For instructions on how to nominate an article, see below.
"Did you know ...?"
Introduction and rulesWP:DYK
General discussionWT:DYK
Supplementary rulesWP:DYKSG
Nominations (awaiting approval)WP:DYKN
Reviewing guideWP:DYKR
Nominations (approved)WP:DYKNA
Preps and queuesT:DYK/Q
Currently on Main Page
Main Page errorsWP:ERRORS
Archive of appearancesWP:DYKA
StatisticsWP:DYKSTATS
April 1 hooksWP:DYKAPRIL
April 1 talkWT:DYKAPRIL

This page is to nominate fresh articles to appear in the "Did you know" section on the Main Page, by a "hook" (an interesting note). Nominations that have been approved are moved to a staging area, from which the articles are promoted into the Queue.

Count of DYK Hooks
Section # of Hooks # Verified
December 26 1
January 7 1
January 10 1
January 14 1
January 16 2
January 26 1
January 28 1
January 29 1 1
January 30 4
February 1 1 1
February 5 2
February 6 2
February 7 5 1
February 8 1
February 10 2
February 13 1
February 15 5 4
February 16 3 3
February 17 4 1
February 18 9 6
February 19 11 7
February 20 5 3
February 21 11 7
February 22 14 9
February 23 8 5
February 24 9 5
February 25 9 7
February 26 20 11
February 27 15 10
February 28 12 6
March 1 7 4
March 2 20 15
March 3 10 6
March 4 10 5
March 5 20 9
March 6 15 2
March 7 6 1
March 8
Total 250 129
Last updated 03:05, 8 March 2021 UTC
Current time is 03:29, 8 March 2021 UTC [refresh]

Instructions for nominators

Create a subpage for your new DYK suggestion and then list the page below under the date the article was created or the expansion began or it became a good article (not the date you submit it here), with the newest dates at the bottom. Any registered user may nominate a DYK suggestion (if you are not a registered user, please leave a message at the bottom of the DYK project talk page with the details of the article you would like to nominate and the hook you would like to propose); self-nominations are permitted and encouraged. Thanks for participating and please remember to check back for comments on your nomination (consider watchlisting your nomination page).

If this is your first nomination, please read the DYK rules before continuing:
Official DYK criteria: DYK rules and supplementary guidelines
Unofficial guide: Learning DYK

To nominate an article

Read these instructions completely before proceeding.
For simplified instructions, see User:Rjanag/Quick DYK 2.
I.
Create the nomination subpage.

Enter the article title in the box below and click the button. (To nominate multiple articles together, enter any or all of the article titles.) You will then be taken to a preloaded nomination page.


II.
Write the nomination.

On the nomination page, fill in the relevant information. See Template:NewDYKnomination and {{NewDYKnomination/guide}} for further information.

  • Not every line of the template needs to be filled in. For instance, if you are not nominating an image to appear with your hook, there is no need to fill in the image-related lines.
  • Add an edit summary e.g. "Nominating YOUR ARTICLE TITLE for DYK" and click Save page.
  • Make sure the nomination page is on your watchlist, so you can follow the review discussion.
III.

In the current nominations section find the subsection for the date on which the article was created or on which expansion began (or, if a new Good Article, the date on which it became a GA), not the date on which you make the nomination.

  • At the top of that subsection (before other nominations already there, but below the section head and hidden comment) add {{Did you know nominations/YOUR ARTICLE TITLE}}.
  • Add an edit summary e.g. "Nominating YOUR ARTICLE TITLE for DYK" and click Save page.

How to review a nomination

Any editor who was not involved in writing/expanding or nominating an article may review it by checking to see that the article meets all the DYK criteria (long enough, new enough, no serious editorial or content issues) and the hook is cited. Editors may also alter the suggested hook to improve it, suggest new hooks, or even lend a hand and make edits to the article to which the hook applies so that the hook is supported and accurate. For a more detailed discussion of the DYK rules and review process see the supplementary guidelines and the WP:Did you know/Reviewing guide.

To post a comment or review on a DYK nomination, follow the steps outlined below:

  • Look through this page, Template talk:Did you know, to find a nomination you would like to comment on.
  • Click the "Review or comment" link at the top of the nomination. You will be taken to the nomination subpage.
  • The top of the page includes a list of the DYK criteria. Check the article to ensure it meets all the relevant criteria.
  • To indicate the result of the review (i.e., whether the nomination passes, fails, or needs some minor changes), leave a signed comment on the page. Please begin with one of the 5 review symbols that appear at the top of the edit screen, and then indicate all aspects of the article that you have reviewed; your comment should look something like the following:

    Article length and age are fine, no copyvio or plagiarism concerns, reliable sources are used. But the hook needs to be shortened.

    If you are the first person to comment on the nomination, there will be a line :* <!-- REPLACE THIS LINE TO WRITE FIRST COMMENT, KEEPING :* --> showing you where you should put the comment.
  • Save the page.

If there is any problem or concern about a nomination, please consider notifying the nominator by placing {{subst:DYKproblem|Article|header=yes|sig=yes}} on the nominator's talk page.

Frequently asked questions

Backlogged?

This page is often backlogged. As long as your submission is still on the page, it will stay there until an editor reviews it. Since editors are encouraged to review the oldest submissions first (so that those hooks don't grow stale), it may take several weeks until your submission is reviewed. In the meantime, please consider reviewing another submission (not your own) to help reduce the backlog (see instructions above).

Where is my hook?

If you can't find the nomination you submitted to this nominations page, it may have been approved and is on the approved nominations page waiting to be promoted. It could also have been added to one of the prep areas, promoted from prep to a queue, or is on the main page.

If the nominated hook is in none of those places, then the nomination has probably been rejected. Such a rejection usually only occurs if it was at least a couple of weeks old and had unresolved issues for which any discussion had gone stale. If you think your nomination was unfairly rejected, you can query this on the DYK discussion page, but as a general rule such nominations will only be restored in exceptional circumstances.

Search archived DYK nomination discussions

Instructions for other editors

How to promote an accepted hook

  • See Wikipedia:Did you know/Preparation areas for full instructions.
  • Hooks that have been approved are located on the approved nominations page.
  • In one window, open the DYK nomination subpage of the hook you would like to promote.
  • In another window, open the prep set you intend to add the hook to.
  • In the prep set...
    • Paste the hook into the hook area (be sure to not paste in that that)
    • Paste the credit information ({{DYKmake}} and/or {{DYKnom}}) into the credits area.
    • Add an edit summary, e.g. "Promoted [[Jane Fonda]]", preview, and save
  • Back on DYK nomination page...
    • change {{DYKsubpage to {{subst:DYKsubpage
    • change |passed= to |passed=yes
    • Add an edit summary, e.g. "Promoted to Prep 3", preview, and save

How to remove a rejected hook

  • Open the DYK nomination subpage of the hook you would like to remove. (It's best to wait several days after a reviewer has rejected the hook, just in case someone contests or the article undergoes a large change.)
  • In the window where the DYK nomination subpage is open, replace the line {{DYKsubpage with {{subst:DYKsubpage, and replace |passed= with |passed=no. Then save the page. This has the effect of wrapping up the discussion on the DYK nomination subpage in a blue archive box and stating that the nomination was unsuccessful, as well as adding the nomination to a category for archival purposes.

How to remove a hook from the prep areas or queue

  • Edit the prep area or queue where the hook is and remove the hook and the credits associated with it.
  • Go to the hook's nomination subpage (there should have been a link to it in the credits section).
    • View the edit history for that page
    • Go back to the last version before the edit where the hook was promoted, and revert to that version to make the nomination active again.
    • Add a new icon on the nomination subpage to cancel the previous tick and leave a comment after it explaining that the hook was removed from the prep area or queue, and why, so that later reviewers are aware of this issue.
  • Add a transclusion of the template back to this page so that reviewers can see it. It goes under the date that it was first created/expanded/listed as a GA. You may need to add back the day header for that date if it had been removed from this page.
  • If you removed the hook from a queue, it is best to either replace it with another hook from one of the prep areas, or to leave a message at
    • Don't; it should not ever be necessary, and will break some links which will later need to be repaired. Even if you change the title of the article, you don't need to move the nomination page.

