Template talk:Did you know


 

Zobacz też:



From Wikipedia's newest articles:

Château in Hnojník

This page is for nominations to appear in the "Did you know" section (reproduced on the right) on the Main Page. Eligible articles may only be up to 5 days old; for details see these rules.

Contents

Did you know
(T:DYK)
Rules (WP:DYK)
Discussion (WT:DYK)
Next update (T:DYK/N)
Suggestions (T:TDYK)
Archive (WP:DYKA)

Instructions

List new suggestions here, under the date the article was created or expanded (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.

Remember:

Symbol Code Ready for DYK? Description
{{subst:DYKtick}} Yes No problems, ready for DYK
{{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

Next update

Comment Earliest time for next update is Wednesday, 9 July 2008 11:12 Wikipedia time (UTC).

Today is Wednesday, July 9, 2008; it is now 07:54 (UTC)

Time since last update: 2 hours. (verify)

To update this refresh clock to the current time use: {{DYK-Refresh|2008|07|09|07|54|38}}

Reset Clock | Purge

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 Wikipedia:Did you know/Admins for a list of administrators who have volunteered to help with this project.

Candidate entries

Articles created/expanded on July 9

Severe neutrality problems.--Bedford Pray 05:22, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Please elaborate. The document the article is about is not neutral, but the article itself attempts to be very neutral. But then again, the Iraq Study Group Report is not a neutral document either. -Dankirkd (talk) 05:30, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
It reads like campaign propaganda. Plus, that image can not be on the front page, as its not free use, but fair use.--Bedford Pray 05:55, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
So the image is removed. Again, it appears you're attacking the document. -Dankirkd (talk) 06:04, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on July 8

Articles created/expanded on July 7

Huh? I'm not familiar with this policy and I'm not sure how to proceed. Response on talk page preferred. --Midnightdreary (talk) 17:12, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
  • The bot translator translates the term "som er landets mest trafikkerte fergestrekning" into "as am country mainly the traffic fergestrekning". This should of course be translated "that is the countries most trafficked ferry route". It should be sufficient that User:Lampman (who I believe is a Norwegian speaker) can bough for the reference. There is no requirement that the DYK fact must be cited from an English source. Arsenikk (talk) 17:34, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Yes, I'm afraid you're just gonna have to take our word over the translator bot, which makes the headline out to be "Genocide ø about city trafikkproblemer". How about that as an alternative hook: Did you know "... that genocide ø about city trafikkproblemer"? Lampman (talk) 23:48, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
  • The hook checks out with the ref, but it's true that it doesn't exactly knock your socks off. Lampman (talk) 00:31, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
No that's not quite how it goes, but I see how you've become confused. Dogger is a Dutch word, meaning a fishing boat operating a trawl, rather than any specific design of boat. Dutch boats operating trawls operated in an area of the North Sea, so the area became known as the Dogger Bank. Later this specific design of boat becomes highly prevalent fishing the Dogger Bank, and so they became known as Doggers. There is only one area in discussion, but the time frames are different. Dogger (Dutch word for generic boat) leads to Dogger Bank leads to Dogger (boat) (but a specific and different sort of boat) Benea (talk) 17:38, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
The term "premier" does have a subjective element, though the the Amateur Athletic Foundation Library is truly phenomenal -- not another like it anywhere. If that hook is too subjective, how about the following, which is more objective in its claim?
  • ...that the largest sports research library in North America is located on the grounds of LA's Britt House (pictured), a Colonial Revival mansion built in 1910? new article, self nom. by Cbl62 (talk) 07:12, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
or
  • ...that the Amateur Athletic Foundation Library, located on the grounds of LA's Britt House (pictured), has been called the "world's premier sports library"? Cbl62 (talk) 07:15, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Would an admin please take a look at the article? A editor, over-zealous in my opinion, has slapped a copyright violation tag on it and is preventing my efforts to improve it. Thanks. - House of Scandal (talk) 21:27, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
  • The Pteridomania copyright discussion thread is here. I think using Boyd's web summary of his own writings may raise Wikipedia reliable source issues. GregManninLB (talk) 23:21, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
2008 Indian embassy bombing in Kabul is currently on ITN. --PFHLai (talk) 23:28, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
That's fine. We can wait till it gets buried in ITN. --gppande «talk» 13:44, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Length and reference verified. Definitely should make its way onto DYK at some point. GregManninLB (talk) 01:35, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
No. Definitely should NOT make its way back onto the main page after aappearing on ITN. No double-dipping! Let someone else take the precious space on the main page. --74.13.125.67 (talk) 02:22, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on July 6

