symbol question.svg Newness, length, and hook are all fine. However, there are only two sources, both in Russian – not sure what the rules are on this, but I thought it might be worth pointing that out. Luckily I can read Russian :) and most of the information does appear to come straight from those sources, but there's a discrepancy in birthdate between them and the article (born May 20th according to the sources, May 27th according to article). I'm guessing there might be other discrepancies, but it will be hard for non-Russian-speakers to catch them... Accedietalk to me 03:26, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
I can read Russian (I study it for my degree) but you're right on the source discrepancy. The problem with articles such as this is that there's very few sources in English so I think it's unreasonable to expect provision of English-language sources. I'll do some more reading into it and see what I can do about establishing a more authoritative date of birth. LGF1992UK (talk) 13:48, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, no worries. I'm not an experienced DYK reviewer, so I'm not sure what's acceptable here in terms of non-EN sources. I tried to find him on RU, figuring there might at least be a book cited there, but no luck – he doesn't have an article. FWIW, it's a solid, well-written article and a neat hook :) Accedietalk to me 02:01, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
Спасибо большое! :) LGF1992UK (talk) 15:36, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
Symbol question.svgThere's no problems with using non-English sources, especially if there's no English ones out there - so eventually we can pass it, assuming good faith in the editor and the refs used (by marking it with {{subst:DYKtickAGF}}).
But there are still a couple of things to sort out - all the paragraphs in the main body text need to have an inline citation (although I know no Russian, google translate tells me that all the info appears to be in the sources you used - but I'll let you put in the citations so I don't make any mistakes). Also it is tagged as being an orphan, it would be good if you could make wikilinks to this article from other articles (3 or more) - perhaps as a participant in an event, a medal winner, or lists such as List of Russian aviators (but this isn't a requirement to pass DYK). Other than these it is a very good and interesting article! Cheers, Zangar (talk) 22:43, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
You will also need to do a QPQ review as you have over 5 DYK credits. Cheers, Zangar (talk) 22:50, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg Each paragraph needs a citation to one of the books. Still needed QPQ. Secretlondon (talk) 04:02, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on June 16

Caribbean Clipper

( Review or comment • Article history )

Symbol question.svg date fine, length just enough, I found the hook interesting! But can I understand a bit about that song? the music? the title? - A list of other songs in the session, very general reviews, - somehow that wasn't what I wanted to know, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:27, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Orgastic potency

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Long enough and new enough, but I'm afraid this is going to need radical reworking to be eligible. It's far from neutral: the citations are overwhelmingly to Reichian sources, the last sentence talks of "a track-record of smears, attacks, distortions, deliberate misrepresentations directed against Wilhelm Reich and his supporters" and is sourced to an extremely emotionally worded article (repeated references to "smears"), and the presentation would be described as "in-universe" in a fictional context; the article does not plainly state from the outset that this is a particular viewpoint, that of Reich and his followers, and needs to place the exposition in that context throughout in order to be neutral. There are many references (although it would be advisable to refer to specific pages in the pdfs, and many shorter articles are used repeatedly and this would be clearer with named references); however, in places there is extensive paraphrasing/summary with no references for long stretches; I noticed this in the "detailed description" section under "The natural sexual act" and in the individual paragraphs under "Sexual disturbances"; the treatment of the female there sometimes entirely lacks a footnote, and in all cases, the explanatory heading in small print with ref. does not serve to adequately reference the entire following paragraph. Also, in looking to see what was meant as I began to read the introduction, I immediately found unacceptably close paraphrasing. For example, the hook above reads:

that orgastic potency is the capacity for complete surrender to the involuntary convulsion at the acme of the genital embrace?

The first sentence of the article is:

Orgastic potency is the ability to completely experience and surrender to the involuntary, pleasurable convulsions of the organism at the climax of excitation in sexual intercourse, without any inhibitions and resulting in a complete discharge of excitation.

The Konia reference has:

Orgastic potency is the capacity for complete surrender to the involuntary convulsion of the organism and complete discharge of sexual excitation in the acme of the genital embrace.

And a passage by Reich himself quoted in the Baker source reads:

Psychic health depends on orgastic potency, that is, on the capacity for surrender in the acme of sexual excitation in the natural sexual act.

Again, a passage in the article reads:

About 20–30% of women attain a coital climax; 70–80% require manual clitoral stimulation.

The source, quoted in a footnote, reads:

only 20–30% of women attain a coital climax ...Many women (70–80%) require manual clitoral stimulation.

There needs to be a lot more summarizing and clearly marked quoting; as it is, the article falls afoul of the copyvio standards. Related to this, it's not terribly clear. Explaining "sexual economy" in terms of "energy household" doesn't clarify, because what is "household" in this context? Also, there are rather a lot of grammar problems; particularly subject-verb agreement errors, but also it's for its and comma problems. I (and others, I'm sure) would be glad to help with the grammar and English usage, but the other problems are serious and need to be cleaned up first. Basically, this needs to be rewritten as a shorter account of Reich's theory; and in my opinion it also needs a lot more mention of criticism (for example, of the attitude toward masturbation; that leaps off the screen when one reads the hook). And the hook should also be in terms of Wilhelm Reich's theory, not of generally agreed upon sexual counseling or psychiatric theory. (Again, the obvious analogue is the requirement that a hook about a work of fiction not be wholly in-universe.)
I will watchlist this and the article and see whether I can help. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:42, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
I have asked the question on the article's talk page whether any discussion of censorship of Reich's work is appropriate for this article, which I don't think it is, certainly not in a section of its own. It could be mentioned, I suppose, in the context of discussing how controversial this stuff is, as an example. __meco (talk) 07:37, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
I addressed some of the above criticism in the article, except for these points: Regarding the "energy household", I did not elaborate because I wanted to write a dedicated article "sex economy" (it is too comlex to explain in one or two sentences). Regarding the definitions/paraphrasing, many are direct copies from Reich's original definition, that is why it may show up the same in other sources as well.
The choice to use "DYK ... that orgastic potency is the capacity for complete surrender to the involuntary convulsion at the acme of the genital embrace?" was a bit unfortunate because the article starts with a different definition. However, this definition does occur in the article and was chosen because it was shorter. An alternative would be: "DYK ALT1: ... that orgastic potency is the ability to completely experience and surrender to the involuntary, pleasurable convulsions at the climax in sexual intercourse?"--Gulpen (talk) 17:56, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
There are still two big problems, unfortunately. One is that, despite the need for accuracy and regardless of what article writers have done, we must not re-use other people's wording without putting it in quotation marks. It's not safe to re-use a word here and a word there, or to mix and match between Reich's wording and the wording of an article about Reich. It has to be either a quotation, a summary, or (perhaps not possible in this case because it would be too obviously close to the original) a paraphrase in our own words. With respect to Reich's definition and the definition in at least one article on it, both the article and the hook violate this rule, which is serious legal business, and thus I suspect that the article contains many other such violations. Also, both the hook and the article need to make clear that this is Reich's theory or viewpoint. This goes to adequate coverage of the topic, neutrality, and also the specially strict rules on medical topics. (Also, and not unrelatedly, it needs to be clear. That use of "household" simply isn't, even though it might be so in another language and may even be traditional in Reichian scholarship.) I think the solution is to drastically shorten the article, so that everything is a summary that isn't an outright quote - and to present it from the very beginning as Reich's theory. I feel bad about this, since a lot of work has been put in, and I agree with you that it's an interesting and worthwhile topic to have covered in the encyclopedia and to have highlighted at DYK, but it just isn't mainstream enough in psychological scholarship to be presented as if it's a widely held position. Would it be terribly rude if I rewrote it myself and suggested an alternate hook, so that it could then be given the red bendy arrow asking for a fresh DYK review? The previous version could always be restored from the history, or more or less massive tweakage of my version could happen (for one thing I have never studied psychology) - or of course you could just stick the red bendy arrow on this template now and see what someone else thinks at this point. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:30, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
I follow your argument up until the point where you say "thus I suspect that the article contains many other such violations." I wrote basically the whole article and can guarantee that this is not a systematic phenomenon. I am well-aware of the rules plagiarism and have put serious effort throughout the article to prevent any form of it. There are to this only little exceptions
1. The first sentence, where, drawing on many different definitions, I attempted to combine all aspects of orgastic potency into one major definition. Please note, though, that I quoted three full definitions of Reich in the article. Also note that different aspects are emphasised in different definitions, and that taking any single one of them (e.g. for use in the introduction) results in not covering all aspects. At any rate, that is my view.;
2. Two small portions where I copied small sections from other wiki's (I indicated in the 'source' what part);
3. Very very very minor exceptions which are very unfortunate because I may have overlooked or forgotten them. One such example is the sentence you spotted about the female orgasm statistics, but I had a reason to take this almost literally. I found the reference on the orgasm page (start par. 3 there), but the way it was paraphrased there was so confusing that I did not understand the relation to the sentence in the original source. Because I am not an expert on this topic, I decided put it down as it was. A mistake.
4. Possibly, where I took stuff from a summary of Raknes' article, for which I got permission from the 'summariser'. I say possibly, because though I initially copied material, I did, in the end, summarise everything; I simply may have overlooked something.
Although I am really happy if someone else would take a serious look at the article and try to help improve it, I would find it a serious waste (and unnecessary) to just summarise everything. In that case I would prefer more targeted criticism and improvements - including regarding structural changes. Regarding this, I think the most pressing issue is the medical aspect and status of the theories. I made a first attempt, but your help is welcome.Regarding 'energy household', I have to stress again that it is a very difficult concept to explain. You may look at VERY ROUGH pre-draft draft (with loads of direct quotes) in my sandbox to get some idea of the aspects involved. In case you want to try to clarify 'energy household' I can recommend the above-mentioned essay by Raknes, and/or to look at this section (the principal basis for the 'energy household' theory). Finally, the reason I did not inclue page numbers in some references was because I did not have access to material showing the original page numbers. E.g. regarding the Baker article, I tried to cite paragraphs, but I didn't know how to count from halfway the article onwards. Should I add ".pdf page numbers" (clearly indicated) in references to the Baker article? And e.g. the Raknes article, I wasn't sure weather the headings used in the (above-mentioned) summary correspond to headings in the original, published article. I will ask that now, but if they don't it would be weird to mention the summary headings in the references.--Gulpen (talk) 01:23, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
I see. The thing is, there can't be any overly close paraphrasing. When in doubt, summarize. (It's quite a long article; I don't think it's in danger of seeming skimpy, except on the non-Reichian evaluations.) An encyclopedia article doesn't need to go into every detail, and you say you intend to write a separate article on Reich's concept of "sexual economy", so a full explanation of that can go there. Yes, I would cite the page numbers in the pdfs; you're citing them from the pdf versions. (I put "pdf p.".) Yngvadottir (talk) 03:20, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Feminism in Russia

( Review or comment • Article history )

I don't think you have a source for your comment that it has negative connotations. I'm not sure we should have a POV on whether the anti-Putin demos were/are revolutionary or not, and if we do it needs citing. I'd be happier with more Russian sources - it just feels western POVy. Secretlondon (talk) 00:34, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
Symbol possible vote.svgAlso the hook is original synthesis. Secretlondon (talk) 00:36, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
"CGS members interpreted distrust toward feminists as deriving from Russian history, which has made women activist avoid identifying themselves with feminism. As Maria Grigoriyevna pointed out, 'I think feminism has been a kind of a swear word here since the 19th century...'" – that's a direct quote from the source that I cite. Also, I'd be happy to include Russian sources, but I'm pretty sure that the average reader of English Wikipedia won't be able to read them. Should I also include some Japanese sources? What about Indian? Would that make it less "Western POVy"? (Sorry, couldn't resist the snarky slippery slope argument, but really, c'mon!) Accedietalk to me 04:43, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Blonde (album)

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by Mr. Absurd (talk). Self nom at 18:42, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

ALT1: ... that Canadian artist Cœur de pirate's 2011 album title, Blonde, is a double entendre that refers to the singer's blonde hair and the Quebec French slang word for "girlfriend"? Any better? Tlqk56 (talk) 22:53, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
Note: added an "ALT1" header for the new hook, which is 175 characters and thus below the 200 max. However, the color of Martin's hair is not mentioned in the article, and must be added with an inline citation, as must the intentional double entendre. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:17, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
The fact and citation have been added. Thanks for pointing that out. Mr. Absurd (talk) 07:37, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
I think I'd prefer to put the word "title" near the beginning of the hook, otherwise it sounds awkward to me. Perhaps something like the following (with 186 characters):
ALT2: ... that the title of Canadian artist Cœur de pirate's 2011 album Blonde is a double entendre which refers to both the singer's blonde hair and the Quebec French slang word for "girlfriend"? Mr. Absurd (talk) 07:37, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote4.png Now that the hook is set, this needs a full review. BlueMoonset (talk) 10:12, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
Symbol question.svgA good and well written article - new and long enough and well refrenced. ALT2 hook is referenced in article. But I think the "Songs" section needs to be addressed - currently it has an {{expand section}} tag, and as per the guidelines an article "should appear to be complete and not some sort of work in progress". As I'm not familiar with the subject I'll defer to the author as to completeness of this section. Also, it appears that reference [4], "Blonde ambition", is dead already. But almost there! Cheers, Zangar (talk) 03:05, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote4.png I took out the expansion tag; the section is complete enough as-is to stand on its own. Also, I fixed that reference, thanks for the info. Can someone confirm this article? (I'm assuming I'm not supposed to since I'm the author). Thanks. Mr. Absurd (talk) 00:22, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on June 17

Ginge Manor

( Review or comment • Article history )

Reviewed Cambodia women's national football team♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:34, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol question.svg Date, length, citations OK, but hook a bit long (I make it 203 characters) and repetitive. How about reducing it to:

Pete Appleton

( Review or comment • Article history )

Pete Jablonowski baseball card

  • ... that baseball pitcher Pete Appleton (pictured) had his best seasons after changing his surname from Jablonowski?

