User talk:Cwmhiraeth/Archive 18

/Archive 18

--

DYK nomination of Severn Railway Bridge
Hello! Your submission of Severn Railway Bridge at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! EdChem (talk) 08:05, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Dorchester, Dorset
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Dorchester, Dorset you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of HJ Mitchell -- HJ Mitchell (talk) 16:00, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

DYK talk
Can I please advise you to stop creating threads about on WT:DYK? It doesn't do any good, it just creates drama and requires somebody to come along and close the thread when the bickering gets too much. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  09:13, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I am happy to do so. I wanted to get that table on the record on the DYK discussion page in case further allegations are made there against me. I would dispute what was added at the end after it was closed, but won't. And by the way, reopening an archived thread, adding your point of view and rearchiving it, thereby precluding any possibility of my refuting the statement, is hardly behaviour becoming of an admin. Please see this offer which I made, which was turned down. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:41, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I didn't rearchive it, and have no problem with you providing a further reply. So I don't se what part of my conduct was "hardly behaviour becoming of an admin". perhaps next time you make a peace offer, show with your actions that you mean it instead of pulling this shit.
 * Perhaps it is wiser if you try to explain here first how my reasoning is wrong. You state "Total hooks appearing on main page: 1072" (may be right, I'm not going to count). "Total hooks to which I contributed that were pulled by Fram: 17 (1.6%)". 17 May be correct, I'm not going to count: but 1.6% is 17 compared to 1072, even though there are many hooks in those 1072 with which you had no involvement (as nominator, reviewer or promotor). You should have put 17 compared to 600 or so, which would put the error rate close to 3%. And only taking August and September, it increases to 16 of 350 or so, or nearly 5%. And that's only counting Main Page pulls, I believe (you say "For details of which hooks were pulled by Fram, and how the figures were obtained, see my sandbox." but I can't seem to find this in your sandbox).
 * Compare it to Ritchie333 (as the one already present in this discussion). I pulled one hook. In your calculation, that would mean that he had an error rate of 0.1% (1 out of 1072). In reality, he may have only contributed that one hook (error rate 100%) or 100 hooks (error rate 1%), I don't know (and don't care for this discussion, 1 pulled hook can not establish a pattern of course).
 * So, I won't object if you reply at that discussion, it's your choice, but better try to have a good explanation for how you calculated this table and especially the 1.6% conclusion. Fram (talk) 09:59, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
 * And even that one hook was a hook I didn't particularly like, wasn't my first choice, had thought about pulling myself, and occurred over the August Bank Holiday so I had no time to deal with it. I think I've done about 100 DYK noms and about 150 reviews. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  10:12, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
 * The link should be to my Sandbox1. Reconsidering, I think the 1.6% should be 2.4% based on 486 promotions, 103 articles and 125 reviews, total 714.


 * But really, Ritchie333 is right, we should stop sniping at each other and do something more useful instead. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:40, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Iris cedretii
Thanks for your note on the hook. I have proposed a different one, if you'd like to review it. Yoninah (talk) 19:47, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you for your kind words. It would be nice to find we had entered an era of co-operation at DYK rather than criticism and confrontation. We will miss The Rambling Man there too. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:21, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Teucrium canadense
Gatoclass (talk) 00:01, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Severn Railway Bridge
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Dorchester, Dorset
The article Dorchester, Dorset you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Dorchester, Dorset for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of HJ Mitchell -- HJ Mitchell (talk) 20:41, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Euthyrhynchus floridanus
Gatoclass (talk) 00:01, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Between the Species
You just promoted this to a set but it has raw URLs, prohibited by DYK rule D3 (References in the article must not be bare URLs.... Just thought I'd let you know. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:34, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
 * So it has, I will reformat the citations. Thank you for letting me know. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:10, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I get the feeling you're creating a set every morning just as I'm driving to work, around 6am UTC? Is that right?  The Rambling Man (talk) 21:40, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Well yes, but only to the extent that I need to to make sure that there is at least one set in the prep area to give time for hooks to be scrutinised before they move into the queue. Today for example, there is only one additional hook needed to fill the second prep area set, so I will add just one hook. If there was a single set in the prep/queue area, I would build another. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 04:48, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
 * David Carritt also has a bare URL. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:41, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:58, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Rhopalosiphum rufiabdominale
Gatoclass (talk) 00:01, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

DYK for SMS Erzherzog Albrecht
Gatoclass (talk) 00:02, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Geography of Somerset
The article Geography of Somerset you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Geography of Somerset for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld (talk) 14:01, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Invite to the African Destubathon
Hi. You may be interested in participating in the African Destubathon which starts on October 15. Africa currently has over 37,000 stubs and badly needs a quality improvement editathon/contest to flesh out basic stubs. There are proposed substantial prizes to give to editors who do the most geography, wildlife and women articles, and planned smaller prizes for doing to most destubs for each of the 55 African countries, so should be enjoyable! Even if contests aren't your thing we would be grateful if you could consider destubbing a few African wildlife articles during the drive to help the cause and help reduce the massive 37,000 + stub count, of which many are rated high importance. If you're interested in competing or just loosely contributing any article related to a topic you often work on, please add your name to the Contestants/participants section. Might be a good way to work on fleshing out articles you've long been meaning to target and get rewarded for it! Diversity of work from a lot of people will make this that bit more special. Thanks. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 04:54, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Pic was missed
The pic accompanying my DYK nomination was not promoted. Was it not suitable? -- M h hossein   talk 12:38, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
 * More hooks with images get submitted to DYK than can ever be used with their images, because each set contains one image hook and seven non-image hooks. Your image was fine, but I took a view that it depicted a single mausoleum before destruction rather than the demolition in progress. If the article had been about that particular tomb, the image would likely have been used. Perhaps you will be more fortunate with your next DYK nomination. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:50, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the comprehensive and quick response. The alleged problem is solved and let's see how it finds its way toward the main page this time. -- M h hossein   talk 12:54, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
 * You can see from the discussion on the DYK talk page that it was all my fault! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:57, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
 * So I have to thank you for letting me know about an error in my work. That '1924' was unwanted. -- M h hossein   talk 13:28, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 October 2016
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:29, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Grand Theatre
Grand Theatre is ready to go back into prep if you want to add it. Gatoclass (talk) 05:07, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

DYK nom/Akıncı Air Base‎
Hi! I see that you've promoted the DYK nom/Akıncı Air Base‎ to Prep 1. However, it doesn't appear there, and seems to be lost. Please check. Thank you. CeeGee 05:44, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
 * The hook set is still being prepared, so look again in a few minutes. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:47, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Citing IUCN Red List
Hi, a small technical note. If you access the IUCN Red List today, you will not see version 2013.2 but version 2016.2. You should update the citation you are using, ideally also to include the DOI. For a suggested format, see Template:IUCN. Cheers, Micromesistius (talk) 12:53, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Will do, thanks. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:57, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Acyrthosiphon kondoi
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Geography of Somerset
Hello! Your submission of Geography of Somerset at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! M h hossein  talk 17:31, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Latest set
Hi Cwmhiraeth, just wanted to let you know I made a few changes to the set you promoted this morning and raised a few concerns, particularly over one of the hooks which I simply didn't understand. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:37, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the response. As you can see, I'll be checking every set whenever I can as there still seems to be a reasonably high correction level required.  The Rambling Man (talk) 21:14, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
 * We are on the same side, you know. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:40, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Wise words indeed!! The Rambling Man (talk) 07:27, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I thought your response enigmatic until I realised that while I was talking about improving standards at DYK, you were talking about "polemic". Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:27, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't really understand what you wrote, but I meant what I wrote, i.e. that everyone should realise that we're on the same side. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:24, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Good, I am glad we are in complete agreement. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:30, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Cutervo National Park
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

FAC
Hello, I'm. Ike Altgens is a Featured article candidate. I hope you have a few moments to check this article against the criteria so I may address any concerns and see this nomination through. My thanks in advance. — ATS 🖖  talk  21:34, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Prep 1 discussions
Please note there are two or three threads at WT:DYK relating to the existing items in Prep 1, including a proposed rewording of the Johanna Umurungi hook. Thanks! The Rambling Man (talk) 05:56, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Did you overlook the Umurungi reword? The Rambling Man (talk) 06:44, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
 * No. I thought the hook wording clumsy, but I did not promote the hook. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:29, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Would you address the new suggestion at the talk page? The Rambling Man (talk) 07:35, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Fram
Shouldn't you notify Fram of this? The Rambling Man (talk) 10:55, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
 * While it's clearly disappointing that you didn't, it appears to be of no relevance since it's being snow-closed and Fram responded to your comments. Sorry to have bothered you.  The Rambling Man (talk) 17:18, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, I knew that Fram knew all about it. What does snow-closed mean? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:35, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Procedurally you should still have notified him. It means WP:SNOW, i.e. it's getting kicked out quickly by the Arbs.  The Rambling Man (talk) 18:03, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Ironically, these Arbcom cases usually result in the loss of decent editors through discouragement, etc. They're usually worse than the situation they're trying to solve, in my opinion.  I hope you don't find it that way.  The Rambling Man (talk) 19:57, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I was warned that would probably happen and I chose to disregard it. I do think it is a genuine problem however, even if I am slammed for bringing it up. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:04, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Invitation from Wikipedia Asian Month 2016
 Wikipedia Asian Month  Thanks for partipating Wikipedia Asian Month last year, and I hope you enjoy it. Last year, more than 7,000 articles contribute to Wikipedia in 43 languages in Wikipedia Asian Month, making us one of the largest event on Wikipedia. We will organize this event again in upcoming November, and would like to invite you join us again.

This year, we are lowering down the standards that you only need to create 4 (Four) articles to receive a postcard (new design), and articles only need to be more than 3,000 bytes and 300 words. We are also improving our postcard sending process, e.g. making the postcards right now, and collecting the address after the event ends without waiting other languges.

Wikipedians who create the most articles on each Wikipedia will be honored as "Wikipedia Asian Ambassadors". We will send you both digital copy, and a paper copy of the Ambassador certificate.

Thank you for considering! --AddisWang (talk)

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:46, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Arbitration case request declined
The Arbitration Committee has declined the Fram arbitration case request. For the Committee, Kevin ( aka L235 ·&#32; t ·&#32; c) 00:13, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

DYK nomination of FUNCINPEC
Hello! Your submission of FUNCINPEC at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 00:23, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Please see new note on your DYK nomination template. Yoninah (talk) 09:42, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

barnstar
 The DYK Refugee Barnstar For exceptional work assisting DYK refugees. LavaBaron (talk) 17:41, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, LavaBaron. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:50, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Racket-tailed roller
— Maile (talk) 00:01, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Talkback
Thanks for reviewing, another user has made a suggestion at the discussion, which I responded to. Since you reviewed, would appreciate your input there. North America1000 06:10, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

DYK for FUNCINPEC
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Flea
Hi, now that things may perhaps be a little quieter (?), I notice that we never did get round to working on Flea for GA. I believe it's a suitable pest to interest you. Shall we give it a go? Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:10, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Sure. I'm currently taking part in the African stubathon, but I should be able to find time for a bit of scratching! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:07, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
 * OK, let's go for it. Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:52, 1 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Well, it's looking and sounding an awful lot better! I'm about out of things to do to improve it. I thought about adding a portrait of Charles Rothschild but doubt if it would really help; a PD photo of Miriam R. looking down her microscope at a flea would be marvellous, but I think they're all in copyright. Anything you think still needs doing? Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:37, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I was away for a few days and only got back to the article yesterday. There are some parts that need further expansion, but the sources tend to concentrate on cat and dog fleas to the exclusion of the rest of the order. You could expand the lead if you felt like it. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:54, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I'd done a bit of that already, and have added a bit more on other families. Most of the rest are so obscure that it's hard to know what to put... Chiswick Chap (talk)
 * The lead looks better and I have done all that I wanted to do. Are we ready? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:16, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I think so. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:51, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

I've fixed several small items at the GAN. There are a couple you might like? Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:33, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Tick
Seem to be plenty of parasites around... fancy squashing a Tick now we've disposed of flea for the moment? It's not in a bad state. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:20, 13 November 2016 (UTC)


 * I'd like to do Tick but would prefer to leave it till after November 27th when the African stubathon finishes. After that I will be at a loose end and was wondering where to go next. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:35, 13 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Ok, see you then. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:41, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I've tidied it up a bit; what do you think needs doing? Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:35, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I'll have a look, I have been concentrating on Flea and Grasshopper. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:45, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I would like to do some rearranging. The "Taxonomy and phylogeny" section lacks focus, and I would like to move much of the information there to the "Anatomy and physiology" section. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:53, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Go right ahead, we can discuss if any difficulties arise. The human section was pretty crufty also. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:02, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

D'you think it's better now? What else should we do to it? Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:50, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I have been making considerable use of this source. It is an excellent resource because it goes into detail on various aspects of tick anatomy and behaviour, and explains them in a straightforward manner without resorting to excessive technical terms. Are we using British or American English? I prefer British English, chiefly because my spellchecker does too. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 14:11, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Your source seems to be doing a good job. I doubt anyone will mind about the language tho I think it started out as Am. I'll go along with whatever you choose. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:30, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

WikiCup 2016 November newsletter: Final results
The final round of the 2016 WikiCup is over. Congratulations to the 2016 WikiCup top three finalists:
 * First Place -
 * Second Place -
 * Third Place -

In addition to recognizing the achievements of the top finishers and everyone who worked hard to make it to the final round, we also want to recognize those participants who were most productive in each of the WikiCup scoring categories:
 * Featured Article – Cas Liber (actually a three-way tie with themselves for two FAs in each of R2, R3, and R5).
 * Good Article – MPJ-DK had 14 GAs promoted in R3.
 * Featured List – produced 2 FLs in R2
 * Featured Pictures – Adam Cuerden restored 18 images to FP status in R4.
 * Featured Portal – produced the only FPO of the Cup in R2.
 * Featured Topic – and Calvin were each responsible for one FT in R3 and R2, respectively.
 * Good Topic – MPJ-DK created a GT with 9 GAs in R5.
 * Did You Know – MPJ-DK put 53 DYKs on the main page in R4.
 * In The News – and, each with 5 ITN, both in R4.
 * Good Article Review – MPJ-DK completed 61 GARs in R2.

Over the course of the 2016 WikiCup the following content was added to Wikipedia (only reporting on fixed value categories): 17 Featured Articles, 183 Good Articles, 8 Featured Lists, 87 Featured Pictures, 40 In The News, and 321 Good Article Reviews. Thank you to all the competitors for your hard work and what you have done to improve Wikipedia.--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:52, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

We will open up a discussion for comments on process and scoring in a few days. The 2017 WikiCup is just around the corner! Many thanks from all the judges. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. ,, and

Choice of hook for Russian gay propaganda law
Hi Cwmhiraeth, thanks for promoting this hook into a prep. There were two hooks available to you, ALT4a and ALT4a1, and obviously you have discretion as to which you chose. I'm just wondering why you went with 4a, partly as you also put Jason Graae into a prep recently and again chose the first of the available hooks, which could be a coincidence or taking the first listed. Thanks. EdChem (talk) 06:47, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I chose the hook which I preferred. I did not care for the "LGBTQIA people" in the other hook which I thought would be incomprehensible to many other people beside myself. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:01, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Okay, I understand. It was your call, as I said.  I wonder if the current discussion about changes to DYK should also include the topic of promoters indicating a rationale for choosing when multiple hooks are available, but then there is also an extra burden in so doing.  Thanks for responding.  EdChem (talk) 07:08, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

TFA
Thank you for the mayfly, "an insect that spends almost its whole life as an aquatic nymph, and a brief time (sometimes only a few minutes) as a winged adult"! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:13, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

... and today: Millipede, mille grazie! (from Spain)--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:05, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Schizaphis graminum
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles's 2016-2017 GA Cup
--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:40, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Mere Mete Whaanga
You promoted the above with a bunch of raw URLs. I'll try to fix them but you should know that you've done this a few times now. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:11, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I knew I could rely on you! And I dealt with your disambiguation tag. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:34, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'm sure. But if nominations continue to be promoted contradictory to the DYK rules, something will need to be done, e.g. the rules are changed to allow bare URLs to be promoted, or those repeatedly promoting articles with bare URLs are required to stop doing so.  The Rambling Man (talk) 22:08, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
 * You did it again with Mai Chaza. Please address these issues with article quality requirements before promoting them.  Incidentally, in that same set, Peak Farmland (which was incorrectly capitalised it appears) is an orphan.  The Rambling Man (talk) 08:40, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
 * When building prep sets there are quite a lot of things to be done. I chiefly check whether the hook facts are in the article, are cited inline and supported by the source. The sort of checks you are mentioning here are low on my list of priorities and I do not normally do them. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 21:01, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Phew, you're back. I missed you.  If you don't normally do the checks, i.e. checks against the primary rules of DYK, perhaps you should stop building sets.  Welcome back.  I mean it, I have missed you.  The Rambling Man (talk) 21:19, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 November 2016
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:51, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Rogožarski IK-3
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Adrian Moss (basketball, born 1988)
— Maile (talk) 00:02, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Prep 1 you just completed
I'm going to try to reduce the public exposure of the shortcomings in the sets you promote, but here's a quick one, Aranguren's hook (... that in response to tax increases proposed by Minister of Energy Juan José Aranguren, Argentinians mounted noisy protests with bugles and cacerolazos?), the citation for that hook doesn't actually mention Aranguren explicitly at all. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:25, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Did you want to do something about this or should I raise it at ERRORS since the problem is now on the main page? The Rambling Man (talk) 07:11, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I will have a look in a moment. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:15, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
 * There is nothing that I can see in the sources that refers to him proposing the changes in subsidy (though I expect he did) but I have added another reference to the fact that as the Minister of Energy he made the changes. If you wish to take any further action, you are welcome. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:43, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I guess that's just one of those hooks where you didn't prioritise checking the source? The Rambling Man (talk) 07:46, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I've pulled it. The source for the hook doesn't even mention him, and they are tariffs raises, not tax increases (as they reduce subsidies, they allow or mandate the energy companies to increase their tariffs so that their income stays the same. No tax increase is mentioned in the source. Fram (talk) 07:56, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks Fram! The Rambling Man (talk) 08:00, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

