![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 45 | ← | Archive 48 | Archive 49 | Archive 50 | Archive 51 | Archive 52 | → | Archive 55 |
Anyone else having this problem in the last week or so? The page loads 99%, and then just stops for half a minute or more, apparently doing nothing. I'm starting to find it pretty irritating, it didn't used to do this. Has anyone added some new code or something to the page which might account for this behaviour? Gatoclass ( talk) 10:38, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
Anyone know why
<style type="text/css"> /* Fix the sidebar's position while you scroll */ div[id=column-one] { /* Using the attribute selector hides this from IE */ position: fixed; height: 100%; /* If you shrink the browser too small, the */ overflow: auto; /* side column will become scrollable, so stuff */ z-index: 2; /* is always accessible, albeit ugly */ } #p-logo { /* Make logo inline with other divs */ position:static; } #column-one { /* Sidebar column start at the top screen edge */ padding-top: 0; } #p-lang .pBody ul{ /* Sets the language box to a fixed height and */ height: 6em; /* scrollable if too long to fit on screen */ overflow: auto; } /* Fix the background image, too, so it looks nice as you scroll */ body { background-attachment: fixed; } /* Fix the footer so it looks nice and doesn't overlap the sidebar */ #footer { margin-left: 13.6em; border-left: solid 1px rgb(250, 189, 35); -moz-border-radius-topleft: 1em; -moz-border-radius-bottomleft: 1em; } /* Keep personal links at the top right */ #p-personal { width:100%; white-space:nowrap; padding:0 0 0 0; margin:0; position:absolute; left:0px; top:0px; z-index: 0; border: none; background: none; overflow: visible; line-height: 1.2em; } #p-personal h5 { display:none; } #p-personal .portlet, #p-personal .pBody { padding:0; margin:0; border: none; z-index:0; overflow: visible; background: none; } /* this is the ul contained in the portlet */ #p-personal ul { border: none; line-height: 1.4em; color: #2f6fab; padding: 0em 2em 0 3em; margin: 0; text-align: right; text-transform: lowercase; list-style: none; z-index:0; background: none; } #p-personal li { z-index:0; border:none; padding:0; display: inline; color: #2f6fab; margin-left: 1em; line-height: 1.2em; background: none; } #p-personal li a { text-decoration: none; color: #005896; padding-bottom: 0.2em; background: none; } #p-personal li a:hover { background-color: White; padding-bottom: 0.2em; text-decoration: none; } </style>
is being randomly inserted on the suggestions page? See for example
this diff. Oddly, some of the edits I made to remove it are not in the edit history.
Otto4711 (
talk)
01:23, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
I have noticed that DYKadminBot ( talk · contribs) has not completed the 10:00, August 20, 2009 (UTC) update. The last edit performed by the bot occurring part way through the {{ dyktalk}} insertions. An e-mail has been sent to the bot operator reporting the problem, but I do not know if he will be able to respond before the next scheduled update. Are there any actions that should occur before the 15:00 update to ensure normal continuation of updates? -- Allen3 talk 10:56, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
There was another hiccup during the 05:00, August 23, 2009 (UTC) update. The bot stopped after performing the last needed talk page update. Queue 3 (the queue used by the update) has been manually reset and User:DYKadminBot/count incremented. Hopefully the bot will perform the next update properly. -- Allen3 talk 09:03, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
The toolserver is currently experiencing problems. [1] This is the apparent reason for the bot missing the 17:00, August 24, 2009 (UTC) update. -- Allen3 talk 20:46, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
Well, it has been nine hours since the last update, probably because the toolserver is still down; can an admin manually do it? Thanks, — Ed (Talk • Contribs) 21:04, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
Okay, so the last update (16:40-ish) was perfect. Go bot go! Here's to hoping everything is now back to normal... — Ed (Talk • Contribs) 17:50, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
This update hung in the middle of tagging article talk pages with {{ dyktalk}} templates. Update has been manually completed.-- Allen3 talk 00:03, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
{{ editprotected}}
The note at the top of Template:Did_you_know/Queue should say: "If there are 3 or more empty queues, this page will report as a backlog." and not "If are 3 or more empty queues, this page will report as a backlog." Smartse ( talk) 14:57, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
The number of verified hooks are growing dangerously low. If you guys could take a bit of extra time to verify a couple extra hooks today (especially those without images), it would be much appreciated. Thanks, NW ( Talk) 19:00, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
Moxfyre ( ǝɹʎℲxoɯ | contrib) 22:18, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
Who approves this garbage? -- NE2 18:17, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
Wow! That IS what it's about - enticing readers to new content. Vicenarian ( Said · Done) 02:31, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
Oh is that what it's all about! And all the while I though we were trying to create a quality encyclopaedia here. Let's just take the whole shit down then and put up a link to a Britney Spears crotch shot, I'm sure that will set new records.
