Template:Did you know nominations/Innocence of Muslims

Innocence of Muslims, Nakoula Basseley Nakoula

 * ... that the film Innocence of Muslims, thought to be created by Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, was cited as the cause of the 2012 U.S. diplomatic missions attacks?
 * Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Sigma 8-16mm f/4.5-5.6 DC HSM lens
 * Comment: Very sensitive topic, so I'll defer to any concerns raised. The 2012 U.S. diplomatic missions attacks resulting from this film were ITN, but this article was not included in that.

Created/expanded by Muboshgu (talk), Nasir Ghobar (talk), Cupco (talk). Nominated by Muboshgu (talk) at 17:31, 12 September 2012 (UTC)


 * This isn't a review. However, I'm concerned about having this on the front page at this time. In addition, with regard to the hook, it's becoming increasingly clear that, particularly in the case of the Libyan attack, the film was merely a pretext and diversion for a planned, coordinated terrorist attack on 9/11. Anne (talk) 14:13, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm perfectly okay with this not going up in the immediate future. After things calm down, and we know more about this, it would be more appopriate. Whether or not the film was an excuse or not we don't know and can't say. We can say it was cited as the cause. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:45, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I would recommend having some references in the #Background section of Innocence of Muslims. Chris857 (talk) 02:51, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
 * The paragraph is now referenced. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:19, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Date length and hooks OK. However, I do agree that we will have to be very careful with this. I think we should hold it until further notice as we won't want to stoke the fires any more than they already are nor allow it come onto the main page at a time while it's in the media. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 15:32, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I further propose that there should be a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Did You Know before it is moved up to gauge if others and admins feel that it is appropriate to promote it at a certain time. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 16:06, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:24, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Question: this was not the main ITN article, but from the talk page, it seems Innocence of Muslims was linked in the ITN item for three days. Does that disqualify that article from DYK, as it wasn't the main article? Nakoula Basseley Nakoula can still go forward. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:36, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
 * It has generally been decided that only the main article linked in ITN matters. Otherwise, you would be disqualifying a huge swath of articles from any future DYK nom just because they were linked as extra info in ITN. Silver  seren C 20:10, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Great. Thanks for the response. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:08, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

How exactly is this an interesting hook? Can we have a hook that says "Did you know... that people usually walk on two legs?" The answer by anyone who's alive and breathing is "yes". Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 20:20, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Here's an ALT hook... – Muboshgu (talk) 17:41, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
 * ALT1: ... that Nakoula Basseley Nakoula was arrested for violating his probation due to his role in creating Innocence of Muslims?


 * Absolutely not with the ALT1 hook. He was arrested for suspected parole violation, which required he not personally use the internet.  It had nothing to do with creation of videos.  And any blockage of this DYK nom for reasons other than established policy is censorship.  Wikipedia is not censored. μηδείς (talk) 05:59, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Two months after I nominated this, I'm thinking I should withdraw it. Just because it meets DYK requirements doesn't mean it should be put on the front page. I see a lot of potential blowups from this. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:38, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
 * That or we better run it soon—the hook fact seems to be getting steadily more dubious. groupuscule (talk) 03:17, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Muboshgu, that may be best. If you do decide to withdraw it, just put the orange X icon at the beginning of the comment where you say that you're officially withdrawing it. groupuscule, if the hook fact is getting steadily more dubious, then it's an argument for not running the hook, not for trying to get it out the door before it's fully discredited. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:44, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Symbol delete vote.svg Marked for withdrawal. I'd rather not be responsible for dubious material hitting the front page. It's been more than two months since this film came out and the attacks happened, and it sure appears now that the two were unrelated. As this remains a touchy political issues, what with the Petreaus thing and Susan Rice coming under fire from McCain/Graham, it's best to let this die. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:21, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Anne (talk) 23:14, 19 November 2012 (UTC)