Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
::::*The article looks fine. Where is there a requirement for an article to be 'stable' for DYK? I didn't see it at the top of this page. Did I miss something? (BTW, I added a 'the' to the hook for better grammar) ] (]) 20:41, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
::::*The article looks fine. Where is there a requirement for an article to be 'stable' for DYK? I didn't see it at the top of this page. Did I miss something? (BTW, I added a 'the' to the hook for better grammar) ] (]) 20:41, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
:::] Please give us a break. 4,199 character quote? I've never seen anything as bad as this. Changing my assessment to NO. --] ] 22:02, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
:::] Please give us a break. 4,199 character quote? I've never seen anything as bad as this. Changing my assessment to NO. --] ] 22:02, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
:::: - NO indeed, per Poeticbent.--<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]|]</span></sub> 22:23, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
*... that '']'' journalist ''']''' was questioned by police in 1956 for leaking information about the investigation of suspected ] ]? -- new article, self-nom ] (]) 10:28, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
*... that '']'' journalist ''']''' was questioned by police in 1956 for leaking information about the investigation of suspected ] ]? -- new article, self-nom ] (]) 10:28, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
... that players of the simulation video game Overcrowd: A Commute 'Em Up need to manage everything from the construction of train stations to dumping trash cans?
List new suggestions here, under the date the article was created or the expansion began (not the date you submit it here), with the newest dates at the top. If a suitable image is available, place it immediately before the suggestion. Any user may nominate a DYK suggestion; self-nominations are permitted and encouraged.
contain more than 1,500 characters (around 1.5 kilobytes) in main body text (ignoring infoboxes, categories, references, lists, and tables). This is a mandatory minimum; in practice, articles longer than 1,500 characters may still be rejected as too short, at the discretion of the selecting administrators.
cite their sources (these sources should be properly labelled; that is, not under an "External links" header); and
be no more than five days old (former redirects, stubs, or other short articles whose main body text has been expanded fivefold or more within the last five days are acceptable).
Articles on living individuals must be carefully checked to ensure that no unsourced or poorly sourced negative material is included. Articles and hooks which focus unduly on negative aspects of living individuals should be avoided.
Articles with good references and citations are preferred.
To count the number of characters in a piece of text, you will need to use a JavaScript extension like User:Dr pda/prosesize.js (instructions on the talk page), a free website like this, or an external softwareprogram that has a character-counting feature. For example, if you are using Microsoft Word, select the text from the article page (or, in the case of "Did you know" nominations, this Talk page) – not the edit page containing Wikitext – then copy and paste it into a blank document. Click "Tools" ("Review" in Office 2007), then "Word Count", and note the "Characters (with spaces)" figure. Other word processing programs may have a similar feature. (The character counts indicated on "Revision history" pages are not accurate for DYK purposes as they include categories, infoboxes and similar text in articles, and comments and signatures in hooks on this page.)
Suggested facts (the 'hook') should be:
interesting to draw in a variety of readers,
short and concise (fewer than about 200 characters, including spaces),
Please note that hooks are subject without notice to copyediting as they move to the main page. The nature of the DYK process makes it impractical to consult users over every such edit. In particular, hooks will be shortened if they are deemed too long: the 200-character limit is an outside limit not a recommended length. Also, watch the suggestions page to ensure that no issues have been raised about your hook, because if you do not respond to issues raised your hook may not be featured at all.
Suggested pictures should be:
suitably and freely (PD, GFDL, CC etc) licensed (NOT fair use) because the main page can only have freely-licensed pictures;
attractive and interesting, even at a very small (100px-wide) resolution;
already in the article; and
relevant to the article.
formatted as ] and placed directly above the suggested fact.
Suggested sounds should have similar qualities to pictures, and should be formatted using the format {{DYK Listen|filename.ogg|Brief description}}
Proposed lists should have two characteristics to be considered for DYK: (i) be a compilation of entries that are unlikely to have ever been compiled anywhere else (e.g. List of architectural vaults), and (ii) have 1,500+ character non-stub text that brings out interesting, relational, and referenced facts from the compiled list that may not otherwise be obvious but for the compilation.
Please sign the nomination, giving due credit to other editors if relevant. For example:
*... that (text)? -- new article by ]; Nom by ~~~~
*... that (text)? -- new article self-nom by ~~~~
*... that (text)? -- new article by ] and ~~~~
*... that (text)? -- Article expanded fivefold by ]; Nom by ~~~~
*... that (text)? -- Article expanded fivefold and self-nom by ~~~~
*... that (text)? -- Article expanded fivefold by ] and ~~~~
When saving your suggestion, please add the name of the suggested article to your edit summary.
