Template talk:Did you know/Approved/week-3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page transcludes a subset of the nominations found on the page of all the approved nominations for the "Did you know" section of the Main Page. It only transcludes the nominations filed under dates of the fourth-most recent week. The page is intended to allow editors to easily review recent nominations that may not be displaying correctly on the complete page of approved nominations if that page's contents are causing the page to hit the post-expand include size limit.

List of roles and awards of Liza Soberano[edit]

(
)
Liza Soberano
Liza Soberano
Created by Pseud 14 (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 36 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Pseud 14 (talk) 13:33, 1 May 2024 (UTC).[reply]

I guess that's okay too, but do you have any additional suggestions? Article itself seems long enough and new enough at least. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:08, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not from this article, no. This is in itself a hook that has "international appeal" given it's a Hollywood debut for a Filipino actress, which is a rarity. Pseud 14 (talk) 15:27, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The article is new enough, long enough, is free of close paraphrasing, and is adequately sources. ALT1 (the only hook under consideration) is verified in the source and mentioned in the article. A QPQ ahs been done. I'm still not 100% sure if ALT1 works out in terms of interest or if additional hooks are needed, so I'm passing judgement on ALT1 to a third-party editor. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:02, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • I would argue that there's nothing too unusual about a Filipino actress in Hollywood; the fact that she's not American is something, but foreign actors aren't exactly, well, foreign. (signed, an Angeleno, for what it's worth) theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 02:40, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd probably have passed ALT1, but after reading Liza Soberano and this, I can suggest ALT2: ... that Liza Soberano (pictured), an actress described by media publications as among the most beautiful Filipino actresses of her generation, played an unattractive exchange student in Just the Way You Are? - but you would need to add that bit from Liza Soberano.--Launchballer 09:29, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the suggestion Launchballer, I am unsure if adding the latter would work because it takes context out of the main article, instead of the nominated article for DYK, and honestly, I see little value of adding that bit on her roles and awards (as those publications are mostly listicles and generally don't count as awards). Having said that, Alt2 may be another iteration of Alt0 - which is a just another role she played. Thoughts? Pseud 14 (talk) 20:57, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd have thought the juxtaposition of a beautiful actress playing an unattractive exchange student would be interesting.--Launchballer 08:24, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • List is new, long, well sourced, neutral, and copyvio-free, as well as supported with a licensed image (which I doubt will make it to the Main Page). I concur with Narutolovehinata5 that none of the hooks is interesting; on ALT1, for instance, boldlinked article refers to the subject's acting credits, among others, yet only her so-called Hollywood breakthrough is singled out here, which makes her domestic roles inadequate in a way. This can be an interesting hook for a Lisa Frankenstein DYK, but certainly not for this one. Although QPQ has been given, another compelling hook is needed. Nineteen Ninety-Four guy (talk) 07:44, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can suggest some variant of "that Liza Soberano started her career as a teenager".--Launchballer 08:24, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If this is your alt proposal, then I don't think it's gonna fly, either; it's not unusual for most (if not all) grown actors to start out at a young age. Are there any more? Nineteen Ninety-Four guy (talk) 09:43, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Alt3: ... that Liza Soberano began her acting career playing third wheel characters? Pseud 14 (talk) 20:21, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Alt4: ... that after starring in the highest-grossing film of her career, Liza Soberano was named Box Office Queen? Pseud 14 (talk) 20:21, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Alt3 seems interesting, but could use some tweaks,
Alt3a: ... that Liza Soberano's early acting roles include playing the third wheel in romance films? Source: [2]
  • If this is OK with you, just add an end-of-sentence citations on it so I can redirect this to another reviewer. Nineteen Ninety-Four guy (talk) 21:43, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ALT3a is short enough, sourced, and interesting. Let's roll.--Launchballer 23:11, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Carrie Swain[edit]

(
)
Swain in blackface
Swain in blackface
  • Source: Staples, Shirley (1984). Male-female Comedy Teams in American Vaudeville, 1865-1932. UMI Research Press. p. 58. ISBN 9780835715201.
Created by 4meter4 (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 76 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

4meter4 (talk) 23:14, 2 May 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • New, substantial, well-written, no plagiarism detected, image correctly licensed (I tweaked the tag to cover 100+ period of public domain); QPQ done. Hook verified AGF. Dahn (talk) 09:11, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto Pölzl[edit]

(
)
  • Source: Österreich in Geschichte und Literatur, Vol. 40-41. Stiasny Verlag, 1996. p. 157
Moved to mainspace by Soman (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 381 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Soman (talk) 12:14, 1 May 2024 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
  • Cited: Yes - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith
  • Interesting: Yes
QPQ: Done.

