Wikipedia talk:Did you know

Did you know?
Did you know?
Introduction and rules
Introduction	WP:DYK
General discussion	WT:DYK
Guidelines	WP:DYKCRIT
Reviewer instructions	WP:DYKRI
Nominations
Nominate an article	WP:DYKCNN
Awaiting approval	WP:DYKN
Approved	WP:DYKNA
April 1 hooks	WP:DYKAPRIL
Holding area	WP:SOHA
Preparation
Preps and queues	T:DYK/Q
Prepper instructions	WP:DYKPBI
Admin instructions	WP:DYKAI
Main Page errors	WP:ERRORS
History
Statistics	WP:DYKSTATS
Archived sets	WP:DYKA
Just for fun
Monthly wraps	WP:DYKW
Awards	WP:DYKAWARDS
Userboxes	WP:DYKUBX
Hall of Fame	WP:DYK/HoF
List of users ...
... by nominations	WP:DYKNC
... by promotions	WP:DYKPC
Administrative
Scripts and bots	WP:DYKSB
On the Main Page	T:DYK
Main Page errors	WP:ERRORS
To ping the DYK admins	{{DYK admins}}
	v; t; e;

Error reports

Please do not post error reports for the current Main Page template version here. Instead, post them to Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors. Error reports relating to the next two queues to be promoted can also be posted to ERRORS. If you post an error report on one of the queues here, please include a link to the queue in question. Thank you.

DYK queue status

There are currently 4 filled queues. Admins, please consider promoting a prep to queue if you have the time!

Earliest time for next DYK update: 00:00, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Current time: 23:53, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Update frequency: once every 24 hours

Last updated: 23 hours ago(

)

Shortcut

WT:DYK

Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40
41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50
51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60
61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70
71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80
81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90
91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100
101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110
111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120
121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130
131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140
141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150
151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160
161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170
171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180
181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190
191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200
201

• 2011 reform proposals
• 2020 RFC LT Solutions
• All RfCs
• Removed hooks: 2023–24

This page has archives. Sections older than 5 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

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

Palestinian right of armed resistance

@Vice regent The article has one citation needed tag and one who tag. Please take care of them. BorgQueen (talk) 11:10, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I think I addressed them.VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 04:33, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Queue 3

Fantasy (Las Vegas show) (nom)

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

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

How about adding As of 2016, (and change the tense, of course)... BorgQueen (talk) 21:12, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here we go. BorgQueen (talk) 23:24, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Now it is probably correct, but a bit less impressive (like many "first" or "longest" hooks needing lots of qualifiers). —Kusma (talk) 08:41, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fantasy has been performed at Luxor Las Vegas since it opened in 1999 (including the temporary move in 2021 to a bigger theater in the same hotel owing to COVID-19). That is what I meant by "a single venue". I don't think moving from one theater to another theater in the same hotel makes the statement inaccurate, but maybe there's a way to make it clearer in the hook. Cunard (talk) 09:53, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cunard Why don't we specifically mention the hotel then? BorgQueen (talk) 02:05, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How about now? @Cunard @Kusma BorgQueen (talk) 02:47, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to let it pass, although the article is a but ambiguous about whether the "venue" is the hotel or one of the theaters inside it. —Kusma (talk) 08:20, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abduction of Jonila Castro and Jhed Tamano (nom)

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

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

Fixing ping to Crisco 1492. —Kusma (talk) 20:56, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rebel returnees is saying, perhaps poorly, that they returned to the government fold. The article indicates that they were expected to self-identify as members of the New People's Army, one of the belligerents in the ongoing Communist armed conflicts in the Philippines, but they chose instead to expose the coercion they experienced.

