Misplaced Pages

talk:Did you know: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 03:47, 25 December 2024 editFlibirigit (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers140,186 editsm →Older nominations needing DYK reviewers: strike one← Previous edit Revision as of 15:05, 26 December 2024 edit undoDeparture– (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users3,265 edits →Belvidere Apollo Theatre collapse: new sectionTag: New topicNext edit →
(42 intermediate revisions by 15 users not shown)
Line 34: Line 34:


This is where the ''']''' section on the main page, its policies, and its processes can be discussed.<!-- for nominations: see ... --> This is where the ''']''' section on the main page, its policies, and its processes can be discussed.<!-- for nominations: see ... -->

== Christmas DYK sets ==
]
With Christmas just over four weeks away, I think this is a good time to ask: does DYK want to do sets for Christmas Eve and Christmas Day?

If yes, here are some potential hooks that can be used:

*]: Food, needs a review
*]: TV, <s>currently in Prep 6</s> at SOHA
*]: Ship, <s>Approved</s> SOHA

In addition, these articles are at ] and could potentially be used as Christmas hooks:
*]: Tree
*]: Tree

Thoughts about creating this set are welcome below. ] (]) 15:38, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
:Excellent idea. I did actually see the Christmas Invasion in prep and wondered why it wasn't being saved. Pinging {{yo|DoctorWhoFan91|Piotrus|DimensionalFusion|Thriley|Grimes2}} who are involved with the first two noms. (I've been putting off expanding ] for over a year and they did a track called "Christmas Time" if that's of any use?)--<span style="background:#FF0;font-family:Rockwell Extra Bold">]]]</span> 15:56, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
::{{ping|Launchballer}} Nominate it when its ready: if we decide not to use it for this set, the article will still be better. ] (]) 16:51, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
::It's fine with me - I can review any new XMAS hook if pinged. <sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]&#124;]</sub> 02:09, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
::{{ping|Launchballer}} I'm not really familiar with DYK- should I add somewhere that it should be saved for Christmas (I will read the instructions to DYK more comprehensively later). {{ping|Z1720}} Great idea. Also, I'm working on another Christmas special- if it gets nominated and passed by then, I can nominate that for DYK too. ] (]) 11:26, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
:::No, what someone needs to do is pull the nom, leave a note, and put it in ]. I've done that.--<span style="background:#FF0;font-family:Rockwell Extra Bold">]]]</span> 11:39, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
*I'm planning to do a nativity painting. ] (]) 01:13, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Christmas hooks should go into the "Special occasions" section at the bottom of the ] page. Thanks guys! ] (]) 14:11, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
:Actually, they should go into the "Special occasions" section at the top of the ] page (direct link: ]), and only once they're approved. ] (]) 06:37, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

While not a "Christmassy" hook, it would be nice if ] could run on Christmas Day for the 110th anniversary of her sinking - ] (]) 20:17, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
:{{re|Dumelow}} Since the hook mentions Christmas, I think it is appropriate for the set. It will also help us diversity the set] (]) 01:11, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

I can work up an article on ] species.--]] ] 17:51, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

*]. I just made a Christmas hook for this. ] (]) 21:14, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
*] the "Krampus" hook is live and nominated .--]] ] 20:09, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
*], a stunning Bruegel painting with pic, is now ready for review. ] (]) 19:36, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
**Now reviewed, needs promoting & moving. ] (]) 03:53, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

*If anyone is looking for a Christmas article, I started ]. He played Alfred the janitor in '']'' known for his "Make a buck. Make a buck" critique of Christmas commercialism. ] (]) 21:52, 10 December 2024 (UTC)


:Is there a reason why ] was already promoted instead of being held for Christmas? Or to be more appropriate, not held until Epiphany? ] (] · ]) 08:32, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
::Pulled.--<span style="background:#FF0;font-family:Rockwell Extra Bold">]]]</span> 17:25, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
:Wouldn't mind if ] runs on Christmas Eve if the Christmas Day prep is full. ]@] 17:20, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

::I've just approved ] which might be nice to run in the holiday season - ] (]) 09:54, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

* I nominated ] and ] for Christmas Eve/Christmas Day. ] (]) 23:01, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
*:Just came by to note that I have made a backup hook for Mark Hearld during my review if it's not done by Christmas Eve or Day. {{u|Thriley}}, the rules recommend not doing special occasion hooks within a week of the planned date. Two to three weeks should be enough. ]@] 00:28, 21 December 2024 (UTC)


===Two sets?===
I just noticed this proposal was for ''two'' special sets. I think that's excessive. One would be plenty. ] ] 17:48, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
: Not at all, the more the merrier. Assuming we have more than enough for one set that is. And they don't all have to be run on Christmas Day, they can be split over Christmas Eve/Christmas Day or even Boxing Day or New Year's Day and so on, depending on their relevance. ] (]) 12:18, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

