Template:Did you know nominations/Diana Russell, Duchess of Bedford

Diana Russell, Duchess of Bedford

 * ... that Lady Diana Spencer (pictured) failed to secretly marry the Prince of Wales because the Prime Minister found out about the scheme?
 * Reviewed: List of aircraft accidents and incidents resulting in at least 50 fatalities

5x expanded by Surtsicna (talk). Self nominated at 21:21, 2 July 2013 (UTC).


 * ALT1: ... that Diana, Princess of Wales, was named after another Lady Diana Spencer (pictured), who was also a prospective Princess of Wales and who also died young?
 * ALT1a: ... that Diana, Princess of Wales, was named after another Lady Diana Spencer (pictured), who was a prospective Princess of Wales and who also died young?
 * ALT2: ... that Lady Diana Spencer (pictured), undestined Princess of Wales, had a prematurely born son whose death was kept secret from her by replacing him with another baby?
 * ALT2a: ... that Lady Diana Spencer (pictured), once a prospective Princess of Wales, had a prematurely born son whose death was kept secret from her by replacing him with another baby?

Which of the hooks would be most attractive to readers? Surtsicna (talk) 21:49, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I just realized that I missed the birthday of the Princess of Wales by one day. Would saving the hook for 31 August (anniversary of the Princess's death) be a good idea? Surtsicna (talk) 00:02, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svgSymbol voting keep.svg New enough, long enough, fully referenced. Pic fine. QPQ done. Hook verified against online sources. AGF on ALT hooks with offline sources. Good to go. Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:43, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot for the review! What about the choice of the hook? The original one and ALT2 rely on the likelihood of associating the earlier Lady Diana Spencer with her much better known namesake, while ALT1 directly refers to the Princess. Which one would generate most interest? Anyway, I've decided that it would be best to save it for 31 August. Surtsicna (talk) 13:11, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
 * All are approved, so I've left it up to the promoter, but my preference would be for the original hook. Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:19, 3 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Symbol question.svg I initially moved this back from the special occasion holding area because the requested date, August 31, is outside of the six-week limit for such requests. Is there another date that could be used in the next six weeks (the Diana this is about was born July 31; it'd be her 303rd birthday), or might it just run normally? I'm not sure the modern Diana's death date of August 31 is sufficient to be worth making an exception. However, I have a problem with ALT2: the word "undestined" is not in merriam-webster.com nor in oxforddictionaries.com, so I think it's inappropriate (not to mention confusing) to use in a hook. I also wonder about ALT1, since the modern Diana was an actual Princess of Wales, not merely a prospective one, making "also" somewhat misleading. I do have no objections to the original hook, however, and will happily remove my "?" icon once the ALT hook and special holding issues are settled. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:09, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, no. I did not know that the limit was only 6 weeks! If I knew, I would have kept in my user space for another week. The idea was to launch the hook on the 16th anniversary of the Princess's death, when the article about her gets tens of thousands of views (over 49,000 on 31 August 2012, and it was not even featured on OTD). The birth of the Princess's first grandchild will likely increase the interest in her even more, and therefore also in her namesake. People appear to like reading about her on that day, and this hook would make a really nice tribute (as well as a surprise for the readers). I sincerely hope an exception will be made in this case. Regarding the word "undestined", I too was unsure, having found it in very few dictionaries. I suggest replacing it with "once a prospective". As for ALT1, wasn't the Princess also a prospective Princess of Wales before becoming an actual one? That was what I had in mind, but removing "also" would not be such a big deal, I suppose. Surtsicna (talk) 20:42, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
 * In reviewing the article, I looked up "undestined" and found it dictionary.com.  I did not forget the six-week rule when I moved the hook to the special occasions area, just failed to calculate it.  I would certainly support an exception in this case. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:35, 4 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Yeah, the only website I found "undestined" at was dictionary.com, but they didn't bother to define it or explain which of the "destined" definitions it worked with, which makes it pretty useless as a listing. ;-) I've struck ALT1 and ALT2 and replaced them with ALT1a and ALT2a using Surtsicna's proposed changes to each. I think, since Surtsicna wasn't aware of the six week limit (the article would have needed to be held until around July 19 before being moved out of user space), I'm more inclined to support an exception. Should we get one other person (maybe an admin like Crisco 1492 or Orlady) to opine on this matter? I'm satisfied with ALT1a and ALT2a wording, though like you, Hawkeye7, I think the original hook is the most effective. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:28, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you both for commenting! The original hook it is, then. I have to say it again: I really, really hope the hook will be saved for 31 August. If you believe someone might disagree, Crisco 1492 or Orlady would be good choices for a fourth opinion. Surtsicna (talk) 09:26, 4 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I don't mind holding it (although yes, next time note the 6 weeks limit) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:41, 6 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Symbol voting keep.svg Consensus seems to be that a hold for August 31 is allowable under the circumstances. Restoring earlier tick, and moving to special holding area. Original hook is preferred by reviewers. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:27, 6 July 2013 (UTC)