Rephrasing to "Instead of saying that they were reformed members of the New People's Army" may be clearer. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 21:58, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think there is still some copyediting in the article to do (I still don't understand who surrendered to the two activists), and we need a rephrased and clearer hook. —Kusma (talk) 08:46, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rephrased to make it clearer; nobody was surrendering to the activists. Surrenderee is commonly used by media in the Philippines, but "person who surrendered" is less ambiguous. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 10:07, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That is a new meaning of the word "surrenderee" that has not yet made it into the OED or into Wiktionary (surrenderee). "Person who surrenders" is called "surrenderer". Still not fully happy with the hook. —Kusma (talk) 19:50, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Never said it was standard elsewhere; simply put, the article reflected the sources ("rebel surrenderer" gives me half the results of surrenderee). As for the "had other ideas", I signed off on it as we have previously had examples of less encyclopedic phrasing for hooks ("that mamas performed on "Mama", which admittedly did have an ERRORS discussion); I also signed off on the more explicit hook, which was not promoted — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:18, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How about

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

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

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

DYK template transclusions

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

I remember asking this very same question years ago. As I remember, the answer was something like, "because wiki".

It is unfortunately very difficult to figure out the canonical title of a linked page. In addition to the implied namespace issue, there's case-insensitivity, redirects, namespace aliases (i.e. "WT:" vs "Wikipedia talk:"), cross-wiki links (which look like namespaces but are implemented in some way that I don't fully understand), optional character encodings (User_talk:RoySmith vs User talk:RoySmith, and probably more stuff. I think the only real way to canonicalize a link is to get it from the API and then look to see what you got. RoySmith (talk) 18:05, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yeah, permalinks and a few other Special: links that are effectively redirects. RoySmith (talk) 18:18, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Including the namespace will make sense once we move DYK nominations to a more sensible namespace :) —Kusma (talk) 19:45, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It used to be that way earlier. I made the change in Special:Diff/1028324847 in preparation for migrating DYKs to Wikipedia namespace. – SD0001 (talk) 16:53, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Special occasion request for September 11 Digital Archive, September 11

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

Queue 4

Zhong Jingwen

@AirshipJungleman29, Generalissima, and Di (they-them): This is one of those "first" hooks that I find hard to accept. China has a history going back thousands of years. How can we say with certainty that there were no folklore societies there before 1927? RoySmith (talk) 21:46, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Does adding "academic" or "modern" suffice here? Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 21:48, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It would certainly reduce the size of the problem, but I think we'd still be safer with something that avoided the whole issue. Maybe:

... that Zhong Jingwen was known as the "father of Chinese folklore studies"? RoySmith (talk) 22:19, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I like this one the best, I'd be happy to switch if others were. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 17:34, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done BorgQueen (talk) 01:01, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that would work, as any other folklore society would have been founded in the few decades beforehand (the concept itself was only invented in the 1840s). I can't access the cited page of this source, but its introduction calls the society "the first official organization with "folklore" in its name", and mentions the "Folksong Research Society", founded in 1920. Some adjustment might be needed. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:26, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Submarine Mining Service

@BorgQueen and Dumelow: I can only hope the IP who promoted the hook is watching this because I can't ping them. The hook isn't wrong per-se, but it seems overly complicated and it doesn't even say anything about the subject; it says something about how a newspaper mis-reported something about the subject. RoySmith (talk) 21:56, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Switched it to ALT0. Done BorgQueen (talk) 06:13, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you want, ALT0 could be used instead:

George Macdonogh

... that the uniform of the Hong Kong contingent of the Submarine Mining Service was designed by future British Army Lieutenant-General George Macdonogh (pictured)?

You could add "silk-like" before "uniform" to add a little more interest

Otherwise:

ALT2: ... that the British Army's Submarine Mining Service defended ports and harbours with naval mines and torpedoes?
ALT3: ... that the British Army's Submarine Mining Service "was remarkable for the cheapness and efficiency of its organisation"?
ALT4: ... that the British Army's Submarine Mining Service was supplanted in the harbour defence role by the introduction of Royal Navy submarines?
ALT5: ... that Hong Kong's Submarine Mining Service detachment amount to around 0.1% of the total cost of garrisoning the colony?

