Wikipedia talk:Did you know/Archive 163

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

• ... that the Samsung Galaxy M30s features the largest battery capacity for a smartphone available in India?

@

Also, what's the meaning/ significance of the word "capacity" there? Is this just about size? If so, why not just "has the largest battery"? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:25, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

"largest battery" gives the impression of physical size of the battery, not its capacity. — Maile (talk) 13:29, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I'd agree. So what does this word in the hook mean, the length of battery life? Or is it capacitance? Or something else? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:37, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

By capacity, I was refering to the electric charge of the battery in terms of Ampere hours. The reviewer thought the 1st hook (samsung phone with largest battery) was more interesting but for some reason the 2nd hook (for the India fact) got promoted.

talk

) 16:46, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Whatever hook is chosen, someone will likely complain that featuring Samsung at all at DYK is promotional, see here.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 13:40, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Note that my concern is not with the article subject per se; in fact I have myself written several articles on phones/tech products that have run on DYK. My concern is specific to this hook in that it may fail the "broad interest" requirement, and that "largest battery currently available in India!" sounds too much like an ad to me. I totally understand how it can be difficult to find viable hooks for such topics. feminist (talk) 17:32, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying that, Feminist. I think most people would call that "battery life". But then I'm no expert on the Indian mobile phone market. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:54, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

I agree with @Feminist: on the "broad interest" requirement in regards to limiting it to India. Maybe we could just go with the original hook, especially since the reviewewr indicated a preference for it: — Maile (talk) 17:56, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

• ... that the 6000
  mAh battery on the Samsung Galaxy M30s is the largest ever for a Samsung
  smartphone?

I also support going for the original hook.

talk

) 19:48, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

• Replaced with ALT0, also removing second wikilink to Samsung as that felt over-the-top promotional. I'm concerned about so much currently-available retail merch appearing on the main page. I understand the concerns about fairness to editors who are interested in new tech products, but this just feels very unseemly to me for an encyclopedia to have blurbs and links on the main page to new products. This needs some thought. --valereee (talk) 21:56, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

• WMF could encourage more inclusive editing if it bought everyone in India a Samsung Galaxy M30s. They might ever get them at discount if we got an image on Main page? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:07, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

I strongly support holding a RfC or something like that to determine consensus on the appropriateness of newly released commercial products on DYK, as the last discussion on the dyk talk page did not do much.

talk

)

It's not as if we are getting a ton of these hooks though - as far as I can tell, this is only the second one this month. But I get the concern about the promotional aspect - nominators should be looking to highlight facts that are not of a promotional nature wherever possible. Gatoclass (talk) 01:55, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

I think the problem is really more like, considering the kind of content these articles have, it's difficult, and sometimes perhaps even impossible, to write a hook that doesn't sound the least bit promotional. The battery size hook proposed above is an improvement, but even that could reasonably be interpreted as being promotional. Well I guess considering

csdnew

02:14, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

One possible approach, if no other hooky fact is apparent, is to find some interesting but not overtly promotional observation made by a reviewer and use that as a basis for the hook. Other than that, I can't see anything in our ruleset that deals with promotional hooks, so perhaps we need to add a word or two on the topic. Gatoclass (talk) 05:21, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Taewangkorea, haven't we? Taewangkorea, yeah, maybe an RfC would be a good idea. I'm concerned about three things for sure, the first being whether it's appropriate for WP to look like we're promoting new merchandise. It seems like a magnet for attracting UPE. Other companies are going to see these entries and wonder how they can get their own new products featured. The second is whether a not-truly-groundbreaking feature of ANY commercially-available product is likely to be of interest to anyone who isn't currently considering buying that product. The biggest battery ever in a Samsung phone just isn't of interest to anyone else. But the third thing is for well-intentioned editors like yourself who are just writing articles about things that interest them. In your case that's new tech. Is it unfair to you if the thing you're most interested in writing about isn't welcome in DYK? --valereee (talk

) 15:46, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Nice catch! - that's probably been there for years and nobody noticed :) Per MOS, I would say yes, it should be changed, but as it's not actually a sentence, it might look worse with a space - it's hard to say without seeing it, so it might be one of those

Talk:Main page. Gatoclass (talk

) 12:00, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Okay, thanks! I'll post it there. Armadillopteryx^talk 15:57, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

I had to pull three hooks from prep 3 because I was unable to verify them. Here they are:

• ... that director and screenwriter Travis Stevens paused renovations on his home to film Girl on the Third Floor?
•   Girl on the Third Floor – Jack Sebastian (give) (tag) – View nom subpage

- I was unable to verify from the supplied source that it was his home, so far as I can tell it was just the headquarters of his production company - and substituting that wouldn't make for much of a hook. Pinging the nominator Jack Sebastian.

I am pretty unclear as to why Gatoclass was unable to verify the reference, as its the very first reference in the article. Since Gatoclass pulled and almost immediately went offline, can someone else verify this, so it doesn't miss its mainppace window? - Jack Sebastian (talk) 21:46, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Indeed, this is what the above-linked source says Interestingly, in his post-screening Q&A, Stevens revealed that much of the story was not fabricated: the house is real, the recently acquired headquarters of his production company, and its backstory was only slightly embellished for the film. Inspired, Stevens and his team paused the actual renovation of the house to spin their fictionalized version. — Maile (talk) 22:00, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

 Done sourced hook has been restored to Queue 3. I think Gatoclass swapped more than one hook in Queue 3, and then shuffled them, so I was unsure which one had replaced Girl on the Third Floor. I moved Betsy Head Park down to Prep 3. If it doesn't belong in that Prep, then please feel free to move Betsy Head Park elsewhere. — Maile (talk) 22:16, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

— Maile or anyone, I was going to suggest substituting 'house' for 'home', as the source doesn't actually say it was where the producer/director lived or planned to live, just that it was his production company's house and future headquarters. I think there's less likelihood of quibbles saying "paused renovations on his house". RebeccaGreen (talk) 23:06, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

@RebeccaGreen: I noticed that also, but some producers have their company based in their home. Better to be safe, than have another question. I changed it accordingly. Thanks. — Maile (talk) 23:14, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Am I missing something? I read that quote given by Maile above when I was trying to confirm the hook and I still fail to see how it confirms that the headquarters of his production company was also his home. Gatoclass (talk) 01:24, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

The hook doesn't say it was his home now, it says it was his house (ie, a house he/his production company owned). RebeccaGreen (talk) 01:28, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

The quote supplied to verify the hook above doesn't say it was his home - period. It also doesn't even say he personally owned it at any time - it just says the house was "recently acquired" for use as the headquarters of his production company. Gatoclass (talk) 01:43, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

I see you mean that the hook was changed from "home" to "house". However, that still does not address the issue in my view, and since the hook is now on the main page, I have taken the issue up at

WP:ERRORS. Gatoclass (talk

) 02:38, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

• ... that the Qarhan Playa's Bieletan subbasin – including the Suli, South Suli, Dabiele, and Xiaobiele salt lakes – is China's largest source of brine lithium?
•   Suli Lake – LlywelynII (give) (tag) – View nom subpage

I was able to verify most of this hook after considerable difficulty, but most of the sources refer to the lake as Senie not Suli and I was unable to establish they are one and the same as the article states. Pinging the nominator LlywelynII.

As LlywelynII has been inactive since September (apart from a single edit on October 1), the Suli Lake nomination may have to continue without them. Pinging

csdnew

19:50, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

As a first look, I see that source 2, Yu et al (2001) says "A more detailed lithological, geochemical and pollen record of lake status changes in the basin is provided by a 101m-long core (Core CK2022) taken from the playa surface to the east of Sheli Lake and thus between Sheli Lake and Dabiele Lake (Huang et al.1980; Du and Kong et al., 1983)". The map in source 4, Du et al (2018) shows CK2022 between numbers 1 (Seni Lake) and 2 (Dabiele Lake). Romanisations of names in other scripts are always tricky, and in this case we first have a name in (a dialect of) the Mongolian language being represented in Chinese characters, per the Mandarin pronunciation of those characters, and then romanised .... Regarding "most of the sources refer to the lake as Senie not Suli", of the online sources in the Roman alphabet that we have in the article, the names are given as: Suli: Mao et al, Zheng; Sheli: Yu et al (2001); Seni(e): Du et al, Spencer et al, Yu et al (2013). So 3 sources give Seni(e), 2 give Suli, 1 gives Sheli - or, the second consonant is l in 3 sources and n in 3 sources. Apart from not being able to read Chinese, the Chinese sources would show the characters, but not the pronunciation of the characters, which would depend on which variety of Chinese it was being read in. I would be satisfied that Suli/Sheli/Seni(e) are the same lake - which version should be used as the title name in English Wikipedia could perhaps be discussed, but needn't affect this hook, I don't think. RebeccaGreen (talk) 01:09, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for that analysis Rebecca, I will recheck the nomination using that information a little later. With regard to the "most sources" comment, that was a misstatement, I was referring to the sources provided to verify the hook, not the sources in the article as a whole. Gatoclass (talk) 01:33, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Please note that I will be unable to respond to any comments now as I am about to log off, so these issues if they are going to be resolved today would have to be resolved by others. Gatoclass (talk) 16:09, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

The following discussion is moved here from my talk page. In a nutshell, I was trying to get suggestions on how to word the admin instructions on image protection for the main page. I'm moving this here, as more admins might see it here rather than my talk page. All I'm trying to do is clarify one small part of the admin instructions for image protection. You people figure it out, please. I'm throwing in the towel on simplifying the wording. — Maile (talk) 20:39, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Moved from User talk:Maile66

 – — Maile (talk) 20:39, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

@BlueMoonset: I've done a slight rewriting of Admin instructions#Image. I'm not sure if I got it so it makes sense. You and @Valereee: might want to have a look and edit anything that needs it. Let me put it this way - it still confuses me somewhat. We are telling the reader to either make sure it's loaded on English Wikipedia, or Commons, either/or, without telling the reader why it can be one or the other. And I don't know how to make it clearer. — Maile (talk) 00:02, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Maile, I'm afraid this is out of my area of expertise. It may be that Gatoclass knows, having been an admin and around DYK for a long time, or Shubinator, who wrote DYKUpdateBot and therefore the bot's error messages if there's a protection problem with the image to be promoted. Best of luck in getting the answer you need. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:59, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

It actually looks a lot clearer to me than it was before. I'll look at it again in a couple of days and see if anything stands out to me. --valereee (talk) 12:49, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

The difference is that cascading protection only applies for images on English Wikipedia, not Commons. So Commons images need to be protected manually or by Krinkle Bot. Shubinator (talk) 04:56, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

@

WP:CASCADE, but this makes it even worse to convey this to other admins. How about you @Valereee:? Round and round and round we go. — Maile (talk

) 20:19, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

• I guess what I'm asking, if anyone has tried to follow this, is it seems we either do one or the other to protect the image. But tacked on to the instructions is a 3rd option, but wording confused me as to why we could chose the 3rd option, or do we add it to something else we already did? Can anyone clarify this with a Bullet-point list, preferably one sentence per bullet point. — Maile (talk) 20:50, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

We're protecting the image from vandals who'd love to switch out a Main Page image for an inappropriate one - yes it's happened before. At the risk of confusing things further, let me try to summarize.

If the image is currently:

• On English Wikipedia: no action required, the image should automatically be protected through cascading protection
• On Commons, one of the following should happen:

• KrinkleBot protects the image (if it's working)
• Commons admin manually protects the image
• Upload the image to English Wikipedia and tag it with {{
  c-uploaded
  }}, it'll automatically be protected through cascading protection

The last bullet point is there because it's the only option for images currently on Commons when KrinkleBot is down and the promoting en.wiki admin isn't a Commons admin.

Shubinator (talk) 03:11, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

• I'm afraid I'm with Maile and have been since I started moving preps to queues. My concern is that the instructions say to check whether the image has been protected, but I can't know if the image has been protected or not when I move prep > queue. It doesn't get protected until it's in either the next or the next-but-one queue, which may be days after I worked on that set. Which means I guess I need to remember to check again the day before a set I checked appears, which is definitely something that will slip my mind as the last thing to check off on the checklist.

And I guess I assumed all DYK images were on commons, since we can't use fair-use images on the main page? Shubinator, excuse the stupid question, but how does the main page know to use the wp version instead of the commons version? When you say upload to English Wikipedia, I assume you're talking about me downloading from commons the file of the same name, then uploading it here, protecting it, and changing something in the queue's markup to point to the wikipedia version instead of the version on commons which it's currently pointing to? --valereee (talk) 13:54, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

@Shubinator: THANK YOU! I finally got it, and have done slight rewording that should make it clear to @Valereee: or anybody else. I also added a link to the Commons admins, which I think was a missing piece to this. Please feel free to edit, but I think it's clear now. Admin instructions - Image — Maile (talk) 14:17, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

@Valereee: I think images that are not restricted to Fair Use can be loaded directly onto Wikipedia, without first going to Commons. It's been a while since I've seen one, but I do know such images are (or were) tagged with something like, "Upload this image to Commons" and provide a link to the appropriate tool. Somebody can explain that better than I did. But, yeah, that's been a little confusing to me, also.. — Maile (talk) 14:22, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Maile66, oh, yes, I've seen that, too, and I think I may've uploaded them to commons a few times even. I just looked at the instructions and I'm MUCH clearer now! I've already got the update bot errors on my watchlist, and posting to commons media protection is easy enough! Thanks so much for figuring this out, both of you! --valereee (talk) 18:02, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Heather Olmstead

HickoryOughtShirt?4 Epicgenius

• ... that in 2018, Brigham Young University volleyball coach Heather Olmstead held the highest winning percentage of any women's volleyball coach in NCAA Division I history?

