Template:Did you know nominations/Winsor McCay, How a Mosquito Operates, The Sinking of the Lusitania

Winsor McCay, How a Mosquito Operates, The Sinking of the Lusitania
How a Mosquito Operates: expanded from 1524 B to 7598 B readable prose size. The Sinking of the Lusitania: expanded from 906 B to 6059 B readable prose size
 * ... that cartoonist Winsor McCay created comic strips and animation about explosive sneezes and exploding mosquitoes (pictured), the dreams of children and of adults, a dancing dinosaur, and the World War I torpedoing of the RMS Lusitania?
 * Reviewed: Red Onion State Prison, Canada (novel), Edward C. Elliott
 * Comment: Winsor McCay: expanded from 5674 B to 35 kB readable prose size.

Alternative images:, , and lots more, all in the public domain 5x expanded by Curly Turkey (talk). Self nominated at 06:01, 24 March 2013 (UTC).


 * Symbol question.svg readable text of Winsor McCay has been expanded in excess of 500% in the last two days. Because the book sources are offline I'll have to assume in good faith there are no copyvios. As for the hook, to say "cartoonist Winsor McCay created comic strips and animations..." is hardly surprising. Is there a more 'punchy' hook that can be chosen? A picture that illustrates an aspect of the hook would also be good. Sionk (talk) 21:01, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * All the images I provided illustrate aspects of the hook—the giant mosquito, McCay himself, and the dinosaur. What did you have in mind?
 * Is this punchier?: "Winsor McCay pioneered comic strips and animation about..." Curly Turkey (gobble) 21:34, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * The hook is currently a list of his more notable works. If he pioneered something, or performed an impressive feat maybe that would be a better fact ...for example "Winsor McCay, a pioneer of animation, made 4000 drawings on rice paper for his first animated short in 1911" or "cartoonist Winsor McCay pioneered the animation technique of 'inbetweening' but refused to patent it"? Sionk (talk) 22:16, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Except that this is about three articles (sorry, I forgot to bold two of them). Curly Turkey (gobble) 22:21, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Symbol delete vote.svg In that case, I'll just reject it. I can't see how nominating three articles in one DYK will work. As far as I know, articles should be nominated separately. This isn't Template:Find a way of linking several articles in 200 characters. Sionk (talk) 23:21, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Symbol redirect vote4.png Strong object:
 * Template talk:Did you know explicitly states that one can nominate several articles combined into one DYK: "For nominations of multiple articles together, you can write any or all of the article titles here".
 * NewDYKnomination allows for not only three, but up to eight articles to be nominated for a single DYK. Curly Turkey (gobble) 23:31, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Sionk is dead wrong. I absolutely agree with Curly Turkey's reading.  There's a section called Did you know/Multiple articles.  There's even a "hooks with 5 or more articles" section in the DYK Hall of Fame.  Indeed, the top hook in that Hall of Fame section was a hook with 54 articles promoted just last month. These three articles deserve a DYK review. OCNative (talk) 07:33, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment - I agree with OCNative, it is permissible to have multiple articles nominated within one hook, which also allows for a longer than usual character count in the hook itself. All three articles need to be reviewed to ensure compliance with DYK rules; nominator is also required to undertake the equivalent number of QPQs, so Curly Turkey needs to do another couple of reviews.  SagaciousPhil   -  Chat  09:06, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I thought QPQ was one DYK for one DYK, rather than per article. I'm ahead on reviews, and I've added to more to the list above.  Curly Turkey (gobble) 10:28, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Just for reference: DYK Supplementary guidelines - H4: Where a hook has more than one new or expanded article in it, an article-for-article quid pro quo (QPQ) is required: one article reviewed for each bolded article in the hook. The consensus is that hook-for-hook reviewing is not acceptable in case of multiple nominations. As soon as a new nominator's hook includes articles beyond their fifth DYK credit, each of those require a separate QPQ review. I'm afraid I don't have time to review these interesting looking articles, so I'll mark this with an 'again' icon below and hopefully some one will do the reviews now you have all the QPQs in place.  SagaciousPhil   -  Chat  10:50, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Needs review for three articles now QPQs are in place. SagaciousPhil  -  Chat  10:52, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
 * 5x expansion for How a Mosquito Operates. Date looks good and all files have public domain licenses. Article is neutral, sourced inline, and no close paraphrasing is evident. Offline references accepted in good faith.
 * 5x expansion for The Sinking of the Lusitania. Date is good and all of the files have public domain licenses. Article is neutral, sourced inline, and no close paraphrasing is evident. Small point: This article lists 1,200 dead while the article on the sinking lists 1,198.
 * 5x expansion for Winsor McCay. Date is good and all files have public domain licenses. Article is neutral, sourced inline, and no instances of close paraphrasing were detected. Offline references accepted in good faith.
 * Symbol confirmed.svg All three articles are new enough and have been expanded at least 5x (there is some duplication of text across articles, but not so much that it would drop these below 5x). All of the articles are neutral, have ample inline citations, and do not appear to closely paraphrase. The hook is ~239 characters, which is acceptable since the hook includes three expanded articles. The hook is also interesting, accurate, neutral, and sourced. Three QPQs have been done. The mosquito image is in the public domain, is used in the article, and renders well at 100x100. The other images also meet these criteria, but would require adjusting the (pictured) note in the hook. Gobōnobō  + c 06:59, 3 April 2013 (UTC)