I think it's important that editors understand that DYKSTATS is not a competition. Personally I don't feel strongly about this hook one way or another, but if anyone has legitimate concerns with specific hooks, then that needs to be discussed without reference to the view count. It was because a lot of people didn't understand this that the name was changed from DYKBEST to DYKSTATS. Lampman ( talk) 09:51, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
The hook should read something like "... that in 1987, 13 years after its citizens voted to repeal the city's gay rights ordinance, Boulder, Colorado became the only American city to adopt a gay rights law through popular referendum?" This was suggested as an ALT because the existing hook is grammatically strained. Otto4711 ( talk) 05:41, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
If an article is a translation of an article on a different language Wikipedia, is it considered a new article, or should it be expanded 5x per "Additional Rule" A5? I was referred here from the "Additional rules" talkpage. Thanks, cmadler ( talk) 14:34, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi, my Anglo-Italian Cup hook is currently in queue 2 having been put there by NW. [2] (thanks by the way). If it is a reasonable request and this is seen in time, would it be okay to change it to the second hook that I suggested which was verified by Decltype, because I feel it is much more interesting. I'd do it myself but I don't think it is right to change one's own work without approval once it has got to the protected stage. Also, if regulars know a reason why the alternative hook is not suitable please ignore this request. Finally, a thank you. I really don't want this to sound like a complaint of any kind (it doesn't bother me much) and I think you all do fantastic work in keeping these suggestions turning over to the main page. So, because it isn't said to all you DYK regulars enough, thanks for all your hard work! Rambo's Revenge (talk) 20:35, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
Recently there was a bit of a brouhaha over whether or not informational footnotes (as opposed to reference notes) should be considered "readable prose" for purposes of DYK eligibility. My argument in favor of inclusion is that such asides, designed to offer additional relevant information that may be distracting if placed directly within the article, qualify as readable prose and do not fall under any exclusion listed either in the selection criteria (infoboxes, categories, references, lists, tables) or in the additional rules (block quotes, headers, images and captions, the "See also" section if any, the references section, Table of Contents, edit buttons and all superscript like [6] and [citation needed]). The argument against counting them was that DYK Check excludes them. I don't know how often this situation arises, but when it comes up again I'd like clarification that footnotes are definitely in or definitely out. Obviously, my !vote is for definitely in. Otto4711 ( talk) 02:52, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
<ref name="whatever">bla bla bla</ref>
and extra/explanatory footnotes use the "group" attribute, <ref group="note">By the way...</ref>
). But that's mostly personal editing preference, and there is no time in the foreseeable future when this will be standard across the project. Long story short, there's no good way for a script or any other tool to tell the difference between an "informational footnote" and a "reference footnote" across the project; these characters would have to be added by hand (using a cut & paste character counter, word processor, or whatever) after getting the automated count.Hey guys. I know some of you are on IRC, but I have recently been made aware of the presence of #wikipedia-en-dyk connect. I've been idling in it for a week or two and haven't seen any activity; perhaps it is time we advertise it on the main WP:DYK page, or WP:IRC? At the very least, it will provide a venue for experienced DYK reviewers to get in live contact with potential nominees etc much in the same way #wikipedia-en-help connect operates. Thoughts? \ Backslash Forwardslash / ( talk) 07:25, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
Could someone with the tool very kindly check if there is a 5x expansion in Dutch Golden Age painting between this version and the latest (please say which this was)? I normally just cut & paste, but this is way too long. Many thanks! Johnbod ( talk) 23:37, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
Did anyone else notice that the hook for CSCT, now in prep area 1, relies on a primary source? Dahn ( talk) 11:37, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
Also: it's not that big an issue, but I did state an objection to the hook about Charles of Lorraine-Commercy - namely, that the hook about him being "one of the most trusted lieutenants" is another way of saying that he was in service to Prince Eugene of Savoy. This admittedly is not an interesting hook in itself, unless going with "... did you know that Abraham Lincoln was a US President?" is interesting. It's another way of saying "... did you know that the subject of my article was once alive?", or "... did you know that clicking this link will get you to an article?" I had commented on that, but there was no reply, and the hook was simply picked as such, with no change whatsoever. Dahn ( talk) 12:50, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
Please get this image (now on p1) protected before it is moved to the queue. I added it to p1 intending to get it done, but I'm experiencing connection problems again. ≈ Chamal talk ¤ 15:15, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
Unfortunately, the DYK related to this article already has reached the main page, but it provides a good lesson for those editors who approve hooks. I don't believe it's sufficient to make sure an article has been expanded 5x. The content that has been added needs to be examined as well. In the case of this article, most of what had been added violated film project guidelines and WP:SYNTH. It included two long sections that sounded like they had been written for a film appreciation course and were not related directly to the subject matter. It also included a biography of Shirley Temple. All this material has been excised from the article. May I respectfully request that in the future editors approving DYK nominations give the article enough of a glance to determine if it meets Wikipedia standards and not just the length requirement? Thank you. LiteraryMaven ( talk • contrib) 13:16, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
I notice a bunch of rescue themed hooks / articles on the nominations page right now. Would it be good or bad for them to appear all together on the Main Page? -- Una Smith ( talk) 04:01, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
Can these hooks be scheduled to appear on the Main Page during mid-morning in the eastern US time zone? -- Una Smith ( talk) 04:40, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
The picture is from ultraviolet light and should be thus indicated (ultraviolet image pictured) instead of (pictured) as currently slated for listing. WilliamKF ( talk) 20:23, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
I did a double hook for Not by Bread Alone and Vladimir Dudintsev but only got a credit for the first one. I know it is not a big deal, but could someone take care of a cred for Dudintsev? That way, my DYK total stays easily verifiable.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 18:42, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