DYK for SMS Custoza
— Maile (talk) 00:02, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Rosy bee-eater
— Maile (talk) 00:02, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Prep 4 conclusion
So, three hooks and/or their target articles needed fixing, and one was pulled. I haven't really had a chance to look closely at the others. I don't think this is close to the 98% success rate (or whatever you claimed to Fram) we come to expect. Do you need some assistance with this? One thing I've noticed is that you're pulling together a set just about the same time I get up/get to work (there's usually about an hour between the two for me), so I normally get a heads-up before I leave and then get to focus on the set when I have five minutes upon arrival at work. If it's better for you, I can always ping you with my comments, or just carry on with the current reviewing regime. I'm not bothered either way, just want the DYK section to be less crap, as I'm sure you do too. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:49, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
 * OK. Let's analyse what you found and give you a score for your interventions:


 * Six Dance Lessons in Six Weeks - Article conformed to supplementary rule D2 {at least one citation per paragraph) but you thought it needed an extra couple of citations. 2/10
 * Democratic Alliance List - The alliance was formed to fight the 2016 election and therefore the hook was correct. That the election was postponed was irrelevant to the nomination. I considered these facts before moving the hook to prep. 2/10
 * Robert Scull - You could have changed the hook if you were concerned about the 50 pop art works, I had already improved the grammar. 4/10
 * Egypt at the 1906 Intercalated Games - This was a stupid intervention. 0/10
 * ... that eloquent Holbrook, sociable Humble, denomination-hopping Miller, and troubled Pilling - minor formatting complaint, why not fix it yourself if you thought it needed fixing. 1/10
 * None of these was in anyway serious and Robert Scull the only one really worthy of action. I look forward to you doing something about issues you find rather than merely complaining. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:11, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
 * A shame that you are alone in your analysis. And resorting to personal attacks serves no-one.  I look forward to a time when fewer errors are propagated through a clearly misfiring system, and when a prep set can be built with fewer than 50% errors.  More haste, less speed required. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:49, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
 * What personal attack? And which "errors"? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:53, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
 * All the errors in the preps you've lately promoted that have been fixed by others or pulled. And phrases like "stupid intervention" are easily personal attacks.  Try not to do it again.  The Rambling Man (talk) 09:12, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
 * And please note, my opening post was all about assisting you with your prep-building. All I've seen from you is personal attacks and defensive posturing.  I'm offering to help with the work you do.  As you have told me, aren't we supposed to be on the same side?  I guess the alternative is to just wait and then note each shortcoming at ERRORS, which would be be very embarrassing I suppose, given the current failure rate.  I'm all for collaboration and improvement so please, let's work on this together, even if I have to review everything that's about to be promoted to a queue, so as not to cause further embarrassment to you?  The Rambling Man (talk) 22:47, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I am not sure that you know what an ERROR is. For example, there was no error in the Egypt Olympics hook that was pulled. What there was, was a view by some people that the hook was uninteresting. Promoting a reviewed but uninteresting hook is not an error. Pulling such a hook, or returning it to the nomination area for further discussion as I would prefer to call it, is not something to castigate the hook promoter with. As you say, DYK should be collaborative not confrontational. Incidentally, I have just rearranged the Black Destroyer hook in Prep 6 because I thought it was misleading. Do you agree the current version is better? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:50, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid you don't understand. Did I say the Egypt hook was an error? No. Did I refer you to one of the DYK criteria relating to interest to a broad audience? Yes. If you're not really getting it, better to leave it to others. I'll try to be clearer in future. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:06, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
 * If you want to help me with prep building, you need to be a bit bolder with altering hooks and moving them in and out of prep yourself. I know you have expressed concern about your present position and possible sanctions, but I think you are more at risk from criticising me on the DYK discussion page and here than you are from good faith actions you take with hooks. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:31, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm not going to make big changes to hooks or pull them. Any old admin could just block me for that.  It's not you that I'm criticising in any case, it's the general state of hooks and articles that are being promoted.  You're not the only one advocating such a system, so it's nothing personal.  What I'm doing is trying to stop junk hitting the main page.  I'm not sure that's the same as "prep building", it's more to do with generic quality control.  I also observe OTD, ITN and TFL regularly, so while DYK is by far the biggest problem area, DYK as a whole shouldn't take it personally.   The Rambling Man (talk) 11:06, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Dorchester, Dorset
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Hypera postica
Hello! Your submission of Hypera postica at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 22:24, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

McCarthyism
I see you are still adding more ridculousnes to your laundry list of already rejected issues you see with me. Not answering a question by you is now apparently already sufficient reason to be added there. Perhaps I just don't see the need to answer every paranoid witchhunt question you ask? I have enough examples of questions where you ignore the answers if you don't like them anyway, so why should I waste my time answering more of the same (e.g. all your falsse claims about the GA criteria I had ignored; if I do explain it to you on a level that you can understand, you then just dismiss it because it wasn't important anyway...)? You may remember that similar things were already commented negatively upon by ArbCom in your rejected ArbCom case against me (like the Wikipediocracy question from your editor review). Please, as required by policy, delete that page and take it offline if you feel the need to maintain it anyway. Fram (talk) 09:18, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Actually, what I see is that you are still spying on me. I wonder why? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:01, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Actually, what you ought to see is that we've probably both got that sandbox page which should now be deleted (post-failed Arbcom case) on our watchlists... "spying" is unnecessarily emotive and confrontational. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:05, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Good point. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:11, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Hypera postica
— Maile (talk) 00:22, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Silvery mole-rat
Hello! Your submission of Silvery mole-rat at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Gulumeemee (talk) 06:35, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Hypera nigrirostris
Materialscientist (talk) 00:51, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Clunk
Any chance of a reword of "... that the 2012 web series Cybergeddon was the most expensive web series in history at the time it was created?" to avoid the clunky repetition of "web series"? E.g. "... that Cybergeddon was the most expensive web series in history at the time it was created?", as I'm not even sure how much the 2012 adds to the situation... The Rambling Man (talk) 08:11, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I have rephrased it in a different way "... that when it was released in 2012, Cybergeddon was the most expensive web series ever made?" Better? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:18, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Splendid job. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:25, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Geography of Somerset
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

FWIW
I will no longer be reporting any errors in DYK promotions you make on the DYK talkpage. It appears that has annoyed too many people, yourself included. Instead, I will wait and note them at ERRORS, seemingly the correct venue for such things. As I said to you before, sorry if you feel victimised, and also sorry if you've misunderstood why I take such care and attention on what gets onto the main page. Perhaps we're not on the same side after all. Good luck! The Rambling Man (talk) 20:50, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
 * You can mention them on my talk page if you want, and that makes them easier for me to deal with without having to keep looking at my watchlist. I would have thought that would be preferable than reporting them at ERRORS. I normally stop for the day at 9pm. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:58, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
 * No worries, I'm being criticised far and wide for my current approach, I'll just stick to the basics and we'll get a better world view on DYK if I stick at ERRORS. Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:02, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
 * You stated "Perhaps we're not on the same side after all", but I can assure you that we are, and that we both aim for the highest standards at DYK. When I fill a prep set I welcome the involvement of others in the improvement of hooks and the choice of articles. However, such changes are best made at the prep stage rather than when in the queue or on the main page. If you are determined to leave any corrections that you think are needed till the set is on the main page, so that you can report an ERROR, I would consider that unsatisfactory. It would be inappropriate, for example, for you to try to get a hook changed at that stage because you deemed it uninteresting but it would be quite the reverse if you though it inaccurate. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:34, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * No, I'm afraid I am sick of the criticism when all I am doing is preventing (or trying to prevent) issues on the main page. It appears that the only way to truly highlight the endemic issue now is to use ERRORS rather than face the vitriol of disgruntled article owners at DYK itself.  First step to solving a problem is admitting there is one.  This needs real exposure, not local covering up.  The Rambling Man (talk) 09:48, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Hyo-Won Woo

 * "... that in her Gloria, Hyo-Won Woo combines elements from Korean music and Western contemporary composition techniques?"

This is not in the article explicitly. Nor does the article have the required level of references (the "Selected works" are not all found on page 2 of that PDF). The Rambling Man (talk) 08:52, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I am surprised you say that, as I believe the source clearly backs up both the hook claim and the selected works. What is the problem with it? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:13, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
 * The hook claim is not explicitly stated in the article. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:19, 22 November 2016 (UTC)


 * The hook is stated in the title of the main source, but I repeated it now in the article. I also repeated the source for the selected works after every single one, if that helps. I thought after the last was enough, sorry. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:26, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks Gerda, appreciated. At least it was markedly better than the Swaziland cricket team article which was barely written in English....! The Rambling Man (talk) 09:28, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks everyone. TRM, I see you did some useful copyediting in the Swaziland article. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:35, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Well if you mean I translated it to English, then yes. I know we're not looking necessarily for GAs but that was simply shambolic. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:00, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Once I am here: Could the Swedish industrialist perhaps come with an image, later? He seems notable enough, and it's the nominator's first DYK. I remember (now years later) how disappointed I was when my first image for a nom was not taken, but instead some grape. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:06, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
 * OK, I will relent! :-) Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:13, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Philadelphia municipal election, 1953

 * ... that in the 1953 Philadelphia municipal election, Democrats nominated a dead man for an office that was abolished before the election?

No they didn't. They nominated Vogt who then died. The hook isn't quirky, it's incorrect. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:36, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
 * That point was addressed during the discussion on the nomination template. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:40, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
 * See you at ERRORS. The article says "Democrats nominated Joseph F. Vogt without opposition, but he died a month before the primary" so the logic proposed at the nom page means the article is incorrect or if the article is correct, the hook is incorrect.  The Rambling Man (talk) 10:47, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Are you able to persuade TRM that the hook, which I have just promoted to Prep 5, is accurate? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:58, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
 * As it stands, I am prepared to bet a huge amount of my Wiki-credits that this will be at ERRORS because of the discrepancy between the hook and the article, and the subtlety of the "nomination only becomes real after winning primary" claim which will be lost on many folks. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:04, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Rather than just leave it to proceed to ERRORS, I suggest you take it to the DYK discussion page. I don't know whether what Coemgenus says is right or is wrong, so the matter needs resolving by discussion and consensus. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:21, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I've made my point. If you don't want to action it, that's your call. You're clearly happy with it or else you wouldn't have promoted it.  The Rambling Man (talk) 11:23, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Once I am here: No they didn't nominate a dead man. Different wording needed. Thanks for relenting above ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:46, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I have tweaked the hook: "that in the 1953 Philadelphia municipal election, the Democrat's nominee died, and the office he was running for was abolished before the election?"
 * I'd be happy with that new hook, myself, except I'd change "Democrat's" to "Democratic" (or "Democrats'"). I didn't realize it would be so controversial, but I guess there is some confusion between two senses of the word "nominated." The revised version here works well. --Coemgenus (talk) 13:33, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I have changed the wording in the hook to "Democratic". Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:42, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Now we just have the problem with the awkward juxtaposition of "in the .. election ... before the election..." Maybe it should say "that in the run-up to the 1953 Philadelphia municipal election, the Democrat's nominee died, and the office he was running for was abolished?".  The Rambling Man (talk) 13:49, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Democrats'. Plural possessive. --GRuban (talk) 20:55, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Great point!! The Rambling Man (talk) 21:02, 22 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Just what I was going to say, but its "Democratic" at the moment. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 21:04, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

See you tomorrow for the next set of issues. Thanks for finally believing in me. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:32, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Oooh, looks like has undone all the good work, despite all the discussion here.  See you at ERRORS I guess. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:02, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
 * The problem with this hook revision was the implication that there was one office being contested in the election, or (not nearly as likely) only one Democratic nominee on the ballot, neither of which was the case. So there were problems here, and no discussion that I could see (at WT:DYK) on the hook; the obvious thing to do was to go with an earlier version and explain in my edit summary what was wrong with the iteration I replaced. The current version is accurate: "a Democratic nominee died", so it would seem to be fine, unless The Rambling Man has objections to it. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:55, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

"Vote siphoning"
Would you be amenable to linking "siphoning" to Spoiler effect if you believe it appropriate? I have never heard of the phrase so was wondering if it would be prudent to link it to the benefit of our readers? The Rambling Man (talk) 08:14, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Or would it be more appropriate to link Dummy candidate? Either way I think the technical term needs something to help our readers. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:16, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Pinging and  to see if they can help... The Rambling Man (talk) 08:16, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * , what article are we talking about? Vote siphoning doesn't exist... II  | (t - c) 08:20, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * It's the Mark Callahan article which is being linked to in a DYK hook, that 2016 Republican U.S. Senate candidate Mark Callahan once ran for the Oregon House of Representatives under the Green Party label in order to siphon votes from the Democratic candidate?" The Rambling Man (talk) 08:23, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah, just noticed that a second later. Anyway, I think linking that term would be great. II  | (t - c) 08:26, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Particularly since the term "siphon" doesn't appear in the actual article. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:27, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Please action this or I'll have to make an ERRORS report. Thanks!  The Rambling Man (talk) 20:27, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:34, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks!! The Rambling Man (talk) 20:46, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 November 2016
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:06, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Streaked Scrub Warbler
Are you queering my pitch on this one? Revenge for Desert Lark? I forgot to remove the stub tag, will we share? Quetzal1964 21:14, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I think we can share it. I reckoned it was fair game as it still had the stub tag. I was running out of stubs that I fancied for Western Sahara, which is basically a country of desert. I reckon African fauna has had a great boost during this excellent contest. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:52, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Don Martina

 * ... that former Prime Minister Don Martina campaigned for a slave leader to become a national hero?

It would be beneficial I think to tell our readers to which country this Prime Minister and national hero relates, don't you? The Rambling Man (talk) 09:53, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:18, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge
After a well-deserved break, feel free to continue contributing towards this!♦ Dr. Blofeld  14:05, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Prep 1
I've raised a note about "little games" at the talk page, but another hook " that Asian Paints Ltd's mascot Gattu, a mischievous boy with paint bucket, was created by R. K. Laxman?" stood out. Gattu is no longer the company's mascot, having been "axed" in the 2000s. So it ought to be "former" mascot, don't you think? It may also be helpful to the majority of readers to say who R. K. Laxman was, i.e. "award-winning Indian cartoonist" or similar... The Rambling Man (talk) 08:34, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree about the "little games" and will attend to these matters shortly. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:45, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

List of crossings of the Upper Passaic River
Hello - The DYK nominator of List of crossings of the Upper Passaic River is asking whether the nom can be finalized. would you kindly take another look at it? Thanks. Verne Equinox (talk) 16:38, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * BlueMoonset has responded at the nomination template. Once a suitable citation has been added to the article, the nomination will be able to proceed. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:34, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Queue 5 - Reliquary
This is a reasonably niche term, may I suggest it be wikilinked. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:50, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
 * The word seems to mean a container for relics and it would seem helpful to link it. However, I cannot edit Queue 5, nor did I promote the hook. Several prep sets have been moved to the queue without much time available for checking while in prep. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:31, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

4th Annual GA Cup - Round 1
--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:00, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

List of Mormon missionary diarists
What an odd article. Did you read it? It starts "This is a list of...." and then doesn't list any. It just lists lists. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:32, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes. It might be better if the article was renamed "Collection of Mormon missionary diaries" Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:36, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Well the article is just a header for other articles, it's really not something that should be featured on the main page, especially given the error in its own lead. But you already know that. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:43, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, Maille reviewed the nomination and gave it a tick, and I am just a functionary that collects approved hooks and moves them into sets. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:52, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
 * You could have just re-opened the nomination noting the bizarre error in the lead. What'll happen now is that this will be brought up at ERRORS in a few days time.  Is that what you want? The Rambling Man (talk) 10:54, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I have made a suggestion on the creator's talk page. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:08, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Quotation marks
Hi Cwmhiraeth. Regarding this edit, I think it should actually be quotation marks, not italics, since it the subject is a short story. See MOS:QUOTETITLE. In any case, thanks for checking it over! Mz7 (talk) 23:39, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
 * You're probably right. I will be told I have got it wrong whatever I do. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:52, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Ha! Sadly true. LavaBaron (talk) 07:15, 7 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach. (And those who can't teach, teach teachers.) Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:31, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Very good! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:36, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Tantalus monkey
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Africa Destubathon
Hello congratulations on winning in the Africa Destubathon. Please contact me at karla.marte@gmail.com to coordinate sending the prize your way. Thanks, Karla Marte(WMUK) 12:17, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you Karla. Will do. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:48, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination
Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/African cuckoo at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; if you would like to continue, please link the nomination to the nominations page as described in step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with db-g7, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 01:51, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Lesser spot-nosed monkey
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Woodland dormouse
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

African cuckoo
I eliminated the term "South Africa" in both the article and hook for this DYK nomination, as I suspect the reference would have been to southern Africa rather than the country of South Africa, but I think you'd better check it for me before the nomination is promoted as I cannot see the source. Gatoclass (talk) 07:13, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Your reasoning was good but your conclusion was wrong. The source states "Breeding success RSA from egg to fledging 8-38% (Tarboton 1986)." If you come to think of it, the cuckoo is using different species as host under different conditions in different parts of its range. The researcher in South Africa found these results, but another researcher would get different figures elsewhere, and we can't be sure that the 38% figure is accurate in other areas. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:34, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks. Gatoclass (talk) 08:39, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

WikiCup December newsletter: WikiCup 2017
On 1 January 2017, WikiCup 2017 (the 10th Annual WikiCup) will begin. This year we are trying something a little different – monetary prizes.

