Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Did you know

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Did you know?
Introduction and rules
IntroductionWP:DYK
General discussionWT:DYK
GuidelinesWP:DYKCRIT
Reviewer instructionsWP:DYKRI
Nominations
Nominate an articleWP:DYKCNN
Awaiting approvalWP:DYKN
ApprovedWP:DYKNA
April 1 hooksWP:DYKAPRIL
Holding areaWP:SOHA
Preparation
Preps and queuesT:DYK/Q
Prepper instructionsWP:DYKPBI
Admin instructionsWP:DYKAI
Main Page errorsWP:ERRORS
History
StatisticsWP:DYKSTATS
Archived setsWP:DYKA
Just for fun
Monthly wrapsWP:DYKW
AwardsWP:DYKAWARDS
UserboxesWP:DYKUBX
Hall of FameWP:DYK/HoF
List of users ...
... by nominationsWP:DYKNC
... by promotionsWP:DYKPC
Administrative
Scripts and botsWP:DYKSB
On the Main Page
Main Page errorsWP:ERRORS
To ping the DYK admins{{DYK admins}}
Shortcut

This is where the Did you know section on the main page, its policies, and its processes can be discussed.

Queue 3

[edit]

Fantasy (Las Vegas show) (nom)

[edit]
  • ... that Fantasy is the longest-duration topless production in Las Vegas at a single venue?

Hm. Source in article is from 2016 so no good for "is". According to a 2023 source provided in the nom, the show moved to a different location due to COVID, so this does not seem to be correct. Pinging nom @Cunard and promoter @BorgQueen (can't ping the IP reviewer). —Kusma (talk) 16:56, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How about adding As of 2016, (and change the tense, of course)... BorgQueen (talk) 21:12, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Here we go. BorgQueen (talk) 23:24, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Now it is probably correct, but a bit less impressive (like many "first" or "longest" hooks needing lots of qualifiers). —Kusma (talk) 08:41, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fantasy has been performed at Luxor Las Vegas since it opened in 1999 (including the temporary move in 2021 to a bigger theater in the same hotel owing to COVID-19). That is what I meant by "a single venue". I don't think moving from one theater to another theater in the same hotel makes the statement inaccurate, but maybe there's a way to make it clearer in the hook. Cunard (talk) 09:53, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Cunard Why don't we specifically mention the hotel then? BorgQueen (talk) 02:05, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How about now? @Cunard @Kusma BorgQueen (talk) 02:47, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to let it pass, although the article is a but ambiguous about whether the "venue" is the hotel or one of the theaters inside it. —Kusma (talk) 08:20, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's a good change. Thank you! Cunard (talk) 04:46, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abduction of Jonila Castro and Jhed Tamano (nom)

[edit]
  • ... that the Philippine government tried to force two kidnapped activists to confess to being rebels at a press conference, but they had other plans?

They had other plans is a strange way to say they tried to expose the government. According to the article, they were supposed to be the people the rebels would surrender too ("surrenderees") but perhaps that is just a misprint. In any case, this is quite confusing to me and I'm not happy to sign off on this without some discussion. Ping creator Ryomaandres, nom TheNuggeteer, reviewer User:Crisco 1492, promoter AirshipJungleman29. —Kusma (talk) 20:40, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fixing ping to Crisco 1492. —Kusma (talk) 20:56, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rebel returnees is saying, perhaps poorly, that they returned to the government fold. The article indicates that they were expected to self-identify as members of the New People's Army, one of the belligerents in the ongoing Communist armed conflicts in the Philippines, but they chose instead to expose the coercion they experienced.
Rephrasing to "Instead of saying that they were reformed members of the New People's Army" may be clearer. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 21:58, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think there is still some copyediting in the article to do (I still don't understand who surrendered to the two activists), and we need a rephrased and clearer hook. —Kusma (talk) 08:46, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How about

  • ... that two kidnapped activists were released after claiming at a press conference that they were abducted by government forces?