Created/expanded by Cbl62 (talk). Self nom at 05:20, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Symbol question.svg Length and date check out. Expansion started from 5,050 bytes on 17 June 2012 → now at 33,395 bytes (over 5x). Not sure about the hook, though. The connection between his name-change and "best seasons" is coincidental at best. I just added the actual ext. link to confirm it. How about the ALT1 hook (below).

ALT1:... that baseball pitcher Pete Appleton (pictured) changed his surname from Jablonowski to embark on a musical career? Poeticbent talk 18:24, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

  • I don't think the hook implies a cause and effect connection, but a couple of commentators have noted the coincidence, which I thought was an interesting hook. The alt doesn't work because he never did pursue the musical career. Cbl62 (talk) 18:30, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
  • The cause and effect connection in the original hook seemed obvious to me. How about ALT2 with your own comment included in it?

ALT2:... that baseball pitcher Pete Appleton (pictured) changed his surname from Jablonowski to embark on a musical career, which he never did? Poeticbent talk 18:53, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

  • There is one source that says changing his name may have been done in case he pursued a musical career. Other sources offer different reasons. So I don't think alt 2 is accurate. My preference remains the original hook, which I think should be fine. The language of the hook plainly denotes a temporal connection but not a cause and effect. How/why do you think it suggests cause and effect? Cbl62 (talk) 22:59, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
  • This hook has been lingering for almost 2 weeks since the last comment by the reviewer. I think it's fine and would appreciate a new reviewer giving it a look. As I'll be on vacation next week, I'd like to get this wound up soon. Cbl62 (talk) 06:38, 3 July 2012 (UTC)


Jai Ho

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • Comment: Before I began work on the article, it looked like this and was at 40,673 bytes. Little information on the original version of "Jai Ho" was present in the article. I split its English version into a separate article, which called for a little over 30 bytes of the article. The Jai Ho article was completely rewritten from scratch.

Created/expanded by Status (talk). Self nom at 02:30, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol delete vote.svg Pass GA? Maybe (probably). But not a 5x expansion, sorry. If we were to exclude everything about the English version from the original article, yes... but we can't, and the new version still includes much of the same information. Sorry. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:46, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
  • I completely understand. I didn't think it would hurt to ask. Statυs (talk) 20:50, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on June 18

Sind Valley

( Review or comment • Article history )

Sind Valley at Wayil


Omar Elabdellaoui

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by Mentoz86 (talk), LindaSportGirl (talk), GiantSnowman (talk). Nominated by Mentoz86 (talk) at 20:48, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Length fine, 5x expansion, hook a little confusing. I'm not a football fan, so I don't understand what you mean by "international Mohammed Abdellaoue". I suggest that you think of another hook, something a little more interesting. Actually, this brings up the main issue I have with this article: its grammar. Here are a few examples:
  • Scott Sellars, coach at City's U18 team, stated in an interview with Norwegian TV 2 in January 2010 that Elabdellaoui has "got a big future".
  • He played eight league matches before he got a fracture in his foot in the league match against Fredrikstad on 28 May 2011, and returned to Manchester for a surgery.
  • Feyenoord loan section: This paragraph is full of tense-agreement errors.
  • I could go on, but I think that I've illustrated my point. This article's prose is not at a level deserving of the main page. I recommend that you copyedit it; if you like, I can do it for you.
  • Sources: I don't speak either Dutch or Norwegian, so I'm unable to access the sources. I was able to look at ref 12; the article makes no mention of Omar, so there's no support for the statement you've made about Omar's loan to Rotterdam. That concerns me; I've found that if one source is iffy like that, others have the same problem.
  • All the issues make me hesitant to allow this to go on the main page. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:30, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
  • ALT1 ... that Manchester City's Omar Elabdellaoui did not want to go on loan to Strømsgodset in 2012 because of the artificial turf at Marienlyst Stadion?
  • ALT2 ... that John Guidetti advised his teammate at Manchester City, Omar Elabdellaoui, to go on loan to Feyenoord?
    • Sorry for the late reply. Yes, you are right - the hook was dull. I've struck it, and added two other hooks. My English is not very good, so I'd appreciate if you would copyedit the article. I've replaced the ref that didn't support the statement, (ref 12) and rewrote the sentance a little, and I will go through the English and Norwegian sources once more to check that every source actually supports what's it's supposed to. Mentoz86 (talk) 23:29, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
      I agree to do the copyedit for you. I'll give you a week to look at the sources, and then I'll go through them myself using Google translation. Not the best solution, but it may be helpful. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:40, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
      I have completed the copyedit; whew, it was harder than I thought! I found that I needed to look at a few translated sources; they looked okay in regards to my above concerns about close paraphrasing and the source matching the content. Still go through them, though; when you've assured me that you've done it in good faith, I'll pass it to DYK. Also, could you please check my spelling, especially the Norwegian names? Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 18:54, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

James Leonard Corning, History of neuraxial anesthesia

( Review or comment )
( Article history links: James Leonard Corning • History of neuraxial anesthesia )

James Leonard Corning, American neurologist

Created by DiverDave (talk). Self nom at 04:09, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Kabaret Olgi Lipińskiej

( Review or comment • Article history )

Kabaret Olgi Lipińskiej

Created/expanded by Poeticbent (talk). Self nom at 12:57, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Werner E. Ablaß

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by GreatOrangePumpkin (talk). Self nom at 15:25, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Angels Camp Museum

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by User:SarahStierch (talk). Self nom at 00:06, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol question.svg FN 1 is inaccessible, and FN 2 cannot be accessed in my area because my zip code is out of the website's acceptable territory. FN 3 says that there are 200 miles of tunnels; is it "200 tunnels" or "200 miles of tunnels"? Still checking FN 4. Nevertheless, passes the 1,500 minimum requirement. --George Ho (talk) 23:07, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
  • By the way, FN 2 is viewable somehow, especially with the Find tool from a browser. --George Ho (talk) 23:08, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg FN 3 and FN 4 are accessible and verify information. FN 2 verifies information, as well, as I can see it. Still awaiting FN 1.... As for the hook, I wonder if more clarification is needed: Mother lode is located in some areas of California and Nevada, according to website itself. If not, maybe "ALT #" is needed? How about one of collections located at the museum, a documentary about a frog contest, or a free admission of Gold Rush Day? --George Ho (talk) 23:24, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Author had no notification on her talk page about this, so I put a notice there today. Maile66 (talk) 18:33, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
I'm actually getting ready to step on an airplane (in like...five minutes) so I'm probably not going to fiddle with this anytime soon :( I'm happy with any type of "fun fact" from it. I feel bad making others do the work, but, if people deem it worthy, mentioning the tunnels, the gold rush day...or the frogs (!) would be a-okay with me. Thanks guys. Sarah (talk) 18:56, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Symbol redirect vote4.png I have made some corrections, so anybody else can feel free to review this fully. --George Ho (talk) 20:30, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol question.svgI feel that this article is too short as it stands. I know that it meets the 1500 character minimum, but the lead is repeated (more or less verbatim) in the rest of the article and without that it would be about 1350 characters. Mikenorton (talk) 21:28, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on June 19

Rover chair

( Review or comment • Article history )

Rover Chair at the Barbican in London in 2010

Created/expanded by Trevj (talk). Self nom at 15:14, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Long and new enough article within policy. Thoroughly referenced. Hook seems fine, QPQ met. Image licensing seems fine. Good to go Symbol confirmed.svg --Tomobe03 (talk) 19:45, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
    That's good news. However, I was intending to write Kee-Klamp too, and propose an alternative hook containing both. I'm not sure I'll manage to meet the article length requirements though. So then, if an image lead is sought and this fits the bill, then please don't let that comment be an impediment. But if not, then there's no rush. I'll post here either way regarding Kee-Klamp (unless someone else creates it first). Thanks. PS Regarding the image licensing, I found the photo on Flickr but not under a suitable licence. I asked the author to consider changing the licence, for use in a forthcoming article, which was then done. I understand they're now more than pleased to see it included here! -- Trevj (talk) 23:09, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Even though the photo itself is on Commons, isn't the photographic image of an artwork (the chair) problematic because the chair itself has copyright protection for the artist? This was displayed in an exhibition at the Barbican in 2010, and the photo was taken there. As such, even though the photographer is happy to allow its use, I don't believe the photo is actually eligible for DYK, since it's of a copyrighted artwork. Does anyone know to the contrary? Note that without the photo, the DYK can run; there might be a compelling fair-use argument for the article even if it is copyrighted to the artist, but not for DYK and the Wikipedia main page. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:49, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. I think you have a very good point. Sorry. I've now started a discussion on Commons, where the issues can hopefully be cleared up. -- Trevj (talk) 07:57, 3 July 2012 (UTC)


Furqlus

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by Al Ameer son (talk). Self nom at 17:01, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol question.svg Article meets the criteria, but I have a query about the hook... doesn't the article say it was one of two sites that had indigenous Arab units stationed there? Miyagawa (talk) 21:27, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Actually, the key word is "indigenous." The other Arab unit was not native to the city where it was stationed. See the second passage of the "Early history and etymology" section for further clarification. --Al Ameer son (talk) 21:44, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Breast cancer survivors' dragon boating

( Review or comment • Article history )

Paraphrasing of copyrighted material

( Review or comment • Article history )

[edit] Articles created/expanded on June 20

Ole Hannibal Sommerfelt, Christian Sommerfeldt

( Review or comment )
( Article history links: Ole Hannibal Sommerfelt • Christian Sommerfeldt )

Government Hooker

( Review or comment • Article history )

American recording artist Lady Gaga

  • Symbol delete vote.svg Article was nominated 23 June 2012. Assuming article is at 5x now, expansion began 38 edits ago on June 9, 2012. Article has not been created or expanded 5x within the past 10 days (14 days) . Article is not new enough and expanded enough at the time of nomination. Can't see a case for WP:IAR here. --LauraHale (talk) 11:22, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote4.png Needs a complete review. --George Ho (talk) 16:52, 4 July 2012 (UTC)


Argentine nationalism

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by Cambalachero (talk). Self nom at 22:23, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol question.svgSorry for the delay in feedback. I think this is good except that the WP:LEDE needs sorting out. The hook is just in a caption and needs integrating into the main text. I'm AGF on the Spanish language sources. Secretlondon (talk) 03:48, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Done, I expanded the intro a bit. The hook is not just in the caption, it was already in the text, near the end of the article. Cambalachero (talk) 15:32, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
  • I've tidied the English. However the first sentence isn't good. Could you explain what you mean? What is a 'nationalism of culture'? Secretlondon (talk) 05:26, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Architecture of Póvoa de Varzim

( Review or comment • Article history )

Side portal in the Romanesque Church of Rates

  • ... that the architecture of Póvoa de Varzim in Portugal includes influential Romanesque art (pictured), notable contemporary architecture and fishermen houses that have been described as "Eskimo borrows"?
  • Comment: I've been working on this in the last couple of days, Copyediting would be much appreciated

Created/expanded by PedroPVZ (talk). Self nom at 19:56, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

List of international cricket centuries by Inzamam-ul-Haq

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • Reviewed: Punsari
  • Comment: article expended.

Created/expanded by Sahara4u (talk). Self nom at 16:16, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Tomy Drissi

( Review or comment • Article history )

Tomy Drissi's "Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps" Nationwide Series car at Circuit Gilles Villeneuve in 2010

Created/expanded by The Bushranger (talk). Self nom at 08:06, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Note to reviewers: This is both a former unreferenced BLP and a copyvio rescue. Parts of the article's previous state had been cut-and-pasted and/or very closely paraphrased from the driver's official site; with those removed, the article stood at 1099 characters; it is now at 2258 characters, over a 2x expansion. - The Bushranger One ping only 08:07, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svgConfirmed that expansion is more than twice, and that article is now big enough and now referenced. However this was not an unreferenced BLP before, having 6 references before work started, of which 3 may have been useful. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:34, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Well, those external links (sorted as such, not references, and with zero inline citations) were: the driver's official website (cut and pasted from, but, aside from the copyvio, apparently not used for content), his Facebook, Twitter and RSS feeds (WP:ELNO), a WP:PRIMARY bio that was a dead link, and DriverDatabase, which is, while useful at times, wildly incomplete in its data. IIRC pages with similar 'useful' 'external-link references' have been considered UBLPs in the past, but if they're considered enough here to push it past UBLP status, that's cool - it's good to have the article in better shape anyway. :) - The Bushranger One ping only 18:51, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Note: Expansion now past 3x. - The Bushranger One ping only 19:16, 20 June 2012 (UTC)


