Jump to content

Template talk:Did you know

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

There are currently 2 filled queues. Assistance in moving preps is requested.

DYK is running 12-hour sets. There are currently 15 empty slots in the preps, not counting the bottom prep.

To discuss the content or layout of the Template:Did you know page itself, go to Wikipedia talk:Did you know.
Did you know?
Introduction and rules
IntroductionWP:DYK
General discussionWT:DYK
GuidelinesWP:DYKCRIT
Reviewer instructionsWP:DYKRI
Nominations
Nominate an articleWP:DYKCNN
Awaiting approvalWP:DYKN
ApprovedWP:DYKNA
April 1 hooksWP:DYKAPRIL
Holding areaWP:SOHA
Preparation
Preps and queuesTM:DYK/Q
Prepper instructionsWP:DYKPBI
Admin instructionsWP:DYKAI
Main Page errorsWP:ERRORS
History
StatisticsWP:DYKSTATS
Archived setsWP:DYKA
Just for fun
Monthly wrapsWP:DYKW
AwardsWP:DYKAWARDS
UserboxesWP:DYKUBX
Hall of FameWP:DYK/HoF
List of users ...
... by nominationsWP:DYKNC
... by promotionsWP:DYKPC
Administrative
Scripts and botsWP:DYKSB
On the Main Page
Main Page errorsWP:ERRORS
To ping the DYK admins{{DYK admins}}
Skip to top
Skip to bottom
For instructions on how to nominate an article, see Template:DYK nomination header § Instructions for nominators.
"Template:Did you know nominations" redirects here. For the list of approved nominations, see Template talk:Did you know/Approved.

This page is to nominate fresh articles to appear in the "Did you know" section on the Main Page with a "hook" (an interesting fact). Nominations that have been approved are moved to a staging area and then promoted into the Queue. To update this page, purge it.

Count of DYK nominations
Section Unapproved Approved Total
December 12 1 1
December 19 1 1
December 20 1 1
December 21 1 1 2
December 22 1 1
December 23 1 1
December 25 1 1
December 28 3 3
December 29 2 2
December 30 1 1
January 2 2 2
January 3 1 1
January 4 2 1 3
January 6 1 1
January 7 1 1
January 9 1 1 2
January 10 3 1 4
January 11 2 3 5
January 13 1 1 2
January 15 2 2
January 17 3 4 7
January 18 4 4
January 19 2 2 4
January 20 2 2
January 21 1 1 2
January 22 2 3 5
January 23 2 2
January 24 2 2
January 25 4 4
January 26 2 4 6
January 27 1 5 6
January 28 3 3 6
January 29 1 1 2
January 30 2 6 8
January 31 2 3 5
February 1 2 3 5
February 2 2 2 4
February 3 5 4 9
February 4 1 6 7
February 5 1 3 4
February 6 1 3 4
February 7 6 9 15
February 8 2 8 10
February 9 2 4 6
February 10 4 4 8
February 11 3 9 12
February 12 1 3 4
February 13 4 5 9
February 14 7 7 14
February 15 1 7 8
February 16 4 5 9
February 17 7 1 8
February 18 3 4 7
February 19 6 4 10
February 20 2 5 7
February 21 2 3 5
February 22 5 9 14
February 23 7 2 9
February 24 9 6 15
February 25 7 7
February 26 4 4 8
February 27 5 5
Total 150 175 325
Last updated 13:38, 27 February 2026 UTC
Current time is 13:56, 27 February 2026 UTC [refresh]

Instructions for nominators

[edit]
Shortcut

If this is your first nomination, please read the DYK rules before continuing. Further information can be found at the DYK guidelines.

Nominate an article

Frequently asked questions

[edit]

How do I write an interesting hook?

Successful hooks tend to have several traits. Most importantly, they share a surprising or intriguing fact. They give readers enough context to understand the hook, but leave enough out to make them want to learn more. They are written for a general audience who has no prior knowledge of or interest in the topic area. Lastly, they are concise, and do not attempt to cover multiple facts or present information about the subject beyond what's needed to understand the hook.

When will my nomination be reviewed?

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, 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 below). Because of WP:DYKTIMEOUT, a nomination should be reviewed within two months since the reviewer/promoter may agree to reject and close an unpromoted hook after that time has passed.

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 or with the closer, but as a general rule such nominations will only be restored in exceptional circumstances. If your nomination was promoted, but it hasn't reached the main page after two weeks, you can also query this on the DYK discussion page.


Instructions for reviewers

[edit]
Main page: Wikipedia:Did you know/Reviewer instructions

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 more information on the DYK rules and review processes, see the DYK guidelines and the reviewer instructions.

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

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

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

    If you are the first person to comment on the nomination, there will be a line :* <!-- REPLACE THIS LINE TO WRITE FIRST COMMENT, KEEPING  :* --> showing you where you should put the comment.
  • Save the page.
  • After the nomination is approved, a bot will automatically list the nomination page on Template talk:Did you know/Approved.

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.

Advanced procedures

[edit]

How to promote an accepted hook

[edit]

Handy copy sources:

  • To [[TM:DYK/P1|Prep 1]]
  • To [[TM:DYK/P2|Prep 2]]
  • To [[TM:DYK/P3|Prep 3]]
  • To [[TM:DYK/P4|Prep 4]]
  • To [[TM:DYK/P5|Prep 5]]
  • To [[TM:DYK/P6|Prep 6]]
  • To [[TM:DYK/P7|Prep 7]]

How to remove a rejected nomination

[edit]
  • Open the DYK nomination subpage of the nomination you would like to remove.
  • In the window where the DYK nomination subpage is open, replace the line {{DYKsubpage with {{subst:DYKsubpage, and replace |passed= with |passed=no. Then save the page. This has the effect of wrapping up the discussion on the DYK nomination subpage in a blue archive box and stating that the nomination was unsuccessful, as well as adding the nomination to a category for archival purposes.
  • Alternatively, you can use PSHAW, which automates the process.

How to remove a hook from the prep areas or queue

[edit]
  • Edit the prep area or queue where the hook is and remove the hook and the credits associated with it.
  • Go to the hook's nomination subpage (there should have been a link to it in the credits section).
    • View the edit history for that page
    • Go back to the last version before the edit where the hook was promoted, and revert to that version to make the nomination active again.
    • Add a new icon on the nomination subpage to cancel the previous tick and leave a comment after it explaining that the hook was removed from the prep area or queue, and why, so that later reviewers are aware of this issue.
  • Add a transclusion of the template back to this page so that reviewers can see it. It goes under the date that it was first created/expanded/listed as a GA. You may need to add back the day header for that date if it had been removed from this page.
  • If you removed the hook from a queue, it is best to either replace it with another hook from one of the prep areas, or to leave a message at WT:DYK asking someone else to do so.

How to move a nomination subpage to a new name

[edit]
  • Don't; it should not ever be necessary, and will break some links which will later need to be repaired. Even if you change the title of the article, you don't need to move the nomination page.

Nominations

[edit]

Older nominations

[edit]

Articles created/expanded on December 19

[edit]

Le Roseau d'Or

(
)
Under the Sun of Satan by Georges Bernanos was originally published in Le Roseau d'Or.
Under the Sun of Satan by Georges Bernanos was originally published in Le Roseau d'Or.
  • Source: Schloesser, Stephen (2016). Jazz Age Catholicism: Mystic Modernism in Postwar Paris, 1919-1933. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. p. 181. ISBN 9780802087188.
"Already in March 1925, even he was just beginning his cure, Cocteau had collaborated in the foundation of Maritain's new publishing venture, the Roseau d'Or. Eventually, the directorship would number three - Maritain, Massis, and Lefevre - and a secretary, Stanislas Fumet. Like the Revue universelle, Maritain consciously intended his new venture to challenge Gide's N.R.F. as the centre of elite intellectual life. But the Roseau d'Or, a series that included monographs and novels as well as occasional collections or Chroniques, would be more overtly literary in its union of 'Thomistic thought' with the intellectual and cultural mainstreams."
Created by M.A.Spinn (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 5 past nominations.

M.A.Spinn (talk) 16:14, 20 December 2025 (UTC).[reply]

  • Date, length ok. For the hook, I would suggest linking Thomism (and perhaps also Avant-garde). All facts of the hook need a sentence with reference in the article, but the fact about Maritain and Cocteau being the founders doesn't have a direct reference. I'm also wondering whether the image is really public domain? --Soman (talk) 20:04, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • I have added the relevant quote in the above to the article and reorganized it a little bit to get everything referenced in that note attached to it. I found the image on WikiMedia Commons and I don't see why it wouldn't be public domain; in addition to being published 99 years ago the author died in 1948 which meant by the French copyright law of the time it would have expired in 1998. Furthermore in the 93 years between the magazine folding and today I have seen nothing to suggest there has been any attempt to retain the copyright of the magazine. M.A.Spinn (talk) 21:37, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Soman: Is this nomination approved? If not, what else is needed? Z1720 (talk) 16:29, 31 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • I added a direct reference for the sentence mentioning the two collaborators and the two trends. Ok for the image, being published in 1926 and containing no artwork or similar. --Soman (talk) 19:02, 31 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
      @M.A.Spinn and Soman: I was reviewing this before promotion and found it difficult to understand what the hook was trying to say. I don't know who Maritain or Cocteau are, nor what Thomism represents, and I wouldn't suspect any of our Main Page readers would either. Can a new hook be proposed that takes a non-specialist perspective? (please Reply to icon mention me on reply; thanks!) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 04:34, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
      @TechnoSquirrel69: With all due respect, I don't think Maritain or Cocteau are that obscure. We may not be French Wikipedia but anyone educated in the history of 20th century political philosophy knows who Jacques Maritain is (even Joe Biden is on record as a fan!) especially since he was so influential in the drafting of the UN Declaration of Human Rights. Jean Cocteau likewise was an extremely prolific artist and filmmaker who was a member of the Académie française; I personally first encountered his work in high school French class. The links are blue so if people don't know they can click through. Not every DYK hook is about something I understand or know much about, but the whole point of the section is to showcase new work and stimulate the reader's curiosity. M.A.Spinn (talk) 20:08, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
      I don't disagree with you on that last point, and fully accept that my unfamiliarity with these names may not necessarily reflect the knowledge of our readers. However, how many of our readers are "educated in the history of 20th century political philosophy"? If the hook depends on specialist knowledge in order to understand why the fact is interesting, then I would argue it needs workshopping. (It may be interesting to you that Thomism and avant-garde thought is united in this publication, but if someone doesn't know what either of those represent, then the hook is unlikely to be interesting to them.) I also wouldn't rely on Maritain or Cocteau being linked; those are often removed later in the DYK review process as to not distract from the bolded article link. Let me know what you think. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 02:30, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any way to describe what is meant by uniting Thomism and the avant-garde in a new hook? Not everyone here is a regular Dean Corso... Also, I don't think we are going to run this image per the discussion on the main DYK talk page. Given that the magazine was a venue for LGBT Roman Catholic writers, that's an amazing hook right there. Don't bury the lead. Viriditas (talk) 20:38, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Viriditas: Point also well-taken, I'm open to the idea.
@M.A.Spinn: Note that the nomination is already over two months old and thus may be marked for closure soon if the concerns above are not addressed. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:29, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • ... that the magazine Le Roseau d'Or that was inspired by the philosophy of Saint Thomas Aquinas was launched to unite French intellectuals ?
Alt based on discussions and references above, I decoded Thomism, and removed the names that some found as unknown. HTH Victuallers (talk) 10:25, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on December 21

[edit]

Maung Me Khaung

(
)
  • ... that the legendary Burmese hero Maung Me Khaung was said to have footprints that measured one full cubit in length? Source: Temple, Sir Richard Carnac (1981). မြန်မာ့မိရိုးဖလာဓလေ့ နတ်သမိုင်း: ၃၇ မင်း မြန်မာနိုင်ငံ၌ကျင့်သုံးသော နတ်ပူဇော်သောဓလေ့များ (in Burmese). Cā pe Mitʻ chve Cā pe. pp. 178–180. ထိုသားသည် ဘီလူးမနှင့်လူညား၍ ပေါက်ဖွားသောကြောင့် ခွန်အား ဗလ ကြီးမားကာ အရွယ်ရောက်ချိန်၌ ခြေဖဝါးလည်း တစ်တောင်ရှိ၍ ဆင် ကိုပင် ဖမ်း၍ အစွယ်ချိုးနိုင်သော စွမ်းရည်သတ္တိနှင့် ပြည့်စုံသည်။ [That son was born of an ogress and a human, so he had great strength and power. When he grew up, his footprints were one cubit long, and he was filled with the ability and strength to even catch an elephant and break its tusks.]
Created by Hteiktinhein (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 9 past nominations.

Hteiktinhein (talk) 17:58, 26 December 2025 (UTC).[reply]

@TarnishedPath: Yes, reportedly he is considered to have existed based on historical sources and evidence. Both historical sources and narrative accounts mention him as a real person, and he is regarded as having a deity-level status. Hteiktinhein (talk) 07:26, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Hteiktinhein: It's a bit confusing because the hook says they are legendary. Viriditas (talk) 22:37, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
WP:DYKFICTION states that we should be giving a little bit of leeway to mythology; however, I think stating as fact that someone has footprints a full cubit in length might go beyond that. I'm going to start a discussion about Hteiktinhein's three hooks at WT:DYK. TarnishedPathtalk 23:08, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Actually the article was nominated DYK on December 26, so in reality DYKTIMEOUT does not apply for another few days. However, the new ALT does not work because it fails to make it clear that the subject is a mythological figure. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:58, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The historical account provides specific calendar dates, such as: “The Shwesandaw Pagoda history gives the date as the 10th waxing of Tazaungmon 658 ME (in the Sasana year (Buddhist Era) of 1834).[3] However, 658 ME is equivalent to 1840 BE, not 1834 BE. Thus, the two possible dates are…” How can this still be considered a mythical figure? Too much. Hteiktinhein (talk) 21:35, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Too much tired of notes and of many talks like wind (free). So let me invite @Hybernator:, the oldest Burmese and 100% knowledgeable editor, to give an opinion on ALT1. I don’t want to take notes or take lessons from only one editor’s personal criteria, no matter how big they are on global Wikipedia, because of not understanding Asian tradition. I also want to listen to opinions or comments/judge on native respect.I strongly oppose labeling this figure as purely mythological but semi-legendary due to lack of historiography. I have no issue with many articles like this in the past, and Burmese scholars have no time to make reviews on every legendary figure. So I am happy to withdraw DYK after I read comments from Hybernator. I can accept labeling a fictional character as mythical ✅, but labeling a semi-legendary figure as a fictional character is too much, and I can’t accept that. There is at least one chronicle account that mentions him and his royal title. Hteiktinhein (talk) 22:14, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • AFAIK, the vast majority of the Burmese nat pantheon were indeed historical figures: e.g., Tarabya, Minye Kyawswa, Thihathu, Tabinshwehti, and many more. One recurring motif is that they were all killed violently. (Here, Thone Myo Shin became a nat after being killed by Me Khaung). That said, the nat stories associated with these figures are best treated as myths or legends, IMO. Since the article already clarifies that Me Khaung’s story is largely legendary, we should ensure the DYK hook reflects that distinction. For ALT1, we can tweak the wording to make it clear that the footprints are part of the tradition rather than a biological claim:
Thank you so much for pointing out the “neutral” comment on this. I'm Ok with ALT1b. I sincerely apologize for requesting intervention. If you had not raised any points about Burmese nats, my future DYK activities might have been affected because of the many allegations I have received from several editors regarding my hooks, as they do not fully understand nats. I am really tired of giving this type of explanation to many people, and I know I cannot always explain it very well. Anyway, thank you for helping me out. Let’s see how other editors respond. Some may be frustrated because the article has been open for quite some enough time, but they are forcing the nomination to close quickly under WP:DYKTIMEOUT. Really strange. Many with one.... Hteiktinhein (talk) 23:12, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on December 22

[edit]

Roshni (album)

(
)

* ALT2: ... that a collaborative song between an ex-Hindi actor and Spotify Pakistan's top artist was released for an album the same year after the 2025 India–Pakistan crisis?

Created by M.Billoo2000 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 6 past nominations.

M. Billoo 19:37, 28 December 2025 (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
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Approved. I think hook 1 and alt 2 are the most interesting. --3family6 (Talk to me|See what I have done) 16:45, 25 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@M.Billoo2000 and 3family6: Couple things here: there are a few sources cited in this article that I suspect are press releases disguised as news coverage (such as this one and this one), which is unfortunately quite common in Indian-subcontinent publications. I would treat any source without a byline with a higher degree of skepticism when assessing for reliability. Also, these hooks leave a bit of a bad taste in my mouth — they're bordering on improper synthesis with the way these different facts are presented together, and bringing up the India–Pakistan conflict when the album seemingly has no relevance to it is not ideal. (please Reply to icon mention me on reply; thanks!) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 04:54, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • @TechnoSquirrel69: Hi, thank you for your feedback. I understand the definition of press release coverage, and am aware about the RSNOI policy. Just a concern for scrutiny, I assume that the press release means either totally copy-pasting word to word, or close paraphrasing by more than one news outlets, or lack of fact checking and just churnalism. But in this case, I have selected those references which I felt different from the others and did not select which I felt majorly same.
    It is true that the news outlets have copied the album description and tracklist only, which may look like a press release, but the other text inside the references I have selected is different. It is also true that I am unable to find the album's critical reception or any bylined source, otherwise the article would majorly rely on the primary source, i.e. Zafar's social media and his recent interview on Geo News program, and anyone could strike it out for being unreliable.
    I believe the RSNOI do not apply here; despite being unbylined, the references used here carry different wordings in no promotional tone except for the descriptions. Please correct me if wrong, I am willing to cooperate and rectify my mistakes.
    For the SYNTH, I accept my mistake and I am sorry for presenting like this, so striking as asked... But are all hooks falling under SYNTH? M. Billoo 18:22, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for going that, M.Billoo2000. I think the other two are still toeing the line of controvery by making the Hindi/Pakistani opposition, but the reference to the conflict is oblique enough that I think we can let it slide. Thanks for your willingness to be flexible! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 03:39, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • @TechnoSquirrel69: The first instance of one of the two sources you linked, footnote 11, is acceptable even if it is a press release because all it does is verify which number album Roshni is in Zafar's catalog; that's perfectly fine as a due weight statement about himself. The second source, footnote 7, similarly verifies that the premier of the single happened at an awards show. That one is only potentially an issue because I could see that being a notability statement. But it doesn't have to be. So, yes, I see what you mean about the sources being essentially press releases, but I do not agree that this is a problem.
    As for the Pakistani crisis being linked, that's a valid concern. ALT1 does not reference the conflict but I think is written more interestingly than the main hook.--3family6 (Talk to me|See what I have done) 00:30, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Noted on the ABOUTSELF detail, thanks — I should have looked at that more closely. You stated when removing a tag on the article that "primary sources from the subject (including press releases) can be used to verify factual statements". I disagree, as does RSNOI ("Exercise caution in using such sources for factual claims"); I believe statements of fact made in Wikipedia's voice should only be sourced to secondary sources with decent editorial oversight. With that in mind, we have this source for the "In January 2026, Zafar announced ..." statement, and these sources for the sentence about the music videos. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 03:39, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    TechnoSquirrel69 Primary sources can be used if they are the subject themselves (or very closely affiliated, such as the record label promoting them), or a self-published expert and the claim is not a biography of living persons claim. RSNOI would apply to notability claims, controversial statements, or if the source isn't close to the subject themselves. In this case, it's a moot point since you found secondary sources.--3family6 (Talk to me|See what I have done) 19:18, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I wasn't highlighting those as acceptable secondary sources, those are the type of problematic RSNOI sources I was referring to. I think this conversation would benefit from other perspectives, so I'm going to request further input at WT:DYK. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 22:06, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    TechnoSquirrel69 sorry, I misread.--3family6 (Talk to me|See what I have done) 02:09, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    No worries! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 03:58, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The issues have to be resolved quickly as this will turn two months old on the 28th. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 14:01, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

M.Billoo2000, I would recommend using better sources or this nom will fail.--3family6 (Talk to me|See what I have done) 15:10, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • @TechnoSquirrel69, 3family6, and Narutolovehinata5: Can you please specifically highlight all the references or statements, which you think are creating issue? I think I have already replied my part, and was now waiting for the comments through other forums (I am yet to receive a reply on my concerns). As per WP:DISCOGRAPHY, primary existence is enough, I still do not understand why is RSNOI a hard implementation on a music topic. And if the references I have used here are to be removed, then we will only be having the subject's social media references and one interview on a late night show. M. Billoo 17:02, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
If the only references are primary, then this album isn't notable. I'll look through the sources.--3family6 (Talk to me|See what I have done) 23:16, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, most of these are press-release style articles. There's a few that look reliable, but it's borderline notability at this point.--3family6 (Talk to me|See what I have done) 23:22, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also, I do not think that this deadline is fair considering that the review took place after about four weeks of nomination, pulled further after more than two weeks, and here we are only 10 days ahead but with only 5 days left for TIMEOUT yet the queries are open from both sides? M. Billoo 17:07, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree that it would not be fair to time this nomination out yet given the circumstances. M.Billoo2000, I don't have the time or energy at the moment to conduct a full source review here; I would recommend looking for some of the red flags I mentioned above and seeing if you can replace sources that look like that. Regarding "I still do not understand why is RSNOI a hard implementation on a music topic", I consider these concerns applicable across all subject areas; reliability standards should not be any laxer just because of the article's topic. If the sources can't be replaced, I'm not seeing any alternative but the removal of those statements.
    I'm also marking this as second opinion needed so we can hopefully form a clearer consensus on this nomination. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 21:07, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Yes please. I'm unfamiliar with Indian subcontinent sources.--3family6 (Talk to me|See what I have done) 23:22, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on December 23

[edit]

Cyprus-Greece-Israel trilateral alliance

(
)
Created by TonyFerro (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

TonyFerro (talk) 14:17, 29 December 2025 (UTC).[reply]

  • @TonyFerro: Article new enough (Dec 23), long enough (6100 B), no copyvio (Earwig says 5.7%). However, the sourcing has some issues, and I will be strict about this as the article deals with contentious topics. Please explain why the following sources are reliable: Georgios Koukakis, Greek Reporter, Eugene Kogan, MEPEI, Eurasia Review, Strategy International. Also, there is a consensus that Greek City Times is unreliable, and the Agora Dialogue source is unusable ans it is merely a link to another source that's cited. In addition, it looks like there are a few sources that do not verify the stated information, such as Egypt Oil & Gas and Offshore Technology, which do not mention the alliance.
    There are some other, smaller issues (short sections, short lead, capitalized headings, duplicated references, typos, hyphen should be en dash), but these are simple stylistic issues that aren't required for the DYK criteria. As for the hook facts, ALT0 is interesting and verified in source. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 23:37, 27 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am still learning Wikipedia, so i can't really say why a source is reliable. If i have used unreliable sources i am sorry. Please pin point the and i will try and find others that are reliable. In case of the gas fields, i brought sources proving they exist, rather than their connection to the alliance. As i wrote about the force balance in the region. In any case i will try and find better sources. TonyFerro (talk) 13:55, 28 January 2026 (UTC) User:Vigilantcosmicpenguin Did you read my reply or review again the article?[reply]

    • TonyFerro, please note that unless you sign a comment with four tildes (~~~~) your ping in the comment will not be seen by the user you are pinging. Courtesy ping to Vigilantcosmicpenguin. Dclemens1971 (talk) 12:44, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • @TonyFerro: Sorry I didn't see your comment earlier. I'll try to address each source that I'm concerned about:
      I linked to an existing discussion about Greek City Times. You can read this discussion to see why people consider it unreliable. You would have to start a new discussion if you disagree.
      Some of the other sources (Greek Reporter, MEPEI, Eurasia Review, Strategy International) might be reliable publications, but I need evidence. Wikipedia's sourcing guidelines include the WP:USEBYOTHERS guideline; we should try finding examples of these sources being cited in other reliable sources, as evidence that they are reliable.
      The source by Georgios Koukakis and the one by Eugene Kogan are both self-published. Please note that websites like ResearchGate allow people to publish their own work, so it may look like an academic journal without actually being one. Since these are self-published, we should follow the guideline on WP:Self-published sources—these are only reliable if we can verify that the authors are reputable experts in their field.
      The sources about the gas fields, as you say, only verify that the gas fields exist and not their connection to the alliance. This violates the rule WP:No original research, which requires sources that directly verify the information. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 18:55, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

User:Vigilantcosmicpenguin Thank you for your explanations, found them helpful. Regarding the sources you wrote about, i replaced them all, so i do not think a discussion about (Greek Reporter, MEPEI, Eurasia Review, Strategy International) will be necessary. About the gas fields i just wanted to make sure they have a reference showing they exist within the bigger issue i was writing about, so no violation of WP:No original research. I hope the list of comment will be shorter now. Thanks for your help. TonyFerro

Courtesy ping to @Vigilantcosmicpenguin: as TonyFerro forgot to sign with ~~~~. 1brianm7 (talk) 15:17, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on December 25

[edit]

Genocide

(
)
Improved to Good Article status by Buidhe (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 271 past nominations.

(t · c) buIdhe 21:32, 25 December 2025 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: No - debatable
  • Interesting: Yes
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Impressive article, and clearly vital to our encyclopedia. Unfortunately it's such an important and controversial topic that the exact phrasing of every sentence is A Big Deal, so I'm going to have to nitpick. I was most impressed by ALT2, so that's where I focused ... and, I'm afraid, it's not a sufficient summary of the source in either the hook or the article. The hook says "the United States and Soviet Union...", the article says "powerful countries (both Western powers and the Soviet Union)..." which could be similar enough (as the US was undisputably the most powerful Western country) but the source that this is cited to, p21-22, specifically says "it was not only the major powers...". The source then goes on to list the powers that worked to weaken the definition of genocide: "The Canadian and Swedish delegations... the South African delegation... the Brazilian delegation ... the UK and French delegations... Washington ...". That is not a list that can be summarized as "powerful Western powers"; in both WW2 and the Cold War Sweden was specifically neutral, Brazil was debatable, and the power of both of them and South Africa was quite limited. Implying that only the US and Soviet Union, or even that only the major powers, worked to water down the definition of genocide is incorrect. This is fixable, but needs fixing.

I would also suggest adding a sentence giving specifics as to what part of the definition of genocide the US thought would make them vulnerable (namely Jim Crow and lynchings); there is a single link to We Charge Genocide hidden behind the word "countercharges" (arguably a WP:SURPRISE violation), but otherwise I can't see it in our article. But that is comprehensiveness, which is not a DYK requirement. The above bit goes to neutrality, which is. GRuban (talk) 16:32, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • In both the article and the hook, we are trying to sum up complicated diplomatic negotiations in one sentence. It would be obviously UNDUE to mention every country's position in this article and the hook, which is why they are phrased the way they are—there is no implication that other states didn't take similar positions. (Although in other cases it wasn't necessarily that diplomats believed that they would be vulnerable to a charge of genocide were the definition not kept narrow). (t · c) buIdhe 17:20, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
While I understand the restrictions on detailing country by country, the current phrasing actively contradicts the source's "not only major powers" statement. I think rephrasing is required at the least, or even a sentence of clarification is worth its space. Maybe something like "... third world countries with a history of colonialism"? If it's explained in the article in more detail I could accept the hook, but right now both imply it was the US/SU.--GRuban (talk) 17:49, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
After taking a closer look, the source doesn't say that any of the other countries you mention secured changes to the wording, which is what the article sentence said. I have tweaked the wording a bit to more closely match the source, but I think the article made the same distinction that the source does—as the previous sentence mentions states' concerns, which were more widespread than influence on the final version. I'm also not sure where you're getting "... third world countries with a history of colonialism" from. (t · c) buIdhe 19:26, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I can buy that. However I now looked further and we've got an article on the source, Douglas Irvin-Erickson, and it's a one-liner saying he's an assistant professor, which is quite a lot to hang such a powerful statement as "the United States, United Kingdom, and the Soviet Union conspired..." on. Not that I don't believe it, mind you, that is exactly the sort of Orwellian things they did in the early Cold War ("we have always been at war with Eastasia") but still, powerful claims call for powerful sourcing. Do we have a second source besides one assistant professor? --GRuban (talk) 23:42, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
If not, I'll accept the first hook. I don't think it's nearly as hooky, but since it's not nearly as specific I'll accept its sourcing. --GRuban (talk) 02:03, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I mean, it's the accepted viewpoint in the field that powerful countries from both Cold War blocs were working to undermine the genocide convention while posturing as being against genocide, for example, it's the thesis of Anton Weiss-Wendt's book The Soviet Union and the Gutting of the UN Genocide Convention, which despite its title blames the US almost as much. That's exactly what the hook says. (t · c) buIdhe 18:33, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Quote a sentence or two from that book, with page numbers, that says that here, and add that as a citation to the relevant place in the article and I will accept it; it is a better hook. --GRuban (talk) 22:40, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
As it says on the last page of the book, "The Genocide Convention bears the stamp of approval by Stalin, who made micromanaging a staple of Soviet policymaking.... Representatives of quite a few other UN member states unintentionally admitted to the political agenda behind their vote on certain provisions of the Genocide Convention in 1948. To give just one example, the State Department did not regard forcible transfer of minori- ties as an act of genocide, because the United States had previously cosigned the Yalta and Potsdam agreements providing for expulsion of ethnic Germans from Eastern Europe. Further dark shadows would appear if anyone attempted to compare the official statements to archival records." (t · c) buIdhe 15:16, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
ALT2. --GRuban (talk) 20:49, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Buidhe, GRuban, and Viriditas: The article is undergoing a GAR and an RfC, apparently, so pulled from prep and on hold until that concludes. HurricaneZetaC 04:17, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on December 28

[edit]

Harley Davidson (song)

(
)
Created by Moscow Connection (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 44 past nominations.

Moscow Connection (talk) 23:59, 4 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]

Bird of Pray

(
)
  • ... that Alexandra Koster of Australia's SBS likened the camera work in Ukraine's Eurovision 2025 performance "Bird of Pray" to having a "schmear of Vaseline"?
Improved to Good Article status by TheNuggeteer (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 35 past nominations.

🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 02:30, 2 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]

  • @TheNuggeteer: New enough (GA Dec 28), long enough (9400 B), well-sourced (it appears the sources are considered reliable about Eurovision), no copyvio. However, I don't think the hook is acceptable. The source makes the statement about camera work, followed by a statement about the song "Bird of Pray", but it is not written in a way where it makes a connection between the two (i.e. it could have been a general comment about camera work that had been happening across multiple songs, not just this one specific song). As such, I don't think this statement even belongs in the article (same goes for the following statement about the blackouts). A different hook is needed. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 06:51, 25 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Vigilantcosmicpenguin: I believe the hook is okay. The mention is placed in the specific section where "Bird of Pray"s performance. Also, you can confirm this by looking at the performance video. If this is still a problem, I could try to find a new hook. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 06:58, 25 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    The new hook (which I've relabeled as ALT2) is complicated to read (there's a good hook fact there, but it is hard to get with the current reading). Maybe Launchballer can rewrite it? We could also revisit ALT1, if a better source for the information could be found. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:02, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Lot of information to present; probably not getting much simpler than ALT2a: ... that a backing vocalist on the Eurovision performance of Ukraine's Bird of Pray had been beaten by the song's performer during its selection event?--Launchballer 03:03, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Honestly, how do you guys come up with these hooks? This is good, I like this! 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 11:10, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Pyapon Taung Shinma

    (
    )
    Created by Hteiktinhein (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 12 past nominations.

    Hteiktinhein (talk) 17:27, 3 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    • article is new enough (6 days between 28 december and nom on 3 january). article is long enough, exceeds 1,500 characters of prose. hook uses hqrs, not detecting any neutrality, copyvio or a.i. concerns. qpq is done and i thought it was interesting. i might recommend excising or blue-linking nat, since the sentence structure is a little complicated. happy to pass this.
      • Plifal, reviews must be signed to be valid. Also, nominator Hteiktinhein has removed "according to legend" from the hook you approved—hooks really should not be changed post-review; if it's important, an ALT hook can be proposed with new/updated wording—so please be sure that this is still a valid hook with those words removed when doing a properly signed updated review below. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:05, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
        • i'm sorry i thought i had signed it, total error. i don't have control over the hooks meaningfully changing post review, but given the article currently says, "She was said to have been born" and the hook gives a more definitive claim i'm going to go ahead and say not yet. --Plifal (talk) 15:14, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I removed it because she is regarded as a deity rather than a mythical or fictional figure. Official historical records of the nats describe her birth as occurring “in a historical event” (သမိုင်းဖြစ်စဉ်). Therefore, I do not believe the wording is inappropriate. If there are concerns, please feel free to raise them. Thank you. Hteiktinhein (talk) 15:43, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Hteiktinhein i don't have an issue with either phrasing, but the current hook gives a more definitive statement than the one in the article, if the source is definitive (which the supplied source seems to suggest) i would recommend altering the artcle to remove the above phrase in order to match; then i have no issue in passing. the inclusion of (nat) spirit should be fine to indicate that this is a supernatural phenomenon.--Plifal (talk) 08:34, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Plifal:, done. Hteiktinhein (talk) 06:11, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    ok, thanks! passing. --Plifal (talk) 06:13, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Plifal: I would like to withdraw ALT0, as it falls under WP:DYKFICTION. I have prepared a new hook based on real-life facts and would appreciate it if you could review it again. Thank you very much, and sorry for the inconvenience. Hteiktinhein (talk) 18:33, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Hteiktinhein: using google translate for that quote I get "Because they are jealous when others wear them, those who wear beads, bracelets, earrings, etc., have to take them off and collect them when they reach the ash pit." Are you able to provide a longer quote please. Specifically I'm looking for support of the "local custom at Pyapon Mountain" part. TarnishedPathtalk 02:52, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    If you cannot read Burmese, please use an AI tool for translation. Google Translate is very poor for Burmese and cannot be easily relied on for proper verification. I have mentioned this problem countless times, and it has become very burdensome to me.Here is the quotation from page 183 of the source: မယ်ဖြူသည် လူဘဝက အဝတ်တန်ဆာ ကောင်းစွာမ ဝတ်ရသူ ဖြစ်၍ သူတစ်ပါးဝတ်ဆင်လာလျှင် မနာလိုတတ်သောကြောင့် ပုတီး လက်ကောက် နားတောင်းစသည်ကို ပတ်ဆင်လာသူများသည် ထိုပြာပုံတောင် ရောက်လျှင် ချွတ်၍ သိမ်းဆည်းယူဆောင်ကြရသည်။ သို့မဟုတ်က လေပြင်း မုန်တိုင်း မိုးကြီး မှောင်ကြီးကျ၍ မူးဝေ ထိတ်လန့်တတ်သည်ဟု ဆိုလေသည်။ ပြောင်းပြာမြို့ကြီး အစရှိသောအရပ်ရပ်မှ မိန်းမများသည် သူတို့ဝတ်ဆင်သော ပုတီး နားတောင်း လက်ဝတ်လက်စားများကို မယ်ဖြူနတ်ကုန်းတွင် တင်ဆက်မြှောက်သပြီးမှ ဝတ်ဆင်ကြရသည်။

    @EmeraldRange:, could you please help verify whether this quotation supports the hook for this DYK boss? Burmese is a complex language with both direct and indirect meanings, so careful interpretation is necessary. I created this hook based on an accurate and properly summarized translation.Hteiktinhein (talk) 08:26, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Two parts of the quotes potentially being used here. The first is "therefore, when arriving at Pyapon Hill, [the jewelry] must be taken off and taken away." The last sentence then says: "Local women in Pyaungpya town and surroundings present their pearls, earrings, bracelets to Me Phyu Nat's hill and only then wear it". Note that Pyapon would literally translate to "ash pit". I will let the reviewer make the judgement based on this. EmeraldRange (talk/contribs) 12:59, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @TarnishedPath:/@Plifal:, hello pls do more question on this when other native arrived here and stop procrastinate. Hteiktinhein (talk) 21:44, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Hteiktinhein:, I'll leave this for another editor to review as I'm not sure that I'm confident that the hook is fully supported. TarnishedPathtalk 22:37, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]


    Articles created/expanded on December 29

    [edit]

    Unsanctioned (Magic: The Gathering)

    (
    )
    Created by LivelyRatification (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 6 past nominations.

    LivelyRatification (talk) 00:07, 30 December 2025 (UTC).[reply]

    • Given the nom's explanation (and my familiarity with the game), I am fine accepting the cracked interview as reliable. Article is new enough and passes spotchecks; my concern is about the hooks. I don't think either is particularly interesting; the first one is kind of a plot-summary (see WP:DYKPLOT) of the game (plus: why should the reader care about minor pun related to Alexander Clamilton's name, and a squirrel? The proofreading dragon is ok-ish, but again, plot...). And the second one is again not very interesting IMHO (and I say this as a MtG player too - I doubt it is more interesting to our average reader who knows nothing about MtG). Now, I think this can be rescued by mixing the claims and stressing how the set contains humorous cards - something like "set contains solely satirical and tongue-in-cheek cards like a proofreading dragon that are illegal in the game's tournaments"? Bonus if you can work "anthropomorphized animals" into the hook, furries tend to draw views, IMHO :) Ping me for ALTs and I'll review them. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:29, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    ALT2: ...that the Unsanctioned set of Magic: The Gathering cards are illegal in the game's tournaments due to their satirical nature?
    ALT3: ...that the Unsanctioned set of Magic: The Gathering cards include an anthropomorphised proofreader dragon, a clam named for a musical, and are all illegal in the game's tournaments?
    Still kind of stuck on this one, but oh well. Better than nothing. --LivelyRatification (talk) 00:16, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
        • @LivelyRatification: I think we won't get better than ALT3, so I am on verge of approving it, but read this first. As for ALT2 I'd question if it is correct, AFAIK the reason these cards are not tournament-approved (and even most casual play groups...) is due to cumbersome/unbalanced mechanics on some of them, not the fluff (jokes in names/images/flavour text...). I mean, Chaos Confettii is not illegal because it was "funny", its illegal because its mechancis are crazy, etc. If we could add that, with sources, to the hook, it would make it much better - any chance you could find sources saying the cards are not widely used because they are, well, crazy/cumbersome/funny-but-not-playable? That would make a good, interesting hook for regular people ("these cards are crazy and made to laugh at but not to actually use").--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:37, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Populus Denver

    (
    )
    The "cheese grater" facade
    The "cheese grater" facade
    • ... that Denver's Populus hotel became a subject of online and media discussion after some observers compared its facade (pictured) to a "cheese grater"?
    • Reviewed:
    • Comment: First submission - appreciate the feedback!
    Created by Pdubs.94 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    Pdubs.94 (talk) 18:24, 31 December 2025 (UTC).[reply]

    • Comment: @Pdubs.94: Hi, and welcome to DYK. Not a full review, but your article is good. Just a few suggestions; you can consider copying some info from the WP:LEAD into the article body, and move the references. It would be better if the lead reflects the cited material in the body, instead of using citations in the lead. You can also complete some of the citation furnishing, like putting dates and author's first and last name in the references. Do not worry, the article has got no major problems. Thank you and all the best! M. Billoo 03:10, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
      @Pdubs.94: Hi. Can you please rework on some WP:INLINE citations? A few paragraphs appear unsourced, and it may be hard for a reviewer to find the exact citation for easily verifying the prose. If your work is completely based on the references inside the article, then only the references need better sorting ahead of the clause it verifies. Thank you! M. Billoo 04:48, 21 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
      @M.Billoo2000: The original nominator seems to have not edited in about three weeks. I am happy to hop on and assume responsibility for this nom. I have added two citations that seem to resolve the sourcing concerns you raised earlier. Is there anything else that you would like me to handle so that we can get this nom over the finish line? Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 16:37, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
      The name "Aparium Hotel Group" inside the infobox appears unsourced, and it is nowhere mentioned within the article body. However, the Hospitality Net reference seems to confirm this so it can be used as inline citation as well. Should I perform a full review now? Thank you. M. Billoo 20:04, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
      @M.Billoo2000: Yes, I think we're ready to go now. If you have any other comments, drop me a ping. Thanks for sticking with this review for a month. Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 16:10, 30 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Pbritti: Since opening, Populus has received extensive coverage from local, national, and international media outlets, including The Denver Post, Westword, Forbes, Vogue, Time, and The New York Times. This clause may also need inline citations, as well as the justification or maybe repharsing, considering the terms "since opening" and "international media". The Denver Post is only cited here with the date of pre-opening. And as suggested earlier, I think MOS:LEAD can now be made free of many references. Thank you. M. Billoo 17:46, 30 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • Like the Denver property, the Seattle hotel emphasizes sustainability-oriented design and operations, though it was developed as a distinct project rather than as part of a standardized hotel brand. This may need further clarification because the inline citation has only a passing mention. M. Billoo 19:09, 30 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • I think it is good to go now, and I have also done some CE with INLINE. M. Billoo 05:49, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • I pulled this hook from queue due to issues related to LLM-generation. The article itself has choppy LLM language, attributing sources when it is unneeded and making vague and exaggerated claims. I checked the four sources in the "Sustainability" section:
    The first paragraph is cited to this Forbes source. The problem in the prose is that it says it as if multiple sources have covered it and said these things; if they have, they need to be cited here, and usually it isn't encyclopedic to say it like that. The verifiability issue comes where it says Coverage noted that this claim goes beyond the carbon-neutral designations commonly used in the hospitality industry. This is not in the source and makes it fail verification and potentially making it original research.
    The second paragraph is a close paraphrase of this NYT source.

    The Populus’s approach started at construction, with a concrete mix said to emit 30 percent less carbon dioxide than regular concrete. Repurposed elements are heavily relied on, including wood from an already felled cottonwood tree for the reception desk; beetle-kill pine for some walls and bed headboards; and snow fencing from Wyoming as decorative ceiling beams. The 365 glass-fiber-reinforced concrete panels on the hotel’s exterior, inspired by the bark of aspen trees, help keep the building cool in summer and warm in winter. The hotel did not build a parking garage — instead it uses existing lots in the area for valet parking, and encourages public transit for guests.

    — Source

    According to national reporting, the project used a concrete mix claimed to emit approximately 30 percent less carbon dioxide than conventional concrete and incorporated repurposed materials throughout the building. These included wood from an already felled cottonwood tree used for the reception desk, beetle-kill pine for walls and headboards, and reclaimed wooden snow fencing used as decorative ceiling elements. The hotel did not incorporate an on-site parking garage, instead relying on nearby facilities and encouraging public transit use.

    — Article

    The third paragraph was cited to this Vogue source which doesn't seem to support any of the information in the paragraph from a cursory read and I replaced it with a cn tag.
    The fourth paragraph is cited to the same NYT source, and does seem to check out. It does have the LLM phrasing, however.
    Appropriate tags have been added to this section. Pbritti, I think this needs a complete rewrite as the problems are fundamental in the language it uses to run on DYK, if you're still interested in it. HurricaneZetaC 02:22, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Also, struck ALT0 due to it failing verification (see WT:DYK#Populus Denver (nom)). Suggested by Pbritti:
    ALT1: ... that the facade of Denver's Populus hotel (pictured) has been compared to a "cheese grater"?
    ALT1a: ... that the facade of Populus Denver (pictured) has been compared to a "cheese grater"?

    HurricaneZetaC 03:04, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    • @HurricaneZeta: As a reviewer, sadly I could not figure out the LLM tone or close paraphrasing, so I am really really sorry for it. Though, the term "cheese grater" is mentioned in some more than three references which may qualify WP:SIGCOV:
    I understand that the article should be rewritten in own wordings, though my intention was INLINE at that time, so I believe the original hook was OK as well. Though, now I have no problem with the ALTs as well being short and to the point. Thank you for highlighting the issue. M. Billoo 12:41, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Articles created/expanded on January 4

    [edit]

    Am-progressive

    (
    )
    • Source: Every source on the page, but 1 and 2 are the most useful sources for easy verification.
    • Reviewed: [[]]
    Created by JacobTheRox (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    JacobTheRox(talk | contributions) 20:23, 4 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    General: Article is new enough and long enough
    Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

    Hook eligibility:

    • Cited: Yes - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith
    • Interesting: No - see above
    QPQ: None required.

    Overall: (t · c) buIdhe 18:28, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    • @Buidhe and JacobTheRox: I agree that the hook as currently written is too specialist or technical. However, there does seem to be something that could be used instead. What about:
    ALT1 ... that there is dispute on how to capitalize verb components in a recent form of German progressive aspect?
    While it is still technical (especially with the term "progressive aspect", which to be honest I'd never even heard of before, even as a fluent speaker of English!), it should at least be slightly easier to understand, and there is an aspect about controversy, which might at least be eye-catching. If there is a better way to word the subject in the hook, that would be good too. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:31, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    ALT2 ... that how to capitalise a colloquial German progressive form is the subject of much dispute?
    Is that any better? JacobTheRox(talk | contributions) 18:24, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Given that it's a much shorter and simpler hook, yes it is better. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:17, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • ALT3 ... that despite being "somewhat viewed as standard speech already", the German am-progressive is still considered ungrammatical in schools?
    • ALT4 ... that the spread of a German colloquial aspect has been described as 'biphasic'?
    • ALT5 ... that a colloquial German progressive form has been described as an entirely new verb form?
    Those are all the others I can think of right now.

    The Witcher: The Adventure Card Game

    (
    )
    Created by Piotrus (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 578 past nominations.

    Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:54, 4 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    General: Article is new enough and long enough
    Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

    Hook eligibility:

    • Cited: Yes - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith
    • Interesting: No - Routine release information
    QPQ: Done.

    Overall: (t · c) buIdhe 14:49, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    • There are also other issues with the article. For one, it is in dire need of a copyedit, both in terms of grammar, and in terms of moving the footnotes to come after punctuation. There are multiple parts that use parentheticals; those need to be revised to meet encyclopedic standards. Finally, the article is actually lacking in hooky material. Apart from Buidhe's concerns that the hook is not interesting to a broad audience (which I agree with), the only possible hook I could think of, or at least angle, was something like: "... that a 2007 card game set in The Witcher universe uses screenshots from the video games?", but I'm not sure if that would be considered broadly interesting either. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:49, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
      • I figured the article issues may not be an issue with the DYK criteria, but I could be wrong. I agree the second hook doesn't seem to meet the requirements either. (t · c) buIdhe 15:13, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    "Requiring a copyedit" is technically not a DYK requirement, but if an article is in a bad enough state then there is definitely room for improvement. Given the lack of hooky material, regrettably I would not oppose failing this on that ground. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:04, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    per above (t · c) buIdhe 03:08, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    I strongly disagree that this is not interesting - it's plenty interesting to folks interested in board games, video games, and the very famous Witcher franchise. I can c/e the stops; for grammar I can ping User:Nihil novi, and I'll also ask folks at WT:DYK, BG and VG to comment on whether there i nothing interesting. I think the main hook is interesting, and the propsed ALT1 above is good too. PS. C/e (punctuation, parenthesis, etc.) done, and more hooks proposed below - although I still think that that the fact that very famous computer video game had a board game promotional companion is interesting in itself. Shrug.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 00:45, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • ALT1: ... that a 2007 card game set in The Witcher universe uses screenshots from the video game released at the same time?
    • ALT2: ... that The Witcher: The Adventure Card Game, a marketing tie-in for the first Witcher video game, was the first board game set in the Witcher universe available on the open market?
    • ALT3: ... that the first board game set in the Witcher universe received mixed reviews, unlike its well-received video game counterpart?
    Regrettably, I do not see how any of these hooks are interesting to a broad audience. The first two have already been objected to above, the third requires familiarity with The Witcher or being a fan of it. Hooks about works of fiction ideally need to appeal to broad audiences, even non-fans, and I can't see how ALT3 is all that different. Ironically, if it was the other way around (for example, a poorly-received source material resulting in a positively-received adaptation), that would actually be interesting. Bad media based on good media is pretty common, the other-way-around less so and more surprising. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:21, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • Coming from WT:DYK, and this stood out to me in the article as hooky:
    ALT4: that one reviewer said The Witcher: The Adventure Card Game was "a very pretty piece of junk”?
    I can't speak Polish but google translate gave broadly the same translation (I got junk, not crap, though) 1brianm7 (talk) 01:26, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, that could work, if Piotrus is open to that idea. The "first" aspect is still not interesting. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:32, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I am fine with ALT4, although for me it is less good than the others (I did consider it, actually, but did not write it down due to giving what IMHO is undue weight to a single reviewer's wording. But if you like it more, it's fine - it does represent what most reviewers thought, so it is reasonably neutral on second glance. As for translation, Polish word "gniot" can be translated as junk, crap, etc. It's slangish, see https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/gniot -> (colloquial) worthless work or object; dross, dreck . PS. And we promoted a similar hook few months ago: Template:Did you know nominations/Fromage (board game). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:46, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    ALT4 is an interesting hook: colloquial, engagingly ironic, not requiring familiarity with the topic's esoterica. Nihil novi (talk) 10:03, 9 January 2026 (UTC)Comment movied by Piotrus from article's talk page, courtesy ping User:Nihil novi[reply]
    • All presented hooks are interesting enough to be run on the mainpage as they all touch on multiple general topic areas that the subject is part of. 2 peoples personal preferences are again being forced over 5 million main page viewers.--Kevmin § 20:33, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Z1720: (since Buidhe did not). Can we move forward with this? We have only one person doubting that the newest hook is interesting, several people opined positively about it, and I don't think veto is common in DYKs. Do we need a RfC? :D (Also note that other hooks were found interesting too, by more than just myself). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:40, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    The only hook here that has gained any sort of consensus is ALT4; only one other editor thought the other proposals were interesting, which isn't enough to count as consensus. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:04, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Narutolovehinata5: There were other support comments in differnet threads, but sure, ALT4 is most widely supported. Can we go with it? As discussed, we have run identical hooks in the past (quotations from reviews). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:01, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Also friendly ping to User:Z1720. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:22, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Note that per this discussion at Viriditas's talk page, there are still unaddressed issues that prevent this nomination from being approved. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:03, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Articles created/expanded on January 7

    [edit]

    The Auckland Society of Arts

    (
    )
    Portrait of a Lady, by C. F. Goldie at the Auckland Society of Arts Exhibition
    Portrait of a Lady, by C. F. Goldie at the Auckland Society of Arts Exhibition
    • Reviewed:
    Created by Avawatson03 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    Avawatson03 (talk) 00:56, 13 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    Thank you for the new hook, but generally, we let the original hooks remain in the nomination, we just propose a new hook later in the nomination. I have restored the original hook and struck it, and am putting the new proposal below:
    @Avawatson03: The issue here is that the hook is a "first" hook, and per WP:DYKFIRST, hooks that are about a "first X" need to have exceptionally strong sourcing and ideally a search for counterexamples to prove the firstness. As such, while not outright banned, they are discouraged whenever possible. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 06:49, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Narutolovehinata5 We just had an RFC on this repudiating this type of response to first hooks. It's concerning that your review is linking to an essay without community backing and not supported by WP:DYKCRIT. You need to give this hook a fair review or let another editor take over. This bias against first hooks after the RFC is not ok.4meter4 (talk) 03:25, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    There is a misunderstanding here. I did not intend to say "first" hooks cannot run, merely that they are subject to greater scrutiny and higher sourcing requirements. They are discouraged if there are alternatives, but they are not banned. They can run if there are no other better alternatives, or are the best choice. But if a "first" hook runs, it can only do so after the necessary scrutiny and sourcing have been provided. Exceptional claims require exceptional sourcing. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 05:25, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Narutolovehinata5 I would avoid making broad statements about first hooks in review which is skirting too close to defying the RFC outcome. Your comment "discouraged whenever possible" is your opinion and not one supported by the RFC which broadly supported using first hooks when supported by the evidence. The way this review has been approached has prejudiced other reviewers from approving the hook. The review is also in a strange state where you as the reviewer have not addressed the specific hook materials (ie no discussion about whether the hook fact was interesting or whether it was verified to the provided reference as would be required by WP:DYKCRIT). This creates an indefinite review limbo for the hook which is a form of bias against achieving hook approval. Keep your comments targeted on this specific hook and its specific supporting reference(s). If you feel the specific source is not sufficient to verify the claim made say why specifically in relation to the evidence, and say what type of source/evidence would be necessary to approve the hook. Further, as the reviewer of a first hook, it is your responsibility to take on searching for counter examples. If you aren't willing to do that, don't take on the hook review and leave it to another editor. 4meter4 (talk) 02:17, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    To be honest, I really don't understand the apparent defensiveness over "first" or superlative hooks. They can be used if they are the best option, but if there is a more interesting or airtight hook, that would be preferred; not because of a bias against "first" hooks, but simply because they are more interesting. Conversely, if the "first" fact is the more interesting fact than the alternatives, then the "first" hook would be preferred. Just because the subject is a "first" does not mean a hook should be about a "first". In any case, ALT2 is a better option anyway, so I can approve that if other options are not forthcoming. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:44, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Not the best hook out there, but I'd be open to it if there are no other possible alternatives. Are there any other options? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:28, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • The article was nominated just within the seven-day limit. It is long enough and new enough and I did not find any close paraphrasing. No QPQ is required as this was the nominator's first nomination. If we are to go with the "first" hook, I would like to see more sources for it plus a search for counterexamples, per the above. ALT2 is not the most spectacular hook but it is currently the preferred option pending further work on the "first" hook. Again, I'd like to see more alternative hooks proposed first before approving. However, the main issue with the article right now is WP:DYKCOMPLETE; other than a mention of the society dissolving in 2004 and brief mentions of the group's exhibitions, the history information stops at around the 1950s. Is information about what happened afterwards available out there? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:56, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Avawatson03: Please respond to the above review. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:16, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Articles created/expanded on January 9

    [edit]

    Dalmatius

    (
    )
    • Source: Pages 14; 18 of The Summer of Blood: The "Great Massacre" of 337 and the Promotion of the Sons of Constantine by R. Burgess
    5x expanded by Jon698 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 111 past nominations.

    Jon698 (talk) 23:33, 9 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    I will be able to add one after 1 PM CST. Jon698 (talk) 13:33, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Narutolovehinata5: QPQ done. Jon698 (talk) 19:47, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    This article is right up my alley, so I'm going to review it.
    General: Article is new enough and long enough
    Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

    Hook eligibility:

    QPQ: Done.

    Overall: NeoGaze (talk) 17:21, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    The article has indeed been expanded fivefold. It is long enough with 4882 characters (764 words) of "readable prose size". It is neutral in tone, and no case of copyright violations, plagiarism or close paraphrasing have been found. Copyvio only shows a mirror wiki that seems to copy the content of the article. The article is also exceptionally well-sourced, with every inline citation supporting each statement. The hook itself is also well-referenced, but in my opinion it doesn't appear to be particularly interesting or striking to a general reader, at least beyond those already interested in the history of the late Roman empire. No image is used and the one required QPQ has already been done for this nomination.

    To fix the issue, I suggest proposing alternative hooks. For example I formulate one below that I think will attract more interest and catch the attention of general readers. If it is satisfactory to the nominator, we can proceed with it, if not now new ones should be created.

    ALT1: ... that caesar Dalmatius was murdered by his soldiers in the midst of a massacre that killed nearly all the male members of the Constantinian family?

    • Source: Page 10 of The Summer of Blood: The "Great Massacre" of 337 and the Promotion of the Sons of Constantine by R. Burgess
    On second tought, I might have been overly strict or subjective on how much interesting the original hook is, so if other editors disagree with my judgement, then the original hook would be fine. NeoGaze (talk) 15:12, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @NeoGaze: I like the hook that you suggested. We would have to wait for another user to give approval for it though due to DYK rules. Jon698 (talk) 20:47, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Second opinion requested @Jon698: Thanks, then lets wait for a second opinion then. NeoGaze (talk) 14:49, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Article looks fine and this new hook is darkly interesting. AllWeKnowOfHeaven (talk) 22:54, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Jon698: Happy to promote, but I don't see the mention to any soldiers doing the killing, neither in the article nor in the source. This needs fixing first - please ping me when done. Barbalalaika 🐌 21:14, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Barbalalaika: Soldiers are mentioned in the last pharagraph of the "Death" section in the article. About the source, Page 14 states that "it was the army that had assassinated Dalmatius Caesar in the midst of a mutiny". Page 18 also mentions the soldiers. NeoGaze (talk) 21:34, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Jon698: Ah, sorry about that. I see it. I also see that "Aurelius Victor was uncertain about who was responsible for Dalmatius' death" - would it be nitpicky to ask the sentence to be reformulated? As it stands, I didn't fully understand what is uncertain: that he died by soldiers or by command of Constantius. Seems to be the latter, if I understood source 35 correctly? Barbalalaika 🐌 22:01, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]


    Articles created/expanded on January 10

    [edit]

    Wei Shujun

    (
    )
    • ... that filmmaker Wei Shujun has often depicted characters struggling with their rational worldviews under extreme circumstances?
    Improved to Good Article status by 222emilia222 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 90 past nominations.

    ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:20, 20 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    • Since this was promoted to GA status on January 10 but was nominated until January 20, this is technically ineligible for DYK even taking into account the built-in extension. However, as a first-time author, and 10 days being close enough to nine days, we can probably let it slide.
    The main issue at the moment is hook. Isn't that theme about rational characters facing adversary very common and not specific to Wei's work? As currently written, it may not meet DYKINT, so a different angle may be needed here.
    Other than that, I did not find any close paraphrasing, and the article is properly sourced and meets DYKCOMPLETE. For now I did not do any of the usual hook checks as I am waiting for alternative hook proposals first. Please ping me once you come up with new hooks. Given that the article is already technically ineligible, this is more at risk of being rejected entirely if new hooks are not provided (since this isn't a case of "the article or nomination is otherwise eligible or close enough"). Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:21, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I find the hook interesting, but how about ALT1: ... that the films of Wei Shujun often meditate on the process of making films for the Chinese cinema industry? Feel free to adjust iff you will. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 09:12, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you. That's better, but I'm not sure if "meditate" is the best word here. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:25, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Narutolovehinata5, are you asking me to think of another word or do you have one in mind? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 09:42, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    "Meditate" seems like the wrong word because, as far as I can understand, he covers the industry and does not "meditate" it. "Meditate" sounds like he's overseeing a dispute. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:36, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    You appear to be confusing wikt:meditate with wikt:mediate Narutolovehinata5. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:02, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    My bad. It's still weird though, because when I think of "meditate", I think of meditation (the relaxing thing), not as in "dealing with". Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:19, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, now you now the difference between meditating and meditating on something, as with here. Is wverything ready to progress this nominarion, Narutolovehinata5? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:38, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    No, because a new hook wording has not yet been proposed. I would suggest going with a more "accessible" or at least "natural" word. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:00, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    And what are you waiting for Narutolovehinata5? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:05, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Please propose a new hook and/or make the necessary changes to the article. This can move forward once that is done. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:07, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    No, this can move forward once you tell me what words feel natural to you Narutolovehinata5. You don't want to understand the basic and original meaning of meditate; that's not my problem, so you can think of a word you do know about. Go look at a thesaurus and come back to me. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:24, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    This is getting out of hand. My request was simply to ask for a minor change to a hook, one that could have easily been done without snarky comments. I would have approved this nomination yesterday if that had already been done. I know what meditation is, that is not a reason to have this kind of attitude. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:29, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I do not know which words you don't understand. Please either find something that suits you Narutolovehinata5, or leave this nomination for someone who has a basic sense of decency. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:41, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I do not understand the hostility. All I asked was for the word "meditate" to be changed to something else. The only reason why I did not is because I was not sure exactly which one, there are many other possible options. One option is "deal", but I'm not sure if that is the best word either, only that it isn't "meditate". Another option could be "cover". I know you mean well, but please do not berate or attack reviewers and commenters for having opinions you do not agree with. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:45, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    An unhelpful attitude often causes irritation and hostility. You could have saved us all this blather by simply saying "I prefer the phrasing ALT1a: ... that the films of Wei Shujun often deal with the process of making films for the Chinese cinema industry?" around six comments ago, but instead we had to pretend you'd lost the ability to think. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:55, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    First session of the United Nations General Assembly

    (
    )
    5x expanded by Raydann (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 6 past nominations.

    ❯❯❯ Raydann(Talk) 20:06, 15 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    General: Article is new enough and long enough

    Policy compliance:

    Hook eligibility:

    • Cited: No - Several comments:
      • ALT0: Can you please provide the relevant quote from the source?
      • ALT1: The source provided here and in the article are both primary sources. Are there secondary sources for this quote?
      • ALT2: Two things. The URL suggests that this source was retrieved using ChatGPT. Also, are there any secondary sources? This appears to be a governmental blog.
    • Interesting: Yes
    QPQ: Done.

    Overall: @Raydann: Good effort on the article, but I saw a few issues that should be resolved first. Epicgenius (talk) 17:00, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Not a Bad Thing

    (
    )
    • Reviewed:
    Improved to Good Article status by RedShellMomentum (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    RedShellMomentum 05:37, 10 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    Among the two, the second hook is probably the better option. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 06:25, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Ltbdl: Do you see anything else usable here? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:17, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    no, sorry. ltbdl (select) 00:45, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Given that, regrettably there does not appear to be a path forward for this nomination at this time. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:06, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Articles created/expanded on January 11

    [edit]

    Lan Yu (general)

    (
    )
    • ... that approximately 20,000 people were executed in the purges which followed Lan Yu's downfall?
    • Source: Langlois (1988), p. 172.
    Improved to Good Article status by Min968 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 91 past nominations.

    ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:33, 20 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    General: Article is new enough and long enough

    Policy compliance:

    • Adequate sourcing: Yes
    • Neutral: Yes
    • Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing: No - I've noticed some potentially close paraphrasing, particularly of Goodrich & Fang 1976, which is relied on quite heavily for this article. Specifically, the article fairly closely matches this book's bio of Lan on a line-by-line basis. Perhaps additional sources could be used to break up those passages and make it less paraphrasy.
    Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
    QPQ: Done.

    Overall: I made a few minor edits as I was verifying the sources in the article. Axem Titanium (talk) 22:49, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    @AirshipJungleman29: dropping a quick ping to the nominator since it has been a month. Axem Titanium (talk) 00:13, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Min968, do you think you can address the above concern? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:41, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    @Axem Titanium: I am not sure whether you could identify which sections contain close paraphrasing. Min968 (talk) 11:46, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Yes, of course. It's primarily the paragraphs which have Goodrich & Fang as the only citation. For example, in the two paragraphs starting with "In November 1378" and ending with "Prince of Shu", the article discusses the same events in the same order with the same diversions as the first paragraph on page 789 of Goodrich & Fang. This continues further into the next paragraph of the article, which parallels the next two paragraphs of Goodrich & Fang p. 789, except for the citation to History of Ming in the last sentence.
    I understand that this is a biographical article documenting events that happened chronologically and you can't change that. The thing that raises warning bells to me is when the editorializing also appears in the same place, for example, "but most of them were later executed as members of Lan's conspiracy" appears in the article in the exact same place as where Goodrich & Fang refer to the future event within their telling. This is where multiple sources would benefit the article: different historians will highlight different events as key to this person's life and going back-and-forth between them will naturally break up the proseline effect that comes with citing one source repeatedly. Axem Titanium (talk) 22:59, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Alone on the Wall

    (
    )
    Converted from a redirect by Verylongandmemorable (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    [[User:Verylongandmemorable]] (talk) 08:15, 17 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    • Date, QPQ, spotchecks, are good. Hook is fine. What I am somewhat concerned about is size. Yes, it's 500 words of prose, beyond stub, but 2/3 of it is unrefenced plot/contents summary. I am somewhat concerned that this content may not be elibible for size count, although I'll ask at WT:DYK to be sure. If possible, I'd suggest expanding the reception section to more than one-line summary of what did the reviewers say. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:41, 21 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks for your review! I've expanded the article with a background section, bringing it to a total of 4200 characters of prose. The plot/contents section is 1800 bytes, so it meets the DYK length requirement only counting the cited sections. I hope this is acceptable. I could also add citations to the plot summary for the relevant page numbers in the book (WP:PLOTREF states this can be helpful but is not required), though this would take me some time. [[User:Verylongandmemorable]] (talk) 05:49, 1 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Articles created/expanded on January 13

    [edit]

    Taiwan Love Story⁵

    (
    )
    • ... that a visual novel set in Taiwan in 2024 is produced by a Hong Konger?
    • Source: https://gnn.gamer.com.tw/detail.php?sn=271382 , quotation: "特別我是香港人，從外地人的眼光來看待台灣，可以找到很多本地人已經習慣，但外地人覺得有趣的地方。", translation: "Especially since I'm from Hong Kong, looking at Taiwan from an outsider's perspective, I can find many things that locals are used to but outsiders find interesting."
    • ALT1: ... that a visual novel released in 2024 has its own theme song? Source: https://gnn.gamer.com.tw/detail.php?sn=271382 , quotation: "聽說這次還特地製作主題曲，也是受到台灣文化影響嗎？蕭：是的。", translation: "Q: I heard that a theme song was specially created for this project. Was it influenced by Taiwanese culture? A: Yes."
    • ALT2: ... that an adult visual novel released in 2024 is set in Taiwan? Source: https://gnn.gamer.com.tw/detail.php?sn=271382 , quotation: "本作正如其名，是以台灣為背景，借鏡 90 年代偶像劇風格的環島尋愛故事。", translation: "As its name suggests, this work is set in Taiwan and is a love story that takes inspiration from 1990s idol dramas."
    • Reviewed:
    • Comment: I have thought of some other hooks, but I'm not very sure.
    Created by Saimmx (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    Saimmx (talk) 18:19, 13 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    @Saimmx: Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:30, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Narutolovehinata5: I have wondered once, but the "stylistic" part of Fifth power (⁵) appeared almost everywhere when mentioning the game, including reliable sources - not only the official website and Steam, but also UDN, gamer.com and vndb. I can't find any reason to change the fifth power mark in terms of reliable sources. I will say that in Chinese Wikipedia, where the original article comes from, stylistic characters are preferable (条目名称应尽可能使用拉丁字母，对于非拉丁字母的语言应使用拉丁字母转写...如有充足的中文来源描述条目主题，应使用这些来源中的写法；即使这种写法不符合上述关于罗马化的规定，也应采用。, see also zh:WP:COMMONNAME), but I am not sure if MOS:TITLE here is more preferable than reliable sources' coverage. --Saimmx (talk) 05:14, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    It might be worth bringing up at the relevant talk page, or perhaps you can start a requested move discussion and see where it goes. For what it's worth, the Chinese and English Wikipedias have different guidelines and standards, so what applies there may not necessarily apply here (and vice-versa). I do remember though that one of the MOSes outright included superscript and subscript titles as examples of stylizations to avoid. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 05:25, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Saimmx: MOS:TE mentions the similar case of Alien 3 (which is stylized as ALIEN³), where the title and all mentions of it outside the lede use the non-stylized name. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 15:13, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I have a question - By your understanding of MOS:TE, do you believe that Ranma ½ should be "Ranma 1/2" (or "Ranma half", rather)? And how about DNA²? Should the work be "DNA 2" or "DNA2" as well? I wonder the reason why no one mentioned those names. --Saimmx (talk) 15:28, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Saimmx: I'm not sure about those specific cases, I'm just going by what MOS says. My suggestion is to start an RM discussion and see where consensus ends up going. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 15:31, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Articles created/expanded on January 15

    [edit]

    Annie Stainer

    (
    )
    • ... that during her solo shows, Annie Stainer "would appear to fly, by delicately and continuously undulating her arms as if they were remarkable wings"?
    • Source: "At childhood ballet classes, Annie had been reprimanded for her “broken arms” – this physical attribute would later become a feature of her celebrated solo shows. She would appear to fly, by delicately and continuously undulating her arms as if they were remarkable wings. This skill for physical shapeshifting was strengthened by her studies in dance in 1968 at the London School of Contemporary Dance and in mime with Etienne Decroux in Paris (1970-71), and complemented by an innate talent for storytelling, which helped establish her as a spellbinding performer" The Guardian
    5x expanded by Thriley (talk), Victuallers (talk), and Altenmann (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 205 past nominations.

    Thriley (talk) 21:54, 23 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    • QPQ=Pany Yathotou
    • The article is long enough and was expanded 8 days before the nomination. We can probably accept that as a sufficiently recent expansion. It looks good and seems to cover the subject's career well enough. I see no copyright or neutrality issues. QPQ is done. I believe the hook would be much more interesting if, instead of quoting the Guardian journalist, it explained how her "broken arms" or ability to undulate her arms became her signature move or something like that. Surtsicna (talk) 09:30, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    @Surtsicna: Thanks for the review so far. If you want to add an alt hook then that's fine. I avoided "broken arms" as I felt that someone would want to argue that her arms were not broken. Are you insisting that we create this alt hook? Victuallers (talk) 09:25, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Cow mortality

    (
    )
    • ... that In some herd studies, nearly half of the cows that died did so within the first month after giving birth, often with a large share in just the first few days?
    • Reviewed:
    • Comment: (first ever nomination attempt)
    Created by SeldomSeldom (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    SeldomSeldom (talk) 19:47, 17 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    • Comment: @SeldomSeldom: Hi. Welcome to the DYK, thank you for your contributions. You have created a page from multiple study papers, that is good. I will be reviewing your article within a week, currently I am providing short comments only. This is a new enough article and nominated two days after creation, and it requires to be de-orphaned. Earwig copyvio tool shows 0.0%, and QPQ is not required. Hook seems interesting but needs to be rephrased for easy understanding otherwise it may appear confusing; although it is sourced. Thank you and all the best! M. Billoo 09:47, 25 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • References #3 and #5 are identical, you can consider removing one of them. M. Billoo 06:02, 27 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • @SeldomSeldom: I was just wondering that the citation and hook you used here are nowhere in the main page. Can you please look into this? Is your page really complete, or is there more to add? Some of your points/clauses appear potentially unsourced; if you believe your page depends upons the references you have used, then please re-order the references ahead of each clause/sentence it supports as per the WP:INLINE citations. Thank you! M. Billoo 02:36, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hi @M. Billoo, thank you for bringing up this issue. When creating the article, I compiled a list of links I might be able use, and ended up not using the (sciencedirect) one during drafting. However, it seems like I forgot which ones WERE used, and deduced that this might be a cool nomination. I will review my article and fit relevant info, using this link and relevant external info. Also, is there a deadline to get to final stages of this process? Thanks for the heads up!
    @SeldomSeldom: Do not worry, please see WP:DYKTIMEOUT. Thank you. M. Billoo 18:27, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @M.Billoo2000:, thanks for the feedback. I’ve now added the ScienceDirect reference, The page (should) now be complete and properly sourced. Any other steps before final submission? SeldomSeldom
    @SeldomSeldom: Please use WP:INLINE citations. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) M. Billoo 03:09, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • @SeldomSeldom: Your reference #2 here is written as Periparturient Dairy Cow Mortality: Timing and Risk Factors, but it actually points to Necropsy-based study on dairy cow mortality—Underlying causes of death. Please correct this.
    Most of the citations belong to the studies in the continents of America, but only one is from Finland. Do these really present a worldwide point-of-view? If not, then I think the contents in the article should specifically reflect this, because currently, there is only one mention of a study of pasture‑based dairy farms in Uruguay, and one mention of large surveys in the United States within the article.
    When I say WP:INLINE, it means that every claim inside the article, whether a prose/paragraph or a bullet point, should be supported with the respective reference(s) ahead. And currently, you have 14 paragraphs and points, out of which only 7 have an INLINE citation, excluding the MOS:LEAD which generally does not require inline citation because it is extracted from the article body.
    You may also consider seeing WP:SYNTH, if it is implying here or not, that multiple different studies have been collected and tried to be presented as one article.
    Awaiting your response, thank you! M. Billoo 02:47, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • @M.Billoo2000: Apologies for the inactivity,, thank you again for reaching out and for the feedback. I’ve decided not to continue with the DYK nomination for now, it’s a bit more challenging than I expected for my first try. I still want the article to be useful and accurate, so should every single issue listed above be corrected to the worldwide view, even if I’m not doing the nomination? Thanks again for your help and patience! SeldomSeldom (talk)

    Articles created/expanded on January 17

    [edit]

    Curitiba Pride

    (
    )
    1st Curitiba Diversity Parade in 1995
    1st Curitiba Diversity Parade in 1995
    Created by Questionadora ávida (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    Abesca (talk) 18:04, 24 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    • Article long enough, created within the window (nominated on 24 Jan, which is the seventh day from its creation on 17 Jan -- I don't think we usually split hairs about the hours), fully cited and generally in good shape. QPQ not required. The image is a bit of a problem: it's Public Domain in Brazil, but also needs to be PD in the United States for us to host it on Commons: unless someone has explicitly released the rights to it, it almost certainly isn't. You could upload a local version to Wikipedia to solve this. However, I would suggest running any hook without this particular picture, which doesn't display well at small scale.
    I'm not convinced that the current hooks pass WP:DYKINT: surely the first Pride parade in Brazil had to happen somewhere, so why is it interesting that it happened here? I must admit I'm struggling to find good alternatives in the article, but am happy to help workshop them. UndercoverClassicist T·C 15:20, 25 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Looking through the article here, I have to agree. The "first" hooks both need strong sourcing per WP:DYKHOOKCITE, while the article is currently lacking in usable hooky material. Maybe if the article is expanded further, more hooks could be suggested. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 03:09, 26 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    A curiosity could be that it used the acronym GLT in 1995, which is a uncommon term still currently. And that it was changed to just diversity. There are other pictures from Commons. Abesca (talk) 18:47, 1 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    There might be something in the "Diversity" name change -- do we have any idea why they made this change? Does the event now encompass more communities than "just" LGBT+? UndercoverClassicist T·C 19:22, 1 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Pinging article creator Questionadora ávida and nominator Abesca for their input here. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:52, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    According to the source, it was only changed because of organization organizing it changed in 2005. It's said that the original acronym was GLT in 1995, which is an uncommon initialism. At that time, LGBT wasn't regularly official, until 2008, in which they changed from GLBT to LGBT. Probably because of so many inconsistent acronyms popped up that they changed, but I couldn't find any reported instance/source saying specifically that. ~~
    So what about:

    Abesca (talk) 03:03, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Hands off Greenland protests

    (
    )
    Make America Go Away (MAGA) hat
    Make America Go Away (MAGA) hat
    • Source: "Red baseball caps spoofing Donald Trump’s Maga hats have become a symbol of Danish and Greenlandic defiance against the US president’s threat to seize the frozen territory."[15]
    Created by VitoxxMass (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 278 past nominations.

    Surtsicna (talk) 13:55, 21 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    @Rollinginhisgrave: What particular wording would you suggest then? ~2026-32351-0 (talk) 21:50, 22 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Maybe something like: ... that Greenlanders began producing Make America Go Away hats (pictured) in response to Donald Trump's push for the US to annex the island? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 14:51, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Rollinginhisgrave and Surtsicna: Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:37, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I do not think the readers will get it if we do not spell out MAGA, Narutolovehinata5. But if it is smug to do so, so be it. Surtsicna (talk) 20:47, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't think the original hook was "smug", but I can see it as being editorializing. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:30, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Ditto Naruto. Bremps... 22:56, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Tolkien: Man and Myth

    (
    )
    Created by Piotrus (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 580 past nominations.

    Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:07, 18 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]


    General: Article is new enough and long enough

    Policy compliance:

    Hook eligibility:

    • Cited: No - See below.
    • Interesting: Yes
    QPQ: Done.

    Overall: Article created on 17 January, and meets the length requirement. All sources are, as far as I can tell, reliable for the material they are cited for. There are no obvious neutrality issues. Earwig reveals no outright copyvio and I didn't spot any instances of unacceptably WP:Close paraphrasing—though it gets a bit close at times, as summarizing book reviews is wont to. The hook is interesting (enough), but I don't think it quite conveys the same thing the source does ("Tolkien : Man and Myth makes an important contribution to the literature regarding Tolkien, especially for those who seek to understand Tolkien from a religious perspective."—the person rather than his work). I also don't think "recognized" is an appropriate word to use like this in the hook; "described" or similar would be fine. QPQ has been done. Some comments about the content:

    • This may be a bit indelicate to ask, but did you use an LLM to help write/copyedit this? Some of the phrasings feel sort of AI-typical (e.g. Pearce’s book is thus seen as highlighting Tolkien’s role in reaffirming the cultural and spiritual importance of myth, suggesting that without myths and legends, modern humanity risks losing a sense of meaning, origin, and direction.).
    • especially for readers interested in the religious dimensions of Tolkien’s work – as noted above, what the source says is "especially for those who seek to understand Tolkien from a religious perspective". It is of course common to use the name of an author metonymically to refer to their work, but that seems too much of an WP:INTERPRETATION here since the review notes that the book is both about Tolkien the person and his literary work.
    • Wojciech Chudziński [pl] the Polish translation of the book – there seems to be a word missing here.
    • Bradley J. Birzer writes in The J. R. R. Tolkien Encyclopedia that scholars had hardly discussed Tolkien's Catholicism until Pearce's Tolkien: Man and Myth – not quite what the source says ("Between 1984 and 1998, very little appeared specifically discussing Tolkien's Catholicism or the religious symbolism within his legendarium"). It might work to describe Birzer's point as similar to Caldecott's rather than the other way round, depending on the exact phrasing.
    • it is focused on several aspects of Tolkien's life, such as his religiosity – I don't quite get this from the cited source ("with lively enthusiasm it evoked the spirit of the man, justified the popular poll that made him the “author of the century” and revealed the central importance of his faith").

    Ping Piotrus. TompaDompa (talk) 19:54, 22 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    • @TompaDompa: In order. First. Since I am not a native speaker, I use tools to refine my prose - Grammarly until recently, trying various AI tools these days. Second. I am afraid I fail to see the difference - I think my text is an accurate summary, but I am happy to consider alternatives if you have ideas on better phrasing. Upon rereading this several times, I got the point, I think, and replaced the phrasing with quotation. Third - missing word - yes, fixed. Just like in my second point, I am unsure how it is inaccurate or can be improved, outside of verbatim quotation and adding the "religious symbolism within his legendarium". Fourth. Likewise. I think this is a good if simplified summary, albeit yes, focusing on the last segment "evealed the central importance of his faith". Again, I am happy to consider and likely apply an specific fixes you have in mind, but I am not sure how to fix them myself. PS. I am proposing ALT0a with "described" instead of "recognized", per your suggestion. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:14, 23 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • ALT0a... that a biography of Tolkien, Tolkien: Man and Myth, was described as particularly valuable for readers interested in the religious dimensions of his work? Source: https://www.jstor.org/stable/45296776
      • ALT0a is better, though it still says "interested in the religious dimensions of his work" where the source says "understand Tolkien from a religious perspective". Again, it's possible to interpret the source as talking specifically about Tolkien's work, but it is equally possible to interpret it as talking about Tolkien as a person, and we shouldn't be making an editorial decision to interpret it either way.
      • Birzer does not say that there was a lack of discussion before this book, only that there was a lack of such discussion between 1984 and 1998. Birzer brings up Jared Lobdell's England and Always: Tolkien's World of the Rings (1981) as an earlier example. On the other hand, Caldecott writes that "Tolkien's Catholicism had been largely ignored as somehow irrelevant to an understanding of the great novel" until this book and Pearce's later Tolkien: A Celebration.
      • I don't think "it is focused on several aspects of Tolkien's life" is an accurate summary of "it evoked the spirit of the man". I think it would be fine to write, for instance, "Caldecott noted that Peace's work is not intended to be a comprehensive biography, rather, among other things, it gives focus to Tolkien's religiosity." TompaDompa (talk) 18:16, 25 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
      • @TompaDompa: Thank you; I c/e-ed the article to address your concerns, and how about ALT0b below, using a direct quote? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:18, 1 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • ALT0b... that a biography of Tolkien, Tolkien: Man and Myth, was described as particularly valuable for readers interested in "understand[ing] Tolkien from a religious perspective"? Source: https://www.jstor.org/stable/45296776
    • The nomination has been pulled per this discussion, which raised DYKCOMPLETE concerns. This will be re-approved once that is addressed. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:06, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Articles created/expanded on January 18

    [edit]

    Nun ruhen alle Wälder

    (
    )
    • ... that "Nun ruhen alle Wälder", a 1647 song that Catherine Winkworth translated as "Now all the woods are sleeping", is part of Protestant hymnals and of songbooks? Source: several
      • Reviewed: Cimpoi
      • Comment: open to ideas - it's to a famous melody that Bach used a lot, and entered the Catholic hymnal late, and one stanza became an evening prayer for children
    Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 2170 past nominations.

    Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:47, 23 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    • Given the request for hook ideas, here are a few:
    The issue is that I checked the source and it doesn't seem to explicitly say that Frederick called the song "stupid": could you point to me the relevant part then? Maybe the article wording doesn't exactly match the source yet. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 03:16, 26 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    He didn't call the song stupid. It was one line "es schläft die ganze Welt" (the whole world is sleeping") which he - as others from the "enlightened" period - saw in conflict to knowing that the world was round and "sleeping" at different times, if "sleping" at all. I would not build a hook on one personal view (however important that person is) which shows that one person's limited access to poetic freedom. All ALTs don't provide an idea what the topic is about, besides "a song". Can you say positively what is special about this song? Perhaps listen? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:42, 26 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    ALT3: ... that "Nun ruhen alle Wälder", a 1647 song that Catherine Winkworth translated as "Now all the woods are sleeping", entered the Catholic Gotteslob in 2013?
    ALT3a: ... that "Nun ruhen alle Wälder", a 1647 evening song by Paul Gerhardt, entered the Catholic Gotteslob in 2013?
    Te special thing about the song is that it is not the typical hymn, and therefore made it to very secular German songbooks (but these are not known in English) and it made it - late, very late - even to the Catholic hymnal ;9 - and all the editors who included it in their many and very different collections didn't think it was stupid ;) - Providing the translation gives an easy-to-see explanation for the so-called stupidity: woods are not "sleeping", nor "resting", as a more literal translation would say. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:58, 26 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Adjusting the hook then, although the article will need to be adjusted accordingly based on what you said:
    ALT3a ... that Frederick the Great called a line from "Nun ruhen alle Wälder stupid?
    Personally, do not think that a song entering a hymnal is by itself interesting to a broad audience, and I imagine reviewers would agree with that assessment. Finally, you keep saying you are open to ideas in your nominations, but when other editors do suggest hook ideas or angles, you tend to object to them anyway. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:08, 26 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    We had an edit conflict. I wrote (in explanation, not as a response), but it is a response:
    In German, what the King wrote is given word for word: "„Ein jeder kann bei Mir glauben, was er will, wenn er nur ehrlich ist. Was die Gesangbücher angeht, so stehet einem jedem frey zu singen: Nun ruhen alle Wälder, oder dergleichen dummes und thörichtes Zeug mehr. Aber die Priester müssen die Toleranz nicht vergessen, denn ihnen wird keine Verfolgung gestattet werden.“ , my version of the passage in question: "... everybody is free to sing "Nun ruhen alle Wälder", or similar stupid and nonsense stuff ...". Deepl says "silly and foolish". Perhaps Moonraker can give us a better idiomatic translation (perhaps worthy to enter the article)?
    So, no, he didn't call one line so, but used that one title as an example for a group, whether we say stupid, silly, fooish or nonsense. Whatever (and it feels like I said this hundred times): I don't ever want to introduce a subject by only something negative. Have you listened? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:24, 26 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    You said you will never introduce that kind of hook, and that's fine. You are free to suggest the hooks you want, and others are free to chime in with their own ideas. In any case, it is still the reviewer who will ultimately decide on a hook, whether it is your wording or another editor's proposal. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:38, 26 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    "Nun ruhen alle Wälder" is so lovely, I can't go along with the thought. But for dummes und thörichtes I like "stupid and foolish" better, as "silly" is more shouty. For dergleichen, how about a plainer "such" or "suchlike"? Moonraker (talk) 09:43, 26 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Narutolovehinata5, I know you believe that reviewers decide on hooks. As I understand it, they can only rule out a hook if it is somehow against policy. They do not get to insist on new ones they like better. Moonraker (talk) 09:51, 26 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I proposed a hook, so I cannot review the nomination. Yes, hooks can be ruled out if they do not meet guidelines, and WP:DYKINT (interestingness to a broad audience) is one of them. If a hook is thought not to be interesting enough, such hooks can be rejected. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:01, 26 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    The song has proved enduring (despite what the King said) and endearing (as Moonraker said), and to only quote the King is misleading, and we should perhaps have a guideline to avoid that, if you ask me. I see that quite generally, something negative causes more interest, but it's still not my way. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:15, 26 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Gerda, what you are trying to do with ALT1 is great, but I want to see it combined with ALT2. Let me think about how to best do this. Viriditas (talk) 22:07, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Perhaps something like ALT4: ... that in a song by Paul Gerhardt, the whole world is said to be asleep at the same time, an idea Frederick the Great mocked during the Enlightenment?
    (edit conflict, the following was written when it still said "claimed") :: Thank you for thinking, but I don't think that our "general reader" knows that King without a link, nor the meaning of Enlightenment without a link, and the key thing - that this old song is still "alive" inspite of some King's mocking - is not obvious at all. Also, even someone not reading German can guess the rhythm of the song from the title, which gets lost when piped. Also, I don't think that a poetic phrase is best described as a "claim"; - imagine if later poetry was taken literally ... Food for thought, in case you want to think further.
    After edit conflict: I need sleep now. The phrase didn't mean "the world ... at the same time", but "the world around the person reflecting", - why should we focus on a misunderstanding? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:23, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    More openness in suggested hook wordings, or at least flexibility in accepting suggestions instead of being rigid on what exact wordings and facts you want to see, would help your nominations be approved faster. ALT4 is a fine hook to me, and if you can agree to that wording, this should breeze through review. @Viriditas: To clarify, has the discrepancy between the article and the source been addressed already? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:54, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I appreciate your thoughts. I am open to adversarial collaboration, provided both parties are working in good faith towards the same outcome. Working styles vary, which is where the friction often arises. I'm less interested in how we get from A to B, just as long as we get there. For others, they are only concerned about those precise steps, not the destination itself, and I think that's a particular concern of Gerda's. She wants to get to B a certain way, and that's fine. My presentation of ALT4 wasn't "this is it", but more of "can you build on this and improve it?" I don't think Gerda likes that approach, so I might have to tailor my response in the future. Viriditas (talk) 09:25, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you. I am open to thoughtful exchange, and there's no rush for this song. (We are not going for a 300th anniversary as for Easter Oratorio. Let readers wonder why that will probably be posted for the piece's 301st anniversary.) The career of this song was roughly as follows:
    • 17th century: an evening song is written, from the perspective of a childlike person, mixing observations and reflection, successful in many hymnals.
    • 18th century: the song gets ridiculed because the observations are read as if they were science, and the "foolish" song gets barely tolerated.
    • 19th century: the song gets translated into English, matching romantic and spiritual interests.
    • 20th century: the song gets interesting even for secular collections, as in the right mood for folk singing, making it popular.
    • 21st century: the song finally enters a Catholic hymnal (which is an almost quirky final twist).
    This is an unusual career, and if it was about a living person, we would not want to stay with only a negative aspect, and I am willing to argue against doing so for however long it may take, for this topic and others.
    ALT5: ... that "Nun ruhen alle Wälder" ("Now all the woods are sleeping")", a song regarded as foolish by a King of Prussia, became acceptable to the German Catholic hymnal in 2013?
    I am open to variants from the "career" that don't give that King the only or the last word ;)
    I could translation of the part of "Satan devouring" quoted in the famous (at least in Germany famous) novel (which will also have offended the Enlightenment period), but am afraid that it would become the new "only negative" focus. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:58, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Speaking just from a RPOV (reader POV), I don't like reading both German and English in a hook that is supposed to be terse and succinct; anywhere else, I have no problem. So I recommend folding the two into an English title like this: "... that a song originally regarded as foolish by Frederick the Great later became acceptable to the German Catholic hymnal in 2013?" You don't have to do it like that. My point is that you should do it in a similar way. As for that specific hook, I can envision several additional variations. Also, have you checked to make sure the claim about the eighth stanza matches the so-called prayer? I think they may be out of sync. Viriditas (talk) 21:59, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I am a friend of original unpiped names (of people and things), and of also something transporting the meaning in English, quite generally so, but specifically in this case, where the sleeping or resting of forests explains why some may think "foolish". I still don't think readers will know Frederick the Great (having been told that they will not know Verdi and Puccini), but may know Prussia, and that Prussia belongs to a former time. I don't see how "originally" matches Frederick when it's about hundred years later than when the song was written. ALT5 is a compromise, because I wouldn't mention Frederick at all. We could keep this simple, and let readers decide if they think the content is foolish or not:
    ALT0a: ... that "Nun ruhen alle Wälder", a 1647 evening song by Paul Gerhardt, was translated by Catherine Winkworth as "Now all the woods are sleeping"?
    Regarding the prayer, I numbered the verses to make sure it's the right one, the one that ends with the angels singing that this child may be safe ("unverletzlich": Deepl gives me "inviolable" which I never heard, or "invulnerable"). It's a rare word in German already, "unverwundbar" = "invulnerable" would be more common, but "Verletzung" has more of a double meaning of both "injury" and "infringement". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:50, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Great. My only problem with ALT0a is it isn't interesting. But, I like your idea of moving on to a new hook and keeping it simple. Viriditas (talk) 23:02, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Define "interesting". It's a pacifying soft slumber song, bzzt. Can only loud, bizarr, eccentric things be interesting? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:08, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    You are preaching to the choir! Interesting in this case would mean something unusual and unexpected. Viriditas (talk) 23:17, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    If we are looking for a terse hook, wouldn't a simplified version of ALT4 also work? I don't think that a general reader would find a German song being translated to English by itself would be interesting. I also don't think that just being added to a hymnal by itself is interesting without additional context (for example, if the song was once controversial for other reasons). The Frederick the Great angle seems to be the best option here, and ideally the best hook here would be one that focuses solely on that aspect, instead of adding extra unnecessary details. @Viriditas: if you don't mind, maybe you can also elaborate more on the "think of the general reader" aspect here? Any hook needs to focus on that, after all. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:29, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I am referring to readability in general. We should emphasize the familiar, a "German song" or equivalent, instead of the unfamiliar, "Nun ruhen alle Wälder" ('Now all the woods are sleeping')". The other way to approach this is to move the unfamiliar info to the end of the hook. Viriditas (talk) 23:36, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    So something like ...
    I'm however not convinced that a general reader would find the translated title angle interesting. I'm also still lost as to why the German title must be included when the hook works without it being mentioned by name. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:43, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I wouldn't link the non-article link in the beginning, as that will steal visits away from the main link. And I wouldn't focus on just the negative aspect, as Gerda has already stated is her preference. We should try to tailor new hooks to what the original nominator prefers. Viriditas (talk) 01:16, 30 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Viriditas: So something like:
    While we should try to accommodate nominators' wishes whenever possible, there are times when doing so would be counterproductive, such as them preferring a hook angle that fails interestingness guidelines or other issues. Hopefully we can reach a compromise on this, as it is still a pretty interesting song based on the article. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:23, 30 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, I know, we've had this discussion before. But I think you should go out your way to meet Gerda in the middle. Viriditas (talk) 03:21, 30 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Viriditas: Throwing some more ideas here. For meeting in the middle, ALT4b is one option, since it mentioned the adding to the Catholic hymnal fact which she liked. On the other hand, we could also try something like:
    Perhaps there could be other phrasings, but trying to reach a compromise here. I'm open to hearing other suggestions, or even a different hook angle if necessary. ALT5b is over 193 characters, but it's difficult to write a hook that mentions both the German title (which Gerda wants mentioned), and the Frederick the Great aspect. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 03:29, 30 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for thinking while I slept. How is this (because of the chronological order, and why "once"):
    ALT5d: ... that "Nun ruhen alle Wälder", an evening song by Paul Gerhardt mocked as foolish by Frederick the Great, was tranaslated by Catherine Winkworth? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:38, 30 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Charles Lecomte, Grand Council of French Equatorial Africa

    ( Comment or view )
    • Source: Bernault, Florence. Démocraties ambiguës en Afrique centrale: Congo-Brazzaville, Gabon, 1940-1965. Karthala, 1996. pp. 139, 170
    Moved to mainspace by Soman (talk). Number of QPQs required: 2. Nominator has 450 past nominations.

    Soman (talk) 09:54, 20 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    QPQs good. Lecomte is long enough and new enough and its Earwig is clean. I gave it a copyedit and removed some surplus sections but I see no other blockers. I'll take the Grand Council article later, though I'll say now that ALT0 has a WP:SEAOFBLUE issue (I could probably approve ALT0a: ... that Grand Councillor of French Equatorial Africa and Catholic missionary Charles Lecomte renounced priesthood after being asked to leave the Vicariate of Brazzaville? but am all ears for other suggestions) and that I'll probably need a quote from the source if I can't find it in the Grand Council article. Also, why Vicariate rather than Archdiocese?--Launchballer 23:25, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Soman: Very sorry for the delay in reviewing the (long and new enough) Grand Council article. What kept me is that this deserves {{copyedit}} and {{overly detailed}} (and less critically {{lead too short}}), and I've tried several times to sort it out myself but kept giving up towards the end of "First elections...". Please ping me when you've rectified these.--Launchballer 06:18, 25 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    2026 is the new 2016

    (
    )
    Created by AdobongPogi (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    AdobongPogi masarap 🍛 03:37, 18 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    General: Article is new enough and long enough

    Policy compliance:

    Hook eligibility:

    • Cited: No - no
    • Interesting: No - no
    QPQ: None required.

    Overall: Where do I even start here. The hook idea here isn't cited or mentioned in the article whatsoever, which would make this hook misleading for guiding readers to a page that doesn't discuss this at all. As far as I am aware, this is an immediate failure. The article isn't neutrally worded at all; just in the lead alone, we have "It was amplified at the beginning of January 2026 when Grammy nominated Rapper, Fetty Wap’s publicist, Abesi PR posted “2016 is back.” Days later Fetty Wap re-emerged in New York after a three years hiatus. Tik Tok users instantly began posting 2026 is really 2016. TikTok did an instant reset to 2016. Almost overnight, TikTok began to sound and feel like a throwback 2016 reel". Confusing and unencyclopedic, especially that last sentence. The article cites Hello! Magazine, which if my source reliability highlighter script is to be believed, is not a reliable source (though I can't find an entry for it on WP:RSP). The image in the article doesn't seem to be relevant to the text really at all (see WP:IMAGEREL). The phrase "described the year as "golden" in her posts" doesn't have a source at the end of it and is also grammatically incorrect considering that it refers to multiple people. I also don't think that the hook used here, even if it were cited in the article, is that interesting of a fact. This should not appear on the main page. λ NegativeMP1 00:28, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    @NegativeMP1: WP:IMAGEREL is a redlink. Finnfrog99 (talk) 15:08, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Slightly harsh to give this an X (you probably mean WP:IMAGERELEVANCE), though I suggest that @AdobongPogi: address the above.--Launchballer 15:17, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Launchballer: I do apologize if my review was too harsh, but I'm still not fully sure this should be on DYK. There would have to be an article copyedit, new hooks proposed, source revising... at what point does a nomination fail normally? λ NegativeMP1 17:14, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Usually when it times out or a nominator doesn't respond.--Launchballer 01:17, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Hello @NegativeMP1, sorry for the delay. I removed the paragraph about Fetty Wap and TikTok (1) because it did not have a reliable source, and the statement that someone "described the year as golden in her posts" also lacked a reference, which I have now corrected. I verified this here (2) cited Hello! Magazine, a notable source used in other articles. The image I added in the "Origin and spread" section is relevant because it visually illustrate the use of 2016-style. I also included some images to give extra context. There's any fixes or recommendations that need to address? Thank you! AdobongPogi masarap 🍛 02:32, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    That Hello! is used in other articles does not make it usable here, and in fact WP:NPPSG describes it as a "celebrity tabloid with a reputation for fabrication". Very much not a reliable source. (And neither is WP:FORBESCON.)--Launchballer 02:59, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • @NegativeMP1: Please respond to the above concerns. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:05, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
      • Will take a further look when I'm in better conditions. λ NegativeMP1 12:42, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
        • @Narutolovehinata5 and Launchballer: I am taking a glance at the article now: the Hello! source is still in use, which I think remains a problem when even after the concerns were brought up. Some of the prose seems cleaned up and more suitable in that regard, but something about the article still seems "off". For example, the Reception section goes between present and active tense. This entire excerpt: "Shane O'Neill and Haben Kelati of The Washington Post, Generation Z appears particularly interested in this year. Kelati, an assistant editor for the paper's advice section, counts herself among those who remember 2016 fondly, while O'Neill, a millennial who writes the Seriously? newsletter, is less enthusiastic. The two talked about why 2016 still matters, why the trend is happening, and what we can learn from that year", feels really off. Some other parts of the article also feel off. Even if my initial concerns were resolved (sort-of), the Hello! source still being used and other parts of the article reading weirdly still suggests to me that this is not suitable for the front page. λ NegativeMP1 17:07, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    The Inklings (book)

    (
    )
    Created by Piotrus (talk).Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 582 past nominations.

    Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:28, 21 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    • Changed earlier pass per below. New enough (submitted within 3 days of creation, long enough (4819 characters). Independent secondary sources are cited in the form of book reviews. The reviewers' opinions are attributed appropriately and presented neutrally. Copyright violation doesn't seem to be a problem, though the summarization of the reviews is rather wordy and excessively long, such that some of the most interesting points get a bit buried and could use some editing so it sounds less mechanical. The hook is cited to a reliable source, although it seems we don't have access to the National Forum through Wikipedia Library so we can't access the continuation page of the journal article. Assuming good faith here. The hook is interested and the QPQ is done. Cielquiparle (talk) 05:39, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • Updating per comment from Launchballer: @Piotrus: Could you please 1) Provide a quote from the source you are citing for the hook, as the full ProQuest article is not accessible through Wikipedia Library (just the preview) per WP:DYKHOOK. And 2) Could you please edit the Review section so it sounds less formulaic and LLM-like? (Just saw that we now have at least one recent DYK nomination landing at the AI Cleanup board and would like to avoid that if at all possible, regardless of whether or not an LLM tool was used.) Thanks. Cielquiparle (talk) 19:47, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
      • PS. Good catch asking for a double check. The relevant quote, from page 2, is "Carpenter provides a necessarily rather skeletal account of the life and writings of Williams, including some very interesting quotations from previously unpublished letters, as a background to the role which he played in the affairs of the Inklings." Seems like my brain misfired - this refers to unpublished letters by Charles Williams, not Tolkien (whom I was thinking about while working on this book). As such, good save, and here's an ALT1, and an even safer ALT1a, since on third rereading I am not sure if it the review makes it clear who authored the latters (that said, see also this quote: "Carpenter has made effective use of the so-called “Lewis Papers,” the eleven volumes of typescript compiled by W. H. (“Warnie”) Lewis and now in the Wade Collection at Wheaton College, Illinois, as well as other unpublished materials."):
    • ALT1: that The Inklings by Humphrey Carpenter draws on previously unpublished letters by Charles Williams?
    • ALT1a: that The Inklings by Humphrey Carpenter draws on previously unpublished letters? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:46, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Adding another one as ALT1 and ALT1a didn't seem that exciting, many more are possible now with the expansion to the article:

    @Cielquiparle: Thanks for your help. I think the hooks you proposed are fine, and I can "adopt" them so you can approve them :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 00:14, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    This DYK needs a new reviewer please. Happy for new reviewer to take credit for this and start over fresh. Thanks. Cielquiparle (talk) 04:07, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Articles created/expanded on January 19

    [edit]

    Alonso Ramírez (pirate)

    (
    )
    Created by Caribbean H.Q. (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 5 past nominations.

    - Caribbean~H.Q. 22:38, 25 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    Review


    General: Article is new enough and long enough

    Policy compliance:

    • Adequate sourcing: No - There is much use of quotation marks but it's not clear if these are direct quotes, translations from Spanish, scare quotes or what. There seem to be plenty of citations in general but the nature of the quotes needs some explanation, please.
    • Neutral: Yes
    • Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing: No - Earwig doesn't indicate any problems. But the article is quite large and draws on numerous Spanish language sources. Please could the author say whether there has been any systematic translation from Spanish.
    • Other problems: No - I looked for an equivalent article in the Spanish language Wikipedia but couldn't find one. is there one? Why not? Why start this in English?

    Hook eligibility:

    Image eligibility:

    QPQ: Unknown
    Review is incomplete - please fill in the "status" field

    What is in quotes is directly quoted from the source, I did not use scare quotes. There has been no direct translation of anything else except for the letter in Note e, which was translated literally 1:1 so that it could be understood by the reader. The general prose was not translated, nor was it copied from anywhere else. The Spanish Wikipedia is not linked to our WikiProject, but it has less articles overall than the English one, and it was started here because I don't edit there. - Caribbean~H.Q. 19:11, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    There is an online copy of the source from where these quotes are taken at the Archive, if verification of provenance is needed. - Caribbean~H.Q. 19:29, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Caribbean H.Q.: Thanks for responding to my initial comments. I'm finding the review to be quite hard work and so some discussion may help. Here some points that occur to me so far:
    1. The article needs some copy-editing. Some words are misspelt - "tough" instead of "though" for example. I might guess at what is meant but I reckon the primary author should do this first. Another thing that seems needed is wikilinks to the many placenames. This may help get them in them in the customary English form, rather than Spanish. For example, Havana rather than Habana.
    2. I started considering the hooks to establish which should be the priority. The first hook about being considered fictional seems tricky because much of it seems to be speculation. And many parts of the narrative are still considered to be fabricated or distortions of the truth. So, it seems difficult to categorise it as 100% one thing or the other.
    3. The second hook about inspiring the novel seems straightforward but not the most interesting
    4. The third hook about being the first person from the Americas to circumnavigate the globe seems the most interesting but claims of a first are often unreliable and have a bad reputation at DYK. The conventional claimant for this title seems to be Robert Gray (sea captain) much later. We'd need quite good sources for this and careful wording.
    I need to go to bed now. Please give some thought to the copy-editing and I'll look further at the sources. I don't have good Spanish though and so may need to defer to someone who does.
    Andrew🐉(talk) 23:33, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Andrew Davidson: Hello Andrew and thanks for the review. I will do some copyediting. Re: the hooks, he was regarded as a creation of the novel's author, which is something that has been falsified with contemporary documents. I would say that is separate from how much of his testimony is true, considering that the parts in question are mostly those that would incriminate him if confessed. Regarding Captain Gray, he was definitely the first American (as in citizen of the United States) to do so, but Buscaglia uses the phrase "the first person from the New World known to have circumnavigated the globe" instead. Americas is used as a synonym for New World in the ALT hook. But I can understand the negative perception about "firsts" and still favor the first hook. - Caribbean~H.Q. 00:45, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Caribbean H.Q.: Ok, I'll focus on the first hook. I reckon its wording could be tighter and replacing "intercontinental journey" with "circumnavigation" would bring in that aspect too. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:19, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Andrew Davidson: I have completed a copy edit and linked the location names to their English form or, otherwise, to the name used as title for their articles here. - Caribbean~H.Q. 05:22, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Caribbean H.Q.: Thanks. I started rereading the article but immediately felt the urge to do more copy-editing -- linking press gang and pieces of eight, for example. Rather than list such issues, I feel it is better for me to make a copy-editing pass. As this will make me an author, I want to withdraw as the main reviewer, especially as I have difficulty with the Spanish sources too. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:58, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, I've tried some copy-editing of the lead and am much more comfortable doing that. As this activity will tend to improve my knowledge of the topic, I may comment further here, but leave the option of a new reviewer open to help keep it moving. Andrew🐉(talk) 12:34, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Andrew Davidson: Thanks for your feedback! - Caribbean~H.Q. 21:44, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    A new reviewer is required, please. Some understanding of Spanish would help. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:58, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Abdul Rahman Salama

    (
    )
    Salama in 2025
    Salama in 2025
    Created by Faldi00 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 10 past nominations.

    Faldi00 (talk) 18:57, 23 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    General: Article is new enough and long enough

    Policy compliance:

    Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
    Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
    QPQ: Done.

    Overall: The sentence " Al-Raqi played a significant role in the economic revival of Idlib city during HTS rule before the fall of the" is far too close to the source to be used. Watch for close paraphrasing, as even when we try to rephrase things, it is possible to accidentally violate the author's copyright.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 03:06, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]


    Articles created/expanded on January 21

    [edit]

    Twelve Angry Men (1955 play)

    (
    )
    • Source: "The first stage version was an adaptation of Rose’s television script by Sherman L. Sergel, one of the many members of his family who wrote for the Dramatic Publishing Company, which specialized in adapting for the stage works that in most cases had been initially written for other media." Price, Steven (2017). "Commentary". Twelve Angry Men. By Rose, Reginald. Methuen Drama
    "sold the stage rights to "Twelve Angry Men" to Dramatic Publishing Company, a Chicago- based publisher owned by the Sergel family." Rosenzweig, Phil. “A Life on Stage.” In Reginald Rose and the Journey of 12 Angry Men, 1st ed., 193–207. Fordham University Press, 2021
    Converted from a redirect by BrechtBro (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    BrechtBro (talk) 00:43, 24 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    • Is it more interesting if it's "written" instead of "created"? My thinking is that family businesses do a lot of things but playwriting is pretty unusual. What about something like this? (not naming/linking to Reginald Rose because there's a maintenance template there) —BrechtBro (talk) 16:59, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • ALT2: ... that amateurs can perform Twelve Angry Jurors and Twelve Angry Women because Reginald Rose didn't see a theatrical market for Twelve Angry Men in 1955 and sold the stage rights to a family business?
    • Source: "This is one explanation for the Sergel adaptation’s continuing popularity, but another is that the rights owners were willing to countenance additional changes that the original author could not accept. [...] The Dramatic Publishing Company was able to meet the problem of the gender imbalance in the original by licensing alternative texts and productions: those wishing to mount productions could now obtain Twelve Angry Women (published in 1983), or combine the two versions to create Twelve Angry Jurors. Rose, however, was unwilling to allow his original text to be altered in this way" Price, Steven (2017)
    • ALT3: ... that the play Twelve Angry Women exists because Reginald Rose had sold the rights to Twelve Angry Men in 1955 to a family business willing to make changes to the characters that Rose refused to?
    • Mmmm still a little skeptical. I think it does take up a bit of space; hooks are supposed to be as snappy as possible. And honestly, without people being intimately familiar with showbiz, people are unlikely to know that family businesses are uncommon in showbiz (esp with the barrier in time; things may have been different in the 1950s, idk). I consider myself reasonably well rounded but I wouldn't know that. And even if I did know that, imo it's still not like particularly interesting. grapesurgeon (talk) 01:01, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    "... that the play Twelve Angry Women exists because the original author sold the stage rights to Twelve Angry Men two years before it became a film?"
    receptive to any edits, just trying to get into the ballpark —BrechtBro (talk) 03:01, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • Taking a look at the article, there doesn't seem to be much more that is hooky, but perhaps a hook about how it is often confused for its more famous source material might work? I agree with Grapesurgeon that the family business angle is not working out, and the new hooks are far too long and complicated to be snappy for DYK purposes. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:09, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've given this some thought, and I'm not really sure if the article is a good fit for DYK at this time. The confusion angle is the best option, but it would require knowledge of the play to be interesting, and I'm not sure if it's well-known enough outside of the US for broad audiences to get the connection. From what I understand, the play is well-known in America, but we aren't just writing for American audiences. Having said that, the only wordings I can see in the article are something like:
    ALT3 ... that the 1955 play Twelve Angry Men has been confused for its more famous source material?
    ALT4 ... that a 1955 play adaptation of the teleplay Twelve Angry Men allows for all-women or mixed-gender casts?
    ALT4 especially can probably use wordsmithing, this is more about brainstorming ideas. My main concern about both hooks is that they would require familiarity with the source material, at least to me. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:25, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks for this Narutolovehinata5. Twelve Angry Men is very famous internationally (see Twelve Angry Men), both in English and translation on film and stage. The confusion is so thorough that the two distinct stage plays were discussed as the same dramatic work for over 15 years at what is now Twelve Angry Men (1964 play). So if that's the best tack, maybe a revision like:
    "... that the 1955 play Twelve Angry Men is frequently confused with adaptations of the film, which it predates by two years?"
    Last clause could be cut but it might punch up the interest factor. —BrechtBro (talk) 02:53, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    That works. I think keeping the clause would be fine. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:57, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @BrechtBro: Recent proposed hook is better, but grammar issue that causes confusion I think. "Which it predates" is supposed to refer to the film, but the preceding object is "adaptations of the film". Also, the article only talks about confusion between the two plays; doesn't talk about other adaptations being confused.
    How about this instead: ALT5 "... that the 1955 play Twelve Angry Men is frequently confused with another play that was based on the famous 1957 film by the same name?" It's still a little wordy so open for suggestions. grapesurgeon (talk) 05:39, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't share the grammar concern and think it adds to the hook but ok. I agree that "film of the same name" is more clear but I don't think it is necessary. can be added back but for what do you think? I'm using "versions" here as there are several distinct revisions of the later work, but "a later play" works if this adds ambiguity. "... that the 1955 play Twelve Angry Men is often confused with later versions based on the 1957 film?" —BrechtBro (talk) 23:55, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Articles created/expanded on January 22

    [edit]

    Benjamin Hammar House, Samuel Dyer House

    ( Comment or view )
    ( Article history links:
    )
    Created by Pbritti (talk). Number of QPQs required: 2. Nominator has 96 past nominations.

    Pbritti (talk) 16:07, 29 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    @Pbritti: Long enough, new enough, Earwig's clean. No reason why either would deserve a maintenance template. Two issues: I find the hook rather dull and suggest proposing something else; and the QPQ for KP Permanent Make-Up is not a full review so doesn't count.--Launchballer 15:03, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Launchballer: If you don't mind giving me about 24 hours to get back to you, I'll offer an alt or two with a new QPQ. Thanks for the review! Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 16:02, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Take your time. Ping me when you've finished the sandbox article and I'll review that.--Launchballer 16:04, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Launchballer: Time was taken. Offering Template:Did you know nominations/Alexander F. Warley as QPQ. Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 17:14, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Launchballer: Just wanted to ping you again to let you know the QPQ has been completed. Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 17:38, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • While both houses are undoubtedly historic (hence their listings), there doesn't seem to be anything else hooky in either article. The only thing that stands out in either article is the mention of the Benjamin Hammar House being the sight of a hanging, but that's probably not a good fit. I was initially going to suggest proposing separate hooks for both houses, but again, the lack of material. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:14, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Launchballer and Pbritti: Per the above comment, I will be marking this nomination for closure if a new hook is not proposed. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:06, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Narutolovehinata5: With respect, I don't believe your judgement in the above comment is sound and believe unilaterally closing it pending a response from the reviewer is out of process. If anything, the correct step would be to either perform a new review yourself or mark this for a new review. @Launchballer: do you intend to return to this review? ~ Pbritti (talk) 14:27, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I believe I said "I find the hook rather dull and suggest proposing something else". I don't see any other hooks on this page.--Launchballer 14:40, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Launchballer: How about ALT1:
    Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 15:54, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Launchballer: Does ALT1 address your concerns? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:13, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Bayside Blue

    (
    )
    • Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNqHkK4zuZc&t=327s 5:27乗ってみた感想を言うと、このベイサイドブルー今までいろんな連節バス乗ってきましたけど、ダントツでたぶんカーブを曲がる回数が多い" Caption5:32 圧倒的に右左折が多い
    • ALT1: ... that Yokohama's articulated tourist buses feature a matte metallic blue livery inspired by the city's symbolic blue color and its waterfront setting? Source: https://www.city.yokohama.lg.jp/shikai/kiroku/katsudo/h30/suikoH300517.files/j8-20180928-kt-13.pdf　ア デザインの基本的な考え方横浜のシンボル的な色である青に水面のきらめきを表現する光沢を持たせた「マットメタリックブルー」を用い、景観にアクセントとなり路線バスと差別化できる単色づかいのバスとします。また、利用者からの視認性を高めるために車体にシンボルマークを配置します。イ 名称水際線沿いを疾走する青い連節バスをイメージさせる「BAYSIDEBLUE」とします。　
    • ALT2: ... that Yokohama City adopted articulated sightseeing buses as part of its waterfront regeneration and visitor circulation strategy? Source: https://prtimes.jp/story/detail/yxJepRIVm9B　「横浜市では、2015年に『横浜市都心臨海部再生マスタープラン』を策定しました。その計画に基づき、横浜市の都心臨海部全体の回遊性を高めて街の賑わいづくりに寄与するため、新たなバス路線を導入しようということになったのです」
    • Reviewed:
    • Comment: Personally, I prefer the first proposal, as articulated buses are generally intended for rapid, high-capacity transport and therefore usually operate on straighter alignments. In that respect, I find this route to be especially unusual and noteworthy. Thank you very much.
    Created by Galactic Center Radio Arc (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    Galactic Center Radio Arc (talk) 12:45, 24 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    • @Galactic Center Radio Arc: Very promising first DYK article. My main request is that you go back and vastly simplify the "History" section. At the moment it has excessive background detail about every single twist and turn that went into the planning process, mostly sourced to essentially primary sources. This is probably one of the hardest things to overcome in COI situations – you're so close to it, of course you think it's important but actually maybe not all of it matters for Wikipedia readers – which is unfortunate because it's pushing down and burying all the interesting content about Bayside Blue lower down in the article. If you need a second opinion, you could ask for help at WikiProject Japan or one of the public transportation sub-groups. Cielquiparle (talk) 17:59, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
      • @Cielquiparle: Thank you very much for your thoughtful advice; I sincerely appreciate it. In fact, I also felt that the History section had become somewhat verbose. At the same time, I believe that the route—rather unusual for an articulated bus—is one of the service’s most distinctive features. I was concerned that readers might not reach the route description if the earlier section remained too long, and therefore considered rearranging the structure, such as switching the positions of the History and Route sections.I have attempted to condense the information as much as possible while staying within a range that I believe does not affect the explanations of transport and urban planning. Has the article become easier to read as a result? If you have any further suggestions, I would be most grateful to hear them.Galactic Center Radio Arc (talk) 14:05, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Articles created/expanded on January 24

    [edit]

    Serpentina (album)

    (
    )
    • ... that for her album Serpentina, Banks broke from her usual practice by developing the record without seeking feedback or approval from management?
    • ALT1: ... that for her album Serpentina, Banks broke from her usual practice by developing the record without seeking advice or approval from her record company?
    • ALT2: ... that when making her album Serpentina, Banks worked with only few producers, even though she had been an avid collaborator with producers and other musicians?
    • ALT3: ... that for Serpentina, Banks signed a deal with an independent record label that gave her ownership of her master recordings?
  • ALT4: ... that the music video for Serpentina's lead single, "The Devil", draws visual inspiration from Francis Ford Coppola's 1992 film Dracula and Robert Zemeckis' Death Becomes Her?
  • Reviewed:
    • 5x expanded by Camilasdandelions (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    Camilasdandelions (✉️) 08:46, 26 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    • Camilasdandelions, the Rolling Stone source is paywalled for me. Can you quote the passage that validates the hook fact? Thanks. Dclemens1971 (talk) 05:24, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
      • Dclemens1971 here. Instead of sending music to her management for approval and advice as she normally would, this time, "I was just like, 'This is what it's gonna be'", she says. Camilasdandelions (✉️) 14:48, 29 January 2026 (KST)
        • Going to do a full review. New enough (5x expansion), long enough, neutral and reliably sourced. Copyvio free; no QPQ required. Article is presentable (and is a GA nominee). On the hook: Camilasdandelions What does management mean here? I assume it means her talent manager based on the source but the hook isn't clear on this; it could mean management of the record company. Also, the source doesn't she didn't receive "feedback"; it says she didn't receive "advice", which is different. (Almost all advice is feedback, but not all feedback is advice.) But I'm also skeptical of this claim because Banks' comment "This is what it's gonna be" is not particularly clear about what's going on -- when did her management hear her music? Did she send finished music directly to the record company? What was the role of her management in selling the album? Is there another source for this claim or more context in the current source? Thanks -- Dclemens1971 (talk) 18:33, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • Camilasdandelions I tried trimming it down a bit and the angle on ALT2 boils down to "Banks worked with fewer collaborators than usual", which I don't think is particularly interesting. Looking at the Harper's Bazaar source though, I came up with another angle that I think works. What do you think about this alternative? ALT3: ... that for Serpentina, Banks signed a deal with an independent record label that gave her ownership of her master recordings? Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:13, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Not a review, but maybe because I'm not super familiar with the artist, but I don't really see ALT3 as interesting. Are there other options possible here? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:55, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Narutolovehinata5 What if I adopt content from: Marking her first release as an independent artist after parting way with Harvest Records,[24] its music video draws visual inspiration from the surreal and ornate aesthetics of Francis Ford Coppola's 1992 film Dracula and the stylized body-horror elements of Robert Zemeckis' Death Becomes Her.? Camilasdandelions (✉️) 23:27, 13 February 2026 (KST)
    Sure, give proposing a hook based on that a shot and let's see how it turns out. My suggestion though is to see if mentioning Coppola or Zemeckis by name is possible. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:11, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Narutolovehinata5: Adopted ALT4. Camilasdandelions (✉️) 21:56, 14 February 2026 (KST).

    Flactorophia, Redemption of the Flesh, Factory nightclub fire

    ( Comment or view )
    Created by 3family6 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 2. Nominator has 111 past nominations.

    3family6 (Talk to me|See what I have done) 17:04, 25 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    @3family6: Both are long enough and new enough. QPQs are both done, though do me a favour and let WT:DYK know you reviewed Smeargle as it's being discussed there as part of a themed set. No reason why either would deserve a maintenance template. Couple of things:
    I saw that discussion, I'll notify them.--3family6 (Talk to me|See what I have done) 20:01, 25 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • What makes androopylifemetal.blogspot.com a reliable source?
    It's an interview with Gag, and I'm citing Gag for his statements on the creation of 6-Way Sin Decomposition, so it's an WP:ABOUTSELF situation. Even though some of that isn't directly about him, 1) with Barragan there isn't a BLP issue, and 2) he was closely associated with the production of the album and his statements aren't controversial, so there's not a BLP issue where his statements touch on living people (I checked into this at the BLP noticeboard months ago; and before that regarding the Eternal Blue FA where LaPlante made a statement about when a fellow band member joined.)--3family6 (Talk to me|See what I have done) 20:01, 25 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • The Flactorophia article is too short to deserve a lead section, without which this would be under 1,500 characters. If you have any further sources, I'd add them.
    I should have added a "style" section, anyway. Multiple reviewers noted the drum machine programming, also.--3family6 (Talk to me|See what I have done) 20:01, 25 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Will do.--3family6 (Talk to me|See what I have done) 20:01, 25 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    ALT1: ... that an eight-track EP lasting less than nine minutes was rereleased ten years after the death of its performer in a fire?

    Launchballer, I'm going ahead with your suggestion of combining this with the Factory nightclub fire. The only reason I didn't was I'd had some reticence of the disparity in importance between that world news event and the obscurity of this artist, but that's a great suggestion and I'll run with it.--3family6 (Talk to me|See what I have done) 20:04, 25 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    The fire article is long and new enough, QPQ-compliant, clean on Earwig, and doesn't need any maintenance templates. I need a reviewer for ALT1 because I introduced 'ten years after'. (I did wonder about ALT2: ... that an eight-track sub-nine-minute EP by 6-Way Sin Decomposition contributor Flactorophia was rereleased ten years after his death in a fire?)--Launchballer 20:40, 25 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    My concerns have been resolved; I still need a reviewer for ALT1.--Launchballer 03:53, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]


    Articles created/expanded on January 26

    [edit]

    Tyren Montgomery

    (
    )
    Created by BeanieFan11 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 447 past nominations.

    BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:19, 2 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    Exceptionally rare, probably, but that might not be immediately clear to non-American football fans. Ideally we'd want a hook that doesn't rely on knowledge on the sport. ALT1 is a cute hook, but I'm not sure if it works as a hook either (I imagine many athletes became athletes upon the encouragement of a relative or friend, so it's not inherently interesting). Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:17, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Any knowledge of flag football (which apparently is "Played by more than 20 million people in more than 100 countries") would make it clear that a transition from pulling flags to playing in the NFL is an extraordinary leap. Regarding the second hook, it's not just that his brother encouraged him, it's that he had never played the sport at all until two and half years ago. From that to the NFL is unheard of. BeanieFan11 (talk) 04:22, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    The issue here is that just because a sport is popular does not necessarily mean that the general context would be understood by people around the world. For example, cricket is one of the world's most popular sports and is pretty much a religion in South Asia, a region of over two billion people. Even then, a cricket-related hook would still need to be written in such a way that readers from places where cricket is not popular, or even a general layperson would understand it. Even association football or soccer, the world's most popular sport, is not popular or widely-understood everywhere: there are plenty of people who are not into sports. I'm not saying that the angles are necessarily unsalvageable, but rather they need to be worked on further. Either that, or something else needs to be proposed here. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:25, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    If we had a hook of something like, ... that so-and-so had never played soccer until 2023, but is now going to compete at the 2026 World Cup?, that would certainly be accepted and understandable to non-fans. Even if the flag football option doesn't work, I still think the second option is very interesting. BeanieFan11 (talk) 04:28, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Rather than focusing on the brother aspect, I think it might actually be better to focus on the "he never played tackle football before 2023" thing more, especially if he is now being primed for the NFL now. It might be slightly misleading since he played flag football before that, but I think the prospect thing, with contextualized wording focusing on his being a prospect, might be more accessible. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:32, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Melania (film)

    (
    )
    5x expanded by Jon698 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 114 past nominations.

    Jon698 (talk) 04:22, 1 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    This is for discussion of the DYK nomination. If you wish to discuss the term for the film then take that to the article's talk page. Propaganda documentaries are still documentaries. Jon698 (talk) 04:39, 1 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    The article has been sufficiently expanded in the last 7 days. It is long enough and comprehensive. While Trump supporters would certainly call it biased, the article seems to correctly reflect the coverage of the topic in what Wikipedia considers to be reliable sources. I do not see any close paraphrasing. I do think that we can come up with more interesting hooks. The last two sentences in Melania (film)#Production could make good hooks, and the bits about only one ticket or no tickets selling would be even better. Surtsicna (talk) 12:06, 1 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Will do so after getting back from the theater. Jon698 (talk) 02:46, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    How do these hooks sound @Surtsicna:
    1. ... that two-thirds of the New York production staff for Melania requested to be omitted from the credits?
    2. ... that Jonny Greenwood requested that his music be removed from Melania?


    Articles created/expanded on January 27

    [edit]

    Cameron Fraser-Monroe

    (
    )
    • ... that Cameron Fraser-Monroe is the first Indigenous person to choreograph a full-length ballet for a major company?
    Created by Significa liberdade (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 15 past nominations.

    Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 22:15, 28 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    • The article is 1533 characters, which is just above the 1500 character requirement, but is close enough that it still feels too short. I would suggest expanding the article further. The article is properly sourced and is free from close paraphrasing. A QPQ has been done and it is a full review. Both hooks are cited inline and verified in the hook. However, for ALT1, not only is it an exceptional claim, but I'm also not sure if the source is even strong or reliable enough to be used for such a strong claim. ALT0 is better given that the source is the New York Times, but it's still exceptional, so we need more sources and a search for counterexamples. Unfortunately, another issue here is that there is nothing else in the article that works as a hook, so either the article needs to be expanded, we go with ALT0 but only with stronger sourcing and a search for counterexamples, or we let this one go. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:45, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I've made a request at WT:DYK asking for input here. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:30, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    As the nom has chosen to withdraw this nomination if no sources are found, I think its best for me to close this (as withdrawn) after 24 hours. JuniperChill (talk) 23:20, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Significa_liberdade do you want to withdraw completely or take a look at new hooks?

    ALT2 ... that ballet choreographer Cameron Fraser-Monroe applied to the Royal Winnipeg Ballet School on a whim and got a scholarship?

    ALT3 ... that Cameron Fraser-Monroe is the Royal Winnipeg Ballet's first choreographer-in-residence in 20 years?

    By the way, ALT1 is unsubstantiated by the article—which states that Fraser-Monroe is the only First Nations ballet dancer in a professional company, not the only indigenous dancer. The Métis and the Inuit are indigenous but not First Nations. Bremps... 04:09, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Thank you for the correction, Bremps! I like ALT2. :) Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:38, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I like ALT2 as well. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Hello Naruto, is this fine for the tick? Bremps... 17:18, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    As much as I like ALT2, it doesn't seem to be supported by the source. The article and hook say that he applied "on a whim", but the source only says that he applied for the scholarship and was surprised that he was accepted on the spot despite only practicing ballet two hours a week. Maybe a further reword is needed here? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:19, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    That can be found in the Vancouver Ballet Society source, not in the CBC Radio source. The citations need to be reordered. Pinging User:Significa_liberdade. Bremps... 03:39, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Refs reorganized. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:54, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Naruto? User:Narutolovehinata5 Bremps... 20:16, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you. The sourcing issue is addressed; however, when reading that source, his quote about the experience stood out to me: "Ballet was like the broccoli you had to eat to get to the bacon." Would you be okay with suggesting a hook about that quote? Like he said that once but then he became a ballet dancer? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:27, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]


    Articles created/expanded on January 28

    [edit]

    Vau i Dejës Hydroelectric Power Station

    (
    )
    • Reviewed:
    • Comment: I would be okay with this being an April Fool's hook. In the source, it was called Mao Ce Dun. This is technically a day late, but I was unable to nominate it yesterday or the day before.
    5x expanded by EasternShah (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    Sahib-e-Qiran, He Who is Otherwise Known as ‪EasternShah‬ 15:01, 5 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    • Hello, and welcome to DYK. There are two issues with the proposed hook, April Fools' Day or not. The first is that the hook as currently written is "well, duh", since hydroelectric dams area always bigger than people, no matter who they are. The second is that the article does not actually use the term "Mao Zedong" anywhere, and it is not explicitly stated if the Mao Ce Dun plan was named after Mao or not (note that the Mao Ce Dun plant does not currently have an article). The April Fools' Day angle is not unsalvageable, but right now it cannot work without more work done to the article, and even so, it would still be objectionable since the other dam was never called "Mao Zedong".
    As for the article itself: this does not seem to be a 5x expansion within the last seven days, as you said: I will ask Nikkimaria if it is close enough, taking into account the delayed nomination. I found some matches to Mapcarta (I cannot give the exact link because the site is blacklisted, but you can use Earwig to find the link), but I'm not sure if Mapcarta copied from Wikipedia (it probably did, based on an earlier version of the article). No QPQ is needed as this is only your second nomination. The other checks will follow once you address the above, but right now this doesn't seem to be ready for DYK. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:15, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    This version was 597 characters of readable prose, and the present version is only 2325. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:20, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @EasternShah: This does not appear to be a 5x expansion right now: please expand the article further (the magic number is at least 2,985 characters of prose); otherwise, this will be marked for closure as ineligible. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:27, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay I will expand it and see if I can find a better hook or confirm that Mao Ce Dun was named after Mao Zedong. Sahib-e-Qiran, He Who is Otherwise Known as ‪EasternShah‬ 18:28, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I have expanded it beyond the 5x that is required; I also looked at the mapcarta source you talk about. I do think that it is copied from Wikipedia, and I never accessed it while writing the article. I also propose Alt 0.5:... that Mao produced less electricity than the Vau i Dejës Hydroelectric Power Station? The source is the same as above. There seems to be an exciting amount of information about hydroelectricity in Albania (given that it is the main way that the country gets its electricity, I am not suprised). So, I will be trying to create an article on the "Mao ce Dun" HPP before this runs on DYK. Thus, I wonder if I will be able to later amend this DYK to also make Mao a boldlink (given that it meets the DYK criteria ofc)? Thanks for your patience. Sahib-e-Qiran, He Who is Otherwise Known as ‪EasternShah‬ 01:36, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Narutolovehinata5, were you able to review the hook/the article?Sahib-e-Qiran, He Who is Otherwise Known as ‪EasternShah‬ 19:05, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Sources: [16], [17]. Unless there are three different power plants in albania, all suspiciously similar and named after Mao, these are the same. I think a more interesting alt can also be proposed: Alt 1: ...that the Vau i Dejës dethroned Mao Zedong as the largest hydroelectric project in Albania? Sahib-e-Qiran, He Who is Otherwise Known as ‪EasternShah‬ 05:05, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Unless a direct source is provided that explicitly states that all these dams are named after Mao, that would count as original research and thus cannot be used. My suggestion is to simply move away from the Mao angle and try something else. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:17, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Narutolovehinata5: Gkitsa, Dimitra (1 June 2025). "Chimneys and Electric Wires Conquering the Sky: The Great Transformation of Nature in Socialist Albania". ARTMargins. 14 (2): 84–103. doi:10.1162/artm_a_00414. says on pg. 90: "Ismail Lulani’s At Deja’s Ford (Në Vaun i Dejës) from 1969, depicts the large-scale construction of a reservoir accompanying the Mao Zedong Hydropower Plant on the River Drin." ALT 0.5 without the link to mao zedong is fine, since it is not original research if mao zedong isn't linked.Sahib-e-Qiran, EasternShah 05:24, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    ALT2 ... that the Vau i Dejës Hydroelectric Power Station provided over half of Albania's electricity in 1973?

    ALT3 ... that if construction is completed, Vau i Dejës Hydroelectric Power Station will have Europe's largest floating solar panel project?

    ALT4 ... that the Vau i Dejës Hydroelectric Power Station created a lake?

    ALT5 ... that the Vau i Dejës Hydroelectric Power Station turned Albania from an energy importer to an exporter? Bremps... 03:13, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    I think these are good second-options, except for alt 4 which is very plain. All hydroelectric power plants, except run-of-the-river ones make reservoirs and it is a matter of semantics whether one is to call it a lake or not. I prefer alt 0.5, Alt 2, alt 3 and alt 5 in that order. Sahib-e-Qiran, EasternShah 05:24, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm okay with ALT2 or ALT5, with a slight preference for ALT2 as being more understandable or eyecatching. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:14, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Centres of governance in the Roman Empire

    (
    )
    • Source: Page 151 of Rome and the transformation of the imperial office in the late fourth-mid-fifth centuries AD by Meaghan McEvoy (reference [94])
    • ALT1: ... that Roman emperors used multiple cities for their residence, base of operations, or to issue laws from? Source: Pages 80, 83, 86 of The Cambridge Ancient History: The Crisis of Empire, AD 193-337 (references [11] and [12]), pages 15 and 18 of From Mobile Center to Constantinople: The Birth of Byzantine Imperial Government (reference [14] and [15]),
    • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Farnsworth House
    Moved to mainspace by Jon698 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 113 past nominations.

    Jon698 (talk) 20:09, 31 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    • The article is in a very respectable condition, long enough and earwig was fine. It was moved to mainspace on the 28 January and nominated on 31st so new enough. The hooks are interesting, the first one probably more so to a general audience. Alt 1 is well cited. You need to add a citation for the first hook. Llewee (talk) 14:46, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Llewee: It is sourced by Page 151 of Rome and the transformation of the imperial office in the late fourth-mid-fifth centuries AD by Meaghan McEvoy. That is reference 94 in the article. Jon698 (talk) 17:51, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Jon698 Source 14 doesn't seem to be supporting the content before it. Llewee (talk) 20:36, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Llewee: The source states on page 151 that "From the reign of the usurper-emperor Maxentius (306-12) onwards,3 not a single emperor resided at Rome throughout the whole of the fourth century" Jon698 (talk) 07:26, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Jon698 Yes I checked that one and it was fine and then I started checking the ALT1 sources and source 14 doesn't appear to mention all those cities in the text it was supporting. Llewee (talk) 11:05, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Rickrolling

    (
    )
    • Source: [18] for Apple and White House, [19] for MLB stadium, [20] for Disney film
    Improved to Good Article status by Vigilantcosmicpenguin (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 62 past nominations.

    — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 01:32, 29 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    Articles created/expanded on January 29

    [edit]

    A Media Luz

    (
    )
    • ... that "A Media Luz" (transl. "With Dimmed Lights") is one of the most popular tango compositions of all time?
    • Source: *Curotto, Angel (June 7, 1964). "Figuras del Tetro Rioplatense" [Figures of the Rioplatense Theater]. Diario El Día (in Spanish). 33 (1638): 11. Retrieved January 16, 2026 – via Archive.org. Open access icon
    • Ferrer, Horacio (1977). El libro del tango: crónica & diccionario, 1850-1977. Vol. 1. Editorial Galerna. p. 105.
    Created by GDuwen (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 35 past nominations.

    GDuwenHoller! 17:32, 30 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    • Article was previously a redirect and was created on January 28 as an overwrite of that redirect. In this scenario it is considered a new article and not a 5x expansion. I have modified the nomination template to reflect that this is a new article. It was nominated on January 30 in the proper window. No copyright violations detected and QPQ has been done. Hook fact is interesting, but I am having trouble verifying that fact. I will need a quote in the original Spanish and with an English language translation provided here to verify the hook fact.4meter4 (talk) 16:56, 26 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]
    Thanks for taking up the nomination. I'll gladly provide both of them:
    Curotto:
    Spanish: "Según las estadísticas de la Sociedad Argentina de Autores y Compositores de Música, esa composición musical, con “La cumparsita” y “El choclo”, siguen siendo todavía los mayores éxitos mundiales de la música popular rioplatense."
    English: "According to the statistics held by the Argentinian Society of Music Authors and Composers, that musical composition, together with "La Cumparsita" and "El Choclo", still are the biggest successes worldwide of Rioplatense popular music".
    Ferrer:
    Spanish:"A MEDIA LUZ. Tango. Música de Edgardo Donato, letra de Carlos César Lenzi. Se cuenta entre las obras de mayor éxito, de más larga permanencia en los repertorios y de mayor divulgación nacional e internacional."
    English:"A MEDIA LUZ. Tango. Music by Edgardo Donato, lyrics by Carlos César Lenzi. It is numbered among the most successful works, with the longest stay in repertoires and one of the most widespread nationally and internationally."
    Note that the translations are my own. I've made the attempt to do it as faithfully to the original text as possible, so some of the wording may sound awkward to read.GDuwenHoller! 17:44, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @GDuwen: Hmm.. I do not see popularity directly stated in those quotes (although certainly hinted at). "Most successful" would be verifiable and/or "most enduring work in the tango repertoire" would be verifiable. Without the word "popular or "popularidad" its not really feasible to make the claim as the quote is basing success on the enduring place in the tango canon and how widespread it is (which again hints at being popular but isn't outright stated). I would try crafting a hook more directly tied to the translation. Sorry to get fussy here, but we've had too many hooks get dragged to WP:ERRORS over little stuff like this. Some minor tweaking of the hook language based on these quotes should yield something we can use.4meter4 (talk) 04:19, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Articles created/expanded on January 30

    [edit]

    Until the End of Time (Justin Timberlake and Beyoncé song)

    (
    )
    Improved to Good Article status by RedShellMomentum (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 5 past nominations.

    RedShellMomentum 00:14, 31 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    General: Article is new enough and long enough
    Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

    Hook eligibility:

    QPQ: Done.

    Overall: Article was nominated for DYK within 7 days of reaching Good Article status. No issues with sourcing and length. Article is neutral. Earwig reports an unlikely copyright violation of 18.7%, which is mostly from the name of the song. QPQ is done. Both ALTs seem kind of promotional. Is there a way you could rewrite ALT0 to expand on the comparison? lullabying (talk) 21:23, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    @RedShellMomentum and Lullabying: How does this sound? ALT2 ... that a reviewer called "Until the End of Time" "excessively bland"? I get it's yet another review quote hook, but it's at least one that's catchy. One issue with the article is that there really isn't much else that would be hooky to a general audience. As for ALT2, I've deliberately omitted Justin's name from the hook to avoid possible future complaints about us running too many Justin hooks. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:24, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Potocki Palace, Ivano-Frankivsk

    (
    )
    • Reviewed:
    Created by Skoropadsky (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    Skoropadsky (talk) 11:36, 30 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    The bigger concern here, imo, is that there are only three sources. Bremps... 01:58, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Per the guidelines, while it is discouraged for articles to be heavily reliant on one or a few sources, leniency can be given for more obscure topics. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:46, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Articles created/expanded on January 31

    [edit]

    Aubrey Bowser

    (
    )
    • ALT1: ... that Aubrey Bowser wrote a serialized novel adapted into a 1921 race film?
    • ALT2: ... that Aubrey Bowser originally wrote his serialized novel The Man Who Would Be White under the pseudonym Jane La Mott?
    • ALT3 ... that prior to becoming a published writer, Aubrey Bowser worked as a porter at the New York Stock Exchange?
    Created by Cielquiparle (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 76 past nominations.

    Cielquiparle (talk) 04:23, 7 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    Added an ALT hook, happy to add more. Cielquiparle (talk) 12:06, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    That's not much better. Novels are adapted into films all the time, and other than it being a "race film" (which might count as specialist knowledge since the term is not a common one), it's not clear what makes this particular adaptation any more interesting or different from others. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:17, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Added ALT2. Cielquiparle (talk) 16:26, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Neither is writing under a pseudonym. How do the following sound instead?
    ALT3 ... that prior to becoming a published writer, Aubrey Bowser worked as a porter at the New York Stock Exchange?
    The article may need to be expanded as right now there really isn't much else in it that's hooky. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 16:54, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    OK I have added ALT3 above. Thanks for your input. Cielquiparle (talk) 18:49, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you. I've struck the other hooks, so ALT3 and the article are ready for a review. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:11, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree that the original hook should be struck, but I have unstruck ALT1 and ALT2. I leave it up to the actual reviewer and others to assess those hooks. ALT2 actually has a lot going on, including an androgynous first name, a male possessive pronoun, a man with an ambiguous racial identity in the book title, and a female pseudonym for the author. (ALT1 is a placeholder for an AFC article that could be added to a more interesting hook in future...or not.) Cheers. Cielquiparle (talk) 06:02, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I apologize, but I have restruck both of those hooks. The main issue here is that neither hook meets DYKINT. The points you bring up would easily be missed by a reader, and simply saying that a name being androgynous or the reader mistaking the subject for a woman does not count as hooky. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 06:20, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes it is clear from your response that it is confusing and my comment probably made it worse. I am striking it as well. Cielquiparle (talk) 06:24, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Jimmy Crystal (28 Days Later)

    (
    )
    Created by AdobongPogi (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    AdobongPogi masarap 🍛 16:05, 31 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    AdobongPogi masarap 🍛 3:25, 1 February 2026 (UTC).

    I think this one is on the wrong side of WP:DYKGRAT. With Savile taken out, a hook like "that a fictional character's appearance was based on that of a celebrity?" would be compeletely unremarkable and fail WP:DYKINT, so the only interest here comes from using Savile's crimes and reputation to generate shock value or a kind of dark humour. I would be open to alternative hooks which avoided this theme, though note that the nomination has already had one chance to take another run at the criteria. UndercoverClassicist T·C 20:04, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    ALT4: ... that some Americans unknowingly offended Britons by cosplaying a fictional gang?
    The contested info is moved off the main page. Bremps... 01:44, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Articles created/expanded on February 1

    [edit]

    Quarantine II: Road Warrior

    (
    )
    • ... that several aesthetic and gameplay elements of the video game Quarantine II: Road Warrior, in which player drives a weaponized hovercab, were inspired by the Mad Max franchise? Source: as mentioned in the PC Joker and PC Player reviews
      • ALT1: ... that many reviewers felt that the loss of the fare-based economy in Quarantine II: Road Warrior video game was a disappointing simplification of its predecessor? Source: mentioned in majority of reviews, ex. Computer Gaming World, GameSpot, PC Gamer, etc.
      • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Metro Chabacano (Álvarez)
      • Comment: I am claiming it as a created, since it was in mainspace for just 5 minutes 4 hours in 19962019 before it was turned into a redirect. Otherwise it's just a bit under 5x.
    Created by Piotrus (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 588 past nominations.

    Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:02, 3 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    FRA DOTX 219

    (
    )
    FRA DOTX 219
    FRA DOTX 219
    • ... that FRA DOTX 219 (pictured) surveys about 30,000 miles (48,000 km) of railroad track annually?
  • ALT1: ... that the data collected by FRA DOTX 219 (pictured) has been used in train derailment investigations? Source: https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/TOCPrintable?data=99303 (No. 46 in docket) and https://railroads.dot.gov/sites/fra.dot.gov/files/fra_net/16955/HQ-2015-1082%20Final_Riddleville%2C%20GA.pdf "The DOTX219 FRA geometry car surveyed this section of track on February 19, 2015, with no exceptions found in the area of the derailment."
  • ALT2: ... that there was an argument over a track geometry car (pictured) unable to measure 1⁄8 of an inch [3.2 mm]? Source: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2011-09-09/pdf/2011-23133.pdf "AAR argues that "today’s automated inspection equipment cannot measure rail seat deterioration at all, let alone within 1⁄8 of an inch."
  • ALT2b: ... that a track geometry car (pictured) could not measure up to "1⁄8 of an inch [3.2 mm]"? Source: same as ALT2
    • Reviewed:
    • Moved to mainspace by JudeHalley (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    Jude Halley talk/contribs 19:20, 1 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    Articles created/expanded on February 2

    [edit]

    Osyp Turiansky

    (
    )
    • ... that Osyp Turiansky's novel Lost Shadows has been claimed to be the first work of Ukrainian fiction to get published in the United States in English translation?
    • Reviewed:
    Created by Skoropadsky (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    Skoropadsky (talk) 19:40, 2 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    It's written in the article that it was suppressed. Was that a mistake? Bremps... 15:38, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    1918 Massachusetts Question 1

    (
    )
    • ... that a 1918 referendum to establish an initiative and referendum process in Massachusetts passed by fewer than 9,000 votes?
    Created by Delcoan (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 9 past nominations.

    Delcoan (talk) 06:10, 2 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    @DYK admins: Hello, I accidentally selected 1976 Massachusetts Question 1 instead of 1918 Massachusetts Question 1 when I was creating the DYK, so it was created on the 1976 article's talk page and is known under that name on the DYK nominations list. Delcoan (talk) 06:14, 2 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Nomination has been patched accordingly. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 06:44, 2 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Thank you! Delcoan (talk) 00:02, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Delcoan I moved this page to the correct title, don't think it would cause any issues but anyone can revert me. HurricaneZetaC 01:12, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you! Delcoan (talk) 01:59, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, rather than moving it back, I've patched it again. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 04:56, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • Not a review, but the correct word for describing a countable quantity is fewer, rather than less. For example, "he had less water" versus "he had fewer gallons of water". Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 22:41, 2 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Thank you for letting me know! I have changed the proposed hook to say fewer rather than say less. Delcoan (talk) 00:02, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Full review follows:

    • Areas with no issues: Article is new enough, copyvio-free (Copyvio Detector flags only the block quotes) and neutral. Overall, the article is presentable. The hook is backed up by the provided source (noting that the source for the hook is a primary source). QPQ has been done.
    • Length: The article is just barely long enough. I get a count of 1532 characters after removing the two quotations. Of that balance, there are 171 characters in the three short sections that introduce tables or block quotes. That's not much margin, and I would recommend adding some prose to give yourself some more cushion should copyediting remove some text.
    • Sourcing: Most of the article relies on a political advertisement placed by Francis P. Garland. What makes Garland a reliable source here? I would think that a contemporary political advertisement supporting the measure is a primary source, which means the article is based almost entirely on primary sources. Per WP:RSPRIMARY, while primary sources may be used judiciously, Large blocks of material based purely on primary sources should be avoided. Do you have some reliable secondary sources you can sub in for the extensive material for which you use Garland's ad as a source?
    • Hook: I find this angle uninteresting. 9,000 votes is not a interestingly tight margin, and the measure had to pass or fail so I don't see how simply reciting the margin of victory would be perceived as unusual or intriguing. (We've had a number of ballot measure-related hooks in the last month, and with one exception they've all performed below average, suggesting that a different approach is needed for these kinds of hooks.) Can you suggest a different hook?

    I hope these issues aren't insurmountable. Thanks! Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:59, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    @Dclemens1971: Hello! Thank you for your review. Regarding the sourcing- because of it being from so long ago and being pretty niche, sources for this particular data I could not find elsewhere. Well, at least for the voting data in the house and the support. Maybe info on the facts about others states are available elsewhere. Anyway, my question for this is if I add a lot of other information throughout the article that doesn't use that source, would this concern of it being a large block of material from a primary source disappear because of the other content overtaking that concern? In other words, I keep that data, but add a bunch of other info, meaning that source goes from being like 3/5ths of the article to 1/5th or something, but all of it still remains. Let me know! Delcoan (talk) 16:55, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Delcoan: Maybe, but that only addresses the extensive use of primary sources issue and still leaves the question of whether Garland's advertisement is a reliable source for the claims it makes. (I don't know one way or the other.) I would also like to see a different hook; I'm not going to approve this one. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:59, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Dclemens1971: By "I'm not going to approve this one," do you mean not going to approve my proposed change, or do you mean you'll fail the review entirely? Delcoan (talk) 17:32, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Delcoan: I mean I'm not going to approve the proposed hook as written, because it fails WP:DYKINT. I don't plan to fail the review entirely if necessary improvements across the other dimensions can be made. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:36, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Dclemens1971: Can I actually withdraw this nom for now and then maybe later put it back up when its ready with criteria? Delcoan (talk) 14:23, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I wouldn’t, because it won’t be eligible again unless it’s brought to GA. You have another 7 weeks before this times out, so don’t sweat—come back to this open non when you can. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:52, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Delcoan: I will be on a wikibreak for a few weeks starting 18 February, but will try to check my pings weekly. If my attention is needed more quickly, I have email enabled. Thanks! Dclemens1971 (talk) 13:43, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay! Enjoy your wiki break :) Delcoan (talk) 20:41, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]


    Articles created/expanded on February 3

    [edit]

    Tui Hobson

    (
    )
    • ... that New Zealand artist Tui Hobson completed an international commission for a garden in Northern France commemorating 100 years since WWI and New Zealand soldiers?
    Kohlhase, Marilyn (21 February 2025). "Tui Hobson: Va'ine Warrior - Retrospective. Feb-April 2025 by Marilyn Kohlhase." The Charlotte Museum. Retrieved 31 January 2026. https://www.charlottemuseum.co.nz/post/tui-hobson-va-ine-warrior-retrospective-feb-april-2025-by-marilyn-kohlhase.
      • Reviewed:
    Moved to mainspace by Avawatson03 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    Avawatson03 (talk) 02:38, 9 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    Drill Dozer

    (
    )
    Improved to Good Article status by Cukie Gherkin (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 6 past nominations.

    Cukie Gherkin (talk) 22:37, 7 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    • Given recent WT:DYK discussions regarding special occasion sets focusing on a product or organization, the best option here might actually be a hook that doesn't mention Pokémon by name (not to mention that it is unlikely that a Pokémon set will run now in the wake of the reception to the William & Mary College set). Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:44, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Why do the party poopers have to ruin things for people who find these themed sets interesting?-3family6 (Talk to me|See what I have done) 13:37, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I like ALT6 the best. I would just like to inquire though if Hardcoregaming101 is a reliable source for this statement or not: I know WP:VG tends to be stricter when it comes to sources compared to other WikiProjects. I would personally accept that source, but I imagine that if it it's not considered reliable, the claim could be challenged. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 03:05, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah, HG101 is acceptable, per WP:VG/RS - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 06:14, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • Article was promoted to GA status on time, is adequately sourced and free from close paraphrasing. I found some minor copying with this source: "translated all of the Japanese text into English" needs to be rewritten (the other hit is a quote so that can stay). A QPQ has been done. Regarding ALT6, the article does not make it clear if the cartridges did contain mercury or not (i.e. if it was rumored that the cartridge had mercury and that is why it was not released in Europe, or if it did have mercury and that lead to the rumors). If ALT6 cannot be salvaged, ALT2 is the other option. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:58, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
      Paraphrased; I'd say ALT6 is not that strong based on your comments, so yeah, I'd suggest against it. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 08:40, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Cukie Gherkin: Even if ALT2 is the ultimately approved hook, the mercury fact still needs to be clarified better: right now the recent edit did not really address the concern. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:02, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Clarified further - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 10:12, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you. Would it be possible though to find another source proving that the motor had mercury? That way, the mercury thing could be introduced earlier in the article, making the wording even less vague or ambiguous. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:26, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I did a pretty big deep dive; by the sounds of it, the use of mercury is hard to confirm. I've mainly seen talk of WarioWare: Twisted! being blocked for alleged use of mercury in its gyroscope rather than its rumble pack, which almost makes me think that its presence came about from a game of telephone due to both games having rumble. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 09:45, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you. Given the circumstances, I think it would be better for there to be a better clarification regarding the mercury thing to make the use of mercury more unsure (i.e. not to directly state that the game had mercury). I would now go with ALT3 for the hook. My concern is that the source in the article is actually a fan translation of the actual interview: I'm not sure if WP:VG would accept that to be the main source and would instead encourage there to also be a reference to the actual magazine if possible (even if not the actual quote since the English TL should suffice). I would accept it as is, this is more out of an abundance of precaution since as far as I know, WP:VG tends to be strict with reliable sources. However, since the article passed GA without issue, maybe I can let that be. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:37, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Shmuplations actually came up for discussion at WP:VG/RS, and it was determined that it is suboptimal, but that the author is a trustworthy source, if not a suboptimal one. Such interviews are unfortunately not easily available online. I also opted to remove the mention of mercury, as I can't really find any evidence for or against its presence aside from the rumors. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 10:33, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Jerry Bird (skydiver)

    (
    )
    • ... that American skydiver Jerry Bird participated in the world's first 10-man star formation, above Taft, California, on July 2, 1967?
    • Source: "A Galaxy of Stars". Parachutist. October 2022. pp. 42–44. Retrieved 3 February 2026. … on July 2, 1967 - 10 Southern California skydivers exited from a Twin Beech … and made history by building the world's first 10-man star formation … over the Taft School of Sport Parachuting. ... The record-setting jumpers, by exit order, were Gary Young; John Rinard; Clark Fischer; Jim Dann; Jerry Bird; Bill Stage; Terry Ward; Bill Newell; Brian Williams and Paul Gorman.
    Created by Paul W (talk) and Tspooncl65 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 12 past nominations.

    Paul W (talk) 12:00, 4 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    Daughters of Mary, Mother of Our Savior

    (
    )
    Improved to Good Article status by Johnson524 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 30 past nominations.

    Johnson524 09:32, 3 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    • ALT0 is still as inaccurate as it was last year, because it still was not the entire convent of nuns who participate in dodgeball, because it still was not the entire convent of nuns who teach at the school. Also, how sure are you that the item which was reported in 2006 is still the case? ALT1 is a good example of a dangling modifier. DS (talk) 04:42, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Pokémon Uranium, Pokémon Prism

    ( Comment or view )
    ( Article history links:
    )
    Improved to Good Article status by Pokelego999 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 2. Nominator has 8 past nominations.

    Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 05:25, 3 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    • @Pokelego999: The trick is to type closing and opening brackets in the QPQ field in that order, so "Template:Did you know nominations/The Missing (2023 film)]], [[Template:Did you know nominations/Retro Mystery Club Vol.1: The Ise-Shima Case". Will review in the next 24 hours.--Launchballer 05:33, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • @PL, I think some words may be missing in your sentence.
    "Pokémon Uranium and Pokémon Prism, after Nintendo contacted them due to copyright concerns?"
    "Pokémon Uranium and Pokémon Prism ceased development, after Nintendo contacted them due to copyright concerns?"
    This may have been what it was supposed to say? 11WB (talk) 06:11, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    @Pokelego999: Long enough, new enough. QPQs are done and Earwig's clean. No reason why either would deserve a maintenance template, though I removed one factual clanger from the Prism article. I'm on the fence as to whether the hook's interesting; 'firm sues to preserve its copyright' doesn't strike me as terribly unusual?--Launchballer 12:10, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    • @Launchballer: Perhaps it would be helpful if the lead were expanded with information that the games gained enough of a following that fans continued updating them after their release? Should be able to keep the hook intact while also providing a more interesting hook. Let me know your thoughts on this. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 02:32, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Pokelego999: That wouldn't help as readers bored by the hook won't get that far. I suggest proposing a hook based on their long development times.--Launchballer 07:31, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Launchballer: What do you think of an alternate DYK proposal that's only Uranium, and focuses on the fact that it was nominated for an award, which was rescinded after a DMCA by Nintendo? - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 07:58, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Nintendo are known for doing this quite often. I agree that this should have something extra to make it that bit more interesting. 11WB (talk) 21:38, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Cukie Gherkin: My apologies for dropping this. It would be a shame to drop Prism; you could start a hook starting "that a fan-made video game based on the same series as Pokémon Prism" or suggest a hook based on their long development times.--Launchballer 15:57, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Articles created/expanded on February 4

    [edit]

    Chinese songs with Vietnamese lyrics

    (
    )
    • Source: https://vnexpress.net/su-lan-san-cua-ca-khuc-nhac-ngoai-loi-viet-1873888.html
    • Supporting quote (VI): "Có khi một bài hát có 3-4 lời Việt …"
    • Translation (EN): "Sometimes a song had three or four Vietnamese lyric versions …"
    • Supporting quote (VI): "Một số tác phẩm người nghe khó mà biết được chúng thuộc loại gì như Tình xưa nghĩa cũ có 6 bản lời khác nhau, Kiếp ve sầu (4 bản), Ước mơ vươn tới ngôi sao (3 bản)..."
    • Translation (EN): "Some songs were so hard for listeners to pin down what they really "were" that "Tình xưa nghĩa cũ" ended up with six different Vietnamese-lyric versions, "Kiếp ve sầu" had four, and "Ước mơ vươn tới ngôi sao" had three."
    • Source: https://tienphong.vn/khi-nhac-hoa-qua-tay-nguoi-viet-post51462.tpo
    • Supporting quote (VI): "Nhạc Hoa lời Việt chỉ tạm xẹp xuống vào khoảng tháng 10/2004, khi công ước Berne thực thi tại VN."
    • Translation (EN): "Chinese-melody Vietnamese-lyrics songs only temporarily cooled around October 2004, when the Berne Convention was enforced in Vietnam."
    • Reviewed:
    Created by VinhNguyen.1257 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    VinhNguyen.1257 (talk) 04:27, 6 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    • This is a fascinating article, and ALT1 is both interesting and a supported hook. This would be a pass, except the nominator has retired from Wikipedia and requested a namechange. As such, I don't think it makes sense to point more attention toward their article if that's not what they're looking for, so decline. That said, if a Vietnamese-speaking Wikipedian wants to brush this article up to GA status, it'd be great to see on DYK some day anyway. SnowFire (talk) 03:46, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Articles created/expanded on February 5

    [edit]

    Bernhard Waldenfels

    (
    )
    Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 2171 past nominations.

    Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:47, 11 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    HurricaneZetaC 17:50, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hook isn't particularly interesting imo. A European philosopher studying with French philosophers doesn't come across as surprising, unusual, or noteworthy. Could you come up with one or more alternates? grapesurgeon (talk) 15:56, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Gerda Arendt: grapesurgeon (talk) 16:00, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
      Hook has 3 pieces of information: leading phenomenologist, long-time professor, long-time study (two years seems unusual) in a foreign country. I think it should give some broad impression of this particular person. We could focus on the exchange further (which is mentioned in most obits): he translated the works of these French people who were unknown in German philosophy, and he wrote a book of introduction into their thinking, - all this culture exchange across borders on a high level. But we'd loose giving him a time and place in history and a stance in importance. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:10, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
      • The point of DYK hooks is to be eyecatching or to attract general interest. An academic having studied abroad, especially in Europe, is incredibly commonplace. An academic having a speciality that isn't like counterculture or incredibly unnusual is not eyecatching. A long-time professor is really not unusual. Long-time study abroad is not significantly unusual. Do you get what I mean? Like if you had to tell a random person you meet about this, what's the probability they'd find this interesting? grapesurgeon (talk) 16:17, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
        I found it interesting. I found his writing even more interesting, but it would be even more specialist. We can try:
        ALT1: ... that a book by Bernhard Waldenfels was translated into English as Phenomenology of the Alien?
        I would not tell it the random person without mentioning that he was leading in the field but DYK wants it short I understand. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:13, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
        • Then take an information theory or statistical approach, which is more objective (trying to measure how different the things you mentioned are from other people in his field). None of the things you've mentioned about him previously are unusual or particularly noteworthy. The alien bit is a bit more eyecatching, but it's not really discussed substantially nor explained in the article; the point of DYK is to get people reading to understand the hook, but there's nothing given for them to understand. grapesurgeon (talk) 19:11, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
          I still think that working towards a mutual understanding between people and philosophies from two countries would be good to know. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:38, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
          • I think most academics who've been in more than one country (i.e. a good chunk of academics in Europe and the US) would say something similar in a job interview. Idk how to explain; not only are these things not particularly different from other academics, it's not engaging to an average person on the street. Grab a random Gen Z person and try to get them to be interested in this person. I'm sure maybe there's an angle for it, but at present I'm not seeing anything in the article, nor anything you've provide dso far. grapesurgeon (talk) 19:41, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
            I am here to tell what a person gave to the world, and I'm aware that not everybody will care. Is knowledge only for Gen Z persons (whatever that may mean)? When he studied in France it hadn't been long ago that France and Germany had been enemies.
    • Gen Z just an example. Take a person of any generation, really. Also still doesn't address point about information theory/statistics. I don't really get the pushback to this; it's antithetical to DYK. The point of DYK is to share things to get people interested in reading. If you intentionally don't try to appeal to others (moreover, if you don't even try to differentiate the topic from most other things in the same topic area), this isn't where you should be. I'm actually perfectly happy to click on a hook on a topic that I don't care about, as long as the hook is well constructed. But the orig proposals weren't even that; just mundane facts about a topic most will probably not be interested in. You should find a different niche space to share that information, like a subreddit or email group.
    On Alt2, publishing a book in late 80s is reasonably common imo, but somewhat more interesting than the orig hooks. I'm borderline on that hook. You can propose alternates if you'd like.
    If you'd prefer, I can hold off on reviewing; I don't want to just straight up decline. Maybe others will disagree with me. grapesurgeon (talk) 21:10, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    To be clear, I think it's noble you're trying to share this person's work, and you did good work on the article. But DYK is DYK. I intentionally choose not to go to DYK when I think an article I've made doesn't have a clear hook. I don't feel need to force it each time; my writing an article is service enough to the topic. grapesurgeon (talk) 21:14, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    ... that Bernhard Waldenfels wrote about the "black holes of everyday life"?
    ... that according to Bernhard Waldenfels, "the extraordinary accompanies order like a shadow"? Bremps... 20:18, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]


    Articles created/expanded on February 6

    [edit]

    Clinton plan intelligence conspiracy theory

    (
    )
    • ... that investigators determined the purported "Clinton plan" was baseless and fabricated by Russian spies, while the Trump administration claimed it was real?
      • ALT1: ... that investigators were unable to verify an alleged "Clinton plan" mentioned in a hacked Russian intelligence memo, even as Trump administration officials publicly promoted the claim?
      • ALT2: ... that no evidence was found supporting a purported "Clinton plan" described in a hacked Russian memo, even as Trump administration officials publicly cited the claim?
      • ALT3: ... that a purported "Clinton plan" originated in Russian intelligence material obtained by Dutch intelligence hackers?
      • ALT4: ... that a purported "Clinton plan" cited by Trump officials came from Russian intelligence material later described as likely disinformation?
      • ALT5: ... that no evidence was found for a purported "Clinton plan" in a hacked Russian memo cited by Trump officials, and that Durham's sources included Russian spies discussing creating the material?
    • Reviewed:
    Created by Valjean (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    Valjean (talk) (PING me) 16:07, 6 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    References

    1. ^ Savage, Charlie (August 1, 2025). "Durham's Debunking of the 'Clinton Plan' Emails, Explained". The New York Times. Retrieved February 1, 2026.
    2. ^ Strobel, Warren P. (July 31, 2025). "FBI investigated, never verified, purported Clinton plan to link Trump with Russia". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on August 6, 2025. Retrieved February 1, 2026.
    3. ^ Bump, Philip (May 15, 2023). "Durham's probe ends as it began: Pointing at trees to obscure the forest". The Washington Post. Retrieved February 1, 2026.


    Articles created/expanded on February 7

    [edit]

    Annamite striped rabbit

    (
    )
    Nesolagus timminsi
    Nesolagus timminsi
    • Source: Can, D.N., Abramov, A.V., Tikhonov, A.N. et al. Annamite striped rabbit Nesolagus timminsi in Vietnam. Acta Theriol 46, 437–440 (2001). "In 1996, biologist Rob Timmins found similar striped rabbits offered for sale in a food market in the town of Ban Lak, Laos. [...] The taxon was described as a new species, Nesolagus timminsi Averianov, Abramov et Tikhonov, 2000. "
    • ALT1: ... that the Annamite striped rabbit (pictured) has been separated from its closest relative, the Sumatran striped rabbit, for roughly 8 million years? Source: Tilker, Andrew; The Truong An, Nguyen; Gray, Thomas (2018). Nesolagus netscheri (Schlegel, 1880) Sumatran Striped Rabbit". In Smith, Andrew T.; Johnston, Charlotte H.; Alves, Paulo C.; Hackländer, Klaus (eds.). Lagomorphs: Pikas, Rabbits, and Hares of the World "However, despite having similar morphology, there is a large degree of genetic divergence between the two extant species, and it is estimated that they have been separated for more than eight million years."
    • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Kips Bay Court
    • Comment: I don't have the full text of the first source on hand but can get quotes in a couple days.
    Improved to Good Article status by Reconrabbit (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 14 past nominations.

    -- Reconrabbit 01:36, 12 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    • First hook is good. Have you checked whether the journal is accessible via your Library account? DS (talk) 02:55, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
      • I typically get it through my university library so it's resolved now. See quotation. -- Reconrabbit 15:18, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
        • Article is long enough and newly promoted to GA. Hook is interesting and properly cited. QPQ is done. Article is mostly well-sourced (thank you, GA reviewer) although I'd like better sources on "It is unknown why there is a thousand-mile gap between it and its nearest relative, the Sumatran striped rabbit (Nesolagus netscheri)" and "N. timminsi apparently coexists with the Burmese hare in a sympatric relationship", which I couldn't find in the sources you cited. Fix those and we should be good. DS (talk) 19:10, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Complications in Sue

    (
    )
    • ... that the new opera Complications in Sue was written by ten different composers, each writing without knowledge of what the others were doing, inspired by the surrealist exquisite corpse?
    • Source: "A big inspiration for the setup was the Surrealist parlor game known as exquisite corpse, in which people add bits and parts to a drawing or a text without knowing what others are contributing. The “Sue” composers saw only their scene in full, along with short descriptions of the others." [22]
    • ALT1: ... that the ten-composer opera Complications in Sue started as an idea for a show where the opera's star, Justin Vivian Bond, and Tilda Swinton would both play the same character, a woman named Sue? Source: "Tilda Swinton suggested to the performer Justin Vivian Bond that they do something together. Bond came up with a project she called “Complications in Sue,” in which they would both play the title character; they’d have two bodies but share the same brain. It became a bit of a running joke..."
    • Reviewed:
    • Comment: I think there's several potential hooks here, but that the 10 composer thing is probably the most unique and least trivia-like. I've included one focused more on Justin Vivian Bond, as she's an important trans artist.
    Moved to mainspace by BrechtBro (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    —BrechtBro (talk) 00:00, 12 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    • @BrechtBro: I can give this a full review; I have a preference for the first hook. However, before doing so, would you be okay with the following shortening?
    • ALT0a ... that the opera Complications in Sue was written by ten different composers, each writing without knowledge of what the others were doing?
    Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:27, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • The article is new enough (nominated within seven days of creation), it is adequately sourced, and ALT0/ALT0a (for the purposes of this review I am only considering ALT0a) are cited inline, verified in the source, and interesting to a broad audience. No QPQ is necessary as this is the nominator's second nomination. I found some minor copying with this source (specifically the names of the composers); I suggest rearranging the composers to resolve that (perhaps instead arranging them by alphabetical order). It might also be a good idea to have a reference for the composers within the article, as right now their names are mentioned without a footnote. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:48, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    The composers list is currently in alphabetical order and the article predates the page you have linked. I will add a citation for the composers, but doesn't the work itself serve as a source? —BrechtBro (talk) 03:02, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Theoretically it could, this is just to be on the safe side. Anyway, as you said, the article (or at least the initial draft) came before the linked page. Where did this particular order come from? I can approve this once the reference has been added, I was just wondering. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:50, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I added the inline citation to the composers list. I may further improve the article with a synopsis and composer breakdown if I can come up with a reasonable way to format it, but that shouldn't impact your review—BrechtBro (talk) 18:50, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I could approve the nomination now, but I imagine some might ask why there is no synopsis and bring up WP:DYKCOMPLETE, so I'll wait for the synopsis (not the composer breakdown) before giving this the tick. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:18, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I reviewed (without noticing that you did already), and would have approved, just asking to say a bit more about the scenes than "cover a decade", - they seem to be a scene from a decade, rather than "covering" the whole time. Mentioning that there a comic and serious aspects would also help. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:24, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    There was a recent nomination about a documentary whose DYKCOMPLETE compliance was challenged over a lack of a synopsis section, so having one added is probably the safest way forward. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:20, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    It would obviously be complex, and it would put too much weight on the plot. In an opera, the music should deserve detail, not only the plot, and that would imply ten different styles. There are several opera articles without plot, and why make things needlessly complicated? Completeness is required for GA, but so far DYK was for the short new articles with the hope to improve them when exposed on the main page. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:54, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Princess Thonbanhla

    (
    )

    *... that according to legend, Princess Thonbanhla possessed a supernatural beauty that changed its appearance three times within a single day? Source: Sithu, Min (1992). မြန်မာနိုင်ငံ နတ်ကိုးကွယ်မှုသမိုင်း (in Burmese). Mraṅʻʹ Chve Cā ʼupʻ Tuikʻ. p. 101. သမိုင်းတစ်စောင်ကမူ— သုံးပန်လှမိန်းမသည် ဟံသာဝတီမြို ကန္နန်းနိမ့်သူ တစ်နေ့ သုံးကြိမ် သုံးဖန်လှသည့် မိန်းမဖြစ်၍ [One history, however—The woman Thonebanhla was from Hanthawaddy, who is beautiful three times a day.]

    Created by Hteiktinhein (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 13 past nominations.

    Hteiktinhein (talk) 00:11, 9 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    How about,
    • ALT1: ... that Princess Thonbanhla was accused of witchcraft by the king's other consorts due to her beauty, leading to her death?

    *ALT1a: ...that because of her threefold beauty within a single day, Princess Thonbanhla died after the king's other consorts slandered her as a witch? Source: "သရေခေတ္တရာက သုံးပန်လှတို့ဆီ". The Irrawaddy (in Burmese). 14 July 2019. . Check again @HurricaneZeta:. Hteiktinhein (talk) 20:26, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Hteiktinhein I think those run into the same issues - they state the mythology as fact. Mythology gets some leeway as stated on WP:DYKFICTION and just now on WT:DYK#WP:DYKFICTION, but I think these still apply as it's entirely within the story. HurricaneZetaC 23:57, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Nonsense! You consider new hooks to be mythology in your view, but this is actually based on the real-life history of a princess from the small Taungnyo kingdom. Official records also state how she died and how she later became an object of worship. Even if a deity is considered mythical, there can still be a historical person identified with that deity. Hteiktinhein (talk) 06:13, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    It presents her threefold beauty as a fact instead of as an aspect of mythology.--User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 17:06, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • Full review:
    General: Article is new enough and long enough

    Policy compliance:

    Hook eligibility:

    • Cited: No - The statement in the article for ALT0 is not cited. The hook facts are ALT1 and ALT1a are not present in the article, which does not mention witchcraft. The article offered as a source for ALT1a does not mention that fact or the princess at all. the claim of witchcraft.
    • Interesting: No - With some rephrasing they could be, but the interestingness is hard to discern as the hooks are not clearly written.
    • Other problems: No - The hooks assume elements of legend as if they are historical fact. They make claims not found in the sources, and the threefold beauty concept requires more contextualization if it is to be used.
    QPQ: Done.

    Overall: This nomination has multiple defects of sourcing, copyright and hook composition. Given the nominator's apparent unwillingness to abandon the approach of treating legendary material as quasi-historical and their rejection as nonsense of good-faith efforts to improve the hooks, I am marking this for closure instead of further improvement. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:34, 17 February 2026 (UTC) ::I will report you at ANI. This is a personal attack and an overwhelming, non-neutral review. It feels like someone may have influenced this behind the scenes, and may be the outcome of the recent ANI case. I can fix the issues, but you are being very rushed in pushing me to make changes. Hteiktinhein (talk) 19:00, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Why are you not interested in explaining? I will ping respected Burmese editor for assistance regarding your treatment toward me. As for the Yangon Now source, it was not added by me; I moved the content from Thonbanhla. Please see that page’s edit history for attribution (WP:CWW): [23]. That is an additional reference, and it is still acceptable even if it is excluded from the article, because the history book already covers all the information. Hteiktinhein (talk) 19:04, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Hybernator: Hello ako, please help me regarding what I feel is overwhelming bullying by the reviewers. The user does not seem interested in understanding the facts or requesting clarification from me. The accusations made are not true. You can check one by one. Hteiktinhein (talk) 19:10, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    The reviewer also stated that “The Irrawaddy article does not appear to mention Princess Thonbanhla at all.” ([24]). I am really surprised at how the user made this claim without properly researching and rushed to blame me. It is not true...the article significantly covers the subject. Google or machine translation tools are very unreliable horrible for the Burmese language and can change the meaning of formal names easily. If the nominator could not check manually, they could have requested assistance from Burmese-speaking editors. But they did not. Why? Hteiktinhein (talk) 19:16, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, the reviewer also stated that “the article does not maintain a neutral tone.” How so? This article is about a deity identified with a historical figure, which is a normal case in Southeast Asia. It is written by presenting different accounts one by one. The reviewer’s comments are not neutral and should not be based solely on personal opinion. I have pinged a senior Burmese editor for this matter and for a neutral intervention. Hteiktinhein (talk) 19:24, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Come on, khwe thadaungsermyo. The nominator also mentioned that “Multiple passages are closely paraphrased from this source.” Really? According to Earwig’s copyvio tool ([25]), the similarity is only 13.8%, mainly due to common phrases such as “held on the eve of the full moon day of Waso” and “wrought-iron statue of the princess.” May i know What is your problem? Have I done something against you in the past? Hteiktinhein (talk) 19:34, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Hteiktinhein You should withdraw the WP:ASPERSIONs you have cast above about my motivations. As for the Yangonow source, when you merge content from another article, you take responsibility for the reliability of that source. Furthermore, the WP:BURDEN is on you to show a source is appropriate. If machine translation cannot show that the Irrawaddy.com article validates the claim made, it is imperative that you provide a quotation/translation that demonstrates how. This is English Wikipedia, and there is no requirement that only editors who speak a particular language review a DYK hook. Finally, close paraphrasing is considered a form of copyright infringement, and you have done it here. It goes beyond similarity of short verbatim phrases. Compare Stricken with self-doubt, the princess paused on the way home to dig in the swampy ground with her bare hands to see her face in the water. Meanwhile, King Duttabaung realised his error and set after her. (source) with While in exile, the princess was reportedly so stricken with self-doubt that she paused in a swampy area and dug into the ground with her bare hands to see her reflection in the water. The lake formed there is still visible today and is known as Let-the Yay-Kan (Claw Lake). (your article). There are other passages as well. I am honestly surprised an autopatrolled editor would not recognize this as impermissible WP:CLOP. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:48, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    It reflects a lack of research and translation skills on your part. If you are unable to verify the material, you can ask others for assistance rather than placing blame on my work. Hteiktinhein (talk) 19:58, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • Again? You are out of line. The reviewer also stated that “The statement in the article for ALT0 is not cited.” That is not true. The phrase “beautiful in three ways within a single day” is mentioned in most of the references in the article because it is a well-known part of her portrayal in Myanmar history. The reviewer seems to be blaming me without properly checking the sources. Hybernator or any Burmese editors can verify whether this is supported by the references. You can ping any Burmese native editor for fact-checking. Moreover, Princess Thonbanhla appears in nearly half of The Irrawaddy source, and it states that she died after being pushed by other queens due to jealousy over her supernatural (Burmese: “အင်မတန်လှပပြီး တနေ့ကို အလှ ၃ ကြိမ် ပုံစံပြောင်းတဲ့အတွက် နန်းတော်အတွင်း မလိုသူတွေက မင်းသမီးကို ချောက်တွန်းရာကနေ”). Of course, witchcraft is not mentioned in the current article because I summarized the content, but it can be added now verified with another source. Hteiktinhein (talk) 19:53, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for pointing out the specific passage. My translation software was not translating that passage when I had the whole article translated, but by flagging the specific passage I was able to validate it using machine translation. I've stricken a part of my review, but the rest of the review stands. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:01, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I will explain more one by one and pls give me more time and I'm waiting Hybernator for new hook. Thanks Hteiktinhein (talk) 20:06, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    How about proposing a new hook based strictly on the real-life situation?: ALT2: ... that in villages surrounding Ko Gyi Myoke, spreading gossip is traditionally feared because people believe it may incur Princess Thonbanhlas curse of leprosy? Source: "ဒဏ္ဍာရီထဲက သုံးပန်လှ ကျိန်စာ". Lotaya (in Burmese). 1992. အစွဲကနေ ကျိန်စာဖြစ်ပြီး ကျေးရွာအတွင်းကုန်းချော တဲ့လူတွေကို အနာကြီးရောဂါဖြစ်စေပြီး နူသွားတဲ့အထိ ကျိန်စာသင့်လေ့ရှိ] Hteiktinhein (talk) 21:26, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    How is Scary Myanmar - Chilli's writing on lotaya.mpt.com.mm a reliable source? It appears to be a blog post reposted from a Facebook page. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:31, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I believe it may be considered reliable in some cases because it is run by Myanma Posts and Telecommunications (MPT), Myanmar’s state-owned telecom operator. The platform has official partnerships and collaborations with several literary publications, news outlets, and writers whose content is republished on LoTaYa by paid. If you are not happy with this source as weak, this claim is also support by MMtimes ref. Hteiktinhein (talk) 21:43, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    ALT3:... that Princess Thonbanhla was posthumously granted territorial rights over several villages by King Duttabaung? Source: "သရေခေတ္တရာက သုံးပန်လှတို့ဆီ". The Irrawaddy (in Burmese). နာကြည်းချက်တွေနဲ့ သေဆုံးခဲ့ပြီးနောက် ဒီဒေသမှာ စောင့်ရှောက်ဖို့ မင်းကြီဆီကနေ အပိုင်စား ရခဲ့ပါတယ်လို့ ဆိုပါတယ်။] Hteiktinhein (talk) 21:38, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    The Irrawaddy source appears to say this statement is legendary. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:45, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    No, She is still regarded today as the spiritual landholder of those villages. In Myanmar’s traditional royal and religious culture, kings granted land or towns to deities in a manner similar to secular titles. This reflects a long-standing practice in which spiritual figures could hold territorial domains. For comparison, see Myosa for an explanation of how land and town grants functioned within the royal system. The granting of territory to her spirit follows that same cultural framework.If this were purely an invented legend without cultural grounding, she would not continue to be recognized today as holding apain-za (territorial rights). Hteiktinhein (talk) 21:51, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment from reviewer. I have given the nominator an opportunity to withdraw the multiple aspersions they cast above (see diffs linked here). They have refused to do so. The nominator's further statements and proposals have not given me any reason to change my review. As I am taking a previously scheduled wikibreak starting tomorrow, I will not have any further part in this discussion. It will be up to another editor either to close the nomination or to conduct a new full review that addresses all of the DYK criteria and the multiple failures to meet them (note there is still CLOP present). Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:58, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    :: minmayloe like...Really?...I have fixed as you said. Do more drama to avoid your overlooking. Really a drama king. Hteiktinhein (talk) 22:02, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    • New reviewer needed: The above reviewer is one-sided and not interested in fact-checking or considering my explanations. We should be discussing facts, but the reviewer seems to be deliberately ignoring what I explained and focusing only on aspersions instead of the actual issues. I can fix everything they questioned. If the nomination is closed in a one-sided manner, I will seek justic at ANI. If I truly cannot address the concerns, then it is my fault and the DYK should be rejected immediately. However, the current review appears to be creating unnecessary drama. Most of the issues raised have already been fixed, and several comments were made without proper review of the updated version. If new reviewers have any questions about this DYK, I am ready to respond here at any time. Hteiktinhein (talk) 22:12, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    ALT4:... that Princess Thonbanhla is honored annually on the eve of the full moon of Waso with a major worship ceremony funded by local villagers? Source: MMtimes ref. This hook is suggestion from [26]. Hteiktinhein (talk) 23:01, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    • Coming here after seeing this being discussed at WT:DYK. Hteiktinhein, I am very disappointed at your responses to the review here. Dclemens1971 made a review in good faith and nowhere did he question your skills or make aspersions. All his comments were about the article itself, and they are all genuine problems that need to be addressed for this to be approved. I suggest you make an apology to Dclemens1971 and strike your threat to bring him to ANI, and instead focus on addressing the issues he raised. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:23, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Narutolovehinata5: Thanks for reminding me that I was close to crossing the line. I have already apologized to him on my talk page. I was overheated during the argument after he suggested closing the nomination without my explanation. That’s why. I have successfully promoted DYKs about deities in the past and have never had any issues. My only wish is to address every question raised by others in a calm manner. So if you have time, I would be glad if you could review and raise any questions about this nomination. Hteiktinhein (talk) 23:36, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    The subject matter is outside my comfort zone so regrettably I will be unable to review this. My only concern was about your behavior, and I am happy to see that you have apologized and it was accepted. Please use this as a learning experience for your future nominations. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:58, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hello, I have struck the myth-based hooks, and there are refined hooks ALT1, ALT2, ALT3, and ALT4. Please tell me which hook is appropriate and which is not suitable for promotion, and I will strike the improper hooks. For me, I would prefer to choose ALT4, as it was suggested by DYK editors on the DYK talk page. I have addressed the additional errors mentioned above, and if there is still any CLOP present, please let me know here. Hteiktinhein (talk) 17:50, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I have successfully promoted several deity-related articles like this, such as Template:Did you know nominations/Thone Myo Shin. Hteiktinhein (talk) 18:08, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Such hooks and articles running without issue in the past is no guarantee that they would be allowed in the future. Consensus can change. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:30, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Here is a recent DYK in the same style: Template:Did you know nominations/Ma Aung Phyu, and there was no issue with it. So is the DYK policy now dependent on which reviewer is handling the nomination? Oh my jesus Hteiktinhein (talk) 08:32, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    If my recently promoted deity-related many DYKs fell under WP:DYKFICTION, is that the fault of the reviewer and promoter, or what? If WP:DYKFICTION depends only on the reviewer’s personal interpretation or knowledge, then perhaps DYKFICTION should be abolished as well. Deities are not fictional characters; they are real-life entities of worship. Hteiktinhein (talk) 08:37, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    And I cannot keep silent about this. Of course, Consensus can change, but to change consensus, there should be a clear reason. Why was the same structure accepted recently, but now it cannot be accepted? This should be explained clearly, even in a comparison table if necessary. Consensus cannot change so easily likeeee “accepted three minutes ago” and then “not acceptable one minute later” simply because the reviewer has changed. That is not proper consensus. This is not opposition. I know you are high-boss DYK editor, and I do not intend to oppose you here and just a fair question. However, I am super shocked and still cant accept that consensus appears to change depending on different editors. Thanks Hteiktinhein (talk) 09:47, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    To answer your question, it is no one's fault. Perhaps in previous nominations, reviewers did not realize that WP:DYKFICTION actually applied to the hooks, or that the articles were treating mythological figures as if they were real. It would be like, for example, our articles on Zeus or Jupiter treating them as if they actually existed.
    You should also remember that there is a difference between a mythological figure and a mythologized figure: they are not exactly the same. Jesus is widely believed to have existed, but not all of the events about him mentioned in the Bible are thought by scholars to have actually happened. Another example provided before was about George Washington: George Washington existed, but the cherry tree story never actually happened.
    The concerns raised by other editors was that the articles treated the figures as if they were real, or if they did exist, the stories as if they were real rather than contextualized. Admittedly, this concept is a bit complicated, but hopefully you understand now why editors now see the articles as problematic when they did not see it as so before. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:48, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the explanation, but you said that “reviewers did not realize that WP:DYKFICTION actually applied to the hooks.” That is not correct. Even if the reviewers did not realize it, the promoter could have. Moreover, once a hook is moved to the preparation area, if it falls under WP:DYKFICTION, many editors would pull it down. This has happened to my hooks several times. It is very difficult — almost impossible — for a hook to pass if the fact falls under WP:DYKFICTION. It is possible if WP:IDONTLIKE (Asian culture) is not being applied. Hteiktinhein (talk) 21:42, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    ALT-d... that the Burmese nat spirit Princess Thonbanhla was said to be "beautiful in three ways," changing her appearance to match the morning, noon, and evening? Source: Sithu, Min (1992). မြန်မာနိုင်ငံ နတ်ကိုးကွယ်မှုသမိုင်း (in Burmese). Mraṅʻʹ Chve Cā ʼupʻ Tuikʻ. p. 101.

    ALT-d1... that the spirit of Princess Thonbanhla is believed to protect the harvest, but may curse "backbiters" with leprosy? Source: Sithu, Min (1992). မြန်မာနိုင်ငံ နတ်ကိုးကွယ်မှုသမိုင်း (in Burmese). Mraṅʻʹ Chve Cā ʼupʻ Tuikʻ. p. 101. Hteiktinhein (talk) 21:51, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    To answer your concern, DYKFICTION's current wording with regards to mythology actually emerged from a discussion about Western mythology, so it is not an "anti-Asian" bias. In fact, we have run multiple Asian mythology hooks no issue in the past.
    As for the two new hooks, I'd actually be okay with a rewrite of the second hook: ... that the Burmese nat spirit Princess Thonbanhla is believed to curse "backbiters" with leprosy? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:25, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm Ok with your version even short. Hteiktinhein (talk) 23:19, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Climate change in the Democratic Republic of the Congo

    (
    )
    Created by Chidgk1 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 43 past nominations.

    Chidgk1 (talk) 06:39, 8 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    • Article is long enough, new enough, free of copyvio (only a 7.4% on Earwig). Prose is... rather rough. Far more subsections than are necessary for an article of this length. Sources may be questionable (most appear non-academic, mainly from the UN and advocacy groups). Hook seems interesting and its length is good but I didn't see where the linked source verifies it (a quote would help). Also not sure if an announcement from a specific UN programme is sufficiently reliable here (no author is given). QPQ is done. — An anonymous username, not my real name 20:48, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @An anonymous username, not my real name: I have combined some short subsections. I will look into the hook cite. Please could you tag "better source needed" or "unreliable source" for any other cites you suspect are not good enough to support the text. Chidgk1 (talk) 13:22, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    In this case, the problem isn't necessarily that they are generally unreliable, but that there are better ways to cite the information. UN programmes and climate advocacy groups are likely just reusing more academic studies for their info and it would be better to cite the studies themselves. You can use Google Scholar to find sources of academic quality. — An anonymous username, not my real name 19:40, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    OK I added 4 more scholarly sourcesChidgk1 (talk) 06:36, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    ALT1 ... that tackling its poverty might help to limit climate change in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the world?

    Source: https://cafi.org/country/the-democratic-republic-of-the-congo/ "... in the DRC, forest loss is due to poverty, to a local need for land and forest products (small-scale slash-and-burn agriculture and charcoal) exacerbated by strong population growth."

    Shaea al-Zindani

    (
    )
    5x expanded by Dr. Blofeld (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 7 past nominations.

    Thepharoah17 (talk) 00:36, 8 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    Anke Gowda

    (
    )
    • ... that Anke Gowda, a retired sugar factory timekeeper, built India's largest private collection of books?
    Created by Cl3phact0 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 10 past nominations.

    Cl3phact0 (talk) 10:28, 12 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    ​​ Courtesy link to discussion regarding this nom. -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 19:04, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    ​​​​ Courtesy link re: Pulling doesn't undo the review discussion, which seems to indicate that Thriley's review is in fact still valid. Please clarify "correct" procedure. -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 09:15, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    • As long as there's no reason to doubt a review on a given point – the content has not changed and the assessment has not been challenged – it can stay. I think what TechnoSquirrel69 means (and they are, by the way, very correct that all content in a DYK article that could reasonably be challenged needs to be cited to a reliable source – i.e. no unreliable sources should be there) is that the new content in the article, of which there is a lot, has effectively not been reviewed and needs to be checked against the content-specific criteria (sourcing, neutrality, copyright). theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 12:02, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • Also – I notice you want to clarify these things a lot, Cl3phact0, and I think that's great, but you should know that, afaik, TechnoSquirrel69 has been here for less time than you have. He doesn't (yet) have Mysterious Secret Insider knowledge of "correct" procedure that is unknown to everyone else. He's just making a common-sense judgment call based off the fact that all content in a DYK article needs to be checked against the DYK criteria. Maybe I've run into this scenario before, maybe not, but the rule I've communicated above is just an amalgamation of judgment calls I've made and have seen other people make, not an excerpt from a hard-and-fast set of rules that all of the DYK regulars agreed upon and forgot to write down. All of this is to say, I think it's great that you're involved with DYK and trying to get a clear expectation of what the rules are. Just know that there's not much we know that you don't; it is just our application of our experience and DYK's general principles, which is a thing you can also do and have an opinion on. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 12:13, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]


    Articles created/expanded on February 8

    [edit]

    William and Zachary Zulock

    (
    )

    * ... that some U.S. right-wing political commentators, including Laura Ingraham and Charlie Kirk, baselessly argued against same-sex adoption over the case of two gay men who abused their adoptive sons?

    **ALT1... that the criminal case against two gay men in the U.S. caused a political controversy in Argentina? ***ALT1a... that a criminal case against two gay men in the U.S. prompted anti-fascism demonstrations in Argentina?

        • ALT2...that in early 2025, anti-fascism demonstrations took place in Argentina against President Milei's remarks about gender ideology, pedophilia, and the criminal case against two gay men in the U.S.?
    Created by CoryGlee (talk).
    Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 24 past nominations.

    CoryGlee 23:40, 8 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    General: Article is new enough and long enough

    Policy compliance:

    • Adequate sourcing: No - WP:MEDIAMATTERS is heavily relied on, but the source used is clearly an opinion article by Matt Gertz, and consensus at RSN plus the guidance of WP:RSOPINION indicates that statements sourced to it should be attributed. They are not attributed in the "Reactions and aftermath" section. The article's statement The case against the Zulocks prompted a strong homophobic reaction from right-wing conservatives in the United States and abroad. has two citations (one of which is also identified as an opinion piece), neither of which reference a homophobic reaction in the United States. The only other source given to indicate there was any controversy at all is Media Matters, and considering that Media Matters' business is ginning up controversy about right-wing media, I wouldn't take a single Media Matters writer's (unattributed) opinion that there was a controversy as sufficient without further reliable secondary sourcing. The only discussions about Pagina 12 at RSN have raised concerns about its reliability (and that article reads as highly opinionated as well), so I'd love to see a better source than a sole Perfil article for the scale of the controversy in Argentina.
    • Neutral: No - See above; claims of a strong homophobic reaction are not neutral since they are not sourced to a reliable, non-opinionated, secondary source.
    • Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing: Yes
    • Other problems: No - Original research appears to be present. The entire paragraph starting with Empirical evidence discredits... appears to have been constructed as public service announcement; none of its sources reference the Zulock case and in fact predate them significantly. This appears to be an effort at WP:SYNTH. The article's statement He further described the Zulocks's actions as "appalling", but argued that data and statistics indicate that this type of abuse is much more common among heterosexual persons. is not found in the Media Matters article, which instead says It’s an appalling story, but also appallingly familiar — sexual abuse by household members is unnervingly common, particularly for children who pass through the foster care system. This makes no reference to relative prevalence of child sexual abuse among heterosexual versus homosexual parents.

    Hook eligibility:

    • Cited: No - The hooks are not neutrally phrased, and MMFA is not sufficiently reliable for statements of fact in wikivoice. Moreover, the term "baselessly", presented in wikivoice as if MMFA weren't an opinionated source, doesn't appear in the MMFA claim. ALT1 is sourced to highly opinionated sources but the Perfil article indicates there was a controversy. However, the article does not claim that the Zulock case caused the controversy as the hook states but rather that Javier Milei generated controversy when he linked homosexual couples to “pedophilia” by citing a U.S. court case (machine translation)
    • Interesting: No - If ALT0 were rephrased to attribute the claim to Media Matters, it would result in something that boiled down to "did you know that Media Matters criticized Laura Ingraham and Charlie Kirk", which is entirely predictable. ALT1 is probably fine, interesting-wise, if the sourcing issues can be resolved.
    QPQ: Done.

    Overall: Copyvio detector flags several passages but they are verbatim recitations of the charges and quotes from the sources so not an issue. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:01, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Dclemens1971 I will easily solve all those issues. As for empirical evidence it was copy-paste from Wikipedia article on LGBTQ grooming conspiracy and others that I can link you to. Easily solvable. Ping you when I do it all. CoryGlee 15:23, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    My point about the passage is that including it here the way you did is a sort of WP:COATRACK where you take sources that don't discuss the Zulocks and their crimes to draw readers to conclusions about the Zulocks' crimes. That's the original research.
    @Dclemens1971: Hi, I have fixed the wording where necessary. As for some of the U.S. reactions, I found the whole tape of Ingraham and Mia Cathell on Fox News itself. As for Charlie Kirk, as stated in edit summary, there's a Matter's link but directly to the podcast where he says those things, however, as much obvious as it is that he's talking about the Zulocks, he didn't mention them by name in his (usually, and thankfully gone) hateful speech. In the case of Matt Walsh, I didn't find Wonkette on PERENNIAL. If that's not reliable, I found his verified account on X with that post. So, I am willing to remove Kirk's part altogether if you like, and I used Media's source only as a means of stating Gertz's opinions. Finally, I have reworded the analysis subhead to eliminate OR and SYNTH. And lastly, I have no problems striking ALT0 and going for 1. CoryGlee 22:59, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    CoryGlee, there has not been a discussion about Wonkette at WP:RSN for a while (except for one about its editorial bias), but I am unwilling to tick it off here as a reliable source without a consensus to that end. It is owned by its editor-in-chief, has been migrated to the blogging platform Substack, and has no statement of editorial policy or standards on its site. The article selected as a source here is 1/3 the blogger reposting his own X posts; it's highly opinionated and in traditional Wonkette style, vulgar. I'd sooner just link to Matt Walsh's X posts if you want to include them. There continues to be a problem with neutrality and source-text integrity in the article; the words homophobic/homophobia are used twice to describe the reaction of US commentators, but not even Matt Gertz uses that term, nor does he describe it as widespread, broad or anything similar. Nor does Gertz describe any of the commentators as far-right. I don't know where these concepts are entering the article, but it is not from the MMFA source. The word tabloid in the lead is also not backed up by any content in the article. Additional question: What does the sentence Tenembaum ended the article saying that in the "new times" of Argentina, "absurd questions were beginning to make sense." mean in the article? Finally, can you please propose a rephrased ALT1 if that's the direction you want to go? Dclemens1971 (talk) 13:56, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Dclemens1971: thanks for the neat review. I have removed Wonkette and cited the Twitter (X) from Walsh's official account which links (retweet) from a far-right outlet describing the Zulocks's case to which Walsh responds. That said, I have decided to remove Kirk's entry because I saw on his article that the input was rephrased on the basis that Kirk does not mention the Zulocks by name, although it is obvious that he did refer to their case. Anyway, took that off and rephrased some controversial wording. I will modify hook 1 and strike the original.
    @CoryGlee: Didn't see your response until now; for future reference, a ping only works if the comment is signed with four tildes. Much better on NPOV tone issues, but this is still not ready to go. I see you've added the Laura Ingraham source as a source in other spots. This is an opinionated source (see WP:FOXNEWSTALKSHOWS) and would not generally be considered a reliable source. Looks like you have a second source for this section (In 2011, Zachary was a suspect in the rape of a 14-year-old boy, whom Zachary allegedly lured into his apartment to sexually assault him. He was questioned by Walton County police, but the case did not advance, and Zachary did not face any investigation nor charge.); please be sure that the other source covers this. For the statement The Zulocks also tortured the two boys, forcing them to stand in a corner for "eight hours straight" over back-to-back days, only allowing them to go to the bathroom and eat. A relative of Zachary said that on one occasion William hit the elder sibling in the face and added that "they abused (the children) in every possible way." please add a source that is not Laura Ingraham's show. (The other Ingraham Angle sources are fine; her show is reliable for information on what aired on her show). Not sure why Gateway Pundit's Twitter is being cited for Matt Walsh's tweet, but that should go. As for the hook, I'm still not seeing where in the sources it says that the Zulock case triggered the protests in Argentina. Indeed, the BA Times source added specifically says Political, trade union and civil society groups in Argentina are marching Saturday in repudiation of President Javier Milei's recent remarks about feminism and the LGBT community. As I've said above, this angle needs to be recast to point out that Milei's remarks on the Zulock case were the proximate cause of the protest unless there are other sources to the contrary. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:07, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Dclemens1971: I understand, Ingraham and Cathell could be lying (though I doubt it) about the addition of torture. I have reworded accordingly, including the rape allegation (2011) entry, sticking to the scarce words by The Daily Telegraph. As for the source on the Argentine protests, I cite verbatim this source by Página 12 (Source #25) It's in Spanish, I insert a quick Google Translation: “In its most extreme versions, gender ideology is simply child abuse. They are pedophiles,” Milei ridiculously declared, among other statements where he called for the extermination of the “cancer” of feminists, “leftists,” and everything he calls woke. The economist-turned-president cited as an example a gay couple from Georgia, USA, sentenced to 100 years in prison for abusing two adopted children. Beyond this case, there is no demonstrable evidence that gay men are more likely to commit acts of pedophilia than heterosexual men. A UNICEF report in Argentina, which surveyed incidents between 2020 and 2021, highlighted that “statistics indicate that the majority of abusers are socially well-adjusted heterosexual men.” Regarding the United States, the American Psychological Association stated that “gay men are not more likely to sexually abuse children than heterosexual men.” Gregory Herek, a professor at the University of California, analyzed 352 cases of child sexual abuse, in which LGBT+ adults were responsible for only 1%. [A Popular and Diverse Response] In response to the Argentine president's attack, people took to the streets in every province of the country, generating a memorable mobilization to Plaza de Mayo on February 1, 2025, in what was the 1st Federal March of Antifascist and Antiracist Pride. In response to the president's insults, both LGBTQ+ organizations and other opposition groups—political parties, unions, and civil society organizations—marched. CoryGlee 21:26, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    CoryGlee That quotation confirms what I said and what your hook doesn't say -- that the demonstration was triggered by Milei's comments, not by the Zulock case itself. I thus can't approve your proposed hook because it's not validated by the sources in the article and that you have provided here. P.S. I'm not saying Ingraham and Cathell are lying; I'm just saying that articles at DYK are required to be based on reliable sources, and Fox News opinion shows are by consensus not reliable sources. Dclemens1971 (talk) 22:59, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Dclemens1971 I have reworded the hook to get it backed by Página 12 and other sources' statements. As for Ingraham & Cathell, if you like, I remove their opinions on what is not independently verified by other sources (let's say, the torture thing). In the rest of linking to that source, it is for the analysis and not facts. CoryGlee 23:18, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    CoryGlee ALT2a... that Javier Milei's remarks about the U.S. criminal case against two gay men resulted in anti-fascism demonstrations in Argentina? I'm rearranging this slightly to streamline it for discussion. As I review it, Milei's remarks seemed to be about the abuses the Zulocks committed, not the criminal case. Does this read better? ALT2b... that Javier Milei's remarks about child sexual abuses committed by two gay men resulted in anti-fascism demonstrations in Argentina? Dclemens1971 (talk) 23:29, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Dclemens1971, yes, thanks, I was just about to ping you about that. It looks like translating is giving another meaning for me. Indeed, not the case, but the actions by the Zulocks, added to other general remarks about gender ideology and feminism. I am going to make it very clear in the article. I think that it is a good ALT indeed. Do you think that it is needed to add that he expressed more things like comments on gender, etc. or it's just fine with the case of the article? CoryGlee 23:33, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    CoryGlee I don't want to make the hook too long so I'd leave it at the current length. The one reservation I have is the guideline that Hooks that unduly focus on negative aspects of living persons should be avoided. For my part, I don't think naming the crimes of these individuals is undue focus on a negative aspect of their lives since it is what they are notable for, but I don't know if promoters and queuers will disagree. That said, since I proposed a hook with a new fact in it, I can't review it myself and am requesting an independent reviewer to take a look at ALT2b. Dclemens1971 (talk) 00:02, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Chatô, o Rei do Brasil

    (
    )
    • ... that the film Chatô, o Rei do Brasil took twenty years to be released due to a scandal involving the mismanagement of public funds?
    • Reviewed:
    Created by Cassilvwikis (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    DanGFSouza (talk) 22:09, 8 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    General: Article is new enough and long enough
    Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

    Hook eligibility:

    QPQ: None required.

    Overall: The hook is not directly cited in the source given, it only says (translated): "After two decades of controversy surrounding director Guilherme Fontes – who last year was ordered to pay R$ 71 million to the Brazilian government ... " @DanGFSouza: Do you have a source stating that he mismanaged public funds? Chorchapu (talk | edits) 15:15, 25 February 2026 (UTC) Chorchapu (talk | edits) 15:15, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Articles created/expanded on February 9

    [edit]

    Miloš Vučević

    (
    )
    Miloš Vučević
    Miloš Vučević
    Improved to Good Article status by Vacant0 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 750 past nominations.

     — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:08, 16 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    Marie-Thérèse Fourneau

    (
    )
    Fourneau before 1946
    Fourneau before 1946
    • ... that in a biography of a friend, Marie-Thérèse Fourneau (pictured) was described as having an "independence of spirit" and prioritising both her young daughter and a "healthy world career"?
    • Source: Panigel, Armand (1960). "Anthologie Marie-Thérèse Fourneau". Disques; classiques, danses, chansons, jazz (in French): 212. OCLC 3488212. : le talent de Marie-Thérèse Fourneau est intimiste d'abord.
    • ALT4 ... that Marie-Thérèse Fourneau (pictured) was one of the "most brilliant" students of the "Grande Dame of the French piano school", and was "recorded in wartime Paris", later rereleased?
      • Reviewed:
    Created by PaulasBunt (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    PaulasBunt (talk) 08:36, 12 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    References


    Articles created/expanded on February 10

    [edit]

    Donuts (album)

    (
    )
    • ... that Donuts was produced as a circular loop, alluding to the food's circular form?
    • Reviewed:
    Improved to Good Article status by RTSthestardust (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    RTSthestardust (talk) 15:12, 11 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    Policy compliance:

    Hook eligibility:

    • Cited: Yes
    • Interesting: Yes
    • Other problems: No - Potential issues with interpretation

    QPQ: No - Unneeded
    Overall: Basic checks: article passed GAN on February 10 and was nominated on February 11 and is over 20k characters in length. All paragraphs are cited and the sources appear to be reliable - only nitpick is that there are duplicated citations, I've tagged these so RTSthestardust could you fix them? The article is written in a neutral point of view. Earwig only flags some short irreplaceable phrases, and no close paraphrasing evident from spot-checks. QPQ is not needed.

    Hook: Quotes from the three given sources below

    but one that was pieced together as an infinite loop built of miniatures - PopMatters
    The point of Donuts is its circular nature; that it begins and ends with the same sound and can loop forever. The first sound is the last sound. - Spin
    Donuts opens with an outro and concludes with an intro, and while this may seem ass backwards, it’s almost too perfect a metaphor for Dilla’s otherworldly ability to flip the utter shit out of anything he sampled. Obviously, donuts are circles. - Stereogum

    The third one is the only one that specifically states the fact that donuts are circles and that the album is based off of this. This can just be the writer's interpretation - are there any additional sources for this? Due to that, I don't think it can be stated as fact.

    The hook is cited in the article and is interesting. There's no image attached to the nomination. So, the only outstanding issues are the duplicated citations and the hook issue. HurricaneZetaC 21:11, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Suggest alternative hooks:
    ALT0a: ... that Donuts was produced as a circular loop, alluding to the food's circular form?
    ^ This avoids linking the artist, provided that the circular form claim is further verifiable.
    ALT0b: ... that Donuts was produced as a circular loop, which might be alluding to the food's circular form?
    ALT1: ... that J Dilla worked on Donuts in the hospital?
    ALT1a: ... that J Dilla worked on Donuts, which was released three days before his death, in the hospital?
    ALT2: ... that Donuts was released three days before its creator's death?
    I think these will require a new review, as they were proposed by me. HurricaneZetaC 21:21, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    GAN passed February 10, nominated February 11. Length good. Adequate reliable sources are used (duplicate citations have been fixed). Copyvio is ok (35.5%), flags some short irreplacable phrases and proper nouns. QPQ not needed. Article is written from a neutral point of view. Hooks are interesting, short enough, and cited in article. Looks good to go. With this being my first DYK review, I would like a second opinion. Jude Halley talk/contribs 04:08, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    References

    1. ^ Heaton, Dave. "The 100 Best Albums of the 2000s: 80–61". PopMatters. Archived from the original on September 23, 2017. Retrieved September 23, 2017.
    2. ^ Soderberg, Brandon (February 1, 2013). "Toro Y Moi: Our Finest J. Dilla Disciple". Spin. Archived from the original on September 23, 2017. Retrieved September 23, 2017.
    3. ^ Robinson, Collin (February 5, 2016). "Donuts Turns 10". Stereogum. Archived from the original on September 23, 2017. Retrieved September 23, 2017.

    Hicks-neutral technical change

    (
    )
    • Source: Galor, Oded (1988). "The Long-Run Implications of a Hicks-Neutral Technical Progress". International Economic Review. 29 (1): 177–183. doi:10.2307/2526817. ISSN 0020-6598.p. 177. Quote: "The long-run consequences of a Hicks-neutral technical change for factor prices are studied as well. The analysis demonstrates that in contrast to the results obtained in static (one-good, two-factor) frameworks, a Hicks-neutral technological progress, through its effect on capital formation, alters the factor price ratio in the long run." [27]
    • Source: Sheng, Yu. "Technological change, capital deepening, and agricultural total factor productivity ( TFP) growth: Cross‐country comparison of 18 OECD countries". Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy. 47 (5): 1848–1868. doi:10.1002/aepp.13535. ISSN 2040-5790. p. 1848. Quote: "Our results reveal technological progress as the predominant driver of agricultural TFP growth, consistently offsetting input scale contractions."
    • Source: Doraszelski, Ulrich; Jaumandreu, Jordi (2018) "Measuring the Bias of Technological Change". Journal of Political Economy. 126 (3): 1027–1084. doi:10.1086/697204. ISSN 0022-3808. p. 1030. Quote: "Hicks-neutral technological change causes output to grow, on average, in the vicinity of 1.5 percent per year."
    — Preceding unsigned comment added by MiltonMilei (talk • contribs) 16:08, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    @Grapesurgeon:

    • Source: Galor, Oded (1988). "The Long-Run Implications of a Hicks-Neutral Technical Progress". International Economic Review. 29 (1): 177–183. doi:10.2307/2526817. ISSN 0020-6598.p. 182. Quote: "In the long-run, however, the increase in factor prices stimulates capital formation, which in turn further increases the wage rate while decreasing the interest rate." [28]

    @Grapesurgeon:

      • Reviewed:
    5x expanded by MiltonMilei (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    MiltonMilei (talk) 13:26, 10 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    • @MiltonMilei: Hi, not doing a full review here and no comment on any other potential issues, but for the future reviewer's convenience, you should provide a link to the source in question, and ideally quote the line that supports the hook (especially if it's paywalled/not open access). Thanks, ScalarFactor (talk) 00:36, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • @MiltonMilei: imo hook is not particularly interesting; so what that it does? You could maybe spin the hook to emphasize how the article's title sounds like jargon, but imo at present there's no reason the average person would care to read into this. Could you provide one or more alternate hooks? grapesurgeon (talk) 16:05, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • @MiltonMilei: Hello, I saw the alternate hook proposed. The hook comes from a paper that is making a hypothesis; we can't present hypotheses as absolute truth on Wikipedia. The article also has a similar problem with this; This deceleration of progress reflects a shift from Hicks-neutral to labor-augmenting technological change that favors capital-intensive economies and amplifies cross country TFP differences this is presenting the paper as like proven fact rather than a hypothesis. Could you provide another hook? grapesurgeon (talk) 05:25, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    @Grapesurgeon: I added two alternative hooks. Did you see both of them? MiltonMilei (talk) 06:04, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    • @MiltonMilei: The hook about Spain's output growth has the same hypothesis issue, so imo can't use. The increases wages hook may also be a hypothesis as well, particularly because "level of technology" in given formula may be a little vague, but my background in this area is a little weak. Maybe the hook could be reworded to: ALT5 "... that Hicks-neutral technical change is hypothesized to increase wages and lower interest rates". Maybe the Spain hook could be edited in a similar way instead. Do you have thoughts on which you'd prefer? grapesurgeon (talk) 14:56, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]


    Hypanis plicata

    (
    )
    • Reviewed:
    Improved to Good Article status by Sn 173 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    Sn 173 (talk) 10:35, 10 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    • @Sn 173: Imo hook is not particularly interesting; so what that it can? Is it unusual for molluscs to be able to do that? The average person has no context on this; think about if you had to go out in the middle of the street and tell people about this would they be interested? Could you come up with one or more alternate hooks? grapesurgeon (talk) 16:06, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
      • Boring into hard substrates like this is not something many aquatic animals in general can do, but if you say it's not interesting then I don't really know what I could do, sorry. Other facts about this species would be too technical to add here. Sn 173 (talk) 22:49, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Not willing to review, just a comment: maybe it's a wording issue? If you show that this mollusc, a soft-bodied animal (I think thin-shelled bivalve is too scientific for DYK), can bore into hard clay, and if you explain how it does it (does it use its foot?), and possibly why it does it, maybe it gets a different vibe. Barbalalaika 🐌 14:20, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Sn 173: Courtesy ping, sorry.
    Sorry for responding so late. The literature doesn't really elaborate on this behavior besides comparing it to piddocks (bivalves in the family Pholadidae), but I don't know if "dyk that a cockle from the caspian sea can bore into hard clay similarly to piddocks?" or "convergently evolved that ability separately from piddocks" will mean anything to non bivalve-brained people (and also the most detailed but also brief account on the behavior and the mention of convergent evolution comes from a really old 1917 paper). I'm fine with this not getting promoted I just thought it'd be neat to try :P Sn 173 (talk) 19:18, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Gigamachilis

    (
    )
    Created by TrueMoriarty (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 08:55, 12 February 2026 (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
    QPQ: None required.

    Overall: TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 09:01, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    TrueMoriarty Note that you can't review your own nomination, someone else will have to review it. HurricaneZetaC 01:45, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @HurricaneZeta thank you for the information

    TrueMoriarty Talk | Contribs 08:58, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Articles created/expanded on February 11

    [edit]

    Ctenobethylus goepperti

    (
    )
    • ALT1: that famed German polymath Johann Wolfgang von Goethe unknowingly owned a 40-million-year-old fossil ant in his amber collection that was only identified in 2026?
    • ALT2: that famed German polymath Johann Wolfgang von Goethe's amber collection contained a 40-million-year-old fossil ant discovered in 2026?
    • Reviewed:
    • Comment: This is my fourth DYK nomination, so the next one and every one onwards from that will require a QPQ. I am proposing a special set some time in the future, possibly within a month or two, which will comprise exclusively of ant-related DYKs, including this page, Pheidole navigans, and 5-6 more I have planned, if it is possible.
    Created by 2003 LN6 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    2003 LN6 05:56, 12 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    • NOTE:If you're planning to propose an ant only DYK set @2003 LN6:, you need to start that request process now, as its going to take a lot of convincing and you would need 9 total articles to fill a prep set.--Kevmin § 00:32, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • Starting Review.--Kevmin § 00:32, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
      • As an initial note, the alt1 hook is OR, we dont know that Goethe was unaware of the ant, it is visible to the naked eye in the amber specimen, and nothing in the article say he didn't see the inclusions. Baltic amber is noted to darken with age, and the specimen was likely lighter in tone and plausibly more transparent when he aquired them. I will also fully object to the use of 40mya in the hooks. We don't know the exact source of Goethes specimens, and Baltic Amber age is noted to be contentious, with Priabinian to Early Oligocene still noted in papers and the Goethe paper itself uses Middle to Late Eocene dated (47–34mya). Third, the whole article should be at the gens page and I have started a merge proposal.--Kevmin § 00:52, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I also suspect that such a set will not gain consensus. Following recent events, single-topic sets have become controversial and are likely to be scrutinized. It would also likely require an actual special occasion date to work; a single-topic set on a random day is unlikely to get support given the lack of a connection. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:53, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Te Waihorotiu railway station

    (
    )
    Improved to Good Article status by DDMS123 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    DDMS123 (talk) 21:12, 11 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    • Not a DYK review, but just an observation. In some sections, 2025 predictions are stated using future tense. Obviously, that ought to be updated. Have those things happened? If so, past sense needs to be used, and maybe references added confirming those developments. Schwede66 16:09, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • ALT2: ... that Te Waihorotiu railway station is built in the shape of a waka, a Māori canoe?.
    Is there an independent source for this? It looks like a giant square box to me. Traumnovelle (talk) 20:13, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Neritina pulligera

    (
    )
    A live individual of Neritina pulligera
    A live individual of Neritina pulligera
    • ... that the snail Neritina pulligera (pictured) attaches its eggs to the shells of other living snails to prevent their predation?
    • Source: Kano, Y.; Fukumori, H. (2010). "Predation on hardest molluscan eggs by confamilial snails (Neritidae) and its potential significance in egg-laying site selection". Journal of Molluscan Studies. 76 (4): 360, 364–365. doi:10.1093/mollus/eyq018. "Our laboratory examination showed that Neritina species deposited clusters of egg capsules more frequently on the living shell than on other substrates, and that the predation rate was significantly lower on this moving ‘nursery’."
    • ALT1: ... that during their migration upstream to reproduce, smaller neritid snails "hitchhike" on the bigger Neritina pulligera (pictured) to save energy? Source: Kano, Y. (2009). "Hitchhiking behaviour in the obligatory upstream migration of amphidromous snails". Biology Letters. 5 (4): 465, 467. Bibcode:2009BiLet...5..465K. doi:10.1098/rsbl.2009.0191. PMC 2781923. PMID 19411267. " Small juveniles of N. asperulata (<5 mm in maximum shell length, MSL) were found almost exclusively (98.6%) on the shells of N. pulligera, an abundant, large-sized congeneric species with upstream migration behaviour (...) The hitchhiking of N. asperulata therefore seems to be beneficial in shifting the cost of migration onto the larger congener, thereby increasing the success rate of migration.
    • Reviewed:
    Improved to Good Article status by Barbalalaika (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    Barbalalaika 🐌 20:30, 11 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    Article was promoted to GA status on time and I did not find any close paraphrasing. Spot check checks out. This was the nominator's first nomination so no QPQ is required. As stated earlier, the first hook is the more interesting option: apparently it is actually a common behavior among that snail's family, but as DYK is intended for general audiences and I assume non-specialists would be unaware of that context, it should work in this case. The only issue is that the specific sentence mentioning the "attaching the eggs on other snails" fact lacks a footnote: it needs one per WP:DYKHFC. Once that is addressed this will be good to go. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:20, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Narutolovehinata5: thanks for the quick review! I added the footnote. To match the hook better I also rephrased the sentence in the article to "N. pulligera presents a unique egg-laying behaviour by preferably attaching its eggs to the shells of other living snails."
    I could also rephrase ALT0 as:
    ALT2: ... that neritid snails such as Neritina pulligera (pictured) attach their eggs to the shells of other living snails to prevent their predation?
    If ALT2 is too far from WP:DYKMAJOR:
    ALT3: ... that Neritina pulligera (pictured), like other neritid snails, attaches its eggs to the shells of other living snails to prevent their predation?
    Doesn't flow as good but acknowledges that it's a family behaviour. I also think ALT0 is sufficient for the layreader, but it's your call! Barbalalaika 🐌 10:48, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for the edits. Since I do not have access to the source, do you have a quote that explicitly states that Neritina pulligera snails attach eggs to other snails? The article states that it's a general behavior in the family, but the quote provided above may be insufficiently precise for DYK purposes. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:19, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Narutolovehinata5: Sure:
    "Egg capsules of Neritina species, deposited densely on the shell surface of a female N. pulligera in the 4-day laboratory observation (larger ones by N. pulligera and smaller by N. iris). (...) The predation rate on these capsules (24 out of 170 capsules) is much lower than on the glass wall, suggesting that the back of living snails may act as a safe ‘nursery’." (p. 363, description of figure 2 G.). Table 3 in the same page then shows that the most eggs deposited on shells belonged to N. pulligera.
    If I'm not mistaken the paper can be accessed through the Wikipedia Library.
    Revisiting the paper made me realise that it references the genus Neritina specifically when discussing the behaviour, not the family as a whole. I've corrected this in the article. When you let me know which ALT is preferred, I'll correct it too. Barbalalaika 🐌 12:04, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    As much as I like that angle, it doesn't seem like the sources specifically discuss N. pulligera so unfortunately the angle may not survive scrutiny. I think we can go with ALT1 instead. Just to clarify: is it a general behavior, or has it only been observed once? It is just an observation and isn't a general thing, maybe ALT1 could be rephased to use the word "observed" somewhere instead of treating it as a consistent fact. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:25, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    The source doesn't specifically discuss N. pulligera in the sense that the entire discussion revolves around the genus Neritina as a whole. But they used N. pulligera (among other neritines) in the study and the results show that the species contributed to the findings, as per the snippets above. Just so I understand it for next time: this wouldn't survive scrutiny because it's only my second DYK, or would a hook with this source never be accepted?
    To answer the hitchhiking question, the source says:
    "In fact, all individuals of this species hitchhike in rivers with long lower reaches through which they migrate to reproduce." (...) "no single juvenile of a comparable size was found at locations more than 2 km above the tide in population studies of two congeneric species without the hitchhiking behaviour" (talking about the hitchhiking N. asperulata, p. 466)
    Figure 1 in the same page also shows hitchhiking snails from two different locations in the Solomon Islands (Fig. 1 b and c).
    Barbalalaika 🐌 07:23, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    If the source is talking more about the behavior being about the family or genus in general and not N. pulligera, it would likely be brought up at WT:DYK as being insufficiently precise. The hook needs to be supported by the source. If that can't be done, there are multiple options: 1. reword the hook, 2. reword the article, or 3. propose a different angle. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 07:28, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Understood. Does my reply about ALT1 support it enough? Barbalalaika 🐌 07:59, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]


    Articles created/expanded on February 12

    [edit]

    Ahmad Soedarsono

    (
    )
    • ... that after being suggested to resign due to his cancer, ambassador Ahmad Soedarsono responded that he wanted to die in the line of duty? Source: https://www.tempo.co/tokoh/meninggal-dunia-1079451 - Almarhum mengidap kanker sejak lama dan sudah beberapa kali masuk rumah sakit di Bangkok. Atasannya pernah memintanya untuk pulang saja menginga penyakit itu. "siarlah saya meninggal dalam tugas," jawab Sudarsono. "The late ambassador had long suffered from cancer and had been hospitalized several times in Bangkok. His superiors once asked him to return home due to the illness. "Let me die on duty," Sudarsono replied."
    Created by Jeromi Mikhael (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 117 past nominations.

    Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 03:54, 13 February 2026 (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
    QPQ: Done.

    Overall: The article text uses "pass away in office" rather than "die in the line of duty" (as in the hook) or "die on duty" (as in the source). Per MOS:EUPHEMISM, one of the later two phrases would be preferred. Otherwise, this seems good to go to me. A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 10:10, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]


    Articles created/expanded on February 13

    [edit]

    Seedance 2.0

    (
    )
    • ... that according to a major Hollywood writer, Seedance 2.0 is a sign that "one person is going to be able to sit at a computer and create a movie indistinguishable from what Hollywood now releases"?
    • Source: “I hate to say it. It’s likely over for us,” wrote Rhett Reese, writer of the “Deadpool” films, in a comment on the Cruise-Pitt video. “In next to no time, one person is going to be able to sit at a computer and create a movie indistinguishable from what Hollywood now releases.” Variety
    Created by Thriley (talk). Number of QPQs required: 2. DYK is currently in unreviewed backlog mode and nominator has 208 past nominations.

    Thriley (talk) 03:52, 18 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    • Hooks must adopt a neutral point of view. Someone else's opinion about Seedance 2.0 (even more, a wild prediction about Seedance 2.0 that may never actually happen) does not sound like a neutral hook. Cambalachero (talk) 16:10, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    ALT1: that after viewing a viral clip of Tom Cruise and Brad Pitt fighting generated with Seedance 2.0, a major Hollywood writer stated "It's likely over for us"? Thriley (talk) 21:45, 18 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Still the same problem. it's a wild prediction. I have noticed a problem with the article: it only talks about the reception of Seedance 2.0, and there's basically no info about Seedance 2.0 in itself. What are its features? Has Bytedance shared any insights, stories, or anecdotes about its creation? What changed from Seedance 1.0, 1.5, or whichever was the previous version? (surely it did not start as 2.0). Add more info from that angle, and surely you'll find a better hook in the process. Cambalachero (talk) 00:21, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Is this article in a good enough shape to be featured on DYK? Guz13 (talk) 15:48, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    The article itself has the technical requirements (new, length, etc), but the hook is not suitable, and reading it I can't propose other alternatives either. That's because the article is mostly a "reactions to Seedance 2.0" rather than a proper "Seedance 2.0" article, and as a result there is no interesting info that can be made into a hook that isn't a variation of "someone has X opinion of Seedance 2.0". And, as pointed, hooks must be neutral. Cambalachero (talk) 18:21, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    There has been tons of press over the past week, so there is certainly more to add. I'll propose some new hooks over the next day or so. Thriley (talk) 19:14, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Konstanty Wasyl Ostrogski

    (
    )
    • ... that during the ratification of the Union of Brest, prince Konstanty Wasyl Ostrogski organized a meeting of the union's Orthodox opponents in a local Protestant church?
    • Source: All the hierarchs of the Kievan metropolitanate arrived in Brest [...], but they did not meet together. Instead, [...] the Orthodox bishops, [...] Prince Ostroz'kyi and several other princes met in a nearby Protestant church. (Paul Robert Magocsi: A History of Ukraine, 1996, p. 166: https://diasporiana.org.ua/wp-content/uploads/books/8750/file.pdf)
    • Reviewed:
    5x expanded by Skoropadsky (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 5 past nominations.

    Skoropadsky (talk) 00:28, 14 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    • Oppose; the note contains factual errors. Magoscis is mistaken. The anti-Union synod did not take place in a Calvinist church, but in the townhouse of the burgher Rajski, which was the permanent residence of Ostrogski in Brest. Likewise, the pro-Union synod did not take place in the Brest cathedral, because no such church existed in the city, as the seat of the exarch was in Volodymyr, in the Dormition Cathedral. In Brest there was the Church of St. Nicholas the Wonderworker [be], which the pro-Union bishop Hypatius Pociej closed for the duration of the synod.Marcelus (talk) 11:29, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Renard Johnson

    (
    )
    • ... that Renard Johnson is the first black mayor of El Paso, Texas, and the 53rd mayor of the majority Hispanic city located on the U.S.-Mexico border?
    • Source: "A political newcomer, Johnson will be El Paso’s first Black mayor and will preside over the eight-member City Council . . . " in Perez, Elida S. (December 15, 2024). "Renard Johnson elected El Paso mayor, easily defeating city Rep. Brian Kennedy". El Paso Matters
    • Reviewed:
    5x expanded by ZoyaBoris (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    ZoyaBoris (talk) 20:50, 13 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    • @ZoyaBoris: A new enough and large enough expansion. QPQ not required. I had no idea he was married to a news anchor here in Phoenix! The article needs some fixes:
    It has some bare URLs that need expansion into proper references.
    There are promoters who shun hooks that say "X is the first Y" (see WP:DYKFIRST for a related essay), so I want to see a new hook totally. (I've added to ALT0 some formatting and links to demonstrate what hooks should look like. Is there a more interesting hook out there?
    Please ping me when you respond. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 22:56, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    @Sammi Brie: How about this for a new hook. "Did you know that Renard Johnson, mayor of El Paso, is the founder of El Perro Grande Tequila, which has been named one of the five best tequilas in the world by Forbes magazine." Also the tequila comes in a cute, dog-shaped bottle and Johnson donates part of the company's revenue each year to the Human Society of El Paso.— Preceding unsigned comment added by ZoyaBoris (talk • contribs) 22:45, 15 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    @ScalarFactor Thank you. ZoyaBoris (talk) 22:33, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    @Sammi Brie: How about this for a new hook. "Did you know that Renard Johnson, mayor of El Paso, is the founder of El Perro Grande Tequila, which has been named one of the five best tequilas in the world by Forbes magazine." Also the tequila comes in a cute, dog-shaped bottle and Johnson donates part of the company's revenue each year to the Human Society of El Paso.ZoyaBoris (talk) 22:33, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Zhang Gan

    (
    )
    • ... that Chinese general Zhang Gan credited his military promotions to the guidance of fortune-telling practices?
    5x expanded by Toadboy123 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 74 past nominations.

    Toadboy123 (talk) 23:03, 13 February 2026 (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
    QPQ: Done.

    Overall: Article is new enough and long enough. Hook fact is interesting and appears supported by the source. Sources are in Chinese, so the copyvio detection tool is useless, but spotchecking finds no close paraphrasing with Google Translate.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 18:51, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]


    Articles created/expanded on February 14

    [edit]

    Alfonsas Svarinskas

    (
    )
    Alfonsas Svarinskas prays the Rosary
    Alfonsas Svarinskas prays the Rosary
    • ... that the Lithuanian Catholic priest Alfonsas Svarinskas (pictured) was arrested 3 times, spent 22 years in Soviet gulags, and was named by a Soviet court as an especially dangerous repeat offender?
    • Source: Lietuvos Respublikos Seimo kanceliarija – Exhibition "The Legendary Priest. Monsignor Alfonsas Svarinskas (1925–2014)" [29]
    • Reviewed:
    Created by +JMJ+ (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    +JMJ+ (talk) 22:02, 20 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    The article is long enough, new enough (just) and the hook is interesting (but the wording could possibly be tweaked). No QPQ needed.
    I do have a few concerns with the article, however. The proposed image cannot be used because it is flagged for missing evidence of permission. I checked if there is an alternative image that could be used but I'm a bit wary of using either of them, I don't feel confident they are not subject to copyright. The article furthermore contains several unreferenced paragraphs, and much of it reads too much like proseline; for example here: In 1990–1991, he was the Chancellor of Cardinal Vincentas Sladkevičius. 1991–1992 Deputy of the Supreme Council – Reconstituent Seimas. In 1991–1996, he was the Chief Chaplain of the Lithuanian Armed Forces, the first clergyman to hold this position in Lithuania. He was also given the rank of Reserve Colonel. [...] In 1997–1998, he was the Rector of Church of St. Michael the Archangel, Kaunas and Assistant Priest of the Minor Church of the Resurrection of Christ [lt]. In 1998–2000, he was the priest at Church of St. John the Baptist [lt] in Kavarskas. Since March 30, 2000, he was the priest-resident of Church of St. Peter and St. Paul in Ukmergė. It's mostly a list of postings, can it be re-worked into genuine prose?
    There are some minor beauty spots regarding the language too ("Alfonsas Svarinskas (January 21, 1925 – July 17, 2014) – Lithuanian Roman Catholic priest, Monsignor." is not a great way to start the articel; "grandma" seems a bit too informal to me, why not use "grandmother"? etc); I can perhaps live with those but they bring the general presentability down.
    Finally, the hook facts are not readily identifiable in the prose of the article or supported by inline sources per WP:DYKCITE. To simplify things, I would propose an alternative hook, ALT 1: "... that Alfonsas Svarinskas was nicknamed "The Incorrigible" by the KGB?" which I find snappier and likely to make the reader curious; it is already supported by an inline citation.
    Take your time to address these issues, and let me know your thoughts. Thanks, Yakikaki (talk) 21:42, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Valerie Pitt

    (
    )
    • ... that Valerie Pitt campaigned for the ordination of women in the Church of England for 25 years but when right was granted said that she could not understand why any woman would want to be a priest?
    Created by MumphingSquirrel (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 9 past nominations.

    MumphingSquirrel (talk) 16:54, 19 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    • New enough. Long enough. Well-sourced, neutral, and BLP-compliant. The article is also presentable, including a basic biography of the subject. The hook is also interesting. QPQ is met. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 23:48, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • MumphingSquirrel, please rephrase (1) "she could not understand why any woman would want to be a priest" in the article and the hook. Also, (2) "Her BLitt dissertation was on the roots of Shelley's philosophy". These clauses/sentences are word-for-word identical to the source according to Earwig. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 19:27, 22 February 2026 (UTC). Done MumphingSquirrel (talk) 23:04, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • Drive-by comment "when right was granted". Is it more grammatically correct to say "when that right was granted", or a similar phrasing? The problem is that adding that one word would take the hook slightly over 200 characters. Unless I'm wrong, that means that the hook would be either slightly too long (perhaps this isn't really an issue) or grammatically incorrect. It might also be worth wikilinking either ordination of women and/or Church of England. Thanks, A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 21:28, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Alt 1: that Valerie Pitt campaigned for the ordination of women by the Church of England for 25 years but said she didn’t understand why any woman would want to join the clergy when that right was granted? MumphingSquirrel (talk) 23:04, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    British Airways data breach

    (
    )
    Improved to Good Article status by Joereddington (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    Joe (talk) 07:41, 15 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    Okay, so - the issue is that the main source was Klijnsma's blog on RiskIQ, which is now defunct and is not on the Wayback Machine. Various scholarly pdfs reference either the RiskIQ page or the medium article (which I think is effectively a copy-paste - Klijnsma himself started a series of Medium articles afterwards) which is super annoying. I would email Yonathan Klijnsma myself for other sources in question, but he sadly died a couple of years ago: https://itwire.com/business-it-news/security/cancer-claims-talented-researcher-yonathan-klijnsma.html. Now, the Medium article is detailed and an excellent source, but I see your point. Would you be happy with it being mentioned in this Wired article? https://www.wired.com/story/british-airways-hack-details/? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joereddington (talk • contribs) 15:07, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Joereddington: Thanks for explaining; it seems Schoenbaum is a bit of a subject-matter expert here, at least. I agree the Medium article appears detailed and excellent, but it's always good to ensure we have secondary sources to support the information—in that case, I would definitely recommend adding the Wired source as well. Here's a link to Klijnsma's blog post too, if that helps. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 21:00, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Archion

    (
    )
    • ... that after an emissions fraud scandal caused more than a year of delay, Japanese truckmakers Hino and Fuso are merging into Archion?
    • Source: Delay, scandal: "Back in May 2023, the four companies reached an agreement in principle and announced their intention to complete the business integration by the end of 2024. [...] However, Hino’s engine emissions scandal, which surfaced in 2022, delayed the integration process, leading to an indefinite postponement in February 2024." Japan News. Fraud: "Hino Motors [...], a subsidiary of Japanese automaker Toyota [...], pleaded guilty on Wednesday over a multi-year emissions fraud scheme" Reuters. Timing of merger: "Daimler Truck and Toyota have revealed further details about the planned merger of their Japanese commercial vehicle brands Mitsubishi Fuso and Hino Motors. The new holding company will be called Archion and is due to begin operations on 1 April 2026." Electrive.
    • ALT1: ... that combining Hino and Fuso vehicles creates Archion?
    • Reviewed:
    • Comment: April 1 is the day this becomes effective, so if anyone has a way of appropriately making light of this business, by all means go ahead, and queue it accordingly. (The best I could come up with was that Hino and Fuso vehicles combine into Archion...like Voltron.)
    Created by TheFeds (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    TheFeds 03:24, 15 February 2026 (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

    Image eligibility:

    QPQ: None required.

    Review is incomplete - please fill in the "status" field

    Reviewing this article as part of a QPQ. Article meets the criteria for DYK having been nominated a day after creation, with no other eligibility issues. Article is above 1500 characters long. The hook concept seems interesting but I don't know how much it would trigger interest among the average reader. The ALT hook however is much better for this nomination and it would fit well with WP:DYKAPRIL. No image used so that's all good for the nomination. Should be good to go. PresentlySuraye3 (talk) 00:27, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Andrew Ranken

    (
    )
    Andrew Ranken
    Andrew Ranken
    5x expanded by Launchballer (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 370 past nominations.

    Launchballer 22:53, 14 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    • Article expansion began February 14 and was nominated the same day. Character count before expansion was 1054 characters. Current character count is 4110 characters. This is below the required expansion. More content will need to be added to reach the required character count of 5270 characters. Article is cited to reliable sources. No copyright violations detected. Everything otherwise looks policy compliant, and QPQ has been done. Hooks are both interesting, but I am unable to verify them as google books has the pages blocked from view. I will need quotes to verify and approve the hooks. Please ping me when the expansion has reached the required length and quotes have been provided so I can complete the review. Thanks.4meter4 (talk) 02:47, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I'll deal with the hooks in the morning, but the expansion started from this edit, which was 612; and before this was BLARed in 2014, the article was 743 characters; and the article was recreated on 12 February anyway, which is less than a week before I started playing with this. How are you getting 1054?--Launchballer 03:00, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't know where you are getting 612. I copy pasted that text from that exact page into word counter. This page right before the expansion is 182 words at 1056 characters (I mistyped earlier it is 1056). If you dont believe me here is the text in green: Andrew Ranken (13 November 1953 – 10 February 2026) was an English drummer, best known as the percussionist for the English-Irish band The Pogues Ranken was born on 13 November 1953 in the Ladbroke Grove area of London. He joined the Pogues in 1982, and played his first gig with them at the 100 Club in London on 29 October 1982. He appeared on all of their recordings and tours until their breakup in 1996. He performed with The Pogues from their reunion in 2001 until their official break up in 2014. He contributed to the music soundtrack of "Macbeth", a Puppet Theatre Barge production, with a drumming improvisation. He sang in Andrew Ranken and Mysterious Wheels and played the drums for the Recidivists. In July 2023, Ranken and the Mysterious Wheels released a charity single in support of St Joseph’s Hospice in Hackney, London.The song is called “Take me down to St. Joe’s”. His diagnosis of Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) was the main inspiration for him to write the song. Ranken suffered from COPD. He died on February 10, 2026. You can copy paste the green text into https://wordcounter.net Best.4meter4 (talk) 03:31, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Firstly, I'm not copy-pasting anything into anywhere given that checks are supposed to be done with WP:DYKCHECK, secondly expansion started an edit later because your version included considerable WP:BLP violations, and thirdly the 1,0-whatever-it-was version had been created barely 31 hours earlier so this would still be eligible anyway as a new article. As for the hooks, the book says "Returning to the doctor's, Ranken was relieved to find that he could keep his finger and was back on stage for the rest of the tour, albeit in a one-handed capacity.", "Andrew Ranken was nicknamed The Clobberer after a MacGowan composition of the same name, and because he was a drummer.", and ""When I finished work, I'd have to close everything down and just hope everything had burnt properly. Anyway, I came in one morning and obviously the fire had gone out a bit too early. I opened the incinerator and there was this half-burnt Alsatian dog inside it. It smelt like bacon, funnily enough. It made me retch. I couldn't bear it any longer. I walked out." That was when Ranken decided to go back to college and began his three-year course at Goldsmiths."--Launchballer 17:54, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Nonsense. First BLP violations are not exempt from five time expansion prose count. Only copyright violations are exempt per WP:DYK5X policy. The objectionable text was not copyrighted, so the older and longer extant text with the BLP violations is included in the prose count as required under our guidelines for article expansion reviews. This is probably why your prose count was so different, because you incorrectly assumed BLP violations would not have their prose counted. That is simply not our policy at DYK.
    Second, using DYKCHECK is not mandatory, and never has been (see WP:DYKCHECK#Counting prose characters without DYKcheck). Several older reviewers use other accepted methods which we've grandfathered in from long ago. I've used word counter since before DYKCHECK was even created. It was the long standing tool used at DYK for years (yes my history here goes back to pre-2009 under my first account which I long ago abandoned). This is old school expansion style reviewing which is still allowable. I stand by my prose count which carefully removed the items required as indicated in the DYKCHECK guideline for using word counting tools. I am the reviewer, and I use word counter, as many reviewers have for years. (Note I've never had an editor at review push back on this and I have been around at DYK for a long time and reviewed tons of 5x expansion hooks using this method).
    Third, I note that this article was restored from identical pre-existing text from 2023 (see here in 2023 and here in 2026 pre-expansion). It was not simply a redirect turned into an article, but an old article that was restored and existed in article space in 2026 prior to your expansion. It's not eligible under the new article criteria because the page went live earlier. Some of the restored 2023 article text dates way back to the 2013 article. There is not a good new article argument to made here with an article history going back 13 years, and a brief period in 2026 without a redirect. I think you know that or this wouldn't have been a 5x expansion nomination from the start.
    On a positive note, Alt1 is usable to the cited source. I can approve that one once the prose count issue is sorted. Alt0 sort of checks out, but I could see some people questioning whether the dog was the prompt or the aftermath of leaving the job was the prompt. It's borderline and I don't want to get dragged to ERRORS because somebody decides it is questionable. I can reject this if you don't want to expand further. You will need to meet the prose count as required by the guideline in order for me to give the DYK tick. I'm not trying to be mean here, just consistent with the way I have been reviewing for the last 20ish years. Best.4meter4 (talk) 05:56, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    The 2010s version has never been above 743 characters. The 2023 version lasted in mainspace for less than two and a half minutes and was not live again until 2026; it was essentially draftified. It would be unreasonable to count that. (There probably is tons of Pogues material I could add to the article, but the tale is largely best told at The Pogues.)--Launchballer 10:32, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I hate to do this to a valuable editor here at DYK who does excellent volunteer work here routinely, but if I can't get you to accept what I am saying in my review, then I am going to have to reject this. WP:DYK5X states Articles can be made eligible via a fivefold expansion of an article's prose. This calculation is made from the last version of the article before the expansion began, even if text from the original was deleted in the process (unless the text was a copyright violation, in which case it does not count towards the size of the original). We don't have enough time and volunteers to reach consensus on the quality of each previous article. The guideline is the guideline. The prose size count before expansion is 1056. That version of the article existed both in 2023 and 2026 and never contained copyright violations. There is no time in article space exception component to the review guideline, and I can't just overlook this version of the article because it is convenient for the nominator. The required prose length for DYK pass is 5280 characters. The current prose size count is 4110. Given the nominator's unwillingness to accept what I am telling them, and that we are in backlog mode, the hook is rejected. I am willing to reconsider this if the nominator wants to do the work of bringing this up to required prose count, what I will not do is change the way policy instructs us to implement DYK5X. If we can't agree on this, than there is no point in going further here at review.4meter4 (talk) 13:26, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    The article existed in 2023 for three minutes. It should not count towards a week. I've posted at WT:DYK because it's clear we aren't going to agree on this.--Launchballer 13:41, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    No, that version of the article existed in 2023 and in 2026. It was there briefly, but it was there. There isn't a time in article space exception and the instructions are clear to begin with the last version of the article pre-expansion. This is what the policy says to do. I am following the policy as written.4meter4 (talk) 13:54, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Running Up That Hill (Meg Myers recording)

    (
    )
    • Source: [30] — "For her cover of the Kate Bush hit Running up that Hill, Los Angeles artist Meg Myers decided to make a music video that would bring the song into Crayola colour. With the help of 2,130 children, the video's director created a moving colouring book. Every frame in the 12-frame-per-second animation, features a page coloured by a different kid.
    Created by An anonymous username, not my real name (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 12 past nominations.

    — An anonymous username, not my real name 21:13, 14 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    • @An anonymous username, not my real name: Hi, hope you are doing well. Thank you for coming up with this article about a beautiful music video. Please do not mind, I see there are a few problems.
    Good catch; I replaced the primary use with the press release and completely removed the review associated with it.
    Same issue with the Red Light Management reference.
    Removed.
    • Duplicate references #5, 7, and 9, despite the music video is linked in the infobox... Instead, this could be merged under footnotes.
    5 and 7 were duplicates and I have fixed them. 9 is meant to cite the music video specifically, not just the song itself. Not sure what you mean about the video being linked in the infobox; this is a commonly used template in music articles and unrelated to ref tags.
    I repeat, but in different words. References #5 and 8 are not OK because they are still duplicate to an official external link, which is correctly provided already inside the infobox. When the media is publically released, it is often easy to obtain the credits and generally do not require an inline citation. This may fall under WP:OBV and can be enlightened in a footnote instead. WP:PERSONNEL says, "it is generally assumed that a personnel section is sourced from the liner notes". (Apparently, you are aware of this)
    I don't think it's that big a deal. It may not be necessary, but I fail to see the harm. The music video does not provide the same credits as the audio.
    I can understand your concern, but I don't think this applies. WP:CLOP is primarily about wording things the way the source does when there are more original ways the information could be summarized. With a sentence like Roy grew up in the Edmonton area, where her parents worked as schoolteachers, and she pitched the idea to Myers knowing they could help connect her with local students., there really aren't many other ways to express the information without changing the meaning of the original source.
    I will see more deep and reply back.
    • When we say, is often compared to her, according to National Public Radio (NPR), we need to comply WP:V as well, which only one WP:INLINE would not do. I could not find any reference before the release of the cover song which compares the singers.
    See WP:INTEXT. This is attributed to NPR, a reliable source, not stated in wikivoice as a fact.
    Then would you say same for Myers being a fan of Bush? Because it is also attributed to this only reference, yet mentioned in WP:LEAD as a primary fact in wikivoice.
    Saying they are "often compared" is a somewhat subjective (which is why I provided in-text attribution) but not particularly controversial claim. Saying Myers is a fan of Bush is neither subjective nor controversial — I don't see any issue with such a mundane statement only being supported by one source.
    • Probably typo: nonetheless expression satisfaction --> nonetheless expressed satisfaction
    Fixed
    • The Screen Rant review can easily be summarized in one sentence, please also see WP:DATELINK.
    Summarized more concisely. I have indeed read WP:DATELINK. However, the source is discussing the year overall, which I felt represented a meaningful difference between linking here and linking for any random year. Nonetheless, I have removed it.
    • Hook concept is good, but what if it does not trigger interest for those who are not fans of Myers? Should the hook be rephrased to ALT0a, dropping the name and instead calling "the music video for a 2019 song"?
    I don't think she's a particularly well known artist to begin with, and if she is, it's largely for this song. It's also worth noting that the original version of the song is extremely popular and using its name is likely to increase interest if anything.
    Not denying the popularity, but what if it is not extremely popular outside the selected countries, how would this trigger interest for a reader from any other country viewing the Wikipedia mainpage?
    That's not really my concern. This is English Wikipedia after all; most readers will be familiar with American/British popular culture. This argument could be applied to almost any possible DYK hook — one of the ones currently running is about Sukumar Barua who may not be well known outside Bangladesh, but I, as a non-Bangladeshi, find the hook perfectly interesting.
    The article is new and long enough, QPQ linked as well (review is under process). But I do not know how this became a sudden GA. Please check, thank you! M. Billoo 21:10, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @M.Billoo2000:, I have addressed your comments. — An anonymous username, not my real name 22:01, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @An anonymous username, not my real name: Replied under some points, working more on the CLOP one. M. Billoo 22:57, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    As also suggested by the GAN reviewer, try adding more about the subject. The Synopsis and Production sections can be added/expanded to comply WP:DYKCOMPLETE as well. Just in case, please check the official press release above, also [31] and [32]. Hope this may also resolve the CLOP issue. As for the reference duplication, I am still not convinced because literally the WP:REFDD says, "Don't add references for obvious information". Also, please see Template:Infobox song#genre, and I sugest revisiting the genre of the subject... Thank you! M. Billoo 01:55, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @M.Billoo2000:, WP:REFDD is neither a policy nor guideline, and this statement is linked to an essay (WP:BLUE) for which there exists an equally valid opposing counterpart (WP:NOTBLUE). As for DYK:COMPLETE, all it says is There is an expectation that an article—even a short one—that is to appear on the front page should appear to be reasonably complete and not some sort of work in progress. I would hardly call this article a "work in progress", even if it could possibly be expanded a bit more. The sources you linked only cover the production of the music video, not the song itself, and the press releases do not go into the song's production detail either. Again, I really don't see the CLOP issues and I'm inclined to ask if you could request a second opinion if you think they indeed are present. As for the genre, the GA reviewer specifically told me to change it from 'pop-leaning' to 'pop'; you may take it up with them if you think this is an issue. With all due respect, I have never had a DYK review that went so far in depth and so far beyond the content of the DYK hook itself. — An anonymous username, not my real name 02:15, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • Really sorry, I did not mean to make you feel bad. I am just trying to help with what I can...
    • For expansion, something like artwork and video took three months in total including one month of mixing, depicts a caterpillar turning into a butterfly, etc. can be added, because the hook is about the music video and basically not the song or cover.
    • For the genre, more suitable is Alternative instead of Pop, as reliably sourced by Billboard and iHeartRadio, instead of Pop-"leaning" (which is definitely not Pop).
    • Just revisited some other articles, e.g. "The Fate of Ophelia", and those contain a Tidal or Apple link for Personnel credits.
    Again, please do not mind, I have no bad intentions, the only reason for in depth review is that my QPQ do not get hold once again, after some previous poor attempts (I am sad and extra-conscious myself). Thank you! M. Billoo 03:00, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you. It is for sandbox only, I have not run any spell or grammar check on it yet. Cheers! M. Billoo 18:09, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    • I have found some more references (which can be used) to support Myers is a fan of Bush and is inspired with her work, and that she used to be compared with Bush.
    M. Billoo 20:02, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Lemon Express

    (
    )
    The Lemon Express
    The Lemon Express
    • Source: https://vialibre-ffe.com/noticias.asp?not=1150 "Se repintaron amarillo limón, según el promotor para hacer juego con las muchas millas de limoneros entre Benidorm y la sierra de Bemia, ..." translated: "They were repainted lemon yellow, according to [the owner] to match the many miles of lemon trees between Benidorm and the Sierra de Bemia,"
    • ALT1: ... that a Spanish tourist train (pictured) briefly returned to service after 10 years for European Mobility Week? Source: http://docs.aaaf.org/GF/53/mobile/index.html (p. 10) "El material móvil expuesto estaba formado por ... una corta composición del Limón Exprés, en lo que era su primera aparición pública en los casi 10 años que lleva fuera de servicio." translated: "The rolling stock on display was made up of ... a short composition of the Lemon Express, in what was its first public appearance in the almost 10 years it has been out of service."
    • ALT2: ... that the Lemon Express (pictured) didn't serve lemons? Source: "El 'Limón Expres', un tren para el turismo" [The 'Lemon Express', a tourist train]. Vía Libre (in Spanish). "mientras los camareros del "Limón", vestídos de amarillo, venden bocadillos y vino para el almuerzo." translated: "While the waiters on the "Lemon [Express]", dressed in yellow, sell sandwiches and wine for lunch."
    • Reviewed:
    • Comment: I'm open to any other hooks.
    Moved to mainspace by JudeHalley (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    Jude Halley talk/contribs 20:58, 14 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    Articles created/expanded on February 15

    [edit]

    LastPass 2022 data breach

    (
    )
    • Reviewed: [[]]
    • Comment: p19 of linked pdf.
    Improved to Good Article status by Joereddington (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    Joe (talk) 10:10, 15 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    General: Article is new enough and long enough

    Policy compliance:

    Hook eligibility:

    • Cited: Yes
    • Interesting: Yes
    • Other problems: No - See below
    QPQ: None required.

    Overall: @Joereddington: Congrats on the GA! Very enjoyable read, shouldn't be too much to fix before passing 🙂 First, copyvio is tagging quite a few sentences from here, with most of which being false positives, but other sentences like:

    and exfiltrated 14 out of approximately 200 LastPass source code
    On 12 August 2022, the personal computer of a separate LastPass employee (a senior [...]
    On 13 August 2022, LastPass engaged Mandiant to assist with the incident response.
    [...] Incident 1), LastPass' investigation was unable to determine the full extent of the threat actor's activity.
    On 30 November 2022, LastPass submitted a personal data breach report to the ICO.

    Are personally too long (over seven words) to be taken straight from the source without quotes. The last one in particular is it's own sentence in the article taken word for word from the source. For policyother, could you straighten all the apostrophes per MOS:CURLY? They're really inconsistent rn. Finally for the hook, could you make an ALT1 that reads something like ... that a key moment in the LastPass 2022 data breach saw an attacker compromise an engineer's personal Plex account?, with the key changes being past-tense wording (compromising -> compromise), MOS:CURLY on the one apostrophe, wikilinking Plex, and changing "server" to "account", to better match the source text provided. Congrats again on the GA, once these changes are implemented you should be gtg. Johnson524 16:57, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]


    Articles created/expanded on February 16

    [edit]

    Laurie Triefeldt

    (
    )
    • ... that Laurie Triefeldt taught herself to use a computer program to create a World of Wonder to fill the gap between text and illustration?
    • Source: "...the second installment of "World of Wonder," the full-page educational feature that will run in Thursday's Today section throughout the school year. The creative brainchild of graphic journalist Laurie Triefeldt, the series features a colorful look at topics in science, history, technology, and nature...While coverage of the toples will be geared to third- through eighth-graders, Triefeldt said, "What I find is that people of all ages like It. Even grownups like it a lot." (She does take suggestions for future topics.) After researching the weekly topic, Thefeldt "draws" the lustrations using a computer mouse and sophisticated software that includes an almost limitless palette of colors. Geometric shapes - a roof or a chimney — are executed with a tew deft mouse clicks, while something as asymmetrical as a buttery's wing is outlined by mouse with a quick and graceful hand. Triefeldt, a graduate of the Ontario College of Art, is self-taught in the skills of computer graphics, noting. "When I went to school, they didnt even teach computer art yet." She came up with the idea of an lustrated newspaper page for students because it matched the kind of artwork she enjoyed, and because it filled a gap between the regular text for adult readers and the cartoon-based features that were available for children. I was unable to have children, but I love kids. "World of Wonder' is a way for me to give to many children," she said. Triefeldt lives in Trenton with her husband, two cats, and a fish pond." The Star-Ledger
    Created by Thriley (talk). Number of QPQs required: 2. DYK is currently in unreviewed backlog mode and nominator has 209 past nominations.

    Thriley (talk) 18:18, 23 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    2007 Temple of Awwam bombing

    (
    )
    Temple of Awwam
    Temple of Awwam
    Improved to Good Article status by Hsnkn (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

    Hsnkn (talk) 00:30, 23 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    • Article reached GA status on 18 February and was nominated in the proper window. Article looks compliant with policy as one would expect with a GA article. No copyright violations detected and no QPQ is required. The hook has issues. The "nearly 3,000-year-old" portion of the hook fact appears to be in error as the temple is centuries older than that. The scholarly article in JSTOR cited in the Temple of Awwam article dates the temple to 1500 - 1200 BCE meaning it is at a minimum 3200 years old and possibly 3500 years old. The other part of the hook fact checks out, but we can't run a date contradicted by WP:RS. That fact will need to be removed from the article, and a new or modified hook proposed. I am surprised the GA reviewer did not catch this. Best.4meter4 (talk) 04:21, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
      • This error would be on my part as I included it after the GA review was passed. As for the age, the AP article simply says its 3,000-year-old, not nearly, so perhaps it could fit the correct time frame if I replace it with "approximately 3,000-year-old"? Otherwise, would noting that the temple was built during the "ancient kingdom of Sheba" be a good enough replacement hook? Hsnkn (talk) 17:52, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Two to five hundred years off in dating a structure is an error. Given that approximately 3000 years old is factually not true in RS, I would say that doesn't fix it. The AP is not a subject matter expert on the temple, and clearly did not consult recent scholarly publications (which were published after the bombing because the research was published post 2007) when writing its article. I suggest adding this journal with the correct dating of 1500-1200 BCE written by scholars on the temple who are subject matter experts: Zaid, Zaydoon; Maraqten, Mohammed (2008). "The Peristyle Hall: remarks on the history of construction based on recent archaeological and epigraphic evidence of the AFSM expedition to the Awām temple in Mārib, Yemen". Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies. 38: 327–339. JSTOR 41223960. I note too that this temple is far older than the Kingdom of Sheba which did not exist until 1000 BCE. The temple predates the Kindom of Sheba by at least two hundred years, so that fact is also not true. Note that archaeology studies on the temple have advanced post 2007, so that news reports at the time of the bombing were based on older archaeology studies which have since been repudiated by more recent research using epigraphic evidence and other types of technological innovations which were not possible earlier. Best.4meter4 (talk) 19:35, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Eric Tolt

    (
    )
    Improved to Good Article status by Johnson524 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 2. DYK is currently in unreviewed backlog mode and nominator has 31 past nominations.

    Johnson524 17:11, 22 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    • Johnson524, could you suggest a different hook? I am sorry but I don't find this hook interesting. There is a fact in the first paragraph "Tetris career" section that is very interesting. I would suggest it myself, but then I could not review it. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 19:31, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
      • @Coffeeandcrumbs: Ooo I'd love to hear what you had in mind! 😀 Even if you can't conduct a review, it's more important to me to have the hook be as polished as possible for the main page. Cheers! Johnson524 22:01, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
        • Johnson524, I will have to find another DYK to review for QPQ but here goes. I suggest the following hook:
          ALT1:- ... that Eric Tolt was the first person to achieve a "maxout" on a version of Tetris, a point in the game where the score becomes so high that it no longer registers correctly?
    I hope you like it. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 03:13, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Coffeeandcrumbs: Very much so! I've added it above, cheers! Johnson524 03:20, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    No opinion on ALT1, other than if we are to go with that, we need to make sure that the sourcing is extra strong per WP:DYKFIRST. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:46, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Bum (San Diego dog)

    (
    )
    Bum
    Bum
    Created by Chipmunkdavis (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 68 past nominations.

    CMD (talk) 04:37, 16 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    • No objection to April alts, like ALT3 or: "…that a Bum can be alcoholic?" and so on. Regarding disambiguation, I found a police dog from Toledo called Bum which seemed notable while researching this and so was more specific. Thinking about it again the argument could be made that this is the primary dog Bum, but I've never found it a worthwhile endeavour to judge one Bum above another. CMD (talk) 14:41, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]


    Articles created/expanded on February 17

    [edit]

    SS Hippocampus

    (
    )
    Hippocampus
    Hippocampus
    • ... that the freighter Hippocampus (pictured) was sunk by fruit?
    • Source: Chicago Tribune (September 10, 1868) "This disaster, to a far greater extent than most of those which have sorrowfully distinguished Lake Michigan, seems to be the direct result of the wanton carelessness or avarice of the owners or freighters in sending to sea an old vessel so manifestly overloaded that it was noticed by indifferent observers."
    5x expanded by Akaza (talk). Number of QPQs required: 2. DYK is currently in unreviewed backlog mode and nominator has 34 past nominations.

    ❆ AKAZA ❆ 22:48, 25 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    General: Article is new enough and long enough

    Policy compliance:

    Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
    Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.

    QPQ: No - pending
    Overall: Article looks mostly good. Nice work. I was wondering what makes the ShipwreckWorld citation a reliable source? It looks like anyone might be able to write for them, as their front page has a "Submit Your Own" article button. Let me know if I'm wrong. Also awaiting the QPQ @Akaza: BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:12, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    St. Martin's Church, Zillis

    (
    )
    St. Martin's, Switzerland
    St. Martin's, Switzerland
    • Source: https://zillis-st-martin.ch/kirchendecke-st-martin-zillis/ is checkable online. it indicates "Einbau der romanischen Holzdecke." was 1109-1114, but the printed Nay 2008 source suggests this is either a mistake or too aggressive - it says AFTER 1114 (when an original log in the ceiling was dated to).
    Created by SnowFire (talk). Number of QPQs required: 2. DYK is currently in unreviewed backlog mode and nominator has 22 past nominations.

    SnowFire (talk) 01:48, 25 February 2026 (UTC).[reply]

    General: Article is new enough and long enough

    Policy compliance:

    Hook eligibility:

    Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.

    QPQ: Unknown
    Review is incomplete - please fill in the "status" field

    I have modified this to "the third and present church". Toadspike [Talk] 09:32, 25 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Template:Did you know nominations/1972 Montana Constitutional Convention Template:Did you know nominations/María Cristina García-Sancho Template:Did you know nominations/Bethan's Rock Template:Did you know nominations/FC Barcelona v Atlético Madrid (1999–2000 Copa del Rey) Template:Did you know nominations/Lincoln Cosby

    Articles created/expanded on February 18

    [edit]

    Template:Did you know nominations/Middle Fork Snoqualmie River Template:Did you know nominations/Romanian folk violin Template:Did you know nominations/Cobb (play)

    Articles created/expanded on February 19

    [edit]

    Template:Did you know nominations/Ornament & Crime Template:Did you know nominations/Highness (song) Template:Did you know nominations/Don W. Moore Template:Did you know nominations/Taher al-Aqili Template:Did you know nominations/Khau Vai Love Market Template:Did you know nominations/Gennady Danilenko

    Current nominations

    [edit]

    Articles created/expanded on February 20

    [edit]

    Template:Did you know nominations/Breakfast with Girls Template:Did you know nominations/WOM (Chile)

    Articles created/expanded on February 21

    [edit]

    Template:Did you know nominations/Coulterville Main Street Historic District Template:Did you know nominations/Bull Believer

    Articles created/expanded on February 22

    [edit]

    Template:Did you know nominations/Chronicles from the Siege Template:Did you know nominations/Fly-Day Chinatown Template:Did you know nominations/Clara Sansoni Template:Did you know nominations/Sachio Ashida Template:Did you know nominations/John Humble (artist)

    Articles created/expanded on February 23

    [edit]

    Template:Did you know nominations/Catullus 96 Template:Did you know nominations/Allan Williford Template:Did you know nominations/Duetos (Armando Manzanero album) Template:Did you know nominations/Raşit Küçük Template:Did you know nominations/Haibane Renmei Template:Did you know nominations/A Place with the Pigs Template:Did you know nominations/Sargento Pimenta

    Articles created/expanded on February 24

    [edit]

    Template:Did you know nominations/BravesVision Template:Did you know nominations/Djauhari Oratmangun Template:Did you know nominations/2024 EFL League Two play-off final Template:Did you know nominations/Robert N. Mullin Template:Did you know nominations/Kaneza Schaal Template:Did you know nominations/Castelluccio di Norcia Template:Did you know nominations/Harry Akin Template:Did you know nominations/Pacific Marine Mammal Center Template:Did you know nominations/Assyrian naming dispute

    Articles created/expanded on February 25

    [edit]

    Template:Did you know nominations/Luca Gargano Template:Did you know nominations/Clear Usui Template:Did you know nominations/Effects of the 1928 Okeechobee hurricane in the Caribbean Template:Did you know nominations/Assassination of Pedro Eugenio Aramburu Template:Did you know nominations/La Ofis (Chilean TV series) Template:Did you know nominations/National Sporting Club Template:Did you know nominations/Pat O'Keeffe

    Articles created/expanded on February 26

    [edit]

    Template:Did you know nominations/Formal semantics (natural language) Template:Did you know nominations/Moshe Avigdor Amiel Template:Did you know nominations/Assalamualaikum Beijing Template:Did you know nominations/Die Stechardin

    Articles created/expanded on February 27

    [edit]

    Template:Did you know nominations/Hannah Spencer Template:Did you know nominations/Nicholas Tartaglione Template:Did you know nominations/Matilda Jane Evans Template:Did you know nominations/On Learning to Dissect Fetal Pigs Template:Did you know nominations/Curlew sandpiper

    Special occasion holding area

    [edit]

    Template:Seealso

    The holding area is near the top 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 intended to be held for special occasion dates should be nominated within seven days of creation from the start of expansion, or promotion to Good Article status. The nomination should be made at least one week prior to the occasion date, to allow time for reviews and promotions through the prep and queue sets, but not more than two months in advance. The proposed occasion must be deemed sufficiently special by reviewers. The timeline limitations, including the two month maximum, may be waived by consensus, if a request is made at WT:DYK, but requests are not always successful. Discussion clarifying the hold criteria can be found here: Hold criteria; discussion setting the two month limit can be found here: two month limit.
    April Fools' Day hooks are exempted from the timeline limit; see Wikipedia:April Fool's Main Page/Did You Know.
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:Did_you_know&oldid=1340756857"