That would clarify the ALT0 hook in the nom a bit. —Kusma (talk) 08:13, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Implemented this for now, not much more than a day to go until this hits the Main Page. —Kusma (talk) 19:54, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DYK template transclusions

[edit]

Currently, DYK templates from the DYK script are inserted onto talkpages with the inclusion of the "Template:" aspect, eg. {{Template:Did you know nominations/Baguia Fort}} This seems nonstandard behaviour, and can confuse bots slightly. Is there a specific reason templates are not simply transcluded as {{Did you know nominations/Baguia Fort}}? CMD (talk) 11:11, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I remember asking this very same question years ago. As I remember, the answer was something like, "because wiki".
It is unfortunately very difficult to figure out the canonical title of a linked page. In addition to the implied namespace issue, there's case-insensitivity, redirects, namespace aliases (i.e. "WT:" vs "Wikipedia talk:"), cross-wiki links (which look like namespaces but are implemented in some way that I don't fully understand), optional character encodings (User_talk:RoySmith vs User talk:RoySmith, and probably more stuff. I think the only real way to canonicalize a link is to get it from the API and then look to see what you got. RoySmith (talk) 18:05, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yeah, permalinks and a few other Special: links that are effectively redirects. RoySmith (talk) 18:18, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Including the namespace will make sense once we move DYK nominations to a more sensible namespace :) —Kusma (talk) 19:45, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It used to be that way earlier. I made the change in Special:Diff/1028324847 in preparation for migrating DYKs to Wikipedia namespace. – SD0001 (talk) 16:53, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Special occasion request for September 11 Digital Archive, September 11

[edit]

I realise that it is too late for the the same anniversary day of the September 11 Attacks, but it would be nice if September 11 Digital Archive could be featured in the next few days. ―Panamitsu (talk)

QPQs and the nomination wizard

[edit]

I don't know if this has been brought up before, but the DYK-helper/DYK-wizard tools aren't correctly calculating the number of QPQs needed for multi-article nominations. For example, Template:Did you know nominations/Niederdollendorf stone includes three bold-linked articles, but the DYK-wizard tool generated text saying that only one QPQ is needed. I think this should be changed to reduce confusion, if that's possible. – Epicgenius (talk) 00:03, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging SD0001 - doesn't seem like too difficult a task? theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 01:47, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed the text shown on DYK pages which is controlled by Module:NewDYKnomination. Fixing the text shown within the scripts is harder as they need to change as the user adds or removes articles. – SD0001 (talk) 14:12, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@SD0001 Thanks for the change! While you're at it, would it be possible to implement the warning for lacking a QPQ? You already have a similar warning for late DYK nominations so I imagine the code for that should be rather similar. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 14:27, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done in DYK-helper and raised an edit request for the wizard. There's still no support for entering multiple QPQs, however. – SD0001 (talk) 16:51, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@SD0001 I just did a sanity check of the nomination wizard's QPQ check, and it turns out that putting anything after "Template:Did you know nominations/" (for example, making it say "Template:Did you know nominations/TBA") would result in the nomination pushing through immediately rather than the warning showing up. In this case, I tested the wizard out by trying it out on Puella Magi Madoka Magica, and although the QPQ check worked correctly with the default parameter, to my surprise (and horror), when I added a "TBD" at the end, the wizard still created the nomination rather than show the warning. Maybe the QPQ checker also needed an added check to give the same warning if the QPQ link is a red link? That way, if a nominator made the QPQ say "Template:Did you know nominations/TBA" or "Template:Did you know nominations/pending", the warning will happen rather than the tool thinking that a valid QPQ was provided. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 22:46, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please add a /doc subpage to Template:Did you know

[edit]

I posted this at the template's talk page, but the post was removed and I was told to post here.