Nominations

Older nominations

Articles created/expanded on December 26

Epsom College in Malaysia

Fernandes in 2011
Fernandes in 2011

Created by Moonraker (talk). Self-nominated at 20:02, 10 January 2021 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg The overall article is new enough and long enough. Regarding neutrality, the first paragraph of Origins feels unencyclopaedic in tone. The Scholarships sentence on a pupil being offered scholarships also feels out of place. On citations, I am wary of expatgo.com, and would prefer to hook from another source. On hooks, ALT0 is currently lacking, but I can see it working with a bit of expansion. ALT1 is hooky if you know who the two individuals are, but would not be otherwise. The sources seem to abbreviate it to ECiM not ECM. CMD (talk) 12:17, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
Chipmunkdavis: “Regarding neutrality, the first paragraph of Origins feels unencyclopaedic in tone.” It has two sentences. The first of those is strictly factual and seems to me to give the critical fact in the section. The second is about the motivation of Fernandes, based on the source. If there is anything there you find not neutrally written, do please say exactly what it is, and I’ll see how I can improve it. “The Scholarships sentence on a pupil being offered scholarships also feels out of place.” It is an achievement of the school as well as the pupil. Where would you prefer to put that? “On citations, I am wary of expatgo.com...” Expatgo is a publisher in Kuala Lumpur which has been publishing Expat magazine there since 1996, now employing about twenty journalists and editors. Do please say what your objection to it is. “On hooks, ALT0 is currently lacking, but I can see it working with a bit of expansion.” What is it lacking, please, and what would you want to add to it? “ALT1 is hooky if you know who the two individuals are, but would not be otherwise.” Most DYK hooks are about people and topics the world has never heard of, and there is no DYK rule that hooks can only mention famous people. But have you really not heard of Boris Johnson? “The sources seem to abbreviate it to ECiM not ECM”. The school, yes, but not the ECM Libra Foundation, which is not the same thing, see ecmlibrafoundation.com. Moonraker (talk) 00:28, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Strictly factual text can be unencyclopaedic in tone, and what is not neutral is the tone of those sentences. They're very promotional, perhaps magazine-like. The scholarships information is also promotionally written, is it needed on the page? Have the expatgo journalists done journalism elsewhere? What is the reputation of the magazine, and/or its credentials? Both hooks are short and rely on name recognition. The source used says "ECiM Libra Foundation co-founder Dato’ Lim Kian Onn...". CMD (talk) 01:57, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Chipmunkdavis You say Strictly factual text can be unencyclopaedic in tone, and what is not neutral is the tone of those sentences. They're very promotional, perhaps magazine-like. You are entitled to your personal opinion, but in this context please say which element(s) you object to and what conflicts you see with a policy on tone and/or neutrality. The scholarships information is also promotionally written... Again, this is your personal opinion. I have not the slightest interest in promoting anything, the text is simply reflecting the contents of the best source available. ...is it needed on the page? Yes, some information on scholarships is clearly needed for a fee-paying school which can accept non-fee-paying students. Leaving that out would seriously affect the neutrality of the page. Have the expatgo journalists done journalism elsewhere? I have not the slightest idea. What is the reputation of the magazine, and/or its credentials? I can find nothing which casts any doubt on its good reputation. If you want to discredit it, that is surely up to you. Both hooks are short... They are a good length. There is a DYK limit on the length of hooks, but not on shortness. ...and rely on name recognition. I do not agree at all, and even if they did there would be no rule against that. The source used says "ECiM Libra Foundation co-founder Dato’ Lim Kian Onn...". So it does. Clearly both are used, life is like that, not neat and tidy. I have edited “ECM” to “ECiM”. Moonraker (talk) 03:09, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
As a sample element, "the brainchild of Tony Fernandes" is a positive spin lifted directly from the source used. The next sentence is similar, and I can't see what information it really adds to the first sentence. On scholarships, it is a common practice for fee-taking international schools in Southeast Asia to provide scholarships to local students, and so one instance feels unremarkable. CMD (talk) 10:05, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Chipmunkdavis As a sample element, "the brainchild of Tony Fernandes" is a positive spin lifted directly from the source used. You can’t have it both ways, either it is “lifted directly” or else it is “positive spin”. It is indeed lifted directly and is offered as the main hook, which you haven’t objected to, except to claim without any policy support that it isn’t long enough. The next sentence is similar, and I can't see what information it really adds to the first sentence. Not the least bit similar, but to humour you I have taken it out. On scholarships, it is a common practice for fee-taking international schools in Southeast Asia to provide scholarships to local students... It is indeed, but not universal, and the information is needed. ... and so one instance feels unremarkable. There is no policy which insists on everything in an article being remarkable. It has not struck you that 100 per cent scholarships are very unusual, but no matter. I have to say, I am not finding you constructive. If you are feeling so negative, why don’t you start an AfD to try to get the page deleted? Moonraker (talk) 02:51, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

I don't understand that both ways comparison, if you're suggesting magazines cannot spin things positively I will have to disagree. The relevant hook policy is 2.1, interesting to a broad audience. A hook lifted directly from a source also seems an issue for Article 3.3 though, on close paraphrasing. As for deletion, I don't see where the notability of the page has been called into question. Is there an issue there? CMD (talk) 03:25, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Chipmunkdavis I thought you were trying to say it was “positive spin” by me. If you are saying it is “positive spin” by the magazine, I am completely at a loss to see what you mean. The word “brainchild” is simply an Anglo-Saxon form of “conception”. The magazine is saying Fernandes conceived the school in his mind. Other sources say he put a lot of money into it. Where on earth is the “spin” in that, what is being “spun”, and in what way is it too “positive”? You say the relevant policy is interesting to a broad audience, are you now saying that that hook is not interesting enough? If you are, you did not say it to begin with, you had other feeble objections then. ...an issue for Article 3.3 though, on close paraphrasing: no, “the brainchild of Tony Fernandes” is not paraphrased at all, it is a quotation. I am adding ALT0a to make that clearer. Looking over all of the above, you are clutching at a whole series of straws to find reasons to oppose the nomination, and looking for new ones when your first ideas do not hold water. Moonraker (talk) 06:43, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

The initial feeble straws remain the current feeble straws, although some have been dealt with and the copyright issue is new. There is no general preference for opposing nominations. If quotations are used they should be presented as quotations per WP:NFCCP, although the reliance on name recognition remains. On the topic of spin, the magazine is written in WP:NEWSSTYLE, and the article should not imitate that. On another initial comment, reading into the various sources in the scholarship section, they actually discuss the same scholarships, and so I am happy to c/e myself from the sources to maintain the information you feel needs mentioning. CMD (talk) 07:36, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Chipmunkdavis, I am glad you agree your objections are feeble. If you mean quotation marks should be added, you could have said that a long time ago and didn’t. I do not see any need but have added them as it is such a trivial point. It is quite normal for magazine articles to be written in NEWSSTYLE, and the article plainly does not "imitate" that, that is just subjective rubbish plucked out of the air. I do not understand your last sentence. You seem to be here only to play games, and I suggest you should bow out. Moonraker (talk) 05:14, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

The article copied the magazine almost word for word. That is beyond imitation. The objections remain, however you may feel about them. CMD (talk) 05:30, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Chipmunkdavis, that’s plainly not so. The article has two short quotations from the Expatgo article, which were there when you made your first comments, and you didn’t object to them. There is no “imitation” of NEWSSTYLE or anything else. Your nit-picking is the most extreme I have seen from a DYK reviewer in ten years, and that is what remains. When one nit-pick fails to hold water, you look for another. Moonraker (talk) 05:59, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

As I have already stated, aside from the issue of lifting some text from the source the other items were all mentioned in my initial response. CMD (talk) 06:02, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Chipmunkdavis, that expression “lifting some text from the source” is a weird turn of phrase to mean “quotation”, and it is helpful in showing just how hostile you are to something here, I don’t know what. At least you accept that it is a new nit-pick you have added. I see no point in repeating anything said above. If you are not going to bow out, we now need an experienced DYK contributor to look over the thread. Perhaps BlueMoonset can spare the time for it? Moonraker (talk) 06:21, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Any updates on this? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 06:58, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello Narutolovehinata5, the situation does not appear to have changed. CMD (talk) 14:17, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Given that it appears that this nomination has reached a deadlock and the nominator and reviewer cannot come to an agreement, I would suggest that a new reviewer take a look here. If the issues remain unaddressed within a reasonable time frame the nomination may need to be closed. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:24, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Blimey! Basic points such as length already covered & some of the review points now dealt with. Others remain, & most of the sources read like PR people dictating to journalists, but the school only opened last year. I think all 3 hooks pass, but ALT1 is probably best. Really the lead is much too short & the whole thing should be merged into say 4 sections. But I'll call it GTG. Johnbod (talk) 01:07, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Symbol possible vote.svg Hi there. Just a few concerns about this nomination. ALT0 and ALT0a are derived from an ExpatGo article, and there's note at the bottom of that article indicating that it's a press release from Epsom College. Therefore, it likely counts as a primary (WP:PRIMARY) and non-independent (WP:NIS) source. ALT1 is sourced to an HMC blog post and an Epsom College press release, both of which I would consider primary and non-independent for similar reasons. Edge3 (talk) 18:42, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Edge3, on Expatgo, I do not see what you see, except that there are contact details for the school. The article may or may not be based on a press release, but I imagine it was kicked off by one. Expatgo has journalists and editors and is a reliable source. I agree that oeclub.org is a primary source. You could call HMC a kind of trade association, but it is reliable on facts. I have checked out HMC and Heidi Salmons, and she was its Communications Manager at the time this was posted. If we were talking about notability, some of these sources could not be counted towards that, but even a primary source can be relied on to cite facts. Moonraker (talk) 20:56, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on January 7

Usmani family of Deoband

  • Comment: Since this is my first try for DYK, please allow me to improve things in between. I would really appreciate your advises. Thanks. ─ The Aafī (talk) 19:17, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Created by TheAafi (talk). Self-nominated at 19:17, 7 January 2021 (UTC).

  • This is more of a comment but right now none of the proposed hooks may appeal to an international audience except perhaps for some variant of ALT5. Would it be possible to write a hook that would be understood and interesting even to people outside of Pakistan who may not be familiar with any of the names or events mentioned in the article? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:37, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
    • Narutolovehinata5, I guess yes. I'll take some time for this. I know that ALT5 only can make a way out, but I was waiting for a review. Allow me some time. ─ The Aafī (talk) 05:29, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
  • @Narutolovehinata5: Are you able to finish a review? @TheAafi: Do you need help or clarification? I'm not sure if you were able to work on your hooks. Let your reviewer know if you need help. Edge3 (talk) 04:19, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
As I noted above, I wouldn't be able to do a full review of this due to a lack of time; however I'm willing to help out with sorting out any hook and hook interest issues. I see that the nominator suggested a new hook below, but the hoisting-the-flag angle will need to have some additional context for non-Pakistani readers. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 06:05, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Narutolovehinata5, Do you think, for example, if we say, Shabbir Ahmad Usmani and Zafar Ahmad Usmani, Islamic scholars from the Deoband India based Usmani family of Deoband hoisted the flags of Pakistan in 1947 in Karachi and Dhaka respectively? Or something so. I'd try to fix it. I don't understand how I can provide a more better context for non-Pakistani readers? ─ The Aafī on Mobile (talk) 06:18, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
I'm really not sure but I'm leaning towards against. Maybe Edge3 has some ideas? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 06:59, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
I think the main issue here is that non-Pakistani readers won't be able to get exactly what this "flag raising" thing is all about and why it was important. The context is missing, the hook would be fine otherwise. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:30, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
Narutolovehinata5 how's this then? ─ The Aafī on Mobile (talk) 10:36, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
At 192 characters, it's a bit on the upper end of an allowed hook length and could still be shortened if possible, but among the directions proposed so far this is perhaps the most promising. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:39, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
Narutolovehinata5 Thanks for the heads up. I guess I won't be able to shorten it, if yes, we could remove the "Islamic scholars" thing. Helpful? I'm on mobile and I feel hard to write here. If it is more promising than all the earlier tries, may you approve this now with slight modifications on your own? Thanks. ─ The Aafī on Mobile (talk) 10:43, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
I haven't had time to conduct a full review, but another reviewer might. Edge3 (talk) 16:21, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
    • ALT6:... that four members of the Usmani family of Deoband were co-founders of Darul Uloom Deoband, where the Deobandi movement began? (adaptation of ALT3). Narutolovehinata5, whether or not you have heard of it, the Deobandi movement is very well known in many parts of the world outside Pakistan, & should be the key to the hook imo. Haven't checked if the refs given above support the added bit. Johnbod (talk) 03:31, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
Is there a way to rephrase ALT6? The current version feels a bit repetitive wording-wise. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 04:52, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
@Johnbod:, looks fine to me. The sourcing is offline and Urdu-based, I'd request AGF. Among those four are, Fazlur Rahman Usmani, Zulfiqar Ali Deobandi, the father of Mahmud Hasan Deobandi, Nehal Ahmad, the brother-in-law of Muhammad Qasim Nanautawi and Mehtab Ali, the uncle of Mahmud Hasan Deobandi. Everything such is also individually referenced in the article as well. ─ The Aafī on Mobile (talk) 06:05, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
Johnbod, university is a bad idea for it, it is better called a seminary. So I propose it as:

References

  1. ^ Iqbal Hasan Khān, Shaykh al-Hind Mawlāna Mahmūd Hasan: Hayāt awr Ilmi Kārnāme, Aligarh Muslim University, p. 116
  2. ^ Muhammad Tayyib, Qari. Bukhari, Akbar Shah (ed.). 50 Misaali Shaksiyaat [50 Exemplar personalities] (in Urdu) (July 1999 ed.). pp. 58–59.
  3. ^ Muhammad Miyan Deobandi, Ulama-e-Haqq Aur Unke Mujahidana Karname, 1, pp. 22–23
  4. ^ Iqbal Hasan Khān, Shaykh al-Hind Mawlāna Mahmūd Hasan: Hayāt awr Ilmi Kārnāme, Aligarh Muslim University, p. 116
  5. ^ Muhammad Tayyib, Qari. Bukhari, Akbar Shah (ed.). 50 Misaali Shaksiyaat [50 Exemplar personalities] (in Urdu) (July 1999 ed.). pp. 58–59.
  6. ^ Muhammad Miyan Deobandi, Ulama-e-Haqq Aur Unke Mujahidana Karname, 1, pp. 22–23
  7. ^ Mehdi, Jameel (ed.). "Atiqur Rahman Usmani (1901-1984)". Mufakkir-e-Millat Number, Burhan (November 1987 ed.). Delhi: Nadwatul Musannifeen. pp. 506–507.
  8. ^ https://dailytimes.com.pk/324380/asia-bibi-pakistanis-need-to-bridge-the-mister-mulla-divide/
  9. ^ https://dailytimes.com.pk/324380/asia-bibi-pakistanis-need-to-bridge-the-mister-mulla-divide/

Articles created/expanded on January 10

Everard F. Aguilar

  • ... that stamp dealer Everard F. Aguilar proposed that the Jamaican Post Office issue stamps to mark the death of James Bond creator Ian Fleming but the idea was not accepted?
  • Reviewed: Dog & Bull
  • Comment: Still working on it. Part of the career section was copied from Philip Saunders but there is sufficient new material for a new DYK

Created by Philafrenzy (talk) and Whispyhistory (talk). Nominated by Philafrenzy (talk) at 15:58, 17 January 2021 (UTC).

Policy compliance:

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Green tickY
  • Interesting: Green tickY
  • Other problems: Red XN - ?
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol question.svg ALT0 is fine, and has an online citation ("Between the devil and the deep blue sea") in the text. However there are minor issues. 1. Regarding the language and citation of ALT1: its language is unclear to me. I had to read the article and the citation ("Between the Devil") to work out that it meant that Aguilar had contributed one of the chapters in the book which was written by Fleming. On re-reading ALT1, yes the hook does say that, but it's not clear at first glance. It just needs to be clearer and simpler. 2. Also, ALT1 is not written out in the same way in the text with its citation next to it, so if ALT1 is to have a chance, you must do that. 3. The phrase, "third and youngest son" rings the plagiarism bell (re The Daily Gleaner: "Mr Everard Aguilar dies") - OK no-one would sue WP for that, but to get it through DYK you need to rephrase it. 4. QPQ pending. Apart from those minor issues, which are easily remedied, this is a nice article, and I thank you for this. I like the way that you make his difficult personality clear, while keeping the article neutral - I think all the best biogs are like that. Keep up the good work! Storye book (talk) 15:40, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, I am looking into the Fleming connection and will expand on it shortly. Philafrenzy (talk) 19:45, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for the QPQ; I've adjusted the review accordingly. I've also struck out point 1, regarding the clarity of ALT1 - I think I was being too picky. I look forward to seeing the other issues resolved - that should be quite straightforward. Storye book (talk) 09:51, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
Symbol possible vote.svg Placing a hold on this nomination until Philafrenzy completes their review at Template:Did you know nominations/Dele Fadele; that QPQ was assigned to a nomination of theirs that has been promoted despite being incomplete. Once that review is done, this can be promoted, but not until. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:56, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
BlueMoonset Philafrenzy continued the review and the nominator is working on fixing the issues. I think it might be considered complete enough now. SL93 (talk) 08:36, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
  • This review is not resolved yet, and it would be good to complete this one. Issue 2 could be resolved quickly if ALT1 is struck out and we just use ALT0. Issue 3 is very minor indeed, and could be resolved by rephrasing or deleting "third and youngest son" - or "third son"/"youngest son" would do.

    Turkey and the Holocaust

    • ... that Turkey has used Holocaust commemoration to deny both the Armenian Genocide and antisemitism in Turkey? Source: Quotes from Turkish officials: "In our history, there does not exist any genocide." "Turkish society has always been away from anti-Semitic feelings [sic], has never shown any feelings of anti-Semitism and xenophobia. Our people has [sic] always embraced their Jewish brothers." https://doi.org/10.1111%2Fsocf.12521
      Analysis by Baer: Beginning in 2014, Turkish Jewish community leaders have been joined in their annual Holocaust commemoration by high-ranking Turkish officials who have used the occasion each year to promote the image of Turks as rescuers of Jews, from 1492 through to World War II. Playing the part of Jewish savior against the tide of genocide, the Turkish government can vaunt its pride and claim never to have engaged in such historical crimes, thereby denying, sometimes obliquely, sometimes explicitly, the annihilation of the Ottoman Armenians. — Baer 2020 p. 207
      "A second theme, unique to the Turkish case, is the determination to deny the Armenian genocide by acknowledging the Holocaust." https://pen.org/professional-ethics-and-the-denial-of-armenian-genocide/

    Created by Buidhe (talk). Self-nominated at 18:06, 14 January 2021 (UTC).

    • buidhe This does not look like a neutral hook. Many hooks can be made on this article that are both interesting and neutral.VR talk 03:43, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
    • There is no requirement for hooks to follow NPOV. See WP:DYKRULES. It is factual and sourced to RS which is what matters. (t · c) buidhe 03:47, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
    • If you go to WP:DYKRULES and look under "Content", it says The hook should be neutral.VR talk 04:05, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
    • How is it non-neutral? It is just a fact. One that doesn't reflect well on Turkey, but many hooks don't reflect well on their subjects and have always been allowed on DYK. (t · c) buidhe 04:10, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
    • Now that's a tricky one. I understand the NPOV concern and believe Vice regent is right about pointing to the DYK rules; but on the other hand after reading the article I believe the statement in the hook is correct, Turkey seems to do that (at least according to the sources in the article). So I would personally have difficulties wording the hook another way to present Turkey in a better light. @Vice regent could you maybe think of an example alternate hook that would satisfy NPOV for you? (Caveat: I am really not an expert on the subject, just a random Wikipedian chiming in.) --LordPeterII (talk) 15:27, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
    • My previous hooks have often portrayed various institutions, people, or countries in a negative light. Just a few examples,
      • "that memorial director Jens-Christian Wagner blames Alternative for Germany for the increase in heckling at former Nazi concentration camps in recent years?"[1]
      • "that in September 2019, far-right politician Milan Mazurek became the first Slovak parliamentarian to lose his seat due to a crime after comparing Romani children to "animals in the zoo"?"[2]
      • "that after the Greek Civil War, 20,000 leftists were exiled to Gyaros (pictured), dubbed "Dachau of the Mediterranean"?"[3]
      • "... that the European Commission of Human Rights found in 1969 that the Greek junta systematically tortured dissidents, leading to Greece's exit from the Council of Europe?"[4]
      • " ... that the Israeli Nazis and Nazi Collaborators (Punishment) Law was intended to punish Holocaust survivors rather than Holocaust perpetrators?"[5]
      • "that death squad commander Otto Ohlendorf claimed that the extermination of 90,000 Jewish men, women, and children was a justified act of self-defense?"[6]
    • Generally, the only negative hooks that were rejected were for BLP reasons. I don't really see NPOV as something that occurs in isolation for one fact or sentence, rather for an article as a whole, but I proposed hook ALT0 as I found it the most interesting element of the article. (t · c) buidhe 18:16, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

    buidhe and LordPeterII How about something that actually discusses Turkey's WWII policies and considers both sides of the story:

    • Alt1: ... that during World War II Turkey helped thousands of European Jews escape the Holocaust even as it enacted a law that discriminated against Turkish Jews?
      • This is interesting because it shows the contradicting nature of Turkish policies. It also shows the good and the bad that Turkey did to Jews during WWII.
      • Source: "In November 1942, the [Turkish] government introduced a Property Tax (Varlιk Vergisi) ...[which effectively discriminated against Jews]. Meanwhile, and quite paradoxically, Turkish intervention saved many thousands of eastern European Jews from the Holocaust, by aiding their clandestine immigration into Palestine. There thus seems to have been a complete disconnect between internal and external policies. William Hale (professor), Turkish Foreign Policy since 1774, page 67VR talk 17:54, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
        • Not suitable, as I explained on talk, "saved" is not a WP:IMPARTIAL way to characterize giving a limited number of transit visas. Nor is it particularly interesting or unusual because that also Spain's policy at the same time was not dissimilar, although in the spanish case the laws discriminating against non-Catholics were passed before wwii. (t · c) buidhe 18:17, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
    • I have trouble understanding buidhe's comments. 1. The word "saved" only applies to the indicated "saved" people. So the fact that it is a "limited number" is not an issue - the number is indicated. There is no statement that all were saved. 2. The fact that Spain - not a Muslim country - had a similar approach does not as buidhe suggests make it not "particularly interesting or unusual". 2603:7000:2143:8500:6960:9DFE:CAD2:CC8E (talk) 19:16, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
    • If you read other books that focus on this topic, such as Tuvia Friling's Arrows in the Dark, you would find that all of these transits were organized and paid for not by Turkey but by Jewish organizations, who faced many restrictions in their work. Furthermore, if you are going to contrast the transit visa issue with another Turkish policy, surely it would be denaturalization. (t · c) buidhe 19:23, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
    • Okay, now Vice regent your suggestion is problematic in the exact opposite direction: If buidhe's original hook shows Turkey in a negative light, yours show it in a very positive. I mean, if they enacted laws to discriminate against Jews, but then saved lots anyway, surely the law was more of a farce? (At least it sounds like that imo.)
    More importantly, ALT1 does contradict the article, as both the lede and the history section quite explicitly state that Turkey did not actively seek to rescue/save Jews, and rather let them pass through at best. There are notable examples, sure, but your hook would suggest it was a general and official rescue scheme. Especially this part of the lede, "Turkey and parts of the Turkish Jewish community have promoted exaggerated claims of rescuing Jews", is such a sentence as it directly contradicts the message of ALT1.
    I understand that this is a delicate topic, and I admit that I do not have nearly enough knowledge about it (or time to acquire it) to weigh in on the neutrality discussion about the article itself. My argumentation thus will revolve solely around the eligibility of hooks for the current article.
    Going back to the original hook ALT0, I must say that I am convinced by buidhe's point that they had previously gotten hooks approved that are quite critical - not unlike ALT0. Now I have previously made the mistake of invoking WP:OSE, but I do not believe this is the case here: If the DYK rules allowed several hooks to be approved that were critical extremely of Greece and Israel, why would a hook critical of Turkey be disallowed?
    So in conclusion, while I value the discussion and still agree that we must be careful not to break NPOV, I do not think that this is actually the case with ALT0. Instead, ALT1 is unsuitable because it contradicts the article (in its current form). Maybe you two will want to discuss the neutrality of the article itself first (and I see at least one uninvolved editor has weighed in there), and then this DYK discussion can resume once we know what the hook should be compared against. --

    March of the Indonesian National Armed Forces

    Created by Jeromi Mikhael (talk). Self-nominated at 14:09, 23 January 2021 (UTC).