This is probably just me being ignorant of sports, but the article says During the 2018 season, Olmstead earned her 100th win in a match against Pepperdine University.[13] At the conclusion of the season, she was named the American Volleyball Coaches Association Coach of the Year.[14] The following year, she was selected by Team USA to coach the U.S. Collegiate National Volleyball Team in Japan. At the time of her selection, Olmstead held the highest winning percentage of any women's volleyball coach in NCAA Division I history with a minimum of one season and in any division with a minimum of three seasons.[15] 1. This seems to say it was in 2019, and 2. Is "the highest winning percentage of any women's volleyball coach in NCAA Division I history with a minimum of one season" the same as "the highest winning percentage of any women's volleyball coach in NCAA Division I history?" --valereee (talk) 16:15, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

@Valereee: thanks for pointing this out. To your second point: I would say so, since the highest winning percentage of any women's volleyball coach in NCAA Division I history with zero seasons would be an empty group. Coaches with wins and at least one season would be automatically included in the group of all coaches with wins. epicgenius (talk) 16:18, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Epicgenius, I'll take your word for it! I was guessing it was intended to exclude someone who, for instance, only coached three games but won them all, but no one would confuse that with a winningest coach? But I do change the 2018 to 2019, though? --valereee (talk) 16:24, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

valereee, I guess so. epicgenius (talk) 16:44, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, ya'll. As someone who writes hockey, I am used to it encompassing 2018-19 but realize I misunderstood. Thanks for catching this. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 18:48, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

No worries at all, that was exactly the kind of thing I was thinking of! I was like, "Is this a typo, or correct as written for reasons with which I'm unfamiliar?" --valereee (talk) 22:07, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Jack Roxburgh was reviwed and approved for a special occasion request on October 28, but never made its way into the corresponding holding area. Could it please be added to Template:Did you know/Preparation area 1? Thank you. Flibirigit (talk) 19:04, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Cwmhiraeth just promoted it to Prep 6. Would you want this to be placed in Prep 1 instead (so it would go up at night on October 28 in Canada)? feminist (talk) 06:04, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Well, if you are going to put "on this day" in the hook, you do need to include it in the hook set that moves to the main page on that day. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:11, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Well, going by Canadian time, "the hook set that moves to the main page on that day" would be Prep 1. feminist (talk) 06:14, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Prep 6 is fine. Cheers. Flibirigit (talk) 14:33, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

We are back to the more usual longer lists of non-current nominations that need reviewing. There are 33 such nominations this time, those through October 19, all listed below. We have a total of 248 nominations, of which 167 have been approved. Thanks to everyone who reviews these, especially the four from September.

Over two months old:

• August 26: Template:Did you know nominations/Hermann Oestrich (ALT1 needs reviewing)

Over one month old:

• September 2: Template:Did you know nominations/2019 Chungju World Martial Arts Masterships
• September 3: Template:Did you know nominations/Madara Uchiha (review now started)
• September 20: Template:Did you know nominations/Merryll Saylan (more ALT hooks to review)
• September 26: Template:Did you know nominations/Niamh McEvoy (two articles)

Other old nominations:

• October 3: Template:Did you know nominations/KEYZ (new ALT needs reviewing)
• October 3: Template:Did you know nominations/HMS Sceptre (P215)
• October 3: Template:Did you know nominations/Gateway of India
• October 6: Template:Did you know nominations/Lang Ayre
• October 11: Template:Did you know nominations/Christof Nel
• October 12: Template:Did you know nominations/John Ystumllyn
• October 13: Template:Did you know nominations/Judith (Matthus)
• October 13: Template:Did you know nominations/Siege of Masaka
• October 13: Template:Did you know nominations/Tell Qudadi
• October 14: Template:Did you know nominations/Magnificat (Vivaldi)
• October 14: Template:Did you know nominations/Prehistoric Sites and Decorated Caves of the Vézère Valley
• October 15: Template:Did you know nominations/Mirko Ludwig
• October 15: Template:Did you know nominations/Institutes of Eminence
• October 15: Template:Did you know nominations/John Cule
• October 15: Template:Did you know nominations/List of accolades received by Red Dead Redemption 2
• October 15: Template:Did you know nominations/Development of Red Dead Redemption 2
• October 15: Template:Did you know nominations/Music of Red Dead Redemption 2
• October 15: Template:Did you know nominations/A Stanislaw Lem Reader
• October 15: Template:Did you know nominations/List of honors received by John Ashbery
• October 15: Template:Did you know nominations/Tymshare RETRIEVE
• October 16: Template:Did you know nominations/Helmuth Froschauer
• October 17: Template:Did you know nominations/Dinosaur Ridge (Gangwon)
• October 17: Template:Did you know nominations/Jeff Martin (tenor)
• October 17: Template:Did you know nominations/Syritta pipiens
• October 18: Template:Did you know nominations/Laura Cooper
• October 18: Template:Did you know nominations/Francesco Filidei
• October 18: Template:Did you know nominations/Tony Renna
• October 19: Template:Did you know nominations/Calvert Vaux Park
• October 19: Template:Did you know nominations/Concentration of land ownership
• October 19: Template:Did you know nominations/Yashasvi Jaiswal

Please remember to cross off entries as you finish reviewing them (unless you're asking for further review), even if the review was not an approval. Many thanks! BlueMoonset (talk) 01:16, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Does an article become ineligible if it spends more than 7 days as a draft in the Draft: or User: namespaces? Thanks! Airbornemihir (talk) 06:27, 27 October 2019 (UTC) (please ping when replying)

No. The 7-day period starts when the article is moved into article space. It can linger endlessly in Draft or User space without losing eligibility. feminist (talk) 07:07, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

In less than two hours Did you know will need to be updated, however the next queue either has no hooks or has not been approved by an administrator. It would be much appreciated if an administrator would take the time to ensure that DYK is updated on time by following these instructions:

1. Check the prep areas; if there are between 6 and 10 hooks on the page then it is probably good to go. If not move approved hooks from the suggestions page and add them and the credits as required.
2. Once completed edit queue #5 and replace the page with the entire content from the next update
3. Add {{DYKbotdo|~~~}} to the top of the queue and save the page

Then, when the time is right I will be able to update the template. Thanks and have a good day,

We need an admin: we're now overdue, since Prep 5 has yet to be promoted to Queue 5. Is anyone around who can check the prep and promoted it to queue, so the bot can do the promotion? Pinging Gatoclass, Maile, valereee, Cas Liber, Amakuru, and Vanamonde, in the hopes that one can do a promotion right now, and perhaps one of the others could promote the prep after in the next 23 hours that so we don't run into this problem tomorrow. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:31, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

BlueMoonset, no one seems to be active. ___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 01:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

All we can hope is that one of them stops by in the next hours and can do a promotion. Absent an admin who knows what they're doing in the DYK space, we're stuck until one shows up. It's been a while since it's happened, but sometimes we've had to wait many hours. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:53, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

I am around and could give it a try, but preferably only if someone experienced here helps me verify the set since I have never set a prep or promoted it to a queue. If you all think that is a bad idea then we can wait for someone with experience. Kees08 (Talk) 03:10, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

•  Done, albeit three hours late. Gatoclass (talk) 04:44, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

• Thanks, Gatoclass. Much appreciated. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:54, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

• Comment I was around and aware that there was no queue last night, but unfortunately I had a somewhat busy evening and did not have the time to do any checks on the Hooks, so per the instructions and recent discussions I was unable to upload them. I will see if I have some time to tackle the checks for queue 6 today. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 08:22, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
• Comment Sorry, have been helping a friend clean out her parents' house, we're headed over again in a short while, so I won't be around today either. Tomorrow I have meetings starting at 8:30, but I can probably do a set Tuesday. Gosh I wish some more regulars here would run for admin. If we even had just ten people who were all trying to do one check per week, I feel like we could take a breath. --valereee (talk) 11:59, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Joshua Guerrero may be a good fit for the last person-hook slot, as it mentions The Ghosts of Versailles, but the QPQ hasn't been done yet. Pinging nominator @Gerda Arendt:. Yoninah (talk) 10:15, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

reviewed now --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:09, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

I have just reviewed this article, Gerda Arendt. I have a suggestion about the hook - see what you think. RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:51, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

I have now suggested an ALT hook, so a new reviewer is needed. RebeccaGreen (talk) 04:14, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Yoninah has reviewed and approved the hook, so could another promoter add it to Prep 3, please? RebeccaGreen (talk) 14:23, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Another possibility for Halloween is Template:Did you know nominations/Gara Medouar - if we're not waiting for the image licence, and if there's room in the set. RebeccaGreen (talk) 12:18, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Yes, but most of the hooks are non-bio. And the image is really good. Yoninah (talk) 12:29, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

• ... that Jack Roxburgh introduced legislation on this day in 1964 to declare ice hockey Canada's national game, after disproving the myth that lacrosse held that distinction?

  I find this a bit misleading myself, as I assumed from this hook that the legislation was successful and that ice hockey was installed at the expense of lacrosse. But according to the article they were eventually both given the honour, as "winter national sport" and "summer national sport" respectively. I think this could do with a clarification.  — Amakuru (talk) 09:33, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

  Pinging Yoninah Gerda Arendt Flibirigit MB who were involved with the hook nomination.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:05, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

  I think "introduce" is an open word, but may be wrong. How is this:

  ... that Jack Roxburgh introduced legislation on this day in 1964 to declare ice hockey Canada's national game, after disproving the myth that only lacrosse held that distinction?

• It makes no difference to me. I won't be online much today. Flibirigit (talk) 14:21, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

I think the hook is fine. It is factually correct. He did disprove that Lacrosse was the national game and he did introduce legislation. Legislators propose laws all the time that are unsuccessful. The reader can read the article to find out more. MB 15:14, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

I think that the new proposal makes more sense, since it at least implies about the situation of ice hockey and lacrosse both being declared national sports of Canada, as opposed to just one or the other.

csdnew

00:17, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

I've noticed that Prep 5 is the set due to run on 2 November and currently has an image hook. I've just nominated Template:Did you know nominations/2019 Rugby World Cup Final to run with a (I think good image). Could I ask if this could be reviewed for Prep 5 with the current image in there being moved up to Prep 4 which is lacking an image lead hook please? The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 11:40, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Prep 4 has had its image hook moved to make way for a hook that has been in the Special occasion holding area for November 1 since October 9. Of course, it's up to promoters what they choose to do - and also whether they accept an article nominated for a special occasion less than the required minimum time before the date. RebeccaGreen (talk) 12:02, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

I'm wondering if it's a good idea to run an article in DYK before the event it describes has actually taken place. Although it's incredibly unlikely, what if it were postponed? Might it be better to run it on Sunday instead? Black Kite (talk) 17:51, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

@

2019 FA Cup Final both ran on the day of the final and referred to it being "today". It's just following precedent. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk

) 06:15, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

@RebeccaGreen: nomination has been reopened, and relisted under August 9. @LlywelynII: has been pinged on the nomination template, and given a courtesy notification on his own talk page. — Maile (talk) 18:23, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

That's right, I didn't bother reopening the nomination because I brought it to this page for discussion instead, and had already stated my intention to re-check the hook when I can find the time, so reopening the nomination served no purpose. Gatoclass (talk) 10:48, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

The hook is now verified. Gatoclass (talk) 11:23, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

I expanded Oecanthus fultoni from 573 characters to 2,900 characters. DYK check on the article is messed up for some reason and says "Assuming article is at 5x now, expansion began 44 edits ago on August 30, 2014 Article has not been created or expanded 5x or promoted to Good Article within the past 10 days (1885 days)". I know that I have 215 characters more than is needed, but I was wondering if anyone else is experiencing this and if there is a fix. SL93 (talk) 05:01, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Interestingly enough, I fixed a typo in the article and tried the tool again. It worked. SL93 (talk) 05:05, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Queue 1 has a hook that says "... that Pixar cinematographer Patrick Lin pioneered the use of a visual lens based on an actual camera lens in Inside Out?

I was wondering what a "visual lens" was. The article also says that, "On Inside Out, he pioneered Pixar's first use of a visual camera lens based on an actual camera lens, so that the animation appears to be filmed on an actual camera." (What are non-visual lenses, I wondered?)

The source [1], however, says "Patrick Lin applied his experience as a live-action cinematographer to push the studio in two new, history-making directions: (1) The first virtual lens to be modeled on a real-world camera lens. Mathematically true to a real camera, Pixar’s virtual lens has the ability to move on a track, dolly, or even appear to be hand-held. Lin and his team did this to help viewers distinguish between the interior and exterior worlds of the film."

