A fact from Herrera v. Wyoming appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the Did you know column on 6 August 2019 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or
poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see
this noticeboard.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Native Americans,
Indigenous peoples in Canada, and related
indigenous peoples of North America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Indigenous peoples of North AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaIndigenous peoples of North America articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the
legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the
United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is part of WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases, a collaborative effort to improve articles related to
Supreme Court cases and the
Supreme Court. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the
project page.U.S. Supreme Court casesWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court casesTemplate:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court casesU.S. Supreme Court articles
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as
this nomination's talk page,
the article's talk page or
Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
I'm not sure the pun on an ethnic name is a good idea (esp. for April 1, for which this has been nominated). If it was really, REALLY funny that would be one thing, but it's only very modestly amusing or clever at best. I see trouble ahead.
EEng04:56, 19 June 2019 (UTC)reply
We are not here to be PC (as NOTCENSORED is supposed to attest), we are here for AFD to be funny. I see no problem with it. Now for the reivew: Date, length and hook all OK under DYK and AFD rules. QPQ done, no close paraphrasing. Good to go. Well done @
DannyS712: on the first approved hook for April Fools Day 2020. The C of E God Save the Queen! (
talk)17:54, 19 June 2019 (UTC)reply
Jesus, this has nothing to do with censorship, nor with the dopey concept of "PC". I can say without fear of contradiction that there is no WP editor more willing than I to find a laugh wherever one is available. The problem is, as I already said, this really isn't funny or clever; it's a lame and obvious pun. At the very least, if we're going to bore our readers with this on AFD, the word crow should be lower-cased, or there's no joke at all.
EEng22:48, 19 June 2019 (UTC)reply
Despite what was said, Crow would need to be uppercase. I would also be wary of the term for nation and people being applied to an individual, which reads to me as "a British won a court case", but I'm applying usage of national and ethnic terms from elsewhere. On the other hand, "an American won court case" would work, but that is just what happened and not funny either.
cygnis insignis23:46, 19 June 2019 (UTC)reply
I'll just say it one more time before unwatching: either phrasing -- a crow or a Crow -- is weakly amusing at the very best, is a bad idea, and has a good chance of
ending in tears.
EEng02:44, 20 June 2019 (UTC)reply
As we have ample evidence based on a number of his own nominated hooks that
The C of E is not a good judge of what is appropriate when it comes to potentially controversial nominations, I am requesting a second opinion review, preferably by someone with experience in judging April Fools' Day hooks. Thanks.
BlueMoonset (
talk)
04:47, 20 June 2019 (UTC)reply
Again I have to say NOTCENSORED, but its things like this that make me wonder if we really are. There is no policy based reason to override and furthermore according to
WP:DYKAPRIL, it states that capitalisation can be disregarded for AFD. The C of E God Save the Queen! (
talk)06:29, 20 June 2019 (UTC)reply
I would remove my objection if an interesting hook for the regular queue was proposed. Excuse the critique as suitable humour for the front page, victimless jokes are difficult to find and I don't think that your intention was anything but an attempt at fun.
cygnis insignis07:26, 20 June 2019 (UTC)reply
Once again, I am putting out the call for a new reviewer to give a second opinion; as EEng points out, only The C of E out of four reviewers has no problems with the hook, and his judgment, as I noted above, has proved faulty with regard to such hooks on numerous occasions. If necessary, this will go to the
WT:DYK page for further discussion. (Note to
DannyS712: you are most welcome to propose a non-April 1 hook; please feel free to do so.)
BlueMoonset (
talk)
04:10, 12 July 2019 (UTC)reply
the proposed hook is a bad idea. It is offensive to make a play on words regarding a First Nations tribe name. Another hook needs to be proposed here.
Flibirigit (
talk)
16:59, 18 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Sounds clear and reflects the wording used in the lede, without being offensive. And The C of E, I strongly advise that you stop insisting on the April Fools wording. I understand that you feel very strongly about using that wording, but consensus is against you at this point, and consensus is how Wikipedia (and by extension DYK) decides on matters.
Narutolovehinata5tccsdnew12:58, 21 July 2019 (UTC)reply
ALT2a is the best option here, with ALT2 as an alternative. I have struck ALT0 and ALT1. The new hooks are neutral, reasonably interesting, mentioned inline and properly cited. The article adheres to all other DYK policies for newness, length, tone, neutrality and sourcing. I detected no copyvio issues, and QPQ requirements are met.