    Hook eligibility:

    • Cited: Green tickY - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith
    • Interesting: Red XN - Sorry, I don't find anything particularly hook-y about this being Addie MS's first march. I don't think most readers will know who he is, and I'm not really sure what it means that this is his first march.
    QPQ: Done.

    Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg Sources accepted in good faith since I can't read Indonesian and am not familiar enough with the media landscape there to judge their reliability. Earwig turns up no violation. Neutrality seems fine, although a glance from someone familiar with Indonesian politics couldn't hurt. The main issue is just interestingness, as we want a hook that'll actually entice people to click through to the article. Reading it over, the most interesting factoid to me was that the previous march was retired after being unused due to constant mocking by activists. I'd suggest adding a little more information on that and then using it as the basis for the hook. {{u|Sdkb}}talk 00:26, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

    ALT1 ... that the March of the Indonesian National Armed Forces was adopted after the previous march was retired due to mocking and parodying by activists?
    How does this sound? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 05:15, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
    Narutolovehinata5, the nominator is on a wikibreak (enforced by a self-requested block), so someone else may need to step up to get this on the main page. I'd like to see more contextual information on the page itself, since currently it doesn't say why or how the previous song was mocked, and if we're using this as a hook we should allow people who click through to learn that. {{u|Sdkb}}talk 01:58, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
    I've left a message at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indonesia asking for help. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:19, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
    @Narutolovehinata5 and Sdkb: Really sorry to both of you; I forgot that I have a DYK review left open! I've unblocked myself for this occasion, and I searched for another source. I found a really interesting article from Kompas (I could send it to you if you want) and added some more text and information from the source. It turns out that the retirement of the march due to mocking was just an allegation from the author and was not the official stance of the armed forces. I also found the sheet music of the song, but it is quite blurry and I can't see anything. Probably someone who is expert in music could recognize the musical symbols immediately. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 05:07, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
    Where does the nomination stand now? SL93 (talk) 08:39, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
    Pinging @Narutolovehinata5:. jp×g 22:52, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
    As Sdkb is the reviewer, I am deferring to them on whether or not the nomination is ready. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:30, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

    Dele Fadele

    Created by Ceoil (talk). Self-nominated at 01:34, 18 January 2021 (UTC).

    • Beginning Review
    • Article is new enough and long enough.
    • Hook is correctly formatted.
    • Should "extensive" pieces be "long" or "detailed"?
    • extensive is fine. Ceoil (talk) 23:59, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
    • This sentence seems confused: "He was gregarious in life; according to Andrew Collins, in the 1990s Fadele arrived at the NME office each morning from a squat, but was always "absolutely impassioned"."
    • Hopefully clearer now. Ceoil (talk) 00:06, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
    • New Order need disambiguating.
    • Could you add anything about his early life? The article seems to start when he is already in his 30s.
    • Yup, hand on....Ceoil (talk) 23:59, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
    • Well referenced and neutral. Long book may as well be put with the other sources as it is only used once (needs a page number).
    • Long book mereged into the inlines. Its on google books, but seems to be a kindle version...ie doesn't give a page nr. Ceoil (talk) 00:01, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
    • Hook fact needs a ref immediately after (I added CN in the place)
    • Sorted....Ceoil (talk) 23:59, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
    • Is it true that Morrissey's career "never really recovered"? Not according to our article on him.
    • His credibility never recovered, and has continued to sink since, especially since Brexit. But agree, this is not the article for that. Removed. Ceoil (talk) 23:59, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
    • Awaiting QPQ.

    Will finish later. Philafrenzy (talk) 10:17, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

    • Thanks Phil...I see you took care of a lot of these yourself. Will comb through and sort the remainder, and come back after a QPQ. Ceoil (talk) 20:25, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
    • Philafrenzy, the QPQ has been provided. Please return to complete your review, since you have already claimed QPQ credit for it on an article that has since been promoted. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:41, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
    Continuing review. Not sure about Nigerian-English in the hook. He was born in Highbury, London, and spent his career in England too. I would call him Black British or just drop his nationality/ethnicity from the hook entirely as it doesn't add much. What about saying that the death of NME music critic (or journalist) Dele Fadele wasn't well-known for more than two years after the event? Could be stronger if you could say it wasn't known to his own colleagues for two years? Only Earwig matches are quotes and titles. Other issues dealt with. Will tick once hook finalised. Philafrenzy (talk) 09:53, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
    Ok, agree with these, will ping when done, and thanks for adding the photograph!

    Old-age-security hypothesis

    Created/expanded by Vyacheslav84 (talk). Self-nominated at 11:09, 26 January 2021 (UTC).

    • Comment (not a review). The article does not support the hook, in several important ways. (1) It is about a decrease in fertility caused by adding pensions, not about an increase in fertility caused by removing them. The phrasing in the hook, suggesting that cutting pensions will cause fertility to go back up is an inference (WP:SYNTH) rather than something directly supported by the sources in the article. (2) Linking Welfare state to "well-being of the country" is a violation of WP:SUBMARINE. (3) There is zero support in the article for the claim in the hook that cutting pensions will increase well-being. It links low pensions to "overall income growth" but that is hardly the same thing as well-being. The only connection to well-being is an opposite one to what is in the hook: "although it increases household savings". The article is also quite problematic in its context-free presentation of various opinions with no evaluation of what local circumstances they are based on or how widespread those opinions are, and in its base assumptions that greater fertility is a greater good and that individual hardship (based for instance on involuntary childlessness) can be ignored. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:52, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
    • Your suggestions for the wording? — Vyacheslav84 (talk) 07:36, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
    • Adding pensions cuts fertility? —

      1x1 (song)

      • ... that Nova Twins recorded and returned their contributions to the Bring Me the Horizon song "1x1" in two days? Source: "They were on a really tight deadline because they needed it done a week after we'd got it, so the song was there and they said they wanted a few weird sounds, so I added a few weird bass noises on there [...] We turned it around in two days because they needed it quickly." (link)
        • ALT1:... that Nova Twins were asked to feature on the Bring Me the Horizon song "1x1" through a message on Instagram? Source: "The next day we got an inbox from Oli saying, 'Got a song for you guys, I've been listening to you guys on Spotify and I really like your stuff' and he send us the song as a DM!" "Yep, he sent it as a Dropbox file through Instagram!" (link)
      • Reviewed: QPQ pending

      Created by Sock (talk). Self-nominated at 23:36, 28 January 2021 (UTC).

      • Herr, unser Herr, wie bist du zugegen

        Huub Oosterhuis in 1969
        Huub Oosterhuis in 1969

        Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 22:54, 5 February 2021 (UTC).

        • This is only a comment, but perhaps a hook based on the proposal to ban the song from the 2013 edition of the hymnal that had it would be more interesting than it saying that it is a German translation of another song? The efforts to ban it and subsequent pushback sound more eye-catching to be honest. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 05:17, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
          Go ahead, I was tired when I wrote it, and have work waiting. The especially quirky thing is that the Dutch author received a German sermon prize only a few years after the "ban" discussion, but I couldn't get it all in. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:26, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
        Reading through the article, I'm confused as to who was the one who left the Catholic Church: was it Oosterhuis or Huijbers? The article wording makes it ambiguous. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:10, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
        I repeated Oosterhuis, but don't think that a composer's turning away would have caused the same conflict. Also, the composer didn't head a church. For a hook, I'm reluctant to say too much about the author - vs. the text of this hymn which is the subject. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:24, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
        ALT1 ... that a proposal to remove "Herr, unser Herr, wie bist du zugegen" and other hymns from a 2013 hymnal because their composer writer (pictured) had left Catholicism was met with backlash from German parishes?
        How does this sound? Unfortunately, mentioning Oosterhuis by name would have meant the hook would go beyond 200 characters so I had to leave it out and include a piped link instead. As for the award angle, that sounds good, but it appears that he received that award for his work in general as opposed to for this hymn specifically. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:50, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
        Good try, but he was the author, not the composer, it couldn't be removed from the 2013 edition which didn't exist yet, and the same - not only this hymn - could be said against it. How is this: I write about another of his works, and then we try the approach? For this hymn, I'd really like the "God's presence" meaning, in memory of a friend. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:21, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
        • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed, during which the reviewer can request or suggest additional hooks. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:03, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
        It doesn't seem clear from the article if "Herr" was one of the songs that were planned to be removed from the 2013 edition, so clarification on this information is needed if the angle is to be used. If it wasn't, then this angle could probably be dropped and a different direction be used. As for the "it couldn't be removed from the 2013 edition" part, as I understand from the article, the proposal was to remove his songs from the revision planned for publication in 2013. Was this indeed the case? If so, I don't understand how "remove from a 2013 hymnal" is inaccurate, because it was still discussing about a proposal related to the 2013 version. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:16, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
        @Gerda Arendt: Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 14:10, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
        The original hook avoids all this. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:21, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
        Even if ALT1 or a variant thereof isn't used, it remains an article concern that would need to be addressed if the nomination is to be approved, regardless of what hook is ultimately promoted. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:45, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
        That hook is too straightforward and "DYK that X is a Y" hooks have been discouraged in the past, at least from experience. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 14:51, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
        Then how about an exception? The German-Dutch thing is not usual. I wrote in memory of a friend who picked it for the last service he held. I don't need anything spectacular or quirky. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:11, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
        If the nomination was written in memory of a friend then perhaps any hook about the subject could suffice rather than a specific wording, if the goal was to have the hymn featured on DYK. I understand that you want the "God's presence" wording highlighted, but it appears difficult to write a hook focusing on that angle. Also asking for a hook that isn't quirky goes against the spirit of DYK, which aims to entice broad readership to read an article and not just appeal to only its nominator. In any case, if some variant of ALT0 is to be used, then it would need to be rewritten as the current version is rather dry. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:45, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

        COVID vaccine dispute

        • ... that during a vaccine dispute, the European Union was accused of "an absolutely incredible act of hostility" by Arlene Foster, Northern Ireland's first minister?