I have changed 'visual' to 'virtual' in the article. Could someone please check this and change it in the hook, if you agree that that's what it should be? This will go on the main page in about 10 hours from now! RebeccaGreen (talk) 14:42, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Congratulations! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:28, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

@Gatoclass: Having noticed that you are finding some issues with the hooks, I had a look at this one. I have replaced one url that led to a completely different article with one for the cited article (source 4), and replaced citations to source 4 in the final para with citations to source 5, which does contain the information presented in that para. So the hook should be OK now. I must admit, I would have gone with something more hooky like
"... that the assassin bug Rhynocoris longifrons is attracted to the smell of moth larvae?"
(And I won't be butting in on any more hooks tonight - it's bedtime here!) RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:35, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

• Pinging nominator Cwmhiraeth. Yoninah (talk) 13:41, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

• Thanks, I should have done that. This hook is currently in Prep 6. RebeccaGreen (talk) 14:12, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

• I wanted to explain how assassin bugs feed and got the citation from the Reduviidae or another article but could not access the cited paper. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:44, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

• ... that the mother-and-daughter authors of The Book of Gutsy Women explain what 17th-century nun Juana Inés de la Cruz and climate activist Greta Thunberg have in common?
•   The Book of Gutsy Women – Wasted Time R (give) (tag) – View nom subpage

- I moved this from p2 to p1 in order to allow some time for more discussion of this hook. There is no indication in the article, or the provided source, that these two women are directly compared in any way in the book. Rather, the implication seems to be that what these two have in common is that they are both "gutsy women". However, this is self-evident from the book title. Self-evident hooks are by definition uninteresting. IMO this hook either needs to be refactored, or a new hook found.

Please note that I will be unable to contribute further to this discussion until I am back online tomorrow. Gatoclass (talk) 14:56, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

How is this then:

... that the mother-and-daughter authors of The Book of Gutsy Women portrayed, among others, the 17th-century nun Juana Inés de la Cruz and climate activist Greta Thunberg? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:17, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Better. Gatoclass (talk) 15:24, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Okay with me (the author/nominator). Wasted Time R (talk) 23:56, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

 Done Replaced in prep. Yoninah (talk) 00:45, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Maryul

• ... that Ladakh was originally called Maryul (capital pictured), the "lowland" of West Tibet?

Kautilya3 Zanhe I see this has been discussed at the nom, but I'm still confused. Maryul of Ngaris means "lowland of West Tibet", but the article doesn't say that Ngaris is West Tibet. It says that Maryul of Ngaris means lowland of Ngari, and that Maryul was a West Tibetan kingdom. Is that enough to convey that Ngari is/was West Tibet? Normally we'd link to Ngari within the article to provide that context, but in this case we intentionally are not linking to it because it doesn't provide help, and instead the article simply links to Tibet. If this weren't an issue involving the hook, it wouldn't matter, but I was flipping back and forth between nom and article trying to figure this out. --valereee (talk) 12:37, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

I think adding a note in the lead, right after the translation, which connects Ngaris with West Tibet would be the solution. Yoninah (talk) 13:10, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

I requested on

 Done I reserved the lead spot in Prep 4 for your hook; promoter needed. Yoninah (talk) 17:11, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

@Feminist: What connection does this article have with November 1st? @Yoninah: Why do you want to use the image/video clip, because I wouldn't of my own volition choose this hook for an image slot? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 14:14, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

I don't actually see a request or explanation for the date in the nomination, nor any mention of November 1 in the article. Are we missing something? RebeccaGreen (talk) 14:29, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

BlizzCon, Blizzard Entertainment's annual gaming convention, begins on November 1 this year. The phrase (the subject of the DYK article) gained prominence in the United States via events in connection with Blizzard (see Blizzard Entertainment#Hearthstone ban and Hong Kong protests for details). A protest has been planned at BlizzCon in response to the controversy. I expect reader interest for the topic to increase during BlizzCon, and having the article on the main page would aid readers who are curious about the slogan. feminist (talk) 14:46, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

With regards to the hook, I welcome other suggestions. It doesn't have to occupy the image slot, just that it's not every day we can get a video relevant to the topic as the image. feminist (talk) 14:49, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I thought it was novel to have a video clip. Yoninah (talk) 21:53, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

We seem to be at a stalemate here. Prep 4 needs to be promoted to the queue but is lacking a lead image. Cwmhiraeth doesn't think this hook image is appropriate for the lead slot, I can't promote it because I reviewed it, and the nominator, feminist, who usually promotes hooks, also can't promote it. Is someone else going to step up and promote this hook to Prep 4, or should we put in another image and promote this hook later? Yoninah (talk) 13:08, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

We can put in any other image in the article. It doesn't have to be a video, though (as I said) I think having a video as the DYK image is unique. feminist (talk) 13:13, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

With regard to

WP:NPOV. I feel uneasy about having a video of chanting protesters in the image slot as it makes it seem that Wikipedia is supporting the protests. Cwmhiraeth (talk

) 15:55, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

 Done @Yoninah: I have promoted it to Prep 4. I fail to be convinced that a video makes us look more supportive than anything else. We've had some pretty funky lead images on DYK, which I would rather not have seen. One of which could have been seen as a support of blatant obscenity and/or outright pornography. Could a chant be be worse than that? We don't censor the Main Page. I thought DYK had guts for garters. — Maile (talk) 16:55, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

I had requested November 1 for

@Yoninah: you and I are doing the same dance on this one. So, please finish it how you think it should look. — Maile (talk) 19:32, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Sure. BTW this illustrates the importance of making sure approved hooks are moved to the special occasion holding area. Prep builders are not mind-readers; we usually don't comb the nominations page looking for special occasion requests. Nominators must ask closing reviewers to move the nomination to the special occasion holding area as soon as they get the tick. Yoninah (talk) 19:37, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

In less than two hours Did you know will need to be updated, however the next queue either has no hooks or has not been approved by an administrator. It would be much appreciated if an administrator would take the time to ensure that DYK is updated on time by following these instructions:

1. Check the prep areas; if there are between 6 and 10 hooks on the page then it is probably good to go. If not move approved hooks from the suggestions page and add them and the credits as required.
2. Once completed edit queue #3 and replace the page with the entire content from the next update
3. Add {{DYKbotdo|~~~}} to the top of the queue and save the page

Then, when the time is right I will be able to update the template. Thanks and have a good day,

Template:Did you know nominations/bbno$

• ... that Canadian SoundCloud rapper bbno$ became interested in music after suffering a back injury that prevented him from pursuing his dreams of becoming a professional swimmer?

This is sourced to an interview in undergroundunderdogs.com, not sure that's really enough for a DYK hook, and I agree with Cwmhiraeth that the term 'professional swimmer', although it's used in the source, is odd. None of the other hooks were approved. I'm wondering about sending this back for further review, but I thought I'd see if anyone else thinks we can fix it here. --valereee (talk) 12:15, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

• Without having read any of the article or source, I assumed that "professional swimmer" meant "competitive swimmer", as in
  Swimmer redirects to that page, so perhaps a link would solve that problem? No thoughts yet about the sourcing. RebeccaGreen (talk
  ) 12:26, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

@Valereee: What about BeatRoute magazine? "Bbno$ Is Having More Fun Than You", archived here [2]. RebeccaGreen (talk) 12:54, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

I've added that source to the article. RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:03, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

RebeccaGreen, that's better, definitely! I think I'll tweak the hook to remove professional, that'll solve the rest for me. Thanks! --valereee (talk) 13:10, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/1949 Rhodesia vs New Zealand rugby union match

The C of E Yoninah

This had a request for this date because it's the world finals, but the main article is already in the set, also requested for this date, which puts two rugby articles in the set. Is this still appropriate? --valereee (talk) 12:29, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

It looks okay to me. We often run more than one hook on a major sporting event on the same day. Gatoclass (talk) 12:44, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

If you like, you could Swing it Low to tomorrow @Valereee: since that's when the All Blacks are playing Wales in the Third place play off (editor's note: Ha Ha Ha!) so that it is more topical. @Gatoclass:, up to you. I'm happy either way The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 14:03, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

I'm not unhappy if no one else is, so I'll leave it up to Gatoclass also! Er...what's the joke I'm missing? :D --valereee (talk) 14:09, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

I'm an England fan and we beat the All Blacks to make it to the final @Valereee: :). The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 16:11, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Ah, of course! :) --valereee (talk) 16:27, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Hello!

I have been recommended on the WikiProject:Medicine talkpage to put forward my article on Thomas Morstede for the Did you know section on the main page. My article is 10 days old, however it is my first article. I was just wondering how I actually nominate my page for Thomas Morstede? I have read the rules on the project page but I cannot find instructions about how to this. Any helping pointing me in the right direction would be much appreciated!

ChocolateOrange1 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:05, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

The instructions are here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:Did_you_know#Instructions_for_nominators . Hopefully whoever looks at your nomination is lenient with the 7 day requirement. Umimmak (talk) 20:21, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

I will be lenient. Please go ahead, ChocolateOrange1. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:35, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

My hook "Did you know...that the relics of St Adelphus attracted so many pilgrims by the 12th century, that the Benedictines of Neuwiller-lès-Saverne Abbey had to build a secondary church nearby?" has been approved, and I'm very glad about it. However, I am aware that a sentence with two "thats" is a little labored. How can I put it better? "...that the Benedictines of Neuwiller-lès-Saverne Abbey had to build a second church because the relics of Saint Adelphus attracted too many pilgrims in the 12th century?" Not sure about this at all. It's better to open a sentence with the more unusual fact, than to conclude it. Inputs are very welcome! --Edelseider (talk) 20:26, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Is the first 'that' stylestically or grammatically neccessary? Seems to read just as well without it.

Slywriter (talk) 01:14, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

The suggestion seems to fall under the "rule question" without an answer in ""Rules" sometimes invoked but lacking a consensus: "E1: Does the first word always have to be "that"?"

I don't have a problem with the two thats myself. RebeccaGreen (talk) 08:25, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Since I am not a native speaker of English (like many readers and contributors around here, I suppose), I shall trust your judgment - if you say the two "thats" don't look funny, then I'm fine with it. Thank you, both! --Edelseider (talk) 08:38, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

This hook reads "... that Brazil was the only country with an exhibit at the 1918 Bronx "World's Fair"?"

The previous paragraph ends with the sentence "Other attractions included ... 15 large pavilions, including Chinese and North Sea-themed pavilions, as well as those for fine arts, liberal arts, and American achievements." So, it seems that there were American exhibits, and Brazil was the only other country that exhibited, apart from the US? It might be good to tweak the hook a bit, as it sounds like the only exhibits were from Brazil. RebeccaGreen (talk) 08:21, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

The source clearly states that Brazil was the only country to have an exhibit.[3] The US Congress refused to get involved (per the same source), so there was no formal US exhibit - only a "Palace of American achievements" apparently dreamed up by the organizers themselves. We should stick to what the sources say - to do otherwise ventures into

WP:OR. Gatoclass (talk

) 11:36, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi Gatoclass, yes, I did see that the single source cited says that Brazil was the only country. I didn't read "submitted a proposal to the U.S. Congress for support ... Congress turned them down" as saying that there was no formal US exhibit. I assumed that "support" meant funding for the exposition. It seemed possible to me that the source meant the only country besides the US, and assumed its readers would understand that too. My comment about tweaking was jumping the gun a bit, sorry. If others had been concerned, then perhaps (rather like I am concerned about a completely different hook that says an event was the largest, based on one source, when none of the other sources say that). I would have looked for other sources, to check what they say - that Brazil was the only country, the only other country, the only foreign country, etc, and whether they refer to American exhibit/s. But if no one else is concerned about it, that's fine. RebeccaGreen (talk) 14:30, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

• ... that Ferrari driver Michael Schumacher won the 2001 Australian Grand Prix, which was overshadowed by a major accident that caused the death of a track marshal?

@MWright96:@Dee03:@Cwmhiraeth:

This hook is worded rather circuitously around the bolded subject. Could we have a hook that opens with the subject, ... that at the 2001 Australian Grand Prix? (It might mean leaving off the winning driver.) Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 17:02, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

• @Yoninah: I have no objection to your suggestion. MWright96 (talk) 17:39, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

• @MWright96: so it's okay to trim it to:
• ALT1: ... that the 2001 Australian Grand Prix was overshadowed by a major accident that caused the death of a track marshal? Yoninah (talk) 17:41, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
  • @Yoninah: Yes, looks like an improvement to me. MWright96 (talk) 18:37, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

• @MWright96: now that I'm looking at the article, I think you can write a better hook. Like:
• ALT2: ... that spectators at the 2001 Australian Grand Prix were not informed of the death of a track marshal as a result of a two-car collision on lap five? Yoninah (talk) 21:05, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

• @Yoninah: I agree with the wording of the alternative hook. MWright96 (talk) 21:26, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

• We need someone else to review ALT2. Yoninah (talk) 00:12, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

I would approve this, but ALT2 needs to be revised: the article mentions that the death was not made public during the race itself, but the hook specifically mentions spectators, which as far as I can tell the sentence in the relevant section does not mention.

csdnew

00:29, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

I'm returning this to

WP:DYKNA so it won't get promoted in the meantime. Yoninah (talk

) 13:27, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi, coming late to the discussion here. User:Gatoclass trimmed off half of this hook, but I feel he eliminated the quirky half and kept the non-quirky. As he is now offline, pinging Maile, Valereee, Casliber, Amakuru, Vanamonde and others for help here. I would write it:

... that Mill Creek, Washington, was not named after a mill or a creek? Yoninah (talk) 18:14, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

ok done Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 19:35, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! Yoninah (talk) 20:15, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

• ... that Lin Mei-hong attended the first classes held by the Lanyang Dance Troupe, founded in Taiwan by the Italian priest Gian Carlo Michelini?