Overall: New enough, long enough, Earwig notes no notable copyvio. Hook is interesting but on an offline source (Österreich in Geschichte und Literatur, Vol. 40-41) so I am assuming good faith. QPQ is completed. Everything seems to check out! Ornithoptera (talk) 05:37, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Soman and Ornithoptera: This article needs a robust copy edit before it gets anywhere near the main page.--Launchballer 23:23, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, Launchballer, but you'd have to be more specific. If you have a problem with another editors tick, you should explain why. You've left drive-by comments on {toomanysections} on a number of DYK nominations in the recent past, is that the issue? --Soman (talk) 11:29, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think merging some of the sections would help. I need to go out, but I'll take another look when I get back.--Launchballer 11:37, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Much of what was winding me up was the fact that many sentences were very short and jumped back and forth, I've merged some of the worst offenders. My "Early life" section header was based purely on the fact that two single-paragraph sections look odd next to two much larger sections, though I suppose this isn't a DYK issue.--Launchballer 09:47, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd also question the WP:DYKINTerestingness of an Austrian politician being an Austrian politician.--Launchballer 10:13, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure this is the correct forum, but I disagree on applying {toomanysections} rigidly. There is no problem in itself to have sections with 3-4 sentences if and when the material in that section is sufficiently distinct from another section. Sections are supposed to help with readability, and lumping prose together to create larger sections is no goal in itself. In terms of your copy-editing, you are diverging from the source material, such as,
  • By mixing the age of joining SPO and being a leader of the left faction, makes it seem like he was a factional leader from the onset
  • We have no source for Polzl "joining" the municipal council (presumably he was elected, but we don't have a reference for the exact conditions of entry).
  • changing "upon" to "after" regarding his arrest gaves space to interpretation of the timeframe between return and arrest.
  • "he and many of its other members" is backed up by what source?
I'm not saying that there shouldn't be improvements in flow of prose, but copy-editing should not tamper with the referencing. In terms of DYKINTERESTING, I think the key element here is '1945'. This was not an ordinary period in the history of the country, and Polzl is the only Communist Party cadre that had been in the government prior to arrival of Soviet troops as well as remaining in the position after the British takeover. --Soman (talk) 17:22, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All I did was reword the text as it appeared, I didn't check it against the references (I don't speak German). Re: "many of its other members", I've cut "many of its", but the article said "Within the Central Committee he was one of those that [...] argued that the party should resign from the Austrian government." - does this not mean that other members argued for it as well?--Launchballer 20:07, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aurora Gaming, Fire Beavers[edit]

( Comment or view )
( Article history links:
)
  • Reviewed: 55 Broad Street and The End of Everything (novel) Soulbust (talk) 02:00, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: QPQ to come soon; hoping WP:IAR can be applied for this nom. I think this can be a silly/quirky hook, so open to ALT hooks/phrasing as well to accentuate the quirkiness of it. Moved both pages to mainspace on May 4, so a few hours shy on the 7-day week limit. Just get busy offline and also on Wikipedia and lose track of the time tbh. Sorry about that. Soulbust (talk) 01:51, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Moved to mainspace by Soulbust (talk). Number of QPQs required: 2. Nominator has 35 past nominations.

Soulbust (talk) 01:51, 12 May 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • Both articles were moved into the mainspace almost six hours late from the prescribed seven-day period. It can be pardoned, however, as the joint nomination is otherwise DYK-compliant—long enough, well sourced (with primary and Twitter sources used sparingly), neutral, and copyvio-free—and nominator clearly has real-life commitments; invoking IAR privilege is totally reasonable. Furthermore, the hook is cited (both in the article and nom page) and witty for the most part. Since QPQs have been given, this should be good to go. Nineteen Ninety-Four guy (talk) 13:29, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

C. J. Hanson[edit]

(
)
  • ... that in 2024, C. J. Hanson became the first player from his school to be chosen in the NFL draft since 1989, and the team that chose him also chose the previous player?
  • Source: Kansas City Star ("He’s the first player from Holy Cross selected in the NFL Draft since the Chiefs selected linebacker Rob McGovern in 1989")
5x expanded by BeanieFan11 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 178 past nominations.

BeanieFan11 (talk) 03:00, 11 May 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • Article was nominated in the proper time. Five time expansion verified. Article is policy compliant with sourcing and citations. No copyright violations found. Hook fact is verified and moderately interesting. Hook length is fine. This can be promoted.4meter4 (talk) 20:40, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chronotropic incompetence[edit]

(
)
Created by Femke (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 9 past nominations.

—Femke 🐦 (talk) 19:39, 10 May 2024 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
  • Cited: Yes - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith
  • Interesting: Yes
QPQ: Done.

Overall: I found this an interesting hook that caught my attention. AGF on restricted sources, although available extracts seemed to confirm the facts. Only comment would be that this article could possibly be improved by an infobox, e.g. Template:Infobox medical condition, or other supporting material, although this is not strictly necessary for DYK. CSJJ104 (talk) 00:59, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article needs a lead section, as it would deserve {{lead missing}} without one.--Launchballer 11:55, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good idea about the infobox, will try to add something later. Per MOS:NOLEAD, the article is not long enough to require a lead, unless there is some DYK-specific rule I'm unaware of. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 16:40, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If I'm reading that correctly, then articles are exempted from having them when they are stubs, and stubs can't run per WP:DYKSTUB.--Launchballer 16:46, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I read the policy slightly differently, i.e. stubs and other articles under 400/500 words don't require a lead. Often, the threshold for not being a stub anymore is roughly 250/300 words. So shorter Start articles also don't always benefit from a lead section. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 16:54, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've added an infobox and slightly expanded the article so it's more clearly above the stub threshold. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 19:10, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I still think the article would benefit from having a brief lead, such as "Chronotropic incompetence (CI) is the inability of heart rate to increase as expected in response to exercise. The condition can be defined in different ways and occurs in various diseases. Sufferers have a higher risk of cardiovascular disease and early death."--Launchballer 19:30, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reuben Solo[edit]