Please check back for comments on your nomination. Responding to reasonable objections will help ensure that your article is listed.
If you nominate someone else's article, you can use {{subst:DYKNom}} to notify them. Usage: {{subst:DYKNom|Article name|January 19}} Thanks, ~~~~
If you want to confirm that an article is ready to be placed on a later update, or that there is an issue with the article or hook, you may use the following symbols (optional) to point the issues out:
Symbol
Code
Ready for DYK?
Description
{{subst:DYKtick}}
Yes
No problems, ready for DYK
{{subst:DYKtickAGF}}
Yes
Article is ready for DYK, with a foreign-language or offline hook reference accepted in good faith
{{subst:DYK?}}
Query
An issue needs to be clarified before the article's eligibility can be determined
{{subst:DYK?no}}
Maybe
Article is currently ineligible but may only need some minor work to fix
{{subst:DYKno}}
No
Article is either completely ineligible, or else requires considerable work before becoming eligible
2025-01-19T00:00:00Z
Backlogged?
This page often seems to be backlogged. If the DYK template has not been updated for substantially more than 6 hours, it may be useful to attract the attention of one of the administrators who regularly updates the template. See the page Misplaced Pages:Did you know/Admins for a list of administrators who have volunteered to help with this project.
Actually the better of the many good refs on the article say they are original 12th century work. They are Romanesque, trather than Romanesque-style. Johnbod (talk) 02:21, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Please note: some of the sources cited mis-spell the name as La Princess (see article talk page for clarification); I also put the hook in the past tense as in 5 days' time she'll be gone (stomped on? Raided?) Roisterdoister (talk) 13:02, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
Could you add something about the paradox of his reputation as a sabra in the hook? Sabra (person) generally refers to those Jews born in Israel and not those who immigrated there, as Ben-Amotz did. Tiamut11:21, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
I understand your concern about POV, but "unusal" isn't actually quantifiable either. If the word "bizarre" was to be used in the article with in-line citations (and preferably in quotation marks) I don't think it should be a problem. Boston (talk) 21:51, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
Great, I think that's just how you should format it. However, that's a very long hook. Can we do with less examples? - Boston (talk) 13:47, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Well the hook is factually accurate and neutral as can be. It does not blame anyone just states simple historical fact. Regarding revert warring - there is no edit warring, except some attempts to insert false information ("more Poles that Jews died" etc), but those attempts ceased, so normal editing process is on its way. M0RD00R (talk) 16:34, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
The article looks fine. Where is there a requirement for an article to be 'stable' for DYK? I didn't see it at the top of this page. Did I miss something? (BTW, I added a 'the' to the hook for better grammar) Malick78 (talk) 20:41, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
I added a picture caption, because "Panorama Nydeggbruecke Bern.jpg" sounds like it's a picture of the wrong bridge (Brücke or -bruecke means bridge). Art LaPella (talk) 22:57, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
Expansion not five-fold. Prior length 950 characters; current length 3,786. Also lacks inline cite for the "Father of the Concorde" point, and I don't see the phrase in the internet references listed.Cbl62 (talk) 06:33, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Can't access offline ref but article says "the largest paleontological painting in the world", not the broader "natural history". —97198 (talk) 07:35, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
... that, Isabel Gonzalez, a pregnant Puerto Rican mother who in 1902 was detained in Ellis Island as an alien, challenged the Government of the United States in the groundbreaking case "GONZALES v. WILLIAMS", which helped pave the way for all Puerto Ricans to be recognized as citizens of the United States? Tony the Marine (talk) 23:53, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
... that in 1902 Isabel Gonzalez, a single Puerto Rican mother, challenged the Government of the United States and helped pave the way for all Puerto Ricans to be recognized as citizens of the United States? Tony the Marine (talk) 01:10, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
It has potential, although I'd prefer a word other than "controversial"; and the article lacks inline citations; I've added a slew of fact tags, if you cite these sources - and add one or two more sources, I think it could be featured. Sherurcij20:24, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
I added some, and removed some bits I couldn't find sources for (I copied this straight from the French Misplaced Pages). It could do with a fact check before being featured, as well as a thorough copyedit. how do you turn this on20:59, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
If I may jump in? I don't like to be pedantic, but Edward was not Edward VIII at the time of his marriage as he had already abdicated. And I'm not sure about Wallis's surname - did she not revert (vague recollection here, may be wrong) to Wallis Warfield? George The Dragon (talk) 21:35, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