== ] ==

===]===
{{ping| AirshipJungleman29| Spiderpig662 |4meter4 }} There's extensive copying from The Independent, a clear violation of ] which needs to be addressed before this can go live. ] ] 18:13, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

:This also has a {{t|Lead too short}} maintenance tag, which also needs to be addressed. ] ] 19:44, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
::@] I see you took care of the worst of it. If you take a piece of text and just change words here and there but keep the same underlying structure and order, that's the definition of close paraphrasing. That's what you had (and to a lesser extent, still do). What you should be doing is reading the original source and then formulating your own way of expressing the same information. ] ] 22:02, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
:::{{ping|RoySmith}} I didn't even realise about close paraphrasing, thanks for letting me know. I'm planning on rewriting more of it tomorrow. ] (]) 23:17, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
::::Glad I could be of service. ] ] 23:27, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::This still has the maintenance tag, so I've swapped it down to ] to be worked on. ] ] 03:09, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

===]===
{{ping| AirshipJungleman29 | Chaiten1 |PCN02WPS }} If I'm reading this right, the last set of papers were published ''on'' his 18th birthday, not ''before''. ] ] 18:26, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

:Thanks - he published his 200th paper in 2004, and was still publishing new papers aged 18 / 72, in 2008 ] (]) 18:43, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
::I'm not seeing where it says that in the article. ] ] 18:49, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

== Should ] apply to mythology, legends, folk tales, and the like? ==

For context, ] is stuck as the original hook was about an event in Greek mythology. Concerns were raised that the hook violates ]. Wouldn't that be overkill? Plus, wouldn't saying that DYKFICTION applies to mythology, legends, and the like would mean that much of the Bible, as well as other religious texts, would also fall under DYKFICTION? I sort of see where the idea was coming from, but I really don't think that mythology was something that editors had in mind when that guideline was codified. ] (] · ]) 05:10, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

:I'm a bit confused by this because you closed ] after it was rejected for DYKFICTION with the same argument. ] (]) 08:02, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
::I marked that nomination for closure not due to DYKFICTION concerns, but due to DYKTIMEOUT (it was already two months old with outstanding issues). ] (] · ]) 09:25, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
:::The outstanding issues were DYKFICTION ones. ] (]) 10:04, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
::::I didn't even notice or realize that the concerns were regarding DYK fiction, only that it remained unapproved after two months, hence why I timed it out. ] (] · ]) 01:34, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
:Why should we exempt religious texts and make a difference between L. Ron Hubbard's fiction that was widely available and the fiction that was only sold to Scientologists? Involving the real world isn't too difficult for religious texts; they don't need an exemption. —] (]) 10:06, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
:I strongly disagree with attempting to apply DYKFICTION to folklore, mythology, and so on. In fact, there should be an explicit disclaimer added to DYKFICTION that it does not cover those, since this has come up before. The ''intent'' of DYKFICTION was to discourage "did you know that (in-universe fact like "the fictional alter-ego of Jimmy Wales defeats 100 criminals in just 10 seconds") in ''Some Novel''? Because that's a trivial issue someone just made up. But if we're talking folklore, it ''really is'' relevant to say what the folklore is. That's something true in real-life culture. Like if Paul Bunyan became a GA, mentioning that he carved the Grand Canyon with his axe would be a totally valid hook. Same with religious / theological topics - if there's a suitably hooky fact about what some guru / saint / etc. is said to have done, that's precisely the point. Knowing what precisely Hermes was the god of isn't "fictional", it's basic human knowledge of a field. ] (]) 18:08, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
::How could DYKFICTION be reworded to incorporate this? ~{{Smallcaps|]}}<sup>]{{nbsp}}•{{nbsp}}]</sup> 18:45, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
::If you want to feature a legend of Paul Bunyan, just make sure to incorporate the real world in your hook. Say where it comes from, who recorded it, where there are statues commemorating it. This is generally easier with legendary characters than for general plot points in fiction. —] (]) 20:17, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
:::The problem is that the main page is aimed at readers, and the best hooks are ''short'' that ideally highlight just ''one'' fact. If that fact is something about the legend, that should be acceptable; we shouldn't feel a need to create an awkward dual-hook that says the interesting thing we want readers to care about, and then some later bit that might be less interesting. ] (]) 22:14, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
::::I don't see a hook "... that Paul Bunyan was said to have carved the Grand Canyon with his axe" as any better than "... that in ''Star Wars'', backwards Yoda speaks?" —] (]) 22:45, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
:If a mythological topic has a Misplaced Pages article, it needs to be the subject of multiple non-narrative sources. Those will provide non-fictional analyses of the subject which can be used as a hook. The later sections of ] provide numerous examples.{{pb}}People have been inventing stories using the limits of their creativity for millennia. It makes no sense to allow a hook like "that in the ], Aeneas went to the undwerworld", and to disallow "that ] used to be called Anakin Skywalker" when everyone involved in creating both stories knew they were entirely fictional. ] (]) 18:46, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
::Going to the underworld and Vader turning to the dark side are far more than fiction. They are part of a large body of mythology based on archetypes related to patterns in literature, concepts in philosophy, and more controversially, psychology itself. The element of fiction is just the appearance of the larger iceberg, 90% of which lies beneath the surface. If we reduce all of this to "just fiction", we aren't even addressing the most interesting and salient features of the idea. That's why DYKFICTION is so limiting. ] (]) 01:34, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
:::A hook that hints at these archetypes already involves the real world to a degree sufficient to pass the guideline. —] (]) 08:12, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
::::Thank you for saying so, as I will write a hook that does just that (next year!) and then ask you to review it. :) ] (]) 10:08, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