Please add a documentation subpage to Template:Did you know so that the template's documentation can be added and edited. Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:31, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jonesey95: already exists at Template:Did you know/doc :) theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 01:45, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Right. Please add it to the template page. The code to add is, at the bottom of the page, on a new line: 
{{documentation}}
</noinclude>
Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:48, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As Template:Did you know is not a typical template (arguably the page is in the wrong namespace), I don't understand the need for a template documentation subpage (if you ask me we could just delete Template:Did you know/doc, which seems pointless cruft). We need to minimise human (and bot) errors while editing, so anything that is added should be actually useful. Even if a documentation subpage does get added, I would strongly advise against the suggestion to add 
</noinclude>
to avoid stray nonsense making it onto the Main Page. —Kusma (talk) 06:17, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If it is in the wrong namespace, like the DYK subpages, it should finally be moved to project space. If it is going to stay in template space, it should have documentation and a category. The page is one of a tiny handful of pages that is showing up on Wikipedia:Database reports/Uncategorized templates. Please at least add a category to the page (within noinclude tags). I am surprised that any of this is receiving pushback; it's standard stuff for pages in template space. Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 10:55, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
DYK has extensive documentation already. I see zero advantage for DYK in adhering to conventions for template space, as DYK should not be in template space. Just like article space rules do not apply to Main Page, another page that is in the wrong namespace for historical reasons. We should add categories if we need them, not in order to make a database report prettier. —Kusma (talk) 11:08, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Template:In the news added {{documentation}} to the page in 2009 with this edit: [1] MSGJ I realize that's like twenty years ago, but do you remember running into any problems?
The other mainpage sections are transcluded from project space, like Wikipedia:Today's featured article. Rjjiii (talk) 17:25, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Where are there two (noinclude)s on the page and only one (/noinclude)? These should be converted to (onlyinclude/).--Launchballer 09:19, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not broken, so no, they should not. —Kusma (talk) 09:51, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. The DYK template structure is indeed a mess and should be cleaned up, but that needs to be done by a careful analysis of how the process works, not to satisfy some spurious problem in a database report generator. RoySmith (talk) 13:33, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting PSHAW glitch

[edit]

Continued from Wikipedia talk:Did you know/Archive 201#Wake Me Up When September Ends. I noticed when I was pulling Allison Reese that PSHAW seemed to be counting the initial "{{DYKmake|ArticleName|Editor|subpage=}}" from Template:Did you know/Clear, meaning that a hook per set was going into the comments (see Special:Diff/1244572458). I've reverted my edit to /Clear, but this should probably be fixed. Pinging @Theleekycauldron:.--Launchballer 14:26, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Another example for this bug: [2]. (Only noticed this one after promoting the set). —Kusma (talk) 16:39, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, so that explains why when I did Special:Diff/1245602502, the example comment had reverted back to the old style :-) RoySmith (talk) 16:42, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Launchballer, SL93, AirshipJungleman29, Rjjiii, Kimikel, Premeditated Chaos, Sohom Datta, TheNuggeteer, and NightWolf1223: In light of me really not wanting to fix this bug on its own, I've rolled out PSHAW 2.0, an update I've working on in my userspace for quite a while! not much changes on your end for now – you'll still only have the prep building script and the queuer script (there is a hook puller script that is very close to done) – on my end, the script is much easier for me to read and update. you might find new and interesting bugs, so please do keep me abreast of those either here on on my talk :) thanks! (ugh i gotta update documentation now...) theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 18:24, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Will do ;) thanks for the work. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:54, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Was the option to close nominations removed? It's not showing up on my end anymore. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:03, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Echoing the above Theleekycauldron, and also noting that promoting to the bottom prep set produces a message ("This appears to be the bottom prep set – per J14, try to leave the image slot, quirky slot, and at least two middle slots open for bumps and replacements!") that refers to an outdated rule number from the old supplementary guidelines. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:12, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Queue 3

[edit]

Margaret Coe

[edit]

@Premeditated Chaos, AnotherColonialHistorian, and Trailblazer101: The image is indeed tagged as CC-BY-3.0 in commons, but I don't believe that's correct. I don't see anywhere at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aW4yKuf7O-0 where that license is stated. This is discussed on the nom page, but the argument that "YouTube clips are allowed on the site" doesn't seem grounded in policy. RoySmith (talk) 15:41, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see it anywhere either. SL93 (talk) 19:42, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've pulled it and nominated the image for deletion on commons. RoySmith (talk) 20:54, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Now that I look at it, I'm also dubious about File:Margaret Coe - Steps to the Sea - 1986 - University of Oregon.jpg. The commons page claims it is CC-BY-4.0 but I don't see any actual evidence of that. RoySmith (talk) 21:06, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