You're probably right, though this may be better discussed on the article talk page, then updated here. I know he wasn't King, that's for sure. But I wasn't sure what else to call him how do you turn this on21:37, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
... that Adamson House, called the "Taj Mahal of Tile", uses local handmade Malibu tiles (pictured) throughout and even has an elaborately tiled dog bath and a 60-foot imitation Persian rug made of tile? more than 5-fold expansion by Cbl62 (talk) 14:29, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Comment I just wikilinked road racing cyclist and national criterium and road race champion. However, I advise you to retain the surprise element (that she's not actually from America's Next Top Model). Mspraveen (talk) 14:36, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
... that Samuel Johnson's London, his first major work, contains the beginnings of his views on literature, politics and ethics? self-nom, new pages (with one "early life" explained - All pages contain information pulled over from other pages, but contain a lot of new information (over 3k worth each, plus headers, etc). I talked to some people about a dispute before - Johnbod, and Art LaPella are pushing forth an "unwritten" rule to say that content like this must be a five fold expansion above the information pulled elsewhere. I believe that there is no difference if I added in that information now or if I were to wait 5 days after to add it in after it went through DYK, especially when there is enough new information to warrant it as a topic without any problem. The only page that would be a problem here is the "early life" page, as the rest are all new and written together with the information placed on the main Samuel Johnson page and are not duplicate.) This is all a question on if early life should be bolded or not. The other three are new and not a content split, but pages created per FAC and then linked into the main page later. Ottava Rima (talk) 13:56, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
I've restored based on improper procedure by John. I have already sufficiently proven that Art and John are using too narrow of a definition of "split", which Misplaced Pages has three terms (split, spin out, and spin off) all meaning the same - a secondary article that contains information pertinent to the first. I have already demonstrated how this definition applies to a large proportion of new articles, and that their understanding of the definition/use is problematic. I have already pointed out the logical fallacy of saying that an article should be "expanded 5x" when you can easily create the page and then import the text in after it reaches DYK. Furthermore, DYK is to promote all new pages that are notable, meet the minimum requirement of new text (i.e. 1,500 characters), and has appropriate citations for verifiability. Ottava Rima (talk) 19:46, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Article uses bare URLs for citations, is unwikified, and has other issues. The primary editor does not seem willing to address these concerns. - Boston (talk) 21:32, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
- article says the seats came from Briggs Stadium, which appears to be an older name for Tiger Stadium. I suppose we should be consistent and change the hook to read "Briggs". Otherwise, size and refs check, not a stub -> almost ready to go. Truthanado (talk) 01:28, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
I helped with the hook (Dincher did the article and all the hard work). If "Tiger Stadium" is changed to "Briggs Stadium", I would make it clearer by changing it to "that were taken from Detroit's Briggs Stadium?" the alternate hook would be
Either hook is fine with me. I used Briggs Stadium in the article because that is what it was known as at the time. Briggs Stadium and Tiger Stadium are one in the same. Dincher (talk) 10:38, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Object Badly written, ill-sourced article, researched by Google, and containing such writing as Kievsky traveled during the time of the middle ages. (To pile Ossa upon Pelion, Kievsky isn't a surname, it's a post-positive adjective.) SeptentrionalisPMAnderson18:54, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
- According to the article, the record was definitely broken, so "possibly" in the hook is misplaced. How about rephrasing it. Otherwise, size and refs check out, not a stub -> ready to go after rephrasing. Truthanado (talk) 01:44, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Disagree with Lampman! Written very neutrally & sourced from mainstream media that is mostly opposed to creationism - in the case of The Guardian very strongly so. Date, lengths, hook ref all ok. A 3rd opinion would be useful. Johnbod (talk) 15:30, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
I agree that the sources are legit, but the cherry-picking of information gives a one-sided view, with no criticism included whatsoever. I’m tempted to say it’s using an in-universe perspective to describe fiction. Here’s a few quotes:
"...to reach out to the 45% of Americans who believe that God created humans as they currently exist within the past ten thousand years and that they do not descend from apes."
"Dinosaurs became extinct following the Great Flood and that a pair of young dinosaurs accompanied elephants and lions on Noah's Ark." (This might be just faulty grammar, but as it stands it's ambiguous whether this is stated as fact or as the museum’s view.)
"...to show that changes believed by mainstream scientists to take millions of years can occur in as short a period of time as hours or days."