[edit] Articles created/expanded on June 21

Rape in Pakistan

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • Pictogram voting keep.svg As far as DYK criteria goes, it checks out. The date is new, length is suitable, it's well-referenced (all references are offline books, however), the hook is cited in-line, and it appears to be neutrally written. I'm AGFing the reference. My only concern—and someone with a better understanding of DYK-worthy articles can chime in—is if this is an article appropriate for the front page of Wikipedia. I understand we shouldn't necessarily censor what we put up if it's verifiable, neutral and acceptable by all other conventions, I just feel like certain topics need to be dealt with more carefully. This particular hook is probably as safely worded as it can get, given the circumstances. I'd just like to hear others' opinions as well. Jrcla2 (talk) 15:30, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Striking out the tick/checkmark and replacing with symbol for issue to be resolved. The reviewer expressed doubts about the accuracy of the hook at Wikipedia talk:Did you know, after comparing the book passage with the claim in the article and hook. I am also not sure that the article is adequately neutral in tone - I suggest dividing the lead para to create a separate paragraph on the magnitude of the problem and wording that more in terms of "Studies by human rights organizations have shown . . ." and "Scholar ... says". The article at present presents it as incontrovertible. I note that I was able to find all but one of the source passages online. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:01, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
  • ALT1... that according to lawyer Asma Jahangir, up to seventy-two percent of women in custody in Pakistan are physically or sexually abused?
proposed by Darkness Shines, tweaked by me; a reference for this has been added to the article and I've now added a URL to that ref. (The reference does support the statement.) Yngvadottir (talk) 20:12, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
"Up to 72%" includes 0%. Again, what is the basis for this claim? Nothing.
When I am dictator of Wikipedia, this article will be razed and the editor thrown into the dungeon. Since I am not the dictator, what shall we do?
Kiefer.Wolfowitz 08:27, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
While I'd hate to see 200-odd "Rape in X" articles sprout from the mycelium of Wikipedia, there has evidently been considerable academic ink spilt on rape in Pakistan (and some other countries and territories). The article needs to be rewritten to be more neutral; part of this involves recasting and dividing the intro, as I've suggested above, but the rest requires someone with the knowledge to set it in context - rather than just critiquing the sources, producing sources that disagree and dealing with whether things have been improving, staying the same, vary massively between rural and urban environments, and so on. I can't do that part of it. Until that's done, it's hard to defend any but a weak hook like "Many human rights activists have pointed to Pakistan as having a serious rape problem" against the accusation of being unfairly negative about a whole country and its authorities. Rape is an important topic and I disagree with the original reviewer that it is per se undesirable to have hooks about such shocking things at DYK. (For one thing, we regularly have DYKs that mention Nazi or to a lesser extent Stalinist atrocities, and for another we have a DYK about a lynching or a gruesome crime spree at least every week on average.) Unfortunately the editor is blocked so s/he can't help for a week. I suspect what we're going to do is improve the tone and presentation and maybe talk further about hooks until s/he returns and hope they can set it in context. Or do we have a good chance of getting help at a relevant wikiproject? I'm afraid I haven't had much success asking them for expert help. Yngvadottir (talk) 15:30, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
I've made a few little tweaks, primarily creating the separate intro that I had recommended above. I've tried to avoid weasel words; it really needs someone with a broad grasp of the literature. I'm hoping that now I've started, others will continue improving it. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:06, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Bukit Batu Biosphere Reserve

( Review or comment • Article history )

View on Bukit Batu Biosphere Reserve

  • Reviewed: not necessary as this is not self nomination

Created/expanded by Doseiai2 (talk). Nominated by Annas86 (talk) at 06:46, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Length, date, hook's ref verified. Interesting hook. --Rosiestep (talk) 04:03, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Sources are bare URLs.
Hook is incorrect English. "are", not "is"
Sourcing for hook needs to be at the end of the sentence, not end of the paragraph containing the hook.
Copyvio - Duplication Detector finds that entire section of "Flora and Fauna" was duplicated from Ref #3
The Flora and Fauna section only has Flora, no Fauna

Maile66 (talk) 12:26, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Doseiai2, who created the article, was notified; but I also notified the nominator, Annas86. If the Copyvio issue isn't addressed within the next 3 hours, I'll remove it myself. --Rosiestep (talk) 01:41, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
    • Sorry, actually I wait for Doseiai2. But I think its ok to remove that section now.*Annas* (talk) 05:03, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
      • I removed the Copyvio section. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:31, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg DYK - no bare urls. Additionally, this article is about a biosphere. Removing the flora and fauna, and replacing it with one sentence so you can have a hook, removes the substance of the biosphere. Maile66 (talk) 14:45, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
The creator of the article hasn't edited since June 21 and may still be unaware of the issues. I have restored the Flora and fauna heading and rewritten the section, and identified that source, to provide a model. This also reveals inaccuracy in the hook: the source actually says there are 29 protected species of plant in the reserve, and is apparently giving 9 as examples. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:23, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for doing that editing work. Duplication Detector is stalling out right now, but I'm AGF on what you did. So, there are now two items to be taken care of: (1) An accurate hook; (2) Bare URLs 1 through 8, excluding #3 which you formatted as an example. Maile66 (talk) 17:34, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
I reformatted the bare URLs. --Rosiestep (talk) 02:56, 27 June 2012 (UTC)


Thanks for reformatted the bare URLs. For the hook, I suggest ALT1:... that there are Sumatran elephants and Sumatran Tigers in the Bukit Batu Biosphere Reserve? *Annas* (talk) 07:45, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
As far as I can make out the current page title is incorrect - I think this should be moved, preferably to Giam Siak Kecil-Bukit Batu Biosphere Reserve, the UNESCO Man and the Biosphere appellation; or to Bakut Batu Wildlife Reserve, the national designation of part of what is discussed; [8] (I only know how to do copy-paste moves...) Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 19:19, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences and Humanities

( Review or comment • Article history )

The modern BBAW headquarters at Jägerstrasse 22/23 (2006)

Created/expanded by Ultracobalt (talk). Self nom at 06:27, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol possible vote.svg DYKcheck confirms a 5x expansion to 6705 characters, photo is public domain and used in article. The hook has some problems: it's over the maximum 200 character length even not counting "pictured", "perverted" is non-neutral and not sourced, "rebuilt on the ashes of the historic Prussian Sciences Academy" is not accurate (there were intervening organizations), and the "78 Nobel prizewinners have shaped its history" from berlin-sciences.com, based on the context (coming after a sentence referring to a 300-year history) would seem to include previous institutions, not (as the hook implies) the post-reunification Academy's membership. In addition, the article itself, while well sourced, is not neutral in similar fashion to the hook: referring to Theodor Vahlen as "notorious" is inappropriate. Finally, the article is classified as a stub; while I think it's more than that, it cannot be passed while it is still rated a stub. Given these significant issues, checks have not yet been made for copyvio/close paraphrasing. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:27, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Responding to your points: The BBAW is officially designated a recreation of the old Academy, despite intervening organizations, but the non neutral word you cite can definitely be fixed. The inevitable length of the article's title makes hook length tricky but as it is 204 without (pictured), word adjustments can correct that. Fixing the ref to Vahlen is easy enough (done). Considering the historical sensitivities, I did take care to make the article WP:NPOV and request what other aspects you regard as non-neutral before I rewrite hook. As to "stub", the article was so labelled before expansion. I've never heard a non-stub designation is a prerequisite for DYK, particularly in cases of expansion, so I didn't remove it. Please cite policy as WP:WIADYK does not list this. -- Ultracobalt  (talk) 09:02, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
  • The wording in the article says BBAW was created "on the original model of the old Prussian Academy" but not that it's a direct successor; if that were true, presumably the BBAW site (ref 11) wouldn't include the GDR years, but they do. While a couple of issues remain with NPOV, you were good overall in maintaining it aside from Vahlen: the "international fame" claim for the Prussian academy is problematic, especially as it is sourced from the non-neutral BBAW website, as is the description of Planck as "a broken man", which by implication leads the reader to think that it was due to the academy, while Planck's own article ascribes it to the death of his son Erwin in 1945. With regard to the stub, DYKcheck, the tool developed to check a number of issues in nominated articles, flags stubs as problematic (along with sourcing, size, and expansion), and rule D11 of WP:DYKSG applies. It's been enforced regularly ever since I have come on board, and makes sense to me: articles classified as stubs should not be highlighted on the main page. This article is surely eligible to be reclassified at a higher, non-stub level. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:43, 3 July 2012 (UTC), revised 17:49, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
  • If it's wording on BBAW origin you object to, I can adjust. Re: Planck, the broken man reference is from the source cited, separate from his bio article which has its own issues and for which I am not the author. Planck was both a victim of and a collaborator with National Socialism, which tormented him, and that complexity is not properly covered in the bio. I merely summarized the point because this article isn't about him. Re: D11, all that rule states is any stub tag be removed if an article is long enough for DYK (1500 prose char) - are you going to do that or should I? -- Ultracobalt  (talk) 05:15, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
  • My problem with the BBAW origin wording was in the hook, not the article. For Planck, if the cited source says "broken man", then my discomfort with the implication shouldn't stand in the way of a DYK. I have taken the liberty of reading over the WikiProject Germany article class standards, and have changed the rating of Stub class to C class. I've also made some WP:YEAR-based formatting edits to the article. At this point, aside from the "international fame" phrase, the article looks fine. If you would please propose a new hook, I would be happy to review it. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:35, 4 July 2012 (UTC)


Danger By Design (TV show)

( Review or comment • Article history )

Nik Wallenda as he begins to cross Niagara Falls on the highwire

  • Reviewed: Nicolaus Ricii de Nucella Campli and Matt Cain's perfect game
  • Comment: Nik Wallenda also meets the DYK criteria, but was recently featured on WP:ITN. That article is currently a good article nominee, so if the reviewer of this DYK is interested in the subject, comments for improvement on that article are welcome. (But, don't feel obligated to even read that article if not interested.)

Created/expanded by ThaddeusB (talk). Self nom at 04:53, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Wow, that was a fast comment - I just renamed it a few minutes ago (Discovery renamed the program) --ThaddeusB (talk) 04:57, 25 June 2012 (UTC)


Talking Heads (Body of Proof)

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • Symbol question.svgNeeds more in-line references. There is at least one existing in-line reference that links to another Wikipedia article, please find and alternative. Gaius Cornelius (talk) 16:48, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
ALT1 - that Body of Proof episode "Talking Heads" which received positive reviews and stars Dana Delany, featured Kelly AuCoin as the episode's murderer? —M.Mario (talk) 17:03, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
Note that the original hook is over the maximum length at 218 characters, and therefore can't be used. I've corrected a couple of typos in ALT1, but I think it needs work: "received positive reviews" is not interesting. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:20, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
Maybe remove the positive reviews part? And add, ... Talking Heads, which stars Dana Delany, was described as "fascinating" and featured Kelly Aucoin... — M.Mario (T/C) 16:07, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
ALT2 - that Body of Proof episode "Talking Heads" was directed by Christine Moore and featured guest star Kelly AuCoin as the episode's murderer?
Generally, directors and stars or guest stars do not make for an interesting hook. You need an odd juxtaposition or fact to intrigue the reader. This is a possibility, if a bit gruesome, since the body wasn't dismembered by the murderer (I don't think including AuCoin would be useful):
Pulling ALT3 with apologies: I realize now that it's not enough of a real-world connection as is required for hooks on articles about a fictional episode or show or character. Let's try ALT4 instead:
  • ALT4: ... that the performances in the Body of Proof episode "Talking Heads" of Kathy Searle as the person who dismembered the murder victim and Kelly AuCoin as the murderer were both praised? BlueMoonset (talk) 17:39, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Agreed; changed a little though.
*ALT4a: ... that the guest performances in the Body of Proof episode "Talking Heads" of Kathy Searle and Kelly AuCoin, who played the murderer, were both praised? — M.Mario (T/C) 19:23, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Mario, I've restored my ALT4 and put your changes in as ALT4a, since yours were major changes, not little ones. The whole point I was trying to make is that the who-does-what type of hook is basically uninteresting, and put in what I felt would pique the reader's interest—dismemberment and murder and it not being by the same person—which you pulled right out again. That's your prerogative, though I recommend against it, and there's a chance the reviewer may well find your hook dull and refuse to pass it without improvements. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:48, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote4.png Need reviewer now that hook is settled. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:27, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Farewell, My Queen, Chantal Thomas

( Review or comment )
( Article history links: Farewell, My Queen • Chantal Thomas )

Created/expanded by Ruby2010 (talk). Self nom at 05:33, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

  • I wasn't expecting this to be here long enough, but it would be great if this hook could appear on July 14 (Bastille Day). :) Ruby 2010/2013 00:38, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Ferenc Kossuth

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • ... that Ferenc Kossuth, son of Hungarian revolutionary Lajos Kossuth, was also a prominent politician and Minister of Trade in his country?
  • Reviewed: Will review another soon
  • Comment: ALT1: ... that Ferenc Kossuth, son of Hungarian revolutionary Lajos Kossuth, was also a prominent politician and Minister of Trade in his country?