For the WC2017 the prizes will be as follows (amounts are based in US$ and will be awarded in the form of an online Amazon gift certificate):
 * First place – $200
 * Second & Third place – $50 each
 * Category prizes – $25 per category (which will be limited to FA, FL, FP, GA, and DYK for 2017). Winning a category prize does not require making it to the final round.

Note: Monetary prizes are a one-year experiment for 2017 and may or may not be continued in the future. In order to be eligible to receive any of the prizes above, the competing Wikipedia account must have a valid/active email address. After two years as a WikiCup judge, Figureskatingfan is stepping down. We thank her for her contributions as a WikiCup judge. We are pleased to announce that our newest judge is two-time WikiCup champion Cwmhiraeth.

The judges for the 2017 WikiCup are, , and.

Signups are open now and will remain open until 5 February 2017. You can sign up here.

If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:02, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

DYK Malagasy white-eye
— Maile (talk) 14:13, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Sloggett's vlei rat
Hello! Your submission of Sloggett's vlei rat at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 16:53, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

African cuckoo hook in Prep 4
I'm finding it really hard to parse that hook, " fewer than 40% of African cuckoo eggs are successfully hatched and the chicks raised by their foster parents" so are you saying those who are successfully hatched are raised by "foster parents" (and odd phrase outside of the human species)? The article seems very clear that it's "breeding success rate" (is that the same as "successfully hatched"?) is 38% (not 40%), and doesn't really relate anything to "foster parents". I'm lost here. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:40, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
 * It's in the queue now. There was extensive discussion about a suitable hook and this one was thought suitable. 38% was rounded to 40% and foster parents seems a suitable description for birds raising chicks that are not their own. As for the blue dome, you did allude to it, but you did not indicate that it was too long, else I might have taken some action. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:17, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Fungi
It would be great if we could finish the fungi today, if you have a moment! Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:20, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Done. I think Tick is about ready, but shall we leave it till after Christmas? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:09, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much! Yes, Tick is ready. As you like; if we nominate it now, the worst that can happen is that we have to ask for a brief hold over the holiday. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:27, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
 * OK, I will nominate it soon, because it will likely be weeks before it gets reviewed. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:31, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

DYK for African cuckoo
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Happy Christmas!


A very Happy Christmas and a restful Wikibreak!

Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:44, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:56, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Best wishes for the holidays...

 * Thank you Johnbod. May peace and goodwill abound this Christmas season, on Wikipedia and the world over. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:44, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Triple Crown nomination
Hi Cwmhiraeth. Regarding your Triple Crown nomination, can you please provide DYK credits in the relevant section? For an example see Imzadi1979's nomination here. You can link to either recieving the credit on your talk page like he has, or linking to the original nomination. Imzadi1979 has also gone to the trouble of providing credits for his GA and Featured content, however, while this is nice it is not necessary as far as i'm concerned as it's quite easy to check who nominated a GA or piece of featured content, in comparison to checking a DYK credit anyway. Cheers. Freikorp (talk) 08:05, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you Freikorp. The credits are available in my talk page archive from here onwards. Will this be sufficient or do you wish me to link each separately? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:01, 20 December 2016 (UTC)


 * That will be fine, thanks. :) Freikorp (talk) 11:31, 20 December 2016 (UTC)




 * Thank you Freikorp. That's great. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:05, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Talkback
Another user has commented at the discussion regarding the hook, which has delayed the discussion. North America1000 22:57, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Silvery mole-rat
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Likelike (wife of Kalanimoku)
Can you possibly promote with the ALT0 hook instead?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 06:32, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:37, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Did you know?

 * That's very clever of you. Thank you. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:02, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 December 2016
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:04, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Sloggett's vlei rat
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Oi!, hook-mangler-in-chief ...
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:red; background-color:gold; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks"> Martinevans123 (Santa's Drop-in Centre) ... sends you ...   ... warmest seasonal wishes for ... Nadolig Llawen a Blwyddyn Newydd Dda.

Hoping that Christmas may bless you with peace, love and understanding... and wishing that you may find your true star...
 * Da iawn, diolch. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:20, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Any help with David Hughes (Eos Iâl) would be much appreciated. Diolch yn fawr! Martinevans123 (talk) 13:36, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Not really my type of article, and I have no suitable reference sources either. At the moment, I am trying to understand Templates and Transclusion. Are you knowledgeable about that sort of thing? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:45, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
 * No worries. Not really knowledgeable about anything, I'm afraid, but Templates and Transclusion would be a particular nadir, I think. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:01, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
 * OK. Thanks. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 14:05, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Holiday card

 * Thanks Montanabw. And a Charlie Russell Christmas to you too! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:51, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

It's a wonderful time of the year!

 * And very nicely decorated too. Thank you. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:12, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:#01902a; background-color:#fff; border-width:3px; text-align:left; padding:2px;"><div style="border-style:solid; border-color:red; background-color:#fff; border-width:2px; text-align:left; padding:6px;" class="plainlinks">

Redolta is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Red olta 📱 Cont ribs 00:05, 25 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you Redolta, what a peaceful scene. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:55, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Greater long-nosed armadillo
— Maile (talk) 00:02, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry, merry!
From the icy Canadian north; to you and yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 04:22, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you, FWiW Bzuk, Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:56, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Warionia
— Maile (talk) 00:01, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Beecroft's flying squirrel
— Maile (talk) 00:02, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Catananche lutea?
Hello, perhaps you would consider a DYK nomination for the Catananche lutea article? I would say that the fact that it produces five different types of seed, that correspond to different survival and dispersion strategies is something worth noting. Kind regards, Dwergenpaartje (talk) 14:58, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Sure, it looks a good article and I will nominate it later today. I may need to add an extra inline citation to the hook fact so as to conform with DYK rules. DYK nominations have to be made within seven days or the article's creation or expansion, so it is only just within the time limit. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:50, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Belated Holiday Greetings! Cwmhiraeth

 * Thanks, 7&amp;6=thirteen. Indeed, let there be peace. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 14:10, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I would also wish for a return to sanity, but the Magic 8-ball says "Outlook not so good." <b style="color:#060">7&amp;6=thirteen</b> (<b style="color:#000">☎</b>) 14:15, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Grasshopper
Chap and I think the article is about ready for FAC. Shall I nominate? LittleJerry (talk) 18:49, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, go ahead. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:51, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Editor of the Week seeking nominations (and a new facilitator)
The Editor of the Week initiative has been recognizing editors since 2013 for their hard work and dedication. Editing Wikipedia can be disheartening and tedious at times; the weekly Editor of the Week award lets its recipients know that their positive behaviour and collaborative spirit is appreciated. The response from the honorees has been enthusiastic and thankful.

The list of nominees is running short, and so new nominations are needed for consideration. Have you come across someone in your editing circle who deserves a pat on the back for improving article prose regularly, making it easier to understand? Or perhaps someone has stepped in to mediate a contentious dispute, and did an excellent job. Do you know someone who hasn't received many accolades and is deserving of greater renown? Is there an editor who does lots of little tasks well, such as cleaning up citations?

Please help us thank editors who display sustained patterns of excellence, working tirelessly in the background out of the spotlight, by submitting your nomination for Editor of the Week today!

In addition, the WikiProject is seeking a new facilitator/coordinator to handle the logistics of the award. Please contact if you are interested in helping with the logistics of running the award in any capacity. Remove your name from here to unsubscribe from further EotW-related messages. Thanks, Kevin ( aka L235 ·&#32; t ·&#32; c) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:19, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Natural selection
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Dwarf scaly-tailed squirrel
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

SvG clean-up
In the recent discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive941 you supported mass-deletion of all BLP articles created by SvG. The closing decision was that this should be done. I have started a page at User:Aymatth2/SvG clean-up for discussion / coordination of the deletion job. Your comments or suggestions would be welcome. Also, we urgently need volunteers with the technical skills to create a useable list of articles to be deleted. Any suggestions would be welcome. Thanks, Aymatth2 (talk) 12:57, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Happy 2017!
Wishing good health and happiness as we start the new year! --Rosiestep (talk) 20:14, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Your good wishes are reciprocated. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:20, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

WikiCup
Hi! I am a bit confused about the submissions for the WC - how do i know what kind of article it is! For example, i have made a few changed today but don't what 2016/17 EFL Championship is! Thanks, Tube Geek 77 (talk) 17:38, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I can see that you have been adding to and expanding 2016–17 EFL Championship. To score points at the WikiCup, the article would have to be nominated for DYK (Did you know?) or become a "good article" (GA) or something similar. Just editing an article is not sufficient in itself. The EFL Championship article would not qualify for DYK at the moment because it is not newly created nor recently expanded by five times, but it could theoretically become a GA. You could try contacting another WikiCup contestant, The C of E. He sometimes writes football articles and nominates them at DYK, and if you cooperated with him on a new article, you could both score points for the WikiCup. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:43, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks! PS What kind of footie articles? As i wouldn't to (say) make a list of *insert club name here* players, since that would take too long! Tube Geek 77 (talk) 18:50, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Here's a list of his creations, quite varied! But you could ask him on his talk page if he would like to cooperate. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:02, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Cheers again! Also, another WikiCup query - do the scores update automatically? As i have made a couple of Submissions but my score is still 0! Tube Geek 77 (talk) 21:26, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I think you do not understand. You have submitted Portishead, Somerset as a GA on your WikiCup submission page and your score has been updated with it by the WikiCup bot. This part of the procedure has worked because your score is no longer showing as zero.


 * However, the judges will disallow your submission and remove the points. This is because the article has been a GA for several years, and the WikiCup is for newly created or improved articles. So, to claim points for a GA, you will need to choose an article that is not currently a GA, make improvements to it to bring it up to GA standard, nominate it for GA and wait for someone else to review it. When it passes the GA review you will be able to submit it to the WikiCup and receive the points. If it fails the GA review you will not receive any points. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:07, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh..... Thanks for alerting me of that, i thought it was just for editing on good articles. So do none of my submissions count, then? Tube Geek 77 (talk) 08:05, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
 * No, I think not. I suggest you have another look at the "Scoring" page where the rules are explained. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:30, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Patrick Dehm
Did you look at the referencing for this article before you promoted it? The Rambling Man (talk) 09:06, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Instructions for promoters are here. I expect Gerda will deal with your tags. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:13, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * That's a no then. So you promote articles that violate WP:V, that's against the DYK rules, yes? The Rambling Man (talk) 09:17, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * No, I did not check the referencing of the article in the way you suggest. That is not part of a promoter's responsibilities as explained here. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:44, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Ok, you promoted an article against the rules of DYK. I get it. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:59, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Checking that ALL the rules of DYK are met is not part of a promoter's responsibilities. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:02, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * No, I get it. You didn't even look at the article, I understand. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:09, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * If you were to take the trouble to look at the nomination template, you would see that I did. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:20, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm away, postpone him please. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:14, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I will do that. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:20, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Bear
Hi, I've blitzed the human sections, added a cladogram, sorted the images, and cut a lot of dross. It's now quite a bit better ... just needs proper biology and reffing! Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:07, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I planned to get to work on Bear today but the whole morning has been frittered away on DYK-related matters. Never mind, I'll get there in the end, and have anyway found a useful book source. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:55, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I've no idea how you put up with it! Looking forward to seeing how Bear gets on. Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:00, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
 * The article looks a mess now, probably because you changed the reference name while I was rewriting a paragraph. Do you want to sort it out or shall I? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:37, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that, fixed it. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:52, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Do I gather that <ref name="Marshall Cavendish"> was OK as a ref name but <ref name=Marshall Cavendish> was not? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:02, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, the space was as you noted causing problems, sorry. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:04, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I didn't know that. The trouble is, I fiddle about a bit in the section I am working on, and perhaps write a paragraph before saving my work. If I saved every sentence, edit conflicts would be more easily resolved. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:10, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Apols, shd have held off. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:24, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Another DYK perhaps?
I've just created an article about:

Famatinanthus is a genus in the daisy family that was created in 2014. It contains only one known species, Famatinanthus decussatus, a small shrub (½—1¾ m high) that is an endemic of the Andes of north-western Argentina, with small, oppositely set leaves and flowerheads containing about ten cream-colored florets. For more than 100 years, the species was known to science only from the type collection used for the 1885 description which had assigned it to the genus Aphyllocladus. Reinvestigating the old material prompted an analyses of the DNA and it turned out the species should be in its own subfamily, which is now called Famatinanthoideae.

I've tried to avoid KevMin's problems with Catananche lutea. Do you think it would be eligible for DYK submission, and if so, would you again be willing to put it forward? Kind regards, Dwergenpaartje (talk) 23:01, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * It looks eligible and I will nominate it later today. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:59, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Where the text mentions "int het" I imagine it should be "in the"?


 * It is difficult choosing a suitable hook for someone else's article; hooks should be interesting, where possible, to a wider public. The "own subfamily" bit hardly meets this requirement because it is too technical, nor the "not known to science for 100 years" bit, because it was not "lost", it just needed some researcher to actually investigate it. If the article were mine, I would go for something like "... that Famatinanthus decussatus is a rare shrub from Argentina threatened by mining, off-road vehicles and livestock?" Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:51, 5 January 2017 (UTC)


 * I'm fine with that! Dwergenpaartje (talk) 11:58, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Jingdezhen ware
Cwmhiraeth, I just noticed that this has once again had additional hooks proposed, and the ticks superseded. Do you think you might stop by again and see whether the latest hooks can be approved? Thanks for anything you can do. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:05, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:53, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Ainley's storm petrel
Hi, I've found this page on some taxonomy facts such as "The English name commemorates U.S. marine ornithologist David Ainley, who described this taxon". It might be useful. FYI only. Hanberke (talk) 08:00, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks Hanberke, and a happy new year to you! I started the article by looking for a random bird stub while having a spare quarter of an hour before I planned to stop for the night. But all these animals become more interesting as you get to find out more about them, and I will expand this one further soon and make use of your source. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:27, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Lanice conchilega
Hi Cwmhiraeth. A editor has posted a image on WC. And posted a quastion wondering what they are on Reference_desk/Science. Think they might have been created by Mason Worms. Any thoughts?--Aspro (talk) 21:36, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Hill-Crest Mansion
Cwmhiraeth, I was wondering if you could stop by and take a look at a newly proposed ALT hook, since you've reviewed previous ones. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:36, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Diploastrea heliopora
Hello! Your submission of Diploastrea heliopora at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:07, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Biological pest control at GAN
Hi, a while back we cleaned up this article, and I think it should clear GA without too much trouble. Do you wish to be co-nominated? Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:28, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes please. As it happens, the ant Oecophylla smaragdina is due to be the featured picture of the day on 12 January and when I noticed this, I expanded the article accordingly. I am proposing to use the ant's early use in pest control for the DYK hook. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:37, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Excellent! Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:38, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Lok Sewak Sangh
Cwmhiraeth, I was wondering whether your concerns about the hook, when you looked at it when thinking of promoting the nomination to prep, have been addressed by the newly suggested ALT? Thanks for taking another look at it. (If you do think it works, you could ask Gerda to approve it so you are still eligible to promote it.) BlueMoonset (talk) 00:10, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination
That's very kind of you to add my name to the DYK nomination. My contributions in English going with a slight change is encouraging for further article creation/improvement on my own. Cheers! Hanberke (talk) 08:46, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Your English is pretty good. I will be happy to help polish up the English of any article you create/expand. This particular article on the weaver ant was expanded in response to the fact that the Featured picture on the main page tomorrow is to be of this ant, and the article was previously a stub with two citation needed tags. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:19, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Pel's flying squirrel
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Cretaceous-Paleogene extinction timeline hook
I first nominated this article with the intention of running it on New Year's Eve because the mass extinction theme seemed so fitting as an end of the year article and the "slot" was available. The hook and article were both approved prior to that time but no one would move it to a queue despite repeated attempts to call attention to it. Then, when I did manage to raise a discussion, it was quickly derailed to revolve around an unrelated article until it was too late.