== Diane Leather ==

Just leaving a note here that I've pulled the ] hook from the main page (got there via Q2) over copyvio concerns as reported at Errors. ''']]''' 08:48, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

:Turns out that the copyvio existing for a year back in 2014 and 2015, was mentioned on the talk page, but nobody had ever done a revision deletion. I've done so now and restored the article. ''']]''' 09:04, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
::@] I certainly appreciate the diligence of finding this old issue, but I'm curious how you noticed it. Do you have a tool which searches all old revisions for copyvios? ] ] 19:24, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
:::] ]&nbsp;]<sup>]</sup> 19:27, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

== ] ==

This nomination will be two months old on Christmas Eve, but it hasn't moved forward despite a request for a second opinion. Requesting any interested editor, preferably those fluent in Chinese and/or have an interest in movies, to take a look and help it move forward. Thank you. ] (] · ]) 09:50, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

:If it helps to move it forward, you can collapse the discussion as "extended content". I was going to do that before another user stepped in and requested the second opinion. My purpose was never to hold it up, but rather to present an opinion. ] (]) 10:10, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

== ] ==

===]===
*One of mine, so it will require a second pair of eyes. &nbsp;—&nbsp;] (]) 14:07, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
::Doing both.--<span style="background:#FF0;font-family:Rockwell Extra Bold">]]]</span> 15:04, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
:::This is a first hook, but I think it's unlikely a prior flight/fatality would have gone unnoticed. This ''should'' be fine, but I'm going to ping {{yo|RoySmith}} just in case.--<span style="background:#FF0;font-family:Rockwell Extra Bold">]]]</span> 15:34, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
::::Thanks for the ping. I'm inclined to think we can go with this one, partly because the WSJ is a good source (although I strongly suspect in this case they did no investigative reporting beyond reading the 100 year old North China News article) and partly because anything involving aviation in 1911 was big news. It's hard to imagine some previous flight having been taken in secret. I do however note that the WSJ talks about "China's first powered flight". It's likely there were previous unpowered flights (i.e. gliders or hot-air balloons). And for sure, the Chinese were flying rockets 100's of years ago, and a rocket is certainly a powered flight. So maybe we want "... first airplane flight". And similar rewording in the second part of the hook; I would imagine the first flight-related death in China was in the 13th century either as the victim of a rocket attack or an accident on its launch pad. ] ] 15:57, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
::::*I've changed to "aircraft flight" and "aircraft-related".&nbsp;—&nbsp;] (]) 16:20, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
::::*:@] I intentionally used the word "airplane". The word ] is a more general term which also includes gliders and hot-air balloons (and some other things which did not exist in 1911). ] ] 16:31, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
::::*:*I was referring to ], but you are correct that aeroplane would be more specific. Addressed and promoted.&nbsp;—&nbsp;] (]) 16:46, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
::::*:*:Actually, the distinction between "aircraft" and "airplane" is indeed international. See for example, the : "Aircraft. Any machine that can derive support in the atmosphere from the reactions of the air other than the reactions of the air against the earth’s surface". ] ] 16:59, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
::::*:*:*I wasn't saying there was no distinction in either variety; my thought when using aircraft was that it is a common term that avoids air vs. aero. That being said, the distinction is important here, and I have no qualms with using aeroplane.&nbsp;—&nbsp;] (]) 17:02, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

===]===
*One of mine, so it will require a second pair of eyes. &nbsp;—&nbsp;] (]) 14:07, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
::I've adjusted the article so that the number 174 has an end-of-sentence citation, as I don't particularly fancy going through 50 references. This set should be fine. Incidentally, I was wondering if my ] article could run in the next prep 5 (i.e. the next prep area to open when this is queued), as it runs on 29 December, which is her birthday.--<span style="background:#FF0;font-family:Rockwell Extra Bold">]]]</span> 16:46, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
::*Sure, done.&nbsp;—&nbsp;] (]) 16:49, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