Created/expanded by Norden1990 (talk) and Bob Burkhardt (talk). Nominated by Norden1990 at 12:00 21 June 2012 (CEST)

  • Symbol question.svg In the hook, "also" is confusing - I suggest it be deleted. Gaius Cornelius (talk) 12:34, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg New and long enough. Images good to go. There are references, inline citations would be an improvement although with the article and the references being quite short, this is not a big problem. I cannot verify that he was Minister of Trade. Gaius Cornelius (talk) 12:34, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Also doesn't sound confusing to me. I think this is legit if it is referenced. Electriccatfish2 (talk) 21:42, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on June 22

Sir Walter Roper Lawrence

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by Mehrajmir13 (talk). Self nom at 13:02, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Pakistan Zindabad

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • Symbol possible vote.svg The source given for the first hook says something else. It clearly says that they were not Kashmiris, but Jamait-Tuleba, student wing of Jamait-Islami. The article also fails D6 of Wikipedia:Did you know/Supplementary guidelines, since there is a RfC going on the talk page. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 07:05, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
    Do you mean to say Jamait-Tuleba is ethincity? Being Kashmiri and being a member of a student organization are two different things. Besides the source no where says that they were not Kashmiris. And about D6, there is no edit warring at the article neither there is any tag there, unless someone put one after my comment. --SMS Talk 07:51, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
  • So you mean to say that Jamait-Tuleba are representatives of Kashmiris? Jamait-Tuleba is a extremist group, and you can't term a group as Kashmiri. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 08:11, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
    Yes, thanks you get it now. Jamait-e-Tuleba are one of the representatives of Kashmiri students. If a group belongs to some ethnic group, we can call them being from that ethincity. --SMS Talk 16:29, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
  • This hook is highly misleading. Jamait-e-Tuleba is an extremist anti-Indian group. Please correct this hook, and alo the article. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 17:38, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
    I don't understand your exact point. We really should not care whether they are anti or pro to any country, the point here is they are a Kashmiri group. And the said incident is mentioned by a number of sources. See for yourself how Victoria Schofield described the incident. --SMS Talk 21:28, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Your hook is very misleading. Th thing is, they were a group, not an ethnicity. Why are you increasing the scope too much? ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 06:36, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
    Yes exactly that was a group, a Kashmiri group. Besides I gave you a neutral source to check what it says about the incident and the group. --SMS Talk 09:24, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
But why are you just increasing the scope. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 09:51, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
I am not increasing the scope, that is why I added a neutral source for you to look for yourself, covering the event. --SMS Talk 16:47, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
The book is not available for review, quote the book if you have access. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 07:53, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Kashmir In Conflict: India, Pakistan and the Unending War by Victoria Schofield, Page 132: "...In October 1983 much was made of a cricket match held in Srinagar between India and the West Indies. The Indian team was booed by the assembled crowd, and supporters of the Jamaat-e Islami waved their green party flags...". --SMS Talk 17:26, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

I have gone through some sources related to this cricket match, and from what I've read so far, there is nothing to indicate that only "Jamait-Tuleba" crowd was cheering Pakistan. Thus, calling the entire crowd as Jamait-Tuleba is probably WP:OR and improper synthesis. Mar4d (talk) 04:02, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Comment This interesting event is also covered in a piece in OPEN (Indian magazine). According to the narrator, there were "deafening cries of Pakistan zindabad" and that the West Indies team couldn't figure out "why they had so much support on Indian soil." An Indian cricketer, Kirti Azad, remarked that "It was like playing in Pakistan against Pakistan." (That day in 1986) Mar4d (talk) 03:56, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg After reading through, the article appears to be of good length and has good sourcing too. The first hook on a cricket match in Kashmir is interesting and appropriate for DYK, and seems relevant to the context. From what I see, looks good to go. Mar4d (talk) 03:44, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Please provide sources then. Its clear that supporters of an extremist group can be referred as "Kashmiris". I am still on the position that this hook is misleading. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 16:00, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
    I respect your determination but I think its time to drop it. Its nothing more what I can do, the sources you are asking for are already provided. --SMS Talk 16:10, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol delete vote.svg The DYK is clearly misleading and unsupported by the source, Even the source by SMSarmad above clearly say they are a group of separatists from Jamaat-e-Islami ( a pro pakistani party) and their political views on a sports ground do not represent the whole Kashmiri community.--DBigXray 17:43, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
    Please don't falsify the facts, the above source does not say so, read it again. --SMS Talk 19:20, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
1) Do not falsify facts, 2) there are two hooks there, you've opposed it without addressing the second. 3) You edits on my DYK submissions are clear cut hounding. --lTopGunl (talk) 12:30, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
More baseless accusations. Is everything is this world hounding? Also the hook itself is falsifying the fact. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 12:35, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
@TopGun Read WP:HOUNDING again before you make such serious accusations and admin shopping. this and a related article is already being discussed centrally at AfD. --DBigXray 14:07, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
  • N Not done This hook fails criteria 1 as nor it has been newly created nor has been expanded in 5 days but it has taken 1 month to come up here. Correct me if I m wrong. →TSU tp* 15:39, 4 July 2012 (UTC) PS: Before anyone accuses me of hounding, I would like to clarify that I stalk Dave's talk page. Cheers! →TSU tp* 15:39, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
    Kindly consider reviewing it again against Criteria 1. --SMS Talk 15:52, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
    • I did, and still it is failing. The content has to be expanded to 5 folds so addition of refs or cats don't count. It is not summing up to 5 fold. It is close to 2.5 or 3 but not 5. Sorry. →TSU tp* 16:04, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
This is the before expansion version (as on 21st June 2012) that had 864 characters (prose only) and this is after expansion (on 26 June 2012) and has about 4750 characters (again prose only). So you are right it is not five times expanded but more than five. --SMS Talk 16:29, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on June 24

Jasmyn Banks

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • Symbol confirmed.svg--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:55, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
    • Article too short, only 1025 characters.
    • Article does not support the hook and the hook is uncited, of course.
      • Now good to go, everything validated.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:12, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
May I ask what the specified size of the article needs to be? — M.Mario (T/C) 07:56, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
Expanded to correct size. — M.Mario (T/C) 08:57, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg There were significant problems found with this article: a good deal of repetition, a mostly irrelevant quote from another actor that was only tangentially about Jasmyn, and a plot summary used as a review. After editing, the article is at 1200 characters according to DYKcheck, well short of the required 1500 minimum. In addition, DYKcheck shows that the article is a stub class article, and such articles are not eligible for DYK. Some significant additions are needed for this article to be approved again. I also recommend shortening the hook: "when the EastEnder bosses" is unnecessary and makes the hook less interesting. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:16, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Expanded once again, now ready to move to queue. — M.Mario (T/C) 16:56, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
I'm afraid it isn't ready, and it's up to a reviewer, not you, to say that it is. First, the article is still rated a Stub by WikiProject Biography; as I noted above, stubs cannot be DYKs, and it is an appropriate ranking for the article as it is now. Second, the new very long quote from Jasmyn is too long by WP:MOSQUOTE standards to be an inline quote; it has to be in a blockquote or quote box, neither of which are eligible when it comes to counting characters for DYK. The article is at 1419 characters after the latest edits, and may shrink further depending on the outcome of the Daily Mirror inclusion discussion. More information about Jasmyn or her work (as opposed to quotes from her) is what the article needs at this point. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:44, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

8-Pass Charlie

( Review or comment • Article history )

PAF B-57s


  • Symbol delete vote.svg Misleading, The unknown pilot does not qualify as ace no source to back up the claim that he was an ace. And there is nothing known as Bomber ace. I dont thing we need to have misleading info as DYK on homepage--DBigXray 11:45, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
I've removed the link to flying ace to prevent confusion. You need to use the brain some times. Every thing is sourced. And after being told multiple times at WQA and ANI not to hound me or interact with me you've yet again appeared at two of my DYK submissions. Yet, I've (also) removed the objectionable part. --lTopGunl (talk) 12:11, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
From what I see there is already too much WP:AOBF and admin shopping going on. --DBigXray 14:10, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
Have fun with that... I've addressed the concerns here.. this is good to go, --lTopGunl (talk) 14:12, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
  • N Not done This hook fails criteria 1 as nor it has been newly created nor has been expanded in 5 days but it has taken 4 years to come up here. Correct me if I m wrong. →TSU tp* 15:41, 4 July 2012 (UTC) PS: Before anyone accuses me of hounding, I would like to clarify that I stalk Dave's talk page. Cheers! →TSU tp* 15:41, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
    FYI the rule of expansion is relaxed sometimes. Sometimes if the hook is interesting. Besides biography articles need to be expanded two folds to become eligible for DYK and this one is expanded about 2.3 times. --SMS Talk 16:05, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
Criteria is often 3.5 when it is interesting.. and this one obviously is. --lTopGunl (talk) 16:27, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Hook is catchy and article is interesting, expanded more than 2 times (a biography). --SMS Talk 16:57, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg SMS, the 2x expansion is only valid if the article had been completely unsourced prior to expansion; as this article had two sources when the recent work began, it is ineligible for the exception and must be expanded 5x. According to DYKcheck, the article had 760 prose characters as of 14 January 2012; it needs 3800 characters now, and has only 2126, which is 2.8x. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:28, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

The Politics of Nonviolent Action

( Review or comment • Article history )

Mahatma Gandhi

  • Reviewed: Blake Gaudry DIFF
  • Comment: Hook quote can be confirmed online HERE. The actual snippet does not seem visible, but the Google Book hit confirms it is from page 82.

Created/expanded by Presearch (talk). Self nom at 05:58, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Mahatma Gandhi

Comment: ALT 1 hook quote can be confirmed online HERE. --Presearch (talk) 04:16, 30 June 2012 (UTC)





Lit Motors

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • Symbol delete vote.svg Tagged as under construction, has bare URLs, expansion began 9 days before nomination. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:42, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Uh, the article was published the day of nomination. In past DYKs, they considered the date of creation to be the date the article is moved out of AfC. And the template was added by me to help the user complete some edits they were working on, and they must have not removed it. I'll handle the other problems. --Nathan2055talk - contribs 20:03, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Right. Okay, still has three bare URLs (one is a link to YouTube, but the feed looks legit). What makes Autoblog a reliable source? A couple unreferenced sentences and the article has a stub template. I like the hook though. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:53, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Almost no DYKs don't have a stub template. I will look into the references though. --Nathan2055talk - contribs 17:16, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on June 25

al-Rastan

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by Al Ameer son (talk). Self nom at 19:18, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Alexander Aan

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by Khazar2 (talk), Crisco 1492 (talk). Nominated by Crisco 1492 (talk) at 12:33, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol question.svg The date, reference, length, and article looks good. However, technically there weren't calls for him to be executed because he simply posted on Facebook. They were angry because he posted (supposedly) anti-Islamic things on Facebook. The hook should be rewritten to comply with this. Regards, Ruby 2010/2013 05:30, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote4.png There is no requirement to reveal the entire context in the hook (not in the DYK rules or guidelines), and it is not hooky if we give too much information. An ALT: ALT1 ... that there were calls for Alexander Aan to be executed because of several of his posts on Facebook? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:53, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Ed Carfrey

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • Reviewed: Not my creation/expansion, QPQ rule doesn't apply.
  • Comment: Similar to Template:Did you know nominations/Henry Oxley, this will be kept at AfD, and should be promoted after the discussion closes. AfD closed as keep.

Created/expanded by Cbl62 (talk). Nominated by Muboshgu (talk) at 17:07, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

  • I appreciate Muboshgu nominating this rescue effort. I was probably going to nominate it anyway, so I don't mind doing a QPQ. Please consider 4 2012 Pulitzer Prize Winners - George F. Kennan to be the QPQ. I think Muboshgu's proposed hook is good, but I have an alternative that I'm offering below. Either one is perfectly OK by me. Cbl62 (talk) 02:16, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
  • alt1 ... that Ed Carfrey played in an 1891 exhibition of indoor baseball using a 19-inch, hair-filled ball that was called "a travesty on the noblest of games"? Cbl62 (talk) 02:16, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Dance Again... the Hits

( Review or comment • Article history )

IMHO, this proposal has issues, because it promotes the interests of other individuals, companies, or groups. It sounds like the commercial annoucement of the release of a new album from the artist in question. Pdellani (talk) 11:55, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
How so? It's a fun fact. Her album will be released on her birthday. Also, you are supposed to notify users when you have commented on one of these. Statυs (talk) 16:01, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
Sure it is fun. But it is at the same time a commercial announcement. Cheers, Pdellani (talk) 08:32, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
The hook must be: "interesting, hook fact is accurate and cited with an inline citation in the article, neutral and does not focus unduly on negative aspects of living people". Your opinion on whether or not it appears to be a "commercial announcement" has nothing to do with the guidelines of how a hook should be. It is interesting, accurate and neutral. Statυs (talk) 19:18, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
Saying that the content of this hook is neutral, does not make it neutral. It should also be in conformance with the policies of Wikipedia. According to the article "What Wikipedia is not - item 2.3" - "Wikipedia is not a soapbox, a battleground, or a vehicle for propaganda, advertising and showcasing". How can a hook, which content is the announcement of the release date of an album, that is scheduled to happen in the near future, not be an advertisement? Is the album going to be distributed for free or it will be sold? If it is not going to be distributed for free, it is indeed commercial. Is is not a matter of opinion, it is a fact. With this hook, Wikipedia will be advertising the release of the album. With this hook, Wikipedia will be advertising the official start of the sales of the album. It is a commercial advertisement. A hook like this, that clearly violates the content policies of Wikipedia, can not be called neutral and, therefore, has no place in the Did you know... section. Pdellani (talk) 09:18, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

I have to agree that this sort of thing (a DYK coinciding with the launch of a commercial product) should not be allowed. Regardless of the particular motivations of this nomination, we should not be naive about the advertising value of a place on the front page of a top ten website. Rd232 talk 13:20, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes; I didn't understand with the user's initial vague comments. I can assure you that was not the reason, to advertise. The point was to get across the fact that she's releasing her first ever greatest hits album on her birthday. I think the new hook gives a better look, since it also states the fact that it is her first in a 14 year music career, which has been deemed to be long overdue. Cheers, Statυs (talk) 18:35, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
I believe you that your motivation is not to advertise, but as a matter of policy, we can't effectively police abuse of DYK for promotional purposes, and it's a territory ripe for exploitation. Therefore we should just not have DYKs that, intentionally or otherwise, involve the promotion of commercial products. I would add as well that DYK is about encouraging people to contribute content, and for me that's more about CSB content than for something like this (an article that would certainly be created without any DYK-type incentive). Rd232 talk 19:30, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Can somebody actually review this, please? Statυs (talk) 20:51, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Inter-Services Intelligence activities in India

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by Vibhijain (talk). Self nom at 08:05, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Article is long enough.Hooks seems good and interesting.Aye! ≫TheStrike Σagle≪ 09:42, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Can you please correct the hook to "...that Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence agency is accused of supporting Khalistan movement...", the same way this fact is mentioned in the article. Besides the source you have mentioned in the article says this fact a little differently which you might want to look again to correct it. --SMS Talk 21:54, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Please have an another look at the source, it clearly says,"the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) has supported this organization for a long time". And the offline source clarifies the revenge thing. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 06:15, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
    Can you please cite here the relevant text from the offline source for us? --SMS Talk 16:24, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
  • You may check it yourself, I have added the link on the article. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 17:36, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
    Ok now that I have checked it, I think it is a case of source falsification besides the South Asian Terrorism Portal doesn't look like a reliable source. --SMS Talk 17:16, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Could you please explain how is it a case of "source falsification". The source clearly says that it was to take revenge. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 07:52, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
    The source you have used says: "... the key policy-makers in Pakistan, have a number of incentives to support the Khalistan Movement, either covertly or overtly. These are: To seek revenge against India for its help in creating Bangladesh...", not what you have presented as a fact. --SMS Talk 16:37, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
I have said that only. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 17:12, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

George Higoumenakis

( Review or comment • Article history )

Comment - This article is mostly composed of material moved from Higoumenakis' sign, so I'm not certain it is eligible. Kerowyn Leave a note 22:55, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
Symbol possible vote.svg Also, this article has less than 1,500 characters and insufficient citations. --George Ho (talk) 23:08, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
  • This article was created with only 1294 characters. The author never had a notice on their talk page about this, so I posted one today. Maile66 (talk) 19:05, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
I haven't been able to find any other citations for this. There may be more stuff in the Greek Wikipedia, but I haven't been able to find . Kerowyn Leave a note 19:51, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Doglands

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • Comment: Article was created today. Seems long enough, but I cannot tell for sure because I am afraid to let scripts run on my computer.
  • Reviewed: New nominators exemption; this is only my first nomination.

