Wikipedia talk:Did you know

src: rightrealist.com

This is where the Did you know section on the main page, its policies and the featured items can be discussed.

Do you have a suggestion for improving DYK, or would like to comment on the suggestions of others? Have your say at Wikipedia:Did you know/2017 reform proposals.

Video Wikipedia talk:Did you know

Template:Did you know nominations/Rector v. MLB

Having a bit of difficulty with this nomination: I'm not sure if the hooks proposed here are fine or not: while the hooks are interesting, they seem too BLPish for me considering they focus on the lawsuit's plaintiff sleeping. I also struck ALT1 because, while it was my preferred hook had the hook been less-BLPish, it was cited to The Daily Beast, which seems to be discouraged at the moment. Additional advice is welcome here regarding the eligibility of the hooks, and the possibility of proposing alternative hooks. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 08:58, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

As nominator, my view is that there is no BLP issue as the hooks proposed are NPOV, Verifiable and NOR as well as not being "unduly negative" as they feature only the facts as they were presented in the case (which is what the hook is about), without any particular angle or opinion on the person involved. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 09:18, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Can we get a view on this please? The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 16:22, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Personally I prefer ALT2 proposed by Yoninah. It's unnecessary for a hook to be borderline sensational and explicit in order to make it interesting. Alex Shih (talk) 10:43, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

The C of E requested an April 2 posting date; April 2 is a week away, so a prompt response to this is welcome. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 12:02, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Maps Wikipedia talk:Did you know

March Women's History Month

I've moved 13 approved women's hooks to the special occasions holding area for March. Let's try to promote them all! Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 00:14, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Let's also try to review open ones, and I will do what I can to nominate some more. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:04, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

src: upload.wikimedia.org

Question about the 6-week limit for Special occasion hooks

Where is this rule discussed? I can't seem to see it either on the main DYK or the supplementary guidelines page. I'm asking because I'm planning to expand Yurika End?, an article about a soon-to-retire Japanese voice actress and singer, and I was planning to request for it to go up on June 1 (the date of her final concert). Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 01:19, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Narutolovehinata5, this is part of the instructions for the Special occasion holding area itself, which can be found at WP:DYKNA#Special occasion holding area. I would recommend waiting to start the expansion of Yurika End? until April 20 if you wish to request a June 1 date. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:51, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

@BlueMoonset: Noted. I've started a userspace draft at User:Narutolovehinata5/Yurika Endo and I plan to move its content to the mainspace article after April 20. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 02:55, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

src: i.imgur.com

DYK date offset by 1 day from UTC

At WP:DYKA, it appears that the date in the heading for archived DYKs is 1 day ahead. (This is not the offset between UTC and any particular timezone; it's that the UTC date doesn't match the DYK date.) For example, Talk:Smashburger (and my own recollection) state that the DYK was posted on on March 21 (UTC), but the heading states 00:00, 22 March 2018 (UTC). Am I missing something, or can this be addressed? TheFeds 02:01, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

DYKUpdateBot by Shubinator updates Wikipedia:Recent additions. It seems the archiving has always given the date and time it was added to the archive which is when it's removed from {{Did you know}} and not when it's added there. DYK entries can be edited while in {{Did you know}} so they have to be archived when they are removed. The time between DYK updates has varied and is currently 24 hours. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:41, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

src: pbs.twimg.com

Charles LiMandri removed from Main Page

• .. that San Diego attorney Charles LiMandri won a decades-long court battle against the ACLU to prevent the destruction of the Mount Soledad Cross (pictured)?

Template:Did you know nominations/Charles LiMandri

The hook was sourced to this, a blog article on an utterly unreliable and partisan site (with among other articles gems like "Global Warming: The Evolution of a Hoax"[1] from yesterday). Just take a look at that site for yourself and you'll swiftly get a feeling of the general position it takes, and the strength of the arguments underpinning it.

The hook wsa not only very, very poorly sourced, it was also wrong. No single court battle was won, they had to accept that the court had decided that the cross wasn't allowed on that government-owned location, and solved it by selling the ground. That's not "winning a court battle", that's choosing the best (for them) of two possible solutions to comply with a court battle they lost.

Please make sure that hooks with this very poor level of sourcing, which is contradicted by the linked article on the cross anyway, don't make it unto our front page. Fram (talk) 11:32, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

@Lionelt, Yoninah, Narutolovehinata5, and Cwmhiraeth: pings failed. Fram (talk) 11:32, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Sorry about this. I was skeptical of the website myself, but I gave it the benefit of the doubt as I didn't want to decline a source solely because of its political orientation. I'll be more careful with checking questionable sources next time. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 11:46, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

I was surprised that so many faults were found with the article here and at Errors. I didn't see that blog page; I read the source at the end of the paragraph about his litigation on behalf of the Cross. Thanks to a note at ERRORS, "prevented the destruction" was rightly changed to "prevented the removal". But now I see the hook was sensationalized and not based on the source I read, either. Yoninah (talk) 15:05, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

src: upload.wikimedia.org

Reviewers needed for 2018 NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Tournament noms

I am rooting for my Michigan Wolverines men's basketball team via DYK and hoping for a final four. Given Michigan is the highest remaining seed in its region of the 2018 NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Tournament, I hope I can run two noms next week. I need reviewers at Template:Did you know nominations/Jordan Poole and Template:Did you know nominations/Zavier Simpson. #GoBlue.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 16:39, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

src: rightrealist.com

Oldest nominations needing DYK reviewers

The previous list was archived a day ago. Here is an updated list with 38 older nominations that need reviewing, which takes us through March 6. Right now we have a total of 274 nominations, of which 135 have been approved. Thanks to everyone who reviews these, especially the three from January.

Over two months old:

• January 13: Template:Did you know nominations/Christ the Lord Is Risen Today (needs final approval before April Fools' Day)
• January 14: Template:Did you know nominations/Nolder
• January 19: Template:Did you know nominations/Fly Fishing: Memories of Angling Days (April Fools Day)
• January 20: Template:Did you know nominations/Warwick Castle, Maida Vale
• January 26: Template:Did you know nominations/Joan Benesh

Over one month old:

• February 12: Template:Did you know nominations/Alepotrypa cave
• February 16: Template:Did you know nominations/All India Services Act, 1951
• February 20: Template:Did you know nominations/Airliner Number 4
• February 20: Template:Did you know nominations/Feng Yidai
• February 22: Template:Did you know nominations/Leon Tom?a
• February 22: Template:Did you know nominations/Military Engineering Experimental Establishment
• February 23: Template:Did you know nominations/Phomoxanthone A

Other old nominations:

• February 26: Template:Did you know nominations/Isabelle Druet
• February 26: Template:Did you know nominations/CISBOT
• February 26: Template:Did you know nominations/Nicholas Muellner
• February 26: Template:Did you know nominations/Sonic Gems Collection
• February 27: Template:Did you know nominations/Mary E. Woolley Chamberlain
• February 28: Template:Did you know nominations/David Frühwirth
• February 28: Template:Did you know nominations/Chief Management Officer of the Department of Defense
• March 2: Template:Did you know nominations/Ukrainian decommunization laws
• March 2: Template:Did you know nominations/Burgabo
• March 2: Template:Did you know nominations/Milo? Havel
• March 3: Template:Did you know nominations/Endsleigh Gardens
• March 3: Template:Did you know nominations/Macrobiotus shonaicus
• March 3: Template:Did you know nominations/Laboratory experiments of speciation
• March 3: Template:Did you know nominations/Evidence for speciation by reinforcement
• March 3: Template:Did you know nominations/Parable of the Polygons
• March 3: Template:Did you know nominations/Stefán Kristjánsson
• March 4: Template:Did you know nominations/Alex Raisbeck
• March 4: Template:Did you know nominations/Tosun (construction equipment)
• March 5: Template:Did you know nominations/Group testing
• March 5: Template:Did you know nominations/Yao Xian (general)
• March 5: Template:Did you know nominations/Gregor and the Prophecy of Bane
• March 5: Template:Did you know nominations/Maudgalyayana
• March 6: Template:Did you know nominations/Crawford family of the White Mountains
• March 6: Template:Did you know nominations/Toni Iwobi
• March 6: Template:Did you know nominations/Manu Bhaker
• March 6: Template:Did you know nominations/William Ruck-Keene
• March 6: Template:Did you know nominations/Flushing-Co-op City buses
• March 6: Template:Did you know nominations/Mary A. Monroe

Please remember to cross off entries as you finish reviewing them (unless you're asking for further review), even if the review was not an approval. Many thanks! BlueMoonset (talk) 02:02, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

src: i.ytimg.com

Second opinion!

Hey y'all, I did a review for Chinese characters for transcribing Slavonic. I initially failed it but the author has added more sources in-- I would love if someone that isn't involved in the discussion already could review the article to see if it meets the criteria. Nomader (talk) 18:04, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Second opinion provided. Yoninah (talk) 11:54, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

src: upload.wikimedia.org

DYK nominations not transcluded in December 2017

The following three DYK nominations were never transcluded after they were created in mid-December 2017 as part of the Sociology of Globalization course, for which Piotrus is listed as Facilitator. The nominations all appear to have been immediately following moves into mainspace (or, in one case, anticipating the move by two days).

• Template:Did you know nominations/Gabjil: the article was subsequently moved from Gabjil to Gapjil, and has both neutrality and copy edit templates on it. It obviously cannot pass DYK in that condition; the proposed hook may have NPOV issues as well. The nomination was the creator's most recent edit.
• Template:Did you know nominations/Hanbit Unit: while the template needs fixing up, there aren't any obvious issues with the article. (I don't consider a template saying that more categories are needed, even though there are five listed, as a significant issue.)
• Template:Did you know nominations/Jeju Oreum: the hook may need work ("outstanding beauty" strikes me as puffery), and the article needs a copyedit: I had trouble understanding a number of passages.

Since the course is long over, it doesn't make sense to resurrect any of these unless someone is willing to address any issues found during the review process (or the ones already mentioned here). Are there any volunteers to take these on? (After three months absence, Yeon So Jeong, a creator of Jeju Oreum, and Byung chan kim, who created Hanbit Unit, have made edits to other articles within the past week. If they are interested in pursuing the nominations and addressing issues that come up, that could work.) BlueMoonset (talk) 14:50, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

@BlueMoonset: Those students signed up for another wikipedia-editing class of mine, which should explain the otherwise miraculous reactivation of their accounts. I'd suggest relisting those articles in whatever section allows it, and when the reviews are posted, hopefully they'll notice this fact on their userpage and edit the articles with whatever fixes necessary. I'll of course try to help. For Gabjil, we should probable close the nom as unsuccessful and move on. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 12:17, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Piotrus, in the past we have not transcluded forgotten nominations without a commitment from the nominators to work on the nomination once it is reviewed. I'll post a note soon on their respective talk pages; if they make said commitment, I'll be happy to restore the nomination in question, but without that agreement the nominations will lapse. Per your suggestion, I have closed Gabjil/Gapjil. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:47, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

That's totally fair. I talked to the student responsible for Jeju Oreum, and I hope she will get back to you. One minor problem is that without a review, ie. a formal list of things to fix, I am a bit hard pressed explaining to students what they need to do now. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:33, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

src: pbs.twimg.com

Thomas D. Keizur DYK nomination

I nominated Thomas D. Keizur for DYK on 10 MayMarch, but it's not listed as pending review or approved. I checked original DYK file and it look like noination was approved on 22 March. Could someone tell me what status of this nomination is?--Orygun (talk) 22:39, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

@Orygun: the reviewer mistakenly closed the nomination rather than put the approval tick at the bottom of the thread. I reopened the nomination and also asked for a fuller DYK review. Yoninah (talk) 23:30, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Tense problem in Sharon Calahan hook

In Prep 1, the hook I wrote has an error, : "...that Sharon Calahan is the first member invited to join the American Society of Cinematographers with a background entirely in computer animation, not live action film?" The tense and grammar don't work. It should say she "became the first member invited to join", not "is the first member"; it's written as if she were already a member before she accepted the invitation. It could also say "...that Sharon Calahan is the first cinematographer in the American Society of Cinematographers whose feature film work had been entirely in computer animation, not live action film?" --Dennis Bratland (talk) 23:51, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, Dennis Bratland, I'm changing it to:

• ... that Sharon Calahan is the first member of the American Society of Cinematographers whose background is entirely in computer animation, not live action film? Yoninah (talk) 11:37, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

• I trimmed the hook a bit more. It seems punchier without the last phrase:
• ... that Sharon Calahan is the first member of the American Society of Cinematographers whose background is entirely in computer animation? Yoninah (talk) 20:02, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

• Her background includes "illustration, graphic design, and still photography" so this suggestion is completely bogus. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:55, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

• Seems fine to me, I understood it to mean her cinematography background is entirely in computer animation. ... that Sharon Calahan is the first member of the American Society of Cinematographers whose cinematography background is entirely in computer animation? is just unnecessary redundance. MB 21:01, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

• No, it's not her "cinematography background". It's her feature film experience. The ASC doesn't care whether potential members might have previously worked the drive-thru at McDonald's, or drove a truck, or done something or other on TV commercials. It's a feature film organization and until Calahan all members had had at least some experience as Director of Photography on feature films. The fully qualified claim, as it is in the article, would be phrased as "first ASC member whose feature film work had been entirely in animation". That's animation, computer or otherwise. Another way of phrasing it would be "Calahan is the first person invited to join the ASC who had no feature film work as a Director of Photography [cinematographer]. All of her feature film experience was in animated films, and all of them computer animated." Calahan had also worked as an art director at two TV stations and a documentary company, and it's likely that included live action videotaping, but that's not feature film and her title wasn't Director of Photography. Anyway, there are more sources to support the claim than just those I have cited so far: [2][3][4][5][6], etc. Wired wrote "she became its first member to have an all-CG reel." --Dennis Bratland (talk) 01:26, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Date wishes

Sorry to ask for help, - I was told not to move "my" approved noms to Special occasions.

• 29 Mar Maundy Thursday: Template:Did you know nominations/Herr Jesu Christ, du höchstes Gut  Done Promoted. Yoninah (talk) 15:59, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
• 30 Mar Good Friday: Template:Did you know nominations/Ein Lämmlein geht und trägt die Schuld  Done Promoted. Yoninah (talk) 15:59, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
• 1 April Easter: Template:Did you know nominations/Erschienen ist der herrlich Tag --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:14, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Don't forget, Template:Did you know nominations/Christ the Lord Is Risen Today also needs a review in time for Easter. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 15:23, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

@BlueMoonset: I "happened" to come across one of these special occasion earmarked hooks of Gerda's and promoted it. I would never have found the others if she didn't mention it here. If reviewers aren't moving the special occasion hooks to the holding area, who will? Yoninah (talk) 15:52, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Yoninah, it ought to be the reviewer or a passing promoter. (There's nothing wrong with the nominator posting here if their hook wasn't moved by the reviewer when the tick was given.) We had an example of a request that was ultimately turned down recently (two related hooks that were promoted, but that decision was questioned on this page); I don't think people should be allowed to give their hooks special occasion status without independent concurrence. There can be other problems as well, such as the two nearly identical hooks in Prep 2 (the initial portion of the hooks shown below sans non-bold links):

• that the baritone Johannes Hill was the voice of Jesus and Pilate in Bach's Passions
• that Willem Ravelli was the voice of Christ in Bach's St Matthew Passion

There's nothing wrong with the hooks as hooks, but having two of these in a single set is really a problem. Gerda Arendt, these are both yours. Can one of them be moved to another day during Holy Week, ideally not immediately before or after Good Friday, but as long as they aren't on the same day it would be workable. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:32, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

I asked the same question on one of the nominations. But in the end I put both hooks in the same set because they talk about different Passions, and because it is the Good Friday set after all. Yoninah (talk) 22:44, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I've moved the one that Gerda Arendt said could be moved one day earlier to the next set earlier. The hooks start out almost identically, and "voice of Christ" and "voice of Jesus" are the same thing. They're both talking about singers being the voice of Christ in one or more Bach Passions, and that's way too close. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:25, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

How about not mentioning Jesus in the Hill hook, but the archangel Raphael and Adam (both in The Creation) instead, or additionally? I had agreed to Maundy Thursday, but Pilate is actually not on the scene until Good Friday. - Whe can't get around "voice" twice, because it should show that both singers are not the operatic kind, so only lend their voice to personalities. How is this:

... that the baritone Johannes Hill was the voice of the archangel Raphael, Adam, Jesus, Pilate and Pope Francis? - with our without links to the figures? I think it's even "quirkier" than Ravelli. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:09, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Gerda Arendt, can we avoid the "was the voice of" phrasing? It's unusual, and having it twice in one set is problematic. Even something as simple as "has been" or "has performed as" might work, though something a bit wordier might be preferable. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:04, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Do you see the problem in saying "X has been Jesus"? (Or Pilate? Or an archangel?) Or "has performed as Jesus"?) - I see Main page errors coming for all these wordings. It's vox Christi for a reason. - It works for Rigoletto, or "Wagner's Wotan", because everybody knows that's an operatic role. Rather don't run it that day. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:49, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Easter and April Fools Day

...coincide this year. Should I move the approved Easter hook to the AFD holding area? I put it in the Special Occasions holding area. Yoninah (talk) 15:59, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Yoninah, this opens a whole set of questions, since this hasn't happened before (at least that I'm aware of): Are we mixing the hooks? Or does one take precedence over the other? Or would it be a meta thing to have a serious Easter hook in the middle of a sea of AFD hooks? Or will the Easter hooks need to also serve double duty as AFD?

I think much will depend on who is putting together the AFD prep sets this year (and note that unlike the days around it, there will be (at least) two sets of hooks being posted that day, a temporary departure from the one a day promotions we currently have). There is a section of the AFD talk page related to this: Wikipedia talk:April Fool's Main Page/Did You Know#Easter in 2018. However, I don't see much in the way of specifics. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:41, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. I wrote my suggestion there. Yoninah (talk) 22:51, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Strandflat

Strandflat has an approved hook based on a 1982 journal article, but the Wikipedia article says the hook applied up to 2013 and adds a second citation that does not appear to support the hook.

Pick a date. Tie it to an article not written 30 years in its future.

--2600:387:6:805:0:0:0:9F (talk) 21:02, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

I added a failed citation tag to the hook information within the article and posted a main page error report.[7] --2600:1700:FB00:9C00:6156:F38D:548F:695B (talk) 16:40, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

DYK is almost overdue

In less than two hours Did you know will need to be updated, however the next queue either has no hooks or has not been approved by an administrator. It would be much appreciated if an administrator would take the time to ensure that DYK is updated on time by following these instructions:

1. Check the prep areas; if there are between 6-10 hooks on the page then it is probably good to go. If not move approved hooks from the suggestions page and add them and the credits as required.
2. Once completed edit queue #4 and replace the page with the entire content from the next update
3. Add {{DYKbotdo|~~~}} to the top of the queue and save the page

Then, when the time is right I will be able to update the template. Thanks and have a good day, DYKUpdateBot (talk) 22:09, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

April Fools-related straw poll

A straw poll regarding the faux politician hooks to be run on April Fools Day is currently in process at Wikipedia_talk:April_Fool's_Main_Page/Did_You_Know#Quick_straw_poll_on_faux_politician_trio which may be of interest to DYK regulars. Gatoclass (talk) 14:17, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Missed special holding area hook

I've noticed the preps for the 29th are filled but they appear to have missed out Template:Did you know nominations/Major League Baseball Authentication Program which was held for then as the Opening Day of MLB. Can someone please add it to the prep for the 29th please? Also we have Template:Did you know nominations/Christ the Lord Is Risen Today which needs a review in time for Sunday please. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 15:48, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

FYI the open slot in Prep 1 for March 29 has a hidden note reserving the space for Template:Did you know nominations/Major League Baseball Authentication Program. Since I worked on the article, I can't promote it. Yoninah (talk) 15:58, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Prep 2 - early retirement

... that the English radiographer Ethel Armstrong worked for the National Health Service from the day it was founded in 1948 until 2018? Yoninah, Zeromonk, Whispyhistory

I tweaked this because the previous hook was tautological, but then reading the article it makes no mention of her actual retirement. It simply says "However, she noted that when the NHS turns 70 it would also be her 70th anniversary, and perhaps time to retire fully.[1][4]". This is not what the hook (either before or after my tweak) implies. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:22, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

that the English radiographer Ethel Armstrong has worked for the National Health Service from the day it was founded in 1948 until its 70th anniversary year in 2018? Philafrenzy (talk) 21:22, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Philafrenzy's alt here is what we posted in prep. Since her retirement date is vague, perhaps we could say:

ALT2: ... that the English radiographer Ethel Armstrong has worked for the National Health Service from the day it was founded in 1948? Yoninah (talk) 22:14, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

I added "has" to indicate a time span that has not ended. I prefer the one that says 70 years as it has more impact and doesn't require maths. Philafrenzy (talk) 22:20, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

No, any mention of "until" indicates that her career is over. The article doesn't back that up. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:38, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

ALT3: ... that the English radiographer Ethel Armstrong has worked for the National Health Service since the day it was founded in 1948? Philafrenzy (talk) 22:42, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Yep, much much better. Unsure why this wasn't the original blurb really, but at least we got there in the end. The Rambling Man (talk) 23:01, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

•  Done Changing to ALT3 wording in prep. Yoninah (talk) 23:04, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

• Thanks, I'm surprised this fundamental issue was missed. Or am I? The Rambling Man (talk) 23:11, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

DYK is almost overdue

In less than two hours Did you know will need to be updated, however the next queue either has no hooks or has not been approved by an administrator. It would be much appreciated if an administrator would take the time to ensure that DYK is updated on time by following these instructions:

1. Check the prep areas; if there are between 6-10 hooks on the page then it is probably good to go. If not move approved hooks from the suggestions page and add them and the credits as required.
2. Once completed edit queue #5 and replace the page with the entire content from the next update
3. Add {{DYKbotdo|~~~}} to the top of the queue and save the page

Then, when the time is right I will be able to update the template. Thanks and have a good day, DYKUpdateBot (talk) 22:07, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

DYK is almost overdue

In less than two hours Did you know will need to be updated, however the next queue either has no hooks or has not been approved by an administrator. It would be much appreciated if an administrator would take the time to ensure that DYK is updated on time by following these instructions:

1. Check the prep areas; if there are between 6-10 hooks on the page then it is probably good to go. If not move approved hooks from the suggestions page and add them and the credits as required.
2. Once completed edit queue #6 and replace the page with the entire content from the next update
3. Add {{DYKbotdo|~~~}} to the top of the queue and save the page

Then, when the time is right I will be able to update the template. Thanks and have a good day, DYKUpdateBot (talk) 22:05, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

DYK a second time

Can an article be submitted for DYK a second time, after it has been reviewed and upgraded to GA status? I am looking to nominate the article Goat Canyon Trestle a second time after the doggle was added.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 05:58, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

No, rule 1d: Articles that have featured (bold link) previously on DYK, or in a blurb on the main page's In the news, or On this day sections are ineligible.

... but you can find something related, write a short DYK article about it, and mention the GA in the hook. Attention for the GA guaranteed. Sometimes it's not the bolded subject that receives most attention. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:40, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Source of article : Wikipedia