@

There was a longish discussion already, for example to split the nom in two. It's tough to do justice to two people in one hook. I'm out for the day. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:16, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

The hook reads fine to me. Gatoclass (talk) 13:47, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

There probably is a better hook in there somewhere. I'll see if I can come up with something tomorrow. Gatoclass (talk) 16:12, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

Is the dance troupe notable enough for its own article? If so, it could be blue-linked, which would solve the problem. Otherwise, I would just delete the name as without a link it serves no purpose. Gatoclass (talk) 13:36, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

I was not successful in locating sources for the dance troupe itself. Chinese Wikipedia does not have articles on Lin, Michelini, or the troupe. Vycl1994 (talk) 20:39, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

• As the nomination is now in the next prep that will be next to go to Queue, I've pulled it from prep for now while discussion on a new hook continues. Discussion can continue at
  csdnew
  04:55, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

I have submitted Template:Did you know nominations/W. A. Fry with a special occasion request for November 11 / Remembrance Day special occasion request. I apologize for the short notice. Thank you for consideration. Flibirigit (talk) 20:58, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

 Done Ready for promotion to Prep 2. Yoninah (talk) 19:47, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

The fourth hook in

 Done. Thanks, Gatoclass, for taking care of this. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 21:49, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

This was marked for closure by

I'd be willing to do so in this case, it's clearly in good faith, and Symphony No. 1 (Kalinnikov) meets all of the dyk criteria apart from the nomination. Vasily Kalinnikov on the other hand doesn't meet any of them, as far as I can tell. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:17, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

I agree with Lee Vilenski. The symphony article is long enough and was nominated by the creator one month after they created it. The composer's article was created in 2004, and has only one minor edit by the nominator. (It also lacks inline citations.) So I'd be happy to IAR for Symphony No. 1 (Kalinnikov), but not for Vasily Kalinnikov, which can still be included in the hook as a link, but should be unbolded. RebeccaGreen (talk) 04:26, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

I also agree. New contributors to DYK should be encouraged rather than losing out to the small print. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:30, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

I agree --valereee (talk) 14:51, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Fine, I reviewed the article again and it should be good to go once the author (or someone else, really) has added a discography. I think it should be a requisite of any article about a piece of classical music to add a list of notable recordings. That symphony has been recorded by A-listers like

Svetlanov, and... Toscanini, so this shouldn't be hard. --Edelseider (talk

) 13:44, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

• September 21: Template:Did you know nominations/Alois Ickstadt
• October 3: Template:Did you know nominations/KEYZ
• October 3: Template:Did you know nominations/HMS Sceptre (P215)

Other old nominations:

• October 12: Template:Did you know nominations/Tujhe Kitna Chahne Lage
• October 15: Template:Did you know nominations/A Stanislaw Lem Reader
• October 19: Template:Did you know nominations/Concentration of land ownership
• October 21: Template:Did you know nominations/Gott ist gegenwärtig
• October 21: Template:Did you know nominations/Ignaz Saal
• October 21: Template:Did you know nominations/Chad Wolf
• October 23: Template:Did you know nominations/Elizabeth Richards Tilton
• October 23: Template:Did you know nominations/Leaskdale Manse
• October 25: Template:Did you know nominations/Gupta art
• October 25: Template:Did you know nominations/Heinz Guderian
• October 25: Template:Did you know nominations/Xie Gaohua
• October 26: Template:Did you know nominations/Sandyhills
• October 26: Template:Did you know nominations/List of international goals scored by Hassan Maatouk
• October 27: Template:Did you know nominations/Totentanz (Distler)
• October 27: Template:Did you know nominations/Polish-Bohemian War
• October 27: Template:Did you know nominations/Type 277 radar
• October 27: Template:Did you know nominations/WUOT
• October 28: Template:Did you know nominations/Cameron Chesterfield Alleyne

Please remember to cross off entries as you finish reviewing them (unless you're asking for further review), even if the review was not an approval. Many thanks! BlueMoonset (talk) 16:34, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

We're coming up on the 6 million mark. I'm wondering if DYK could do a special occasion set to run that day? Don't have any very good ideas on what that would be. Maybe a series of new good articles from some of the earliest articles, or DYKs for a selection of Wikipedia:First 100 pages or something like that? --valereee (talk) 18:43, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

6 million mark for whom? — Maile (talk) 20:24, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Maile66, enwiki...at the current rate, we should hit 6m within two months. Am I misreading something? --valereee (talk) 20:56, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

@

Signpost would have mentioned that little feat. — Maile (talk

) 22:12, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

@Valereee: Never fear - The Signpost is on the job - well sort of. I've been half-way tracking this for a month or two. ETA for 6,000,000 is January 4, 2020 by the back of my envelop, plus or minus a week. So The Signpost has to have something for the November 30 issue or we'll be missing the story. I did email the WMF yesterday to see if they are doing anything special, but no reply yet. Any suggestions for a story or who to ask? Please reply at Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom Smallbones_(smalltalk) 23:03, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

We could perhaps waive the usual rules to run the 6 millionth article - assuming it's not a mere stub - using the fact that it's the six millionth as the hook. Gatoclass (talk) 13:54, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

Gatoclass, if we slot it for the day after (... that Wikipedia's 6 millionth article appeared yesterday?) that would give us a chance to swarm it to improve, and also likely have some sources? --valereee (talk) 19:46, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

The last hook of Queue 4, nominated by Vanamonde93, features a song with lyrics by Robert Hunter, who died about six weeks ago. I think it would be a wonderful tribute if we made this a picture hook. This would require adding a photo to Dire Wolf (song); there are two Commons photos in the Hunter article (my preference would be the black-and-white one). Any thoughts? MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 08:02, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

@Mandarax: I have historically had poor luck with photos, so I often don't bother. I would love for a photo to be featured; adding one to the article is easy, and I'll do it in a minute or two. Incidentally, I wrote the article because in revamping Robert Hunter for RD, I found this song didn't have one. Vanamonde (Talk) 17:25, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Image added; it's this one. If an admin is willing to switch them that would be great, but as it's my own hook I'm not going to insist on it. Vanamonde (Talk) 17:36, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

I agree with this being moved up into the image slot. But the Michigan Firehouse Museum would need to be returned to the noms page for later promotion, and one of the quirky bio hooks from a prep set should be moved into the quirky slot in Queue 4. Yoninah (talk) 19:34, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

@Gatoclass, Maile66, and Valereee: I wonder if any of you would be willing to deal with this? Vanamonde (Talk) 23:56, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Done, but I trimmed the hook back a bit as I thought it was a tad long for the lead. Gatoclass (talk) 12:02, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

• ... that the Guinness World Record for the largest bowl of
  braised pork rice
  is 647 kg (1,426 lb)?
•  
  Braised pork rice – Ganbaruby (give) (tag) – View nom subpage

This record was set back in 2012, is it still extant? Gatoclass (talk) 11:30, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

• @Gatoclass: The Guinness World Records website keeps everything current. This says that it's still extant. SL93 (talk) 11:50, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

Fine, would you mind adding that source to the article please? Gatoclass (talk) 11:58, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

Added. SL93 (talk) 12:03, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

• ... that Brants's whistling rat (illustrated) seldom ventures more than 1 foot (30 cm) from one of the many entrances to its burrow?
•   Brants's whistling rat – Cwmhiraeth (give) (tag) – View nom subpage

The image used for this hook is of a creature called Euryotis Brantsii, but Brants' whistling rat is Parotomys Brantsii. How do I know these are the same species? There is nothing in the article to confirm it. Pinging the nominator, Cwmhiraeth. Gatoclass (talk) 11:04, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

I am in the process of adding the name to the article as a synonym. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:12, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

@Gatoclass: Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:21, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

• ... that Hungarian pianist Márta Kurtág and her husband performed together for 60 years, often from his collection entitled Játékok ('Games') on an upright piano?
•   Márta Kurtág – Gerda Arendt (give) (tag) – View nom subpage

I am unable to confirm that the couple played Games "often" together, or on an "upright piano". Pinging the nominator, Gerda Arendt. Gatoclass (talk) 11:47, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

While waiting for Gerda Arendt to be available, a comment: I am not sure if there is one single source that says that they played Games together often. However, after the sentence starting "They often played from his Játékok (Games), a collection of miniature pieces for two and four hands ..." there are places and times named: Rheingau 2004, 2008 Aldeburgh, Carnegie Hall in 2009, also at Paris, Aix-en-Provence, Washington DC, Zürich (all with no date), and London in 2013. Some of the recordings named are of them playing from this collection too. Is that

WP:SYNTH to say that it was "often"? (The upright piano is only mentioned in a quote from one review, so I don't think there is evidence that that was "often".) RebeccaGreen (talk

) 12:46, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Replace "often" by including if you have to. I wanted her mentioned on ITN, avoiding all DYK wording trouble, but see

User talk:Gerda Arendt/Archive 2019#Márta Kurtág. - I should pack for travelling. --Gerda Arendt (talk

) 13:06, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) RebeccaGreen, the source itself (google translation) says: They performed regularly in four hands with the program of transcriptions of Bach choirs and compositions by György Kurtág including his famous Játékok. I took that to mean that they played all kinds of Kurtag's compositions, including, sometimes, the Jatekok. But in re-reading the sentence, I think it could reasonably be interpreted to mean they played the Jatekok "often". So I'll accept that part of the hook as verified. There is still a question mark over the "upright piano" bit though. Gatoclass (talk) 13:15, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Gatoclass, Replacing "often" with "including", as Gerda Arendt suggests, would solve the question about the upright piano. RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:21, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

You could say specifically that the played the upright at Queen Elizabeth Hall in London, which is sourced, and show as one example how they played at the grandest locations humbly as in their living room, and of course the piece of their lives. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:24, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) But then the "upright piano" bit would look superfluous, what does it matter if they played it one time on an upright? Also, I'd prefer to keep "often" as it makes for a more compelling hook. I'm about to log off so we may have to resolve this one tomorrow. Gatoclass (talk) 13:29, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

I removed the "on an upright piano" clause as it served no purpose, but have altered "Hungarian pianist" to "Hungarian pianists" as it was unclear from the hook previously what instrument the husband was playing. I think the hook reads well now and I have consequently activated the bot for the set. Gatoclass (talk) 12:32, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your efforts! - Just for my education: the original hook had "collection Játékok (Games}", - which was changed to "collection entitled Játékok ('Games')", - I don't understand why we need "entitled", nor the funny quotes around italic "Games". "Games" is only a translation, not itself a title. - By saying "pianists" we neglect that he is much better known as a composer, and by dropping "upright piano", we loose that wonderful humblenes, but so be it. Don't miss the video. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:13, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

On my user page, I run the ALT "... that Hungarian pianist Márta Kurtág and her husband performed together for 60 years, often from his collection Játékok (Games) on an upright piano?" - I believe that the "upright" said clearly enough what he played. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:50, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Any answer to why we have to say "entitled" for the name of a collection, and why have to have italics for something which is not a title, just a translation, and why we have to have singe quotation marks for something that is separated by brackets anyway? Just would like to learn. --

I don't see 'entitled' used much in this sense, but when I was younger, it was used to mean 'named' or 'called' when referring to a book, record, composition, etc - something published or released with a title. Now, 'titled' is much more common in this sense. That doesn't really answer why you would say 'his collection called/named/titled/entitled Játékok ' rather than just 'his collection Játékok ': either is acceptable, in my opinion, just a matter of preference. RebeccaGreen (talk) 08:30, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, that helps! In hooks, I'd prefer brevity. Rebecca, could you use your language skills for Clara Schumann, another pianist for 60 years? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:42, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Is there a problem with the hook? It looks fine, and is approved ... or do you mean the article? If I have time, I can read it - but it is already a Good Article, so all should be fine with it? RebeccaGreen (talk) 09:03, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

The article ;) - Peer review open, heading for FAC, defiently fighting bias - but informal copy-editing also just fine, anybody. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:10, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

• ... that the Fall of the Berlin Wall (immediate aftermath pictured) was an accident?
•   Fall of the Berlin Wall – Onceinawhile (give) (tag) – View nom subpage

This hook makes it sound as if the wall fell of its own accord. Suggested tweak:

• ALT1: ... that the fall of the Berlin Wall on 9 November 1989 (immediate aftermath pictured) was the result of a "bureaucratic mistake"? Gatoclass (talk) 10:37, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Done --valereee (talk) 19:47, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

@Valereee:@Gatoclass: should "Fall" be capitalized in the bolded link? Yoninah (talk) 17:26, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

Yoninah, good catch! --valereee (talk) 17:36, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

• ... that despite being the wife of the
  Halyna Kouzmenko
  provided information to the Soviet secret services?
•  
  Halyna Kouzmenko – ProletariatetsBefrielseOrkester (give) (tag) – View nom subpage

- I can barely follow the narrative in this article, and can't see any place where it clearly states that this woman spied for the Soviets. Can somebody please point it out to me in the text? In the meantime, I have pulled it from the prep in question as I am about to promote that set. Gatoclass (talk) 10:37, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

@Gatoclass: "During her working-time in Paris, as a librarian in the Slavic Department of the Bibliothèque nationale de France, she collaborated with the secret services, transmitting information to the USSR." ProletariatetsBefrielseOrkester (talk) 10:53, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Okay, thank you for that ProletariatetsBefrielseOrkester. However, there are still several issues. Firstly, the hook is misleading, as it implies she was betraying her husband during the civil war, when her collaboration evidently only began much later, during the 30s. Secondly, the provided source only says she collaborated "according to some sources". Thirdly, the source itself looks like a blog that anybody can post an article to. It does say at the bottom First published in the journal Obshchina [Society], Confederation of Anarcho-Syndicalists, Moscow (1990), No. 43, p. 6-9. but even if it came from that journal, I have no way of knowing how reliable that journal was. Gatoclass (talk) 11:17, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