was moved to prep area and then something happened - a single nom Thierry Gueorgiou was split out of it, and I do not know what to do with other honest 3 noms. Una Smith reposted them individually, with his own hooks (kind of weird situation, as he actually did not expand them), which was a great help though as I would be absolutely clueless, still could anyone give a comment. It is not that I'm really complaining, but IMO, at least some explanation had to be given to me as a nominator. Thanks. Materialscientist ( talk) 01:00, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
Argh.. No. The promoter cut off the other three noms, linked in all and any possible ways in the code of the joint nomination, ignoring ALT hooks and discussion. All those articles are on a rare topic (who watches the sport of orienteering ?) and were expanded only to join the nice rescue story, which happened once in a lifetime in this sport, under one umbrella hook. Now that hook is already aired, with one nom, leaving three others hookless. Una Smith is trying to save them by other hooks, kudos to him, but the train is gone. There is no use crying over split milk here - it is about the system. Speaking in language of Matrix-3, you've got dark areas, like T:DYK/P1, where a Trainman can do anything and I can do nothing. I would be much happier if all discussions happen at T:TDYK or user talk pages, if more appropriate, but once a nom leaves T:TDYK then no drastic action is normally taken. Obviously, I am not at peace now, and you can ignore all this, I'm just asking myself why should I write for DYK anymore. Materialscientist ( talk) 04:46, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
As far as I can see, the hook was moved to prep area at 22:11 and aired in two hours at 00:28. I was inactive those few hrs. Sure blunders happen, perhaps every day at DYK. I guess I just wanted to hear that it was a blunder, but I'm not sure it was - hooks get entirely rewritten, in prep area, every so often. IMO, this should happen at T:TDYK. Materialscientist ( talk) 05:19, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
For some unknown reason the bot has made two updates in less than 30 minutes. [3] As the first of these updates has received less than 10% of the time it should normally receive, I have rescheduled it for a another appearance. Not sure what caused this hiccup. The only unusual thing I have spotted is a database delay reported with user contributions that was over 10,000 seconds but has now dropped to less than half that value. At the same time as user contributions is showing this large lag, my watchlist shows no indication of a database lag. Thus this problem may be due to different database tables being out of sync. -- Allen3 talk 19:32, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Will the bot be giving out double credits? — Ed (Talk • Contribs) 19:51, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
The Articles created/expanded on September 12 sub-section is missing after that . I'm not experienced enough to fix it -- KrebMarkt 22:21, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Do we really need SoxBot to report changes to T:TDYK at our IRC channel? This is a page that can have several edits in a minute, and the channel is full of these reports at times. I've tried a couple of times to ask something about the queues there in the past two days, and both went unnoticed among all those reports. It's all right to report changes to this page (WT:DYK), but I think it's really unnecessary to report T:TDYK changes. It's more like a report page than something used for relevant discussion on DYK. ≈ Chamal talk ¤ 01:35, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
Where does the content of the suggestions page go when it falls off the bottom? It doesn't go to the Archive... Maury Markowitz ( talk) 12:01, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Sept 17 is almost here, and the hook for the occasion is still in the " T:TDYK#Special_occasion_holding_area". -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 00:13, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
The bot hiccuped on the last run and only did user credits; it didn't update the template. Could an admin either 1) manually update, or 2) clear the credits from queue 3 and wait for the bot to update in 30 minutes?
Shubinator (
talk)
00:33, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
The bot (see contribs) seems to have died mid-way in tagging talk pages on the last run, so it might be down currently. Could someone take care about that, I am about to go offline for the next hours and cannot take care of it myself. Regards So Why 15:09, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
We have only one full queue, 163 total hooks on
T:TDYK—16 of which are verified. Of the rest, many have
or
underneath... Cheers, —
Ed
(Talk •
Contribs)
23:33, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Lately there's been some controversy about what is and what is not permissible in a DYK hook, and I was hoping we could bring some clarity to this issue. Let's face it; DYK is the special ed class of Wikipedia; while anyone can write a DYK in about an hour, writing an FA takes about a month, yet a DYK gets almost the same exposure as an FA does (in fact, an FA isn't even guaranteed a Main Page spot, which a DYK is). That is why it's particularly important that DYK does not compromise the overall quality of the Wikipedia project.
Just like Jon Bon Jovi wished that every day could be like Christmas, there seems to be some editors on DYK who wish every day could be like April Fool's day. On this day we allow some caprice in our hooks, but we should not let this be the norm. Yet the tendency towards this is largely driven by the DYKSTATS project, where there seems to be a competition to get as many hits as possible on each DYK. This was not the original purpose of this page; rather it was intended to celebrate good hooks, not to incite a "race for the bottom" to maximise hits. That was why it was renamed from the original DYKBEST to DYKSTATS. To avoid these unfortunate hooks, I would like to suggest some additional guidelines (with illustrations from last year's April Fool's day's hooks):
All of this could easily be summed up in one addition to the additional rules :
If anyone objects to this, please say so here, and we can discuss it. Lampman ( talk) 00:35, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
I think consensus is clear at this point, and there is unlikely to be any benefit from continuing this discussion. Gatoclass ( talk) 17:49, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
We are currently down to less than 150 hooks again. So I think either we need to go back to six hooks per update for a while, or else somebody needs to do a lot of third party noms in a hurry. Since the latter seems unlikely given the generally low level of interest over the last few days, I suggest we go with the six per update solution. Gatoclass ( talk) 11:12, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
Can someone run it on space debris? Maury Markowitz ( talk) 12:25, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
Currently on T:DYK. I'm concerned that this falls afoul of our selection criteria, which states "Articles and hooks which focus unduly on negative aspects of living individuals should be avoided." DYK should not be a forum for "let's laugh at the crazy person" hooks. Thoughts? Skomorokh 22:26, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
I went bold and removed "unduly" from Wikipedia:Did you know/Article. The main rule set for the hook is WP:DYKHN, which clearly says negative hooks should be avoided. Each will interpret "unduly" by their own standards, so we might as well say "go ahead, put up a negative hook". That word there creates confusion rather than clarifying the problem, so I don't think it's really needed there. ≈ Chamal talk ¤ 07:32, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
that the 1999 anime series Digimon Adventure was first seen as an imitation of Nintendo's Pokémon franchise when its episodes first aired in North America?