 * Honestly after following the rules to the letter and getting everything done on time I feel kind of cheated for the hook of such an effort-intensive article to be ignored, delayed, and then demoted to a non-image-bearing hook on a random day. Could you please move it to the image slot on another queue so it could at least be a headline hook after all the crap I went through to get it there? Abyssal (talk) 17:29, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
 * The picture hook in Prep 4 had been moved out, so I substituted your hook. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:17, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Awesome. I appreciate it. Abyssal (talk) 00:08, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Europeans in Medieval China
Can you elaborate on this? Is there something I should do about it? I don't what should happen next. 10W40 (talk) 11:40, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Your claim for points in the WikiCup were disallowed because the Good Article Review had not been completed at that time. I see that you have been proceeding with the review, and when you have decided whether the article qualifies as a Good Article under the GA criteria, you will be passing or failing it as mentioned on this page. When you have completed the review you can submit it again to your submission's page at the WikiCup and receive the points. I hope that makes things clearer. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:19, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Cornops aquaticum
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:01, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Ceratophyllus gallinae
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Ipomoea pandurata
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Tick
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Tick you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Vanamonde93 -- Vanamonde93 (talk) 12:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Talkback
North America1000 09:48, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK
Hello! Your submission of Catananche lutea at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! North America1000 12:36, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Battle Royale
Cwmhiraeth, I was wondering why you just promoted this when it has an active slash icon superseding the tick. I haven't gotten back to post again on this one since the new, shorter hook was added, but I'm a bit dubious about the hook; if I'm remembering my preliminary check of it, only one of the three judges is actually cited as saying that was said judge's reason for not giving it the award, while the other two judges gave different reasons. Can you please unpromote it? Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:57, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
 * You were too quick for me. I was just about to modify the hook and had in fact done so before I read your post here. Are you happy with it now? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:05, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
 * No, I'm afraid not. The two clauses don't work together well, and "may have been" is also problematic. I'm sorry, but I'm going to pull it: it simply shouldn't have been promoted with an active "/" icon. As it happens, I actually hadn't seen that you'd finished the set; I just saw that it was promoted without a new tick when I posted. BlueMoonset (talk) 07:14, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I considered your "/" only referred to the length of the hook and when this was reduced, the nomination was good to go. By all means pull it, or I can do so if you prefer. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:23, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm currently finishing off the pull—I have to complete a suggestion or two—so no need to do it yourself (and better that we avoid edit conflicts!); thanks for offering. In my experience, if there's one thing wrong with the initial review, especially something as fundamental as hook length, probably other things are missed, and a new tick should be expected. Heaven knows there are plenty of hooks waiting that have active ticks at the moment... BlueMoonset (talk) 07:29, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
 * It would be better if more people were building prep sets, especially as we are now using two sets a day. I normally work through the pink panel which lists approved nominations, starting from the oldest ones. There are currently about 40 approved nominations created/expanded/promoted before December 19th, the date from which I am currently promoting. Nearly all of these are not available for me to promote for one reason or another, and are liable to linger.


 * So, when I come to a nomination like Battle Royale I have several options. Doing nothing merely puts the problem off till another day! In this case, it has been ticked and the ALT1 hook length is (just) OK but the hook fact is questionable. If, having looked at article and hook fact source I can see how to adjust the hook to make it acceptable, I go ahead and promote the hook as it stands, making the adjustment as a separate edit when I have completed the set. If I think an alternative hook is necessary and further work needs to be done, I can suspend the tick and ask the nominator to make changes, as I did in this nomination. When that matter finally gets sorted, it is often one more nomination that I can't promote, so you can see why I like to deal with minor problems first time round wherever possible. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:43, 15 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Cwmhiraeth, the thing about Battle Royale is that it was not ticked. It had been ticked at one point, but its status at the moment you promoted it was Symbol possible vote.svg. So your only options since you were looking for a hook to promote was to pass it by or to reinvestigate the new hook and see if it could be ticked for someone else to promote. Either way, it can't be in contention for a promotion; in those cases, the best thing may indeed be to put the problem off for another day, when someone comes by and moves it forward. (In this case, that person should have been me, and I hope I would have gotten back to it by the end of the weekend.)
 * For those nominations that are ticked and just need minor rewording to make the hook fact better align with the fact in the article and its source, or just read better, that's fine. But if the hook really doesn't reflect the facts in the article or source it isn't a minor problem, even if there's a fairly easy fix; it needs to be fixed and formally rechecked prior to closing the nomination, because the prior review was flawed in this way and, as like as not, in other ways as well. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:22, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Tick
The article Tick you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Tick for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Vanamonde93 -- Vanamonde93 (talk) 11:21, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Laudato si
When I wanted to move the nom to the special date mentioned in the comment, I found it promoted already. Can you please revert that? - Also, "musical performers" sounds redundant to me, who else? Also makes me think of musical performers, comparable to opera singers. - I will say so in the nom, once you reopen. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:26, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Done. I didn't notice your comment. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:14, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Lok Sewak Sangh
Hook not checked. I've fixed it for you. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:16, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Well spotted! Congratulations. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:35, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Did you check it? The Rambling Man (talk) 22:48, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Absurd obfuscation
This (relating to the cricketer) has gone beyond absurd. Time to stop promoting hooks until such a time that (a) you can check they are cited and (b) check they aren't absurdly obfuscated. You are, I'm sure, aware of WP:V, WP:EASTER and other such policies, guidelines etc. Now I know you've told me it's not part of your role as a promoter to anything, but you spend over an hour a day making a queue up, yet you have promoted an article with a clear error in both the hook and article, and now a hook with an utterly absurd hook. What's going on? The Rambling Man (talk) 22:48, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I wait with baited breath for the next instalment of "Absurd hooks you have promoted!" Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:24, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Shouldn't take too long. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:41, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 January 2017
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:39, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Wildlife of Morocco
 Schwede 66  12:01, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK question
Hi Cwmhiraeth. You know more about DYK than most - can I ask your opinion on Template:Did you know nominations/Zdenka Samish, please? The hook is taken from a pull quote rather than the body of the article, and I'm not sure whether this is accepted under the eligibility criteria (there's no direct prohibition, unless I've missed something, but equally it does seem to imply that the hook needs to come from the body of the article). Would appreciate your thoughts on the matter, either here, there or on my talk, if you have time. Cheers, Yunshui <sup style="font-size:90%">雲 <sub style="font-size:90%">水 14:27, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi, I was glad to see that my guide in the world of vandalism was back! I think that taking the hook from a pull quote is acceptable at DYK, I have certainly seen it done before. Actually, Yoninah probably knows more about the rules of DYK than I do, and in this instance we both think its permissible. Cheers. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:11, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Goldman's pocket mouse
 Schwede 66  12:03, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK for New Zealand eagle ray
 Schwede 66  12:04, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Acer taggarti
Cwmhiraeth, I wasn't sure whether you'd be interesting in revisiting this nomination now that new hooks have been proposed, after the kerfuffle earlier, but it would be nice to get a new approval. I can't do it because I suggested the idea behind the new wording. If not, let me know and I'll add the "review again" icon. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:56, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:05, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Prep 1
Hi, I appreciate your promoting my hook to the lead image slot, but I honestly think it would be better in a non-image slot. The hook is talking about a first-time novelist, which makes it look like the old woman who's pictured just wrote her first book. I added the date of the photo to the caption, but now it just looks confusing with the 1950s reference. I think it would be best to move it out of the image slot, where the hook can work on its own. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 13:44, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
 * OK, I will move it, especially as the hook is about the first part of her trilogy which was published when she was 40. it is a photo full of character, and her literary career had a long span ....


 * On another matter, when you promote hooks could you do some of the older ones which I can't promote? I find Wugapodes' test page very helpful in finding approved nominations. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 14:00, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Yes, I am also using the test page–it's great! I realized when I built the last set that I didn't promote any of your created hooks or reviewed hooks. Sorry about that. I'll be sure do it next time. Yoninah (talk) 17:19, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

A little bit of concern....
10W40 has just started to do a GA Review of Assassination of Abraham Lincoln. As the GA Nominator I am somewhat concerned that an editor
 * with around 200 edits at the moment,
 * who's been editing for about 2 weeks

is reviewing this massive article. Would appreciate your keeping an eye on the Review as it progresses. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 15:53, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
 * It is certainly ambitious from an editor still finding their way about. 10W40 has done another review and did seem to grasp the concept of the GA criteria. I have watchlisted the Abraham Lincoln review page and perhaps you could contact me again if things get problematic. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:17, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, a couple of things...nothing major yet. *They don't seem to understand how to use their particular GA Review Template...They will say a section has passed but they haven't used the parameter of "y" etc. so then I am not sure which sections are ok and which aren't in terms of their Review. (I did just leave a note about that on the Review page.) *They also stated that the lead section needs more focus and less detail.  I have no idea how to interpret that statement plus their offered alternative seems somewhat watered-down from the desired encyclopedic tone. *Their 1a (prose/spelling/grammar) issues don't quite seem correct - other than Wikilinking within quoted material (but then again, very few people know what "catafalque" means...). Shearonink (talk) 06:38, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I think you need more patience. Different reviewers do things different ways and I don't see any cause for particular concern at the moment. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:47, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * sigh...ok. Will do. Taking a WP-ChillPill lol. Shearonink (talk) 15:19, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Well it seems to have got there, even if the review was a bit unconventional. Congratulations. I have added the article to the North America list on the GA/History page. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:31, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * "Unconventional" about covers it. And thanks. Shearonink (talk) 13:31, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Reversed promotion of hook in special occasion slot
Cwmhiraeth, I'm not sure why you promoted the Template:Did you know nominations/The Capture of the Hessians at Trenton, December 26, 1776 hook, but the nomination is in the special occasion section for Washington's Birthday, February 20. As such, so far as I can tell it should be held for another four weeks, rather than be added to prep before then, so I've reversed your promotion of it. I'll take a look to see what I can put in prep 6 instead. BlueMoonset (talk) 08:21, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I didn't notice that. It is best if the nomination is moved out of the general list when transferred to the special occasion holding area. Or perhaps this is a Wugqapodes test page anomaly - I can see it would need to be manually removed from the test page when transferred, but it was still there when I promoted it. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:14, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a Wugapodes anomaly, since the hook was only in the special occasion area on the Nominations page (I double checked just to be sure). The bot shouldn't be moving anything from Special occasions, unless it's to an Approved page Special occasions section. We may need to set up a process for moving hooks on the Approved page into that page's Special occasion section, and in the meantime, anyone testing that page should keep a close eye out for potential special occasion hooks. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:45, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * If there was a time gap between when the nomination was approved and when it was moved to the special holding area, that would have given the bot ample time to select it first. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:29, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * That is certainly possible. It was approved back on January 6. I've done a manual move of the special occasion hooks on the Nominations page to the special occasion area on the test page, and removed them from the Approved section of the test page, to help avoid a recurrence. However, I do have another concern at the moment: WugBot hasn't done a DYK run since January 18, so continuing to use the test Approved page as your source for preps means that you aren't seeing any recent promotions of otherwise old hooks (for example, one under November 4 that you weren't involved in). Can you please take a look at some of the older (and longer) ones on the regular Nominations page for your next set? It would help. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:13, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Montane wood mouse
 Schwede 66  12:02, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Mount Oku hylomyscus
 Schwede 66  12:02, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Tolai hare
 Schwede 66  00:01, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Diploastrea heliopora
 Schwede 66  12:01, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Pterinoxylus spinulosus
Harrias talk 13:42, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Franco-Tahitian War
Hi, you forgot to close this nomination when you promoted it to Prep 4. Best, Yoninah (talk) 17:30, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Done, thanks. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:27, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Non-U.S. bios
Hi, there are so many bios of Native Hawaiians and other U.S. figures that many prep sets are almost half U.S.-based. I'd just like to point out that I have written a few Israeli women bios waiting to be promoted: Template:Did you know nominations/Sarah Bavly; Template:Did you know nominations/Maxine Fassberg; Template:Did you know nominations/Zdenka Samish. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 22:20, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * OK. We are rather overwhelmed by Hawaiian history at the moment. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:54, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

I don't know quite how to fix something...
Assassination of Abraham Lincoln is showing up as a delisted good article but (as you know) it is a GA. I can't quite figure out how to fix the headers on the talk page so the GA status is showing up correctly at the main article page. If you could take a look at the headers at Talk:Assassination of Abraham Lincoln and fix it so the status would be correct that would be great. (I did ask Jaguar - a GA Cup judge - for some assistance so it's possible everything might be cleared-up by the time you look at it.) Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 04:07, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Update: I think I figured out how to get the headers fixed...but would appreciate your taking a look at it to make sure. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 04:50, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Well I don't understand all those header templates. It seems that it was previously a good article (2007) but was later delisted (2008). Perhaps the all-knowledgeable could take a look. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:51, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Cwmhiraeth, it looks like Shearonink took care of it. The Article history template was what caused it to be described as a delisted good article (DGA) on the talk page; once its current status was updated and the new GA incorporated into the Article history template, it was all set. I did remove the GA template, since it was obsolete once its information had been added to the Article history. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:01, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Catananche lutea
Harrias talk 12:48, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Tick
Harrias talk 00:31, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Contingency Fund for Foreign Intercourse
Cwmhiraeth, can I ask you to try to get a response on this one? It's been unanswered for over a month and a half now, and it needs to get moving, but someone other than me needs to take it in hand. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:55, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:45, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Fair use images
Please ensure you don't promote articles which are incorrectly using fair use images which have no specific rationale for inclusion. This is a legal issue which we should be avoiding, especially when linking to such violations from the main page. The article in question this time is India Government Mint, Hyderabad. I have fixed the issue on this occasion. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:57, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
 * OK. Thanks. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:00, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Talkback
North America1000 09:58, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
 * N.b. Per your comment there, yep, pings don't work when posts are unsigned. North America1000 10:34, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Special occasion hooks for Preps 5/6
Cwmhiraeth, there are a couple of hooks in the special occasions section for February 2 that should go into either Prep 5 or Prep 6. Yoninah promoted a couple of others, but couldn't promote these two because the person who approved them was, you guessed it, Yoninah. (Both of the nominations were proposed by Gerda Arendt, so it might be best to put them in different preps, especially since she already has yet another special occasion hook in Prep 6.) Thanks! BlueMoonset (talk) 05:29, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I have acceded to your request, but with reluctance. Some of these special occasion requests are very tenuous. The Nunc dimittis (Pärt) was requested for Feb 2nd but I don't know why, and in Thomas Thomaschke's case, one of the three pieces of music mentioned, the Bach cantata, was first performed on February 2nd 1725. Other nominations have been waiting for many weeks to appear, and I think we should have good rationales if we are going to promote newer hooks like these in preference to older nominations. (I fear Gerda will read this and feel offended). Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:40, 1 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Why should I be offended? In both cases I said "best that day" or "please". Nunc dimittis is sung every day, but particularly on 2 February = Candlemas (in English). Bach's cantata wasn't premiered that day by chance, but was especially composed for that day. It used to be quite a feast, that's why the queen and her court saw the play that day, in Johnbod's hook. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:38, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I didn't realise Feb 2nd was Candlemas and therefore of relevance for these particular hooks. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:23, 1 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Cwmhiraeth, there does seem to have been a trend to allow special occasion requests simply as a matter of course if they've been requested, regardless of how compelling the rationales might be. I didn't look at the merits of the requests, just that the hooks were in the section. There doesn't seem to be any scrutiny of most of these requests, and sometimes it's the nominator who does the move, which I don't believe should ever be the case: there should be some vetting by an independent reviewer, and if appropriate, the occasion questioned.
 * The question is, what to do going forward. One possibility is to have a discussion on the DYK talk page of how we should handle special occasion hook date requests if it does seem tenuous. Another is to allow prep set builders to challenge a special occasion designation. This can be awkward because it would typically be a fairly last minute challenge, which doesn't leave much time. But I think it has to be done, rather than let the sets be built and promoted without the hook that's sitting there. Our guidelines do say that special occasion hooks should be nominated at least five days ahead of the date in question—that's from a time when nominations could reasonably expect to be reviewed that quickly—which does result in some of them leapfrogging others that have been waiting much longer. In a way, that's an argument that the dates really need to be special. (Note: this was started last night but not finished, so there's been a bit of conversation since then, which I hadn't seen before I got an edit conflict; no time to update it now.) BlueMoonset (talk) 15:58, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I think that people asking for special occasion hooks should be required to explain why the date is requested and its significance. This time, it was apparently Candlemas, but that was not mentioned in the request which seems to have been waved through. I don't want to be difficult, but I just wasn't too happy about including them today. As long as the number of such requests is low however, we can probably accommodate them without invoking any special rules/procedures. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:11, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Dusky bushbaby
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:41, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Incorrect use of fair image
Once again you've promoted an article which contains an incorrectly used "fair use" image (this time it was Edith Shackleton Heald). This is a legal issue. Once again I've fixed it. Please stop doing this, you've been told about this before. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:18, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Incidentally, you also promoted a stub, Oriental Desert Express. But I've fixed that too.  The Rambling Man (talk) 07:25, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Instructions for promoters are here; they do not include inspection of all the images used in an article. I inspect the licence of the image I promote but not other images. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:40, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Stop promoting items that contravene the DYK rules or that contain illegally used images. You are endangering the project. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:44, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I fail to understand why you keep criticising my promotional activities in this irrational way. As I have explained before, I am merely moving approved hooks from the nominations page to a prep set. Examining each article in detail is not part of that remit. It would have been more useful if you had contacted the editor who added the inappropriate fair use image. He is the person who needs guidance so as not to repeat the error, so I will ping him . Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:00, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * You shouldn't promote articles to appear on the main page with major issues. There is nothing "irrational" in asking you to stop promoting articles with fundamental problems.  Particularly legalistic ones.  If you keep doing it I'll be asking for you to stop doing it as you're personally jeopardising Wikipedia.  If you're not checking sources, not reviewing quality, not checking for the use of illegal images, what are you doing each time you promote a set? The Rambling Man (talk) 10:04, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * My apologies. As an experienced editor, I should know better than to add a fair use image without making a fair use case. On the other hand, as a DYK reviewer, the only image licensing I always check is for a picture hook image. Edwardx (talk) 18:47, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * That's just what I do too. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:49, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Question about WikiCup points
Hi. Just to make sure I'm not breaking any rules before I try to claim this, I'm permitted to claim an article under both DYK and GA if it appears on DYK as a newly created article and is later promoted to good article, right? I've recently been working on Ian Allen (gridiron football), which I expanded from a stub to what I believe is at or very close to good article status. It's eligible for DYK under the 5x expansion criteria, not becoming a GA. ~ Rob 13 <sup style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">Talk 07:32, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * You are correct. A new/expanded article that qualifies for DYK can score points as a DYK and when it becomes a GA it can score points again. Nor does it matter if it becomes a GA before it is promoted to the main page as a DYK as long as has been nominated at DYK prior to becoming a GA. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:30, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Gotcha. Thanks for the clarification! ~ Rob 13 <sup style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">Talk 09:40, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 February 2017
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:46, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Bytes versus character count
Hi, as I'm promoting hooks you reviewed, I notice that you keep referring to byte count rather than character count. Are you aware that DYK goes by the latter? Best, Yoninah (talk) 22:33, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I use a tool on my tool bar on the left which reports "page size". For example, for