@Gatoclass: Oh. That's fair. I was just surprised that people recommended me to put the article here in the first place if it's this faulty. ProletariatetsBefrielseOrkester (talk) 11:47, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Well I guess they didn't take a close look at the sources. It looks like you wasted your time with this nomination, I'm sorry your experience with DYK wasn't more positive this time around, but hopefully you have learned something useful for another time. Gatoclass (talk) 11:57, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

I have been reading the article and sources, and doing a bit of editing and adding more citations. Is there a possibility that this could be reopened if another well-sourced hook can be found? She's an interesting woman, so I don't mind doing a bit of work on the article regardless. RebeccaGreen (talk) 09:13, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

I'm always in favour of nomination rescue, so by all means go ahead, let us know when you're done. Gatoclass (talk) 09:18, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

I have reserved the image slot for the Gara Medouar hook and image in Template:Did you know nominations/Gara Medouar. As both Cwmhiraeth and I worked on this hook, we need someone else to promote it. Note: After promotion, please leave the template open so the second hook can be promoted afterwards. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 11:11, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

 Done. Gatoclass (talk) 12:05, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Can we move the hook for Special Group in QUEUE 5 up to the second position? I think this DYK has a huge potential since most of my Indian friends have been quite intrigued by the article. (BTW India has the second largest English speaking population, so my request is justified)— Vaibhavafro ^💬 10:04, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

I already moved this up to third spot in response to your request yesterday. To move it up further would mean unbalancing the set with two non-biography hooks adjacent at the top of the set and two biography hooks adjacent lower down. Gatoclass (talk) 09:28, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

We have a policy page (can't locate it now) that says that hook placement has nothing to do with reader response. A hook can be down in the second-to-last spot and still be highly popular. The key factor is the hookiness of the hook. Yoninah (talk) 11:04, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Ok, Understood. Thanks for finally explaining.— Vaibhavafro ^💬 11:50, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a

edit protected}} template. Izno (talk

) 15:33, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

I note that this hook "... that the UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson said he would "rather be dead in a ditch" than seek an extension to Brexit under the terms of the European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 2) Act 2019? " is in Q6.

Parliament has been dissolved and the general election campaign in the United Kingdom has started and I wonder if this contravenes the rule against promoting political causes? Cowlibob (talk) 12:20, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

It doesn't read to me as promoting any particular political cause. Gatoclass (talk) 12:39, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

I think it certainly does because it implies that he lied about leaving the EU when the facts are more complicated than that (Parliament tied his hands, pressure from MPs etc.) which a lay-reader who isn't too versed in politics may misread it as that. It should not run until after 12 December @

WP:DYKNOT to run it because it goes along with the narrative of opposing parties. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk

) 08:42, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

That's not the way I read it, at all. To me, it just reads as a statement of strong determination to oppose a Brexit extension, albeit stated in a colourful and amusing manner. It's absurd to suggest this implies "lying" when anybody with the remotest acquaintance with the topic knows that Johnson is the hardest of hardline Brexiteers. For people who've been living on a desert island for the last three years and have never heard of Brexit, the hook will indicate nothing whatever, so I see this hook as both neutral and amusing. Gatoclass (talk) 09:15, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

I agree with Gatoclass. The hook looks like it's talking about his reaction to a specific motion, not about the whole issue of Brexit. Yoninah (talk) 10:45, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Personally I would have found the ditch scenario both colourful and amusing. But I fear for our Brenda-from-Bristol readers, who may fall asleep before they get to the end of the hook. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:51, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

I agree with Gatoclass; I think we should run this straight away as it has already been hanging around for weeks, after all, it is about an act of parliament and nothing to do with an election. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:36, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

I think it's fine as well. To save Brenda's issues, could it be phrased as "... that the UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson said he would "rather be dead in a ditch" than seek an extension to Brexit?"

I suspect Branda is still out there with her spade. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:20, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Since the election in the UK is December 12, the hook would need to run more than 30 days before then to be eligible, or no later than November 11. Queue 6 is set to run on November 9 at 00:00 UTC, which is outside that window, so it should be all right from that perspective. This doesn't strike me as a situation that would require an even more restrictive holdback than is specified (see

here for the wording). BlueMoonset (talk

) 17:51, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

I don't think it reads as Johnson lying at all. He really, really didn't want it and used a colorful turn of phrase to describe how much he didn't want it. --valereee (talk) 23:43, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello. I've noticed that there are many dates in the Count of DYK Hooks that are empty, but still showing up in this list. For example: from June 29 - October 4 there are 14 dates listed in this count. However, there are actually only 4 dates with outstanding nominations (sept 3, sept 21, sept 27, oct 3). The other 10 are not in the older nominations section but still show up in the count. I was wondering why this was the case. Thanks! --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:53, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

If you are referring to the table at Template talk:Did you know, it has one column for #of Hooks and one for #Verified. If there are no unverified hooks for that date, there will be no corresponding section. The same table appears in Template talk:Did you know/Approved where you will see the verified hooks. The number of unverified hooks that you would expect to see at Template talk:Did you know isn't listed, but you can calculate it easily by subtracting #Verifed from the total. MB 02:21, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

@MB: Yes. But if all of the hooks are verified from that date, and no longer have a section related to it, why do these dates still show up in the table? I would think the dates would have been removed by a bot or something. E.g., June 29, September 9, September 20 etc. Or: have one table for unverified in the main section and another table for verified in the approved section. This would prevent people like me clicking on a date that doesn't exist in the main template but still there in the verified section. Since the approved nominations are moved to the verified section, I would think the dates would be too if they are all cleaned out. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:05, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

• ... that American Goethe scholar Thomas P. Saine used the "GOETHE 1" and "GOETHE" vanity plates on his car and motorcycle, respectively?
•   Thomas P. Saine – Kusma (give) (tag) – View nom subpage

- I'm afraid I don't find this hook to be quirky or even interesting - lots of people have vanity plates which reference their field of work. Would it bother anybody if I substituted this for ALT0 from the nomination page? Gatoclass (talk) 10:58, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Gatoclass, not a problem for me. I did find it amusing that a university professor collected that many vanity plates (more than those mentioned), which look more like fandom than the SERIOUS BIZNIS expected from a professor of German literature to me. But I couldn't turn that amusement into a more enticing hook than what I proposed. ALT0 (or a mix) might be better. —Kusma (t·c) 11:52, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you Kusma, I have substituted ALT0. Gatoclass (talk) 12:45, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

@Gatoclass: The bolded article has a space instead of a hyphen in GOETHE-1 (this space should also be nbsp). — RAVENPVFF · talk · 15:33, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

The source uses hyphens, which is why I altered the hook. Whether US vanity plates use hyphens or not I don't know, but when in doubt I will follow the source. Gatoclass (talk) 15:42, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

There is a source with hyphen and a source without hyphen, unfortunately. There is a picture of the motorcycle plate here:https://webfiles.uci.edu/tpsaine/www/index.htm

which has no hyphen, so I assume there is no hyphen. But it doesn't matter too much to me. —Kusma (t·c) 16:28, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

According to the California DMV site, the only characters allowed are letters, digits one through nine, spaces, and half spaces (plus heart, hand, star, or "+" symbol for "Kids"-themed plates). So it should be  . Also, can we change "registration plate"? In the US, I've never heard that term used. It should be "license plate", "vanity plate", or the term used by CA DMV: "personalized plate". MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 19:54, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

@Mandarax: You are probably correct that the plate has a space, not a hyphen, and I think displaying it with a hyphen is a typographical choice, not a claim about what the real plate looks like. But this is not just true for the source, it is also true for the article and ultimately I find either choice to be defensible. I originally had used "license plate", but Cwmhiraeth changed that here, which seems to me to internationalise the hook a bit. Gatoclass, do you think there should be any further tweaks in response to these comments? —Kusma (t·c) 07:48, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

I have removed the hyphen and replaced it with &nbsp per Ravenpuff and Mandarax. Gatoclass (talk) 11:36, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

• ... that Helmuth Froschauer, a former member of the Vienna Boys' Choir, later conducted the ensemble on 22 international tours?
•   Helmuth Froschauer – Gerda Arendt (give) (tag) – View nom subpage

  The sources, so far as I can tell, state that he was a kapellmeister of the choir, but I can't see any place where it says he was a "member" of it, ie one of the singers. Gatoclass (talk) 12:50, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

  What should it say? First sentence: "Born in Vienna, Froschauer received his musical education with the Vienna Boys' Choir". The choir's obit has "war Sängerknabe" literalle "was singing boy", referring to the real name Wiener Sängerknaben which I think is internationally known, and has a more Viennese + historic flavour. That was what the approved hook had, btw. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:21, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I see that now, google translated that as "choirmaster" which was the source of my confusion. No problems then :) Gatoclass (talk) 13:50, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. The queue still has boys's choir instead of the Viennese flavour Sängerknaben. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:24, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Yes, Sängerknaben is flavorful, but it means nothing to English speakers. Yoninah (talk) 22:21, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

The Wiener Sängerknaben are world famous under that name (look at the record covers), such as The Beatles won't get translated in Germany, but I have no time to argue. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:29, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

• ... that the assassin bug Rhynocoris marginatus injects a mixture of venomous saliva and toxins into its prey to paralyse it?
•   Rhynocoris marginatus – Cwmhiraeth (give) (tag) – View nom subpage

Again, so far as I can tell, the source mentions only venomous saliva, no other source of toxins. Gatoclass (talk) 12:50, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

@Gatoclass: That was in a paragraph added by another editor. Having looked at the source, I have rephrased the article and suggest you change the hook to

• ... that the assassin bug Rhynocoris marginatus injects toxic venomous saliva into its prey to paralyse it?

 Done, thanks. Gatoclass (talk) 14:56, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

This may be an ENGVAR issue, but I find the use of the word 'lasting' a bit strange in this hook, especially as the station didn't last:

• ... that the first incarnation of radio station WYFI was described as lasting "on faith and LPs" and ended in an "Edsel-like burn" within less than a year?

I see that the words in the source are "WYFI, the FM-only outlet that lasted for many months on faith and LPs", which for me is fine, as it indicates a period of time. Without a time, I would find it more natural to say 'ran' or 'survived' on faith and LPs. I don't know if this is an issue for anyone else? RebeccaGreen (talk) 08:52, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Changed to "running" - thank you Rebecca. Gatoclass (talk) 11:13, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Joseph Anthony Dwyer

• ... that
  Joe Dwyer thought general contracting
  was a "mug's game" and converted the firm into a housebuilder?

Dumelow Cwmhiraeth Yoninah

The quote is us quoting the writer of the source material, who writes Dwyer 'had reached the conclusion that contracting was a mug's game' but doesn't attribute that term to Dwyer. Does this hook feel like it might be taken as indicating those were Dwyer's words? --valereee (talk) 16:26, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

We often put quotes around words taken from a source. In this case, since there are only two words (rather than a whole sentence), I don't think anyone is going to read too deeply into whether Dwyer said it or not. Yoninah (talk) 16:45, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! --valereee (talk) 16:56, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/2001 Australian Grand Prix

• ... that the death of a track marshal as a result of a two-car collision on lap five of the 2001 Australian Grand Prix was not announced until after the race ended?

MWright96 Narutolovehinata5

I know this has been discussed at the nom and here on talk, but I'm still having trouble finding the sentence in the article with citation that supports this hook sentence? --valereee (talk) 16:36, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

• @Valereee: The information and citations for the hook can be located in the first paragraph of the sub-section "Death of Graham Beveridge and inquiries", specifally the sentence " At the request of his family, his death was not made public during the event,[75] and Michael Schumacher announced Beveridge had died at the post-race press conference." MWright96 (talk) 18:18, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

  MWright96, thank you! --valereee (talk) 12:27, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

The previous list was archived nearly two days ago, so here is an updated list with all 31 non-current nominations that need reviewing, which covers those through November 7. Right now we have a total of 291 nominations, of which 189 have been approved. Thanks to everyone who reviews these, especially those from September and the first half of October.