Is this no longer seen to be the case? In fact, with Pokemon first being sprung upon the world over a year earlier, is that not the case? WookMuff ( talk) 08:01, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
Just a heads up: All the queues are empty at this point. Little Mountain 5 14:46, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
There are two hooks listed for today's date just in case they aren't spotted. By the way (in relation to the above), I've been told not to queue any newer ones by (I think) an administrator in the past... and when I have I've been reverted and had the hooks moved back to the submissions page so that was discouraging. Has that rule changed now? -- can dle • wicke 00:46, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
Here, here and here I have seen an editor asking for at least one reference per paragraph as a prerequisite for DYK approval. In the rules and additional rules there is no mention of this. I see this new stipulation as rule creep in the direction of requiring DYK articles to meet B-class standards in terms of inline references. The DYK rules forbidding Stub class brings me to conclude that a Start-class article, one with the hook adequately referenced, is all that is needed in order to be approved. If consensus here determines that B-class references are required, then the rules should be changed to reflect this. Binksternet ( talk) 15:11, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
How much interaction (i.e. editing) do we expect readers to have with B/GA class articles at DYK? Part of the original purpose and charm of DYK was that it showcased the dynamism of Wikipedia by featuring our newest (and yes, raw) articles. While the daily FAs featured everything that we aspire to be as an encyclopedia, DYK was the peak behind the curtain for readers into the birth and growth of an article--a growth that they too could be a part of. From simple tweaks in grammar and formatting to minor expansion of content, readers were invited to take part in the Wikipedia experience via the "Edit this page" button at the top of their screens. It wasn't just the button alone that allowed DYKs to encourage reader action but also the motivation ("This should be fixed") and the confidence ("Hey I could do something like this") that moves them to interact with a DYK article and by extension participate in Wikipedia. In this DYK was a completely unique feature on the Main Page-more than just a thematic regurgitation of content already created (such as ITN and OTD) but an immensely valuable asset that benefited so many aspects of the projects from the readers, the editors and the articles themselves.
But as DYK continues its evolution towards requiring B/GA class standards, I think the question should be posed "How much interaction do we expect readers to have with B/GA class articles at DYK?" How much motivation and confidence do readers have to not just simply read but interact with articles like
Vishtaspa,
Turnbuckle Championship Wrestling and
Vasili Bazhenov (current DYKs on the MP)? All excellent articles and enjoyable to read but, in all honesty, these articles are closer to FAs than being a true representation of "Wikipedia's newest articles"-the kind of articles that need growth, development and attention from readers. Without that interaction, DYK serves no different purpose on the Main Page than simply being a regurgitation of content like ITN and OTD only without a "theme".
Agne
Cheese/
Wine
19:41, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
I am inquiring about the possibility of installing [hide] templates within the Main Page templates. Is this at all possible?-- OsirisV ( talk) 11:00, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
I was working on creating the Norman Shepard article here User:Remember/Sandbox to get it up to quality for a DYK (e.g., that Norman Shepard is the only college basketball coach in history to go undefeated in his first season), but I am not very familar with the DYK process and don't want to upload the article and have it fail DYK. I would appreciate any advice that someone could give on this issue. Remember ( talk) 15:59, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
{{NewDYKnom | article=Norman Shepard | author=Remember | status=new | hook= ... that .........? }}
[8] = what is going on with this? Cirt ( talk) 04:24, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
I was under the impression that only registered users can approve hooks. However, looking at the rules, I couldn't find anything that says this. An IP just approved a hook and moved to p1 ( [9]). It's still there, and I'm not sure whether to revert or not since the rules do not explicitly say this. This is a quite obvious and necessary restriction that should be there, for the simple reason that you can just log out and verify your own nomination. Any thoughts? ≈ Chamal talk ¤ 16:58, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
I think this makes things a lot clearer. Shoemaker's Holiday Over 208 FCs served 17:21, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
Shoemaker's Holiday Over 208 FCs served 11:58, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
And why have you reverted it again? You boldly made a change to that page; fine. It was reverted, and there were comments opposing your edit here. When there is opposition and consensus is not yet clear on whether your edit is good or not, you are supposed to discuss it. You have instead gone back there and re-reverted based only on your own opinion that it is appropriate. ≈ Chamal talk ¤ 13:38, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
As for the documentation of the other features:
In current nominations (ignoring "older nominations")