What does your tool give for these articles? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:15, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Veil Nebula it gives "Prose size (text only): 3540 B (610 words) "readable prose size", ie it leaves out the bullet points.
 * Batajnica mass graves it gives "Prose size (text only): 674 B (108 words) "readable prose size", ie it leaves out the quote.
 * I manually copy the whole article into this tool (and remove the footnotes) to get the character count. This also allows me to skip indented text and lists. Veil Nebula is 4087 char. Yoninah (talk) 11:28, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Sicyos angulatus
<small style="color:#999;white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:lightgrey 0.3em 0.3em 0.15em;">&mdash; <big style="color:#ffa439">Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 12:01, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Echinocystis
<small style="color:#999;white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:lightgrey 0.3em 0.3em 0.15em;">&mdash; <big style="color:#ffa439">Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 12:01, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Divine Comedy illustrated by Botticelli
Hi Cwmhiraeth. Thank you for promoting the DYK. I wonder if it would be at all possible to wait for approval of ALT1 which features a nice picture and thus could enable the DYK to pass with a pic. Best regards. Dr.  K.  12:48, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, I looked at the ALT1 image and although it looks good at full size, it is very unclear at thumbnail size. Another factor that influenced me was that we had already had the Map of Hell as a lead image in DYK recently. It's a borderline case, but there are always more encyclopedic images than we have room for, with only one being used per set. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:26, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. Thanks. Dr.   K.  19:37, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Oecophylla smaragdina
Hello! Your submission of Oecophylla smaragdina at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 21:38, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Prep 5
I was looking for a person image to lead off Prep 5. The only one I can find is Template:Did you know nominations/Anna Stanislawska, for which I wrote the hook. Would you be interested in promoting it? Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 14:11, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 14:26, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Yoninah (talk) 15:15, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Please remember to close the nomination template. Yoninah (talk) 15:19, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Good idea! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:12, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Amur hedgehog
— Maile (talk) 15:36, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Oecophylla smaragdina
— Maile (talk) 16:20, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Masoala fork-marked lemur
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:45, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Flea
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:30, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Packera obovata
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:30, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Missodia Sionia
Cwmhiraeth, I'm not sure whether you're interesting in pursuing this review further, or if you feel you can; I just wanted to let you know that it was open and Gerda feels you are still eligible to review it. I had assumed you hadn't returned because you felt you weren't, but I probably should have inquired. It does have a "review again" icon on it at the moment... BlueMoonset (talk) 03:09, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Gobi big brown bat
Vanamonde (talk) 03:30, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Famatinanthus
Mifter (talk) 22:17, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Euryoryzomys nitidus
Mifter (talk) 22:17, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Susanna Elm
Cwmhiraeth, I restored this several hours ago to the Nominations page because it had a slash icon on it after having been pulled from prep. I checked again, after you promoted it again, and it still has that slash as the active icon, so I'm puzzled as to why you're promoting it without an active tick. Regards, BlueMoonset (talk) 06:56, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I hadn't noticed the slash icon, just the discussion of the best wording of the hook. Actually the slash symbol means "DYK eligibility requires additional work" so it was misused here. There seems to me to be a shortage of biography hooks at the moment. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:05, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Since even noms on the Approved page can have their approvals superseded in this brave new DYK world, a check for the most recent icon is a must, just as it was under the old method. If there was a problem with the hook such that it was pulled (which is what Yoninah did), then the slash icon was certainly appropriate: even if the problem is that the hook is interesting, a non-tick icon was needed once the hook was pulled. Maybe it would have been better a ? rather than /, but misused? I don't think so. If there's a shortage of biography hooks just now, then we don't include the usual proportion. It's what the guideline says, anyway: up to half bios and up to half U.S., but not a requirement that both always be half. Just that typically there will be such a large proportion of them in the approved backlog that there will need to be that many. BlueMoonset (talk) 07:19, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
 * OK. I intend to BE BOLD and leave the hook in the set when I complete it in a minute, but if you wish to pull it again, I will not object. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:27, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Cwmhiraeth, I have pulled it, and have placed it on the Nominations page rather than the Approved page. I'll let Yoninah know what I've done. BlueMoonset (talk) 07:47, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Desert hare
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:01, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Thrips
Hi, I'm doing a bit of work on Thrips (those pesky little thunderflies that farmers also find pestilential), and wondered if you'd like to help me bring it to GA? It's not in a bad state but I'm sure we can improve it. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:36, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
 * OK. And the first thing I am going to do is to check it with the aptly named "Earwig" to make sure it hasn't got any pre-existing copyvios like Flea had. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:22, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
 * A sad necessity. I just found out the hard way that Medicinal plants was in large part copied, and worse, the text had been removed as such by Rich Farmbrough, and then put back by the original editor, and nobody noticed for several years... Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:26, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Do you have access to any good Insect books? The "Lifecycle" section is quite detailed but I could not find anything online from which to source the information, only information on individual (pest) species. I have added a link for the "Encyclopedia of Entomology" source, which was already used, but it does not go into sufficient detail. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:49, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I have Gullan & Cranston. It has a page on the order with a short paragraph on the life-cycle - if any of it is new to the section, I've tidied up and cited the section ... but it's now a little shorter than before! I'll see if I can find a little more, but I'd say it was not far off sufficient. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:41, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
 * That looks better. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:28, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
 * We seem to be down to minor tweaks like formatting refs - I've run out of things to do on the article. Time to nominate?
 * Yes I should think so. #19 and #20, Lewis and Lewis, need a page number, but if necessary we can probably find another source. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:28, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * OK, let's see if we can tidy those up. I'll do the nom now. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:35, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Northern needle-clawed bushbaby
<small style="color:#999;white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:lightgrey 0.3em 0.3em 0.15em;">&mdash; <big style="color:#ffa439">Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 12:01, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Southern needle-clawed bushbaby
<small style="color:#999;white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:lightgrey 0.3em 0.3em 0.15em;">&mdash; <big style="color:#ffa439">Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 12:01, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Rufous-fronted parakeet
<small style="color:#999;white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:lightgrey 0.3em 0.3em 0.15em;">&mdash; <big style="color:#ffa439">Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 12:02, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Stripe-breasted woodpecker
<small style="color:#999;white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:lightgrey 0.3em 0.3em 0.15em;">&mdash; <big style="color:#ffa439">Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 00:02, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Bugs and thunderflies
Hi, I've replaced the cladogram in Hemiptera based on the one for Thysanoptera ... so I had to redo the phylogeny text ... and with the images, the table below the cladogram now seems a bit odd. Ideas? Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:03, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, you are the one that has been making the alterations, so you probably know best. It looks as if Sternorrhyncha should come out of the table anyway. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:29, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Yes, taking it out would be the bold, confident, sure the scientists are right this time sort of move. On the other hand, the S. have been in the H. all this time... Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:22, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keeping up with research is difficult. Sometimes one researcher comes up with a revision, some one else rejects it, others accept it, and so it goes on. It is probably best for Wikipedia to be conservative, stick with the traditional taxonomy until everyone is in agreement (or does this never happen). Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:29, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
 * It's impossible (both for the scientists and the Wikipedians). So we stick with the trad, and nod towards the new. I've tweaked the table but left the S. in there with a note. BTW what do you think we need to do with the Thrips article? Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:42, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I am concerned about the life cycle section, see my post above. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:49, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Heures de Charles d'Angoulême
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:01, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Angolan African dormouse
Hello! Your submission of Angolan African dormouse at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Jwrosenzweig (talk) 07:14, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * And if any of my comments are unclear, please let me know! I expect you'll find fixes for the things I'm pointing out, but if you think I've misjudged any of it, I'm happy to chat. Cheers, Jwrosenzweig (talk) 07:15, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Thick-billed ground pigeon
Mifter (talk) 00:01, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Scorpionflies


While we're waiting for our Thrips to fly, I wondered if you'd care to join me on the Scorpionflies. (Not very many insect orders left, actually). They're not exactly pests but they have a menacing look! I've tidied up the article so it's in a clean state, but is rather short with not much on their biology. I don't think it will need to be a long article, but it does need a bit of development. One minor issue is that the image here is in the article's taxobox, so it appears not to its best effect at postage-stamp size. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:26, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * OK, I am prepared to join you working on Mecoptera, but this evening I am going to create Thrips simplex. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:26, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * That's great! Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:07, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * The article seems to have reached a good and stable form. I'm ready to nominate it, if you're happy with that? Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:00, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
 * OK. I feel the lead needs some expansion and I started to do it today before I got interrupted. Maybe I'll have time later tonight. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:42, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Mmm, yes. I've extended the lead a little to cover related groups and forensic usage. If you're happy with that (with or without whatever tweaks you'd like to make), we can go for GAN. Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:14, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Urticinopsis antarctica
Mifter (talk) 00:01, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Forest giant squirrel
Mifter (talk) 00:02, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Susan Dynarski
Cwmhiraeth, have the changes made by the nominator addressed the issues you raised in your review here? Please stop by when you can. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:09, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:46, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

1747!
Thank you for catching that. Don't know how I missed it. --MopTop (talk) 16:37, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
 * It's easily done! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:13, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Wikicup GAR removals
Seems a bit harsh to me. I had already reviewed two ships of the same class, and the issues I identified in them had already been rectified in Superb and the class article before I reviewed them. I can't create review points out of nothing. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 20:45, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
 * The rule is designed to discourage editors from doing token reviews just to gain points. That was not the case here, but you have plenty of points already to proceed to the next round, at which time, points will be reset to zero. A few other contestants have had submissions disallowed for the same and other reasons. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:56, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Platylepas ophiophila
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Lysmata grabhami
Mifter (talk) 12:02, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Re: WikiCup eliminations
According to the current table, anyone who scored points were able to advance to Round 2, which means 70 participants in total. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought only the top 64 advance to the next round. Is there any reason for allowing additional contestants to advance? Eliminating the 6 participants who scored 4 points would result in 64. —Bloom6132 (talk) 13:35, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Well yes, that would have been the obvious thing to do, but in this post, I stated that nobody else would be excluded from the second round because I had allowed Mhhossein to join as a late entrant. Without his presence, there would have been 63 entrants to proceed with 5 or more points, and this would have allowed the 6 four-pointers to have progressed to round 2. I doubt it will make any difference in the long run. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:41, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 February 2017
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:20, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

March 2017 WikiCup newsletter
And so ends the first round of the competition, with 4 points required to qualify for round 2. It would have been 5 points, but when a late entrant was permitted to join the contest in February, a promise was made that his inclusion would not result in the exclusion of any other competitor. To achieve this, the six entrants that had the lowest positive score of 4 points have been added to the 64 people who otherwise would have qualified. As a result, some of the groups have nine contestants rather than eight. Our top four scorers in round 1 were:


 * 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 Cas Liber, last year's winner, led the field with two featured articles on birds and a total score of 674.
 * 🇪🇺 Iry-Hor, a WikiCup newcomer, came next with a featured article, a good article and a tally of 282 bonus points for a score of 517. All these points came from the article Nyuserre Ini, an Ancient Egyptian pharaoh,
 * 🇯🇵 1989, another WikiCup newcomer, was in joint third place at 240. 1989 has claimed points for two featured lists and one good article relating to anime and comedy series, all of which were awarded bonus points.
 * Peacemaker67 shared third place with five good articles and thirteen good article reviews, mostly on naval vessels. He is also new to the competition.

The largest number of DYKs have been submitted by Vivvt and The C of E, who each claimed for seven, and MBlaze Lightning achieved eight articles at ITN. Carbrera and Peacemaker67 each claimed for five GAs and Krishna Chaitanya Velaga was well out in front for GARs, having reviewed 32. No featured pictures, featured topics or good topics yet, but we have achieved three featured articles and a splendid total of fifty good articles.

So, on to the second round. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 1 but before the start of round 2 can be claimed in round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is a good article candidate, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 13:52, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for White-browed piculet
Mifter (talk) 12:02, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Rufous piculet
Mifter (talk) 12:02, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Switched back lead hooks for Preps 5 and 6
Cwmhiraeth, you had it right the first time: French Polynesia is in the same time zone as Hawaii, UTC-10, which is like Los Angeles only two hours earlier. So Prep 6 is the best time to run that hook after all: it will run from 02:00 to 14:00 local time on March 5. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:48, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Grey-hooded parakeet
Mifter (talk) 00:01, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Rock dormouse
Mifter (talk) 12:02, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Periclimenes rathbunae
Mifter (talk) 12:02, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Lizard, Octopus
I will be busy for the next couple of weeks, but I've been thinking of possibly working on Lizard for GA sometime. That article on a major group at the very least needs an expansion Are you still into herptiles? LittleJerry (talk) 05:43, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
 * It would be an interesting project but I find my time so taken up with other things on Wikipedia at the moment that I don't want to tie myself down and commit to this. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:18, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, but again, I'm not starting anytime soon. Maybe closer to spring or summer? LittleJerry (talk) 01:30, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
 * OK. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:54, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm sure Chiswick Chap would join then. LittleJerry (talk) 01:59, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Very likely. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:09, 7 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Lizard would be put on hold for now, would you like to join in on Octopus? I know you want to focus on GA projects but I intend for this to be my last FAC. I feel one more iconic non-arthropod invertebrate will "complete" things. LittleJerry (talk) 17:00, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
 * OK. I would prefer working on Octopus rather than Lizard anyway. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:07, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Do you think this article contains information we could use? LittleJerry (talk) 19:40, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:54, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Would you be able to expand on excretion and osmoregulation? I'm having trouble summarizing it from my book. If your book doesn't discuss it, there's this article. LittleJerry (talk) 23:23, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
 * OK. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 04:57, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank for your help. I think you'll be better suited for the remaining tasks. LittleJerry (talk) 22:35, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I think we're almost done. I think maybe the lifespan and mortality subsections should include some information on diseases and parasites. I think you'd be better suited for that. LittleJerry (talk) 19:25, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I will see what I can find. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:36, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Should we not say something about venomous lizards? See Toxicofera. We could mark a ‡ symbol against each venomous group on the cladogram, for instance, but there ought to be a section on the subject in Biology. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:48, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I think we are talking about octopuses here. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:51, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
 * OK, so Lizard remains in work. Octopus is done, I agree. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:57, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

Or not as done as we thought? I wonder whether the parasites/predators material is correctly placed in Lifespan. We usually have it as a section under Ecology. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:15, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't see anywhere better to put it, but I have finished for now and you can reorganise if you wish. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:25, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
 * In Bear, we had a section named Bear. Would it not be better to do the same here? Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:08, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
 * The predators sentence is a bit weak and I couldn't find anything else. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:27, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I moved it, leaving out the "predators" bit. LittleJerry has seen fit to move it back! Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:09, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Chiswick Chap, sorry, I wasn't following the conversation. I've due FA articles where lifespan and mortality were pout together, (see giraffe and koala). I feel with the way this article is structured, predators, parasites and pathogens should be part of mortality, but I'm willing to accept the change. LittleJerry (talk) 19:15, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

DYK
Hello! Your submission of Bear at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! North America1000 06:54, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Wha' hoppen?
Hello,

Template:Did you know nominations/The Vinh wiretap was approved for April Fools Day, but seems to have vanished. Could you please trace down its whereabouts and place it in the Approved Page holding area for 1 April 2017, please?