Created/expanded by Brambleberry of RiverClan (talk). Self nom at 15:53, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Scheme $6,000

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • Reviewed: I have new nominators exemption as this is only my 2nd nomination. I will review something when I find one I feel comfortable with reviewing.

Created by KTC (talk). Self nom at 03:01, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Doctor Whom (series 7)

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • Comment: This is my first DYK nomination. I'm currently on wikibreak with limited Internet access, so if there are changes to be made you may wish to contact User:Eshlare. Created/expanded by Glimmer721 (talk). Self nom at 00:07, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on June 26

Symphonic Songs for Band

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • ... that composer Robert Russell Bennett's work Symphonic Songs for Band was premiered by the 112-member Kappa Kappa Psi-Tau Beta Sigma National Intercollegiate Band in 1957? Created/expanded by Sycamore (talk). Self nom at 12:03, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

List of William & Mary Tribe head football coaches

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by Jrcla2 (talk). Self nom at 15:39, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Fall of the Western Roman Empire

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • ... that in 405, during the Fall of the Western Roman Empire, manpower was so scarce that Roman soldiers were urged to allow their personal slaves to fight beside them?
  • Comment: Quotation from source: "Manpower to repel Radagaisus was so scarce that Honorius promulgated a law urging all Roman soldiers regardless of status (regulars, auxiliaries,[federates], and dediticii) to allow their slaves to fight at their sides." Burns, Thomas S. Barbarians Within the Gates of Rome : A Study of Roman Military Policy and the Barbarians, CA. 375–425 A. D. ISBN 10: 0253312884 / 0-253-31288-4 ISBN 13: 9780253312884 Indiana University Press 1995

Created by Richard Keatinge (talk), Bazuz (talk). Nominated by Richard Keatinge (talk) at 14:05, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol question.svg Amazing expansion job! Length and date checkout and hook is sourced. However, there are a number of passages without citations: latter half of the first paragraph in "The height of power, crises, and recovery," last passage in "313–376," second half of second passage in "376–395," last passage in "Civil Wars," both passages in "Maintaining power," and there are several more. I'm sure the sources are present in the article, you just need to add the citations to the end of every passage. --Al Ameer son (talk) 05:07, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. I could probably give a citation for every phrase, but certainly every paragraph is now backed by at least one reference. I'd value your opinion on the present state of the article. Richard Keatinge (talk) 18:14, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Peter Isaacson

( Review or comment • Article history )

Lancaster Q for Queenie flies under Sydney Harbour Bridge, 22 October 1943


Day of Rage (Bahrain)

( Review or comment • Article history )

Protesters fleeing after security forces fired tear gas on a march in Nuwaidrat.

  • ... that one protester was killed after security forces attacked protests (one pictured) in Bahrain's Day of Rage?
  • Comment: Didn't review an article yet

Created/expanded by Bahraini Activist (talk). Self nom at 21:53, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Mandarin Oriental, Washington, D.C.

( Review or comment • Article history )

The Mandarin Oriental Hotel, Washington, D.C.

Created/expanded by Thine Antique Pen (talk). Self nom at 17:10, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol question.svg (edit conflict) Length, sourcing and hook all check out. But would you mind adding the name of the article you've reviewed, at the moment I see a list of ones reviewed previously? Mattythewhite (talk) 17:55, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol delete vote.svg I do not like the hook, it reads like an ad. It wouldn't grab my attention, on the contrary, I would be pretty suspicious about that claim. I think we all know about the reliability of magazines or websites rankings. The article has an "about" section, not common at all in wikipedia (an encyclopedia!), that often has an history and architecture section. The article has nothing on this, it's almost empty on useful information about the hotel, it reads like an ad. I'm not accusing anything, I've myself done the same mistake, because we use the hotel's website as sources. --Pedro (talk) 17:50, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
Thanks! ⇒TAP 18:05, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
I think it would be worth mentioning where the quoted text from ALT1 is from, so perhaps something like "... that the Mandarin Oriental Hotel's CityZen restaurant is known to be "among the city's best", according to travel guide Frommer's"? Mattythewhite (talk) 18:30, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
YesY Added to ALT1. ⇒TAP 18:31, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg ALT1 checks out. Mattythewhite (talk) 19:15, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
Symbol question.svgIt still reads like an advert. Why are we promoting this hotel on the front page? Secretlondon (talk) 00:09, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
I wouldn't call this an advert, just informative. '"very expensive"' must put people off! ⇒TAP 07:31, 29 June 2012 (UTC)


Geidi Primes

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by Nikthestoned (talk), Caladonia (talk). Nominated by Nikthestoned (talk) at 13:34, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Chrisye discography

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • ... that five albums by Chrisye were listed among the best Indonesian albums of all time?

Created/expanded by Crisco 1492 (talk). Self nom at 04:39, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Robert Refsnyder

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by Muboshgu (talk). Self nom at 04:04, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on June 27

Grouville Hoard

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • Reviewed: Pending

Created/expanded by BabelStone (talk). Self nom at 22:28, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

The Stool Pigeon (newspaper)

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • I still have to review an article ... may be a couple of days before I get round to it. --JN466 18:24, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Chic Chocolate

( Review or comment • Article history )

Kinal

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • ... that the Maya city of Kinal in northern Guatemala possessed an unusually complex acropolis but is noted for its complete absence of sculpted monuments?

Created/expanded by Simon Burchell (talk). Self nom at 13:47, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Length and date ok; re the hook, my understanding of the source is that the absence of "monuments" is narrowly construed as meaning altars/stelai; however there is mention of estuco ?=stucco? - is that sculpted? Thanks, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 18:18, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
There is no mention of the stucco being sculpted in the sources. However, even if it were, sculpted stucco would have been part of the decoration of a building and would not be classified as a sculpted monument. All the best Simon Burchell (talk) 06:45, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
ALT1: ... that the Maya city of Kinal in northern Guatemala possessed an unusually complex acropolis but is noted for its complete absence of sculpted stelai and altars? Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 22:29, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Derek MacKenzie

( Review or comment • Article history )

MacKenzie playing for the Columbus Blue Jackets during the 2011–12 NHL season

  • Comment: This is the first time I've done a nomination with an image so if it's formatted incorrectly please let me know. Also I'm not attached to having the image included so feel free to not include it in the final nomination.

Created/expanded by Leech44 (talk). Self nom at 01:54, 29 June 2012 (UTC)


Angela Santomero

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by Figureskatingfan (talk). Self nom at 16:33, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

My take:

ALT1:... that two children's TV shows, Blue's Clues and Super Why, were created, produced, and written by Angela Santomero?

A hook needs to take a passive tone, and "important" looks too dubious. I would prefer using "children's TV show" over "important". --George Ho (talk) 09:17, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm good with ALT1 as the hook. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:47, 30 June 2012 (UTC)


Battle of Grudziądz (1659)

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • ... that sources give two different commanders for the Polish forces participating in the Battle of Grudziądz?

Created/expanded by Piotrus (talk), Poeticbent (talk). Nominated by Piotrus (talk) at 13:48, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol question.svg The pure text of the article makes it a borderline stub (1322 characters without spaces, 1568 with spaces). Is it possible to further expand it? The article looks interesting but it would require some additions on the Swedish part of the story. As for the sources, I didn't find anything about the battle in Robert I Frost pp.3 and is just a short introduction chapter, is there any other reliable English language source out there? Also the citation for the second hook is from a website, which is ran by a religious humanitary organization. Is it reliable enough for a history-related article? Are they experts of the subject? Apart from this I would go for the first hook as it seems to be a bit more interesting than the latter if it is sure that modern historians haven't come to terms with and revealed the true identify of the Polish commander yet. Lajbi Holla @ me • CP 11:05, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

List of songs recorded by Faith No More

( Review or comment • Article history )

A man dressed in white singing through a megaphone

Created/expanded by Grapple X (talk). Self nom at 23:07, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

The Melrose Hotel

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created by Thine Antique Pen (talk). Self nom at 17:03, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Lunar Sample Laboratory Facility

( Review or comment • Article history )

A grey rock with a ruler indicating that it is about 8cm across

  • References are fairly bare (should have publisher information and writing dates, at the very least). "The facility takes extensive measures to prevent contamination of the lunar samples." is unreferenced. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:14, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Thanks for your review. I think I've addressed your comments. Can you confirm? --JohnPomeranz (talk) 18:43, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Hook: Interesting, cited, short enough.
Article: New enough, long enough. Referencing is good. Paraphrasing checked against this looks fine. I've added convert templates and categories.
Summary:Symbol confirmed.svg Looks good. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:01, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg How about add8ing a picture of the Genesis rock to the hook? Hawkeye7 (talk) 08:56, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
Sure. That's a good idea. --JohnPomeranz (talk) 00:41, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg A lot of material here appears to be copied directly from various NASA sites. I think NASA allows that type of use, but even if so, you should follow the procedures for such copying outlined here. You might also tweak the NYT-cited material, as it might be a bit close (and that source is decidedly not PD). Nikkimaria (talk) 02:51, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Deputy Prime Minister of Pakistan

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • Reviewed: Reviews
  • Comment: Article expended.

Created/expanded by Sahara4u (talk). Self nom at 01:43, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Symbol delete vote.svg It's a BLP. The nominator/author doesn't seem to have contributed which confuses me. I'm presuming this is being treated as an unreferenced BLP so it would need two fold expansion. However it's still only got one reference and most paragraphs don't have any citations. Secretlondon (talk) 08:01, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote4.png Maybe you clicked the wrong link. I pull up an article about a government position "The Deputy Prime Minister of Pakistan", not an individual. It has six online references that were there since June 26. The nominator is the main contributor. Maile66 (talk) 19:30, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
Ah sorry - I did click on the wrong link. Secretlondon (talk) 06:44, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on June 28

Edmonton air crash

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by GraemeLeggett (talk), MilborneOne (talk). Nominated by The Bushranger (talk) at 21:22, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

bath salts (drug)

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • ... that mephedrone, one of the drugs found in bath salts was first synthesised in the 1920s but only began to be abused in the last decade?
  • Comment: Currently at AFD, but will almost certainly be kept.
  • Now closed as keep. SmartSE (talk) 16:28, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Created/expanded by JunoBeach (talk), Smartse (talk). Nominated by Smartse (talk) at 10:55, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Hameen Ali

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • ... that Hameen Ali received the Disney Sports Spirit Award, awarded annually to "college football's most inspirational athlete, who displays a sense of courage and an undying love for the game, while overcoming adversity on or off the field?"

Created/expanded by Jrcla2 (talk). Self nom at 14:27, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Symbol possible vote.svg Hook is too long (well over 200 characters - and remember spaces must be counted). Otherwise good to go: New enough, long enough, within policy, and hook is verifiable. I think you can fix this easily by shortening the hook. -- Presearch (talk) 10:55, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
One possible alternative hook might be ALT 1: ... that Hameen Ali received the Disney Sports Spirit Award, awarded annually to "college football's most inspirational athlete... while overcoming adversity"?
--Presearch (talk) 11:01, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
I'm good with Alt1. Jrcla2 (talk) 16:31, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

The Hamilton Crowne Plaza, Washington, D.C.

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by Thine Antique Pen (talk). Self nom at 20:02, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg Good to go, although it is a tad too much of a travel guide type article, could use more solid sources and information..♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:52, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your review! ⇒TAP 09:34, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Hook fact about "Art Deco" is not supported by the inline citation; since that's key to all three proposed hooks, none can be substituted in the prepare area, so the hook is being pulled back. The use of citations is a bit odd: number 4, used in the second Information paragraph, and is supposed to support the Starbucks in sentence two and the 1920s in sentence four (the "arched glass" in sentence five might be supported by the photo), doesn't mention any of these on the page that comes up when I click on the reference URL. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:56, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Seems I missed out a ref. ⇒TAP 16:25, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Misleading graphs

( Review or comment • Article history )

Comparison of a properly and improperly scaled pictogram bar graph.

Created/expanded by Smallman12q (talk). Self nom at 17:54, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Algo Centre Mall

( Review or comment • Article history )

Preparing to lift cut the beam, and lift it out.
  • Reviewed: The Show Where Sam Shows Up
  • Comment: The article failed to make front page as part of ITN, but it has passed GA already, just days in. The article was created from scratch June 25.