If any of these are preferred I can supply quotes from the refs if needed - Dumelow (talk) 06:11, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dumelow I had picked ALT0 but then I've switched it to ALT2, since the image hook is about fashion. BorgQueen (talk) 06:22, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I like ALT3. RoySmith (talk) 14:11, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose we'll have to disagree on that one. But feel free to switch. BorgQueen (talk) 14:53, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Broun

@BorgQueen, UndercoverClassicist, and Silver seren: It is unverifiable that "nobody knows" something. I see in the nomination this was cited to "A distillation of..." which is another way of saying WP:SYNTH. I don't see how we can run this hook. RoySmith (talk) 22:07, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's probably fair, though I'd suggest "nobody knows how many beetles there are" is closer to "nobody knows how many grains of sand there are" -- it's a triviality rather than a disputable statement. The cited source has Estimates of the size of the major insect orders in New Zealand, as compared with the British Isles, ... are greatly variable and subject to different interpretations ... The number of species of Coleoptera is about 80% greater than the British fauna. This is ... likely to be, in part, due to what can be called the "Broun effect" We could find a way to put that more succinctly? Perhaps "has been blamed for inflating the number of beetle species in New Zealand"?

Alternatively, we have some ALTs from the nomination:

ALT1: ... that the entomologist Thomas Broun fought in three wars and was awarded medals by two different countries?
Source: Several --- medals and wars given in infobox: Bairstow, Aubrey (2005-07-02). "Captain (later Major) Thomas Broun, 1st Regiment of Waikato Militia". Digger History. Retrieved 2023-12-20. ; see also Cheeseman, T. F. (1919). "Major Thomas Broun 1838–1919". Transactions and Proceedings of the New Zealand Institute. 52: ix–x. Retrieved 2023-12-07 – via Biodiversity Heritage Library.
ALT2: ... that Thomas Broun was one of the most important figures in the study of New Zealand's beetles, despite never visiting half of the country? Source: Crosby, Trevor K. (1996). "Thomas Broun". Dictionary of New Zealand Biography. Ministry for Culture and Heritage. Retrieved 23 April 2017. (most important figures); Watt, John Charles (1977). "Conservation and Type Localities of New Zealand Coleoptera, and Notes on Collectors 1770–1920". Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand. 7 (1): 84. Bibcode:1977JRSNZ...7...79W. doi:10.1080/03036758.1977.10419338. (never visited South Island)

Any thoughts on that lot? UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 06:17, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ALT3: ... that Thomas Broun has been blamed for inflating the number of beetle species in New Zealand?

I like this one, which you've suggested above. BorgQueen (talk) 07:47, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I also like this ALT3. RoySmith (talk) 14:14, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ALT3 sounds good so maybe a sysop could swap the current hook with that? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 14:14, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done BorgQueen (talk) 14:51, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Queue 6

1917 Franco-Russian agreement

@AirshipJungleman29, Dumelow, and Buidhe: there's nothing wrong here, but I think the hook would be more interesting if it included the fact that the February revolution happened a few days after 10 March. RoySmith (talk) 14:45, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Grant Nel

@AirshipJungleman29, 1ctinus, and Styyx: I don't see where the article says he was nine when he switched to diving. RoySmith (talk) 15:05, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RoySmith I found it in a source and added it to the article. SL93 (talk) 23:38, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Homer House

@AirshipJungleman29, GRuban, and Flibirigit: WP:CLOP issues with http://patch.com/massachusetts/belmont/belmont-womens-club-celebrates-homer-house. RoySmith (talk) 15:05, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. The source in question is: "It has 15 rooms, a circular staircase in the grand foyer, period tiles and brass tubs in the bedrooms, chandeliers, stained glass windows, a rotunda or cupola, used for cooling, a metal-lined cold storage room in the kitchen, an 1870s iron stove, an oval-shaped dining room with curved doors, sitting parlors with bay windows, and a library with oak paneling and huge brick fireplace." As per WP:LIMITED, there are few ways to repeat a list of items and still remain true to the meaning of what is included. Flibirigit (talk) 21:30, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RoySmith I agree with Flibirgit, unless maybe you have a suggestion that we didn't think of. SL93 (talk) 21:48, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I took the easy way out and turned most of it into direct quotes with the proper attribution. RoySmith (talk) 23:04, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Durkee Fire