Over one month old:

• September 21: Template:Did you know nominations/Alois Ickstadt
• October 3: Template:Did you know nominations/KEYZ
• October 3: Template:Did you know nominations/HMS Sceptre (P215)
• October 12: Template:Did you know nominations/Tujhe Kitna Chahne Lage
• October 14: Template:Did you know nominations/Prehistoric Sites and Decorated Caves of the Vézère Valley
• October 15: Template:Did you know nominations/A Stanislaw Lem Reader

Other old nominations:

• October 19: Template:Did you know nominations/Concentration of land ownership
• October 21: Template:Did you know nominations/Gott ist gegenwärtig
• October 22: Template:Did you know nominations/Richard Nixon's visit to the Lincoln Memorial
• October 26: Template:Did you know nominations/Sandyhills
• October 27: Template:Did you know nominations/WUOT
• October 29: Template:Did you know nominations/En blanc et noir
• October 30: Template:Did you know nominations/Nocturnes (Debussy)
• October 31: Template:Did you know nominations/Melody (Spanish singer)
• October 31: Template:Did you know nominations/Wilhelm Keitel
• October 31: Template:Did you know nominations/Coelopa pilipes
• November 1: Template:Did you know nominations/Anna Kessel
• November 2: Template:Did you know nominations/Dixit Maria
• November 2: Template:Did you know nominations/Carla Herrero
• November 3: Template:Did you know nominations/Irma Beilke
• November 3: Template:Did you know nominations/Rockstar San Diego
• November 4: Template:Did you know nominations/Real Monasterio de Santo Tomás
• November 4: Template:Did you know nominations/Hussein Mohammed
• November 4: Template:Did you know nominations/KNWB
• November 5: Template:Did you know nominations/Depukhu
• November 6: Template:Did you know nominations/Ratnagiri, Odisha
• November 6: Template:Did you know nominations/Lu Shijia
• November 6: Template:Did you know nominations/Famine Inquiry Commission
• November 7: Template:Did you know nominations/Kurt Meyer
• November 7: Template:Did you know nominations/Iris lortetii
• November 7: Template:Did you know nominations/The History of Doing
• November 7: Template:Did you know nominations/Rags Parkland Sings the Songs of the Future

Please remember to cross off entries as you finish reviewing them (unless you're asking for further review), even if the review was not an approval. Many thanks! BlueMoonset (talk) 00:16, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

I would like to invite more editors to review a past DYK nomination that has been rejected as it appeals to precise understanding of some wiki guidelines. In Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Rue_Sainte-Catherine_Roundup, user Gatoclass rejected DYK nomination of an article on a Nazi roundup during WW2, on the basis that the article contains, among other things, a list of the names of the victims sent to the exterminations camps. I respectfully disagree with this opinion, for reasons that I exposed as well. I would like to invite other editors to give their opinion on the matter, encouraging everyone to remain courteous (as has been the case so far)!Iry-Hor (talk) 08:31, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

WP:NOTMEMORIAL, is that the article includes a complete list of all 84 victims, including their names, ages, date and place of birth, what concentration camp they were taken to, and even the number of the convoy which took them there. The problem is that none of this information is of any interest to the overwhelming majority of readers, because it adds virtually nothing to their understanding of the topic. I did leave the door open for you to include some information about the victims, some sort of summary perhaps, with possibly some comments about one or two of the more notable victims, but a mere list of names, ages, birth dates etc., especially one this long, is IMO more likely to bewilder than engage the reader, prompting them to ask "why do I need to know all these details?" Gatoclass (talk

) 10:54, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

It seems like Gatoclass is the only one promoting preps to queues, which happens only one at a time, once a day. Your prep builders have nothing to do most of the time. Pinging Valereee, Maile, Casliber, Vanamonde, Amakuru. If everyone is busy, we must figure out a workable system to keep prep sets open. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 13:31, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

P.S. With everything being promoted so slowly, the approved nominations have built up to nearly 200. Is it time to run a few twice-daily sets? Yoninah (talk) 13:33, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Been busy. Thanks for the heads-up Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:37, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

PS: @Yoninah: I trust your judgement on this - if you reckon we need to go to twice daily for a bit, then that's fine by me Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:44, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

I actually promoted two this week -- today's, and yesterday's. --valereee (talk) 13:39, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I've been trying to promote at least one prep per day to the queue Yoninah. Unfortunately, over the last few days, I was distracted by having to make a considerable number of additions etc. to one particular nomination, which cost me a couple of prep promotions (thank you Valereee for stepping up while I was otherwise engaged), and then yesterday I lost my supposedly superior-grade internet connection again for several hours and was unable to get anything done - so basically that was at least three prep sets I missed out promoting in the last three days. I like to stay a few days ahead in the queue now because it gives me a lot more time to make fixes or consult with others about possible fixes - if there's nothing in the slot, it's a mad rush to get a prep ready in time. Getting a few queues ahead also gives people at WP:ERRORS etc. more time to suggest improvements. But yes, if other admins can drop in now and again to promote a set, it makes things that much easier. Gatoclass (talk) 13:48, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Gatoclass, I like us to stay ahead, too. Ideally I prefer to promote a prep to queue when I'll have at least two days to check it and ask questions at talk, as I do my checking after I've promoted to queue, so the perfect situation for me is to have at least two queues already filled, then I fill the next and am not feeling harried. I can do one per week, but more than that and I think I'm not as productive. I'll go ahead and fill one now, but honestly that's the third one this week and I start to miss things and get snippy at this point. --valereee (talk) 13:57, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

I was pretty pissed at losing my net connection yesterday Valereee, because I'd already lost a couple of days trying to improve that nomination, and I've been on quite a roll lately, having gotten back into the swing of it and actually kind of enjoying it (although it must be said that I think I've probably had an unusually good run with a lack of problematic nominations lately). But I find if I do a set as soon as I log on, I'm doing it when I'm still fresh, and it gives me plenty of opportunity to go and do some other things afterwards - and then sometimes, I feel like coming back a little later and doing a second set. But nonetheless, I can't be expected to turn up every single day (and the spectre of sudden burnout always looms). So even if somebody else could manage to do two or three sets a week, it makes things that much easier. Gatoclass (talk) 14:12, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Burnout worries me a lot. I'd rather see each of us doing no more than we actually enjoy doing. To me it feels like we need ~10 regular admins here, each ready to do a set a week when they can. That would mean we had extra capacity for when various people weren't available. What we have is about six, which means someone has to do at least two a week, even weeks when everyone is available. When any of us is unavailable, it means most of us doing two a week, and that's more than I want to commit to every week. I don't mind doing a third this week, but we need to figure this out somehow. --valereee (talk) 14:56, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Thinking out loud... I'd be willing to claim a number, then ask for help when I know I'm not going to get to "my" queue? That would put me at doing a queue every six days, which is a workload I'd be happy to commit to. Do you think that would be helpful? --valereee (talk) 15:03, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

• Real-life happened to this administrator, and is going to continue to happen for a little while...I'll do my best to do a set or two a week going forward, but there might be gaps again soon. Vanamonde (Talk) 16:14, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Wales national football team home stadium

• ... that the Racecourse Ground, which has hosted more Wales home international matches than any other stadium, is the oldest stadium in the world still hosting international football fixtures?

Kosack Narutolovehinata5 Yoninah

The sentences in the article read As a result, the Racecourse Ground is officially recognised as the oldest football ground in the world that continues to host international matches by Guinness World Records.[5] The next ground to host an international that is still in use is Hampden Park in Glasgow, which did not host its first match for another 27 years,[6] and has hosted more Welsh international matches than any other ground. which to me sounds like Hampden Park in Glasgow has hosted more Welsh international matches? --valereee (talk) 19:03, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

The sentence fragment was left over from some copyediting. I've moved it now to the correct sentence, thanks. Kosack (talk) 19:28, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Kosack, thanks, I thought it was likely something like that! --valereee (talk) 21:38, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Hevrin Khalaf

• ... that Kurdish civil engineer and politician
  Hevrin Khalaf, who worked for tolerance among Christians, Arabs, and Kurds, was killed in the 2019 Turkish offensive into Syria
  ?

I'm thinking this one might benefit from some additional eyes for neutrality. There've been a few IPs making partisanish-feeling changes, not what I'd call edit warring, but it could be a concern once the thing hits the main page. --valereee (talk) 21:57, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

... is the birthday of Benjamin Britten, and the day of the patron saint of music, St Cecilia. I suggested an article for the occasion, but it appeared today already. So, I wrote a new one and hope for speedy processing of Template:Did you know nominations/A Hymn of St Columba ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:28, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

I hate to compete with an editor I consider a friend but I was hoping for the photo spot for Template:Did you know nominations/Fred Rogers. The video is IMO amazing and would make a great top spot. This would be to coincide with the release of the much anticipated biopic about Rogers. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 06:51, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

I have reviewed Gerda's article, and there is no reason why both can't appear on that day. Which one has the image slot would be up to the promoter. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:17, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for the review! Britten's image is not the greatest, but in this case - finally - matching the composition time. I can try again next year, - War Requiem would also match the time, but making that GA would be quite a challenge. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:40, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: thank YOU, actually. I'm a neutral party on this, but the article on Britten is not specifically about him, but one of his works. While the Fred Rogers article is about him, has the nifty video, and is about a man who was a role model and idol to multiple generations in America. Enough so, that President George W. Bush gave him the Presidential Medal of Freedom for his wholesome legacy. — Maile (talk) 17:41, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

@

Coffeeandcrumbs: The Fred Rogers requested Nov 22 nomination has now been approved. Hopefully, as a lead hook and the Video, to coincide with the release of the much anticipated biopic about Rogers. Is it now possible? Given the time zone of the US, would it be better in Prep 1 or Prep 2? — Maile (talk

) 17:20, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

If you want both hooks to be in the same set, I would personally give the image slot to the Fred Rogers article. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:35, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Sure, only there's already a different image in the set. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:09, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Prep 1 will have plenty of run time in daytime hours in the U.S. on November 22. I'll make the necessary adjustments. Yoninah (talk) 20:23, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks to all for their help on this, and to Gerda for her graciousness on this. — Maile (talk) 21:43, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Indeed, thanks to all. The video makes me happy/laugh/cry every time I watch it and a good cry may be what the world (at least the US) needs right now. Cheers. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 21:49, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

I had the same reaction to watching that video. — Maile (talk) 22:01, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

"It's great to be able to stop, when you've planned a thing that's wrong." OMG --valereee (talk) 22:11, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Poking around a bit I found this (linked from this page) and I have absolutely no idea what it's talking about. It's been tagged for being out of date for over three years, has zero watchers, and has had zero views in 2019. Should we update or mark it as historical or something? Pinging Pppery who last edited it and Shubinator whose bot it once described. ----valereee (talk) 13:40, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Prep 1 has * ... that after her husband committed suicide, Li Yin supported herself by selling her paintings (example pictured)?

Some people don't support the phrase "committed suicide" ("committed a crime ..."), can we phrase that more neutral? Why say at all how he died? Sensation? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:46, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Why not use ALT1 hook from the nomination? — Maile (talk) 14:10, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

ALT1:... that Li Yin's paintings (example pictured) were so sought after that forty imitators turned out fakes in her area?

@Zanhe: perhaps you can clarify something else about the article wording that is confusing to me. Artist Ge Zhengqi, who later committed suicide, "took her as his concubine." In the western world, concubine is not a wife. Later it refers to Ge and Li being together when they ran into a military conflict, Li "stayed to search for her husband" The paragraph indicates she was already with Ge, so who was the husband? I think the article needs a little re-write to clear up that confusion. — Maile (talk) 14:10, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt and Maile66: Sorry for the late response, I was away last week. In imperial China, concubines ranked lower in status than the main wife, but were legally recognized as secondary wives; they were not the unmarried mistresses of the western world. See this CUHK article: "We know about her life mainly from a preface to a collection of her poetry written by her husband, Ge Zhengqi ..." And I don't really care whether ALT0 or ALT1 is used, or whether her husband "committed suicide" or "killed himself". "Committed suicide" sounds perfectly neutral to me, but I understand others may feel differently. -Zanhe (talk) 07:57, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

• "Committed suicide" is a common idiom in English. But I have replaced the hook with the alt since that is also good. Yoninah (talk) 18:42, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello all, I am wondering whether Susie Owens is still eligible for DYK. I expanded it 5x on the 10th (seven and a half days ago) while it was being considered for deletion, and the AfD closed as keep earlier today. Cheers, gnu57 19:31, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

I am ready to be generous, but next time please just write the nomination even if at AfD. Please ping me when done. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:05, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: Please see Template:Did you know nominations/Susie Owens. Thank you, gnu57 22:30, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

I looked now, and wonder why - while it was 295 chars when you started expanding, and has 2111 chars now - it's still marked by the DYK check as ot a 5*-expandsion. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:11, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

gnu57, thanks for nominating. It was eligible all day on the 17th—no need for Gerda Arendt's generosity, though it's great that she's reviewing it. For DYK, the seven days goes through the end of the seventh day after creation/expansion begins, regardless of time of day. Articles at AfD should always be nominated for DYK anyway before the seven days are up; consideration of the nomination will be postponed until after the AfD closes. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:59, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification, - can you also help me understand the expansion factor thing? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:01, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

It looks like the counter is comparing the current size of the article with a revision from 2008 [4]. (I have no idea why.) The character count tool says that that version has 425 characters of readable prose (ignoring the list of magazine titles), but this is an error: it's also including the broken template at the foot of the page. Cheers, gnu57 18:18, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Gerda Arendt, as gnu57 notes, DYKcheck can go back quite a ways to see an older version with more characters, even though that may have been a problematic addition that was later reverted. (Or, in this case, weird code that's counted by DYKcheck; the first line in the diff shown by gnu57 is 72 characters all by itself.) In this case, the article version immediately prior to expansion, the 13 January 2019 version, has 295 prose characters, and that's the basis for the 5x expansion. (The article has been at 295 characters since 2015, but even seven months at that level is way more than a long enough time period to qualify as the starting length for expansion.) BlueMoonset (talk) 18:44, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Right now we have 203 approved nominations out of 304 proposed. WikiCup is coming up in 6 weeks. Are we ready for a short run of 2 sets per day? Yoninah (talk) 21:13, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Heading into a busy time for many...doubling admin requirements when we're already having a hard time meeting them now, can we do it? --valereee (talk) 23:14, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