La Mojana

[edit]

@TheNuggeteer, Chipmunkdavis, and Sammi Brie: I don't get the hook. What does the arrival of the Spanish have to do with canal building? Indigenous cultures performed all sorts of feats of engineering long before europeans arrived. The implication that the Zenú would not be expected to be able to build canals is decidedly ethnocentric. Surely we can come up with a better hook? RoySmith (talk) 15:55, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The framing was inspired on the source, which discusses "la relación dinámica de las poblaciones prehispánicas con el entorno antes de la colonización española". The main impact of the Spanish arrival is on the availability of historical records. Dating anything before that seems difficult, I found sources with various estimates for the post-canal dry period. Our Zenú articles gives a 1,200/1,300 year span for the canal system existing; who knows what was built when and to what extent. At any rate, I found reading about the canal irrigation system interesting and a hook can be something that is obviously true. That said, I am not wedded to the topic. I tried an alt at Template:Did you know nominations/La Mojana based on the past four years of flooding, but per the reviewer it turned into quite a banal statement about wetlands without the background context that was in my head. Figuring out how to make the ALT work may also be interesting. Otherwise, I found the land conflicts and the climate/agricultural relationships interesting, but didn't manage to find a way to make either hooky. CMD (talk) 16:14, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the basic premise of the hook is fine, my only objection is the "before the arrival of the Spanish" part. How about something more along the lines of:
... that the waterway system in La Mojana dates back to the pre-Columbian Zenú culture? RoySmith (talk) 16:25, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know if there is a link between the Zenú system and the modern one, the Zenú seem to have stopped cultivating the area a few hundred years before Spanish arrival reshaped the area. CMD (talk) 16:35, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article implies such a link: The Zenú culture ... manipulated the waterways through means such as the construction of canals. The waterways continue to play an important role in modern times RoySmith (talk) 16:40, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How about:
... that the pre-Columbian Zenu culture may have been driven out of La Mojana by climate change in about 1300? RoySmith (talk) 16:46, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The link is that both societies worked within and modified the naturally existing waterways to suit their needs, not that the first set of modifications led to the second set of modifications. No objection to the new hook suggestion, with the caveat that 1300 is a late date (Zenú gives 1100 as the start of population decline), so maybe "before 1300" or similar. CMD (talk) 16:51, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Masada myth

[edit]

@SL93, Onceinawhile, and Launchballer: The article talks about a military funeral, but the hook says state funeral. It's not clear these are synonyms, especially given that we've got distinct articles for each of those. RoySmith (talk) 16:00, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source says 'state funeral', so changed to that. I should have spotted that part of the hook.--Launchballer 16:28, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I admit I hadn’t realized that those are different things. The source itself, in the quoted excerpt in the DYKnom, says "state burial ceremony" at the beginning and "formal military ceremony" at the end. I agree that consistency is best. Onceinawhile (talk) 21:12, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Earl de Grey, Kingston upon Hull

[edit]

@Kimikel, DandelionAndBurdock, and Silver seren: Surely we can do better than basing a hook on an urban legend sourced to what appears to be a sister publication of the WP:DAILYMAIL?— Preceding unsigned comment added by RoySmith (talk • contribs)

The Hull Daily Mail is owned by Reach plc, who owns the Daily Mirror.--Launchballer 16:28, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Kimikel @DandelionAndBurdock @Silver seren pinging. BorgQueen (talk) 17:08, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So, is the argument because of that that every single regional paper in the UK is unusable? Feels like we should just write off the entirety of the country if we're going to go that route. SilverserenC 17:12, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is there any evidence of Hull Daily Mail being unreliable? I did notice that the newspaper has won several awards of the years, and its article doesn't point to any controversy. SL93 (talk) 17:19, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Hull Daily Mail is not related to the Daily Mail. I don't see any evidence that the HDM is unreliable. And, after all, it is a light-hearted article about urban legends, and it does point out that many of the stories may not be true. Black Kite (talk) 21:13, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Prep 4