Created/expanded by Zanimum (talk), Acebulf (talk). Nominated by Zanimum (talk) at 23:46, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Bob Cortner

( Review or comment • Article history )

[edit] Articles created/expanded on June 29

Double bubble conjecture

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created by Novonium (talk), David Eppstein (talk). Nominated by David Eppstein (talk) at 03:32, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Southway Community College

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by Moswento (talk). Self nom at 13:03, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Davis Tarwater

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by ThaddeusB (talk). Self nom at 15:52, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

  • In a surprising turn of events, Tarwater has been added to the US Olympic team. As such I shave modified the originally blurb, but strongly suggest using
ALT1: ... that after the US Olympic Trials swimmer Davis Tarwater announced his retirement and headed home before realizing he had qualified for the 2012 Olympics?
instead. I also am requesting the blurb he held for use during the Olympics. Tarwater will be swimming on July 31. --ThaddeusB (talk) 07:01, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Special Duty

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • Comment: Not a self-nom. --PFHLai (talk) 15:11, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Created/expanded by Tigerboy1966 (talk). Nominated by PFHLai (talk) at 15:11, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Harriet Hanson Robinson, Doffer

( Review or comment )
( Article history links: Harriet Hanson Robinson • Doffer )

Harriet Hanson Robinson in 1843

Created/expanded by Aymatth2 (talk), Uncle G (talk). Nominated by Aymatth2 (talk) at 19:24, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Bruce Haynam, Bill Mogk

( Review or comment )
( Article history links: Bruce Haynam • Bill Mogk )

Bill Mogk and Marv Wisniewski with 1953 NCAA championship trophy

Created/expanded by User:Cbl62 (talk). Self nom at 20:00, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Antinomian Controversy

( Review or comment • Article history )

Anne Hutchinson trial

Created/expanded by Sarnold17 (talk). Self nom at 18:09, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Sangeet Sharada

( Review or comment • Article history )

John Rolls

( Review or comment • Article history )

St Mary Magdalen, Bermondsey

Created/expanded by ACP2011 (talk). Self nom at 10:08, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Agneta Matthes, Agneta Park

( Review or comment )
( Article history links: Agneta Matthes • Agneta Park )

Created/expanded by Thine Antique Pen (talk). Self nom at 08:12, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

St. Gregory Luxury Hotels & Suites

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by Thine Antique Pen (talk). Self nom at 12:09, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Sources need to be fixed here. Google Maps, Google+, several travel sites that have a monetary investment in providing you with hotel bookings... The sourcing is just not reliable enough. The thing article has POV issues as it reads like an advert. Article doesn't make clear what notability is because it doesn't use any sources that would establish notability. Quoting the hotel's Google+ account to describe the hotel's awesomeness? --LauraHale (talk) 12:22, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Quoting from the owner of the hotel is an extra. It's got enough coverage, I'll add some more sources. I'd say that it does not read like an advert, it reads the points. ⇒TAP 12:27, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
  • I've added some HighBeam stuff. ⇒TAP 12:46, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Done. ⇒TAP 13:45, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
  • WP:NOTTRAVEL appears to be a problem with this article. It reads like those hotel booking pages, minus the flowery language. --LauraHale (talk) 13:41, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

I've given it an edit and added some better sources and info. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:58, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Thanks for assisting Thine Antique Pen. The article really feels like it has some POV issues to it that makes it read like an advertisement. If this was an article about a sportperson, comparables would be citing sources that say "Since moving up from the reserve squad for Manchester United, his performance has been fantastic and his style of play has been fluid, free-flowing, fast-paced while containing all the characteristics that make Brazilian football fantastic to watch." It isn't particularly neutral. There are still problematic un-reliable sources. The Google Maps sourcing still bothers me because I cannot see that from the source. Plus, it is still completely unclear why this hotel is notable. It doesn't appear to pass WP:ORGANIZATIONS. --LauraHale (talk) 21:40, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
  • I've removed the unreliable sources and material that appeared to be WP:NPOV, dated some of the rest of that material to make it seem more encylopediac instead of travel guide. article is now too short and lead does not match. --LauraHale (talk) 22:02, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

The Churchill Hotel

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • ... that the rooms in The Churchill Hotel feature modern elements, but also elements from when the hotel was built in 1906?

Created/expanded by Thine Antique Pen (talk). Self nom at 10:22, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Hook reads like an advertisement. Article reads like an advertisement. No indication of article notability based on sourcing or the article text. Sourcing again to sites with commercial interests in getting you booked. Most of the article is sourced to the hotel itself. Why is this reliable for the 6,000 painting fact? --LauraHale (talk) 12:27, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg On the QPQ the review was very cursory, without stating what had been checked. Even if the article is great you should make the statements about the article newness, size, plagiarism, neutrality etc and say if the Hook is suitable. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:31, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
Saying 'Good article!' is my way of simply saying 'good to go'. If required I will review another, but I had checked for all of them criteria you listed. ⇒TAP 12:33, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for doing that, I am looking for you to actually say that you checked! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 13:19, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
  • ALT1: ... that the The Churchill Hotel is a former apartment block built in 1906, before being renovated into a hotel?

⇒TAP 12:54, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol question.svg Alt2 does not appear to be reliably sourced. What makes the hotel booking site reliable? --LauraHale (talk)
  • I've gone through and removed all the references and materials referenced to hotel booking sites as these appear unreliable. Removed some language that appeared NPOV problem. This leaves the article too short, with only two sources. --LauraHale (talk) 22:15, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
  • I have posted more references on the talk page, but it needs a writer to turn this into text that can count for a DYK. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:49, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Patrick Awuah Jr

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • Comment: Ashesi University Founder and President

Created/expanded by Nkansahrexford (talk). Self nom at 09:01, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol question.svg ... Where is the hook? --George Ho (talk) 00:51, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote4.png I have bolded the article title in the hook and added "that" per WP:DYKSG (and WP:DYK) rules. Let's await for another reviewer. --George Ho (talk) 03:34, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
  • I have added a comma and period in the article title, as well as renamed a title per WP:naming conventions (people). I have also restructured the hook for proper reading. --George Ho (talk) 06:45, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Which University (does it have an article?) also how are you defining world class? Secretlondon (talk) 19:35, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
  • The university is called Ashesi University, its located in Accra of Ghana. World class in the sense that its got almost anything worth recognizing about a good university, in terms of tuition, facilities, and more and it meets all necessary standards involved.
  • Lots of universities promote themselves with such words, it needs to be defined as such by an authority I think. Secretlondon (talk) 04:52, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Gerard Lyons

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • Reviewed: .

Created/expanded by Mcsony (talk). Self nom at 21:02, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

  • I've made a number of WP:MOS edits to the article and tidied things up. Nominator/creator looks to be exempt from reviewing a hook in return. The length and date of the article are fine, and the hook is nice and catchy, but the reason I will currently Symbol possible vote.svg decline is that the source given for the hook was written by the subject himself. Can you provide an alternative source that corroborates what the hook says—one that was written by a third party? matt (talk) 09:23, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Thanks v much for the cleanup on the article. I'm a n00b and this was my first DYK submission so it was a bit of a long shot. Source for the hook is 1999 so it should be okay, but I'll see if I can find corroboration. Also, do I need to review a hook in return? I'm perfectly happy to do so but I'm not sure I'm experienced enough yet. Mcsony (talk) 19:28, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Current nominations

[edit] Articles created/expanded on June 30

Treasure of El Carambolo

( Review or comment • Article history )

The twenty-one pieces of the Treasure of El Carambolo

  • ... that the sixth century BCE Treasure of El Carambolo (pictured) was found during renovations at a pigeon shooting club? Created/expanded by Bkwillwm (talk). Self nom at 07:25, 4 July 2012 (UTC)


Jahlil Okafor

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • Symbol question.svg Article is new enough and long enough and well-sourced. Hook is short enough, supported by an in-line citation, and interesting enough. I had my doubts that an article about a high school athlete would pass notability standards, but the editor seems to have found plenty of material. There is an "under construction" tag on the article, and it is still undergoing major revision this evening, so I won't give it final approval until that's been removed. Let me know when you're done, and I'll give it a final look. Cbl62 (talk) 05:44, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Kate Allenby

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • ... that former British Olympic bronze medallist Kate Allenby became a PE teacher after she retired from professional sport?
  • Reviewed: Rachel Covey
  • Comment: As this one isn't directly linked to the 2012 Olympics, it'd be fine to go either beforehand or during the Games themselves.

Created/expanded by Miyagawa (talk). Self nom at 19:18, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

In the Middle

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by Till I Go Home (talk). Self nom at 13:42, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Mont Sainte-Victoire and the Viaduct of the Arc River Valley

( Review or comment • Article history )

The Mont Sainte-Victoire and the Viaduct of the Arc River Valley, by Paul Cézanne

Created/expanded by Thine Antique Pen (talk). Self nom at 12:08, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

The Dance Lesson

( Review or comment • Article history )

The Dance Lession by Edgar Davis

Created/expanded by Thine Antique Pen (talk). Self nom at 09:41, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Fails verification. No evidence that this or this are describing the painting in the article. Other than that not too bad. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:57, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Comment They aren't - those sources are about ANOTHER Degas painting with a similar title (The Dance Class, painted 1874). This article should be renamed to "The Dance Lesson (1879)" as there is at least one other Degas painting with this title, or the article should be expanded with details on the other "Dance Lesson" to avoid confusion. This is something that whoever does "The Dance Class" should bear in mind as Degas did at least six/seven unique paintings with that title! Mabalu (talk) 10:20, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Exactly. Stuff like "The works were moved to the gallery in 1929, after Havemeyer's death." only holds true to the one version, and is not supported for this one. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:07, 3 July 2012 (UTC)


Goodwin Heart Pine

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • ... that the company Goodwin Heart Pine harvests sunken logs from rivers for lumber production that loggers felled in the 1800s, where they initially sank because of their high resin content? Created/expanded by Springmata (talk). Nominated by Northamerica1000 (talk) at 08:54, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
  • You should remove the second sentence from your hook. Anne (talk) 16:23, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
  • I wasn't referring to notability. The Products and Services section, which is completely unsourced, reads like ad copy, and has barely changed despite the removal of the capitalizations and trademark symbols in your edits. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:55, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
  • I've added inline citations to the Products and services section and copy edited the article to reduce promotional tone. Northamerica1000(talk) 07:55, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
  • The hook has been rephrased a few times; see the history for this template. But I propose for consideration:
ALT1 ... that the company Goodwin Heart Pine retrieves for lumber production logs that were felled as long ago as the 1800s, but sank in rivers because of their high resin content? Yngvadottir (talk) 22:15, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on July 1

Embassy of France, Berlin

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • Comment: ALT1 ... that the French Embassy in Berlin opened in 2002 has struck many, including the Mayor of Mitte, as resembling a barricade with gun slits?

Created/expanded by Yngvadottir (talk). Self nom at 20:58, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Order of the Falcon (Czechoslovakia)

( Review or comment • Article history )

Badge of a Knight of the Order of the Falcon (with swords)


Cerianthus lloydii

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self nom at 18:49, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Stumholmen

( Review or comment • Article history )

Mars Geyser Hopper

( Review or comment • Article history )

A spider feature.


Scarabeo 9

( Review or comment • Article history )

Taisun crane at the Yantai Raffles Shipyard holds the 17,100 metric ton deck box of Scarabeo 9 in the air as the barge is moved out from underneath.


Hisyah

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • ... that in the 17th century, the Ottoman garrison at Hisyah served as the dominant military faction in the Homs region?

Created/expanded by Al Ameer son (talk). Self nom at 04:40, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Syque Caesar

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by Cbl62 (talk). Self nom at 03:31, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Liam Killeen

( Review or comment • Article history )

Liam Kileen, photographed in 2010

  • Reviewed: Jodie Schulz
  • Comment: Another Olympics related ones that would suit appearing during the Games.

Created/expanded by Miyagawa (talk). Self nom at 20:50, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Scott Brash

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • Reviewed: Bull Perrine
  • Comment: Another one to be held for the Games.

Created/expanded by Miyagawa (talk). Self nom at 19:24, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Kalapuya (fungus)

( Review or comment • Article history )

The truffle Kalapuya brunnea

Created/expanded by Sasata (talk). Self nom at 18:12, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Close to the Edge Tour

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by Mattgirling (talk). Self nom at 17:14, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Chicago (airplane)

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • Reviewed: Piercing point
  • Comment: Bastille Day, July 14, might be good for this

Created/expanded by Alanscottwalker (talk). Self nom at 16:38, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol question.svg should wait til merge tag is resolved.PumpkinSky talk 13:18, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

E-class Melbourne tram

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • ... that the 50 new E-class Melbourne tram's will be the first trams built in Australia in 12 years, with the last locally built Melbourne tram a B class built in 1994? Created/expanded by Liamdavies (talk). Self nom at 14:23, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
  • I put the subject of your article in bold letters. Anne (talk) 16:28, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

2012 Chevrolet Detroit Belle Isle Grand Prix

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by Harrias (talk). Self nom at 14:19, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Are All Men Pedophiles?

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Falls below 1,500 character minimum, excluding citations, infobox, and reference list. Needs expansion, such as adding in reception. However, just avoid lengthy quotes and make more paraphrasing. References are fine though. --George Ho (talk) 09:46, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
  • By the way, IMDB is an unreliable source because of user-submittance, so I removed it. --George Ho (talk) 10:39, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
  • ... Back on subject, this article needs reviews from sources, like NY Times or LA Times. This can do. Oh... paraphrasing would be recommended. Ooh... I found this non-review source. --George Ho (talk) 17:55, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
  • I have used the first of those links and expanded the article. I hope it's acceptable now. __meco (talk) 20:10, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Symbol redirect vote4.png Passes minimum and information well-sourced. However, I was hoping any other source, as there weren't additional sources, but I'm not sure. I wouldn't include a lot of info from same sources, but I'll leave this to another reviewer then. To be honest, this topic has not yet been released in general theatres yet, as there were only festival releases. I'll make sure that someone here is more experience on film articles or a film expert. --George Ho (talk) 20:20, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Vue de toits (Effet de neige)

( Review or comment • Article history )

Vue de toits (Effet de neige) by Gustave Caillebotte

Created/expanded by Cmprince (talk). Self nom at 05:14, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Note: The hook citation is offline, but Google Books has a snippet: [11]

Pedro de Aguado

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • ... that Franciscan monk Pedro de Aguado wrote a history of northern South America in the late sixteenth century, which was not published for over 300 years? Created/expanded by Rd232 (talk). Self nom at 04:41, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
  • I put the subject of your article in bold letters. Anne (talk) 16:25, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on July 2

De Mores Packing Plant Ruins

( Review or comment • Article history )

De Mores Packing Plant Site

  • ... that a pretender to the French throne built the De Mores Packing Plant (ruins pictured) in the Dakota territory in 1883?