== ] ==

My article (]) ] should ideally not be on the same DYK template as ]. They're both tornado blurbs less than a year separated (both with CCTV footage, coincidentally) and should be spaced out to achieve a bit more variety. Since Andover already has image rights, I'd like mine to be swapped with one a day ahead or behind where it is. ] (]) 16:50, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
*<small>Also, I'm unsure as to why Queues and Prep areas are dictated properly - Preparation Area X vs Queue/X. Not that it matters here. ] (]) 16:53, 20 December 2024 (UTC)</small>
**Swapped into Prep 2; I've promoted '']'' in its place.&nbsp;—&nbsp;] (]) 17:00, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
**:Thank you. ] (]) 17:01, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

== ] (2024-12-20) ==

{{ping|Crisco 1492}} I'm confused about ]. Both of these were indeed in ] (which I just promoted to ]). ] ] 18:10, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
*You're right; switched back. I got confused as I was expecting to promote it, and then it was empty when I went back.&nbsp;—&nbsp;] (]) 18:15, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
===]===
*I reviewed this, and thus new eyes needed.&nbsp;—&nbsp;] (]) 17:29, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
::{{yo|Cukie Gherkin|Crisco 1492|Nineteen Ninety-Four guy}} I saw ] in the article.--<span style="background:#FF0;font-family:Rockwell Extra Bold">]]]</span> 21:18, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
:::I have made some tweaks to hopefully reduce paraphrasing. If this was not adequate, could you point me to the concerning text? - ] (]) 21:40, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
::::I think "a Puff-Puff, only for it to turn out to be a" should be reworded.--<span style="background:#FF0;font-family:Rockwell Extra Bold">]]]</span> 21:59, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::How's that? - ] (]) 22:19, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
::::::Should be fine, though as I'm falling asleep I'll double check in the morning.--<span style="background:#FF0;font-family:Rockwell Extra Bold">]]]</span> 23:50, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::::This is fine.--<span style="background:#FF0;font-family:Rockwell Extra Bold">]]]</span> 11:45, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

===]===
*Tried looking up the hook fact and I got a 404 error. Pinging ], ], and ].&nbsp;—&nbsp;] (]) 17:29, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
** Does work for you? ] (]) 17:34, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
***Yes, but it's not used to help support the fact in the article, which goes against our guidelines for hooks.&nbsp;—&nbsp;] (]) 17:57, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
**** So, is reusing that ref for the sentence about being the last surviving activist all that's needed? ] (]) 18:02, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
*****That would suffice for me; it would have to be in addition to the current ref, as it doesn't support her becoming the last surviving activist after the death of Min.&nbsp;—&nbsp;] (]) 18:07, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
*****:I replaced the ref about Min with a different news article that supports that fact.
*****:{{tq|오 지사는 지난 2021년 독립운동가 민영주 지사가 작고한 뒤 유일한 생존 여성 애국지사이기도 했다.}}
*****:{{tq|Oh was the last living female independence activist after the death of Min Yeong-ju in 2021.}}
*****:Is there anything else needed from me? ] (]) 20:23, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
*****:*No, it's good.&nbsp;—&nbsp;] (]) 00:12, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

== ] ==

===]===
{{ping| Nineteen Ninety-Four guy|Grnrchst|AirshipJungleman29}} The article says {{tq|expressed her disapproval}}, which got turned into {{tq|refused to accept}} in the hook. I know next to nothing about Catholic rites, do these two phrases mean the same thing? ] ] 17:39, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
*Source says "she expressed her displeasure with a grimace". When I reviewed this set, I felt that the two were functionally identical within the context of an avowed and non-verbal anarchist who actively campaigned against religious doctrine.&nbsp;—&nbsp;] (]) 18:00, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

==]==
Can someone take a look at ]? It would be so nice if it could run on Christmas Eve. ] (]) 19:19, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
:Everything looks good. I made some copyedits and added missing info. The only question I had was whether the lead should say Christmas carp is one of several different fish dishes served at the traditional ] in Central Europe. I did add a link to it in the last section. I don't think I should do the formal review since I added content, but I think it checks out in all respects. I checked Earwig, spot checked sources, and fixed the grammar. I think it's ready to go, but others might want to change the hooks. ] (]) 21:39, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
::Time is running out and this still needs a review. ] (]) 09:35, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
:::Looking now. ] (]) 10:17, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
::::This is passed. ] (]) 17:17, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
::::*I replaced puff-puff with the carp in Queue 7.&nbsp;—&nbsp;] (]) 17:56, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