Many thanks.Georgejdorner (talk) 03:09, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
 * It seems that special arrangements are made for April Fool's Day, and you will find the hook here. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:59, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK
Hello! Your submission of Thrips tabaci at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! North America1000 08:26, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Struck above. I erred on the DYK nom page. North America1000 11:32, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK
Hi: Yes, I made a mistake at Template:Did you know nominations/Thrips tabaci. I have went ahead and restored the page to the state it was in prior to my errors on it (diff). This removed your reply there. I'm not trying to hide anything, or anything like that, and hence notifying you here about the matter. No point in making the nomination page cluttered with my error, which just creates more unnecessary text for people to parse through, for nothing. Please let me know if you're okay with this. North America1000 11:25, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
 * That's fine. You are doing a useful job checking up on people's QPQs. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:30, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I try to help DYK moving along at times, to prevent entries from sitting there for months at a time. I also like for the main DYK nominations page to be as streamlined as possible, which makes it easier for everyone to read and contribute to. North America1000 11:31, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Sure. Personally, I do a QPQ immediately before I nominate an article. It is a pity that certain others don't adopt the same habit. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:43, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
 * That kind of thing helps keep thing moving along. Well, I guess that's it. Feel free to ping me here if you would like to chat more. North America1000 11:52, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Prep 6
Hi, are you online now? Could you promote Template:Did you know nominations/Charmian Gooch or Template:Did you know nominations/Dora Bloch to Prep 6? (Otherwise I'll look for something I didn't review.) Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 21:12, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Talkback
North America1000 07:13, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Diplasterias brucei
Mifter (talk) 12:01, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Crocidolomia pavonana
Mifter (talk) 12:03, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Hans Larwin
Are you able to provide a reference for the awards that Hans Larwin received? That section is currently unreferenced and a reference is needed before this goes ahead at DYK. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:46, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Added a reference. -- Esemono (talk) 14:00, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/R. v. Gowan
Hi, you forgot to close this after promoting it to Prep 3. Yoninah (talk) 13:03, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Roaches
Given your predilection for pests, perhaps you'd like to join me on the Blattodea, one of the few pestilential insect orders we haven't worked on? The article is in pretty good order but there's scope for development. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:47, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * OK. Most of the Blattodea are not pests at all, I think. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:13, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Ah well, sales talk is what it is! Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:19, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Actually, I think it is rather difficult because the modern view is that Isoptera is nested within Blattodea whereas most of the sources are using Blattodea for the cockroaches alone. So, if I did a section on diversity, I would really need a paragraph or more on each, because the two infraorders are so different. Termite and Cockroach are GAs already so I would be pirating those I suppose. I daresay I could conjure something up. I would need to find everything they had in common. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:44, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, we need to take care here, given that the term has changed its meaning now. If there aren't good sources on Blattodea sensu novo then we'd be guilty of WP:TOOSOON (if not WP:OR), so we should take a look and then make a quiet decision on whether and how to proceed. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:49, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, the article is much improved, even feeling rounded, amazingly. What else needs done? Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:37, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Superficially, cockroaches and termites do not seem very similar, so I have been finding the bits I have been adding interesting. I think the article needs careful inspection so as to include a suitable amount about each group. I should think the "Predation" section could go and the "As pests" section be removed from being included under "termites", if we want to include it at all. Much of the "Habitat" section seems over specialised. I'd like to read the termites article to see that we have got the salient points and don't contradict it. So I think we have a bit to go as yet and may need to do a bit of "slash and burn". Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:20, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Conservation-grade slashing completed. Chiswick Chap (talk) 23:06, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I have finished what I think needs doing. Anything else needed? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:21, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I think it's fine now, though I wonder if "various other similarities" in the lead could be sharpened up slightly. Otherwise it's ready, a reviewer would likely remark on it. Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:25, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Better? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:20, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Much. It's good to go, as the ads say. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:52, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Angolan African dormouse
<small style="color:#999;white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:lightgrey 0.3em 0.3em 0.15em;">&mdash; <big style="color:#ffa439">Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 12:02, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Fulham Refuge
Good work on expanding the lead, there's a raw URL there which is against DYK rules. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:44, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
 * OK, I'll deal with that I see you have fixed that. Is The Reformed Rambling Man going to adopt a different policy on tagging articles in prep? I would prefer to use an edit summary that just says "Expanding lead" rather than the POINTY one I did use. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:55, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
 * No, I'll still tag, that's nothing to do with bullying or belittling, although of course someone could interpret it that way I'm sure. I still believe that basic article quality should be addressed, regardless of Arbcom sanctions.  By the way, thanks for your help during my block, much appreciated, but interesting to see the volume of issues I picked up in just a few days... The Rambling Man (talk) 09:09, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
 * P.S. You don't need to use POINTy edit summary, no matter what. It's not helpful and could be considered unnecessarily inflammatory, particularly when levelling it at someone who clearly cannot respond in kind. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:09, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Point taken. However, if you were to alert me to tags you add while articles are in prep, I could deal with them, whereas otherwise they may proceed to the main page unnoticed. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:24, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Well 99% of the time you can be assured that I'm looking at the prep sets within an hour or so of you building them. It would also be helpful if the admin(s) promoting them from prep to queue had a look too (please note that I'm not the only person who edits these articles while they sit in prep/queue), but that's probably a bridge too far.  The Rambling Man (talk) 09:32, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
 * "fix raw url which should have prevented this being promoted at DYK", is that edit summary a bit POINTY too? :-) But actually the question as to whether your tags are helpful depends on several things; how much it matters if articles appear on the main page with a tag; how long it is till the article appears on the main page and the willingness of other people to deal with the tags before the article gets there. All DYK requires is at least one citation per paragraph. The easiest way for me to detect your tagging is to look at your contributions and search for the word "tag" in your edit summaries; I found it three times today. Now I have other things I would prefer to be doing, expanding the article on cockroaches just now, and I think your tags on articles in prep are unhelpful as to timing. Probably three quarters of Wikipedia consists of articles with taggable deficiencies, so you could easily move elsewhere if you long to tag something. So that's my view, that you should stop tagging articles in prep. However, we do not want to get into an argument over this so you would probably be wise not to reply if you disagree with me. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:56, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

And therein lies a major problem. I said "fix raw url which should have prevented this being promoted at DYK" which is 100% purely factual, not pointy, and a suitable edit summary to alert anyone reading why I should be spending any time at all crafting a decent citation template on an article in which I have precisely no interest. If articles are being reviewed and promoted by the DYK project then sent to the main page with the volume of issues that I have picked up on my talk page over the past week or so and nothing is changing, there's a genuine and worrying problem. Another hook was pulled from the main page just this morning. "tag" was used five times today, once on DYKs for a maintenance tag, twice on DYKs for inline "citation needed"s, once on a DYK for a dab, and one on an ITN candidate. One maintenance tag was added without tag in the edit summary, that one had "several unreferenced works" as its summary, so it's not safe to assume that all tags will have "tag" in the edit summary. Anyway, the whole maxim of the DYK project is to show that new work can make it to the main page, regardless of quality, so the tags aren't a problem, and may even help new editors understand where they're going wrong. Cheers! The Rambling Man (talk) 11:25, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Thrips tabaci
Mifter (talk) 12:02, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Hook tweak
Hello Cwmhiraeth. Thank you for all your DYK work. However, I wish you had pinged me or Aporter90 before you made this rather drastic edit--I see now that there was a typo: there should have been a copy between "another" and "James Sullivan", that's all. That one deserter pays another to enlist was the attempted appeal. Thank you, Dr Aaij (talk) 13:40, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
 * A comma would have helped. The hook originally read "... that one American Civil War deserter, Peter Van Hoesen, was paid $300 by another James Sullivan, and performed a Medal of Honor-worthy deed at Fort Fisher in 1864, but didn't get the credit for it?"
 * I didn't feel the hook made sense as it was. Reading the article, I was not sure that the real James Sullivan was a deserter or just someone who had received a draft but was looking for a way not to have to join up. It would perhaps have been better if I had queried the hook and hadn't promoted it, but if I did that for every imperfect hook I found, very little would get promoted. Good, clear unambiguous hooks are best. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:59, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
 * ... that a deserter was paid $300 by another to enlist in his place, and didn't get the credit for the Medal of Honor-worthy deed he later performed? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 14:04, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes. I tried to design the hook so that it would be clear why he didn't get credit--the name thing. You have that now because of the "in his place". Dr Aaij (talk) 15:10, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Polynesian Dog
Looking at the queue, it does not appear that the DYK credits reflect my contribution. Please. <b style="color:#060">7&amp;6=thirteen</b> (<b style="color:#000">☎</b>) 10:58, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Well it does, as you can see here, but I have noticed before how your editor name needs to be handled differently in DYK credits from those of others and I will have a shot at improving the credit in this fashion


 * If that does not work, I will ask BlueMoonset. Pinging you doesn't seem to work either. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:16, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * There is a quirk because of my user name. User:7&6=thirteen works.  Pinging requires an odd format, I have been told.  Thanks.  <b style="color:#060">7&amp;6=thirteen</b> (<b style="color:#000">☎</b>) 11:19, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * The credits are OK now. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:21, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * There is a quirk because of my user name. User:7&6=thirteen works.  Pinging requires an odd format, I have been told.  Thanks.  <b style="color:#060">7&amp;6=thirteen</b> (<b style="color:#000">☎</b>) 11:19, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * The credits are OK now. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:21, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Bear
Mifter (talk) 00:01, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Congrats on the GA to you and ChiswickChap and anybody else who contributed. A real core article.♦ Dr. Blofeld  14:33, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Blob sculpin
Mifter (talk) 00:02, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Armistead Burwell (judge)
Did you miss my response here? I am waiting on you. Thanks. <b style="color:#00FF00">MB</b> 03:11, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Wipeout 2048
Hi Cwmhiraeth. I noticed you promoted Wipeout 2048 to prep 4, but the image is not included. I just wondered why this was? JAG UAR   11:17, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
 * The stock answer is that many more images are nominated with hooks than can be used with images; seeing that each set has a single image hook, that's 1 in 8 of promoted hooks has an image. With regard to this particular image, I didn't find it interesting at thumbnail size, appearing like a featureless black elongated oval that reminded of this insect. I can't see the two separate sticks, if the controls at either end are "sticks", at that size. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:35, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that's OK. I just wanted to make sure that I didn't do anything wrong with the nomination as I'm not really a DYK regular! JAG  UAR   13:21, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Xylosandrus compactus
Mifter (talk) 00:02, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

New red links
Hi. In the new articles on moist forests in, all created by Aymatth2, there are a lot of flora and fauna red links. I thought you'd probably be interested in them. 103.6.159.79 (talk) 09:38, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you, certainly plenty of scope there. I would have to see whether there is much information available on line because it is more satisfying to create start class articles rather than stubs. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:45, 23 March 2017 (UTC)


 * I agree that stubs are not very satisfying, but a stub that puts a species into a taxonomy, and perhaps mentions where it is found, does have some use to readers. A more complete description would of course be better. I somehow feel any species deserves an article, but should I make redlinks when I do not plan to start the articles myself? Aymatth2 (talk) 13:01, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I think the red links are good. There's nothing wrong with creating stubs, but I just meant that I find greater satisfaction in creating one start class article than I do creating five stubs. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:23, 23 March 2017 (UTC)


 * I am the same. No objection to stubs as long as they give some useful information, but I would much rather start more complete articles. I will keep on putting redlinks in the Amazon ecoregion articles. I expect a lot of the species are found in several of the ecoregions. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:48, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Two Hearts (Jackie Evancho album)
Hello! I added the Alt hook that was agreed to and made sure that it is sourced in the Lead as well as the body of the article. Can you put this nom back in the prep queue? All the best! -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:20, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Heroic Medicine
Hello! Your submission of Heroic Medicine at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 21:38, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Aulacophora
Hi, I just promoted this to Prep 2. I was wondering if it would be accurate to say they "bore out circular discs", which makes more sense to me than "cut out" (do they own scissors?), and also removes the close paraphrasing. Yoninah (talk) 21:47, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I think "remove" would be better; it seems that the removal of leaf fragments before the beetles eat them may reduce the amount of unpalatable substances present. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:29, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Great, thanks. I'll make the change. Yoninah (talk) 14:43, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Non-free images
Just a heads-up, for the third or fourth time I've had to remove a non-free image from an article you've promoted. I realise you don't consider this part of your role, but you are facilitating the use of illegal images and enabling them to be linked from the main page. This one was removed here. The issue here is probably not major, but the general trend to ignoring the abuse of non-free images at DYK is becoming somewhat endemic. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:08, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I note what you say. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:07, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
 * As you rightly surmise, looking at the licensing of images in articles that I promote is beyond the role of a promoter, as are some of the other things you have urged me to do in the past. It could be included in the role of the reviewer, but I doubt that would work either because many reviewers do not have sufficient expertise in the licensing of images. If the community, or you, feel sufficiently strongly about this, you could check the images on a regular basis, just as I promote hooks on a regular basis when I see empty preps.
 * You know I already do this. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:31, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
 * With regard to the "London Bridge" hook, I think my version is an improvement on the original, so I will not be asking an admin to change it. I would not have promoted it in its original form had I not already worked out how I planned to rephrase it. You often adjust hooks for grammar, flow, clarity etc., and so do I, so why this horror at my doing so on this occasion? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:30, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
 * You changed the meaning of the hook. It's fine, the nominator has given up hope and will probably not bother again.  The Rambling Man (talk) 17:31, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I clarified the meaning of the hook; the nominator is a regular. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:45, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
 * You altered it. Yes, he was.  The Rambling Man (talk) 17:47, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Ceriops australis
Mifter (talk) 00:02, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Ceriops australis
I'll be in Exmouth in Oz later next month, I'll see if I can't work out which mangrove is which and get a photo while I'm there. Sabine's Sunbird  talk  01:59, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Excellent. Have a good trip! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:13, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Macrotermitinae
Hello! Your submission of Macrotermitinae at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and one issue may need to be clarified, as I'm not sure about its eligibility over article length ands 5-fold expansion. (But I've not done a DYK review for ages, and you're far more familiar with the process than I am.) So could you review the comment underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Nick Moyes (talk) 12:51, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Prep 6
Hi, thanks for building the prep set for April 2. I'd just like to note that there are 2 special occasion hooks for that day, which is Major League Baseball's Opening Day, including a good image hook. Yoninah (talk) 16:44, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I looked at the Special holdings area and thought to myself, "nothing till April 2nd" without realising that Prep 6 is April 2nd! I will change some hooks around. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:19, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Which image did you mean? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:25, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I started building Prep 2 with special occasion hooks for April 3. The image is in Template:Did you know nominations/Moses Fleetwood Walker. Yoninah (talk) 17:27, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
 * OK. Shouldn't April 3rd be Prep 1? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:33, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Oops. I'll move Prep 6 to Prep 1. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 17:35, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I will not do anything till the morning (UTC 06.00) to avoid getting edit conflicts. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:03, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I just wanted to point out that the current assumption is that Prep 4 and Prep 5 will be the April Fools sets—we'll be able to fit what we have into two sets, each running 12 hours, and then go back to one a day for April 2 (Prep 6, which is currently full but will need to make room for the two special occasion hooks noted above. (April 3 has that one special occasion hook about Mount Davis.) In the event that we need three sets for April Fools, then we can move all the preps after Prep 5 one later to make room for the new set that will need to go into Prep 6. I'm hoping not, though. Thanks for all the great work putting together prep sets. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:41, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I have added the two special occaion hooks to Prep 6. With regard to Casliber's bird hook currently earmarked for AFD, I think it should be used as a quirky on a normal day and not squeezed into the AFD sets where it doesn't really fit. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:27, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Cup: nom after 10 days
Hey Cwmhiraeth, this article was promoted to GA on 17 March. It was then nominated for submission on 28 March. If I'm not mistaken, that falls outside the 10 day window to submit. The competitor in question also last updated his submissions page on 18 March (day after GA promotion) but did not add his GA at that time. What do you think? —Bloom6132 (talk) 03:38, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Pinging too. —Bloom6132 (talk) 03:40, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Looking at his contribution history, the editor made only a single edit between 20 and 28 March, so I'm inclined to think that it was simply overlooked.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 03:48, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
 * – that still left him with 2 full days between promotion and the start of his week-long "break" to do it … —Bloom6132 (talk) 05:24, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Until 2014, I think, the cup had no rule about submitting entries within a certain time period. If I remember correctly, the limit was then set at 14 days and has since been tightened up to 10 days. At DYK the rules call for nominations to be made within 7 days of qualifying, but some leeway is usually allowed. In this instance, I do not believe there has been any attempt to game the system. Where significant work has been done on the article during the contest, as it has here, I would not choose to deny someone their points on a technicality such as this, but I will remind the editor in question of his need to make his submissions in a timely fashion. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:25, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
 * On looking at the user's talk page, I see that he did not receive any notification that the article had passed at GA, the most recent notification stating that the article was on hold. Under these circumstances, any delay in submitting his claim at the WikiCup is understandable. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:36, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
 * The reviewer passed the article by updating the talk page banner, but the rest of the steps never got completed (user talk notification, badge on article, added to WP:GA listing). I only found out about the passage when I started looking around to see why it was taking so long.  Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 16:09, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the explanation. That's fine. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:35, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
 * "I will remind the editor in question of his need to make his submissions in a timely fashion" – I don't see any such thing on his talk page. All I see is yet another "Get Out of Jail Free card", confirming what I feared all along – that this rule will never be enforced and is simply ceremonial.  The rule says nothing about leeways, technicalities, or belief that someone is/is not gaming the system.  The scoring rules page simply states: "In the spirit of fair play, contestants have 10 days to nominate their work after promotion … Work submitted after this time is no longer eligible.  Your previous stance was that Cup rules – no matter how harsh they may seem – cannot be changed midway and should be changed/clarified "at the close of the competition".  Why the volte-face in this situation? —Bloom6132 (talk) 18:28, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I was going to warn him but did not as I could see that he had received no notification that the GA had been successfully completed. I will copy this thread to the WikiCup discussion page for other input. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:04, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Only one other competitor gave his opinion in the ensuing thread on WT:CUP, which can hardly constitute consensus. And yet you still went ahead with approving a submission which broke the rules.  Disappointing, but predictable. —Bloom6132 (talk) 07:45, 31 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Well, the WikiCup is meant to be an enjoyable competition which encourages article creation and improvement. The rules are short and do not have the fine print terms of a consumer product. In the first paragraph on the scoring page it states: " the judges reserve the right to adjudicate in the spirit of the rules, rather than to their letter." The technical infringement (submitting in 12 days rather than 10) is minor and I chose to accept the submission. My advice to you would be to forget about whether other competitors deserve the points they are awarded (we do check every submission) and concentrate on scoring points yourself. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:44, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
 * "I chose to accept the submission" – what about the other two judges? Do they not get a say in this too?  "The rules are short and do not have the fine print terms" – precisely, there is nothing in the rules that say technical infringements are acceptable.  And this here is an infringement plain and simple.  I cannot "concentrate on scoring points [my]self" when other competitors are allowed to unfairly pile points against the rules.  What's the point of having them in the first place if you're not prepared to enforce them?  The solution to this problem isn't to tell me to "forget about whether" the rules are being broken; it's to actually enforce the rules.  Worst of all, it appears the judges refuse to take an even-handed approach to implementing the current rules – while arbitrarily citing "spirit" in this case, you enforce it to the very last letter in this one. —Bloom6132 (talk) 10:25, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Personal attacks warning
Please refrain from making personal attacks. You stated here "Fram targeting certain vulnerable individuals by humiliating and bullying them". This is a direct personal attack, and to boot one which has already been examined and rejected in your previous attempt to get this at ArbCom. Note that personal attacks are a blocking offense here. Fram (talk) 07:04, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
 * In light of your response here, I would appreciate it if you would delete the second sentence of the second paragraph of your statement. <strong style="font-variant:small-caps">WJBscribe (talk) 11:01, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Removed. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:07, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Aulacophora
Mifter (talk) 00:03, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Waterloo Pioneer Memorial Tower
Cwm, can I get you to reconsider with regard to the Template:Did you know nominations/Waterloo Pioneer Memorial Tower nom? I agree it isn't a great April Fools hook, but I think it does have an April Fools-ish quality in that it suggests something much more dramatic happened than actually occurred.