That works out to those features being used hundreds of times a year, as I estimate. Shoemaker's Holiday Over 208 FCs served 14:01, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 45 | ← | Archive 48 | Archive 49 | Archive 50 | Archive 51 | Archive 52 | → | Archive 55 |
Anyone else having this problem in the last week or so? The page loads 99%, and then just stops for half a minute or more, apparently doing nothing. I'm starting to find it pretty irritating, it didn't used to do this. Has anyone added some new code or something to the page which might account for this behaviour? Gatoclass ( talk) 10:38, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
Anyone know why
<style type="text/css"> /* Fix the sidebar's position while you scroll */ div[id=column-one] { /* Using the attribute selector hides this from IE */ position: fixed; height: 100%; /* If you shrink the browser too small, the */ overflow: auto; /* side column will become scrollable, so stuff */ z-index: 2; /* is always accessible, albeit ugly */ } #p-logo { /* Make logo inline with other divs */ position:static; } #column-one { /* Sidebar column start at the top screen edge */ padding-top: 0; } #p-lang .pBody ul{ /* Sets the language box to a fixed height and */ height: 6em; /* scrollable if too long to fit on screen */ overflow: auto; } /* Fix the background image, too, so it looks nice as you scroll */ body { background-attachment: fixed; } /* Fix the footer so it looks nice and doesn't overlap the sidebar */ #footer { margin-left: 13.6em; border-left: solid 1px rgb(250, 189, 35); -moz-border-radius-topleft: 1em; -moz-border-radius-bottomleft: 1em; } /* Keep personal links at the top right */ #p-personal { width:100%; white-space:nowrap; padding:0 0 0 0; margin:0; position:absolute; left:0px; top:0px; z-index: 0; border: none; background: none; overflow: visible; line-height: 1.2em; } #p-personal h5 { display:none; } #p-personal .portlet, #p-personal .pBody { padding:0; margin:0; border: none; z-index:0; overflow: visible; background: none; } /* this is the ul contained in the portlet */ #p-personal ul { border: none; line-height: 1.4em; color: #2f6fab; padding: 0em 2em 0 3em; margin: 0; text-align: right; text-transform: lowercase; list-style: none; z-index:0; background: none; } #p-personal li { z-index:0; border:none; padding:0; display: inline; color: #2f6fab; margin-left: 1em; line-height: 1.2em; background: none; } #p-personal li a { text-decoration: none; color: #005896; padding-bottom: 0.2em; background: none; } #p-personal li a:hover { background-color: White; padding-bottom: 0.2em; text-decoration: none; } </style>
is being randomly inserted on the suggestions page? See for example
this diff. Oddly, some of the edits I made to remove it are not in the edit history.
Otto4711 (
talk)
01:23, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
I have noticed that DYKadminBot ( talk · contribs) has not completed the 10:00, August 20, 2009 (UTC) update. The last edit performed by the bot occurring part way through the {{ dyktalk}} insertions. An e-mail has been sent to the bot operator reporting the problem, but I do not know if he will be able to respond before the next scheduled update. Are there any actions that should occur before the 15:00 update to ensure normal continuation of updates? -- Allen3 talk 10:56, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
There was another hiccup during the 05:00, August 23, 2009 (UTC) update. The bot stopped after performing the last needed talk page update. Queue 3 (the queue used by the update) has been manually reset and User:DYKadminBot/count incremented. Hopefully the bot will perform the next update properly. -- Allen3 talk 09:03, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
The toolserver is currently experiencing problems. [1] This is the apparent reason for the bot missing the 17:00, August 24, 2009 (UTC) update. -- Allen3 talk 20:46, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
Well, it has been nine hours since the last update, probably because the toolserver is still down; can an admin manually do it? Thanks, — Ed (Talk • Contribs) 21:04, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
Okay, so the last update (16:40-ish) was perfect. Go bot go! Here's to hoping everything is now back to normal... — Ed (Talk • Contribs) 17:50, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
This update hung in the middle of tagging article talk pages with {{ dyktalk}} templates. Update has been manually completed.-- Allen3 talk 00:03, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
{{ editprotected}}
The note at the top of Template:Did_you_know/Queue should say: "If there are 3 or more empty queues, this page will report as a backlog." and not "If are 3 or more empty queues, this page will report as a backlog." Smartse ( talk) 14:57, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
The number of verified hooks are growing dangerously low. If you guys could take a bit of extra time to verify a couple extra hooks today (especially those without images), it would be much appreciated. Thanks, NW ( Talk) 19:00, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
Moxfyre ( ǝɹʎℲxoɯ | contrib) 22:18, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
Who approves this garbage? -- NE2 18:17, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
Wow! That IS what it's about - enticing readers to new content. Vicenarian ( Said · Done) 02:31, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
Oh is that what it's all about! And all the while I though we were trying to create a quality encyclopaedia here. Let's just take the whole shit down then and put up a link to a Britney Spears crotch shot, I'm sure that will set new records.