        Created by Cwmhiraeth (talk) and Dumelow (talk). Nominated by Cwmhiraeth (talk) at 07:32, 3 February 2021 (UTC).

        Whether relevant or not for DYK I have concerns this article has not been expanded to cover some of the fallout from this dispute (I'm unsure if this affects DYK). This includes: fallout impact on the ramifications of threat of revoking Article 16 (e.g.https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-55882140) ; the impact of the threat of export controls ; where the 9m doses have been magic'd from (I think I read AZ had procured extra capacity); Questions about more UK support for Valneva vaccine rather than EU/French support; pressure on Commission President Ursula von der Leyen .... I'm too tied RL currently to try to expand article which could be controversial but it probably needs nuturing and expansion in my view. It also really needs a Template:Gs/talk notice for covid if chosen for DYK. Otherwise probably has merits for DYK but DYK is not a zone I follow or know much about. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk)

        Symbol possible vote.svg In response to Djm-leighpark's concerns, no, that is of no relevance to the DYK nomination. What is of relevance is the merge tag. That needs to be resolved before this nomination goes anywhere. Please place a {{subst:DYK?again}} tag once that's resolved. Schwede66 01:21, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
        Symbol redirect vote 4.svg The merger suggestion has been resolved. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:29, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

        Jane Lunnon

        Created by Moonraker (talk). Self-nominated at 12:47, 31 January 2021 (UTC).

        • Symbol question.svg Long enough, nominated in time, QPQ done. Appears neutral/stable. Generally adequate inline sources, which appear reliable enough (but see below caveats/queries). Earwig found no copyright problems and spotchecks on freely available sources revealed no close paraphrasing. Hooks are concise, not negative and check out with sources. Alt 1 is fine.
        • I find the main hook a little dull, having not previously heard of Alleyn's School (and I'm a Brit, it's probably less known internationally); this needs more context to be usable, I think.
        • I like Alt 2 but the quotation given is slightly inaccurate, I think what she actually says is: "is not really doing anything very much for feminism". What you've put in the article is technically correct (C4 misquotes her) but the hook is not. I also think it needs the context of her being a head teacher adding. It would also be useful to add more about this interview clip to the article; she talks extensively about the show's emphasis on appearance, particularly sexualised appearance.
        • Not seeing a source for the place & year of birth?
        • Does Lunnon publish her middle name, maiden name and marriage date? If not, I think these should probably be removed per BLP policy if they are only sourced to the marriage certificate. Neither she nor her husband are public figures and the marriage certificate is not a published source.
        • kesw.org & rolemodels.me ref details could do with expansion. Channel 4 interview needs the date. Espresso Addict (talk) 04:37, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
        • Thanks, Espresso Addict. I think you are right, I am adding more context to the main hook, and I have corrected and expanded Alt2 as suggested. On the middle name, the answer is yes, Lunnon has included it in several public documents. I wasn’t aware of the BLP policy, which strikes me as very unhelpful to the purpose of an encyclopaedia. I doubt if any other reference works are so particular. In England and Wales Registration of Births, Deaths, and Marriages, is a public process, and while the original documents are primary sources, the indexes to them are publicly available secondary sources and in no sense private or confidential. So I would be inclined to leave those dates (but not to complain if someone comes along and removes them). The source for the place and year of birth is in the next citation. I’ll get around to expanding the article on the lines you have put forward. Moonraker (talk) 05:45, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

        Mapuche polygamy

        Created by Sietecolores (talk). Self-nominated at 09:18, 31 January 2021 (UTC).

        Symbol possible vote.svg The topic is interesting enough, but the article has several issues which needs to be resolved. The least of these involve grammar, which can be rectified easily enough. However, the image which accompanies the article says it depicts the "Martrys of Elicura," but makes no mention of this incident within the body of the article, nor does it cite its connection to it. Some of the assertions in the article are poorly cited. For example, the lede states that "Mapuche polygamy has also been reported in the low-income peripheral communes of Santiago." However, the corresponding citation makes no mention of this, although it does spend a paragraph describing a polygamous union set in an unspecified urban area. With respect to the second hook, the source it cites doensn't establish any proof. Rather, it relies on heresay about people several generations ago for whom, unfortunately, there are no records provided of their social habits. In fact, a number of quotes from within that source suggests that polyandry was strongly discouraged historically and very likely did not exist at all. One person goes so far as to say that there exists "no precedent" for polyandry in Mapuche culture, and that the very concept "without question goes against nature." Finally, the main source of the article is, simply put, poorly written. Long paragraphs consisting entirely of meandering, run-on sentences are rife throughout. Worse of all, it poses what appears to be the author's personal opinions as objective facts. I think the article itself and at least one of the hooks needs some work in order to be DYK-ready. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 00:03, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

        Work in progress. I have made some changes to address some issues CurryTime7-24 find problematic. I do however find this statement "author's personal opinions as objective facts" unacceptable and I would like to have another author that assume good faith and neutrality address this DYK nomination. I have edited and created numerous Mapuche-related articles onver the years and this is the first time I encounter such negative attitude. Of course authors leave an imprint on the articles they create and I have done plenty of work in selecting the information to include which I think is encyclopedically relevant. As written above, I am addressing most of the issues CurryTime7-24 is concerned about But I will accept he/she being the reviewer here. Sietecolores (talk) 16:45, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
        Sietecolores, CurryTime7-24, it's been over a month since the above posts; where does this nomination stand? BlueMoonset (talk) 22:34, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
        I don't know. It doesn't seem like very many of the problems which I addressed last month were fixed. The article seems to contain a lot of original research by the editor who nominated this article. (The writing style of this article and the essay which is the main source here would seem to bear this out.) As I had mentioned earlier, the main source itself is poorly written, unclear, and consists of a lot of personal observations. To be clear, my objection isn't to the subject, the editor's arguments, or even the fact that the editor is citing themselves (they probably are knowledgeable in this subject). Rather, I just wish that there was a better source which clearly back up their arguments. That their mere say so about this or that (for example, regarding polyandry in Mapuche culture) was published in an academic paper without any way to verify, or without providing any criteria by which one could observe how the author reached their conclusions doesn't prove anything. There must be other academic papers and books on the topic of polygamy in Mapuche culture available which can be used as additional sources? Otherwise, it's an interesting subject, but in my opinion the article needs a fair bit of work before it's DYK ready. Maybe another editor can weigh in on this? —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 00:48, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
        Correction, the main source is not an essay, it is a PhD thesis from the University of Chile. The thesis is well-written and is essentially an on-field enquiry into the topic of Mapuche polygamy. I can´t see what the problem with is. Second, much if not all of what may be called "original research" is simply rewriting as to avoid close paraphrasing and have a coherent text, rather than a collection of statements. Some of CurryTime7-24 were plainly ridiculous as to ask for a source that state the image used in the article comes from the said source. This together with other such as attributing me WP:OR and acting in bad confirm my view CurryTime7-24 is either biased against the topic, me or may not simply be familiar with how Wikipedia works. Sietecolores (talk) 01:16, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
        I’d like to add with some relevancy to this discussion that

        Coat of arms of Naples

        Coat of arms of Naples
        Coat of arms of Naples

        Created/expanded by Borteddd (talk). Self-nominated at 19:39, 8 February 2021 (UTC).

        Policy compliance:

        Hook eligibility:

        • Cited: Green tickY
        • Interesting: Red XN - N
        QPQ: None required.

        Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg Is the large Italian-language direct quote needed? I think it should be rewritten and cited in the body of the article. Perhaps suggest a more specific and interesting hook that has an in-line citation. I added the image from the article. TJMSmith (talk) 02:33, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

        National Socialist Party (Philippines)

        • Comment: QPQ to come later. Republican Party is too short and will look for ways to expand it further.

        Created by Howard the Duck (talk). Self-nominated at 17:41, 5 February 2021 (UTC).

        • Maybe another hook specifically about the party could be proposed here? MLQ doesn't really have that much name recall outside of the Philippines so I don't know if this hook works (except as a double hook where Republican was also nominated for DYK). Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:41, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
        • Westerners will associate "National Socialist Party" with Nazis, that flourished in the 1930s. U.S. Republicans hate communists. People will then be intrigued on MLQ who beat Nazis and communists only to find out it wasn't Nazis, but still communists. Howard the Duck (talk) 01:28, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
        Maybe mention Aguinaldo and that he was the first Philippine president? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:10, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
        Aguinaldo didn't have the incumbency advantage in this election. The hookiness of the hook relies on someone beating Nazis and communist-backed Republicans in the mid 1930s, with someone beating Nazis at this time close to impossible, and communists backing Republicans close to impossible as well, only to know that it wasn't Nazis, but still communists, but not the Republicans they know about.

        Giacomo Sartori

        Created by Vaticidalprophet (talk). Self-nominated at 16:17, 6 February 2021 (UTC).

        • I will start this review momentarily. Ktin (talk) 21:48, 6 February 2021 (UTC)


        Policy compliance:

        QPQ: None required.