BlueMoonset is already complaining that the sets are a bit short, the other available hooks are even less April Fools-ish and I think we are going to need this one. Gatoclass (talk) 05:22, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I have approved one of the hooks. I can see why you were keen to avoid being responsible for the AFD hook sets! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:46, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
 * You're a brick, Cwm :) Yes, April Fools is a lot of work. Every year I say to myself "never again", but when I see a bunch of substandard hooks on their way to the main page, just can't seem to help myself :) Gatoclass (talk) 07:32, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Stierling's woodpecker
Mifter (talk) 00:01, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Taxonomy templates
Just a small point about taxonomy templates: although they may seem to work if you use the English form of a rank (e.g. "family") rather than the Latin form (e.g. "familia"), some features don't behave properly. So you should always use the Latin form. (If you forget, the template will appear in an error-tracking category, Category:Taxonomy templates using unrecognized rank parameters, and will eventually get fixed. So it's not a serious problem.) Peter coxhead (talk) 13:23, 3 April 2017 (UTC)


 * I see you were referring to "tribus" and "subtribus", which are intermediate ranks that I had not met before. Thanks. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:52, 3 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Yes. There's a complete list of all the ranks recognized at Automated taxobox system/taxonomy templates. The table comes out in an annoying order because of a feature of the Lua programming language, but it can be sorted, both by rank order and alphabetically.
 * (Not my decision or preference to use Latin names for ranks in this context, but it's embedded in the system now.) Peter coxhead (talk) 18:31, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I am just working on Acalypha. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:35, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I have a special fondness for Acalypha hispida. There's a specimen in the tropical house of the Birmingham Botanical Gardens of which I'm a member. So it was one of the few plants I immediately recognized when I saw it in the wild in Malaysia. So many plants there were totally unfamiliar to me, so the chenille plant felt like an old friend! Peter coxhead (talk) 19:05, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I would never have guessed they were in the Euphorbia family. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:09, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Nor me. You need to work your editing magic on the material introduced in [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Acalypha&type=revision&diff=590121172&oldid=572629670 this edit], it would appear by a non-English speaker. It looks a bit like copy-and-paste to me, though I can't find the source at present. Peter coxhead (talk) 19:16, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I noticed it and thought it looked a bit formidable. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:23, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
 * It's from the website cited (the Acalypha Taxonomic Information System), but the user is one of the authors of that website. I think the right thing to do is contact the website and ask them to provide an OTRS release of the content, but I've never done this before. Choess (talk) 20:23, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
 * ah, right. My experience in the past is that policy here is to delete immediately, pending the correct copyright clearance. However, it needs drastic copyediting to be acceptable anyway . Peter coxhead (talk) 20:36, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I supposed that's true, but in a case like this where there's a strong, if rebuttable, presumption that the text was in fact released by a person authorized to do so but just didn't go through the forms, I'd rather wait for the rewrite than go nuke-on-sight. (I agree that it needs a rewrite, but I'd rather be gentle with expert contributions, even if they don't quite match our needs in point of style.) Choess (talk) 03:54, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Macrotermitinae
Mifter (talk) 00:02, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Bombus balteatus
Hello! Your submission of Bombus balteatus at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 22:57, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Rhizophora racemosa
Mifter (talk) 00:01, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Notice
Hello dear @ I though you may interested in this https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Okon_Goes_to_School. It was re-listed. You probably may want to !re-vote Celestina007 (talk) 12:56, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Biological pest control
Hi, there are 3 refs lacking page nos. Guess they need to be replaced. Ideas? Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:53, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I will have a look in the morning. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:56, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Nice work. That leaves ref 6. We could work around it but a page ref would be nice. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:01, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Tacca integrifolia
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Wikicup submission
Hi Cwmhiraeth. I left this same query on Godot13's talk page a week ago but he has not replied. I nominated Resident Evil 5 for FAC on January 28. It looks like it will be passing its nomination shortly. While the majority of the article was written prior the Wikicup opening, I have made over 150 edits to the article to both improve it and address the concerns at FAC since it was nominated. I think the article has been significantly improved since the cup began. Here are the differences:. Do you think this will be eligible for points? Thanks for your time. Freikorp (talk) 05:51, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for bringing this up. I will take a look. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:53, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
 * This was discussed in this discussion on the WikiCup talk page. In your particular instance, I see you nominated the article at FAC at 23:55 (UTC), 28 January 2017. Most of the preparatory work was done in 2016 but some was done in 2017 before the nomination and some more immediately afterwards before anybody had reviewed it at FAC. I think the amount of work you did before February 6th, which was when it was first reviewed, was sufficiently substantial for it to qualify. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:30, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your prompt reply and clarification. :) Freikorp (talk) 07:24, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Fire-bellied woodpecker
Mifter (talk) 00:01, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Landolphia owariensis
An article that you have been involved in editing&mdash;Landolphia owariensis&mdash;has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Yoninah (talk) 18:45, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Andean flicker
Mifter (talk) 00:02, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

New hook for Prep 1
Hi, the discussion at WT:DYK has decided to replace the hook fact for Elvis González Valencia in Prep 1. Since I suggested the hook, could you do the honors? Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 17:47, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

 * Thanks from me, too! This is collaboration at its best! Yoninah (talk) 22:35, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
 * My favourite cookie! Thanks. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:00, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Second pair of eyes requested at Template:Did you know nominations/Robert Grace
Hi there. As one of DYK's most active and experienced editors, could you take a look at this nomination. ALT9 looks good to me but I made one or two mistakes on this article already, so I'd be grateful if you could accept the hook if it is acceptable. TIA! Regards  So Why  21:04, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Bombus balteatus
Mifter (talk) 00:03, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Caddisfly
Well, with Thrips done we're almost out of pestilential insect orders. Caddisfly isn't at all that, but it's an interesting and little-known group and the article's certainly ready for some work. And the guy who uses them to make tiny jewelled artworks ... (see the article) ... wow. Be delighted if you felt like joining in! Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:16, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
 * OK, but I mustn't neglect Octopus, and I thought some time, we might like to move on to Mite. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:26, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes and yes, very good. (Like ticks, mites are honorary insects.) Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:58, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Starting in on Caddisfly, I tried it with Earwig, and found this, but I think you'll agree that Wikipedia is being copied here rather than vice versa. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:38, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
 * No doubt about it! Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:11, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I'd love to supply a page number where you have added a tag, but this Google book does not seem to have page numbers. It's in the Introduction, though, so I have put that instead of a page number. However, the book is a useful source and I am now moving on to Chapter 1, so it would be nice to sort out some page numbers. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:15, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
 * 'Introduction' is fine. Library? Wiki Resource Request? Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:30, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
 * For the time being, I am including a "chapter" parameter, until we sort out the page issue. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:12, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I will get back to this soon, but at the moment it's the end of the round at the WikiCup, and that and associated matters are occupying my time. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:49, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

How do you think we are doing? I have removed the unreferenced tag but do we want to try to acquire information from the Dutch Wikipedia? Is the present structure of the article satisfactory? The Wiggins source is very comprehensive and I could go on adding information on underwater architecture almost indefinitely, but have we got enough?. And then there is the matter of page numbers for that source, and the lead needs expansion. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:41, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * We seem to be managing but it's proving hard to find a good balance, maybe: but since u/water architecture is the genus's key distinguishing feature, we ought to cover it well (subsections?). On the Dutch article, I'm not sure; it isn't hugely well-cited but it might be worth looking at some of the sources, or running one or two cited paragraphs through Google Translate to see if anything useful turns up! I'll add a summary of the human side of things to the lead now. Chiswick Chap (talk) 06:48, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I have about done what I feel needs doing. Are we ready to nominate it at GAN? The next thing I plan to do is the Core Contest, which starts today. You might have an article in mind for this, or perhaps you don't like editing contests, but I wondered if you would care to contribute to Animal husbandry, one of two entries I have made, - plenty of history there to interest you! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:32, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Delighted to help with both projects, I assume you want to do the nom. Maybe the contest will help do something about the GAN backlog in biology (it's full of student projects which I expect now have long-gone noms, too). Good luck with the contest! Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:40, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
 * The article William Alison is one of the nominations you mention. It is largely unreferenced and has bare urls where there are references. It clearly does not meet the GA criteria and could be quick failed, or reviewed briefly, given a week for improvements and then failed. If the other student project nominations are similar, they could be cleared from the system quite quickly in that way. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:47, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I'll QF that one now. Any others? Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:49, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I'm back, managed to work out how to use a flaky mobile connection ... a phone engineer came on Friday morning, stayed till evening, left leaving both phone and until-then-working-perfectly broadband off until Tuesday at earliest ... just starting to recover now ... Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:09, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
 * My commiserations! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:16, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Landolphia owariensis
<small style="color:#999;white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:lightgrey 0.3em 0.3em 0.15em;">&mdash; <big style="color:#ffa439">Coffee //  have a ☕️ //  beans  // 00:04, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Prep 4
Hi, did you notice that Prep 4 has only 1 bio? Yoninah (talk) 14:53, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Sure. There seem to be very few bios on the approved page at the moment. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:46, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. BTW I really like that nifty new T of C at the beginning of the Approved page. I can scroll through it quickly to find bios or non-bios when I need them! Yoninah (talk) 21:42, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, the TOC is good. I have just re-reviewed Fatebenefratelli Hospital and it needs to be moved to Prep3 or Prep4 to appear in the requested 23-24 April slot. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:33, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
 * OK. Waiting for a new prep set to open so I can move out one of the Prep 4 hooks to accommodate this. Yoninah (talk) 12:08, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
 * BTW the nominator on Template:Did you know nominations/Electric fire engine specifically requested an image slot, which I also think would enhance the hook, showing the two models side by side. Perhaps when a new prep set opens up, we could move this to an image slot? Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 12:12, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
 * OK. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:28, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Just clarifying, I said OK because I had looked at the image earlier and was in two minds as to whether to use it or not. In general, I try to choose images because of their encyclopedic value, because the hook needs them (art work or something visual), because they are directly relevant to the hook, because they are historically interesting, and because they are good clear images. I also try to vary them from set to set. I tend to avoid living people, celebrities, and uninteresting landscapes. Do you remember the fuss when I didn't include the image when I promoted this nomination? was very dismissive of me! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:09, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the ping. Sadly today I have more troubling Wikipedia issues to deal with that are far more important than something I said in, what, August last year?  I'm hoping that one of our admins is going to be okay having been treated with short shrift here.  Feel free to find all the other things I've said and lay them out here, I'm afraid life-and-death issues take much more of a priority than petty pointed revenge.  The Rambling Man (talk) 20:12, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I have no idea what you are talking about. I pinged you because it seemed to me that your views on me had changed since last August and that we now had a satisfactory working relationship so I am a bit mystified by your response. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:18, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I did discover what you were talking about when I did some research, but your mention of "revenge" is way off the mark. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:45, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Grey-and-buff woodpecker
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Suggestion
Might I suggest you move El Temblor to prep 2, otherwise you'll have 2 Maya articles in one prep list? Prioryman (talk) 12:01, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Done. Star war was promoted by someone else and I didn't realise it was anything to do with the Maya. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:30, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Neoseiulus cucumeris
Vanamonde (talk) 00:02, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Onesimus Ustonson
Hi, I see you promoted this. But the QPQ is still outstanding. Yoninah (talk) 09:56, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure how I missed that. I have returned it to the nominations page. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:16, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Yoninah (talk) 13:36, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

The Big Treehouse
Thanks for reviewing the article. It was a bit frustrating waiting several weeks after I fixed the first two editors' concerns. I really appreciate it. SL93 (talk) 05:39, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
 * My pleasure. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:45, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Odontomachus assiniensis
Mifter (talk) 01:56, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

DYK query
Hi, I was just wondering why my DYK hook was moved to a prep area, but the corresponding image was not, for the nomination here which you closed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Did_you_know_nominations/The_Formation_World_Tour. Was there something wrong with the image? I'd hope you can get back to me soon as ideally I was hoping the hook could have the image attached before it reaches the main page, and it is already in a prep area. Thanks ThirdWard (talk) 17:38, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
 * The main answer is that every set of eight hooks has a single image slot, and since about half the nominations have images, many of the hooks have to be promoted without images. Besides that, I looked at the image and could not understand what I was looking at, so I didn't feel it was a good image to illustrate the hook, and thirdly, the image was not included in the article, which is a DYK requirement for any hook to be used. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:55, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the explanation. Mainly the third point, I did not know that, so will keep in mind for potential future noms. Thanks! ThirdWard (talk) 16:40, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Talkback
I added two alts there. North America1000 10:01, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

May 2017 WikiCup newsletter
The second round of the competition has now closed, with just under 100 points being required to qualify for round 3. YellowEvan just scraped into the next round with 98 points but we have to say goodbye to the thirty or so competitors who didn't achieve this threshold; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia. Our top scorers in round 2 were:


 * 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 Cas Liber, led the field with five featured articles, four on birds and one on astronomy, and a total score of 2049, half of which came from bonus points.
 * 🇯🇵 1989 was in second place with 826 points, 466 of which were bonus points. 1989 has claimed points mostly relating to anime and Japanese-related articles.
 * Peacemaker67 took third place with two FAs, one GA and seven GARs, mostly on naval vessels or military personnel, scoring 543 points.
 * Other contestants who scored over 400 points were Freikorp, Carbrera, and Czar. Of course all these points are now wiped out and the 32 remaining contestants start again from zero in round 3.