or ... that Sourav Ganguly scored centuries in his first two test innings, and was only the third person to do so? self nom Abeer.ag (talk) 10:29, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
How to relate the hook to the suggested pic? Where to put "(pictured)"?--74.13.125.67 (talk) 02:26, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Voltaire
  • I think the above list proves my point about the article being too listy: several similar lists have been deleted in the past. I reduced the list to include only a limited number of examples. With the current improvements I believe the article is ready for DYK. Lampman (talk) 00:54, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
  • As I've made clear, the article has to remain an encyclopaedic discussion of the topic, rather than descend into a crufty list. Lampman (talk) 02:59, 9 July 2008 (UTC)


Please merge this with Lüshi Chunqiu, which is an older and longer article. --PFHLai (talk) 05:12, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Ah - sorry, didn't realise that the article already exists. I speedy deleted it. Nousernamesleft (talk) 19:23, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
I've turned the redlink into a redirect. Please be encouraged to update and expand the old article. --PFHLai (talk) 23:03, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Pls be reminded that DYK articles need to be longer than 1500 characters. This one has less than 900. Pls type in a bit more. --PFHLai (talk) 01:52, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, didn't see that requirement. I didn't add that much text (mostly high scientific citations that throw off the character count), but frankly, I tried to pull everything I could on him. I hope it works now. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 05:18, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, Ricky81682, for expanding this wikipage to 1700+ characters for quickly. A regular DYK screener will look into other aspects of this nom. --PFHLai (talk) 15:27, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
This article's hook is unsourced or too long or there are other content issues Wikipedia's black hole article and the New York Times article from Dec 29, 1971 indicate that Louise Webster, Paul Murdin, and Tom Bolton were the first astronomers to prove the existence of a black hole. Webster and Murdin's work was from August 1971 to October 1971.[2] If you have something that shows Bolton's black hole finished work predated August 1971, then the hook would be justified. -- GregManninLB (talk) 07:15, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
  • The alt hook looks better and is supported by the references. However, we can't have red links on the Main Page, but you can turn them into stubs or not dynamically link them. GregManninLB (talk) 02:28, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on July 5

I removed the passage on which the hook was based from the article.This position is by no means exceptional, nor milestones in the political career of Bilal. Bilal, as Minister of Information, is the official spokesperson of the Syrian government, and this statement is just in line with all other Syrian government statements on Golan since the 1967 war. It is not Bilal who 'threatens' anyone, it is the government position. Its a bit like saying that Ari Fleischer threatened to invade Iraq. --Soman (talk) 07:36, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Without question the malaria "view" is correct, especially considering this is 100 years too early for the plague. You can take out the cause of death in the hook if it worries you. I don't understand your second comment. Savidan 23:57, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, Black Death in 1287 would have been an interesting hook indeed! The malaria story checks out, according to Bagliani and Peterson, I believe it was quite common in Rome at the time (certainly more common than the Black Death...) The problem with your links was that they were dead. I've replaced them, but the Google Books links I found weren't readable. Anyway, the main issue here is length - without the table I get it to be 1,372 characters, and the 1,500 limit is a mandatory minimum. Lampman Talk to me! 06:07, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Yes, I was referring to 404 error, but Lampman's corrected that now. As he says the length is the primary remaining issue - still some time to expand it a little more, though. Olaf Davis | Talk 13:25, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
If the cause of death is a subject of debate, how about just "... that six of the sixteen cardinals died during the papal election, 1287-1288?" That's interesting enough to me...maybe even more as it would make me want to read the article and find out why. In any case, let's be sure to link "cardinals".- House of Scandal (talk) 15:44, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Let me be absolutely clear that this is not under any circumstances a matter of debate! I was really just being flippant about this, but there was no Black Death in Europe in 1287/8! This was suggested by some historian writing in 1898, who obviously had no idea what he was talking about, and I assume it's included in the article simply as a curiosity. Modern historians are quite clear that it was in fact malaria. The issue of length remains though, and Savidan must show an effort to expand the article before it can be approved. Lampman (talk) 01:18, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Przemyśl, Old Synagogue

Miguelemejia (talkcontribs) --Miguelemejia (talk) 23:39, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Far too short at less than 500 characters. No inline citation. --Millbrooky (talk) 22:23, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Updated, still less than 1500, aprox 1050. Inline citations added. --Admrb♉ltz (tclog) 00:27, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
It's still not up to 1,500. Daniel Case (talk) 04:53, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Charles Mathias, Jr.