[edit]
I agree that it should be moved. I will do that unless someone gets to it first. SL93 (talk) 21:25, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Doing.--Launchballer 21:26, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done. I moved the other flag hook to prep 3 and moved up from prep 6 what I believe is the only non-American non-bio hook in the preps.--Launchballer 21:39, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Launchballer, all ok on my end, I also felt it strange to see 2 flag hooks in same prep. The Flag of La Guaira nom had an image, in case it would be of interest for Prep 3? --Soman (talk) 21:44, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll be honest, all I did was put it in the exact same position it was in before. I think you should take that up with @TheNuggeteer: just in case there was a reason he passed.--Launchballer 21:49, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apple (song)

[edit]

The source for the Amish Tiktokers "operating a horse" actually says "operating a horse and buggy". "Operating a horse" would be bizarre wording - you ride a horse, you don't operate it. Black Kite (talk) 21:21, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed the article and hook. SL93 (talk) 21:25, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, although I'm surprised that part of the hook survived WP:DYKTRIM.--Launchballer 21:39, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Request for review of anniversary-themed hook

[edit]
Moved to Template:Did you know nominations/Lake Erie Walleye Trail fishing tournament cheating scandal

QI 18 Sept Neutrality?

[edit]

I'm a little concerned about

May not be neutral enough for the front page in Wikivoice? Pinging Vice regent Makeandtoss AirshipJungleman29. Valereee (talk) 16:05, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I could maybe see
... that arguments in favor of a Palestinian right of armed resistance are often based on Article 1(4) of Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions?
That feels like it would be neutral? Valereee (talk) 16:21, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm fine with Valereee's formulation.01:00, 17 September 2024 (UTC) VR (Please ping on reply) 01:00, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Given that the page is WP:ECP under WP:CTOP, I don't see how it meets The article should not be subject to unresolved edit-warring and should not deserve stub or dispute tags. RoySmith (talk) 16:21, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I hadn't even noticed that! Hm. Are Palestinian right to resist and Palestinian right of armed resistance possibly forks of one another? Valereee (talk) 16:28, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yup, they are. There was some move warring going on[3][4] so I'd say this also fails the newness test. RoySmith (talk) 16:30, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've moved it to Prep 5 for further discussion. BorgQueen (talk) 16:34, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article was cut and pasted from User:Vice regent/sandbox on 1 August and nominated on 7 August. There is some discussion on the talk page whether it should be a separate topic, but it seems to have died down, so I don't see how this can be argued to fail the newness test. —Kusma (talk) 16:35, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think it might have been moved to VR's sandbox from Palestinian right to resist? Depending on how much was moved, it might not pass 5x. Valereee (talk) 17:04, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Palestinian right to resist has about 213 words prose size. Palestinian right of armed resistance has 3889 words prose size. Even if I copied and pasted the entire former article into the latter one (I didn't), it certainly meets 5x expansion.VR (Please ping on reply) 01:03, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We do not generally forbid contentious topics on the Main Page. I agree with Valereee's more neutral reformulation. At the very least, it should be "a Palestinian right", not "the Palestinian right". —Kusma (talk) 16:33, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How can being labeled a CTOP and being ECP not constitute deserving a dispute tag? RoySmith (talk) 16:40, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The dispute tag is not for real world disputes, it is for disputes within Wikipedia about the article content, so CTOP and ECP has nothing to do with deserving a dispute tag. Do you think Israeli citizenship law should have a dispute tag? It is CTOP and ECP (and a FA). —Kusma (talk) 16:53, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
+1. If Roy wants to tag every article on the Israeli-Palestine conflict with dispute tags, they can but they'll probably face unanimous pushback. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:28, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies if I seem conservative about what we should publish and what we shouldn't; I'm just trying to reduce how much time we spend at WP:ERRORS. RoySmith (talk) 22:43, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Roy, it looks like Proar was ECP'd simply to prevent non-EC editors from editing, as a normal CT admin action? VR moved the setting there from Prtr, which was protected by Ymblanter in November as an ARBPIA restriction. It doesn't look like it was due to active edit-warring. Valereee (talk) 12:04, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Where do you see unresolved edit-warring? The single pair of move reverts happened almost two months ago. Also tagging buidhe.VR (Please ping on reply) 00:57, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I wrote almost the entire article myself from scratch in my sandbox. AFAIK, user sandboxes don't count towards newness (meaning content doesn't start becoming stale until its moved into mainspace). There should be no newness concerns.VR (Please ping on reply) 00:55, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh, sorry, VR, I think I misinterpreted the tag on Prtr as meaning the section had been spun off to form the new article, not that it had been brought there from the new article! Valereee (talk) 11:52, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Valereee: Thanks for raising your concerns here. The suggested amendment to the hook is most certainly an improvement, as it avoids the passive voice. I support the new version along with VR.
As for the fork concerns, armed resistance is separate (and/or a subcategory) from the right to resist. Non-armed resistance includes many non-violent methods such as the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement, or peaceful protests in the occupied territories. In my opinion, the German parliament's 2018 decision to criminalize the former based on antisemitism, to cite one example, shows that these are two different but interrelated topics that have had their own fair share of controversies. Makeandtoss (talk) 11:35, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've made that change to the hook in prep 5, anyone should feel free to revert me if you disagree and we can continue to discuss. Valereee (talk) 11:58, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Valereee: Thanks again. "often" should be after "are" if I am not mistaken, grammatically speaking? Makeandtoss (talk) 12:27, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I think that's right. Fixed, but any grammarian, have at it if that's not right in this case. Valereee (talk) 12:38, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Older nominations needing DYK reviewers