Created/expanded by Doncram (talk), Cbl62 (talk). Nominated by Cbl62 (talk) at 21:34, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

List of Florida state parks

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by Mgreason (talk). Self nom at 17:10, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Five-fold expansion of text confirmed. Date of expansion confirmed. Hook is interesting and short enough. QPQ needs to be completed. I am not finding the hook fact cited in the source cited (fn. 4). Could you clear that up? There should also be an in-line citation for the fact that there are "161" state parks. On the latter point, I've been able to verify the point, and adding an inline citation to this source would suffice. Cbl62 (talk) 17:42, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Patty Gasso

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • ... that Patty Gasso has led the Oklahoma Sooners softball team to seven appearances in the Women's College World Series, including a national championship in 2000 and a second-place finish in 2012?

Created/expanded by Cbl62 (talk). Self nom at 06:22, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Sarah Coysh

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by ACP2011 (talk). Self nom at 23:55, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Would be better if the hook were about the article's subject rather than her great-grandfather. Is there nothing interesting to say about the subject?? (Not a review, just a suggestion) Cbl62 (talk) 17:09, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
  • I think that's generally true but, in this case, the article is a genealogy article about the heiress' family tree, and I picked one of her interesting ancestors. Anne (talk) 20:12, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Billa II (soundtrack)

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by Asalajith (talk). Nominated by George Ho (talk) at 17:12, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Comment
1) Half of the content already exists in Billa II#Soundtrack.
2) None of the hooks are impressive as Na. Muthukumar has written lot of lyrics for Tamil cinema and its common practice in Indian cinema to have music released prior to movie relase
  • Symbol delete vote.svg Not a 5x expansion from Billa II#Soundtrack (DYKSG A5: "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.") — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:36, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Berberis koreana

( Review or comment • Article history )

Korean Barberry (berberis koreana) in spring

  • ... that a Korean Barberry (pictured) is used for medicine with severe but non-threatening digestive side effects?
  • ALT1:... that a Korean Barberry (pictured) is delicious and intoxicating?
  • ALT2:... that a Korean Barberry (pictured) is used for medicine and food with severe but non-threatening digestive side effects?
  • Reviewed: Max Charles
  • Comment: Not a self-nom. ALT1 might be good for April Fool's?

Created/expanded by Katewright54 (talk). Nominated by George Ho (talk) at 16:53, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

St Andrew's Church, Crosby Garrett

( Review or comment • Article history )

St Andrew's Church, an 11th Century church still intact in England

Created/expanded by Peter I. Vardy (talk). Nominated by George Ho (talk) at 16:26, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Is there a word or two missing from the hook? Maile66 (talk) 20:27, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
  • You're missing a verb in hook 1. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:33, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
  • I checked the rules in WP:DYK and WP:DYKSG: there is no such rule about nouns and verbs, unless I'm missing something. Also, "that" doesn't have to be used. --George Ho (talk) 08:54, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
  • I would hope that basic grammar doesn't need to be written in DYKSG. Let me put it to you this way: hook 1 (not ALT1, but hook 1) is a sentence fragment and does not have a single verb; it is thus ungrammatical. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:30, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
  • "Did know" is a verb; that counts, right? "Did you know that..." is often used, but that's double use of a verb, isn't it? "Did you know the 11th century..." and stuff isn't a sentence fragment, is it? --George Ho (talk) 02:06, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
  • George, the initial hook amounts to a yes or no question. Did I know the church from Crosby Garrett? No, I didn't. What about it? None of us understand what it is you're trying to ask, which is a sure sign that there's something badly wrong with the hook. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:05, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
  • I'm just implicitly asking the existence of the church. How is it not that interesting? --George Ho (talk) 03:32, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
  • That would be "did you know of", which is not hooky at all. I consider it on par with "Did you know Indonesia is a country?" — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:03, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
  • As creator, I have to confess that I do not undersand the hook, and ALT1 is unremarkable — this applies to most medieval churches still in existence. But thanks for the nomination; I failed to find a sufficiently interesting hook. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 08:09, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
    • So what else is an interesting alternative? Therefore, you or I can add it as ALT2. --George Ho (talk) 08:23, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Sometimes there is no interesting alternative. I've written articles I haven't nominated because there wasn't anything there to adequately hook the reader. Absent some new fact, this may be an article that doesn't have that unusual fact or juxtaposition to make a DYK feasible. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:05, 4 July 2012 (UTC)


George von Amsberg

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • Reviewed: Max Charles
  • Comment: Not a self-nomination. Anyway, some citations are needed, depending on effects of this nomination.

Created/expanded by Awun (talk). Nominated by George Ho (talk) at 16:05, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Echeveria runyonii

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • ... that although Echeveria runyonii has been in cultivation since at least 1922, wild plants were unknown until 1990? Created/expanded by TDogg310 (talk). Self nom at 14:52, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on July 3

Eucalyptus rhodantha

( Review or comment • Article history )

Eucalyptus rhodantha flower in Kings Park

  • ... that the leaves of the rose mallee (pictured) give it the colloquial name of "silver dollar tree"?

Created/expanded by Melburnian (talk), A Willz (talk). Nominated by Casliber (talk) at 14:40, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Operation Primicia

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by Cambalachero (talk). Self nom at 02:39, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Wilburn Hill King

( Review or comment • Article history )

Yoshitaka Fujii

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • ... that Japanese anesthesiologist Yoshitaka Fujii published 172 medical research papers that reported falsified data, including 126 papers described as being "totally fabricated"?

Created/expanded by Orlady (talk). Self nom at 03:30, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Ichirizuka

( Review or comment • Article history )

Woodblock print by Hiroshige

Created/expanded by Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk). Self nom at 01:45, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Resistance, Politics, and the American Struggle for Independence, 1765-1775

( Review or comment • Article history )

President John Adams

  • Reviewed: Liam Phillips (DIFF)
  • Comment: While the book is unfortunately not viewable online, the Adams quote (which appears on page 3), can be corroborated various places online - for example, HERE.

Created/expanded by Presearch (talk). Self nom at 23:34, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Zara Dampney, Shauna Mullin

( Review or comment )
( Article history links: Zara Dampney • Shauna Mullin )

Created/expanded by Miyagawa (talk). Self nom at 22:41, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

  • I've removed the nomination of Shauna Mullin as there isn't a unique 1500 characters in addition to the text moved over from the Dampney article, as such I've redrafted the hook so that it is cited directly in the Dampney article (previous hook relied on some unique information from the Mullin article too). Miyagawa (talk) 11:37, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Melissa Breen

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • ... that 2012 Australian Olympian Melissa Breen ran an Olympic B qualifying time of 11.38 seconds nine times in the 100 metres before finally running an Olympic A Qualifying time of 11.29 seconds?

Created/expanded by LauraHale (talk). Self nom at 12:53, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol question.svg Article is long enough and new enough. Not sure the hook fact is accurately phrased though. The hook suggests to me that she ran the distance in exactly 11.38 seconds nine times. The source notes: "Breen, who bettered the Olympic B-qualifying time of 11.38sec on nine occasions this season during which she said she raced 27 times over 100m." An alt that is directly supported by the source is suggested below for your consideration. Cbl62 (talk) 17:20, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
  • alt 1 ... that Australian Olympian Melissa Breen ran the 100 metres 27 times in 2012 before finally running an Olympic A qualifying time of 11.29 seconds? Cbl62 (talk) 17:20, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
*Laura -- Let me know if the alt seems reasonable and accurate to you. Cbl62 (talk) 20:24, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
* Alt1 is fine with me. She's local to me and her repeated attempts made a lot of local news. That was why I thought that bit was interesting. :) 27 could probably be more interesting than 9. ;) --LauraHale (talk) 21:16, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Rum Ration

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by The C of E (talk). Self nom at 11:51, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol question.svg The article is new enough and long enough. The hook is interesting and short enough. But I do have some question or concerns. First, "rum ration" does not appear to be a proper noun, so it should not be capitalized either in the hook, the article title or the body of the article. Second, the alt hook has a grammar problem in that Navy is singular, so it should be either "Navy was concerned" or maybe "the Navy's leadership was ..." Third, the BBC article cited as an in-line source for the first hook doesn't say anything about toasting the monarch being "required." (Did I miss it?) Fourth, I'm not sure what DYK policy is with respect to whether articles that are largely split from pre-existing articles qualify as new content. Here, it looks like much of the content was already on Wikipedia in Rum#Naval_rum, Black Tot Day and splice the mainbrace. Let me know why you think the content should be treated as "new"? Cbl62 (talk) 16:33, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
To be honest, I didn't look that much at those articles but I don't think that all of it was already on here. For example, the information about the barrel wasn't, nor the dates of the other Navies giving up the ration, nor the compensatory beer amount (which actually contradicts what is said in the Black Tot Day article). If capitalisation is the problem, I'll change it. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 16:51, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
The capitalization, grammar, and sourcing issues do need to be addressed. And if there's a factual contradiction between two articles, shouldn't that be resolved? Cbl62 (talk) 17:01, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
I've done the grammar in the second hook, moved the page to Rum ration and found another source for the first hook. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 17:14, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
In the alt hook, "leadership" is singular, so it should be "leadership was ..." Also, I don't see the reference to the mandatory toast in the new source you added. Can you provide a page number? Cbl62 (talk) 17:29, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
Fixed. The source is on page 21 where they say "to the Queen, God bless her". The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 17:48, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
I had seen that reference. It does not say that sailors were required to toast the monarch before drinking their rum. Cbl62 (talk) 18:05, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
Very well, then what about alt1? The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 18:11, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
The article still contains the unsourced statement about sailors being required to toast the monarch. That should either be sourced or removed. Cbl62 (talk) 20:16, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
Removed it. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 20:31, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
Just to be sure there's no issue with the pre-existing content, I've left a query on the DYK discussion page. Cbl62 (talk) 20:45, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
For Alt1, I think it's important to say "Royal Navy" rather than "Navy", to make it clear which of the navies had that reason. Also, since this is a British hook, shouldn't British English hold sway in it, odd though it might seem to Americans such as I? I believe (though I'm no expert) that "the Royal Navy were" would be correct, given their rules, which if I understand correctly would extend to "the Royal Navy leadership were". Is there someone with experience in this area of British English who can clarify? BlueMoonset (talk) 13:25, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
This Brit would say "the Royal Navy was..." as there's only one navy of that name. As for the leadership, again it's grammatically singular, but many people treat such things as plural nowadays, no point in being ideological. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:38, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for clarifying; I was afraid I didn't know exactly how it worked, as proved to be the case. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:47, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Stropharia semiglobata

( Review or comment • Article history )

Stropharia semiglobata

  • ... that the mushroom Stropharia semiglobata (pictured on llama dung) has been recorded growing on the feces of a wide range of herbivores, including rabbits, bears, and wallabies?

Created/expanded by Sasata (talk). Self nom at 06:59, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Good to go! :)--GoPTCN 09:51, 4 July 2012 (UTC)


Rudy Kurniawan

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by Tthaas (talk). Self nom at 02:01, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on July 4

St Ceinwen's Church, Cerrigceinwen

( Review or comment • Article history )

St Ceinwen's Church, Cerrigceinwen

  • Reviewed: QPQ to do

Created/expanded by Bencherlite (talk). Self nom at 00:02, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Fakhri A. Bazzaz

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • Reviewed: Will do so soon.

Created/expanded by Rosiestep (talk). Self nom at 23:35, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Manuel Huerta

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • Reviewed: Olga Butkevych
  • Comment: Please place in the Olympics space below.

Created/expanded by Tomsimlee (talk). Self nom at 21:52, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Olga Butkevych

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • Reviewed: Furqlus
  • Comment: Another one for the Olympic period.

Created/expanded by Miyagawa (talk). Self nom at 21:30, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Length, citation, hook all verified. Tomsimlee (talk) 23:42, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Upper Wolfsnare

( Review or comment • Article history )

Upper Wolfsnare home on July 4, 2012

  • ...that Upper Wolfsnare (pictured), a plantation-era home built in 1759, is still lived in and originally had 7,000 acres (2,800 ha) of land and 55 slaves?

Created/expanded by PumpkinSky (talk). Self nom at 21:29, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Phantosmia

( Review or comment • Article history )

1: Olfactory bulb 2: Mitral cells 3: Bone 4: Nasal epithelium 5: Glomerulus (olfaction) 6: Olfactory receptor cells

  • ... that 67% of pregnant women have claimed to have a higher level of smell sensitivity as well 14% have claimed to have phantom smells (olfactory system pictured)?
  • Comment: Of interest to pregnant women and those who smell stuff.