(
)
Created by Sdkb (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 41 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Sdkb talk 00:42, 7 May 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • New article that was created on 6 May 2024‎‎‎ is 2,548 characters and nominated on the same day. No copyvios detected (high confidence of violation due to direct quotes that have all been cited; AGF sources which can't go through Dup detector). Article is well-sourced. Hook is 106 characters long (under 200 character max.) and is interesting. Ref 4 (verifying the hook) is a reliable source from The Scotsman. QPQ done. Looks good to go! —Bloom6132 (talk) 05:56, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Laura Veale[edit]

(
)
  • Source: Several, including: Harrogate Advertiser: "Hampsthwaite commemorates North Yorkshire’s first female doctor Laura Sobey Veale". Note: This fact has had to be carefully interpreted. It was initially expressed as "the first Yorkshire woman to become a doctor" on the brown plaque, pictured in the article and written by the eminent Harrogate historian Malcolm Neesam. He meant "Yorkshire-born". However it has since been interpreted to mean that she was the first female doctor to practise in Yorkshire, which would be incorrect. Edith Pechey was the first qualified woman doctor to practise in Yorkshire, but she was born in Essex, so to local understanding she was definitely not a "Yorkshire woman" (they are very parochially-minded here). Veale was born in Yorkshire.
  • Reviewed: Sonja van den Ende
  • Comment: Created in userspace over some weeks from 15 March, then moved to mainspace on 6 May.
Moved to mainspace by Storye book (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 105 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Storye book (talk) 17:49, 7 May 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • The article was moved to mainspace yesterday, so is new enough. It is far more than long enough and properly uses in-line citations (perhaps even more so than necessary for some sentences). The copyvio detector doesn't find anything other than names of things and quotes that are properly used in the article. The hook is short enough, interesting, and is cited inline. The QPQ has been done and there's no image to review. Looks good to go! SilverserenC 20:41, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you for the review, Silver seren Re the "even more so than necessary", you'll find that some experienced editors are doing that for a good reason. For example, if you have a "first" in the article, that is going to be automatically questioned and double-checked, and rightly so. Therefore, it is worth finding as many different, independent sources as possible for that "first" and including them all in the article. There is also the fact that some sources may be accessible to some readers (e.g. readers with a subscription, readers in the UK, etc.) and some source may not be accessible to all (e.g. readers outside the UK or without subscription), so it's worth giving them a few alternative sources. A third reason is that various sources give different aspects to the same fact, and some sources also include extra facts which the editor chooses not to include in the article, but which are extremely interesting. In the cast of historical articles, contemporary sources may give the historical standpoint on the matter. Extra sources containing additional facts may also allow other editors to expand the article. Nothing is wasted in this particular article, and there is a reason for everything. Storye book (talk) 08:06, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Storye book and Silver seren: The relevant policy is WP:CLUMP, which says that "Two or three [citations] may be preferred for more controversial material or as a way of preventing linkrot for online sources, but more than three should generally be avoided; if four or more are needed, consider bundling (merging) the citations." I'm afraid it would deserve {{clump}}, and I think your explanation on this page would constitute WP:SYNTH anyway.--Launchballer 11:52, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for removing the surplus reference. I notice there are several unattributed quotes, including (but not limited to) "the first Yorkshire[-born] woman to become a doctor" and the "by all reports" sentence after it, that are not attributed in text, and I think they should be.--Launchballer 19:42, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Edit conflict. @Launchballer: (1) There are now no groups of more than three citations in the article. (2) Synth is about article content. It does not govern discussions on DYK templates, article talk pages or user talk pages. It is permissible to give one's opinion on DYK templates (how often have you seen the opinion "I don't like that hook"?) Neither is Synth about the grouping together of two or more references which support the relevant fact, and just so happen to contain extra material which may or may not also be useful where the fact is controversial. I shall look at the unattributed quotations. Storye book (talk) 19:47, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have now added attributions in words to all the remaining quotations, except where the quotations were just one or two words. It doesn't look right to me, because the quotations are already cited at their ends, but I have done it since you asked, to keep the peace. Storye book (talk) 20:15, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fang Yi'ai[edit]

(
)
Created by TheGreatPeng (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has less than 5 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

TheGreatPeng (talk) 10:01, 6 May 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • Review below, fascinating work!
General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
  • Cited: Yes - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith
  • Interesting: Yes
QPQ: None required.

Overall: AGF on foreign language sources – I was able to Google Translate the source page to confirm it, but because that's not a perfect translation, the AGF stands. Proposing a slight rewording in the ALT below to increase hookiness, but either would work. Nomader (talk) 14:27, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:Did_you_know/Approved/week-3&oldid=1171759282"