[edit]

The previous list was archived a few days ago, so I've created a new list of 36 nominations that need reviewing in the Older nominations section of the Nominations page, covering everything through August 26. We have a total of 294 nominations, of which 137 have been approved, a gap of 157 nominations that has decreased by 4 over the past 8 days. Thanks to everyone who reviews these and any other nominations!

More than one month old

Other nominations

Please remember to cross off entries, including the date, as you finish reviewing them (unless you're asking for further review), even if the review was not an approval. Please do not remove them entirely. Many thanks! BlueMoonset (talk) 15:06, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Newbie request

[edit]

Hi, I'm new to DYK and I'd appereciate it greatly if someone could review my prepping of Prep area 1. I've used PSHAW to prep the articles and I'd like to check that I haven't failed WP:DYKPBR or anything. Thanks! DimensionalFusion (talk ▪ she/her) 18:05, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, @DimensionalFusion, thank you so much for stepping up!
So, on first glance, I'm seeing a pretty good balance of different countries, US, Moldova, Japan, US, Poland, US, Canada/China, US, US. We usually don't want more than 3 or 4 US-centric hooks. It's good to aim for 3 if you can.
We also typically go for alternating bio/non-bio hooks. You've got eight non-bios, one bio. We'd ideally like to see at least four of each, presented in alternating order.
We also like to make sure the topics are varied. We've got currency, building, manga, video game/music, music, building, tech, building/music. Too many buildings, too much pop culture, a bit too much music, maybe too much tech if you include video game in tech. When you're building a prep set, even for very experienced builders, it's quite common to be attracted to the ones that personally interest you, so keep that in mind.
Do you know how to swap stuff out? Valereee (talk) 13:26, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Tracked in Phabricator
Task T371948
Dammit, broke ping: @DimensionalFusion Valereee (talk) 13:30, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@DimensionalFusion did I break it again? Sheesh. Sorry if I've just pinged you twice, DF. Valereee (talk) 13:33, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, this isn't me. This is the Reply thingie. Valereee (talk) 13:33, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, a known glitch. LOL I was like...did I accidentally make decaff? Valereee (talk) 13:49, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What I do is fix the link and then ping in the edit summary.--Launchballer 16:26, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, good solution! Valereee (talk) 13:09, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Only hypothetically swapping: I assume you remove from the queue and move the template back into approved but I've haven't actually done it yet DimensionalFusion (talk ▪ she/her) 13:34, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You needn't move it back to approved, you can simply move a given hook (from the edit source box, copying the code) to another prep set. Move both the hook and the credits. Try doing it once and come back to have someone check your work before doing the rest. Valereee (talk) 13:41, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Valereee I've swapped out some of the articles as suggested, feel free to take a look DimensionalFusion (talk ▪ she/her) 16:13, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@DimensionalFusion thanks for getting involved. Don't sweat making mistakes. It is inevitable that you will make mistakes while learning how this all works, and that's fine. There's really nothing you can do wrong that can't be fixed, and as long as you learn from your mistakes, everybody's happy. RoySmith (talk) 16:17, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can tell you that a) I wouldn't have put that Reese hook in prep 1 as there's another Kamala hook in queue 4, b) you should probably ping any editors if you move their nom, and c) that Taste hook is a flagrant breach of WP:DYKFICTION. Otherwise, nice work.--Launchballer 16:26, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies for the Kamala hook, was unaware of the one in queue 4. DimensionalFusion (talk ▪ she/her) 16:45, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No need for apologies. Everyone here who has actually done the job of filling preps expects new prep-builders to need time and assistance understanding how a prep is ideally built. No one is pointing these things out as criticisms. It's all completely in the spirit of helping you become expert at this. Please don't feel discouraged, there's a lot to learn about how to build a prep, it's basically a puzzle game with a bunch of moving parts. Which is what makes it fun to do once you know what all the moving parts are. Valereee (talk) 13:07, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the balance looks a lot better now! Valereee (talk) 19:03, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tropical Storm Talas (2017)