Flibirigit (
talk)
16:30, 21 July 2019 (UTC)reply
A fact from Herrera v. Wyoming appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the Did you know column on 6 August 2019 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or
poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see
this noticeboard.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Native Americans,
Indigenous peoples in Canada, and related
indigenous peoples of North America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Indigenous peoples of North AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaIndigenous peoples of North America articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the
legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the
United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is part of WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases, a collaborative effort to improve articles related to
Supreme Court cases and the
Supreme Court. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the
project page.U.S. Supreme Court casesWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court casesTemplate:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court casesU.S. Supreme Court articles
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as
this nomination's talk page,
the article's talk page or
Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
I'm not sure the pun on an ethnic name is a good idea (esp. for April 1, for which this has been nominated). If it was really, REALLY funny that would be one thing, but it's only very modestly amusing or clever at best. I see trouble ahead.
EEng04:56, 19 June 2019 (UTC)reply
We are not here to be PC (as NOTCENSORED is supposed to attest), we are here for AFD to be funny. I see no problem with it. Now for the reivew: Date, length and hook all OK under DYK and AFD rules. QPQ done, no close paraphrasing. Good to go. Well done @
DannyS712: on the first approved hook for April Fools Day 2020. The C of E God Save the Queen! (
talk)17:54, 19 June 2019 (UTC)reply
Jesus, this has nothing to do with censorship, nor with the dopey concept of "PC". I can say without fear of contradiction that there is no WP editor more willing than I to find a laugh wherever one is available. The problem is, as I already said, this really isn't funny or clever; it's a lame and obvious pun. At the very least, if we're going to bore our readers with this on AFD, the word crow should be lower-cased, or there's no joke at all.
EEng22:48, 19 June 2019 (UTC)reply
Despite what was said, Crow would need to be uppercase. I would also be wary of the term for nation and people being applied to an individual, which reads to me as "a British won a court case", but I'm applying usage of national and ethnic terms from elsewhere. On the other hand, "an American won court case" would work, but that is just what happened and not funny either.
cygnis insignis23:46, 19 June 2019 (UTC)reply
I'll just say it one more time before unwatching: either phrasing -- a crow or a Crow -- is weakly amusing at the very best, is a bad idea, and has a good chance of
ending in tears.
EEng02:44, 20 June 2019 (UTC)reply
As we have ample evidence based on a number of his own nominated hooks that
The C of E is not a good judge of what is appropriate when it comes to potentially controversial nominations, I am requesting a second opinion review, preferably by someone with experience in judging April Fools' Day hooks. Thanks.
BlueMoonset (
talk)
04:47, 20 June 2019 (UTC)reply
Again I have to say NOTCENSORED, but its things like this that make me wonder if we really are. There is no policy based reason to override and furthermore according to
WP:DYKAPRIL, it states that capitalisation can be disregarded for AFD. The C of E God Save the Queen! (
talk)06:29, 20 June 2019 (UTC)reply
I would remove my objection if an interesting hook for the regular queue was proposed. Excuse the critique as suitable humour for the front page, victimless jokes are difficult to find and I don't think that your intention was anything but an attempt at fun.
cygnis insignis07:26, 20 June 2019 (UTC)reply
Once again, I am putting out the call for a new reviewer to give a second opinion; as EEng points out, only The C of E out of four reviewers has no problems with the hook, and his judgment, as I noted above, has proved faulty with regard to such hooks on numerous occasions. If necessary, this will go to the
WT:DYK page for further discussion. (Note to
DannyS712: you are most welcome to propose a non-April 1 hook; please feel free to do so.)
BlueMoonset (
talk)
04:10, 12 July 2019 (UTC)reply
the proposed hook is a bad idea. It is offensive to make a play on words regarding a First Nations tribe name. Another hook needs to be proposed here.
Flibirigit (
talk)
16:59, 18 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Sounds clear and reflects the wording used in the lede, without being offensive. And The C of E, I strongly advise that you stop insisting on the April Fools wording. I understand that you feel very strongly about using that wording, but consensus is against you at this point, and consensus is how Wikipedia (and by extension DYK) decides on matters.
Narutolovehinata5tccsdnew12:58, 21 July 2019 (UTC)reply
ALT2a is the best option here, with ALT2 as an alternative. I have struck ALT0 and ALT1. The new hooks are neutral, reasonably interesting, mentioned inline and properly cited. The article adheres to all other DYK policies for newness, length, tone, neutrality and sourcing. I detected no copyvio issues, and QPQ requirements are met.
Flibirigit (
talk)
16:30, 21 July 2019 (UTC)reply