We may have many approved nominations, but we don't have many administrators. Those we do have are struggling to cover one set per day. I think that going to two sets per day would be a really good way to burn out the admins. If we do switch to two sets, I think it should be the admins who move preps to queues who decide among themselves when they can manage it. As Valereee mentioned, it's a busy time of year for many, so from now till the end of the year is probably not the right time. RebeccaGreen (talk) 07:25, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Up to Christmas maybe or go straight into it in the New Year when the Cup starts up again? The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 08:30, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Yoninah, we could be ready if we had more sets filled before we start: at least ten queues and preps filled, and at least five of them queues (and better all six queues): I would expect we could run for at least a week with that kind of buffer, which would get 56 extra nominations run on the main page, and perhaps more. (As I type this, we have four queues filled and the equivalent of three preps.) If we could get some buy in from the admins, it's certainly possible, but if they're particularly busy, then we'll be doing well to hold our own. December has not been a problem in the past—last year, we ran two a day for three weeks in December through Christmas Day. We should probably ping the rest of the admin regulars to see whether they think they'll have the time over the next little while (I realize that in the U.S., Thanksgiving is coming up): Gatoclass, Cas Liber, Maile, Amakuru, and Vanamonde. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:31, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

A Hymn of St Columba

@Gerda Arendt and Cwmhiraeth: For A Hymn of St Columba, I was not able to verify the hook on page 8. Is it in another source? Kees08 (Talk) 02:18, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Yes, sorry. The voyage is in the source given, but the years elapsed are only in the other which I added, "Catalogue". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:15, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

A little confused sorry, which source verifies that he wanted it sung with fire? Kees08 (Talk) 16:22, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

As in the article, #3, Spicer. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:19, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt and Cwmhiraeth: The only words with fire in any of the citations say The piece is all about the fire in Columba's belly for his missionary task, which I do not think verifies the 'with fire' part of the hook ...that Benjamin Britten (pictured), who composed A Hymn of St Columba for the 1,400th anniversary of Saint Columba's voyage, wanted it sung "with fire"? Sorry for being unclear, does that make more sense now? I do not know where the 'sung "with fire"' is coming from, I did not see it in any of the sources. Kees08 (Talk) 05:51, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Page 8 of the Spicer source states "In performance it is Britten’s direction that it should be sung 'with fire' which should underpin the interpretation." Alternatively, you could substitute the other approved hook. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:00, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

I came to say the very same thing, thank you Cwmhiraeth. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:47, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

It's actually page 9 of the Spicer, first line of the first full paragraph on that page. ----valereee (talk) 15:32, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Let's chalk this one up to my incompetence. We are all good here, thanks! Kees08 (Talk) 15:57, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Syritta pipiens

@Alicelixuan and Cwmhiraeth: For Syritta pipiens, could we change the hook from ... that the hoverfly Syritta pipiens makes sharp darts in flight to facilitate mating? to ... that the hoverfly Syritta pipiens makes sharp movements in flight to facilitate mating? I imagined it made projectiles until I opened the article. Kees08 (Talk) 02:18, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

That's a good point (pun intended), I suggest you make the change. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:10, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Okay! If the word dart is preferred then ... that the hoverfly Syritta darts sharply in flight to facilitate mating? would work, but for now I have changed it to movement as per above. I am fine with either. Nice pun :). Kees08 (Talk) 16:21, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Here's an interesting fact that isn't in the article (which should be included there and arguably in the hook): Tracking is probably sexual in function and often culminates in a rapid dart towards the leading fly, after the latter has settled. During these “rapes” the male accelerates continuously at about 500 cm · s−2, turning just before it lands so that it is in the copulatory position. The male rapes flies of either sex indicating that successful copulation involves more trial and error than recognition. Source. Gatoclass (talk) 10:41, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Mustafa Güzelgöz

@CeeGee and Morgan695: For Mustafa Güzelgöz, are either of you native (or fluent) Turkish speakers? Google translate gives the name Donkey Librarian, which seems more likely than Librarian with Donkey, especially since they were mocking him. I wanted to verify that the hook is a valid translation, since the sources are in Turkish. Kees08 (Talk) 02:18, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

I'm not, I just AGF'd on the name given by the nominator. Morgan695 (talk) 03:43, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

That seems a good change to me too, but CeeGee should be able to help you. I'm pleased to see you taking an interest in DYK! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:10, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

• Please let me explain. "Eşek" means "donkey", and "eşekli" means "with donkey". This is the usual suffix in Turkish language. What can I do if the Google translator is not able to interpret correctly. I would say it is a helpful tool but not precise always. CeeGee 10:00, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

• @CeeGee: maybe the phrasing could be smoothed out as "Librarian with a Donkey"? Yoninah (talk) 13:12, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
• I am perfectly happy with how it is, I wanted to verify that at least one person in the chain could make a proper translation. Since you can, I easily trust you over Google Translate, so how it is should be fine. I just presumed since they were mocking him, Donkey Librarian sounded more insulting so it could be the proper translation. All is well though, I will leave it how it is unless CeeGee thinks "Librarian with Donkey" is more appropriate. Kees08 (Talk) 16:19, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Eugen Ernst

• ... that Eugen Ernst's (pictured) attempt to take his office as Berlin's president of the police prompted the Spartacist uprising of 1919?
•   Eugen Ernst – HerkusMonte (give) (tag) – View nom subpage

The links in the photo page for the lead image in this set don't go to a photo of Eugen Ernst, they go to a photograph of a photographer. And when I do a search of the site, there appears to be no image of Eugen Ernst on it. Pinging the nominator HerkusMonte and reviewer Gerda Arendt. Gatoclass (talk) 12:24, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't understand. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:05, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Gerda, I'm talking about the source for the image. So far as I can tell, it is this page (which I got from the "Accession number" and "image file name" fields of the Wikicommons image page). But that's a photograph of a different guy, named Abraham Pisarek. Gatoclass (talk) 13:11, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

I guess there's a mistake in the number, because that is also a completely different-looking person. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:13, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

If there's doubt, why not run it without an image? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:18, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

I can do that of course Gerda, I just thought I should give the nominator a chance to respond before doing so. Maybe I will move it to another set for now and find another lead hook for this set. Gatoclass (talk) 13:23, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, both good. Perhaps HerkusMonte knows more. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:00, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Maybe another photo of Ernst, File:Bundesarchiv Bild 183-16469-0001, Eugen Ernst.jpg (source from German Federal Archives), could be used in the article and for DYK? MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 19:24, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for the offer, but the other is better, and it's only problem seems to be some mistake in the attribution. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:07, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't get it. The source for the picture is the Deutsche Fotothek, which donated approximately 250,000 images to commons in 2009 (Commons:Deutsche Fotothek). They linked the photographer (Abraham Pisarek), why is this relevant? HerkusMonte (talk) 07:50, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Gatoclass please check the terms and conditions of the Deutsche Fotothek: The low resolution digital copies made available by the Deutsche Fotothek for Wikimedia Commons are excluded from these provisions. These are subject to the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike 3.0 Germany license model. HerkusMonte (talk) 08:55, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

HerkusMonte, you are missing the point. We can't use the image because it doesn't have a link, so we don't know it actually came from the Deutsche Fotothek. I did do a search of Deutsche Fotothek to try and find the image but it doesn't appear to be there. If you can find it and add a link to it to the image page, then we could run it. Gatoclass (talk) 13:39, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Gatoclass The image was uploaded by FotothekBot in 2009 as part of the Fotothek project. The licensing is absolutely clear ("This file was provided to Wikimedia Commons by the Deutsche Fotothek of the Saxon State Library / State and University Library Dresden (SLUB) as part of a cooperation project. The Deutsche Fotothek guarantees an authentic representation only by using copies of the original images as provided by the Digital Image Archive.") We do know it came directly and straight from the Deutsche Fotothek, whether they published the same image at their own page or not is completely irrelevant. HerkusMonte (talk) 14:07, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Gatoclass I agree with @HerkusMonte:. We have all the documentation and licensing we require on Commons about this image that was uploaded a decade ago. There could be any number of reasons why Deutsche Fotothek doesn't currently have the image on their website. The collection was in a library, and who knows what happened to that original collection in the last decade. Maybe the collection is still there, but their online site can't access it. Maybe their system crashed, and they lost a bunch of info. The "why" it isn't on their website is not under our control, or knowledge, and we should not be concerned. They gave us the license to use it, so it should be good. — Maile (talk) 14:56, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I agree Maile, I think we can safely assume that it did indeed come from the stated source given that it was uploaded by the bot (a detail I missed). So I think it's fine to run with the original image. Gatoclass (talk) 15:12, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

@Yoninah: So we can now move his non-picture hook from a Prep 4 non-picture slot to a lead slot somewhere, if you would, please. I think you originally promoted him to Prep 5.— Maile (talk) 15:29, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

OK, thanks. Yoninah (talk) 15:45, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

I moved it to Prep 6. I think the image needs to be cropped to just a head and shoulders shot. Pinging @

David Levy:. Yoninah (talk

) 15:58, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

I see that Maile cropped the image. Is that a good idea? I liked the original image, showing him with his hand on the book, it's still perfectly viewable at the given resolution and IMO is more compelling than just the face. Anybody else with an opinion? Gatoclass (talk) 12:59, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

I thought the hand looked out of proportion because it's closer to the camera. But the crop is too tight for my taste. Could the image be made rectangular rather than square, with more air over his head and more of his tie showing? Yoninah (talk) 16:08, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

• ... that both Rye railway station (pictured) and its signal box are Grade II listed?

@

I've never been in England, but I found it interesting that the signal box is also listed. Yoninah (talk) 12:12, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

I'll have a quick look in my railway books tonight to see if I can find anything hooky that hasn't been covered in the article already. Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 12:19, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

I think the hook's fine, listed buildings appeal to middle-aged tourists from Nebraska who say "Wow, look at all your cool English things!" even when they're travelling on the M4 past Magor Services thinking "Is Gwasanaethau a real word, Brad?" I have linked "Grade II listed" to listed building so those unfamiliar with the concept can read our article on the subject. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:26, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

I agree that "Grade II listed" may not be widely understood. Linking it does not give context without following the link. Why not tweak it:

• ALT1 ... that both Rye railway station (pictured) and its signal box are listed as historic? MB 14:20, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

How about, this: — Maile (talk) 15:15, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

• ALT2 ... that for half a century, trains arriving at the Grade II historic listed Rye railway station (pictured) and signal box crossed the River Rother on a swing bridge?

I couldn't find any astoundingly hooky facts in any of my books, by the way, although Marcus Binney did describe the station as resembling a "miniature Italian villa". Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 18:30, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

• The original hook was fine. If people don't know what Grade II listing means then this will encourage them to click on the article to find out. ALT1 won't do because it's not clear why the place was listed. Often it is because the place is considered to be of architectural interest rather than historical interest; these are not the same thing. ALT2 is too long and has too many links which distract from the main one. Andrew D. (talk) 17:35, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
• As the hook is two queues away from being promoted and concerns have been raised about the hook, it might be for the best to move it down to a later prep until the issues are sorted out.
  csdnew
  01:38, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

• I'm not in the UK, and I'm not a trains afficionado, and I found this interesting. The fact I don't understand the details of how the UK lists historic sites/buildings doesn't cause me any real confusion; it's somewhere on the scale of "worth noting". I'm fine with the hook as is, also fine with MB's ALT1. --valereee (talk) 15:22, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

Hey, Andrew Davidson, let's discuss. We don't actually prefer shorter hooks over longer, as long as they're shorter than the maximum. We need both longer hook and shorter ones in order to create a set that won't be too short. If we use all short hooks, we end up with a too-short set and sometimes end up adding a ninth hook. ----valereee (talk) 19:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Looks like the verbiage 'shorter hooks are preferred' was added in February 2007 and then in December of that year, length restrictions were codified to a 200 character max. --valereee (talk) 19:17, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

• It would be good to have some statistics about the variation in hook length and how they perform – the number of hits that they get. I just looked through the archive for November and every set seemed to have 8 hooks so the cases where 9 are needed must be infrequent. Other things being equal, I'm content if Valereee makes her hooks long, while I make mine short and others do as they please. The performance of the hooks will then give us some feedback on which works best and we can adjust accordingly. In the meantime, I like the guideline as it is because brevity is usually considered to be good for prose. Andrew D. (talk) 19:20, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

  Vigorous writing is concise. A sentence should contain no unnecessary words, a paragraph no unnecessary sentences, for the same reason that a drawing should have no unnecessary lines and a machine no unnecessary parts. This requires not that the writer make all his sentences short, or that he avoid all detail and treat his subjects only in outline, but that every word tell.