        Overall: Symbol confirmed.svg Article meets eligibility criteria - length and newness. Will require a relook at sourcing -- while sentences are sourced, many of them are sourced to the author's profile on the book publisher's webpage, his own Linkedin page. I am asking another editor / reviewer's assistance to help have a relook. No major copyvios to be seen. The phrase has since published seven novels and four collections of short stories can be considered for revision since it is used as-is from Restlessbooks. Hook is cited and interesting. However, hook is again sourced the author's page on the publisher webpage. Will require another Editor's eyes on this one. Request to the nominator -- In addition, can you think about a rewrite of the lede. Please see if you can avoid narrative style and go for a declarative style. E.g. He is an author of x books including A, B, and C, rather than "Sartori, who began writing in his thirties, has since published ...". I would also suggest reconsidering phrases such as 'positive reviews' in the lede. QPQ not required since the editor has only DYK published so far. However, if this is not accurate, please let me know. Overall, I think this is a good nomination, but, might require a relook. I am requesting for another reviewer's support on this one. Cheers. Ktin (talk) 22:26, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

        Thanks for taking a look, @Ktin! I'm cutting down on the relevant predominance of the author bio a bit. The LinkedIn cite is to support some uncontroversial biographical information, which I've always taken as an acceptable use of that kind of source (and is explicitly called out as "can be a valid reason to use discouraged sources" on Cite Unseen); post-revision, the author bio is mostly the same. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 06:16, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
        @Vaticidalprophet: Thanks. Let me know when the edits are done, and I can pick it up. Cheers. Ktin (talk) 02:14, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
        @Ktin: Been a while, but how do you feel about how the article is currently set up? Vaticidalprophet (talk) 22:55, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
        @Vaticidalprophet: Looks good. Added one [citation needed] tag. Good to go once that is fixed. Ktin (talk) 03:04, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
        @Ktin: Cited. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 22:51, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
        Symbol confirmed.svg Approved. Looks good. Ktin (talk) 23:33, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
        • Came by to promote, but I'm uncomfortable with the hook assertion being sourced to his publisher. I think we need a new hook. —valereee (talk) 16:28, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
        • Symbol question.svg If a new hook is needed, then adding icon indicating that there's an issue holding up promotion. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:33, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
        • Honestly, I'm pretty tired of this process. I have half a mind to entirely withdraw this hook and the I Am God hook. I don't know that I want to commit to it, but I don't exactly feel motivated to come up with a new one. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 03:41, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
        • The hook seems fine to me. jp×g 18:35, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

        Hu Zhiying

        Hu Zhiying (right) and New York missionaries together in 2014
        Hu Zhiying (right) and New York missionaries together in 2014

        Created/expanded by Jujiang (talk). Self-nominated at 13:12, 6 February 2021 (UTC).

        Symbol possible vote.svg I'm not sure this article and nomination are ready for primetime yet. There are still some rough edges in the prose that could be smoothed over into more fluid English, and while the copyvio detector doesn't pick up anything that looks like obvious plagiarism, it does suggest overquotation. I have my doubts about the picture being a free image, and even if it were we could certainly do better than "see, this guy is on the right of this group of three that takes up about one-sixth of the image" ... in fact I was preparing a crop when I decided to look at the image's source.

        As for the hooks ... let's go with the original one; the one I had to remove a duplicate of, as what is now ALT1 is rather unremarkable as many artists have work exhibited worldwide. And even having said that, we will need to clean up the original hook as it is wordy and still awkwardly worded, as a result of being what seems to be a direct translation of the Chinese. Daniel Case (talk) 19:30, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

        Fixed that. Daniel Case (talk) 19:34, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
        @Daniel Case: Thank you a lot. I made a little modification to the hook. --Jujiang (talk) 21:16, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
        OK, but the article itself still needs some work, per what I wrote. Daniel Case (talk) 03:23, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
        @Daniel Case: Can you make a small improvement for this article if you find anything inaccurate? My mother tongue is not English. Thank you very much. --Jujiang (talk) 11:01, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
        This article is moved to Hu Zhiying on December 11, 2020, 2 months before dyk nomination.
        The DYKcheck of Hu Zhiying mentioned "Article has not been created or expanded 5x or promoted to Good Article within the past 10 days (86 days). DYKcheck does not account for previous versions with splits or copyright violations."--Wolfch (talk) 01:06, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
        Jujiang, Daniel Case, the article was at 1523 prose characters prior to Jujiang's expansion on February 4; it is currently 3767 prose characters, about a 2.5x expansion. It will need to more than double in size to 7615 prose characters if it is to reach the required 5x expansion–another 3848 prose characters. Jujiang, do you think you'll be able to add that much material? BlueMoonset (talk) 02:36, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

        Articles created/expanded on February 7

        Freeee (Ghost Town, Pt. 2)

        Improved to Good Article status by Kyle Peake (talk). Self-nominated at 16:57, 15 February 2021 (UTC).

        QPQ: Done.

        Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg 5x expansion began on 7 Feb (article at 11,533 bytes prior to start) and was at 52,103 bytes on 15 Feb. That's not quite 5x expansion (which would be 57,665 bytes). Even now, it's only at 52,437 bytes. It needs at least 5228 more bytes to meet the 5x expansion minimum. Many artists submit songs to be considered, and most of them are not nominated, so the fact that these artists submitted their song and it wasn't nominated is not all that unusual or interesting, even though they are more well-known that many other artists. Article needs more expansion to be eligible, and it needs a more interesting hook. I'll think on it a bit to see if I can come up with a better hook. In the meantime, Kyle, please expand the article a bit more, and also try to think of a more interesting hook. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 23:28, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

        Symbol possible vote.svg The correct DYK icon here should be the purple maybe symbol since changes have been suggested as opposed to being rejected outright. Flibirigit (talk) 02:47, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
        Nihonjoe and Flibirigit, I have now changed the hook to be a more interesting one on my own part and could the suggestion of using the purple symbol be taken on now maybe? Also, I will try to expand the article today since I apologise for not having read the criteria to know expansion had to be 5x; however, this GAN is currently under review so if it passed shortly but has not been expanded further, can the DYK pass too? --K. Peake 07:27, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
        @Kyle Peake: Yes, if it passes GAN, then the 5x requirement is moot. I suggest, instead of changing the original hooks, create new ones using ALT2 and ALT3. That way, people can see what the originals were and be able to compare properly. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 18:17, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
        Nihonjoe I have made this update now, but how do you feel about the new hooks? --K. Peake 18:35, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
        @Kyle Peake: I like ALT2 and ALT3 better, but the wording still needs tweaking to tighten it up. Maybe something like ALT4?
        If this one is picked, then someone else will need to review things to make sure they agree with my assessment. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 19:06, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
        Nihonjoe I have offered an ALT5 now, how does it read? --K. Peake 21:31, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
        @Kyle Peake: The "a lawsuit was launched against" part in ALT5 is passive and too wordy, and therefore makes the hook not read as well. It shouldn't take too long for someone to pop by offer an opinion on ALT4. We're also waiting for you to expand the article further (about 5228 more characters) or for it to pass GAN, so we're not pressed for time. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 00:52, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
        Nihonjoe Would it be acceptable for ALT4 to be used if it is met with approval, despite me not being behind the hook fully? --K. Peake 06:47, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
        @Kyle Peake: That would be for another reviewer to decide. Since I'm the one that worded it, I can't decide if it's acceptable or not. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 17:38, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
        @Nihonjoe: More so what I meant was are alts allowed to be used that another user paraphrased from the nominator? --K. Peake 17:43, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
        @Kyle Peake: Yes, that happens all the time. You would still get all the credit, though. ALTs are often tweaked and fiddle with until a catchy one is found. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 17:57, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
        @Nihonjoe: This article has now passed as a GA and I have changed the expanded part, therefore you should change the new enough criterion to be appropriate in this context. Will just need to wait on the hook review after that! --K. Peake 12:35, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
        @Kyle Peake: Done. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 16:06, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
        Nihonjoe All I have to do now is wait on another review then, correct? --K. Peake 21:54, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
        @Kyle Peake: Yes, someone else needs to approve one of the hooks. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 03:22, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
        Nihonjoe That is fine, I patiently await when they take a look then but at least the article has met the other requirements already! --K. Peake 11:51, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
        Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Since I suggested one of the ALTs, someone else needs to look things over and decide which one is used. Everything else is good to go, though. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 16:11, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
        ALT4 seems fine to me. jp×g 22:59, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

        Viola Brand

        • Comment: Since I withdrew my previous nomination, this is now my final nomination without the need for a QPQ.

        Moved to mainspace by Possibly (talk), RamónMC (talk), and LordPeterII (talk). Nominated by LordPeterII (talk) at 10:17, 12 February 2021 (UTC).

        • Symbol question.svg delighted by a nomination which includes "artistic cycling". The article is okay, but the list of results, i.e. the whole "Personal best" section, needs referencing. It could use being updated too, it says "as of December 2018" she was studying, well it's Feb 2021. It's not essential but would improve things. Regarding the choice of hook, an appearance on the The Ellen DeGeneres Show is mildly interesting, but it'd be more interesting (I think) if we reinforced that Viola is German and only 26, and I think you need to use the proper title of the show rather than "the Ellen show". My preference is for ALT1 right now because I imagine plenty of sportspeople have been on Ellen without being world champions. QPQ not required, noted. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 11:34, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
        • Alright, first a ping to Possibly and RamónMC, because I am not sure if being mentioned in a nomination does ping you automatically, and you might possibly have missed that this is at DYK.
        @The Rambling Man: Okay, I see RamónMC has already added a ref for the table, but I am not 100% happy with it since it is to a javasript-heavy (or whatever) site, where you have to click several times within the same URL to access the actual results you are looking for. I'll try to look for a way to directly link to her results (so it can e.g. be archived by the IAbot). As for updating, I'll take a look - it previously stated that she started studying in 2015, so it's already closer to now. I'm not sure if we have reliable sources following her studies since she has now quit her career, but I'll take a look. I'll also revisit the hook as per your suggestions. Will report back once that is done! --LordPeterII (talk) 09:31, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
        I had forgotten about this article; it was a two-sentence stub when I started it. Congrats and thanks RamónMC, who has improved it so much. I think Alt2 is much better. Nothing more to add.Possibly (talk) 09:37, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
        LordPeterII no problem, ping me when you're ready for me to re-visit. Cheers. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 11:19, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
        @The Rambling Man: Hey, so I'm sorry this took so long. I've been sucked into real life and... whatever, I'm back. The article is in a pretty good state now imo, and I've managed to find a way to link directly to the competition results (though alas IAbot still seems to have problems with archiving these). ALT0 is a bad choice indeed, so I'd prefer not to use it after all. I've also struck ALT1 because while the "17 medals" thing was quoted in an old version of the article, it does no longer fit with our new wikitable - and I think the sources counted some subset, or included medals from her youth. Anyway, I hereby propose an adjusted hook, as well as a new hook:
        And since we apparently have pictures (thanks for adding these RamónMC), I would like to try to include them as well - but I do not know how. The Rambling Man, could you tell me how to add them to the nomination? I'm thinking of this pic here File:Viola Brand artistic cycling (cropped).jpg since it's the most colourful, but maybe File:Viola Brand Worldchampionship.jpg would also be a good option since it shows her in competition. I'd leave the choice to you. --LordPeterII (talk) 22:08, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
        Hi there. I have only added images while creating a nomination. Best bet is to take a look at the coding for one of the existing nominations with an image and replicate that.
        Symbol question.svg With regard to this hook, a few things remain for me. We don't really use "Vice World Champion", more like runner-up at the World Championship. I certainly prefer ALT1a, but artistic cycling is a redirect and The Ellen DeGeneres Show needs to be in italics. The article is in good condition, I'll have to assume good faith on the sources as my German is weak. No QPQ required. Let's just tweak the hook(s) to take into account my comments (if you agree) and we're almost there. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 21:45, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