@Kimikel, Bsoyka, and Sahaib: I think this fails likely to be perceived as unusual or intriguing. According to https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/weather/2023/08/18/how-do-wildfires-start/70592011007/, "Lightning is the most common natural cause of wildfires". RoySmith (talk) 15:05, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would disagree. I don't think most people actually know that lightning causes so many wildfires (I actually did not until just now), so it may still be considered at least intriguing. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:04, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe, I guess. Another issue is "InciWeb estimated it will be fully contained by August 8" which is already a month out of date. RoySmith (talk) 23:55, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RoySmith The last that I can find is 95% contained from a month ago after searching through news archives. I doubt that 95% is even up to date and I think that it should be fully contained by now. I feel like it should be pulled for it not being up to date alone. SL93 (talk) 23:11, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. Looking at it closer, I see statements like The Durkee Fire is the second-largest wildfire currently burning in the United States and (in the infobox) July 17, 2024 – present (58 days). I'm going to pull it. RoySmith (talk) 23:29, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PS, @Rjjiii, SounderBruce, and Narutolovehinata5: I see we've got much the same issue with Pioneer Fire in Prep 5. RoySmith (talk) 23:32, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hook interest or a lack of updates? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:36, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's about a rapidly-changing current event. The Pioneer Fire is an ongoing large wildfire RoySmith (talk) 23:43, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/David Yong

This is currently the oldest open unapproved nomination and is a few days away from timing out. Right now the only thing that needs to be reviewed is the new hook proposal. A review before the 18th would be much appreciated. Thank you. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:52, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Request to allow a nine-day timeframe for newness of a nomination

With respect to Template:Did you know nominations/Janet Panetta, the nominator appears to be requesting a nine-day timeframe for newness of the nomination, with the rationale that it was made in good faith to say thank you to another editor for cleaning up copyright violations. I will respect the community's decision on this. Any thoughts? Flibirigit (talk) 11:39, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be ok with this - I've stretched the day-count a number of times, & people generally allow this. Johnbod (talk) 11:52, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

QPQs and the nomination wizard

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

Pinging SD0001 - doesn't seem like too difficult a task? theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 01:47, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed the text shown on DYK pages which is controlled by Module:NewDYKnomination. Fixing the text shown within the scripts is harder as they need to change as the user adds or removes articles. – SD0001 (talk) 14:12, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@SD0001 Thanks for the change! While you're at it, would it be possible to implement the warning for lacking a QPQ? You already have a similar warning for late DYK nominations so I imagine the code for that should be rather similar. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 14:27, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done in DYK-helper and raised an edit request for the wizard. There's still no support for entering multiple QPQs, however. – SD0001 (talk) 16:51, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@SD0001 I just did a sanity check of the nomination wizard's QPQ check, and it turns out that putting anything after "Template:Did you know nominations/" (for example, making it say "Template:Did you know nominations/TBA") would result in the nomination pushing through immediately rather than the warning showing up. In this case, I tested the wizard out by trying it out on Puella Magi Madoka Magica, and although the QPQ check worked correctly with the default parameter, to my surprise (and horror), when I added a "TBD" at the end, the wizard still created the nomination rather than show the warning. Maybe the QPQ checker also needed an added check to give the same warning if the QPQ link is a red link? That way, if a nominator made the QPQ say "Template:Did you know nominations/TBA" or "Template:Did you know nominations/pending", the warning will happen rather than the tool thinking that a valid QPQ was provided. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 22:46, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

It is requested that an edit be made to the fully protected template at Template:Did you know.
(edit · history · last · links · sandbox · edit sandbox · sandbox history · sandbox last edit · sandbox diff · transclusion count · protection log)

This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, so that an editor unfamiliar with the subject matter could complete the requested edit immediately.