[edit]

Per a request on Narutolovehinata5's talk page, I'm asking to un-close my DYK nom for Talas, which was recently closed for me not providing a QPQ. Thanks, 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 04:39, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Overriding another prep builder's pic choice ... Apparent mistake

[edit]

@DimensionalFusion, what was this for? BorgQueen (talk) 07:15, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

seems like they were probably unaware that the first hook always gets the image slot :) theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 07:26, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Forgot that hooks with pictures always go at the top - I wasn't trying to override a pic choice. Sorry for the error! DimensionalFusion (talk ▪ she/her) 07:34, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh OK, no problem. BorgQueen (talk) 07:39, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Queue 2 (next one up)

[edit]

... that "New York's wealthiest janitor" lived atop the Bergdorf Goodman Building?

The said janitor lived in a 14-bed apartment that was at the top of the building. The hook makes it sound like he lived on the roof (which would be an excellent hook if true, but unfortunately...) Black Kite (talk) 10:58, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Epicgenius pinging BorgQueen (talk) 11:05, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Cambridge Dictionary gives as example usage: "She and Harry toyed with the idea of living in a penthouse atop the building" so I think we're fine. RoySmith (talk) 12:29, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think "atop" is a bit vague (it certainly means "on top of" in UKENG). I'd actually say that the fact he lived in a 14-room apartment is more hooky, but maybe that's just me. Mind you, since he wasn't actually a janitor anyway ... Black Kite (talk) 13:41, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's an odd statement considering the dictionary I cited is from one of the most prestigious universities in the UK. RoySmith (talk) 13:47, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In the Cambridge link the example follows the heading "atop | American Dictionary", so it is likely to be US English. TSventon (talk) 14:10, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not to mention that UK dictionaries often don't reflect the way that UK people actually talk anyway outside of academia. Black Kite (talk) 17:55, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If it helps, we can slightly rephrase the hook to "... that "New York's wealthiest janitor" lived on the top floor of the Bergdorf Goodman Building?". That being said, in American English, "atop" can mean "at the top of", and not just "above". Epicgenius (talk) 18:24, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Moved to Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors § Current DYK
 – Vladimir.copic (talk) 02:08, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Another one from Queue 2: ... that the course of the River Tay was diverted to allow the construction of the Jubilee Bridge?

The source, however, says that North of [the bridge], the course of the River Tay was diverted to allow the new road to run along the river valley. This doesn't seem to support the hook? I'm not a road person so perhaps this is fine. Pinging people involved: BorgQueen, JuniperChill, Voorts. Vladimir.copic (talk) 23:45, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I read it as the road connecting to the bridge, so it was necessary to divert the river to build that road so that the bridge could be built. voorts (talk/contributions) 00:40, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know&oldid=1246568328"