== Christmas Cantata for 26 December ==

Bach first performed ] on '''26 December 1724'''. I hope for a DYK on that day. I had to make it GA, which happened but later than I wanted, I nominated for DYK even before that happened, the review began right away, and today it was approved. - The set (]) is full. Any chance? Because any other day would look strange to an observant audience ;) -- ] (]) 22:53, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
:There probably shouldn't be a sugar hook next to a vitamin hook, so I've made a hole in prep. I'll assess the cantata in the morning.--<span style="background:#FF0;font-family:Rockwell Extra Bold">]]]</span> 00:05, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
::I see {{yo|AirshipJungleman29}} beat me to it.--<span style="background:#FF0;font-family:Rockwell Extra Bold">]]]</span> 11:48, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
:: (ec) Thank you, and it is already in prep 2, thanks to ], who took ALT1b: ... that on 26 December 1724, ] led the first performance of ''']''', based on a hymn that ] ''(pictured)'' had derived 200 years earlier from "]"?, and then dropped the end.
:: I am glad! Having said that, I wonder if some "derived" makes any sense if not saying from what. Teach me English. In this case it is a hymn that was already 1000 years old when Luther derived, 1200 years when Bach wrote, and is now 1500 years. Interesting, I think. Ideas? I thought that just linking to it was the most neutral way. - As for Bach's name: I believe that many readers would know who is meant by Bach even without a link. A link can serve those who don't, but the full name just takes space. (The ], dedicated to the works by ], never writes Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, just W. A. Mozart.) In 2010 and 2011, we had an almost weekly DYK about Bach's cantatas (because he composed them weekly for 2+ years), and most hooks just said Bach without a link (see ])). - Please reserve space on 1 January, ] is already nominated for GA, - a review would help ;) --] (]) 11:57, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
:::Derived can be used in this context. I agree with your suggestion about just using Bach's last name. I also now realise that Luther's derivation was done in 1524, which is exactly 500 years ago and should probably be highlighted. ] (]) 12:14, 21 December 2024 (UTC)


== ] == == ] ==
Line 243: Line 68:
*November 5: ] *November 5: ]
*November 7: ] *November 7: ]
*November 9: ] (second opinion requested) *<s>November 9: ] (second opinion requested)</s>
*November 10: ] *November 10: ]
*November 17: ] *November 17: ]
Line 259: Line 84:
*December 13: ] *December 13: ]
*December 13: ] *December 13: ]
*December 15: ] *<s>December 15: ]</s>
*<s>December 15: ]</s> *<s>December 15: ]</s>
*December 15: ] *December 15: ]
Line 312: Line 137:
*:That is an ] and not a ], so it does not affect DYK. (]) ] ] 19:37, 24 December 2024 (UTC) *:That is an ] and not a ], so it does not affect DYK. (]) ] ] 19:37, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
*::Hi ], as per the summary at the top of ], "maintenance templates" is a valid issue. It also falls afoul of the first sentence of DYK:COMPLETE: "There is a expectation that an article—even a short one—that is to appear on the front page should appear to be reasonably complete and not some sort of work in progress."&nbsp;—&nbsp;] (]) 00:47, 25 December 2024 (UTC) *::Hi ], as per the summary at the top of ], "maintenance templates" is a valid issue. It also falls afoul of the first sentence of DYK:COMPLETE: "There is a expectation that an article—even a short one—that is to appear on the front page should appear to be reasonably complete and not some sort of work in progress."&nbsp;—&nbsp;] (]) 00:47, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
*:::The lead of any page is absolutely forbidden to have anything in it that is not covered in the body. So that sentence has its definition of "maintenance templates" in ]. If there is disagreement, then I can remove it from the lead without further ado. ] ] 06:19, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
*::::{{ping|Hawkeye7}} is it forbidden for the lead to have anything in it that is not covered in the body? ] says the lead usually repeats information that is in the body. ] (]) 11:35, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
*:::::Not an issue for an article, because anything that is unreferenced can be removed. In this case we are not referring to an article, but a ] for an admin page, and {{tq|this template presents a concise summary}}. If it is ''not'' a summary of what is in the body, then it is wrong, and must be removed from the nutshell forthwith. ] ] 18:56, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

== ] ==

===], ], ]===

* ... that ''']''' was "unfortunate" to draw ''']''' as judge when she stood trial over the ''']'''?

{{ping|Launchballer|Folkezoft|Crisco 1492|AirshipJungleman29}} The quote from is "Unfortunately for them, they got Judge Christopher Hehir." Some editors at ERRORS might have issue with the word change, so perhaps one of the below would be better:

* ALT1: ... that ''']''' "unfortunately" drew ''']''' as judge when she stood trial over the ''']'''?

*ALT2: ... that, in describing ''']'''{{`s}} trial for her actions in the ''']''', one reporter said she "unfortunately" drew ''']''' as judge?