Edit requests to fully protected pages should only be used for edits that are either uncontroversial or supported by consensus. If the proposed edit might be controversial, discuss it on the protected page's talk page before using this template. Consider making changes first to the template's sandbox before submitting an edit request. To request that a page be protected or unprotected, make a protection request. When the request has been completed or denied, please add the |answered=yes parameter to deactivate the template.

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

@Jonesey95: already exists at Template:Did you know/doc :) theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 01:45, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Right. Please add it to the template page. The code to add is, at the bottom of the page, on a new line:

{{documentation}}
</noinclude>

Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:48, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As Template:Did you know is not a typical template (arguably the page is in the wrong namespace), I don't understand the need for a template documentation subpage (if you ask me we could just delete Template:Did you know/doc, which seems pointless cruft). We need to minimise human (and bot) errors while editing, so anything that is added should be actually useful. Even if a documentation subpage does get added, I would strongly advise against the suggestion to add

</noinclude>

to avoid stray nonsense making it onto the Main Page. —Kusma (talk) 06:17, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If it is in the wrong namespace, like the DYK subpages, it should finally be moved to project space. If it is going to stay in template space, it should have documentation and a category. The page is one of a tiny handful of pages that is showing up on Wikipedia:Database reports/Uncategorized templates. Please at least add a category to the page (within noinclude tags). I am surprised that any of this is receiving pushback; it's standard stuff for pages in template space. Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 10:55, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DYK has extensive documentation already. I see zero advantage for DYK in adhering to conventions for template space, as DYK should not be in template space. Just like article space rules do not apply to Main Page, another page that is in the wrong namespace for historical reasons. We should add categories if we need them, not in order to make a database report prettier. —Kusma (talk) 11:08, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:In the news added {{documentation}} to the page in 2009 with this edit: [1] MSGJ I realize that's like twenty years ago, but do you remember running into any problems?

The other mainpage sections are transcluded from project space, like Wikipedia:Today's featured article. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 17:25, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

Interesting PSHAW glitch

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

Another example for this bug: [2]. (Only noticed this one after promoting the set). —Kusma (talk) 16:39, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, so that explains why when I did Special:Diff/1245602502, the example comment had reverted back to the old style :-) RoySmith (talk) 16:42, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Launchballer, SL93, AirshipJungleman29, Rjjiii, Kimikel, Premeditated Chaos, Sohom Datta, TheNuggeteer, and NightWolf1223: In light of me really not wanting to fix this bug on its own, I've rolled out PSHAW 2.0, an update I've working on in my userspace for quite a while! not much changes on your end for now – you'll still only have the prep building script and the queuer script (there is a hook puller script that is very close to done) – on my end, the script is much easier for me to read and update. you might find new and interesting bugs, so please do keep me abreast of those either here on on my talk :) thanks! (ugh i gotta update documentation now...) theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 18:24, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Will do ;) thanks for the work. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:54, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Was the option to close nominations removed? It's not showing up on my end anymore. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:03, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Echoing the above Theleekycauldron, and also noting that promoting to the bottom prep set produces a message ("This appears to be the bottom prep set – per J14, try to leave the image slot, quirky slot, and at least two middle slots open for bumps and replacements!") that refers to an outdated rule number from the old supplementary guidelines. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:12, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Queue 3

Margaret Coe

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

I don't see it anywhere either. SL93 (talk) 19:42, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've pulled it and nominated the image for deletion on commons. RoySmith (talk) 20:54, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Now that I look at it, I'm also dubious about File:Margaret Coe - Steps to the Sea - 1986 - University of Oregon.jpg. The commons page claims it is CC-BY-4.0 but I don't see any actual evidence of that. RoySmith (talk) 21:06, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