Created/expanded by Zoono92 (talk). Nominated by WoodSnake (talk) at 19:39, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

John Wheelwright

( Review or comment • Article history )

Wheelwright in 1677

Created/expanded by Sarnold17 (talk). Self nom at 19:34, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

  • hook can be verified here


Old City Hall (Berlin)

( Review or comment • Article history )

The Old City Hall in Berlin

Created/expanded by Thine Antique Pen (talk). Self nom at 15:06, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Ganjuran Church

( Review or comment • Article history )

Christ as a Javanese King

Created/expanded by Crisco 1492 (talk). Self nom at 10:58, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Article meets criteria, long enough and new enough. ⇒TAP 15:06, 4 July 2012 (UTC)


Regan Lamble

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by LauraHale (talk). Self nom at 10:01, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Ortrun Enderlein

( Review or comment • Article history )

Ortrun Enderlein at the German Luge Championships, in Oberhof, 14 February 1965

Created/expanded by GreatOrangePumpkin (talk). Self nom at 09:51, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Hook: Interesting, short enough... couple comments. One, wouldn't she be the first Olympic gold medalist? And two, that she was first is not explicitly in the cited text. AGF on offline and German sources
Article: New enough, long enough, AGF on offline references. Images look nice (although for GA I'd suggest someone crop them and upload them separately, to avoid the white space).
Summary: Symbol question.svg Minor hook issues. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:19, 5 July 2012 (UTC)


United Nationalist Alliance

( Review or comment • Article history )

Joseph Estrada

  • Symbol possible vote.svg The prose has not quite been expanded 5x (about 4.6x according to DYKcheck tool), but the main problem is that vast swathes of the article are completely unreferenced. Every paragraph should have at least one citation, but many entire sections have none at all. Also, the tables which contain potentially contentious BLP information have no sources whatsoever. BigDom 09:43, 4 July 2012 (UTC)


Genevieve LaCaze

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by LauraHale (talk). Self nom at 07:39, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Zoe Buckman

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by LauraHale (talk). Self nom at 05:13, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Length, hook, citation all check out. Tomsimlee (talk) 01:12, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Articles created/expanded on July 5

Miranda Leek

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by Tomsimlee (talk). Self nom at 01:15, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Zuster Theresia

( Review or comment • Article history )

  • ... that the drama Zuster Theresia, written by a man known for comedy, featured a nun, attempted suicide, and polygamy?

Created/expanded by Crisco 1492 (talk). Self nom at 01:04, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg New enough and long enough at time of nomination. Fully sourced where required by WP:MOS. QPQ done. Hook is properly formatted. Article is neutral enough.
  • Pictogram voting keep.svg Offline sources support article facts and were not plagiarised.
  • Symbol question.svg Cannot find word suicide or polygamy in the article. Hook does not appear to be supported by text? --LauraHale (talk) 01:20, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Symbol question.svg Explain where hook is supported by text or make it more clear in the article or propose althook. --LauraHale (talk) 01:20, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Article uses "kill herself" for suicide, and explains that Henk was married to both Daisy and Flora at the same time (in a word, polygamy). I can cite both plot points to an online source if you want. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:24, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

[edit] 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 the article was created or 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.

[edit] July 9

Argentine nationalism

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by Cambalachero (talk). Self nom at 22:23, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol question.svgSorry for the delay in feedback. I think this is good except that the WP:LEDE needs sorting out. The hook is just in a caption and needs integrating into the main text. I'm AGF on the Spanish language sources. Secretlondon (talk) 03:48, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Done, I expanded the intro a bit. The hook is not just in the caption, it was already in the text, near the end of the article. Cambalachero (talk) 15:32, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
  • I've tidied the English. However the first sentence isn't good. Could you explain what you mean? What is a 'nationalism of culture'? Secretlondon (talk) 05:26, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

[edit] July 10th Ada conference

Jessie Ackermann

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by Whiteghost.ink (talk). Self nom at 05:42, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol delete vote.svg Fail on date. This DYK has existed in mostly unchanged size since late May, thus failing the criteria of "new of 5x expanded" within the last week. Other notes: wrong tense (dead person was, not is), and does not adhere to WP:LEAD. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:44, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote4.png Just moved to main space on the 25th. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:36, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
  • I moved this article from my sandbox where I had been preparing it, to the main article space on the 25th (here's the diff [12]). Surely the article is not ineligible for DYK because it took more than five days to write it in a sandbox? With regard to the point about "was" not "is" in the lead - the only time I use present tense in the lead is to say that she "is considered a major voice in the Australian suffrage movement" - which is true, in the same way that it is true to say that "Napoleon IS considered a great military commander". The fact that these people are dead does not discount current historical assessments of them. Whiteghost.ink (talk) 14:54, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg All points seem to be addressed. Author has requested that this be on the front page on 10th July to celebrate the great Ada Lovelace. Gets my vote Victuallers (talk) 15:55, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

[edit] July 12th Talk at Wikimania

Alexander Rolls

( Review or comment • Article history )

Actress Helen Barry

Created/expanded by ACP2011 (talk). Self nom at 14:41, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Review: Size is certainly big enough, recent enough, notable subject, well laid out and illustrated with content within the manual of style. The hook is triple referenced (thanks for indicating which ones!) to offline sources but I'll take your word for it. Some of the prose is a bit clunky - could be made to flow better but not a problem for DYK. Interesting article. Symbol confirmed.svg Whiteghost.ink (talk) 06:08, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for your review. Anne (talk) 15:31, 25 June 2012 (UTC)


Upper Wye Gorge

( Review or comment • Article history )

The Wye Gorge from Symonds Yat Rock

Created/expanded by Zangar (talk). Self nom at 18:16, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Age, size, hook all checks out. It might be nice to include dates of discovery, if it is known (The Antiquarian reference doesn't make it clear if the expedition was the initial discovery). Maybe remove "mammals such as" and "in the UK" for DYK (removing it would make it shorter without loss of "hookiness"). Cmprince (talk) 05:35, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Monmouthpedia is being presentedv at Wikimania on the 12th - OK to move it to that day?
I have no objections - so please feel free to move. Cheers, Zangar (talk) 14:14, 2 July 2012 (UTC)


[edit] July 27th-August 12th Olympics

Tilly Fleischer

( Review or comment • Article history )

Tilly Fleischer after winning the javelin event at the 1936 Games

Created/expanded by Miyagawa (talk). Self nom at 22:09, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Alt1:... that at the 1932 Summer Olympics, Tilly Fleischer (pictured) competed in the javelin, discuss and the 4x100 meter relay?
Alt2:... that in 1966 the daughter of Olympic gold medallist Tilly Fleischer (pictured) claimed to be the daughter of Nazi leader Adolph Hitler?
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Recent 5x expansion and general compliance with policy confirmed. I prefer the original fact, which I have confirmed using the provided inline ref. Pitcure license has also been confirmed. I support holding the DYK for use during the Olympics. --ThaddeusB (talk) 04:21, 1 July 2012 (UTC)


Survival (Muse song)

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by Edgars2007 (talk), Ruby2010 (talk). Nominated by Ruby2010 (talk) at 01:59, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Good to go. The following has been checked in this review:
  • QPQ done by Ruby 2010 on July 2, 2012
  • Created on June 29, 2012, and has readable prose of 1,829 characters
  • Hook is short enough at 106 characters, and referenced at end of sentence
  • NPOV
  • Duplication Detector run, no copyvio found
  • Every paragraph sourced
Maile66 (talk) 17:03, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Jodie Schulz

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by LauraHale (talk). Self nom at 09:40, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Meets all criteria, and hook is cited by several references. Would be worthwhile to be kept for during the Games themselves. Miyagawa (talk) 20:45, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Claire Donahue

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by ThaddeusB (talk). Self nom at 04:25, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting keep.svg All information is well-sourced and well-written. Since her swimming career is still active, and since she will participate in Olympics, I suspect that updates will be made once swimming rounds in Olympics start. Nevertheless, let's reserve this nomination for either July 27 (opening ceremony) or the date of her first swimming race (July 28?). If clarifying her siblings is not needed, then I guess there's no need then. Therefore, let's wait for the beginning of Olympics then. --George Ho (talk) 04:56, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Her first race will indeed be July 28. --ThaddeusB (talk) 05:08, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Lance Brooks

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by ThaddeusB (talk). Self nom at 04:55, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Good to go. The following has been checked in this review:
  • QPQ done by ThaddeusB on July 2, 2012
  • Created on July, 2012, with readable prose on that date of 3,799 characters
  • Hook is short enough at 143 characters, and referenced at end of sentence
  • NPOV, informative
  • Duplication Detector run, no copyvio found
  • Every paragraph sourced
Maile66 (talk) 16:18, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
  • PLEASE NOTE author request to hold this until the Olympics in August. Maile66 (talk) 16:21, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Lauren Boden

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by LauraHale (talk). Self nom at 10:30, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Date, length, and references look good. An interesting hook to boot. Ruby 2010/2013 19:54, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Elisa Barnard

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by LauraHale (talk) and Imzadi1979 (talk). Self nom at 05:51, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

  • I've wikified some subjects. --George Ho (talk) 05:58, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Article is new enough and long enough and well-sourced. Spot-checking reveals no copyvio or plagiarism issues. Hook is short enough and interesting enough and supported by an inline citation. Cbl62 (talk) 06:34, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Birmingham bid for the 1992 Summer Olympics

( Review or comment • Article history )

The National Exhibition Centre, photographed in 2008.

  • Reviewed: C. E. Falk
  • Comment: Despite this not being a 2012 Olympic related article, due to it being a bid for an Olympics by the UK it would be best suited during the Games, preferably on the first day itself.

Created/expanded by Miyagawa (talk). Self nom at 00:03, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Symbol confirmed.svg Recent enough, long enough, hook checks out. Referencing is good. Picture is free but not great - I'll try and find a better one. Good to go! Secretlondon (talk) 07:58, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
Better picture? None of them are striking enough really.Secretlondon (talk) 08:04, 4 July 2012 (UTC) NEC inside atrium 11y07.JPG
Yeah... probably better without an image - the decent image in the article is unfortunatly the non-free use logo. Miyagawa (talk) 11:45, 4 July 2012 (UTC)


Olympic Dam Airport

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by LauraHale (talk). Self nom at 04:39, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol question.svg Hook is cited in article and is acceptable, but expansion from 3,763 to 9,001 is not 5x. Mgrē@sŏn 18:15, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Confused about the length. DYK check tell me: DYK eligibility scan results: (See here for details.) Prose size (text only): 1911 characters (303 words) "readable prose size" Article created by Gittinsj on March 2, 2007 Assuming article is at 5x now, expansion began 17 edits ago on July 3, 2012 Beyond that, on 28 June, the size was: Prose size (text only): 360 B (60 words) "readable prose size". Today, the size is: Prose size (text only):: 1911 characters (303 words) "readable prose size". 60*5 = 300. Five fold expansion. --LauraHale (talk) 21:23, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol redirect vote4.png She's right. We count the number of characters, not the raw byte size (otherwise people would just add spam in hidden text). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:22, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Sources are good, article checks out. Good to go. Mgrē@sŏn 03:06, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Shall we add this to the Olympics related pile to be run during the games? Secretlondon (talk) 07:27, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Yes please. :D That was the inspiration in writing it. :D --LauraHale (talk) 07:48, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

[edit] August 17 (Independence Day in Indonesia)

Sudirman

( Review or comment • Article history )

Sudirman, c. 1948

Created/expanded by Crisco 1492 (talk). Self nom at 13:35, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol confirmed.svg All looks good to go. I prefer the first hook the best out of these. GRAPPLE X 23:28, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Oh, I see no problem holding it for then, I'm always supportive of timely hooks. I'll stick it in a special holding area on the noms page now. GRAPPLE X 23:43, 17 June 2012 (UTC)


Mas Mansoer

( Review or comment • Article history )

Created/expanded by Redyka94 (talk). Nominated by Crisco 1492 (talk) at 15:15, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

This needs to say that it's financial interest, not an interest in themselves, or another subject. Also - this isn't unique to him. Riba makes this out to be pretty standard. Secretlondon (talk) 19:38, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
  • ALT2 links to the proper article and is hookier by not mentioning that he was a scholar of Islam. Regarding the differentiation between financial interest and emotional/psychological interest, I don't think the hook needs it so long as the article is clear. It is commonly referred to as simply "interest" in day-to-day conversation, and adding an indication that it was financial interest cuts down on the hookiness. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:11, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg I prefer ALT2 and everything checks out, except for one small point: in the hook "interest forbidden" links to riba, whereas in the article the link is to haraam – why the discrepancy? —Bruce1eetalk 07:20, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
  • One is for a compound "interest forbidden", while the other has haraam directly. I'll link interest to riba, perhaps. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:59, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting keep.svg Thanks. ALT2 verified AGF: article seems fine, length and referencing fine, although some of my Google Book previews don't show the referenced pages; don't see any close paraphrasing for the refs I can see; hook is fine and correctly cited, although I'm assuming good faith for the offline ref. —Bruce1eetalk 09:19, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the review! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:47, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Save for August 17 (Indonesia independence day) *Annas* (talk) 14:33, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Regrettably, the rules are a maximum hold of six weeks, which only takes us to mid-July from date of submission. Two months from today is definitely too far. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:42, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Albertus Soegijapranata

( Review or comment • Article history )

Soegijapranata in 1947

  • Reviewed: The Dance Lesson
  • Comment: This would be best for Indonesia's Independence Day (17 August)

Created/expanded by Crisco 1492 (talk). Self nom at 08:23, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol question.svgArticle is neutral, new and big enough. But there is a large lead section with no citations. The rest is cited adequately. The hook also relies on assumption that a member of a muslim family is born a muslim, although that is not stated in the article. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:18, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
  • The image is problematic as it would not be in public domain in the US. If it was published in 1950 then expiry happened in Indonesia in 2000, which is after the 1996 US cut off date. If in 1947, then still it would have expired in 1997 missing 1996 by one year. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:27, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Per Wikipedia:Non-U.S. copyrights, the copyright on photographs in Indonesia was 25 years after publication at the time of the URAA. As such, this was public domain in Indonesia at the time of the URAA and not extended. The new copyright law was in 2002, which did extend the copyrights in Indonesia, which is why the second image of Soegijapranata is not on Commons.
Tl;dr version: It was not extended by the URAA. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:37, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
  • THanks for that explanation, so it looks like that commons template needs fixing instead. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:01, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
  • I will do a Pictogram voting keep.svg as I cannot consult the reference. ALso I cannot find any plagiarism. Although I may disagree with Supplementary Guideline D2, I will give this nomination a Good to Go without image. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:10, 3 July 2012 (UTC)


Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:Did_you_know&oldid=500732499"
Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Interaction
Toolbox