I have reworded the last of these two slightly & I see you have added forthright mainstream criticism, so I really don't see a problem now. Johnbod (talk) 18:10, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
The ref is on google books; it opens slap-bang at the top of the page referenced. I have however added the page number. Ironholds10:07, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
No you did not. You added the chapter number; I corrected it. Neither one of the sources, however, supports the claim that this was a rare practice at the time, or, as the article says, that it became common practice in 1346. DNB simply considers it evidence that he was the senior justice. Lampman (talk) 21:30, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
My apologies; I was assuming it was the page number. The Plea rolls article notes that files were kept by the Custos Brevium, an organisation established in 1246; on the matter of how it establishes the hook, if you read the page offered as a reference from the book it says that he had earned "such a reputation as a judge that his plea rolls were preserved", showing both that it was a rare practice and that the preservation was due to his reputation. An earlier practice on the same page mentions that, of the core 15 judges at the time, Pattishall was the most respected. Ironholds22:06, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
... that Kapala, the tantric’s skull bowl has a link with Charnel ground or Sky burial practice in Tibet and the derivative name Kapalik well known as a tantric in India. the stub article Kapala with 1,824 bytes has been expanded to 14,558 bytes.--Nvvchar (talk) 06:26, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
It doesn't meet the rules as it is. The hook is not well phrased, or linked, & the Kapalik part is referenced, via a mirror site, only to another WP article. There are plenty of potential hooks here & I suggest you read the rules & try another version of this or a different one. Date & article size ok. Johnbod (talk) 18:10, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
... that Lonar Lake in the Buldana district of Maharashtra, India, a unique salt water lake in basaltic formation, is an explosion crater lake created by a meteor weighing about 2 million tonnes hitting the earth some 50,000 ± 6,000 years ago? Nvvchar (talk) 02:49, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
The artcile has been shortened from 15,336 bytes to 12134 bite. I was under the impression that artciles could be upto 30 kb size.--Nvvchar (talk) 12:17, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Lonar lake is created under the category of List of Lakes in Asia under the sub list of List of Lakes in India and I consider it desirable to maintain the identity of the lake since it is popular in India as a lake rather than a crater, and the lake may also be considered for recognition as a Ramsar site for conservation. Lonar crater is a shorter article (dealing with geological aspects only) and it may not be appropriate to merge Lonar lake with it. Should I now create another article with the title Lonar Lake? As regards shortening the article, I got confused between Hook and article. I will restore it to the original size.Please consider retaining the article as Lonar lake.--Nvvchar (talk) 15:47, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Please don't create another article with the title Lonar Lake. There should be one article about the lake, not one about the lake and another about the Lake. The only reason I capitalized the word "Lake" in the title is because the word "Lake" is normally capitalized in that context – for example, Great Bear Lake not "Great Bear lake". If that rule is different in India, then maybe this is a WP:ENGVAR situation. In either case, the suggestion was to move the article – that is, change the title from "Lonar lake" to "Lonar Lake" – certainly not to write a duplicate article. Art LaPella (talk) 21:33, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
This is only a 3.3x expansion, so feel free to reject. But since it was a pretty extensive expansion and there has been discussion that there are few life sciences DYKs, I figured I'd submit and let the admins decide whether to use it. Rlendog (talk) 19:59, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Interesting nom, and nice that the Nevada article is developing, but it does not meet DYK criterion for a 5X expansion within 5 days. Measurement of 5X criterion is to based on number of characters in main text, which i didnt count. But in raw size article now at 19,000 or so bytes, was at 13,721 on 12 August 2008. doncram (talk) 19:14, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
... that despite being a popular treatment for cystitis in most of Europe since the late 1970s, pivmecillinam is still effective against over 95% of strains of the bacteria it was first found to kill?
... that a prodrug of the antibioticmecillinam was developed so that it could be taken by mouth and not just IV, but the inactive component of the prodrug was later found to deplete the body of carnitine?