La Mojana

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

The framing was inspired on the source, which discusses "la relación dinámica de las poblaciones prehispánicas con el entorno antes de la colonización española". The main impact of the Spanish arrival is on the availability of historical records. Dating anything before that seems difficult, I found sources with various estimates for the post-canal dry period. Our Zenú articles gives a 1,200/1,300 year span for the canal system existing; who knows what was built when and to what extent. At any rate, I found reading about the canal irrigation system interesting and a hook can be something that is obviously true. That said, I am not wedded to the topic. I tried an alt at Template:Did you know nominations/La Mojana based on the past four years of flooding, but per the reviewer it turned into quite a banal statement about wetlands without the background context that was in my head. Figuring out how to make the ALT work may also be interesting. Otherwise, I found the land conflicts and the climate/agricultural relationships interesting, but didn't manage to find a way to make either hooky. CMD (talk) 16:14, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think the basic premise of the hook is fine, my only objection is the "before the arrival of the Spanish" part. How about something more along the lines of:

... that the waterway system in La Mojana dates back to the pre-Columbian Zenú culture? RoySmith (talk) 16:25, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if there is a link between the Zenú system and the modern one, the Zenú seem to have stopped cultivating the area a few hundred years before Spanish arrival reshaped the area. CMD (talk) 16:35, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article implies such a link: The Zenú culture ... manipulated the waterways through means such as the construction of canals. The waterways continue to play an important role in modern times RoySmith (talk) 16:40, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How about:

... that the pre-Columbian Zenu culture may have been driven out of La Mojana by climate change in about 1300? RoySmith (talk) 16:46, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The link is that both societies worked within and modified the naturally existing waterways to suit their needs, not that the first set of modifications led to the second set of modifications. No objection to the new hook suggestion, with the caveat that 1300 is a late date (Zenú gives 1100 as the start of population decline), so maybe "before 1300" or similar. CMD (talk) 16:51, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Masada myth

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

Source says 'state funeral', so changed to that. I should have spotted that part of the hook.--Laun chba ller 16:28, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I admit I hadn’t realized that those are different things. The source itself, in the quoted excerpt in the DYKnom, says "state burial ceremony" at the beginning and "formal military ceremony" at the end. I agree that consistency is best. Onceinawhile (talk) 21:12, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Earl de Grey, Kingston upon Hull

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

The Hull Daily Mail is owned by Reach plc, who owns the Daily Mirror.--Laun chba ller 16:28, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kimikel @DandelionAndBurdock @Silver seren pinging. BorgQueen (talk) 17:08, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So, is the argument because of that that every single regional paper in the UK is unusable? Feels like we should just write off the entirety of the country if we're going to go that route. Silver seren^C 17:12, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any evidence of Hull Daily Mail being unreliable? I did notice that the newspaper has won several awards of the years, and its article doesn't point to any controversy. SL93 (talk) 17:19, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Hull Daily Mail is not related to the Daily Mail. I don't see any evidence that the HDM is unreliable. And, after all, it is a light-hearted article about urban legends, and it does point out that many of the stories may not be true. Black Kite (talk) 21:13, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Prep 4

The set has two hooks about flags. Could we move one?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Black Kite (talk • contribs)

I agree that it should be moved. I will do that unless someone gets to it first. SL93 (talk) 21:25, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Doing.--Laun chba ller 21:26, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I moved the other flag hook to prep 3 and moved up from prep 6 what I believe is the only non-American non-bio hook in the preps.--Laun chba ller 21:39, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Launchballer, all ok on my end, I also felt it strange to see 2 flag hooks in same prep. The Flag of La Guaira nom had an image, in case it would be of interest for Prep 3? --Soman (talk) 21:44, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be honest, all I did was put it in the exact same position it was in before. I think you should take that up with @TheNuggeteer: just in case there was a reason he passed.--Laun chba ller 21:49, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apple (song)

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

I fixed the article and hook. SL93 (talk) 21:25, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, although I'm surprised that part of the hook survived WP:DYKTRIM.--Laun chba ller 21:39, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Request for review of anniversary-themed hook

Hi. A couple of weeks ago I nominated Lake Erie Walleye Trail fishing tournament cheating scandal with the idea of getting it on the Main Page on September 30, the two-year anniversary of "We got weights in FISH!!" reverberating around the Internet.