  — Elementary Principles of Composition, The Elements of Style

I'm all for conciseness! This isn't me saying hooks should be long. They should be the length that is good for that hook. Whatever length is best for a hook is the preferred length for that hook. A shorter hook that isn't as good is not preferred simply because it's shorter. The reason there are so few 9-hook sets is because prep setters work very hard to achieve balance, and one of the things they'r considering is not choosing 8 short hooks. I've set a number of preps and been thinking, "No, can't use that one, already have too many short (or long) hooks in this set." ----valereee (talk) 19:26, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Main Page balance is an important consideration. A balance of both short and long hooks is important to maintaining a good looking Main Page. Having too many hooks below 100 characters is bad. So is having too many hooks near the upper limits. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 19:32, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

WP:DYKSTATS also has many examples of long hooks that have performed very well. --- Coffeeandcrumbs

19:35, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Yes, some of the ones with the highest numbers are also the longest. ----valereee (talk) 17:45, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

In Germany, 24 November is Totensonntag, or Ewigkeitssonntag, time to think of the dead. Hugo Distler wrote a piece of music especially for the occasion, Template:Did you know nominations/Totentanz (Distler). It's approved but was not moved to special occasions, which I may not do. Help? Squeeze in. Another one, dedicated to a person who fell in World War I, was finally just approved, Template:Did you know nominations/En blanc et noir. 17 November would have been perfect, but is past. I know you want to spread out and no two in one set. If we have 2 sets per day by Sunday, we could avoid that problem, otherwise please don't get it too close to Thanksgiving. Sorry for needing extra attention again. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:29, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

It's too late for moving Template:Did you know nominations/Totentanz (Distler) to Special occasions, the hook needs to go in Queue 3, so needs an administrator's attention. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:07, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

I've made room for it, anyone should feel free to promote to another prep, or if I get a chance to I'll promote it later. Gerda Arendt, we aren't allowed to move our own hooks into a special occasion slot? That seems silly. If anyone objected they could just move it back, couldn't they? --valereee (talk) 12:25, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

@Valereee:, our Gerda is probably referring to a Sept 2019 lengthy discussion about clarifying the rules 1, and a rather lengthy explanation by @BlueMoonset: of why that restriction exists. In a nutshell, not all special occasion requests are granted, and the nominator is bypassing scrutiny by moving it themselves. Just like nominators aren't allowed to promote their own nominations to Prep. — Maile (talk) 12:55, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Maile66, ah, I see...the idea was that a prolific producer of DYKs might abuse the privelege. I dunno...putting a hook in the special occasion area doesn't actually guarantee it will run that date. It doesn't grant the request; it just makes sure promoters see the request. Sometimes another special occasion request for that date is more important, and the two aren't appropriate in the same set. Promoters still have to promote the hook to the correct prep. Putting a hook into the special occasion holding area is really just helping ensure that promoters are aware of the special occasion request. --valereee (talk) 13:36, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

@Valereee:, I guess you could see it as a necessary check-and-balance of how DYK works. Gerda has recently had to defend why she makes so many birthday requests, which are usually on the main page when she wants, anyway. But at least with that step in place, there is the assurance that she is not abusing the system - i.e. it takes more than Gerda to get it there. — Maile (talk) 16:03, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Curious as to why the inordinate number of radio station hooks lately. Jmar67 (talk) 00:32, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Courtesy ping

csdnew

00:38, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

I went on a tear and decided to do a DYK of a radio station in every US state. There are a lot of stubs out there, and with the existence of more sources (between Newspapers.com and David Gleason's excellent American Radio History website, containing the full archives of Broadcasting), I wanted to do some really good broadcasting DYKs. Additionally, there are enough materials now to write articles about defunct stations that never got articles. In general, it's not uncommon for editors to nominate DYKs in a series; we've had a string of excellent articles on New York City topics from

t • c

) 00:58, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

I received flowers that made me blush for saying about what follows: some like flower arrangements all one colour, some all mixed, I like both. Back then, I defended that there was nothing wrong with a bunch of articles around Ghana. I did a series on

The Christmas cantata for FAC, 'tis the season. --Gerda Arendt (talk

) 07:17, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

yesterday. we had a hook about

Hevrin Khalaf, and I arranged it in protest like this

. An image of her was found late yesterday:

Kurdish civil engineer and politician

Hevrin Khalaf

,
who worked for tolerance
among Christians, Arabs, and Kurds,
was killed
in the 2019 Turkish offensive into Syria?

Many of our problems seem minor, compsared. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:17, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

I have been trying to space out the radio station and New York City hooks every other set, and I call on other prep builders to do the same. Yoninah (talk) 13:48, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Well, I hope I'm not clogging anything up with my 3 nominations per week. Like Raymie, I have a lot of source material (NYTimes.com and newspapers.com help a lot, plus there are just a lot of topics to write about). Though a few of the NYC nominations aren't even mine, which makes the queue even more crowded with NYC hooks, I guess. epicgenius (talk) 19:47, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

The encyclopedia can only benefit from this burst of energy on both your parts,

Raymie. Yoninah (talk

) 20:41, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

+1. I kind of like seeing these ripples of dyks. I often recognize whose dyk I'm getting ready to check before I look at the nom credits. We had a wave of cemeteries in Russia for a bit, and you can tell when Cwm has moved to a new phylum or whatever it is. It's like DYK has its own natural history. --valereee (talk) 21:31, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Just want to mention a bit of how it happened, because it doesn't happen without DYK. Back in February, I wrote up

t • c

) 21:34, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Raymie, newspapers.com is available through TWL? Wow, I did not know that. I have access to ProQuest, NY Times, and Wall Street Journal through my school and New York Public Library. But I totally forgot about TWL, so seriously, thanks for reminding me. epicgenius (talk

) 00:59, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

The free site fultonhistory.com actually has a larger database of newspapers, it's amazing what you can dig up there. The main advantage of Newspapers.com is that it has more sophisticated search functions that make it much easier to find what you're looking for. Gatoclass (talk) 17:16, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

@Gatoclass: Fultonhistory.com is a good site that I use often, but that's assuming the website decides to play nice that day (sometimes, the landing page doesn't even load, never mind the individual PDFs). Also, it's really limited to NY and a few small papers in other states. But overall, I agree, it's a really useful source for NY editors. epicgenius (talk) 03:25, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

The site works fine for me most of the time, but I have noted it is frequently down on weekends - this is apparently the time the site manager uses for uploading new pages. And yes, you are probably correct that the site is best for the New York region, but for that it's very good. Gatoclass (talk) 09:13, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

... was on the Main page, is in the DYK archive, but I can't find a trace of the DYK on the article talk. I added it to the stats anyway, but wonder what happened. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:34, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

@

ArticleHistory}}; please tag article manually". DYK bot error report I guess the error report went by too fast for anyone to notice. Good catch on your part. — Maile (talk

) 00:34, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Well, pure coincidence, I didn't remember the wording needed for the stats. Perhaps the bot could be trained to deal with a situation that an article already has a "history", having ben for FAC - and being open now? The easiest would be to just add it anywhere, - I don't particularly like the way the "article history" template "swallows" the information about the nomination. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:57, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

It's a template. All you need do, is copy one from another article that ran in the same set, put it on the article talk page, with the appropriate changes for that particular hook and nomination template. I've taken care of that necessity now. Hope all is OK on this one. — Maile (talk) 21:28, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

• ... that acting U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Chad Wolf stated that, while previously chief of staff, his function was not to determine whether the Trump family separations were the right or wrong policy?

Also in Prep 2, I think this hook is somewhat ambiguous, as I thought at first that Wolf was commenting on relationships within the Trump family. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:10, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

• I thought of tweaking this as:
• ALT1: * ... that acting U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Chad Wolf stated that, while previously chief of staff, his function was not to determine whether the Trump administration family separation policy was right or wrong? Yoninah (talk) 11:30, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

•  Done Changed the wording in prep. Yoninah (talk) 00:15, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

The previous list was archived yesterday, so here is an updated list with 37 nominations that need reviewing, which covers those through November 15. We have a total of 306 nominations, of which 202 have been approved. Thanks to everyone who reviews these, especially the ones from September and October.

Over two months old:

• September 21: Template:Did you know nominations/Alois Ickstadt

Over one month old:

• October 1: Template:Did you know nominations/Memory: The Origins of Alien
• October 12: Template:Did you know nominations/The Cedars School
• October 12: Template:Did you know nominations/Tujhe Kitna Chahne Lage
• October 13: Template:Did you know nominations/Tell Qudadi
• October 15: Template:Did you know nominations/A Stanislaw Lem Reader
• October 19: Template:Did you know nominations/Concentration of land ownership
• October 21: Template:Did you know nominations/Gott ist gegenwärtig
• October 22: Template:Did you know nominations/Richard Nixon's visit to the Lincoln Memorial
• October 22: Template:Did you know nominations/Colleen Barrett

Other old nominations:

• October 28: Template:Did you know nominations/Satyaprakash
• October 30: Template:Did you know nominations/Nocturnes (Debussy)
• October 31: Template:Did you know nominations/Wilhelm Keitel
• November 2: Template:Did you know nominations/Carla Herrero
• November 3: Template:Did you know nominations/Irma Beilke
• November 4: Template:Did you know nominations/Real Monasterio de Santo Tomás
• November 5: Template:Did you know nominations/Depukhu
• November 6: Template:Did you know nominations/Famine Inquiry Commission
• November 6: Template:Did you know nominations/Leena Al-Hadid
• November 7: Template:Did you know nominations/Iris lortetii
• November 8: Template:Did you know nominations/Heiko Trinsinger
• November 8: Template:Did you know nominations/Stucky (fandom)
• November 9: Template:Did you know nominations/Jacques Durand (publisher)
• November 11: Template:Did you know nominations/Maria Krönung (Lautenbach)
• November 11: Template:Did you know nominations/2000 Macau Grand Prix
• November 12: Template:Did you know nominations/Kurt Honolka
• November 12: Template:Did you know nominations/Yu Feng (two articles)
• November 12: Template:Did you know nominations/Ralph Mellanby
• November 12: Template:Did you know nominations/Tom Chase
• November 12: Template:Did you know nominations/Toebox
• November 13: Template:Did you know nominations/Semisimple representation
• November 13: Template:Did you know nominations/Canon EOS RP
• November 13: Template:Did you know nominations/WWIZ (Lorain, Ohio)
• November 14: Template:Did you know nominations/Culley C. Carson III
• November 14: Template:Did you know nominations/Vytautas Tomaševičius
• November 14: Template:Did you know nominations/WXTV (Ohio)
• November 14: Template:Did you know nominations/Brooklyn Fire Department
• November 14: Template:Did you know nominations/Shiza Shahid
• November 15: Template:Did you know nominations/Amrasca biguttula biguttula
• November 15: Template:Did you know nominations/Carl Demmer
• November 15: Template:Did you know nominations/Ronald Grossarth-Maticek

Please remember to cross off entries as you finish reviewing them (unless you're asking for further review), even if the review was not an approval. Many thanks! BlueMoonset (talk) 07:12, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Farthing Pie House

• ... that the Farthing Pie House (pictured) was serviced by a chariot drawn by four muzzled mastiffs?

Andrew Davidson Cwmhiraeth Yoninah

I'm not sure about this hook. It's sourced, but what the source and the article both say is that a small chariot drawn by four muzzled mastiffs once ran between the Farthing Pie House and a nearby pond, giving rides to children. Is that really servicing the tavern? I was thinking to turn it around:

ALT1: ... that a small chariot drawn by four muzzled mastiffs once ran between the Farthing Pie House (pictured) and a nearby pond, giving rides to children?

...but that put the target article pretty far into the sentence, so wanted to see if anyone objected. --valereee (talk) 12:14, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose ALT1 as it's too wordy and overloaded for my taste while hooks are supposed to be brief and punchy. As for the word service, this is commonly used for a transportation route per the
  OED. "conveyance or transit afforded by vehicles plying regularly on a route". So, the original hook is fine. Andrew D. (talk
  ) 12:25, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

While I don't think it's quite accurate to say the pie house was "serviced" by the chariot, ALT1 implies that the chariot ran from the pie house to the pond. I've tried to come up with an acceptable alt hook but haven't quite managed it yet. If nobody else does, I will probably try to come up with one later. Gatoclass (talk) 15:23, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

ALT2: ... that a small chariot drawn by four muzzled mastiffs once ran to the Farthing Pie House (pictured) from a nearby pond, giving rides to children? --valereee (talk) 15:35, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose ALT2 is much the same as ALT1 – overloaded with extraneous baggage. Per
  WP:DYKHOOK, "When you write the hook, please make it "hooky", that is, short, punchy, catchy, and likely to draw the readers in to wanting to read the article. Shorter hooks are preferred to longer ones..." Andrew D. (talk
  ) 16:18, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

  Andrew Davidson, actually that probably needs updating. Short hooks aren't preferred; we need a balance. ----valereee (talk) 17:06, 19 November 2019 (UTC) ETA: I've updated that to reflect current practices. Andrew D, can you suggest some hooks? A regular route with a schedule "services" a location. This was a beggar who made money by giving kids dogcart rides between a pond and a tavern. I don't think we can count that as servicing the tavern. ----valereee (talk) 17:18, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Andrew Davidson, are you able to propose some alts, or should I move this back to approvals? ----valereee (talk) 17:43, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

The hook has already been approved and built into a set and so there seems to be a reasonable consensus. If it works, don't fix it. Andrew D. (talk) 17:49, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

I think it would be a good idea to move it to a later set for now, while this discussion is ongoing.

csdnew

19:53, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Moved to prep 4 --valereee (talk) 12:03, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

• ALT3: ... that for a halfpenny fare, children could ride on a small chariot drawn by four muzzled mastiffs to the Farthing Pie House? Gatoclass (talk) 12:41, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

I like that a lot --valereee (talk) 21:30, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Great work, Gatoclass. ALT3 is AGF and cited inline. I'm replacing it in prep. Yoninah (talk) 12:42, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/List of Red Dead Redemption 2 characters

• ... that
  1,200 actors and 500,000 lines of dialogue
  ?