        Sursock Purchases

        The Sursock Purchases (red circle)
        The Sursock Purchases (red circle)
        • ... that reaction to the sale of al-Fule, one of the Sursock Purchases, was the most significant Anti-Zionist event in Palestine prior to World War I? Source: Emanuel Beska, 2014, Political Opposition to Zionism in Palestine and Greater Syria: 1910–1911 as a Turning Point: "As the debate regarding the crown lands was still under way another, more important event started to develop. The sale of lands of the village of al-Fula to the Jewish National Fund can be considered in this context the most significant event that took place in the period before the outbreak of the First World War. The lands of al-Fula belonged to Ilyas Sursuq, the wealthy Greek Orthodox banker, merchant, and landowner from Beirut, who in 1910 reached a deal on their sale with the Zionists... The peasant inhabitants refused to leave their village and were supported in their resistance by the qa’immaqam (district governor) of Nazareth, Shukri al-‘Asali (1878–1916), who was resolutely opposed to this transaction and became a major protagonist in the affair."
        • Reviewed: To come

        Created by Onceinawhile (talk). Self-nominated at 01:44, 9 February 2021 (UTC).

        • The cited source talks about the importance of the sale, not the reaction to it. Regardless, a claim like "most significant" needs to be attributed unless you can show that it's more than the opinion of one author. (t · c) buidhe 03:15, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
        Many thanks for your comment. The context of Beška's wider article is clear that this refers to the importance of the reaction. See for example the introduction: "The relatively short period at the turn of the year 1910–1911 was of profound importance for the development of political opposition to Zionism in Palestine and its neighboring Arab regions. During a period of about a year, several important events and incidents occurred; a number of Arab journalists, notables, and officers became involved in anti-Zionist activities and campaigns; and the quantity of articles critical of Zionism published in the Arabic press markedly increased. Based on these and other reasons, we are convinced that the months at the end of 1910 and the first half of 1911 represent the turning point in the attitudes of the educated Arab public toward Jewish land purchases in Palestine, Jewish immigration, and the Zionist movement." Onceinawhile (talk) 08:48, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
        @Buidhe: a second source as requested: Rashid Khalidi (1997). Palestinian Identity: The Construction of Modern National Consciousness. Columbia University Press. ISBN 978-0-231-10515-6.: "These themes are reiterated during one of the earliest cases of orga­nized opposition to Zionist land purchase in Palestine: the al-Fula (or ‘Afula) incident of 1910-1911. Many newspaper articles written in oppo­sition to this sale stressed the special place of Palestine, for it was one of the biggest purchases up to that point, and one of the earliest to lead to the eviction of large numbers of Palestinian peasants… The twentieth-century incidents in the Tiberias region and at al-Fula, especially the latter, are significant because of the major effect they were to have in the context of Ottoman and Arab nationalist politics and in the coalescence of Palestinian identity… Important as had been the al-Shajara incidents in 1901-4 and their bloody sequel in 1909, which repeated the pattern of the earlier clashes in Petah Tiqva and elsewhere while taking the conflict to a higher level, a far greater impact was created by events in al-Fula… Although the end result for many of the fellahin involved was the same—dispossession and homelessness—the al-Fula purchase marked the beginning of an overt and articulate anti-Zionist campaign… In large part as a result of al-‘Asali’s actions, the al-Fula incident became a cause celebre in bilad al-Sham, with dozens of articles appearing in news­ papers in Damascus, Beirut, Haifa, and elsewhere over a period of over a year... The sharp, continuing controversy sparked off by the al-Fula sale, an otherwise minor incident, underlines the importance of the disposses­sion and consequent resistance of the Palestinian peasantry in making the issue of Zionism a central one in Arab political discourse before 1914… The coalescence of all these factors made the al-Fula clashes between Arab fellahin and Jewish settlers more significant than the many others that preceded it and that involved a few of the same elements."
        Does this address your questions? Onceinawhile (talk) 22:42, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
        Not really, the second source appears to say that it is the most significant incident of opposition to Jewish land purchases during that era but the claim in the hook does not follow from that. Anyway, I think a better hook would focus on the purchases themselves as opposed to the reaction to them. It looks like Al-Fula incident is a notable topic that could have its own article. (t · c) buidhe 23:35, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
        @Buidhe: I think these sources very clearly support the hook, so perhaps let’s get a third opinion. In the meantime, given you are well read on Israeli-Palestinian history, please could you confirm whether you consider the proposed hook likely to be accurate, or if you are unsure, whether you are aware of any other pre-WWI outbreak of Anti-Zionism in Palestine that could be considered equally or more significant? Onceinawhile (talk) 22:43, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

        Cookhouse

        • ... that cookhouses (example pictured) were a standard feature of remote work sites, as the working men (e.g. cowboys, loggers, miners, etc.) needed large amounts of food for the strenuous work they performed? [16] [17]
          • ALT1:... that a cookhouse (example pictured) at a logging camp served up to five meals a day for the workers who could work upwards of twelve hours, and consume between 6,000 and 9,000 calories, a day? [18]

        Created by Evrik (talk). Self-nominated at 05:37, 7 February 2021 (UTC).

        • @Evrik:...New enough, long enough. Before completing review, suggest a clearer image and addressing high copyvio. I prefer the single hook but consider simplifying it and rewriting without using "e.g.", brackets and "etc". QPQ provided. Whispyhistory (talk) 20:39, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
        • @Whispyhistory: I swapped images, though I'm not tied to any image. As for the copyvio, That mirror site has copied the text from the Wikipedia article. --evrik (talk) 05:11, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
        • Symbol question.svg...@Evrik: Thanks for clarifying the copyvio. Image is free and clear...it is a reconstructed cookhouse. The hook contains "cowboys" and "miners". I could not see this in the cited reference. Please clarify. A shorter, simplified hook might be easier to read. An interesting topic. FYI...if interested...I had a little read around and also found...the evolution of the cookhouse to the kitchen [19], cockroaches and cookhouses, [20], illnesses in military cook houses [21], [22]. In 1885, D. G. Crawford described an outbreak in a military containment where they had to use the cookhouse as a hospital [23]. Whispyhistory (talk) 07:48, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
        • I added a reference about cowboys. The miners cite is less clear, so we can drop that word ... if you have any suggested hooks, they would be appreciated. I will add the references to the talk page and will look at it later. Thanks! --evrik (talk) 02:30, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
        Canadian loggers and their cookhouse, 1917.
        Canadian loggers and their cookhouse, 1917.
        ALT1... that their cookhouse (example pictured) was as important to loggers as their bunkhouse or tool shed?
        ALT1a... that for loggers, the cookhouse (example pictured) was as important as the bunkhouse or tool shed?
        ALT2... that farms often sprang up just to supply the cookhouse (example pictured) of logging camps, and closed when the camp did? Philafrenzy (talk) 20:28, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
        Thank you. Please check ok with you @Evrik:. ALT1 looks good. Image ok too. Whispyhistory (talk) 06:39, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
        • The article cookhouse is barely adequate and is composed of a number of sources strung together just because they use the word cookhouse rather than canteen, kitchen, mess, or restaurant. If the sources had used another descriptor, would they even be in the article? It might be stronger if it more closely defined its subject and went into more depth about it. It has potential but right now it could easily be merged into another article and nobody would miss it. Philafrenzy (talk) 08:49, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
        I think it needs a narrower focus and greater depth. Philafrenzy (talk) 17:25, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

        Articles created/expanded on February 8

        Allen Mawer

        Allen Mawer
        Allen Mawer
        • ... that Allen Mawer (pictured) was the driving force behind the establishment of the English Place-Name Society, which conducted the first scholarly survey of the toponymy of England? Source: Stenton, F. M. (2002). "Sir Allen Mawer". In Lapidge, Michael (ed.). Interpreters of Early Medieval Britain. British Academy. pp. 238–241. ISBN 9780197262771.; Ekwall, E. (1942). "Notes and News: Sir Allen Mawer: In Memoriam". English Studies. 24: 169–171. doi:10.1080/00138384208596736. There had long been a feeling in England that it was time for English scholarship to undertake a systematic survey of English place-names on lines similar to those followed in Scandinavia. It was now obvious that Mawer was the scholar to take the lead. He began paving the way… Thanks chiefly to Allen Mawer's untiring efforts the English Place-name Society was founded in January 1923 in order to finance the great survey planned. The Society met with a remarkable response from the public… The chief burden of the immense preparatory work lay on Allen Mawer's shoulders, and so no doubt did the task of drawing up the plan for the survey… It is really a feat of no small magnitude to have kept this great undertaking going without a hitch for so many years, and the chief credit is due to Allen Mawer. His organizing skill, his indefatigable energy, his infectious enthusiasm and unselfish devotion, his capacity for enlisting the interest and co-operation of other scholars and for frictionless collaboration, have been invaluable assets for the undertaking, as has been his scholarship, his etymological acumen, his sound method, and his experience as a place-name student. It will indeed not be easy to replace Allen Mawer.

        Improved to Good Article status by Krakkos (talk). Self-nominated at 10:02, 8 February 2021 (UTC).

        Policy compliance:

        Hook eligibility:

        • Cited: Red XN - ?
        • Interesting: Green tickY
        QPQ: Done.

        Overall: Symbol question.svg The article achieved GA status on February 8 and was nominated the same day. Length is adequate. No plagiarism issues were detected, and the article meets DYK sourcing requirements. The photo of Mawer is freely licensed to the Commons, clear at a low resolution and would enhance the hook. The QPQ requirement has been completed. The hook is interesting, but I find it confusing that the term toponymy of England is not used in this biography and I do not feel the hook can be verified without more similar language used. I am concerned there may be weasel terms used in the biography. In the "Early career" section it says "he also published two notable papers", but it is not apparent to me why these papers are "notable". The statement "It established him as one of the major experts in this field of study" is not attributed to anyone, so the context is not apparent. In the section "Founding the English Place-Name Society", it says "It quickly became apparent that Mawer was the right man for the job". This statement should be attributed to someone who felt it was apparent. The statement, "Following a memorable speech" is not clear why the speech was notable nor who it is atributed to. In the statement "most notably Eilert Ekwall, Frank Stenton, Percy Hide Reaney, Albert Hugh Smith and John Eric Bruce Gover", it is not clear to me why these scholars are "most notable". The statement, "his highly important article "The Redemption of the Five Boroughs" seems very grandiose and does not attibute who said this nor why the article was important. In the "Provost at University College London" section, the statement "Although a man of great physical strength and energy" seems grandiose and would be better just to say he had a heart condition. Lastly, it is not apparent to me why any of the people listed in the "See also" section are related to this biography. Overall, the article is in decent shape but the tone could be improved. Flibirigit (talk) 17:20, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

        Articles created/expanded on February 10

        Donough MacCarty, 1st Earl of Clancarty

        3/4-length portrait of Donough MacCarty, 1st Earl of Clancarty
        3/4-length portrait of Donough MacCarty, 1st Earl of Clancarty
        • ... that one of the members (pictured) of the Supreme Council of the Irish Catholic Confederacy had two Protestant grandfathers? (1) MacCarthy 1913 p. 66: "Cormac MacDermott, 16th Lord, born in 1552, attended Parliament in 1578 as "Baron of Blarney", and conformed to the Protestant church." (2) McGurk (2004) p. 361, right column: "In the 1613 parliament he [Thomond] strongly supported the protestant party ..."
          • ALT1:... that Donough MacCarty, 1st Earl of Clancarty (pictured) who fought for the Irish Catholic Confederacy had two Protestant grandfathers? (1) MacCarthy 1913 p. 66: "Cormac MacDermott, 16th Lord, born in 1552, attended Parliament in 1578 as "Baron of Blarney", and conformed to the Protestant church." (2) McGurk (2004) p. 361, right column: "In the 1613 parliament he [Thomond] strongly supported the protestant party ..."
        • Comment: The hook fact is not central to the biography of the subject

        Improved to Good Article status by Jdorney (talk) and MadMax (talk). Nominated by Johannes Schade (talk) at 17:31, 10 February 2021 (UTC).

        Policy compliance:

        QPQ: None required.

        Overall: Symbol voting keep.svg ALT1 prefered Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:10, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

        • Symbol question.svg There are a few [citation needed] tags due to lacking inline citation requirements for DYK. These need to be resolved prior to promotion. (t · c) buidhe 14:27, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

        Dera Buidhe. I have done some work on the {{cn}} tags. I would like you to have a look and remove them if you agree. With Thanks, Johannes Schade (talk) 18:06, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

        Treatment of South Asian labourers in the Gulf Cooperation Council region

        Migrant workers in Doha, Qatar
        Migrant workers in Doha, Qatar

        5x expanded by Zakaria1978 (talk). Self-nominated at 03:51, 10 February 2021 (UTC).

        • Comment Zakaria1978, thanks for your work on this article! However, expansion is measured in readable prose and the article's readable prose has not been 5x expanded since creation. Since the size prior to recent additions was 1439 characters, the article needs to be at least 7195 characters of readable prose to be eligible. It currently stands at 5036 so expansion is definitely doable. (t · c) buidhe 03:59, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
        • Article is now at 7645 characters. CMD (talk) 03:38, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

        References

        Articles created/expanded on February 13

        Two-room school

        • ... that the US government once mailed rural school districts scale models from which carpenters could construct actual two-room schools? Source: from ref5 "Schoolhouse Models by Parcel Post"

        Created by MB (talk). Self-nominated at 01:51, 16 February 2021 (UTC).

        I don't agree, it could be split in the future if it got too big. But for now, any additions about anywhere in the world can go into this rather small article. I fear the tag may put off reviewers from looking at this article, so I will point out here that the supplemental rules say a DKY cannot have "dispute" tags, and practice is it cannot have major cleanup/referencing tags. But "improvement" tags like this are this are not an issue. MB 23:24, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
        Article titles should reflect the current content of the article, not what it could be if someone added content on say Bulgaria. Johnbod (talk) 00:29, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
        I added some more stuff about the two-room schoolhouse in Quebec, added one in Toronto, and also added a mention of a two-room schoolhouse being built by the Seabees in Timor-Leste. @MB: Does this help? jp×g 19:05, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
        JPxG, yes, thanks for digging up a more non-US examples. But none of this is DYK related and belongs here - this should be on the article TP. MB 19:19, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
        Oh, I figured that this was the bottleneck on a review. If not, I can just fix the tag and do one myself. jp×g 19:22, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
        QPQ: Done.

        Overall: Symbol question.svg I think that, once the little kerfluffu with the globalization tag is resolved (either by expanding the article, editing it to clarify scope, or by moving it to a more appropriate title) it should be good to roam. jp×g 19:44, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

        Articles created/expanded on February 15

        Green Leader

        Rhodesian Air Force ensign
        Rhodesian Air Force ensign
        • ... that the Rhodesian Air Force's (flag pictured) Green Leader told Zambia that they were taking control of Zambian airspace on an air raid and threatened to shoot down any Zambian Air Force planes that interfered? Source: The Guardian

        Converted from a redirect by The C of E (talk). Self-nominated at 15:47, 15 February 2021 (UTC).

        • Symbol possible vote.svg This is only a comment and not a review (I will leave the full review to another editor), but the current hook is too long as it is 214 characters long including "(flag pictured)" and 198 characters without (I am citing WP:DYKHOOK which states that hooks slightly shorter than 200 characters may still be rejected). Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:12, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
        • @Narutolovehinata5: Also pursuant to WP:DYKHOOK, it also says that character count is "...not including the ... or any (pictured)". I have shortened it a little by changing "bombing" to "air". The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 20:50, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
        QPQ: Done.

        Overall: Symbol question.svg New enough, long enough, sourced enough, neutral enough, does not trigger anything on Earwig's checker, hook is cited and interesting, pic is free, QPQ was done. The above hook issues may give pause, would like to see an alternate hook, but this is not a total dealbreaker. jp×g 19:15, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

        Articles created/expanded on February 17

        How Did I Find Myself Here?

        • Reviewed: I'm on it.

        Created by Drmies (talk) and Myuserid (talk). Nominated by Drmies (talk) at 16:08, 19 February 2021 (UTC).

        Symbol question.svg Interesting album, on good sources, no copyvio obvious. The hook is fine, but has too many numbers for my taste. I don't need the "1980s" at the beginning, and by 29 years (or three decades) or whatever, that is even redundant altogether. I'd begin with the attractive title, say what it is, then how much later than the first. Unless you want to focus on the elapsed time, but then bring that to the front. - In the article, I read many historic things but somehow don't hear the music until Reception comes in. May be just me. - Other music, pleasant: some days ago FS said he often uses a red link, I created that, made a hook, and read a better hook in yesterday's paper! This project can be so great! The interview was run by a person with whom I sang in choir, DYK? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:52, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

        Farahnaz Forotan

        • Comment: Proofreading to both the hook of the article are welcome. I wanted to include the fact that apparently she's the youngest recipient of the "Journalist in the country" as a hook, but I have failed to find this in the cited sources.

        Created by NoonIcarus (talk). Self-nominated at 13:50, 17 February 2021 (UTC).

        • I have tried to remove the flags but have been unable to find either of the awards mentioned in English language sources. The sources currently given seem to be general news links that no longer support the statements given, but perhaps someone can find better ones. Terrific subject for an article! Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 17:35, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
        • I would suggest that the paragraph about awards be moved to the talk page, with a request for people to find sources that would support its return to the article, so that the DYK process can proceed, without that information. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 15:07, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

        Koo App

        • ... that the Koo App shot to prominence after Twitter got into a weeks-long standoff with the government of India? Source:Japan Times article
          • ALT1:... that ...? Source: "You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)

        Created by Aman.kumar.goel (talk). Self-nominated at 11:00, 17 February 2021 (UTC).

        Policy compliance:

        • Adequate sourcing: Red XN - I checked only three of the sources, and two of them didn't support the relevant assertion. So, eg, where did the assertion that the messages are known as "Koos" come from? Similarly, where was the list of intended further languages sourced?
        • Neutral: Green tickY
        • Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing: Red XN - Can't tell yet, as the sources for some of the content are unclear.

        QPQ: Red XN - Not done
        Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg I've added a link and made a minor amendment to the hook. Bahnfrend (talk) 12:22, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

        @

        New York COVID-19 nursing home scandal

        Created by Yousef Raz (talk) and CaliIndie (talk). Nominated by AllegedlyHuman (talk) at 15:57, 25 February 2021 (UTC).

        QPQ: Red XN - ?
        Overall: Symbol question.svg Well-written article on a current political scandal. I have taken the liberty of doing some minor copyediting. I don't think a QPQ is necessary since neither author has any DYK credits, but I'm not sure if it needs one from the nom (would like a second opinion). jp×g 22:41, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

        Spare Time (film)

        Spare Time titles
        Spare Time titles
        • ... that Humphrey Jennings' film Spare Time (1939) showed an American audience how the British working classes spent their free time?
          • ALT1:... that ...?
        • Reviewed: To be done
        • Comment: Just acquired new sources and still working on it

        Created by Edwardx (talk) and Philafrenzy (talk). Nominated by Philafrenzy (talk) at 11:18, 25 February 2021 (UTC).

        • General eligibility:

        QPQ: Red XN - Not done
        Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg Article requires further expansion and QPQ, but a solid start on a British classic. No Swan So Fine (talk) 14:42, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

        Symbol possible vote.svg I have inserted a purple "maybe" icon since the article does not appear to require considerable work before becoming eligible. Completely rejecting the nomination does not seem correct at this time. Flibirigit (talk) 21:12, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
        I think that was probably what No Swan So Fine intended. I have the book needed to expand it (just received) and will work on it shortly. Philafrenzy (talk) 21:18, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
        Yes, sorry for any confusion. I've amended it to a 'maybe'. It'll certainly be fine after some minor work. No Swan So Fine (talk) 13:46, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

        Caroling Dusk, An Anthology of Verse by American Negroes, The Book of American Negro Poetry, Negro Poets and Their Poems

        Created by Eddie891 (talk). Self-nominated at 21:44, 18 February 2021 (UTC).

        • I will take this up momentarily. Ktin (talk) 05:02, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
        • Please can I request for a restructuring of this article? I feel it does not flow well starting with a table with a count of submissions. The table can come lower in the article if needed. Ktin (talk) 05:06, 19 February 2021 (UTC)