Now would be an ideal time to review it and get it into SOHA before we starting putting queues together. Daniel Case (talk) 04:44, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Daniel Case: is there a way to make the hook less hypothetical? The article says they might have been heavy enough to win without the weight but also that "it remains unclear if the men caught the fish the day of the tournament or on a prior day." This is such a goofy crime, that I feel there are probably quite a few ways to craft a compelling hook around it. The article otherwise checks out. It's cited, quotes are attributed, no close paraphrasing, meets NPOV, long enough, and expanded 5x. If you try out other hooks, feel free to ping me, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 04:55, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have added to the hook: "* ... that the two anglers caught cheating in a Cleveland fishing tournament two years ago today might have been able to win without putting weights in their fish, assuming the fish were caught that day?" This comes in at just under 200 characters. Daniel Case (talk) 05:11, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Idk, that's pretty textually dense, maybe something like:

... that two anglers went to jail for hiding weights inside of fish that might have been heavy enough to win the tournament without added weight?

Also, I don't know how to get to NPOV within the space of a hook fact, but the bit where the dude loses a $120,000 prize boat after failing a polygraph test (which doesn't even work) about having sex with other women and farm animals is wild. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 06:04, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not happy with the hook from a negative BLP point of view. Valereee (talk) 16:07, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

QI 18 Sept Neutrality?

I'm a little concerned about

... that the Palestinian right of armed resistance against the Israeli military is often derived from Article 1(4) of Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions?

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

I could maybe see

... that arguments in favor of a Palestinian right of armed resistance are often based on Article 1(4) of Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions?

That feels like it would be neutral? Valereee (talk) 16:21, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Given that the page is WP:ECP under WP:CTOP, I don't see how it meets The article should not be subject to unresolved edit-warring and should not deserve stub or dispute tags. RoySmith (talk) 16:21, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I hadn't even noticed that! Hm. Are Palestinian right to resist and Palestinian right of armed resistance possibly forks of one another? Valereee (talk) 16:28, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, they are. There was some move warring going on[3][4] so I'd say this also fails the newness test. RoySmith (talk) 16:30, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved it to Prep 5 for further discussion. BorgQueen (talk) 16:34, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article was cut and pasted from User:Vice regent/sandbox on 1 August and nominated on 7 August. There is some discussion on the talk page whether it should be a separate topic, but it seems to have died down, so I don't see how this can be argued to fail the newness test. —Kusma (talk) 16:35, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think it might have been moved to VR's sandbox from Palestinian right to resist? Depending on how much was moved, it might not pass 5x. Valereee (talk) 17:04, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We do not generally forbid contentious topics on the Main Page. I agree with Valereee's more neutral reformulation. At the very least, it should be "a Palestinian right", not "the Palestinian right". —Kusma (talk) 16:33, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How can being labeled a CTOP and being ECP not constitute deserving a dispute tag? RoySmith (talk) 16:40, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The dispute tag is not for real world disputes, it is for disputes within Wikipedia about the article content, so CTOP and ECP has nothing to do with deserving a dispute tag. Do you think Israeli citizenship law should have a dispute tag? It is CTOP and ECP (and a FA). —Kusma (talk) 16:53, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

+1. If Roy wants to tag every article on the Israeli-Palestine conflict with dispute tags, they can but they'll probably face unanimous pushback. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:28, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies if I seem conservative about what we should publish and what we shouldn't; I'm just trying to reduce how much time we spend at WP:ERRORS. RoySmith (talk) 22:43, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]