Article has a number of in-line citations, but I'm uncomfortable seeing Voith as the only citation that suggests it is the world's most powerful. Commercial producers often claim such things, and should only be believed if third-party sources agree with the claim. Sherurcij20:28, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Mastrchf91 & Nlu, becareful where you post your comments. I'm now moving the picture for the following hook where it should be. --74.14.18.83 (talk) 17:05, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
No, the problem isn't the sentence (although I just linked "JSDF"). It's that every DYK sentence should introduce an appropriate article. For details, see User:Art LaPella/No qualifying article. Did You Know is intended to introduce new articles. A fivefold expansion is considered new enough. A 1.6-fold expansion is not considered new enough. So you might want to triple the article size (or more precisely, triple its prose portion) within 5 days. Or you could start over with a new, 1500-character article. Art LaPella (talk) 04:12, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
I'll see if I can expand and dig more info, but I kinda doubt it since it's a Japanese firearm. Nevertheless, I'll try my best to do it. Will anyone check it soon since I'll try and increase it. I looked at the the DYK rules regarding prose. Sorry, I guess I was a bit confused. XP Ominae (talk) 07:46, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
No, sorry, not as long as the length is 2795, for a 2.5x expansion. The rule is 5x expansion. So you might want to double the prose portion of that article, or start a new one. Art LaPella (talk) 00:15, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
Length okay. "Bizarre"-ness of titles is subjective, and word is not sourced, does not appear in article. Could you compose a different hook? doncram (talk) 16:29, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Hook sounds promising, but when I look for source and compare 2nd ref to plot summary section, it shows very close paraphrasing (using phrases like "revolves around the unfortunate" and "accident prone" without quoting, and same structure). I don't know how to evaluate the adequacy of this sourcing for DYK; I'd rather it was rewritten in your own words or using explicit quotes. doncram (talk) 05:50, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
I say keep the original as "have titles such as", because it's definitely unusual on its own, no word to explicit the bizarreness are needed, really. Circeus (talk) 19:04, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
People get fired for failing to do what their boss told them to do -- all the time. Need to be clear that neither the Empress nor the eunuch was supposed to be the chancellor's boss. --74.14.18.83 (talk) 17:19, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Saying someone is "corrupt" does not in any way address that, nor incorporate your response. The hook should make clear, as you said, that neither person was his boss. Daniel Case (talk) 16:32, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Clarifying it would require the hook to be way, way too long. It should be clear already that a chancellor, by the virtue of the office, reported directly to the emperor. --Nlu (talk) 17:12, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
I respectfully, though nonetheless strongly, disagree. The main source is Trustees of Reservations website. Other sources are New England Forestry Foundation and Valley Viewpoint newspaper. The bits cited to a Tripod site are minor reiteration of facts stated elsewhere, plus a colorful quotation from someone whose been there to Bear's Den Falls and gushes about "this amphitheater of Mother Nature". It's fine to use a source like that when the article could stand without it -- and it could very easily, it would only be less enjoyable to read. I would be appreciative if another editor would please review this. Thanks. - Boston (talk) 13:39, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
... that "Skin Hunters" is the media nickname for four hospital casualty workers from the Polish city of Łódź, who murdered patients and sold information regarding their deaths to funeral homes? new article, self-nom Malick78 (talk) 11:50, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
That article was written in 2007 and last updated in February this year. But either way, the four main criminals have been convicted and their convictions upheld. Their crimes took place in 2001 so the WP page isn't really hasty:) Malick78 (talk) 18:29, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
The article you link to says the 4 people have been convicted but authorities are investigating other people. The WP page says that 4 people have been convicted but authorities are investigating other people. Where's the problem? It's accurately reporting the situation, isn't it? Stick a warning at the top saying that the page covers ongoing events, but apart from that the page is fine. We can cover developing events you know. Malick78 (talk) 11:50, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Real names are protected by the courts. The article uses initials. In a final statement one of the convicted said he’s innocent. DYK can certainly do without. --Poeticbenttalk16:01, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
For those interested, Poeticbent has failed to provide a current source on the article's discussion page sourcing his concerns. I would humbly therefore say the article is fine for DYK. Other views would be welcome:) Malick78 (talk) 05:52, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
The article has a delete template on it. This will need to be resolved
I don't understand the description of the crime. The motive is not clear
Princess Margriet of the Netherlands
_edit1.jpg)
Length, date & reference verified.Cbl62 (talk) 06:11, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Length and date ok, ref accepted on good faith. Lampman (talk) 22:57, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
date, lengths & hook ref ok Johnbod (talk) 13:40, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
If we are to have a hook about a written work, at least there should be an article about the author. Punkmorten (talk) 22:45, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
The article is a subject of a fierce edit war with massive breaches of Misplaced Pages:Article development guidelines. --Poeticbent talk 19:37, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Expansion not five-fold. Prior length 950 characters; current length 3,786. Also lacks inline cite for the "Father of the Concorde" point, and I don't see the phrase in the internet references listed.Cbl62 (talk) 06:33, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
It doesn't meet the rules as it is. The hook is not well phrased, or linked, & the Kapalik part is referenced, via a mirror site, only to another WP article. There are plenty of potential hooks here & I suggest you read the rules & try another version of this or a different one. Date & article size ok. Johnbod (talk) 18:10, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Date, length ok. Hook ref on AGF (& I remember it is right). Johnbod (talk) 03:02, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
_in_drydock.jpg)
- held until "AFD" is resolved Victuallers (talk) 22:08, 4 September 2008 (UTC)