Thoughts? ] (]) 17:36, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
:I've changed the spelling of "unfortunatly" to "unfortunately" in both ALT hooks, and fixed the apostrophe-s template in ALT2. ] (]) 04:21, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
::I was under the impression that "unfortunately" --> "unfortunate" was covered by ], although now I don't see anything about adverbs in it. (I could have sworn the approved hook had the bold links in a different order?) In any event, all of the hooks are wrong; Plummer uses "they/them" pronouns.--<span style="background:#FF0;font-family:Rockwell Extra Bold">]]]</span> 04:38, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

===]===

* ... that ''']''' never received approval to begin constructing a building for the ]?

{{ping|Ergo Sum|Chaiten1|Hilst}}

While the article talks about how O'Kane was ordered to halt construction, I cannot find where it states that the building never received approval, including that it did not receive retroactive approval. ] (]) 17:42, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

:I've added some more info about the approvals to the article. – 🌻 ] (] &#124; ]) 11:44, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

===]===
* ... that ] has an existential crisis in ''']'''?
@] @] @]
Doesn't this hook as currently written not meet ]? ] (] · ]) 04:23, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

:I guess not. Maybe we could go with ''"... that SpongeKnob SquareNuts, a porn parody of SpongeBob SquarePants, has been described as 'like a train crash that you just can't look away from'?"'' or ''"... that the costume for the titular SpongeKnob SquareNuts character consisted of a box and a condom?"''. – 🌻 ] (] &#124; ]) 11:22, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
::Both of these alternatives are fine with me. ] (]) 14:11, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
:::The idea I had was actually something like "... that ] has a ''']'''?", but I guess we can have another reviewer decide. Not sure if the other proposals fail ] or not (maybe they don't and I'm just being too conscious or conservative), but I guess that's also up to the reviewer. ] (] · ]) 14:44, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
::::That also works. ] (]) 14:48, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::I changed it to the "box and a condom" hook because I thought that was the most interesting. Others are welcome to suggest changes or advocate for another hook. ] (]) 17:52, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
::::::I think that the use of the word "titular" feels odd in this sentence and it's not clear if the sentence is referring to the character or the film. Might I suggest tweaking the wording?
::::::"... that a ] costume used in the film ''''']''''' consisted of a box and a condom?"
::::::] (]) 19:02, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::::{{+1}}
:::::::I used titular because I had just woken up and my brain works very poorly in the morning :V – 🌻 ] (] &#124; ]) 19:56, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
::::::::It's already in Queue, so a sysop will need to swap with the new wording. ] (] · ]) 09:04, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::{{done}} – 🌻 ] (] &#124; ]) 11:26, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
:Are we sure this is notable? I don't see any of the sources in the article making a particularly compelling case for a GNG pass... ] (] • she/her) 09:43, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
::I've started ]. ] (]) 13:13, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
:::It now needs pulling, if it hasn't already been done. ] (] · ]) 14:48, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

== 12-hour sets? ==

] currently has over 130 approved noms. Should we start doing 12-hour sets? – 🌻 ] (] &#124; ]) 11:33, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
:This was discussed at ] and ] and the consensus was that we start when there are seven filled queues.--<span style="background:#FF0;font-family:Rockwell Extra Bold">]]]</span> 13:08, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
::Alright, good to know. – 🌻 ] (] &#124; ]) 13:14, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
:::If two more preps are promoted in the next 20 hours—we have five queues filled and need seven—we will switch to 12-hour sets after midnight and continue for three days, after which we switch back. We actually have over 200 approved noms (202 to be precise): the 133 that are counted in the table, and another 69 that aren't transcluding on the Approved page and therefore aren't counted by the bot as being approved, because the bot can only count transcluded noms. ] (]) 03:56, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
::::If this does happen, then my ] hook will need to move. I put in a request that it run on the 29th, her birthday.--<span style="background:#FF0;font-family:Rockwell Extra Bold">]]]</span> 04:43, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

== ] ==

===]===
{{ping| Crisco 1492|No Swan So Fine|Darth Stabro}} I'm concerned about the ] aspects of this. It also looks like the credit template got lost. ] ] 02:58, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
*I've fixed the credit template. I think the move wreaked havoc on it.&nbsp;—&nbsp;] (]) 03:07, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

===]===
{{ping| Hilst |Bogger | Figureskatingfan}} the article doesn't mention "espresso". ] ] 03:09, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

:fixed. - ] (]) 08:24, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

== ] ==

I nominated this for ITN and now I think it's been lost. I requested it be moved so there aren't two tornado-based blurbs, but the move wasn't done perfectly and it wasn't put into another queue. It was replaced in its original queue with Planting a Rainbow but that one's original queue wasn't updated, and when it went to Errors, was replaced by another blurb from somewhere else. ] - promoted 12 days ago but not on any queue anymore. And whatever anyone does, please keep it away from Prep 5 and the 1991 Andover tornado so we don't have to go through this all over again. I'm not too concerned with getting this up in a timely manner, moreso with having it on DYK at all. Cheers. ] (]) 15:05, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:05, 26 December 2024