I think it's important that editors understand that DYKSTATS is not a competition. Personally I don't feel strongly about this hook one way or another, but if anyone has legitimate concerns with specific hooks, then that needs to be discussed without reference to the view count. It was because a lot of people didn't understand this that the name was changed from DYKBEST to DYKSTATS. Lampman ( talk) 09:51, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
The hook should read something like "... that in 1987, 13 years after its citizens voted to repeal the city's gay rights ordinance, Boulder, Colorado became the only American city to adopt a gay rights law through popular referendum?" This was suggested as an ALT because the existing hook is grammatically strained. Otto4711 ( talk) 05:41, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
If an article is a translation of an article on a different language Wikipedia, is it considered a new article, or should it be expanded 5x per "Additional Rule" A5? I was referred here from the "Additional rules" talkpage. Thanks, cmadler ( talk) 14:34, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi, my Anglo-Italian Cup hook is currently in queue 2 having been put there by NW. [2] (thanks by the way). If it is a reasonable request and this is seen in time, would it be okay to change it to the second hook that I suggested which was verified by Decltype, because I feel it is much more interesting. I'd do it myself but I don't think it is right to change one's own work without approval once it has got to the protected stage. Also, if regulars know a reason why the alternative hook is not suitable please ignore this request. Finally, a thank you. I really don't want this to sound like a complaint of any kind (it doesn't bother me much) and I think you all do fantastic work in keeping these suggestions turning over to the main page. So, because it isn't said to all you DYK regulars enough, thanks for all your hard work! Rambo's Revenge (talk) 20:35, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
Recently there was a bit of a brouhaha over whether or not informational footnotes (as opposed to reference notes) should be considered "readable prose" for purposes of DYK eligibility. My argument in favor of inclusion is that such asides, designed to offer additional relevant information that may be distracting if placed directly within the article, qualify as readable prose and do not fall under any exclusion listed either in the selection criteria (infoboxes, categories, references, lists, tables) or in the additional rules (block quotes, headers, images and captions, the "See also" section if any, the references section, Table of Contents, edit buttons and all superscript like [6] and [citation needed]). The argument against counting them was that DYK Check excludes them. I don't know how often this situation arises, but when it comes up again I'd like clarification that footnotes are definitely in or definitely out. Obviously, my !vote is for definitely in. Otto4711 ( talk) 02:52, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
<ref name="whatever">bla bla bla</ref>
and extra/explanatory footnotes use the "group" attribute, <ref group="note">By the way...</ref>
). But that's mostly personal editing preference, and there is no time in the foreseeable future when this will be standard across the project. Long story short, there's no good way for a script or any other tool to tell the difference between an "informational footnote" and a "reference footnote" across the project; these characters would have to be added by hand (using a cut & paste character counter, word processor, or whatever) after getting the automated count.Hey guys. I know some of you are on IRC, but I have recently been made aware of the presence of #wikipedia-en-dyk connect. I've been idling in it for a week or two and haven't seen any activity; perhaps it is time we advertise it on the main WP:DYK page, or WP:IRC? At the very least, it will provide a venue for experienced DYK reviewers to get in live contact with potential nominees etc much in the same way #wikipedia-en-help connect operates. Thoughts? \ Backslash Forwardslash / ( talk) 07:25, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
Could someone with the tool very kindly check if there is a 5x expansion in Dutch Golden Age painting between this version and the latest (please say which this was)? I normally just cut & paste, but this is way too long. Many thanks! Johnbod ( talk) 23:37, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
Did anyone else notice that the hook for CSCT, now in prep area 1, relies on a primary source? Dahn ( talk) 11:37, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
Also: it's not that big an issue, but I did state an objection to the hook about Charles of Lorraine-Commercy - namely, that the hook about him being "one of the most trusted lieutenants" is another way of saying that he was in service to Prince Eugene of Savoy. This admittedly is not an interesting hook in itself, unless going with "... did you know that Abraham Lincoln was a US President?" is interesting. It's another way of saying "... did you know that the subject of my article was once alive?", or "... did you know that clicking this link will get you to an article?" I had commented on that, but there was no reply, and the hook was simply picked as such, with no change whatsoever. Dahn ( talk) 12:50, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
Please get this image (now on p1) protected before it is moved to the queue. I added it to p1 intending to get it done, but I'm experiencing connection problems again. ≈ Chamal talk ¤ 15:15, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
Unfortunately, the DYK related to this article already has reached the main page, but it provides a good lesson for those editors who approve hooks. I don't believe it's sufficient to make sure an article has been expanded 5x. The content that has been added needs to be examined as well. In the case of this article, most of what had been added violated film project guidelines and WP:SYNTH. It included two long sections that sounded like they had been written for a film appreciation course and were not related directly to the subject matter. It also included a biography of Shirley Temple. All this material has been excised from the article. May I respectfully request that in the future editors approving DYK nominations give the article enough of a glance to determine if it meets Wikipedia standards and not just the length requirement? Thank you. LiteraryMaven ( talk • contrib) 13:16, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
I notice a bunch of rescue themed hooks / articles on the nominations page right now. Would it be good or bad for them to appear all together on the Main Page? -- Una Smith ( talk) 04:01, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
Can these hooks be scheduled to appear on the Main Page during mid-morning in the eastern US time zone? -- Una Smith ( talk) 04:40, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
The picture is from ultraviolet light and should be thus indicated (ultraviolet image pictured) instead of (pictured) as currently slated for listing. WilliamKF ( talk) 20:23, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
I did a double hook for Not by Bread Alone and Vladimir Dudintsev but only got a credit for the first one. I know it is not a big deal, but could someone take care of a cred for Dudintsev? That way, my DYK total stays easily verifiable.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 18:42, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
was moved to prep area and then something happened - a single nom Thierry Gueorgiou was split out of it, and I do not know what to do with other honest 3 noms. Una Smith reposted them individually, with his own hooks (kind of weird situation, as he actually did not expand them), which was a great help though as I would be absolutely clueless, still could anyone give a comment. It is not that I'm really complaining, but IMO, at least some explanation had to be given to me as a nominator. Thanks. Materialscientist ( talk) 01:00, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
Argh.. No. The promoter cut off the other three noms, linked in all and any possible ways in the code of the joint nomination, ignoring ALT hooks and discussion. All those articles are on a rare topic (who watches the sport of orienteering ?) and were expanded only to join the nice rescue story, which happened once in a lifetime in this sport, under one umbrella hook. Now that hook is already aired, with one nom, leaving three others hookless. Una Smith is trying to save them by other hooks, kudos to him, but the train is gone. There is no use crying over split milk here - it is about the system. Speaking in language of Matrix-3, you've got dark areas, like T:DYK/P1, where a Trainman can do anything and I can do nothing. I would be much happier if all discussions happen at T:TDYK or user talk pages, if more appropriate, but once a nom leaves T:TDYK then no drastic action is normally taken. Obviously, I am not at peace now, and you can ignore all this, I'm just asking myself why should I write for DYK anymore. Materialscientist ( talk) 04:46, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
As far as I can see, the hook was moved to prep area at 22:11 and aired in two hours at 00:28. I was inactive those few hrs. Sure blunders happen, perhaps every day at DYK. I guess I just wanted to hear that it was a blunder, but I'm not sure it was - hooks get entirely rewritten, in prep area, every so often. IMO, this should happen at T:TDYK. Materialscientist ( talk) 05:19, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
For some unknown reason the bot has made two updates in less than 30 minutes. [3] As the first of these updates has received less than 10% of the time it should normally receive, I have rescheduled it for a another appearance. Not sure what caused this hiccup. The only unusual thing I have spotted is a database delay reported with user contributions that was over 10,000 seconds but has now dropped to less than half that value. At the same time as user contributions is showing this large lag, my watchlist shows no indication of a database lag. Thus this problem may be due to different database tables being out of sync. -- Allen3 talk 19:32, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Will the bot be giving out double credits? — Ed (Talk • Contribs) 19:51, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
The Articles created/expanded on September 12 sub-section is missing after that . I'm not experienced enough to fix it -- KrebMarkt 22:21, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Do we really need SoxBot to report changes to T:TDYK at our IRC channel? This is a page that can have several edits in a minute, and the channel is full of these reports at times. I've tried a couple of times to ask something about the queues there in the past two days, and both went unnoticed among all those reports. It's all right to report changes to this page (WT:DYK), but I think it's really unnecessary to report T:TDYK changes. It's more like a report page than something used for relevant discussion on DYK. ≈ Chamal talk ¤ 01:35, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
Where does the content of the suggestions page go when it falls off the bottom? It doesn't go to the Archive... Maury Markowitz ( talk) 12:01, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Sept 17 is almost here, and the hook for the occasion is still in the " T:TDYK#Special_occasion_holding_area". -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 00:13, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
The bot hiccuped on the last run and only did user credits; it didn't update the template. Could an admin either 1) manually update, or 2) clear the credits from queue 3 and wait for the bot to update in 30 minutes?
Shubinator (
talk)
00:33, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
The bot (see contribs) seems to have died mid-way in tagging talk pages on the last run, so it might be down currently. Could someone take care about that, I am about to go offline for the next hours and cannot take care of it myself. Regards So Why 15:09, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
We have only one full queue, 163 total hooks on
T:TDYK—16 of which are verified. Of the rest, many have
or
underneath... Cheers, —
Ed
(Talk •
Contribs)
23:33, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Lately there's been some controversy about what is and what is not permissible in a DYK hook, and I was hoping we could bring some clarity to this issue. Let's face it; DYK is the special ed class of Wikipedia; while anyone can write a DYK in about an hour, writing an FA takes about a month, yet a DYK gets almost the same exposure as an FA does (in fact, an FA isn't even guaranteed a Main Page spot, which a DYK is). That is why it's particularly important that DYK does not compromise the overall quality of the Wikipedia project.
Just like Jon Bon Jovi wished that every day could be like Christmas, there seems to be some editors on DYK who wish every day could be like April Fool's day. On this day we allow some caprice in our hooks, but we should not let this be the norm. Yet the tendency towards this is largely driven by the DYKSTATS project, where there seems to be a competition to get as many hits as possible on each DYK. This was not the original purpose of this page; rather it was intended to celebrate good hooks, not to incite a "race for the bottom" to maximise hits. That was why it was renamed from the original DYKBEST to DYKSTATS. To avoid these unfortunate hooks, I would like to suggest some additional guidelines (with illustrations from last year's April Fool's day's hooks):
All of this could easily be summed up in one addition to the additional rules :
If anyone objects to this, please say so here, and we can discuss it. Lampman ( talk) 00:35, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
I think consensus is clear at this point, and there is unlikely to be any benefit from continuing this discussion. Gatoclass ( talk) 17:49, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
We are currently down to less than 150 hooks again. So I think either we need to go back to six hooks per update for a while, or else somebody needs to do a lot of third party noms in a hurry. Since the latter seems unlikely given the generally low level of interest over the last few days, I suggest we go with the six per update solution. Gatoclass ( talk) 11:12, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
Can someone run it on space debris? Maury Markowitz ( talk) 12:25, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
Currently on T:DYK. I'm concerned that this falls afoul of our selection criteria, which states "Articles and hooks which focus unduly on negative aspects of living individuals should be avoided." DYK should not be a forum for "let's laugh at the crazy person" hooks. Thoughts? Skomorokh 22:26, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
I went bold and removed "unduly" from Wikipedia:Did you know/Article. The main rule set for the hook is WP:DYKHN, which clearly says negative hooks should be avoided. Each will interpret "unduly" by their own standards, so we might as well say "go ahead, put up a negative hook". That word there creates confusion rather than clarifying the problem, so I don't think it's really needed there. ≈ Chamal talk ¤ 07:32, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
that the 1999 anime series Digimon Adventure was first seen as an imitation of Nintendo's Pokémon franchise when its episodes first aired in North America?
Is this no longer seen to be the case? In fact, with Pokemon first being sprung upon the world over a year earlier, is that not the case? WookMuff ( talk) 08:01, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
Just a heads up: All the queues are empty at this point. Little Mountain 5 14:46, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
There are two hooks listed for today's date just in case they aren't spotted. By the way (in relation to the above), I've been told not to queue any newer ones by (I think) an administrator in the past... and when I have I've been reverted and had the hooks moved back to the submissions page so that was discouraging. Has that rule changed now? -- can dle • wicke 00:46, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
Here, here and here I have seen an editor asking for at least one reference per paragraph as a prerequisite for DYK approval. In the rules and additional rules there is no mention of this. I see this new stipulation as rule creep in the direction of requiring DYK articles to meet B-class standards in terms of inline references. The DYK rules forbidding Stub class brings me to conclude that a Start-class article, one with the hook adequately referenced, is all that is needed in order to be approved. If consensus here determines that B-class references are required, then the rules should be changed to reflect this. Binksternet ( talk) 15:11, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
How much interaction (i.e. editing) do we expect readers to have with B/GA class articles at DYK? Part of the original purpose and charm of DYK was that it showcased the dynamism of Wikipedia by featuring our newest (and yes, raw) articles. While the daily FAs featured everything that we aspire to be as an encyclopedia, DYK was the peak behind the curtain for readers into the birth and growth of an article--a growth that they too could be a part of. From simple tweaks in grammar and formatting to minor expansion of content, readers were invited to take part in the Wikipedia experience via the "Edit this page" button at the top of their screens. It wasn't just the button alone that allowed DYKs to encourage reader action but also the motivation ("This should be fixed") and the confidence ("Hey I could do something like this") that moves them to interact with a DYK article and by extension participate in Wikipedia. In this DYK was a completely unique feature on the Main Page-more than just a thematic regurgitation of content already created (such as ITN and OTD) but an immensely valuable asset that benefited so many aspects of the projects from the readers, the editors and the articles themselves.
But as DYK continues its evolution towards requiring B/GA class standards, I think the question should be posed "How much interaction do we expect readers to have with B/GA class articles at DYK?" How much motivation and confidence do readers have to not just simply read but interact with articles like
Vishtaspa,
Turnbuckle Championship Wrestling and
Vasili Bazhenov (current DYKs on the MP)? All excellent articles and enjoyable to read but, in all honesty, these articles are closer to FAs than being a true representation of "Wikipedia's newest articles"-the kind of articles that need growth, development and attention from readers. Without that interaction, DYK serves no different purpose on the Main Page than simply being a regurgitation of content like ITN and OTD only without a "theme".
Agne
Cheese/
Wine
19:41, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
I am inquiring about the possibility of installing [hide] templates within the Main Page templates. Is this at all possible?-- OsirisV ( talk) 11:00, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
I was working on creating the Norman Shepard article here User:Remember/Sandbox to get it up to quality for a DYK (e.g., that Norman Shepard is the only college basketball coach in history to go undefeated in his first season), but I am not very familar with the DYK process and don't want to upload the article and have it fail DYK. I would appreciate any advice that someone could give on this issue. Remember ( talk) 15:59, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
{{NewDYKnom | article=Norman Shepard | author=Remember | status=new | hook= ... that .........? }}
[8] = what is going on with this? Cirt ( talk) 04:24, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
I was under the impression that only registered users can approve hooks. However, looking at the rules, I couldn't find anything that says this. An IP just approved a hook and moved to p1 ( [9]). It's still there, and I'm not sure whether to revert or not since the rules do not explicitly say this. This is a quite obvious and necessary restriction that should be there, for the simple reason that you can just log out and verify your own nomination. Any thoughts? ≈ Chamal talk ¤ 16:58, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
I think this makes things a lot clearer. Shoemaker's Holiday Over 208 FCs served 17:21, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
Shoemaker's Holiday Over 208 FCs served 11:58, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
And why have you reverted it again? You boldly made a change to that page; fine. It was reverted, and there were comments opposing your edit here. When there is opposition and consensus is not yet clear on whether your edit is good or not, you are supposed to discuss it. You have instead gone back there and re-reverted based only on your own opinion that it is appropriate. ≈ Chamal talk ¤ 13:38, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
As for the documentation of the other features:
In current nominations (ignoring "older nominations")
That works out to those features being used hundreds of times a year, as I estimate. Shoemaker's Holiday Over 208 FCs served 14:01, 27 September 2009 (UTC)