 * May I suggest using the hook on MainPage on July 29th, the anniversary of the not-so-secret and PM-approved wedding of Charles, Prince of Wales, and Lady Diana Spencer, please? No need to break the 6-week rule, and it would be a better occasion to have some fun, methinks. --PFHLai (talk) 23:05, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I would much prefer saving it for the anniversary of Diana's death (31 August). The interest in her spikes on that day and is very likely going to be even higher this year due to the birth of her first grandchild. The reviewers kindly accepted my petition for an exception to the 6-week-rule (which I wish I had known about before) because the hook would certainly do best on 31 August. That is the day when people flock to Wikipedia to read about Diana, so it would be nice to present them with something they did not know – this, is after all, the "Did you know" project :) Surtsicna (talk) 23:22, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I was not thinking about your article per se. I was just considering when it would be a better occasion (anniversary of her wedding vs anniversary of her death) to have some fun on MainPage. I don't want people to flock to Talk:Main Page to complain that we are being disrespectful to the dead. The proposed hook is more related to her wedding than to her death, anyway. --PFHLai (talk) 08:46, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
 * There is absolutely nothing disrespectful in it to either of the two dead women. I understand what your point, though. It would be interesting to have this hook right next to the "On this day" blurb that says that Lady Diana Spencer married the Prince of Wales on that day, but it would also be very confusing to many readers and that would certainly lead to complaints at Talk:Main Page. While the proposed hook is more related to her wedding, both the chosen date and the hook are more related to Diana than to Charles and Diana. The anniversary of the latter's death is more prominent than the anniversary of their wedding. Surtsicna (talk) 09:03, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
 * The hook itself is not disrespectful. But picking the anniversary of her death to do something cute on MainPage? I don't know... Her name is there in the hook, but it's not really about her. I'd be more supportive if we are doing sth to commemorate her or something directly related to her. Deliberately confusing hooks designed to get readers of MainPage to click and read a particular article is something we often have at DYK. I just don't think the anniversary of someone's death is a good occasion for such fun. --PFHLai (talk) 23:41, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I never intended it to be fun. I simply thought this Diana was someone people would like to learn about when they come to read about the Diana. Anyway, I nominated another article related to her and suggested 29 July as the appropriate date 10 minutes ago. Would that work well on 29 July? Surtsicna (talk) 23:52, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I think both hooks are good for 29th July (maybe back-to-back hook-sets? but the other one needs to be approved by 28th July). --PFHLai (talk) 00:30, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
 * The user who reviewed the other article suggested using both on 31 August. I think one (this one) should be used on 31 August and the other one on 29 July, but if both should for some reason be used on the same day, I'm more inclined to agree with the reviewer who suggested 31 August. Surtsicna (talk) 13:31, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I'd recommend the failed secret marriage hook to be used on the wedding anniversary (July 29th), but the dress hook would be good for either anniversary (July 29th or August 31st). I'd avoid being playful on a relevant death anniversary. I think I've written enough on this point. I'll let the hook promoter decide the dates. --PFHLai (talk) 08:37, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
 * The promoter should note that the nominator, the reviewer and two other users favour saving it for 31 August. Surtsicna (talk) 10:06, 26 July 2013 (UTC)