Error reportsPlease do not post error reports for the current Main Page template version here. Instead, post them to Misplaced Pages: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, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

Current time: 04:55, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Update frequency: once every 24 hours

Last updated: 4 hours ago( )
Did you know?
Introduction and rules
IntroductionWP:DYK
General discussionWT:DYK
GuidelinesWP:DYKCRIT
Reviewer instructionsWP:DYKRI
Nominations
Nominate an articleWP:DYKCNN
Awaiting approvalWP:DYKN
ApprovedWP:DYKNA
April 1 hooksWP:DYKAPRIL
Holding areaWP:SOHA
Preparation
Preps and queuesT:DYK/Q
Prepper instructionsWP:DYKPBI
Admin instructionsWP:DYKAI
Main Page errorsWP:ERRORS
History
StatisticsWP:DYKSTATS
Archived setsWP:DYKA
Just for fun
Monthly wrapsWP:DYKW
AwardsWP:DYKAWARDS
UserboxesWP:DYKUBX
Hall of FameWP:DYK/HoF
List of users ...
... by nominationsWP:DYKNC
... by promotionsWP:DYKPC
Administrative
Scripts and botsWP:DYKSB
On the Main PageT:DYK
Main Page errorsWP:ERRORS
To ping the DYK admins{{DYK admins}}
Shortcut

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, 202, 203

• 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 Lowercase sigmabot III 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.

Prep 2

FoodPharmer

Not happy with the use of unattributed quotes, particularly for a stuff that very clearly isn't a health drink. I propose trimming everything after "pictured" to "once shamed Bournvita into reducing its sugar" or somesuch.--Launchballer 12:53, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Bournvita was marketed in India as a "children's health drink" at the time of the video, and was the very reason the video was made. I do have sources that can be added to back up the claim:
—CX Zoom 16:24, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
FWIW, I've updated Bournvita's article with appropriate references. —CX Zoom 17:27, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

IMAX Melbourne

Second opinion needed

Hi, could we get a second opinion on Template:Did you know nominations/The Heart Knows its Own Bitterness (Talmud)? There's been some changes since my review, and I would like to move this forward with a yay or nay. Viriditas (talk) 20:35, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Took a look and left a few comments. Rjjiii left a few good comments as well. Andre🚐 01:12, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Older nominations needing DYK reviewers

The previous list was archived about twelve hours ago, so I've created a new list of all 24 nominations that need reviewing in the Older nominations section of the Nominations page, covering everything through December 15. We have a total of 310 nominations, of which 223 have been approved, a gap of 87 nominations that has increased by 11 over the past 7 days. Thanks to everyone who reviews these and any other nominations!

More than one month old

Other nominations

Please remember to cross off entries, including the date, as you finish reviewing them (unless you're asking for further review), even if the review was not an approval. Please do not remove them entirely. Many thanks! BlueMoonset (talk) 02:46, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Queue 2

Planting a Rainbow

I reviewed this originally, so somebody else needs to look at it. RoySmith (talk) 20:45, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Alien: Romulus

@Nineteen Ninety-Four guy, Lankyant, and Ippantekina: The use of quotes in the hook ("resurrected") implies this is a direct quote from someplace, but that doesn't appear in the article. I note that MOS:SCAREQUOTES was featured in today's WP:ERRORS, and that applies equally well here. RoySmith (talk) 20:50, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Sigh. Fix ping. RoySmith (talk) 20:51, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Prep 4

Kwan Man-ching

Other

Prep 5

Ceechynaa +1

I'll look at Bernard Gray when I've eaten. Looking at this now, I wonder if it's worth tightening the hook slightly, e.g. "that a reviewer identified an "audible contempt" for men in the songs of Ceechynaa, who entered the UK singles chart earlier this month with "Peggy"?--Launchballer 18:29, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Vitamin E

The hook fact, in the Lead and in the History section, is now followed by the Evans 1936 reference. The ref is also used after the next sentence in the History section, which attributes the suggestion to the name of a Greek scholar in a footnote on page 321. David notMD (talk) 20:47, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
Care to explain this edit @Darth Stabro:?--Launchballer 21:18, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
Hi, it must have been an accidental misclick of the rollback button. ~Darth Stabro 21:21, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Puff-puff (onomatopoeia)

Bernard Gray (Sunday Pictorial journalist)

Looks good to me.--Launchballer 21:18, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Chernobyl Reactors 5 and 6

Queue 6

Phoebe Plummer, Christopher Hehir, Just Stop Oil Sunflowers protest

@Launchballer, Folkezoft, Crisco 1492, and AirshipJungleman29: The quote from the source is "Unfortunately for them, they got Judge Christopher Hehir." Some editors at ERRORS might have issue with the word change, so perhaps one of the below would be better:

Thoughts? Z1720 (talk) 17:36, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

I've changed the spelling of "unfortunatly" to "unfortunately" in both ALT hooks, and fixed the apostrophe-s template in ALT2. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:21, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
I was under the impression that "unfortunately" --> "unfortunate" was covered by MOS:SIC, although now I don't see anything about adverbs in it. (I could have sworn the approved hook had the bold links in a different order?) In any event, all of the hooks are wrong; Plummer uses "they/them" pronouns.--Launchballer 04:38, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Michael O'Kane

@Ergo Sum, Chaiten1, and Hilst:

While the article talks about how O'Kane was ordered to halt construction, I cannot find where it states that the building never received approval, including that it did not receive retroactive approval. Z1720 (talk) 17:42, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

I've added some more info about the approvals to the article. – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 11:44, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

SpongeKnob SquareNuts

@Di (they-them) @Tails Wx @Hilst Doesn't this hook as currently written not meet WP:DYKFICTION? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:23, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

I guess not. Maybe we could go with "... that SpongeKnob SquareNuts, a porn parody of SpongeBob SquarePants, has been described as 'like a train crash that you just can't look away from'?" or "... that the costume for the titular SpongeKnob SquareNuts character consisted of a box and a condom?". – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 11:22, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
Both of these alternatives are fine with me. Di (they-them) (talk) 14:11, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
The idea I had was actually something like "... that SpongeBob has a porn parody?", but I guess we can have another reviewer decide. Not sure if the other proposals fail WP:DYKGRAT or not (maybe they don't and I'm just being too conscious or conservative), but I guess that's also up to the reviewer. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 14:44, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
That also works. Di (they-them) (talk) 14:48, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
I changed it to the "box and a condom" hook because I thought that was the most interesting. Others are welcome to suggest changes or advocate for another hook. Z1720 (talk) 17:52, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
I think that the use of the word "titular" feels odd in this sentence and it's not clear if the sentence is referring to the character or the film. Might I suggest tweaking the wording?
"... that a SpongeBob costume used in the film SpongeKnob SquareNuts consisted of a box and a condom?"
Di (they-them) (talk) 19:02, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
+1
I used titular because I had just woken up and my brain works very poorly in the morning :V – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 19:56, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
It's already in Queue, so a sysop will need to swap with the new wording. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:04, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
 Done – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 11:26, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
Are we sure this is notable? I don't see any of the sources in the article making a particularly compelling case for a GNG pass... theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 09:43, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
I've started an AfD. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:13, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
It now needs pulling, if it hasn't already been done. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 14:48, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

12-hour sets?

WP:DYKNA currently has over 130 approved noms. Should we start doing 12-hour sets? – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 11:33, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

This was discussed at Misplaced Pages talk:Did you know/Archive 202#Approaching 12-hour backlog mode? and Misplaced Pages talk:Did you know/Archive 203#WP:DYKUBM and the consensus was that we start when there are seven filled queues.--Launchballer 13:08, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
Alright, good to know. – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 13:14, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
If two more preps are promoted in the next 20 hours—we have five queues filled and need seven—we will switch to 12-hour sets after midnight and continue for three days, after which we switch back. We actually have over 200 approved noms (202 to be precise): the 133 that are counted in the table, and another 69 that aren't transcluding on the Approved page and therefore aren't counted by the bot as being approved, because the bot can only count transcluded noms. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:56, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
If this does happen, then my #Ceechynaa +1 hook will need to move. I put in a request that it run on the 29th, her birthday.--Launchballer 04:43, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Queue 7

Diddy parties

@Crisco 1492, No Swan So Fine, and Darth Stabro: I'm concerned about the WP:BLP aspects of this. It also looks like the credit template got lost. RoySmith (talk) 02:58, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

De Worsten van Babel

@Hilst, Bogger, and Figureskatingfan: the article doesn't mention "espresso". RoySmith (talk) 03:09, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

fixed. - Bogger (talk) 08:24, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Belvidere Apollo Theatre collapse

I nominated this for ITN and now I think it's been lost. I requested it be moved so there aren't two tornado-based blurbs, but the move wasn't done perfectly and it wasn't put into another queue. It was replaced in its original queue with Planting a Rainbow but that one's original queue wasn't updated, and when it went to Errors, was replaced by another blurb from somewhere else. Template:Did you know nominations/Belvidere Apollo Theatre collapse - promoted 12 days ago but not on any queue anymore. And whatever anyone does, please keep it away from Prep 5 and the 1991 Andover tornado so we don't have to go through this all over again. I'm not too concerned with getting this up in a timely manner, moreso with having it on DYK at all. Cheers. Departure– (talk) 15:05, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Category: