This page uses content from Wikipedia and is licensed under CC BY-SA.

Template talk:Did you know

"Did you know...?"
Discussion WT:DYK
Rules WP:DYK
Supplementary rules WP:DYKSG
Noms (awaiting approval) WP:DYKN
Reviewing guide WP:DYKR
Noms (approved) WP:DYKNA
Preps & Queues T:DYK/Q
Currently on Main Page
Main Page errors WP:ERRORS
Archive of DYKs WP:DYKA

This page is for nominations to appear in the "Did you know" section on the Main Page. For the discussion page see WT:DYK. For articles promoted from this page and now approved for DYK, see the Queue.


TOC:    Go to bottom     Go to top
Count of DYK Hooks
Section # of Hooks # Verified
January 1 2
January 9 1
January 14 1
January 27 1
January 30 1
February 12 1
February 15 1
February 23 1
February 24 2
February 25 1
February 26 3
February 28 1
March 1 2
March 2 1
March 3 5
March 6 3
March 7 3
March 8 4
March 9 3
March 10 3 1
March 12 2
March 13 2 1
March 14 2
March 15 5 2
March 16 3 1
March 17 2 2
March 18 5 1
March 19 5 1
March 20 7 4
March 21 7 3
March 22 6 2
March 23 4 2
March 24 6 1
March 25 9 3
March 26 11 5
March 27 5 1
March 28 9 2
March 29 4
March 30
Total 134 32
Last updated 04:42, 30 March 2017 UTC
Current time is 04:49, 30 March 2017 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 (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.

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.

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.
Post at Template talk:Did you know.

In the current nominations section find the subsection for the date on which the article was created or on which expansion began, 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.
  • Consider adding {{Did you know nominations/YOUR ARTICLE TITLE}} to the article's talk page (without a section heading‍—‌the template adds a section heading automatically).

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:

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


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

How to remove a rejected hook

How to remove a hook from the prep areas or queue

How to move a nomination subpage to a new name


Older nominations

Articles created/expanded on January 1

Why (Taeyeon song)

Improved to Good Article status by (talk). Nominated by TerryAlex (talk) at 20:17, 2 January 2017 (UTC).

Hook eligiblity:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Nominator is exempt from QPQ requirements. I'm not a fan of DYKs on art consisting solely of reiterating what critics had to say about the art. For this article I'd prefer something like:

Alt 1 ... that despite reaching number 6 on the Billboard World Digital Songs chart, "Why" was Kim Tae-yeon's least successful single in her solo career?

~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 18:18, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Comment: Hi ONUnicorn, I've modified your suggestion a little. Is this good to go? Thanks for your review.---TerryAlex (talk) 06:39, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
As far as I'm concerned it's good to go; but I think a second reviewer needs to approve the alternate hook since I suggested it. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 15:16, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg New reviewer needed to check ALT1. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:41, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg - Length, Date, and Copyvio all check. Nom is exempt from QPQ however the cited sources do not directly verify the hook. I went through and verified that this was this musician's first song not to enter the top five of the Gaon Digital Chart however to do so I had to follow the cites of every other song she has released. Further, the cites do not verify that it was her least successful song though it could be inferred from context. I've proposed ALT 2 below. If you were to copy the citations concerning the chart position on the Gaon Digital Chart from the other articles ALT2 would in my estimation be verifiable and good to go. Mifter (talk) 08:43, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Alt 2 ... that despite reaching number 6 on the Billboard World Digital Songs chart, "Why" was Kim Tae-yeon's first single not to enter the top five of the Gaon Chart?

Hi Mifter, sorry for the late reply, Alt 2 is fine, please help to see if this would be good to go. Thank you.TerryAlex (talk) 06:20, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg @TerryAlex: - Unfortunately as I proposed ALT 2 I cannot review it and another reviewer must take a look. Further, while I belive the hook can work and I was able to piece together its citation I am not sure if the relevant cites and information currently exists within the article (if they are not there they will have to be added for the hook to be approved). Let me know if you have any questions. Best, Mifter (talk) 05:13, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Alt 3 ... that despite reaching number 6 on the Billboard World Digital Songs chart, "Why" was Kim Tae-yeon's first single not to enter the top five of South Korea's Gaon Chart?

Symbol possible vote.svg I've added another hook (Alt3) based on Alt 2, however, I'm afraid the information in this hook is not backed by the citation provided. I'm not familiar with how her other songs performed, so I can't know for certain if this was her first single not to make the top five of this chart. If a better reference is added then this could work. FallingGravity 01:04, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on January 14

Holman Rule

Source: "The Holman Rule... empowers any member of Congress to propose amending an appropriations bill to single out a government employee or cut a specific program." [1]

Created by Antony-22 (talk). Self-nominated at 04:24, 14 January 2017 (UTC).

  • Review – Note: I have done some copyedits and clean-up, and though I added the reference of exceptions from Deschler's, I do not consider myself to have done enough to be unable to evaluate this nomination.
  • Article is new enough and long enough, and cited. It does not lack neutrality, but it is incomplete.
  • I am concerned about inconsistencies in the content and between the article and the hook and the sources. The sources speak of reducing the salary of targeted employees to $1, but the articles speak of firing. Though the former may have the effect of forcing a resignation and thus have the effect of the latter, they are not the same. This needs to be clarified and resolved. The source cited above also says "any member of Congress" but the United States Congress includes the Senate and the article and other sources speak of a House of Representatives rule. It may be that the hook needs to speak of reducing salary to $1.
  • On the hook, I'm also not keen on "newly reinstated", I would say when - either January 2017 or at the start of the XXth Congress or something like that. "Propose firing" also needs clarification, because it is a proposal to the House which, if passed as part of an appropriations bill, becomes a mandate. After all, a Member of Congress can write a letter to someone's boss proposing that s/he be fired, but the boss can ignore it. We are talking here about something much more draconian, where federal employees are potentially threatened. The hook needs to be neutral, but also to accurately portray the facts.
  • Earwig raises only the quotation from Deschler's, which is appropriately identified and supported, so no copyvio issues, and no problematic paraphrasing of the sources noted. The commentary in the articles could be expanded, too, and also some recognition that the quotations from Deschler's were published in 1994, and so is the version as was eliminated in 1983... is the 2017 version the same? Certainly the sources provided do not establish that, nor does the article address the issue. Also, should the dissent from Republicans and the unanimous opposition from Democrats in passing the new rules package is due some notice. Covering these issues in a policy-compliant manner is a challenge and is not (technically) an expansion required under DYK rules. However, in presenting an article like this on the main page at a period of time when the topic of the rule and politics in general is highly contentious, I think it behoves us to avoid highlighting an article where obvious questions can be raised and yet go unaddressed.
  • QPQ done as required.
  • Symbol question.svg The inconsistencies noted need to be resolved, and a new hook wording proposed. The areas not covered should be addressed, and I hope that Antony-22 as the article creator will choose to take on that challenge. EdChem (talk) 07:24, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the thorough review. First off, upon doing the research for this article I discovered that there's nothing significant about the amount of $1; the rule allows salaries to be cut to any amount or for a position st be eliminated completely. This source says that there is no evidence that the rule has ever been historically used to cut a salary to an inappropriate level, and I haven't seen any comments from any lawmakers advocating to use it in this way. My guess is that some PR person came up with the $1 line to draw attention to it, and I think we have a responsibility on Wikipedia to avoid repeating clickbait.
Good catch on checking the new wording; it is slightly different so I have included both in the article. Also, it's specifically a House rule and so doesn't directly affect the Senate, so the source may be using the informal use of "Congresspeople" to refer only to House members. The final paragraph of the article already briefly states the Republican and Democratic viewpoints on the rule. The following hook is more specific as you requested, but the original hook is more succinct and still accurate. Antony–22 (talkcontribs) 20:27, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Calling for a second opinion. The updated text from the 2017 version is clear on reducing salary of "any person" and reducing numbers, but not (to me) clear on the ability to fire individuals, and "proposing firing" is something anyone can do any time, and be ignored. This is including in legislation a mandate that a person's salary must be reduced, or the number of people reduced. I am not comfortable that the hook is accurate. I will post at WT:DYK for another opinion. EdChem (talk) 12:43, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
The effective text is "the reduction of the number and salary of the officers of the United States"; the "number" part is where the proposals of firing come from. It might help if it can be demonstrated that both (contemporary) liberal and conservative sources say that the rule allows firing of individuals. The Deschler's Precidents source seems to be neutral and reliable, being published long before the current controversy, and it give specific examples of amendments firing individuals in the past. Here's a more specific and wordier hook. Antony–22 (talkcontribs) 05:21, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg A follow-up review still needs to be performed for this to move forward, or perhaps a new review from a different user. North America1000 08:12, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on January 30

Executive Order 13767

Trump signing the order.
Trump signing the order.
The U.S. Mexico Border.

Created by Junosoon (talk) and Gamebuster19901 (talk). Nominated by Gamebuster19901 (talk) at 15:29, 1 February 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg @Gamebuster19901: There are a few problems with this. Aside of the hook link not being bold (which I have fixed), the article is only 1,366 characters long and thus is below the threshold. There is also a citation needed tag which would need to be replaced with an inline source. Also, I'm not too comfortable with the tag on the white house link because it appears to imply close paraphrasing, which would need to reword certain parts of the article. Once these are fixed, ping me and I'll have another look. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 23:41, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for pointing out some of the issues with the article, I'll get them fixed asap!
However, According to section 2.b. of the eligibility criteria, public domain material is allowed in articles, it just can't be counted towards the total character count. I'll expand the sections some more to help it meet the criteria. Thanks Gamebuster19901 (TalkContributions) 14:36, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
@The C of E: I believe the issues you have shown have been addressed as of now. Gamebuster19901 (TalkContributions) 16:02, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
If you want, you can uncapitalize it, I just quoted it from the source. Gamebuster19901 (TalkContributions) 18:08, 3 February 2017 (UTC) Actually, that was a mistake on my part, I have corrected it. 18:23, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
OK, good. Now then... ALT0 is untenable because it's inappropriate to state, in WP's voice, why Trump signed the thing -- there are too many other possibilities (stupidity, perfidy, racism, personal profit, and just plain meanness) that history will have to sort out. Even ALT1 uses a primary source for this key assertion of purpose, which is marginal (thought the quotations help). If you agree I suggest you strike them. Let me suggest:
ALT2:... that Donald Trump's Executive Order 13767 stated purpose is "construction of a physical wall on the southern border ... to prevent illegal immigration, drug and human trafficking, and acts of terrorism (pictured)"?
EEng 18:50, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
I think you're right, it's better to stick to the facts. How does this sound:
Gamebuster19901 (TalkContributions) 05:54, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Ready for a review of ALT3 since all previous concerns are adressed. Gamebuster19901 (TalkContributions) 15:31, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
I don't get the along the southern border of the US (pictured) bit. The picture doesn't show the southern border of the US, though it might reasonably be said to show an act of terrorism. That's why I'd suggest ALT2 over ALT3. EEng 16:09, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
When it's taken out of context like that, I could see the confusion. However, the (pictured) is applying to the whole sentence, and the caption of the image clearly states what it's showing. Gamebuster19901 (TalkContributions) 13:36, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
How does ALT4 look? Gamebuster19901 (TalkContributions) 13:46, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
Well, now that we come down to it, I don't think the picture's worth much at all -- some guy at a desk signing something. And when you think about it, pretty much only people on Jupiter would be able to answer the question posed in all these hooks with anything other than "Of course I know!" Can't we have a hook on something actually new and interesting, like that the former commissioner says that the current system of patrol is better than a wall? EEng 21:22, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
Well first off, the President isn't just "some guy", secondly, If the phrase "signed Executive Order 13767 to create a physical wall in order to secure the southern border of US, and prevent illegal immigration" isn't suitable for Wikipedia's voice, then there is no way that the former commissioner saying that the current system is better would be suitable either, as that's even more subjective.
Also, DYK isn't about answering the question, it's about exposing new and improved content, and to encourage more editors to edit the article. see WP:DYKAIM Gamebuster19901 (TalkContributions) 13:48, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
It's not the subjectivity, it's the voice. It would be OK for Wikipedia to report that Trump says he signed it for such-and-such a reason (as opposed to reporting that he did it for those reasons), and similarly it would be OK to report that Mr. Ex-Commissioner says that the current approach is better. My point is that the latter will be news to most readers, while the former will be news to no one. EEng 15:50, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg for Alt 4 or Alt 1 Gamebuster19901 (TalkContributions) 13:48, 8 February 2017 (UTC).

Is Alt 1 or Alt 4 good for DYK, if not, how should it be improved? What are some appropriate hooks for this DYK about Executive Order 13767? 14:07, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

ALT5 ... a former US Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection has stated that the current methods of border patrol are preferable to a wall?
There are a few issues with that one, it doesn't have a way to link to the article. It's also just stating the opinion of just one person, and the article isn't specifically about that, even though it's within the scope of the article. Gamebuster19901 (TalkContributions) 15:26, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
EEng 14:20, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
You're right, the RFC was not neutral enough, sorry I have corrected it. Gamebuster19901 (TalkContributions) 15:26, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
ALT6 ... a former US Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection has stated that the current methods of border patrol are preferable to the border wall called for by Executive Order 13767?
EEng 15:38, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
I see, I think I'm willing to go with something similar to Alt 6 if Alt 4 or Alt 1 cannot be used, though. I would also like to have a link to Gil Kerlikowske and a source if we're going that route, without making it too wordy.
perhaps ALT7 or ALT 8
ALT7 ... that a former US Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection has stated that the current methods of border patrol are preferable to the border wall called for by Executive Order 13767? [6]
ALT8 ... that a former US Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection has stated that the current methods of border patrol are preferable to the border wall called for by Executive Order 13767? [7]
Gamebuster19901 (TalkContributions) 16:04, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
I'm not saying this just because you've warmed up to ALTs 6-8, but now that we're moving along here may I suggest you withdraw the RfC (though I don't know how that's done, actually). Do we really want to wait 30 days and have everyone and his brother chiming in on something which is typically left to the privileged few? EEng 18:11, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
"To end an RfC that is on the active RfC list, remove the RfC template. The RfC bot will remove the discussion from the central lists on its next run." WP:RFC. — Maile (talk) 02:13, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
@EEng:I completely forgot about this due to real-life things. The only reason I remembered was because someone posted something on my talk page about it... sorry. I completely understand if you deny this because of the time elapsed. Anyway, since the picture in the article has been changed in the meantime, and the new dyk doesn't state anything about him signing the order, I propose this:
ALT9 ... that a former US Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection has stated that the current methods of border patrol are preferable to the border wall called for by Executive Order 13767? [8]
With Image 2 which I just added at the top of this nomination. Gamebuster19901 (TalkContributions) 04:17, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg We still need a reviewer to do a full review of the article, since nearly 6000 prose characters have been added to an article that was below the 1500 minimum at the time of the original review. Since there were issues outstanding at the time of the original review, those should be rechecked as well. Thanks. I have added Neutrality to the credits, since he or she more than tripled the prose length of the article. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:40, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
ALT10 … that President Obama's former US Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection criticized the efficacy of President Trump's proposed border wall as outlined in Executive Order 13767?
With this, readers can identify with one side of the other while WP remains neutral. — JFG talk 10:36, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on February 12

Licence laundering

Moved to mainspace by Mindmatrix (talk). Self-nominated at 02:54, 12 February 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article created on 5 February and expansion continued till 11th February. Nominated on 12th Feb so falls within date range. "Readable prose" is above 1500 characters. QPQ is done. Inline source is provided. Only one concern: one of the reference links is from Wikipedia Commons. Not sure if thats allowed as its inter-wiki domain because on en wiki, we cannot provide links for another wiki article as a reference. - Vivvt (Talk) 10:27, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
  • In this case, I'm using a policy document, not a content document (article, image etc.) as a source. It probably warrants wider discussion, though, so I'll start a thread at WT:DYK. Mindmatrix 18:08, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on February 15

Creswell Eastman

Eastman examining Tibetan women for eye disorders in Tibet Autonomous Region May 2000
Eastman examining Tibetan women for eye disorders in Tibet Autonomous Region May 2000
  • Reviewed: This is my first DYK nomination so I am exempt from the QPQ
  • Comment: Article created in my userspace on February 2017, moved to mainspace on February 15.

Created/expanded by HaraldW1954 (talk). Self-nominated at 05:38, 15 February 2017 (UTC).

  • Just a comment Don't mean to get political here but why would you refer to post-1949 China as the Republic of China?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 08:51, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
  • I thought all had Peoples Republic of China, but will make sure that all comments reflect this. Thanks for the comment.HaraldW1954 (talk) 07:47, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg - Not a full review - After looking through the article I am concerned that it is not neutral (I have tagged it as such) and that the individual may have had some relationship with the writing of the article (the name of user who uploaded the images is "Creswell.Eastman"). Further, the images do appear on other websites and therefore a permission email should be sent to OTRS to verify that the individual uploading them actually has the ability to freely license them. Mifter (talk) 01:23, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Yes I did contact Eastman to complete the page as I was having difficulty in finding photos. I provided Eastman with the instructions to upload his photos. He indicated that they came from his collection and uploaded them as such. I am happy to e-mail OTRS but not sure that is necessary. I decided on doing the article after listening to the Conversations podcast and was surprised when no page existed. I have attempted to be completely factual in the article and have tried to reference everything mentioned. Can you please give me some examples that do not read as neutral? More than happy to address issues. Thank You HaraldW1954 (talk) 06:18, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg The article as a whole looks better but I would like a second set of eyes/new reviewer's opinion concerning the issues I previously raised before moving this forward. Mifter (talk) 00:47, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on February 23

Tomahawk chop, Foam tomahawk

A foam tomahawk used for the tomahawk chop
A foam tomahawk used for the tomahawk chop

Created by The C of E (talk). Self-nominated at 16:16, 23 February 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Both new enough. Both long enough. Double QPQ done. NPOV. The article can't decide if it is Tomahawk Chop or tomahawk chop. The latter strikes me as better. I'm also sceptical about the concept of it being "invented". Perhaps devised or created would make more sense. Earwig and spot checking found no significant close paraphrasing issues, copyright violations or plagiarism in either article. ALT1 does not tally with the source, " Call them the Atlanta Negroes, Atlanta Klansmen or Atlanta Nazis, said Clyde Bellecourt, the protest organizer and national director of the American Indian Movement." I will add an ALT2. Otherwise, both articles are well-cited, and ALT0 tallies with the sources. Edwardx (talk) 20:49, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
  • ALT2:... that the Atlanta Braves' adoption of the tomahawk chop, sometimes complemented with foam tomahawks (pictured), led to them being called "Negroes", "Klansmen" and "Nazis" by Clyde Bellecourt, national director of the American Indian Movement?
  • Thanks, but you need to adjust the article itself so that it properly reflects ALT2. I will strike ALT1 just to avoid an incorrect promotion later on in the process. Edwardx (talk) 16:05, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Thank you. Good to go. Edwardx (talk) 13:41, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Striking ALT2, which at 214 characters even excluding "foam tomahawks (pictured)" from the count, is far too long for DYK. Having read the original quote, it's also misleading to take the words out of the context of a team name, i.e., "Atlanta Klansmen", and thus probably a BLP violation with regard to Bellecourt as well; I've modified that sentence in the article. I suggest you stick with the original hook. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:56, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
  • ALT3: ... that Native Americans asked the Kansas City Chiefs to stop performing the tomahawk chop, sometimes complemented with foam tomahawks (pictured)?
  • ALT4: ... that the tomahawk chop, sometimes complemented with foam tomahawks (pictured), was banned in 2009 by Massachusetts schools who said that it was "offensive and discriminatory"?
  • ALT5: ... that fans of the Atlanta Braves were asked to stop doing the tomahawk chop with foam tomahawks (pictured) as it was viewed as a mockery of Native Americans?
I think the "complemented with" is an awkward wording (it dates from the original hook), which I hope can be modified if either are used. Note that while it seems unlikely that the merger discussion will be completed in time for this to run on March 31, if the hook still does involve the Atlanta Braves, their home opener is on April 14. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:59, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
@Edwardx: Could you please give the above suggestions a review and restore the tick? Furthermore, there is no merge discussion, there is a suggestion but not a formal move discussion where there is nothing in the DYK rules saying it can't rule while there is a suggested move discussion. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 08:34, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
For the avoidance of doubt, the merge discussion was initiated yesterday. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:14, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on February 24


  • Reviewed: I still have to review another nomination and will post this here once it's done.
  • Comment: History section of article expanded on March 10, 2017

5x expanded by Emarti84 (talk). Self-nominated at 19:29, 10 March 2017 (UTC).


The hook should not say "medical field" at is this is a pseudoscience (or at least psudo-medicine as it even admits in the info block). Worse, after reading it over, I am concerned that this article is still unclear regarding its subject, Osteopathy, a pseudoscience, vs. Osteopathic medicine. I have done a bit of rewriting to correct some of the worst issues, but others remain which I do not have time right now to address. I do not believe this should be a DYK entry until these issues are corrected. RobP (talk) 19:55, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Concern that osteopathy is being made to be on the same level as medical science.Sgerbic (talk) 21:24, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Comment on Objection: Thank you for your evaluation. I edited the DYK hook to simply say the "field" of osteopathy, which was the root of osteopathic medicine. I agree that the two should be distinguished. Thank you for making corrections as you see fit in the article. Emarti84 (talk) 22:46, 11 March 2017 (UTC)emarti84

Hello @Emarti84:: A few things:

In the United States osteopathic practitioners are legally restricted from referring to themselves as "osteopaths" to avoid confusion with osteopathic physicians who are medical doctors trained and certified to practice in the branch of scientific medicine called osteopathic medicine. Osteopathic practitioners on the other hand, are trained only in manual osteopathic treatment, generally to relieve muscular and skeletal conditions.

Hi @Rp2006:: Thank you for your examination of this article.

Hi @Emarti84: That was my interpretation from related WP articles and other websites, but I must admit now that I look a again I cannot find any citable reliable source... and in fact I am more confused on this topic than ever. For now I am going to put "Citation needed" on several of these items in the article. Hopefully others more knowledgeable in this topic will either find citations, or revise the text accordingly. RobP (talk) 17:26, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

François Bott

Created by LouisAlain (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 16:49, 3 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg The article was new enough at time of nomination and is just long enough (1774 bytes according to prosesize.js). I tweaked the hook a little for grammar and clarity. The hook fact is not cited in the article (that I could see), and entire paragraphs are uncited. No obvious problems with copyvios or close paraphrasing. QPQ is done. If the hook can be substantiated with references (along with the rest of the article) I think we're good to go, although it's a little mundane. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mackensen (talkcontribs) 18:54, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for looking. I hope LouisAlain can help. I guess it's better to ask the author about references of a translated article, - my French as marginal ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:23, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on February 25

Mia Borders

Mia Borders by Rick Moore, 2016
Mia Borders by Rick Moore, 2016

Created by Moonraker (talk). Self-nominated at 08:18, 2 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Long enough, new enough, qpq done, hook is interesting and of an appropriate length. However, I have concerns about the sourcing. The citation for the hook is a Huffington Post "contributor." As with e.g. Forbes, they host content for other bloggers that aren't Huffington Post staff, aren't subject to editorial oversight, and isn't actually part of the main site (and typically not considered a reliable source). All in all, I only see one reliable source cited in the article (the Spielman book). The YouTube video and prweb are press releases/marketing companies, the MTV page is their database listing that's filled with press release content (that same text is found all over the internet among promoters), and Bandcamp is a primary source. The article contains the line: "The Times-Picayune has called Borders "confident and cool" and USA Today "deeply funky",[5] while OffBeat has hailed her "great music and great intensity".[3]" -- but none of those publications/sources are actually cited, instead pointing to press release materials. It may be that if you could find these other sources, they could serve to simply replace the others and resolve the sourcing concern (though the hook would probably have to be swapped out).
  • As a side note, the image probably isn't good for the main page because of the jarring watermark. I took the liberty of trying to remove it myself and reuploaded the results at File:Mia Borders (no watermark).jpg. The quality of the Photoshop work is not great, admittedly (it's a bigger watermark than I've attempted before), but may be good enough to include in DYK. Alternatively, there is a Commons category at Category:Mia Borders which includes a few others. If the hook references her voice, it may be good to use an image of her singing (e.g. File:Mia Borders FQF 2012 1.jpg). — Rhododendrites talk \\ 00:21, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
  • On that hook, per WP:NEWSORG, "Editorial commentary, analysis and opinion pieces, whether written by the editors of the publication (editorials) or outside authors (op-eds) are reliable primary sources for statements attributed to that editor or author, but are rarely reliable for statements of fact." That seems to apply here, as we're only dealing with a statement attributed to the author, who (as it happens) is notable as well. If I can find a better hook I'll add it as an Alt. Moonraker (talk) 05:56, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
  • The op-eds, etc. it's talking about are those published in an otherwise reliable publication. Here Huffington Post is basically functioning as a fancier As it says, "Contributors control their own work and post freely to our site." (i.e. WP:SPS). There are some hundreds of thousands of "contributors." Opinion pieces indeed can be reliable in some contexts, but there also has to be a reason it is a reliable source in that context rather than reasons why it's not unreliable. Otherwise we could just include anything written by anyone, promotional or not, self-published or not. I've seen HuffPo contributors shot down at least a couple times at RSN, but it's certainly possible something has changed more recently that I'm not aware of, so I'd welcome additional input on the matter if you'd like to solicit it there (or from the DYK talk page, say). — Rhododendrites talk \\ 06:17, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Moonraker, Rhododendrites, it's been over three weeks since the above was posted. Since then, Moonraker made a series of edits to the article on March 7, but I don't know whether they fully addressed the issues raised by Rhododendrites. Can we please have a status report? Thanks to you both. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:31, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
  • BlueMoonset, I've solved some of the problems found by Rhododendrites. I think I should find a new hook, as the reliability of the source is doubted, although it still seems to me that even a blog could verify that something has been said on the blog! Especially when it has been said by a notable contributor who has a Wikipedia article. Let me see if I can sort it out tomorrow. Moonraker (talk) 03:54, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on February 26

Sociopolitical issues of anatomy in America in the 19th century

Created/expanded by KaylaMa (talk). Self-nominated at 17:08, 9 March 2017 (UTC).

  • @KaylaMa: Could you fix the nomination? For example, you didn't link the article in the hook. HaEr48 (talk) 05:52, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
  • @HaEr48: I have fixed my nomination, is this better now? Thanks so much for the help! KaylaMa (talk) 01:08, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment, No, not much better, & not good enough. Please look at the rules and other examples. And on Wikipedia "our" covers the world not just the US. The hook probably needs an "American" somewhere. Johnbod (talk) 17:40, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

History of retirement

Created by Rabbabodrool (talk). Self-nominated at 22:25, 26 February 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol delete vote.svg Currently proposed for deletion along WP:NOTESSAY grounds, and I have to agree. In its current state, the page represents a highly selective series of facts about retirement presented with commentary and in a non-encyclopedic tone. Per supplementary rule D7, "Articles that fail to deal adequately with the topic are also likely to be rejected." In this case, this is definitely not comprehensive on the history of retirement. It's far enough off the mark that I don't believe there's substantial hope that the article will be improved to an acceptable level within the next 7 days. I'd recommend moving this back to userspace, fixing errors, and continuing to add to it until this is at a higher level of quality. ~ Rob13Talk 19:25, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
Symbol possible vote.svg @Rabbabodrool: New and long enough, QPQ not required as this is nominator's first submission. Earwig detects some borderline close paraphrasing where individual sentences are very similar to their sources; I'd like to see these reworded.
I agree with User:BU Rob13 that the article does not adequately cover the topic. The problem is that the article is a collection of very specific anecdotes and quotes from famous people at various times in history, rather than a general discussion on how ideas and practice of retirement changed over time. Look at History of public relations for contrast; that is a Good Article, so you don't have to be quite that thorough, but it should give you a general idea of what the content and structure should be. I think this article can be fixed by including more general information about the context of the quotes rather than focusing just on who said what. John P. Sadowski (NIOSH) (talk) 19:26, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Oli Shaw

Created by Deiz (talk). Self-nominated at 21:25, 27 February 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Article is new enough and (just) long enough. I have added a couple of citation needed tags and a verification failed tag which need to be addressed before DYK can be considered. QPQ is also needed— Rod talk 19:46, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on February 28

Winter time (Namibia)

  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Continuoolithus
  • Comment: Another error on Wikipedia fixed: The statement on Namibia's clock changing was wrong since inception of Daylight saving time by country [16] because the main article source has it wrong.
    The original hook is my favourite but I'm not sure it is acceptable. To verify that Namibia currently is the only country with winter time instead of DST, we can review Daylight saving time by country which supports it through an entry I edited myself. That would still be somewhat WP:OR as it is only implicitly stated. Or we can take the Czech-language source I indicated, where my cz-0.25 abilities (and Google Translate) tell me that the Czech source thinks that Czechoslovakia was the only country with winter time. Here the obvious problem is that the source is wrong; at the time it was written Namibia already had winter time for seven years. Furthermore, the source says 'probably'. I'm open so suggestions and comments.
    Depending on the decision by the National Assembly and its timing, the hooks might not be factual anymore. I'll report back here as soon as the issue is decided for 2017.

Created by Pgallert (talk). Self-nominated at 13:47, 2 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg @Pgallert: New and long enough, within policy, Earwig detects no copyvios, QPQ done. It's a little unclear from the article text exactly what's going on here. From what I can gather, in daylight saving time, clocks are set an hour forward in the summer, while in Namibia's winter time, clocks are set an hour back in the (Southern) winter. Is it practically the same, the only difference being which of the two times is considered standard time? If so, this should be stated more explicitly in the article. Also, shouldn't the summer time thus be South African Standard Time rather than West Africa Summer Time? Lastly, the fact that winter time was put into effect so that children wouldn't have to walk to school in the dark would make a good additional hook. John P. Sadowski (NIOSH) (talk) 22:12, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
    Hi John P. Sadowski (NIOSH) Yes indeed, the effect of DST and winter time is the same. The three differences are a) that in Namibia, UTC+02:00 (West Africa Summer Time) is the standard time, b) that the time change starts in fall and ends in spring, and c) that the time change is done turning clocks back when it starts, and forward when it ends. I'd be happy for any suggestion on how to clarify that in the article... if I wrote something that is hard to understand I'm probably the wrong person to iron that out :-/ Thanks so far, Pgallert (talk) 06:07, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 1

Sceriman family

The Palazzo Zeno Manin Sceriman in Venice
The Palazzo Zeno Manin Sceriman in Venice

Created by LouisAragon (talk). Self-nominated at 03:31, 16 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Comment: this will be LouisAragon's sixth DYK nomination: the first one ran in early 2016, the second earlier this month, the third and fourth have just been promoted to prep, and the fifth was approved earlier today. So LouisAragon will be required to submit a QPQ (quid pro quo) review of another DYK nomination before this one can be approved. I have just struck ALT1, which is very far over the 200-character maximum for DYK hooks (including spaces). BlueMoonset (talk) 23:29, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
@BlueMoonset:, Yes check.svg Done --> Template:Did you know nominations/Orobanche uniflora - LouisAragon (talk) 22:07, 26 March 2017 (UTC)


Created by DarjeelingTea (talk). Self-nominated at 07:25, 1 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Begin review Article is new enough and long enough. No pic to review. article is interesting, well referenced and neutral. It's not required but is there any pic or logo that could go at the top? That would add to the visual appeal of the article. I will continue the review later. Philafrenzy (talk) 12:25, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
Added an online link to the ref source. Philafrenzy (talk) 12:05, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg Refs 2 & 4 needs page numbers and 2 should redirect to the relevant page in the book since it is available. Hook is correctly formatted but lacks sufficient context. Suggest something about the Nazi invasion of France and state year 1940. Lead could be expanded. No copyvios or close paraphrasing detected. AGF on the mostly offline sources. Philafrenzy (talk) 19:28, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
Alt-1: ... that, in the final days of the French Third Republic after the invasion of France in the year 1940, radio station Paris-Mondial resorted to broadcasting "recordings of military marches and panicked appeals for guns, tanks, and planes"?
Updated and alt. DarjeelingTea (talk) 22:29, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 2

Jean-Nicolas Corvisart

Created/expanded by Aeisenstadt1 (talk). Self-nominated at 20:29, 8 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg @Aeisenstadt1: Numerous problems with this. A lot of the reference tags are showing errors or are bare urls. The Napoleon conversation quote is broken up and finally, there isn't any hook that has been suggested so it can't be promoted without that crucial factor. A lot of work needs to be done on cleanup and you need to propose a hook before this can be taken anywhere. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 10:48, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for drawing this to my attention! This article was part of a class project that we had to write and nominate. Unfortunately, I am unable to go into other headlines to make edits, because I am not assigned them. Again, I appreciate the feedback and will look into remedying the problematic citations. The hook is something we have to come up with in our sandboxes and then propose after. So after it's approved, this can be addressed. Aeisenstadt1 (talk) 14:50, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 3


Created/expanded by Yennyyang (talk). Self-nominated at 19:23, 9 March 2017 (UTC).

Horace Wells

5x expanded by Kennyling96 (talk). Self-nominated at 14:15, 10 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol delete vote.svg @Kennyling96: On February 16 the article had 3120 k of "readable prose" and now sits at 7666 K of readable prose, not even a two time expansion. It was not unsourced prior to expansion so it would have to be a full five time expansion to qualify for DYK. That would mean it should be at over 15,000 k of readable prose. This is far from it. It also has a big "Additional sources" needed tag at the top, something else that would have to be addressed before a DYK could be run. I can see that this is your first DYK, I just want to encourage you to read and understand the eligibility criteria before nominating, I hate to reject a hook but the article just does not qualify.  MPJ-DK  16:26, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
Symbol possible vote.svg @Kennyling96 and MPJ-DK: Doing a 5x expansion for an article starting off at this length is difficult, but not impossible. We usually allow a grace period to increase the length to the meet requirement. If the nomnator or someone else is willing to add the extra text in the next two weeks or so (and it is a lot of text!), then this nomination would be able to proceed. Alternatively, you could try to improve it to Good Article status and then nominate it here afterwards. Antony–22 (talkcontribs) 04:10, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
I apologize for submitting an ineligible article for DYK. The nomination was required for a class assignment. I will try to improve the article to good article status. The "additional sources" tag at the top was added there before I added my portion to the article. I am unsure as to whether it can be removed, now that I have used additional sources to cite the information that I added. Kennyling96 (talk) 02:56, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Crawford Long

5x expanded by HHowar12 (talk). Nominated by Cnpacyna (talk) at 04:29, 10 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg I am sorry to do this @HHowar12 and Cnpacyna: but this was not expanded five-fold. Since it was sourced prior to expansion the rule is 5x expansion. In December 2016 it had 3761 B of readable prose - now it has 8682 B, which is far from the 18,500-ish bytes needed, it's not even half way to the criteria for DYK. If it was closer to the mark I'd put it on hold and ask for more, but it needs to be more than doubled in size to qualify. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.  MPJ-DK  16:31, 11 March 2017 (UTC)


Created/expanded by Dhk0308 (talk). Self-nominated at 19:21, 9 March 2017 (UTC).

Symbol possible vote.svg Started as 5,478 characters, now at 14,751 characters, it's far short of the 27,390 it needs to be a 5x expansion. Also, references are missing in the first few paragraphs of "History in Europe" and the entire section "Challenge to Galenic physiology". Earwig finds no copyvios, FWIW.
It's a cool topic and I'd love to see it on the Main Page, but you'd need to double the current size for it to be eligible for DYK as an expansion. However, it's on its way to what you need for Good Article status. If you can attain Good Article status, you can then nominate it again at DYK as a recent Good Article, and it would be likely to pass then. Antony–22 (talkcontribs) 04:08, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

William Buchan

5x expanded by Lethalbehemoth (talk). Self-nominated at 19:10, 10 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Nice work expanding this, but I am afraid the DYK rules require a 5-fold expansion, what I see is 380 words for the pre-expansion version, and last month brings it to <1000 words. Second, there are possible WP:COPYPASTE/WP:COPYVIO issues: compare for example article's "Catherine the Great, czar of Russia, was so impressed by the work, she sent Buchan a gold medal and personal letter" to [[] source " Empress of Russia was so pleased with it that she sent Buchan a letter of commendation and a gold medal"; this is borderline but I'll flag it for a review by another DYK reviewer. Third, I am concerned about the hook's claim of "one of the longest standing medical texts". This is again sourced to [17], but which part of the article supports that claim? This needs to be clarified, keeping WP:OR in mind - we need a source that clearly states it was one of the longest standing medical texts in (presumably) world's history. PS. If anyone replies here, pleae WP:ECHO me, thanks. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:43, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
  • To be more precise, the article was 2843 prose characters prior to expansion, and 6103 prose characters afterward, a little over a 2x expansion. To attain 5x would require 14215 prose characters, which seems just about impossible. Probably the best route to DYK eligibility would be through the article becoming a Good Article, but the copyvio issues would need to be addressed before that route is attempted. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:13, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 6

Lucky Bastard Club

Moved to mainspace by Dante2326 (talk). Self-nominated at 23:35, 10 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Nothing in the article suggests people came close to being meaningfuly inducted. Additionally while it just about makes the character limit most of it is about survival rates rather than the club.©Geni (talk) 02:19, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Azande witchcraft

  • Reviewed: I'll do one, as the nominator.
  • Comment: Note: we moved this to mainspace on 5 March, but I didn't noticed I had gotten pinged about the hook. I hope/trust that this won't be too much of a problem.

Created by YoungWizard (talk). Nominated by Dr Aaij (talk) at 02:36, 15 March 2017 (UTC).

I am willing to review this, but not right now, weather too nice. What I noticed was the beginning, "Witchcraft for the Azande", that sounds like witchcraft is good for the Azande, like "someone for governor", - I guess it should mean "For the Azande, witchcraft means/is ...? + we need a link to Azande, early. I never heard of them. Looks like you did your qpq ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:41, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Thank you Gerda Arendt. For the record, it was Template:Did you know nominations/Kirchenlied--you should read that article, very interesting. Anyway, the lateness of this class assignment, I missed a ping, and I was busy on my sock account; BlueMoonset knows about it, and thinks I may expect leniency from the reviewer. Thanks. Yes, I see that it may need some work, but I had to get this up on time. YoungWizard will get on this imminently, no doubt. Thanks again Gerda! Dr Aaij (talk) 15:10, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
No rush ;) - I wonder if the article even has the best name, - could think of Witchcraft (Azande). The the lead could start then: Witchcraft means to the Azande (Zande people). Will look closer now. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:14, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
I saw now, that all sources are via jstor, so can only access the abstracts. Any chance that you could mail me the articles? Two sources seem to the same, just different pages. It would be even better to point to a single page for a certain fact. The wording of that source, Witchcraft among the Azande is ... - that could also start the article. I don't think it's too close paraphrasing, - it's just the most precise way to say it. oracle should be linked the first time, and I think not be capitalized. I am so used to witches being female that I was surprised to read they can be both genders. I am waiting for someone telling me I'm a witch. We had warrior, monster, "her flashmob" and groupie already ;) - would you know a good (funny) image for groupie? I took one for monster. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:35, 15 March 2017 (UTC)


5x expanded by Gfosankar (talk). Self-nominated at 16:04, 7 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Article is expanded 5x and nominated within date range. QPQ done. However, it talks only about the wall and related incidents with it. Nothing about the village as such. I believe it fails WP:DYKSG#D7. - Vivvt (Talk) 18:55, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 7

Das Nusch-Nuschi

Hindemith in 1923
Hindemith in 1923
  • Reviewed: Azande witchcraft
  • Comment: If only we had room for the whole quote, or at least "It is essential that this piece be danced (or rather wobbled to) by two eunuchs with incredibly fat and naked bellies."

5x expanded by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 22:14, 15 March 2017 (UTC).

  • This caught my eye while browsing. The following comes in at 175 characters, I think: Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 22:45, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
ALT1: ... that Paul Hindemith said of his opera Das Nusch-Nuschi "it is essential that this piece be danced (or rather wobbled to) by two eunuchs with incredibly fat and naked bellies"?
Nice approach but he didn't say it about the opera but only about its Third Dance, the parody of Reger. Try again, I like the idea (although he spoke German of course)! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:25, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
We could try this, perhaps: ALT2 ... that Paul Hindemith said of the third dance of his opera Das Nusch-Nuschi "it is essential that this piece be danced (or rather wobbled to) by two eunuchs with incredibly fat and naked bellies"?
Still comes in within the 200 char limit, just about. Sorry I left it so long to come back: time passes quickly! Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 17:33, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Renz L. Jennings

Created by ErieSwiftByrd (talk). Self-nominated at 02:33, 7 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg New enough and long enough, with an interesting hook. Third DYK nomination for the nominator, so no QPQ needed yet. Taking the newspaper source for the hook fact on good faith as it is offline and the other source for this (a Youtube clip) is primary. However, Earwig finds too much close paraphrasing to pass this. Compare our article's "Orphaned at an early age, Jennings grew up poor and lived with his sister, then later a brother." with source [1]'s "Orphaned at an early age, Mr. Jennings grew up poor and lived with his sister, then later a brother.", and our article's "Jennings passed the State Bar Exam in 1926, one of only seven people to pass the exam that year." with source [1]'s "Jennings passed the State Bar Exam in 1926, one of only seven people to pass the exam that year." (the same sentences are also repeated at the ourcampaigns external link). This is especially worrisome in view of the high number of offline sources cited. All material here needs to be written in original words, not copied nor closely paraphrased from sources. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:01, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
I did my best to re-right the paraphrasing in the early life section and did some light cleaning of the rest of the article. Any other issues?ErieSwiftByrd (talk) 18:41, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Hi, the biggest concern with the article (close paraphrasing) was addressed. There is 2.9% match now and they are only names and specific terms. The article is almost ready. Here are some stuff you need to fix before: (1) A lot of the references are not complete. Take a look at sources 1, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13. They are either missing the publishers, titles, and/or dates of publication. (2) Make sure that all the info in the infobox is cited elsewhere in the article, per WP:INFOBOX. Lloyd Andrews, Harry Johnson, and his DOB/POB are not cited in the body paragraphs. (3) as far as the YouTube source, I'm undecided. Would you be able to find the original source, or at least know how the original source is cited? That would suffice. Let me know when you're done and I'll go ahead and review this again. Don't get discouraged! The article is very close to getting promoted. ComputerJA () 23:28, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
BTW, consider using this format when adding full citations. It is much easier and cleaner (in my opinion). For news articles, use this template. Let me know if you have any questions. ComputerJA () 23:48, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 8

Ivy Josiah

  • Reviewed: This is my first article, not yet a reviewer.
  • Comment: This was written for International Women's Day at Newnham College.

Created by Yuitsum (talk) and G-Eazy951 (talk). Nominated by Yuitsum (talk) at 11:21, 15 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article is barely above 1500 characters (1519) and is new enough, a QPQ is not needed. But the hook doesn't exactly match what is written in the article. 'Wife', 'beating' nor 'wife beating' are actually mentioned, but 'battered women' are. These are two very different distinctions, at least in my opinion they are, and either the hook or article needs changing so that they match each other more clearly. Also, the article is classified as a stub, which it should be for DYK.  — Calvin999 20:59, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Wife battering does not sound so good. G-Eazy951 worked on this too. He may have a suggestion. Yuitsum (talk) 19:32, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Mary Susan McIntosh

Created by LornaMCampbell (talk). Nominated by Stinglehammer (talk) at 16:20, 13 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg The hook is cited satisfactorily and the article is long enough and there appears to be no copy violation. At 225 characters including spaces, the hook is too long. It needs to include "... that " at the beginning and needs to contain a least a link to the subject and probably to lesbian and gay rights and the House Un-American Activities Committee. I have concerns about the photograph contained in the article. It has been uploaded as creative commons with source and author given as the London School of Economics Library. The page there that it has been taken from is a blog post by one of the Library's archivists discussing the archiving of Ms McIntosh's collection of papers. As such the image is one that Ms McIntosh has collected rather than the University and, from the quality of the image, it appears to be from a newspaper or similar publication and is presumably subject to a copyright rather than creative commons. Is there any additional source information on this? DavidCane (talk) 22:17, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
    • Hi @DavidCane: - Is it the length of the hook that is the main concern? If so how many characters is appropriate? The image used was really a placeholder image. I have since contacted Mary's old workplaces at the University of Essex and Nuffield College, Oxford, and they have supplied 4 better quality images which I can upload shortly. Please let me know if uploading a better image resolves the issue or if the hook needs further tweaking. Best regards Stinglehammer (talk) 20:07, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
      • The hook is still too long. It must be no longer than 200 characters - see the guidance on hook format for details. If the new images are copy free, commons or the like put one of these into the article, change the hook and it should be ready to go. --DavidCane (talk) 21:37, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
How about this:
  • ALT1: ... that sociologist, feminist, political activist and campaigner for lesbian and gay rights, Mary Susan McIntosh was deported in 1960 for speaking out against the House Un-American Activities Committee?
(199 characters) Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:57, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Even though the House Un-American Activities Committee is mentioned, I think that it is necessary to say where she was deported from.
  • The newspaper/magazine image questioned above is still in the article. The two new images are an improvement, but @Stinglehammer: needs to show that the University of Essex and Nuffield College have released them for free use.--DavidCane (talk) 09:08, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
  • ...that sociologist, feminist and campaigner for lesbian and gay rights, Mary Susan McIntosh was deported from the US in 1960 for speaking out against the House Un-American Activities Committee?
Any better? And do you mean getting OTRS permission for the two new images? I can remove the offending third image if that helps resolve the problem?Stinglehammer (talk) 17:43, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Yes, the hook looks better now and I think OTRS permission is the way to go. I have created a commons category for Mary Susan McIntosh, if you remove the magazine one with the uncertain attribution from the article and link to the commons category in the external links section all three images (and any others you have) can be found there. --DavidCane (talk) 17:50, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
@DavidCane:, Okay I have asked for OTRS permission to be provided for all 3 images and removed the 3rd questionable image from the article. Best, Stinglehammer (talk) 10:47, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Helen Alexander Archdale

Created by PrometheasOre (talk). Nominated by Stinglehammer (talk) at 15:53, 13 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg New enough, long enough, neutrally written, well referenced. However, there is extensive word-by-word and sentence-by-sentence close paraphrasing which must be rewritten in your own words:
  • Source: During the First World War she started a training farm for women agricultural workers, served as a clerical worker with Queen Mary's Army Auxiliary Corps from 1917, and in 1918 worked in the women's department of the Ministry of National Service.
  • Article: During the First World War she started a training farm for women agricultural workers, served as a clerical worker with Queen Mary's Army Auxiliary Corps from 1917, and in 1918 worked in the women's department of the Ministry of National Service.
  • Source: The six original specific aims were: (1) Satisfactory legislation on child assault; (2) Satisfactory legislation for the widowed mother; (3) Satisfactory legislation for the unmarried mother and her child; (4) Equal rights of guardianship for married parents; (5) Equal pay for teachers; (6) Equal opportunities for men and women in the civil service.
  • Article: The group's specific aims were:
  1. Satisfactory legislation on child assault
  2. Satisfactory legislation for the widowed mother
  3. Satisfactory legislation for the unmarried mother and her child
  4. Equal rights of guardianship for married parents
  5. Equal pay for teachers
  6. Equal opportunities for men and women in the civil service (Each line need to be :#paraphrased or put in quotes)
  • Source: Later that month Helen Archdale was arrested with Adela Pankhurst and Maud Joachim in Dundee after interrupting a meeting being held by the local MP, Winston Churchill. On 20th October all three women went on hunger strike. They were all released after four days of imprisonment.
  • Article: Later that month she was arrested with Hannah Mitchell (she's not mentioned in the source), Adela Pankhurst and Maud Joachim in Dundee and convicted of a breach of the peace after interrupting a meeting being held by the local MP, Winston Churchill. Following this on 20 October all three women went on hunger strike. All three were released after four days of imprisonment.
  • According to the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography source, her maiden name was Helen Russel. Why is the page named Helen Alexander Archdale, and not Helen Russel Archdale or just Helen Archdale? I also added a clarification tag to "equalitarian feminism" — what is this? Is it a typo? Does it have an associated Wikipedia page?
  • Regarding the hooks, the first one is OK; it would be better not to identify Winston Churchill as an MP in Dundee for intrigue. But an even better hook would be her daughter remembering that she supplied her mother with rocks for her window-breaking protest.
  • No QPQ needed for first-time nominator. Image in article is fair use. Yoninah (talk) 22:29, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 9

George Paul Korengay

Created by No Swan So Fine (talk), Edwardx (talk), and Philafrenzy (talk). Nominated by No Swan So Fine (talk) at 17:54, 15 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article created on 10 March and nominated on 15 March, so falls within date range. QPQ done. Hook length is within the limit. The article has too much quotes. This should be reduced. The hook and some of the claims are sourced from the primary sources. Need to find secondary sources or alternate hook. - Vivvt (Talk) 18:44, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Vaginal steaming

Or worse. EEng 17:46, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Created by Hap400 (talk), Ritchie333 (talk), Amortias (talk), Drmies (talk), Tryptofish (talk), EEng (talk), and LadyofShalott (talk). Nominated by Ritchie333 (talk) at 17:35, 15 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg New and long enough, QPQ done by nominator, all non-lead ¶ with citations, copyvio checks reveal no problems ([20], [21], [22]). The only matter is that the source does not state that Paltrow was personally "advised" by anyone or any entity regarding this matter. The news article simply refutes Paltrow's notions. North America1000 05:46, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
The nom was made to meet deadline, hooks are still being considered. See the article's talk page. EEng 09:52, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
I assume this is deliberately allowing our demograph of teenage boys to go unchallenged  :) How about this for a supplementary hook? — O Fortuna! Imperatrix mundi. 21:24, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
This is going to be our best April 1 ever! [23]. I take it you'll be pitching in on the tampons – in fact, maybe we can get that in for April 1 too! O joy! O ecstacy! EEng 23:09, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
Yes, tampons are simply hilarious. LadyofShalott 00:37, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
Well, if the tampons don't work out we can always withdraw them. EEng 01:42, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
Jive indeed. I think you mean jibe, Your Arbship. (See also Wikipedia:Diffusing conflict.) EEng 04:15, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
Says who? Drmies (talk) 04:30, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

It seems the alts I proposed on the article talk page didn't get copied over to the nomination page, so here they are:

  • striking ALT4 as potentially implying that it is sometimes but not always credibly recommended. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 04:22, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Before it happens, my recommendation is that we do not approve a hook, here, that takes aim at a living person - she may have wrote a blog that is wrong but let's avoid this aspect. (Also, if you look at the article, that mention just hangs there, in a manner that suggests it is not really important to the topic at all). Alanscottwalker (talk) 23:22, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you Alanscottwalker, I have struck both hooks referring to Ms. Paltrow. The original hook is not an April Fools hook in any case, and I think ALT1 rather gives the game away with regard to the "sorcery". Gatoclass (talk) 01:43, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Coney Island–Stillwell Avenue (New York City Subway)

Station headhouse
Station headhouse

Improved to Good Article status by Epicgenius (talk) and Kew Gardens 613 (talk). Nominated by Epicgenius (talk) at 18:26, 9 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg - Length, Date, Cite, and Earwigs check for Alt0 and Alt2 - The cited source for Alt1 does not state it is the largest renewable energy staion in the US. A QPQ must be done prior to final approval however. Mifter Public (talk) 20:37, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 10

Lillian Dean

  • Comment: created during the Women on Wikipedia edit-a-thon of WikiClub NT, moved from draft space 10 March

Created by Jan Hills (talk). Nominated by Gnangarra (talk) at 08:35, 10 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg New enough, long enough, meets core content policies. Hook cited to RS, AGF offline source. A number of paragraphs need references though. Jakob (talk) 02:04, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg It is not clear from the article if she was the photographer or the photographer's assistant for all or some of those seven years. Edwardx (talk) 22:25, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg The hook and article are misleading. From the cited source, "up to seven brides waiting in different parts of the studio", it is reasonable to infer that the brides were all or nearly all photographed in the studio, and that Dean rarely if ever went to an actual wedding. No need to AGF, Jakob Coles and Tenniscourtisland, as the source is available online! Edwardx (talk) 13:24, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

John Brown (doctor)

Created/expanded by Krahaman1 (talk). Self-nominated at 02:37, 10 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol delete vote.svg @Krahaman1: Unfortunately this expansion is ineligible for DYK as it has gone from 6.3k to 14.8k characters since 8 March which is not a 5x expansion. If it was unsourced and a BLP then it would have been fine however this is not. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 09:43, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
@Krahaman1: Symbol possible vote.svg I'm getting 2,962 characters for this revision and 7,709 currently. This is still about half of the 14,630 characters that would be needed for a 5x expansion. We usually allow a grace period to increase the length to the meet requirement. If you or someone else is willing to add the extra text in the next two weeks or so, then this nomination can proceed.
@The C of E: You need to use the DYK check tool to get the readable prose length. The length on the History tab counts all characters, including invisible markup, and does not reflect the length of readable prose. See Rule A3 for details.
@The C of E: The nominator probably didn't see your ping. I put a note on his talk page. Yoninah (talk) 14:36, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
@The C of E: I'm sorry, I didn't realize that the article needed to be expanded fivefold. Since it hasn't been expanded yet I'm assuming the nomination will not proceed? Krahaman1 (talk) 02:08, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 12

Ljubiša Preletačević, Sarmu probo nisi

  • Comment: I am not clear if I should do a QPQ for nominations of articles written by someone else. Can someone enlighten me, please? Also, does this break the rule election candidates rule? The hook does not really promote anyone.

Created by Vanjagenije (talk) and AirWolf (talk). Nominated by Surtsicna (talk) at 13:55, 19 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Comment: two QPQs will be required of Surtsicna: one per nominated article. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:03, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Lofty Chiltern

  • Reviewed: This is my first DYK nomination so I am exempt from the QPQ.
  • Comment: Please feel free to adjust the wording of the hook(s) or add another one.

Created by Soaper1234 (talk). Self-nominated at 10:56, 12 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg The article was created on 10 February 2017‎ but was not nominated within 7 days range. It was continuously expanded over a month and was nominated on 12 March 2017. Considering 7 days limit, the article had 16972 characters (2964 words) with "readable prose size" on 4 March 2017. As of today, article has 27432 characters (4696 words) with "readable prose size". I dont think this is 5x expanded within the date range. Perhaps consider taking it to WP:GAN, if suits, and nominated once the article passes the review. or consider further expansion but I believe that would be too tough to do within next 5 days. - Vivvt (Talk) 05:21, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Thanks for reviewing Vivvt but the article was created in my userspace on 10 February 2017. It was moved to mainspace on 12 March 2017 so does comply with the new article guidelines. Was this the only problem stopping the creation of the DYK? Thanks, Soaper1234 (talk) 07:38, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
  • @Soaper1234: My bad! I didnt notice this with long edit history. I will review the article in the mean time. - Vivvt (Talk) 08:18, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
  • @Vivvt: I have tried to condense the amount of quotations used, but could you be clearer on where in the article needs improving so it is not "written like a fan page"? Thanks Soaper1234 (talk) 17:58, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 13

Odontomachus paleomyagra

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 Kevmin (talk). Self-nominated at 21:21, 13 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg New enough, long enough, QPQ complete. No close paraphrasing via spot checks, no copyvios picked up by the tool. Neutral. Cites sources, but not particularly well. Could you please adjust the reference style so that each citation cites a specific page within the sources? This would make it much easier to verify things. For instance, you could create a references list and then have a notes section that cites a specific page within the source? See WP:CITESHORT for one possible solution. Basically, it's not terribly helpful to link to a 40 page pdf that can't be easily searched to find the information you've cited. The hook could use a bit of work. First, the article doesn't say mandibles are most similar to South African species; it says they're similar to two specific species, one from south-east Africa and one from south-east Asia. Perhaps your hook could note that the fossils of this species were found in Europe but their mandibles are similar to those of ants from other continents? This would be a more interesting way to frame things, and more in line with what's written in the article now. I still need to verify the cite on the hook, but I'll do so after the citations are cleaned up to avoid having to read a 40 page scientific paper in its entirety. Ping me once you've responded to these issues and I'll review again. ~ Rob13Talk 08:40, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
  • @BU Rob13: Reference style adjusted (though I am not a fan of it, since it is not a style typicaly used in entomology and paleontology writing). Regarding the hook, I was trying to keep the hook within the 200 character limit, and noting both Africa and the south-east Asian species group (three species there not one) would make it overly verbose I think.--Kevmin § 12:31, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
  • @Kevmin: You're certainly welcome to use a different style, so long as what you're citing is clear. For instance, parenthetical citations in the style of any major style guide would be appropriate. You could also duplicate the full references but with different page numbers for each cite, although that's a bit redundant. I'm not trying to enforce any particular style on you, just trying to ensure the information is verifiable to the extent possible. As for the hook, we could do something like "that fossils of the Czech fossil ant, Odontomachus paleomyagra, were located in Europe despite having mandibles most similar to species from other continents?" That's a bit wordy, but not overly so. You're welcome to rework or propose a different alt. My biggest concern here is that, as worded, the current hook isn't reflected in the article. There's no claim in the article that the mandibles are more similar to the south-east African species than the south-east Asian species, so the "most similar" is slightly dubious. Based on the current state of the article (assuming verification checks out - still need to look), I would approve an alt with just "similar" if you prefer that route. ~ Rob13Talk 16:21, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
@BU Rob13: How about shifting the wording to notably rather then most (which was relating to the lack of similarity to the Dominican amber species).--Kevmin § 20:23, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 14

Rubén Oseguera González

Created/expanded by ComputerJA (talk). Self-nominated at 17:21, 14 March 2017 (UTC).


Cover of Kirchenlied
Cover of Kirchenlied

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 22:22, 14 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Long enough, new enough, no plagiarism that I see. Hook is verified. Great little article: too few people know how important this kind of book is. Gerda, I am not sure what you mean with "because it was generally accepted"; one way to solve that is to scrap the sentence about the subtitle. Is "Buchschmuck" the general term for "layout in books that looks pretty"? Finally, there's some interesting material on p. 45 of Linner's book, and no doubt more on pages 46 and 47--I read, for instance, that the Gestapo actually saw a use for his collection, particularly in relation to the German youth. I'd love to see more of that in there--but this is not a DYK requirement of course. :) Dr Aaij (talk) 02:07, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
Thank you, that was fast! - "because it was generally accepted", stress on generally, meaning not only by youth, while it had come from the youth movement. How could we say that? - "Buchschmuck" sounds certainly old-fashioned now, - I don't know if it was already old-fashioned or stylish then, nor a good translation. "book ornament" - like Christmas tree ornament? - I will try to take more on board, - did you see how much more there is in German, including a table with every single song? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:28, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 15

Mohammed Mohiedin Anis

1947 Cadillac canvertible
1947 Cadillac canvertible
  • Reviewed: not yet done

Created by Edwardx (talk), Philafrenzy (talk), and Proscribe (talk). Nominated by Edwardx (talk) at 22:50, 22 March 2017 (UTC).

North Shore Branch

Abandoned viaduct
Abandoned viaduct
  • Comment: QPQ pending

Improved to Good Article status by Epicgenius (talk), Kew Gardens 613 (talk), and Tdorante10 (talk). Nominated by Epicgenius (talk) at 01:21, 16 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article is long enough and since no major changes have been made since the GA review, I will assume there are no sourcing issues or plagiarism. The hook is within policy. The second link does not clearly support the hook, but the Staten Island Advance reference (#38) used in the article does. @Epicgenius:: Only outstanding issue is the QPQ review. AHeneen (talk) 15:32, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Glossary of bird terms

Explanatory diagram from Pycraft, W. P. (1893). "The Interlocking of Feathers". Natural Science: A Monthly Review of Scientific Progress. Vol. 3. Macmillan. p. 199. 
Explanatory diagram from Pycraft, W. P. (1893). "The Interlocking of Feathers". Natural Science: A Monthly Review of Scientific Progress. Vol. 3. Macmillan. p. 199. 
  • Reviewed: Wipeout HD
  • Comment: Moved to mainspace from user space draft earlier today.

Created by Fuhghettaboutit (talk). Self-nominated at 03:54, 16 March 2017 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on March 16

George Ronald Richards

  • Reviewed: This is my second nomination and would by the third article I created or expanded to feature, so I haven't yet started QPQ.

Created by Mortee (talk) and Janweh64 (talk). Nominated by Mortee (talk) at 23:57, 22 March 2017 (UTC).

LaVar Ball

  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Plered
  • Comment: There are many interesting hooks possible for this article. Let me know if you have suggestions. Note that ALT2 is an April Fool's Day hook.

Created by TempleM (talk). Self-nominated at 22:57, 17 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg @TempleM: As much as I would like to clear ALT2 for AFD, I do not believe I can at the moment as the article doesn't specifically make the claim of being better than Michael Jordan. I think it would need to be made clearer in the article to pass extra inspection, even if it is for April fools day. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 11:35, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
  • The C of E - Tweaked the hook to something found in the article. TempleM (talk) 16:46, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg The C of E, TempleM, this article has been remarkably unstable, both before being semi-protected for a week on March 17 and between the protection coming off at 15:46 on March 24 and being reinstated at 19:20 that same day. Since the current protection ends late on March 31, I think we can expect the article to be quite unstable, which is a problem if this runs with ALT2 on April Fools' Day. Also, I have trouble with the "would be" claim; even running on that day, I would expect the twist to be that it was some other Michael Jordan, rather than Wikipedia's voice backing up Ball's ludicrous claim. Even "would have beat" (which is the actual claim in the article) wouldn't work in Wikipedia's voice. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:25, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
  • BlueMoonset I have tweaked the hook again so that the reader knows that Ball claimed this and didn't actually defeat Michael Jordan. Will this still sound like an AFD hook? It sounds almost exactly like the original hook but with less detail. TempleM (talk) 20:15, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
  • TempleM, I don't think ALT2 does sound like an AFD hook, but then I didn't think it did the first time. So I think it shouldn't be run then but instead as a normal hook, and should also wait until the article has achieved stability. I'd be interested to hear what others think about these two points. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:53, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 18

Lukas Lundin

Super-yacht Savannah
Super-yacht Savannah
  • Reviewed: not yet done

Created by Edwardx (talk). Self-nominated at 00:27, 26 March 2017 (UTC).

Eva Randová

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 14:19, 24 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article created on 24 March and DYK nominated on the same day. QPQ done. The article is majorly depends on Is this a WP:RS? If not, can we replace the source with other references? Only one other source is used which is used for awards. - Vivvt (Talk) 14:47, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
So sorry, I nominated and only then found that it had no source yet. Created 18 March, I thought I do something about not being late. I added Bayreuth ref already. It's in German, but BC is a translation as far as I can see. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:00, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Pendulum car

Created by Mackensen (talk). Self-nominated at 18:07, 18 March 2017 (UTC).

NWA World Tag Team Championship, NWA World Tag Team Championship (San Francisco version), NWA World Tag Team Championship (Central States version), NWA World Tag Team Championship (Chicago version), NWA World Tag Team Championship (Buffalo Athletic Club version), NWA World Tag Team Championship (Georgia version), NWA World Tag Team Championship (Iowa/Nebraska version), NWA World Tag Team Championship (Indianapolis version), NWA World Tag Team Championship (Salt Lake Wrestling Club version), NWA World Tag Team Championship (Amarillo version), NWA World Tag Team Championship (Texas version), NWA World Tag Team Championship (Minneapolis version), NWA World Tag Team Championship (Mid-America version), NWA World Tag Team Championship (Los Angeles version)

5x expanded by MPJ-DK (talk). Self-nominated at 04:05, 18 March 2017 (UTC).

Expansion overview
  1. NWA World Tag Team Championship: Before 2867 K - after 25,000 K
  2. San Francisco version: Before 137 K - after 3284 K
  3. Central States version: Before 593 K - after 3346 K
  4. Chicago version: Before 176 K - after 1870 K
  5. Georgia version: Before 88 K - after 2479 K
  6. Texas version: Before 262 K - after 2488 K
  7. Minneapolis version: Before 249 K - after 2650 K
  8. Mid-America version: Before 458 K - after 2954 K
  9. Los Angeles version: Before 163 K - after 2752 K

Articles created/expanded on March 19

Grosvenor Gardens House

Grosvenor Gardens House in 2013
Grosvenor Gardens House in 2013
  • Reviewed: not yet done

Created by Edwardx (talk) and Philafrenzy (talk). Nominated by Edwardx (talk) at 22:57, 26 March 2017 (UTC).

The Last Judgment (Michelangelo)

Mary and Christ
Mary and Christ

Source: Secondary sources per article. Refers to this passage in Vasari: "When Michael Angelo had completed about three quarters of the work, Pope Paul went to see it, and Messer Biagio da Cesena, the master of the ceremonies, was with him, and when he was asked what he thought of it, he answered that he thought it not right to have so many naked figures in the Pope's chapel." Text link

  • Reviewed: coming

5x expanded by Johnbod (talk). Self-nominated at 19:48, 25 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Wow! Very impressive job. I read through the whole article and was fascinated by it. Here is a full review: 5x expansion verified. New enough, long enough, neutrally written, well referenced. Unable to check for close paraphrasing as all sources are offline. All images are public domain. Regarding the hook, I really like ALT0, but am unable to find the hook fact with the inline cite in the article. Could you point it out to me? A QPQ also needs to be done. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 21:08, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks! Current note 12, though in fact I see that is a different source from Hartt. Both cover it. QPQ coming, but I'm still adding bits, & there were several old master painting hooks in the last 10 days, so a bit of an interval is good. Johnbod (talk) 03:37, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Bee Free Honee

Created by Paul2520 (talk). Self-nominated at 18:07, 25 March 2017 (UTC).

What To Do About Them

Created by Morganfitzp (talk). Self-nominated at 02:59, 19 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Much of the article is unreferenced - the first paragraph of Content, the entire Other Versions section, the entire track listing section, the entire Personnel section, as well as the entire Singles section. Fair use images are also not permitted in DYK. SL93 (talk) 18:50, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
  • I've removed the non-free image here. --Hammersoft (talk) 13:27, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Added references upon request. Ready for re-review. Morganfitzp (talk) 22:23, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Reference 4 says nothing about a DJ John McGhee or Fort Apache Studios, Reference 5 says nothing about a 4-track cassette recorder, the lo-fi track "Cousteau" sentence is unreferenced, and reference 8 says nothing about Ron Regé. Jr or an ostrich. SL93 (talk) 04:18, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Morganfitzp. SL93 (talk) 21:58, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 20

Rose Cannabich

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 21:22, 27 March 2017 (UTC).

Maha Dewi of Hanthawaddy

  • Reviewed: a+ (television channel)

Created by Hybernator (talk). Self-nominated at 21:10, 25 March 2017 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on March 21

Jaye Muller

Created by Everymorning (talk). Self-nominated at 17:55, 22 March 2017 (UTC).

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol question.svg epicgenius (talk) 02:05, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

@Everymorning: This review is almost done except for the neutrality check. I think the shorter ALT1 is more to the point (thanks to @Edwardx: for adding that), so I would recommend ALT1 when I finish the review. Thanks, epicgenius (talk) 01:00, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
Sorry this took so long - I encountered unexpected issues in real life that resulted in very limited access to a computer. I formally approve ALT1 now, having checked the neutrality. epicgenius (talk) 03:39, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
epicgenius, without having supplied the proper tick icon, this nomination is not fully approved. Please complete the review at your earliest convenience. Sorry about your computer woes. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:24, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Shoot 'Em Up (film)

Clive Owen at the 2009 Berlin Film Festival
Clive Owen at the 2009 Berlin Film Festival

Expanded 5x by Bluesphere (talk). Self-nominated at 06:33, 22 March 2017 (UTC).

  • By my reckoning and according to DYK Check tool, this was expanded less than 5x, from 8,607 characters "readable prose size"to 11,226 characters. - Bri (talk) 02:43, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
  • @Bri: Hi, thanks for your time reviewing this DYK. This is my first nomination and I'm quite confused about the 5x expansion thing. Is there a chance that this DYK could still materialize? Bluesphere 02:49, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
Since it is not a new article, it will need to be expanded fivefold in the seven days prior to nomination. Or pass the good article review process. - Bri (talk) 04:02, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

The Old Axolotl

Created by Piotrus (talk). Self-nominated at 05:40, 22 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Hook is of appropriate length and NPOV. Article is NPOV with a character count of just over 1600. Article, created March 21, is new enough. No image. QPQ done. Earwig shows no obvious signs of copyvio. The hook is cited to WP:PRIMARY on the basis of which I'd usually exclude it. However, the primary source in this case is the website of a Zajdel-award winning author and is being used to support a fairly innocuous claim, on which basis I think it's okay. The hook is cited inline - but is modified to caveat the claim as "his homepage described ...". I think the hook needs to be, itself, modified so as not to speak in Wikipedia's voice (e.g. that, according to Jacek Dukaj, his experimental, electronic novel ...). There are some issues with use of plurals in the article, however, that's not a criteria for DYK so is ignored. Hook is interesting. DarjeelingTea (talk) 15:19, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
    • @DarjeelingTea: Well, the electronic or experimental can be sourced with other sources (English, like, for example). The only thing his website is used for is for the "first book in English" claim, since it collects dates of publications and indicators which works were translated to English, and thus makes it clear that it is the first book (novel/novella) following the prior three translations which are listed as short stories. I don't think we need anu clarification or attribution for this rather non-controversial stuff. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:17, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Robert Grace

Source is Heckscher (p=254) "In his autobiography, Franklin states that he presented a model of his invention to his friend Robert Grace, of Warwick Furnace, who found the casting of the plates for the fireplace profitable. Franklin himself sold a number of these stoves in Philadelphia, but he refused to secure a patent for his invention, stating that he believed it should be used for the benefit of humanity.
Source is Kane "Famous First Facts" -The first heating stove was the Pennsylvania fireplace, invented by Benjamin Franklin in 1742 and now called the Franklin stove. It was a wood-burning open box of cast-iron that stood out from the chimney and caused heat from its back and sides to be thrown into the room. Smoke escaped over the top of a flat chamber behind the fire, and passed downward between it and the real back of the stove, then into the chimney. Franklin refused to patent his invention. The stoves were manufactured by Robert Grace, the master of the Warwick furnace in Chester County, PA.

Created by Doug Coldwell (talk) and 7&6=thirteen (talk). Nominated by Doug Coldwell (talk) at 22:21, 21 March 2017 (UTC).

Bonville-Courtenay feud

Plaque commemorating Radford's death in Devon.
Plaque commemorating Radford's death in Devon.

Improved to Good Article status by Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi (talk). Self-nominated at 18:27, 21 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Both hooks are way above 200 character limit. - Vivvt (Talk) 07:37, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
  • ALT3 and ALT4 can be accepted AGF. I don't have access to the print source cited in the article, but I was able to check that the information about the bedding (alt3), the mock inquest and the stones (alt4) are confirmed elsewhere: National Archives, SC 8/138/6864 Petition of John Radford to the King (SC 8: "Special Collections: Ancient Petitions to the King; to the King and Council; to the Council; to the Parliament; and the like")]. The History of Parliament entry for RADFORD, Nicholas confirms that bedding and six horses were taken, and that the wife was an invalid (alt3); also the "travesty of a coroner’s inquest" and crushing with stones. This source mentions the suicide verdict. (alt4). Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 03:54, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg See paragraph above on confirmation of the alts. The article appears to have been nominated within a day of acceptance as a GA. QPQ has been completed. The article is generally well-written and well-sourced, and has no issues in terms of neutrality or copyvio. The one criticism I have, which is not a bar to passing DYK, is that there are a lot of extended sentence structures that become tricky to follow and could benefit from being repunctuated. ;-) I made a couple of minor changes where punctuation was inconsistent or where a word was used repeatedly in the same sentence. I believe this is good to go. Thanks for working on it! Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 03:54, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 22

Barbara Hammond

Created by Andrew Davidson (talk). Self-nominated at 22:05, 29 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg The article is long enough and new enough. There are no copyright violations. The hook is sourced to an online reference. I assume good faith on the article's offline references. I also made two small fixes to the article. SL93 (talk) 04:27, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Helen King (police officer)

  • Reviewed: to come

Created by Gaia Octavia Agrippa (talk). Self-nominated at 21:44, 28 March 2017 (UTC).

Nevertheless, she persisted.

Created by Grand'mere Eugene (talk). Self-nominated at 18:30, 27 March 2017 (UTC).

  • image: Day Without a Woman SF 20170308-2212.jpg
  • caption: Woman wearing "Nevertheless, she persisted" tee shirt
  • comment: Tried to nominate image, too, after initial nom submitted
  • I won't review the article, but I will note its glaring bias and its imperviousness to any form of critical commentary in sources that are not glaringly left-leaning, with the latter being cited in depth with all the (more or less relevant) things they have to say about this hype. It took me 5 minutes to come across this, this, and this. (Interestingly, the article is not even interested in more positive coverage of the issue by conservative sources.) Dahn (talk) 23:24, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Thanks for these observations. I haven't time this evening, but will draw from the resources you have included to improve the article's neutral point of view. Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 23:38, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
Today, I've added 5 paragraphs to provide a better balanced perspective. Dahn, I especially want to thank you for the reference to the David Barsanyi article, as I do admire his remarkable and humorous ability to turn a phrase. Cheers! — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 20:32, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
Yes, it looks balanced now. Thanks. Dahn (talk) 06:26, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Civil Resettlement Units

A poster for Civil Resettlement Units
A poster for Civil Resettlement Units

Created by Zeromonk (talk). Self-nominated at 10:36, 24 March 2017 (UTC).

History of Macedonia (ancient kingdom)

Perseus of Macedon (r. 179-168 BC), last Antigonid king of Macedon before the pretender to the throne Andriscus
Perseus of Macedon (r. 179-168 BC), last Antigonid king of Macedon before the pretender to the throne Andriscus
  • Comment: This image should only be used for the first hook about the Roman conquest of Macedon in the Macedonian Wars

Created by PericlesofAthens (talk). Self-nominated at 19:18, 22 March 2017 (UTC).

Current nominations

Articles created/expanded on March 23

Northern Marmara and Değirmenköy (Silivri) Depleted Gas Reservoir

Created by CeeGee (talk). Self-nominated at 09:38, 24 March 2017 (UTC).

Lillie Mae Bradford

Created by Drmies (talk). Self-nominated at 15:43, 23 March 2017 (UTC).

  • RIP. Anyhow, article is new enough and long enough. And very insightful in a number of aspects of race issues. @Drmies: I presume that the video in source #8 describes the circumstances of her death. Didn't notice any copyvio or plagiarism. Hook's interesting, reliably sourced and cited inline. QPQ is fine. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:26, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
Jo-Jo Eumerus thanks for the quick review and the kind words. Thanks also for pointing at that video--it verifies the date of the funeral, but that she died in her sleep came out of the other article (today's front page article, as it happens). I stuck it in, between you and me, to verify as well as to get it in in the first place outside of the External links section. Sshht. Anyway, this is for all the heroes, many of whom ordinary folk without committees and lawyers and defense funds, in hopes that we might start doing a bit better--the damage a criminal record can do should be clear. And let me know if you ever want to visit Montgomery and see these sites. Drmies (talk) 19:49, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
@Drmies: Um. Are arrest reports in Alabama in the public domain? By default, only the federal government has a blanked PD status and a few states, and Alabama is not one of them last I checked. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:53, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
Jo-Jo, I edit boldly and presume innocence as well as transparency. But you may be right. Drmies (talk) 19:56, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 24

Niels Larsen Bruun

The German supply ship Roda sinking
The German supply ship Roda sinking

Created by Manxruler (talk). Self-nominated at 12:41, 26 March 2017 (UTC).

Government of Macedonia (ancient kingdom)

The Vergina Sun decorating the royal golden larnax of Philip II of Macedon (r. 359–336 BC), discovered in the Ancient Macedonian tomb of Vergina
The Vergina Sun decorating the royal golden larnax of Philip II of Macedon (r. 359–336 BC), discovered in the Ancient Macedonian tomb of Vergina

Created by PericlesofAthens (talk). Self-nominated at 16:20, 24 March 2017 (UTC).

Malacañang of the North

Facade of the Malacañang of the North
Facade of the Malacañang of the North

Created by Howard the Duck (talk). Self-nominated at 15:35, 24 March 2017 (UTC).

Symbol question.svg Article is new (created on March 24, 2017), long enough (1876 characters), neutral, and complete with citations. Hook format and content is OK. QPQ needed --carlojoseph14 (talk) 18:51, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
Reviewed Template:Did you know nominations/Rey de Reyes (2017). –HTD 19:32, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

An die Hoffnung

Anna Erler-Schnaudt
Anna Erler-Schnaudt

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 13:59, 24 March 2017 (UTC).

James Scott Howard

Howard shown inside the First Toronto Post Office
Howard shown inside the First Toronto Post Office

5x expanded by Oaktree b (talk). Self-nominated at 17:01, 24 March 2017 (UTC).

Symbol question.svg Interesting, on good sources, offline sources accepted AGF, no copyvio obvious. Of the hooks, I like ALT1 best, but suggest to make it more interesting by having "infuriate" sooner, - afraid you will have lost readers who have no patience for boring "was an early Canadian political activist":
ALT3: ... that James Scott Howard (pictured), the postmaster of Toronto, infuriated his superiors by refusing to open mail of suspected rebels before the 1837 uprising? - Article: I changed the section headers but suggest you also supply the years. - Please get the father-in-law somewhere else (or did our subject marry in his later years?) and mention the wife! - Drop "would" (as we look at a past) in ALT2 and the article (if any, I changed one). - Please add pictured to all hooks as in ALT3, and drop where the painting is made, because we don't see it, not in small and not even in larger. - I'll get back to this later. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:16, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 25

Anna Bamford

Moved to mainspace by JuneGloom07 (talk). Self-nominated at 12:43, 28 March 2017 (UTC).

Birendra Nath Mallick

Created by Tachs (talk). Self-nominated at 07:04, 27 March 2017 (UTC).

Pendleton Dudley

Created by DarjeelingTea (talk). Self-nominated at 01:33, 26 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg. The article is new (created on 26 March) and it is also long enough. It cites sources with inline citations and is free of close paraphrasing issues. My concern is that the referred source does not fully substantiates the hook fact. According to the cited source (and the article), Dudley specified that the revelation of the details would be "damaging to our profession" (that is, to PR). However, the hook could easily be interpreted that the revelation would be damaging to Wilson's fame. Borsoka (talk) 14:44, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
  • I made the same inference! Edwardx (talk) 23:04, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Gerardo González Valencia

Moved to mainspace by ComputerJA (talk). Self-nominated at 23:10, 25 March 2017 (UTC).


Hank Azaria
Hank Azaria
  • Reviewed: IOU

Created by Muboshgu (talk). Self-nominated at 23:02, 25 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Long enough, new enough, well written, the hooks match statements in the article and each are sourced directly in the article. No copyright violations. I do have three items that need to be addressed
  1. I do not see any sources for the "cast" section and I don't believe all names are listed in the "development" section so they are in essence unsourced.
  2. The QPQ needs to be provided
  3. Notability in regards to WP:GNG. This show has yet to debut, so there is very little written about the show by independent reliable third party sources. Most of the sources are primary, Azaria talking about the show or his character. Others are announcements of the show being ordered and casting, which seem borderline routine coverage. I'm on the fence with the notability aspect.

Cummer Museum of Art and Gardens

The Cummer's English Garden, designed in 1910.
The Cummer's English Garden, designed in 1910.

Improved to Good Article status by Mooeena (talk). Self-nominated at 17:23, 25 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Recent GA. The hook is referenced. No copyright or neutrality issue detected. Image is properly licensed. QPQ is not needed. But there are a bunch of uncited sentence and parts of paragraphs. Please go back and cite all those sentences or remove them. See [48]..-- KAVEBEAR (talk) 21:15, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 26

Ellen Thayer Fisher

Magnolia Grandiflora, Ellen Thayer Fisher
Magnolia Grandiflora, Ellen Thayer Fisher

Created by Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk). Self-nominated at 20:53, 29 March 2017 (UTC).

Wetar ground dove

5x expanded by Gulumeemee (talk). Self-nominated at 03:55, 28 March 2017 (UTC).

Guy Fort

Created by SouthernNights (talk). Self-nominated at 01:03, 27 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article is new enough, long enough, neutral, and no copy-vio detected, mostly book sources. One issue is that there are two bits of the article which is not referenced (I've marked them with cn tags). This needs to be fixed.
The article's categorization is incomplete, although that isn't a DYK-preventing issue.
The hook is short enough, interesting, referenced to book sources. I wonder, though, if "the enemy" should be replaced with something along the lines of "enemy forces" or "opposing forces". "The enemy" sounds quite POV.
The nominator does not appear to ave any previous DYKs, so QPQ not required. No image with nomination, so no need for an image review. Manxruler (talk) 11:43, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
  • I've made the changes and added the citations you requested. In particular, your suggestion to change "the enemy" to "enemy forces" was an excellent one. I'd used the original phrasing b/c that's how the first citation stated the info, but enemy forces is indeed more NPOV. I should also note that I actually have 10 previous DYKs, all of them from a number of years ago when I was more active on Wikipedia. However, I'm once again doing more Wikipedia work and have no problem with QPQ. Best,--SouthernNights (talk) 22:48, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Could you also change the "enemy" wording in the hook? (I initially missed that you had actually done that) I think it is important in the hook as well as in the article itself.
It is good you've provided further refs, but I don't really think "[]" is reliable. It seems to be a hobby site, where anyone can add a celebrity.
I couldn't see those previous DYKs of yours when first reviewing, but I'm glad you're open about needing to do a QPQ.
Have another look at the Julie Vega bit (I would consider just removing it from the article, if it can't be reliably sourced), fix the "enemy" in the hook, and provide a QPQ. Then we should be good to go. Manxruler (talk) 23:15, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
I've reviewed two other DYKs here and here. I also removed the Julie Vega info. --SouthernNights (talk) 23:40, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Sweat (play)

Created by Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi (talk) and BU Rob13 (talk). Nominated by BU Rob13 (talk) at 06:34, 26 March 2017 (UTC).

Atamu Tekena

Bust of Atamu Tekena
Bust of Atamu Tekena

Created by KAVEBEAR (talk). Self-nominated at 02:45, 27 March 2017 (UTC).

Riro Kāinga

Created by KAVEBEAR (talk). Self-nominated at 22:58, 26 March 2017 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on March 27

Somnath Sharma

Improved to Good Article status by Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk). Self-nominated at 03:20, 29 March 2017 (UTC).


The nundinal letters on a fragment of the Fasti Praenestini
The nundinal letters on a fragment of the Fasti Praenestini
  • Reviewed: Will do Rise of Macedon.
  • Comment: @Potential reviewers: Don't worry. You don't need to go through all the hooks, just the one(s) that most interest you.

Created by LlywelynII (talk). Self-nominated at 08:48, 28 March 2017 (UTC).

  • I love ALT8. — JFG talk 15:29, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Rise of Macedon

A bust of Philip II of Macedon (r. 359-336 BC)
A bust of Philip II of Macedon (r. 359-336 BC)
  • Comment: This bust portrait can be used with either the origin hook or the ALT1 hook.

Improved to Good Article status by PericlesofAthens (talk). Self-nominated at 02:10, 28 March 2017 (UTC).

  • On it.

    Symbol question.svg Thank you for your work on this needful article. If it's already GA, I'm sure the article will mostly be fine, but you need to go through these hooks again. They're both much too verbose and have some hiccups. ("Cit-states"?) Pare them down (e.g., "at the Battle of Chaeronea (338 BC)" could be "at Chaeronea") or come up with something terser and hookier that might grab the attention of people who don't know how cool the Macedonians were or connect to something they do know (e.g., something about the one-eyed Philip setting the stage for Alexander). Send me a message or use a notification template when you've got something for me to look at. — LlywelynII 08:57, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

George Wilson (quarterback), George Wilson (American football coach)

5x expanded by 12george1 (talk). Self-nominated at 02:04, 28 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Kindly clarify what article should be nominated for DYK. Only one article per nomination is allowed. In any case, I have checked both articles. George Wilson (quarterback) was not expanded 5x per DYK check. For the George Wilson (American football coach) article, the hook is sourced (George Wilson coached his son in 1966 after being traded to Miami) but the article failed the DYK check (article was not expanded 5x). -WayKurat (talk) 02:56, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
  • I thought a multi-article nomination was allowed. I've seen others. Regardless, I'll further expand both articles.--12george1 (talk) 03:28, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 28

Mexican Federal Highway 15D

Mexican Federal Highway 15D in Nayarit
Mexican Federal Highway 15D in Nayarit
  • Reviewed: Ariel Award for Best Actress
  • Comment: This is a 5x expansion that was moved to mainspace on 28 March 2017 as a histmerge. (QPQ 4 of 6)

Moved to mainspace by Raymie (talk). Self-nominated at 23:43, 29 March 2017 (UTC).

Clifford Kinvig

  • Reviewed: To be done

Created by Philafrenzy (talk). Self-nominated at 21:37, 29 March 2017 (UTC).

Album primo-avrilesque

Negroes fighting in a cellar at night
Negroes fighting in a cellar at night
  • Comment: I am nominating this for an April Fools hook on behalf of the article creator.

Created/expanded by Theramin (talk). Nominated by Gatoclass (talk) at 07:30, 29 March 2017 (UTC).

Dance of drunks in the fog
Dance of drunks in the fog
  • Symbol question.svg New enough, long enough, neutrally written, well referenced, no close paraphrasing seen. However, the second paragraph under "Background and reception" lacks a citation, per Rule D2. I prefer ALT0; however, the hook fact needs some kind of inline citation in the article. All images in article freely-licensed. A QPQ is needed for this nomination; I'm happy to submit one of mine: Template:Did you know nominations/Wayzata Bay Center. Yoninah (talk) 12:57, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, Yoninah. I took a look at the uncited paragraphs in this article myself before nominating it, and decided that the works of art themselves qualify as cites, because the works of art and the artists are given in-text. Gatoclass (talk) 13:39, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
@Gatoclass: I'm sorry, I'm having trouble following your reasoning. Are you saying that because there's an image of Negroes fighting in a cellar at night on this page that this verifies that (1) Allais painted it and (2) it's in the monograph? Also, what about the cite for some of the information in the 2nd paragraph under "Background and reception"? Yoninah (talk) 19:41, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
  • The majority of the citations are from the album itself, not from other sources, which is extremely problematic. Also, the article mentions the connection with Kazimir Malevich's Black Square but doesn't tie in with the recent controversy around that work, which should be a given b/c of the painting's title.--SouthernNights (talk) 23:16, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

I believe the sources describe them as prints, not paintings (well, apart from the original white one, which is a blank piece of paper, although I believe the frame in the album is printed; I've not inspected an original: perhaps they are all just coloured bits of paper stuck in a book; the cited sources don't say: do you know any better?). Manifestly they are all included in the album, a scanned copy of which is available online from the BnF, but others are available in other libraries to judge from WorldCat. If you doubt the evidence of your own eyes, or the archival verisimilitude of the French national library - cheese-eating surrender monkeys that they are - the prints are also mentioned in many of the cited sources, and I've added some more sources just now.

This article is not about Malevich's Black Square, but that work is mentioned in some of the relevant sources. None of the cited sources mention any so-called "recent controversy", which is not relevant to a book published in a different place, 20 years earlier.

This tedious tick-box approach, typified by the demand for yet more tiny blue numbers littering the article like some deranged form of footnote acne, is why I have not bothered with DYK for the odd article or two I have written or expanded for something like 5½ years. (Still pretty happy with that article, happy days.)

I'm done here. Either get over whatever you find "extremely problematic" with this article and approve it, or don't. Your choice. I won't be coming back. Theramin (talk) 00:06, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

  • I said extremely problematic b/c I don't believe you have enough citations independent of the subject itself for what will be a controversial DYK. The citation I gave above (repeated here) specifically mentions the album primo-avrilesque and ties it in with both Kazimir Malevich's Black Square and racism. Your call whether to consider adding this but I believe the article is lacking without more citations and context.--SouthernNights (talk) 00:30, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Yoninah, Theramin has added some additional cites, care to look again? Gatoclass (talk) 03:23, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Foreign policy of the Donald Trump administration

  • Comment: Created as an expansion and spinoff of Trump campaign articles, trimming existing content, and adding new content about policies of the administration post-inauguration.

Moved to mainspace by MelanieN (talk), TonyBallioni (talk), Snooganssnoogans (talk), and JFG (talk). Nominated by TonyBallioni (talk) at 04:17, 29 March 2017 (UTC).

Monument of States

Monument of States in Kissimmee, Florida
Monument of States in Kissimmee, Florida
Eagle atop Monument of States in Kissimmee, Florida
Eagle atop Monument of States in Kissimmee, Florida

Source: As the creation of Dr. Charles Bressler-Pettis, the monument was built in 1943 with a two-fold purpose: to be a commemorative piece and a draw for local tourism. As a product of World War II, it served as a unifying sculpture to bond together the states after the attack on Pearl Harbor in December of 1941. At the time of its completion, the monument consisted of 1,500 stones from 48 states and 21 countries.pp. 7, 17, 30 160 characters in the hook

Created by Maile66 (talk). Self-nominated at 21:10, 28 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg. The article is new (on 28 March) and long enough. It is neutral and cites sources with inline citations. No close paraphrasing, plagiarism and copyvio was detected. I would prefer the first picture. Most facts in the hook are verified with an inline citations, but I am not sure that the adjective "donated" is also verified. Borsoka (talk) 02:16, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
Borsoka Thank you for catching this. I've added a citation in two different places under the Construction section that should take care of this. I also like the first image best. — Maile (talk) 11:21, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Prawn soup

Chupe de Camarones, a prawn soup
Chupe de Camarones, a prawn soup

5x expanded by Northamerica1000 (talk). Self-nominated at 08:38, 28 March 2017 (UTC).

  • The article has been expanded more than 5-fold in the last 7 days, going from around 200 characters to 2,900. The article is nicely cited with lots of photos with the proper licensing. The hook is also interesting, especially when combined with the photo. However, I'd like to see more linkage to articles on these foods, such as Tom yum for the Thai shrimp Tom yum goong along with the names of the Thai and Malay dishes in parenthesis in their original language script listed alongside the English version. Many of our articles do this. Overall, I think this DYK is close to being ready.--SouthernNights (talk) 23:35, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
  • @SouthernNights: I added links and language translations to the article where I could. Check it out now. I also tried to add a translation for the Malaysian Penang Prawn Mee entry, but wasn't able to comfortably do so. Note that I'm not fluent in these languages. North America1000 04:10, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Antirrhinum filipes

5x expanded by SL93 (talk). Self-nominated at 03:29, 28 March 2017 (UTC).

  • Starting review.--Kevmin § 19:57, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Having trouble? SL93 (talk) 07:45, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
  • No, just real life taking a bit more time that typical. It will happen, be patient--Kevmin § 16:54, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
  • First check, article expansion is new enough and long enough. The second paragraph of he description is sourced, but with all three sources tagged at the end it makes it unclear what information was from what source.--Kevmin § 17:00, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
  • It should be simpler now. SL93 (talk) 18:31, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on March 29

Ilse Hess

Created/expanded by Bellerophon5685 (talk). Self-nominated at 00:05, 30 March 2017 (UTC).


Created by Topcipher (talk). Self-nominated at 18:16, 29 March 2017 (UTC).

Electrification of Caltrain

Caltrain's current diesel locomotives
Caltrain's current diesel locomotives

Created by Haha169 (talk). Self-nominated at 08:20, 29 March 2017 (UTC).

Maon Kurosaki

Maon Kurosaki at Anime Expo 2011 in Los Angeles, California
Maon Kurosaki at Anime Expo 2011 in Los Angeles, California

Improved to Good Article status by Juhachi (talk) and Narutolovehinata5 (talk). Nominated by Narutolovehinata5 (talk) at 02:00, 29 March 2017 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on March 30

Special occasion holding area

The holding area has moved to its new location at the bottom of the Approved page. Please only place approved templates there; do not place them below.

Do not nominate articles in this section—nominate all articles in the nominations section above, under the date on which the article was created or moved to mainspace, or the expansion began; indicate in the nomination any request for a specially timed appearance on the main page.
Note: Articles nominated for a special occasion should be nominated (i) within seven days of creation or expansion (as usual) and (ii) between five days and six weeks before the occasion, to give reviewers time to check the nomination. April Fools' Day is an exception to these requirements; see Wikipedia:April Fool's Main Page/Did You Know.