Vivvt submitted the largest number of DYKs (30), and MBlaze Lightning achieved 13 articles at ITN. Carbrera claimed for 11 GAs and Argento Surfer performed the most GARs, having reviewed 11. So far we have achieved 38 featured articles and a splendid 132 good articles. Commendably, 279 GARs have been achieved so far, more than double the number of GAs.

So, on to the third round. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 13:16, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Prep 2
You appear to have once again promoted articles to prep which have bare urls, Indila in this case. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:59, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I ran Reflinks over it. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:19, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Aulacaspis yasumatsui
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:49, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of White-barred piculet
Hello! Your submission of White-barred piculet at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! 97198 (talk) 07:04, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Speckle-chested piculet
Vanamonde (talk) 05:23, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Typhlodromips swirskii
I've tweaked the wording of the hook a little; could you check it to make certain that I did not change the meaning? Vanamonde (talk) 05:28, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
 * It's fine. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:40, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Typhlodromips swirskii
Vanamonde (talk) 05:08, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Common blossom thrips
Vanamonde (talk) 05:08, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Hi Cwmhiraeth! I noticed that you threw your hat into the ring. Best of luck! To help you through the stormy waves of RFA, here's a kitten to keep you company!

— k6ka  <span title="Canadian!" style="color:red">🍁 ( Talk ·  Contributions ) 21:27, 9 May 2017 (UTC) <br style="clear: both;"/>
 * Thank you K6ka, that's very kind. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 04:56, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Image to be deleted
Mahmood Hayat which you promoted to Prep 6 features a clearly dubious image which is on the route to being deleted. While I'm sure you don't see it as part of your role, just thought you should know. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:42, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm not very well-versed with image licensing. Apart from the fact that it's being moved to commons, what's the issue with this image? The author seems to have made their intentions clear when posting it...what have I missed? Not trying to defend anything, you understand, just that I may have made the same mistake, and so I'm looking to avoid such in the future. Vanamonde (talk) 06:54, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't see how the assertion of Creative Commons can apply just because the image has a banner claiming it to be released under CC. It doesn't even mention CC 4.0.  The image has been scraped from Facebook.  The Rambling Man (talk) 06:58, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's true, but the person who posted it on facebook seems to be trying to release it under CC 4.0, don't they? Vanamonde (talk) 07:15, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I can't check that Facebook link I'm afraid. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:19, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Okay. It has been uploaded by an account whose name matches the supposed subject of the photograph, and the caption says "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International". What do we make of this? Vanamonde (talk) 07:33, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Looks ok then, replace away. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:40, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Okay, done. Thanks. Vanamonde (talk) 07:49, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you. The ArbCom thing seemed so important to me, but I am obviously out of line with the community in general on this issue. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:27, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

RfA
Hi Cwmhiraeth. As you've probably noticed, I've shut down your RfA per your withdrawal. I'm sorry to see that it went the way it did — I can relate. I do hope that you bear in mind what I said in my edit summary. You're a better editor than I ever was; the best thing you can do now is to resolve to use the feedback to improve your editing even further. Warm regards, Dylan620 (I'm all ears) 18:17, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I was in the process of trying to archive it when we had an edit conflict. I had better take notice of all the comments and drop the stick. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:23, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Cwmhiraeth, I don't think we've ever interacted but I wanted to add my sympathies and encouragement. Although I opposed the RfA, I said then, and firmly believe, that there is no reason you shouldn't be able to do the DYK updating you want to.  I would like ot help start a dialogue on making a change to the DYL process to allow exactly that.  As it would be rude of me to start a discussion linked directly to you without your permission, I am asking if you are comfortable with my starting one.  I have created a draft that I can link you to if you are amenable to this.
 * Thank you, Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 18:40, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I am happy with that, please go ahead. For your information, I currently build prep sets of 8 hooks. In theory, these are scrutinised when still in the prep area where anyone can edit them, but an administrator is needed to move the prep set into the queue. That administrator normally checks the hooks again at that stage, and the bot actually moves them to the main page when the changeover is due. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:55, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 19:11, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I did a little rephrasing. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:41, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I like it, thank you. I will put this up, probably on VPP, a bit later.  I'll also link from the DYK template talk and probably RPP talk, as well. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:34, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Discussion started. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 21:03, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Precious five years!
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:58, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you Gerda for your support, and all you do to encourage others. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:04, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Raw URLs
Star Athletica, L. L. C. v. Varsity Brands, Inc., which you added to a prep set this morning, contains no fewer than seven raw URLs. These are pretty clear. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:56, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, I saw them, and I thought to myself, TRM will be onto me about these. It's on my "to do" list for later this morning, along with some necessary improvements to Tomostethus multicinctus. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:08, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Actually I do not know how best to deal with them. They are not bare URLs in the normal meaning of the expression, and are accompanied by a wealth of detail. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:01, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
 * You need to decide on a "title" for the URL and place it after the link inside the square brackets. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:02, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
 * It took me about an hour. Cwmhiraeth (talk)

A cup of coffee for you!

 * Thank you. I was surprised at the direction it took and the basis used for the oppose votes, as mentioned in the "General comments" section at the end. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:35, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Octopus cyanea
Hello! Your submission of Octopus cyanea at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 21:23, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Reformatting of refs in Star Athletica, L. L. C. v. Varsity Brands, Inc.
Hello,

I reverted your good-faith reformatting of references in the article Star Athletica, L. L. C. v. Varsity Brands, Inc. because the citation style used in the article is the Bluebook (Note: Template:Bluebook is on the article's talk page), which is the standard legal style manual in the US. WP:CITESTYLE allows articles to use any common citation style and US legal articles should use the Bluebook style. See also WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases/Style guide. The Bluebook format for internet pages is different than the citation templates. Sorry to have to revert your edits, but hopefully you've learned something new to apply to future US legal articles you come across. AHeneen (talk) 01:23, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I made the reformatting changes with some reluctance when asked to do so by as you can see here, with reference to the rule that bare URLs are not allowed at DYK. Perhaps the term "bare URL" needs clarification. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:07, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
 * No, bare URLs should not be allowed anywhere on Wikipedia, "bluebook" style or otherwise. They promote linkrot and should be fixed in all circumstances.  The Rambling Man (talk) 07:26, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
 * That also means the article should be removed from DYK prep as it violates the rules. A shame that no more US legal cases will be permitted to feature at DYK given this oddball approach to citation.  The Rambling Man (talk) 07:37, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note, I've pulled it, re-opened the nomination. Interestingly, plenty of articles in Category:United States Supreme Court cases do not adopt this odd raw url approach, so clearly this "bluebook" style is not being applied consistently.  Arguably you could run the DYK with the references tidied up and not bare, and then the edits could be (once again) reverted to restore the raw URLs and linkrot.  The Rambling Man (talk) 07:44, 12 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Per the style guideline WP:CITESTYLE (underlining mine): While citations should aim to provide the information listed above, Wikipedia does not have a single house style, though citations within any given article should follow a consistent style. A number of citation styles exist including those described in the Wikipedia articles for Citation, APA style, ASA style, MLA style, The Chicago Manual of Style, Author-date referencing, the Vancouver system and Bluebook . ... Editors should not attempt to change an article's established citation style merely on the grounds of personal preference, to make it match other articles, or without first seeking consensus for the change. Another style guideline at Manual of Style/Legal states: While any citation style may be used in an article (see WP:CITEVAR), for articles on cases, case law, or subjects which use a large amount of case law, it is recommended that editors use the referencing style for the jurisdiction that heard that case or for which that legal subject applies. ... United States, consider using Bluebook, ALWD, or an official state system (e.g., the California or New York systems).
 * Second, the links were not bare URLs. "A bare URL is the URL with no other information about the source useful for addressing link rot." (Bare URLs) The URLs in the article were all used in combination with other identifying information about the source and were either a piped link or a plain-text link (in accordance with the Bluebook citation style). For the articles published on the internet, the Bluebook requires the URL to be part of the citation, so those are piped as http://www.marshallip.com/publications/apart-at-the-seams-copyright-protection-for-apparel-star-athletica-llc-v-varsity-brands-inc/, whereas the statutes that are published in print and thus officially do not have a URL and so I just used a piped link to an available third-party internet source.
 * So the bottom line is that the use of this particular citation style is within policy (even if it is not used consistently across a genre of articles) and links weren't "bare URLs" because they were part of references that had sufficient information to locate the source material. AHeneen (talk) 09:55, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Other such articles manage to produce non-raw URLs, this one should be no different. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:50, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
 * No, it is the appropriate way to cite an online resource. See (given in the OP above),,  (p. 2-3), , , . AHeneen (talk) 05:37, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Other such articles manage to produce non-raw URLs, this one should be no different. In any case, that now precludes it from DYK, along with any other such article.  It's funny, I've reviewed dozens of legal articles, this is the first that has insisted on such a curious approach to such unfeasibly pointless raw URLs being used.  The Rambling Man (talk) 21:43, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Incidentally, the claim that these grotesque manifestations won't fall foul of linkrot is simply wrong. With the understanding that all references should stand alone, I see no easy way of an editor using " Id. at 2-3 (quoting 799 F. 3d 468, 471, 491-492 (2015), available at http://www.leagle.com/decision/In%20FCO%2020150819101/VARSITY%20BRANDS,%20INC.%20v.%20STAR%20ATHLETICA,%20LLC )(some internal citations omitted)." to locate the original article.  This is pure linkrot kingdom.  The Rambling Man (talk) 23:42, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

I've started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Citing sources. You can comment there about your objections. AHeneen (talk) 12:33, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Discussions have also been started at two other locations, and the nomination itself. You might need to comment at all of them to ensure your objections are registered.  The Rambling Man (talk) 20:51, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Biological pest control
Mifter (talk) 04:23, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

El Reno tornado
Hi there. I was just wondering about the basis for this "rephrasing" edit which actually changes the meaning of the information. The sources given support that the tornado was the widest on record anywhere, not just in the United States (see also, ). Would you object to reverting this particular change? –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 13:08, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I made the change because I was about to promote the DYK nomination to the prep area. One of the two sources for the hook facts (#6 and #16) is the National Weather Service, an NOAA site. It said "widest known tornado on record", but it's a US site and I suspect it is talking about tornadoes in the US, especially as the other one, also from the National Weather Service states "THE 2.6 MILE TORNADO PATH WIDTH IS BELIEVED TO BE THE WIDEST TORNADO ON RECORD IN THE UNITED STATES." So it is better to be on the safe side, especially as I am under attack on the DYK discussion page for promoting hooks with errors. Claims such as largest, first, widest etc get very careful scrutiny at DYK. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:58, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Octopus cyanea
Mifter (talk) 03:55, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

DYK: Melanerpes
I left a review at Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Melanerpes, I mention this here in case you'd like to respond to it. — Kaz (talk) 18:47, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Five Nights at Freddy's page
Hey, you seem to have approved the Five Nights at Freddy's page for a | DYK appearance, yet I haven't had any notification that it has had an appearance. It is also no longer on the DYK nominations page. What happened? (sorry if I sound blunt, this is my first time nominating for DYK) WackyWikiWoo (talk) 10:17, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
 * It's in Queue 3 so it'll probably be running on the main page from midnight on 17 May. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:21, 15 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Alright then. WackyWikiWoo (talk) 10:22, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Your RfA
Sorry I did not notice it at the time so I did not vote. Deb (talk) 09:31, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you. It did not work out as expected by me, in that some aspects I had thought important did not crop up at all, while other things I thought trivial were considered to be important. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:12, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Animal husbandry
Some immediate observations:

1) there's a bit of a coatrack in the environmental section, with a ridiculous list of citations in one place.

2) there's actually almost nothing on husbandry itself! Sections should include feeding, breeding, animal health, and I suppose on dairy management, hygiene and traceability for the human food chain, government regulation, and what about marketing and business management also.

3) there had better be short sections with 'main' links to articles on meat production, dairy, poultry, and probably fish farming. These can be in a section called Branches.

4) I'd have thought there should be a section on systems, i.e. raise and feed stock on own farm using own bull the old way; only buy in bullocks and feed'em up for beef; artificial insemination; the list will be long.

5) the current History in 2 sections is visibly unbalanced and oriented to Britain and Europe, as well as having a short time horizon. We need a time perspective from the birth of agriculture (starting before cereals were domesticated with nomads and their flocks); ancient systems; medieval systems; the agricultural revolution; modern systems.

That will make a good start. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:10, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry, back again. I've added a dozen empty sections with 'main' links, forming something like a rational proposal for the article's structure. It was notable, looking around the various husbandry articles, that they're all coatracks for environmentalism and animal cruelty activism. There is some decent material in some of them, but we'll need to be very wary of copying anything, and in any case much of it is uncited. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:01, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree with your assessment and approach, but with regard to systems, was thinking of extensive, semi-intensive and intensive, with a whole world perspective. The environmental impact part could perhaps be hived off as a separate article. I think that animal husbandry should include such things as silk worms, bees, farmed fish, molluscs etc. I see lots of enjoyable work ahead! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:23, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * All of that. Feel free to tweak headings, ideally to terms widely used in the industry. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:52, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Incidentally, you managed to eradicate the paragraph I wrote earlier today. Perhaps having a section "Overview" is not ideal, but I feel it's necessary to put animal husbandry into context. I have added it back for the time being as the second paragraph of the lead. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:58, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Ah, sorry, didn't realize it was yours! I'll leave it alone now, but I think it's not ideal to have 'new' material or citations in the lead; and both lead and overview sections are most easily written once whatever they're summarizing has been written. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:06, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Agreed, I will move the info later. I have started a Systems section along the lines I have indicated above, and will work on it initially. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:35, 17 May 2017 (UTC)


 * I don't think of horses as being livestock. What do you think? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:48, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Why not? They are unless they're pets, anyway. So are farmed deer, llamas, crocodiles, ... though I admit crickets are a bit of a surprise. However, an early visitor to Patagonia said of the locals "They have no cattle, save lice and doggs." Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:40, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, they're a bit iffy and it doesn't seem quite right to include them, but I'm open to persuasion. I'm OK with farmed deer, llamas and crocodiles, but not dogs, cats, pet animals, zoo animals and lab animals though. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:03, 18 May 2017 (UTC)


 * I think it'll be all right to skip them - they're definitely livestock but not part of the normal husbandry-to-raise-food business. Barring Hungarian salami, natch. Agree about pets and zoo. The raising of farm animals to make vaccines I would include; the rearing of lab rats, I wouldn't. I think I can defend these choices, but it's not easy! Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:55, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

I just found Intensive animal farming ... large overlap. May be useful for materials and ideas. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:14, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Well, we're nearly there (and I think you'd better do the poultry bit!). Do you think we need to mention that dread topic, the treatment of animals? All the animal articles are full of POV about it, but remarkably this one had the environment brigade but not the cruelty bit. Wouldn't want to stir it all up, but I'd have thought it deserved a brief mention. At least the reffing will be easy... Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:07, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I think we ought to mention animal welfare, but I have not really considered it yet. The article is basically about looking after the animals that are exploited by man for his food and other purposes. I'll do the poultry bit next. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:29, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Now it is my turn to have no phone or broadband (thunderstorm last night?) and I have borrowed a laptop. I'll return to Animal husbandry when normal service has resumed. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:53, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
 * See you then! Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:15, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

I've rewritten the lead to summarize all parts of the article; I've moved the refs out of there and replaced the bit of text about food which didn't seem to fit. I think it's about the right length, hope you find it satisfactory. If so, we're about ready to nominate. Hope your telecomm troubles are resolved, I'm just switching mobile provider which should save hundreds p.a., let's hope it works out. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:38, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
 * The lead is looking better. I would really like to expand the "Birth of husbandry" and the "Ancient civilisations" sections a little, but I am just about to be away from home for three days and am unlikely to have time till I get back. Our telecoms problems are not resolved; they said 72 hours and we are currently on 96 and counting. However this laptop arrangement is quite convenient. We have family members in the other half of our house. Their business line and hub, which I am using through the wall, is OK, while other people in the scattered hamlet have lost their connections. I don't think BT is too worried about rural locations. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:11, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Hope the comms are back ... we seem to be very close to completion here. I am not sure that "At some stage, the value of the horse as a riding animal was discovered, and humans could move faster and cover distances unimaginable before." is directly relevant, at least not as phrased. Horses were already domesticated for meat (i.e. had become livestock), and would be used as pack and draught animals, and later to pull the plough; riding became important but did it affect husbandry much? Not on farms, I'd suggest... I think it's too much detail on a minor aspect as far as husbandry is concerned, major as far as the horse, riding, cavalry and other topics are concerned. My tuppence worth. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:45, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
 * You are probably right. The source pointed out that it was a significant milestone for man, but as you say, not particularly relevant for animal husbandry. I'm still waiting on BT. Last night this laptop was incredibly slow, like taking 4 minutes to make an edit, often failing to do even that and refusing to return to the previous page. So I took to copying every edit onto my clipboard and not using "preview". When we had an edit conflict, I copied my clipboard into the article so as to not lose what I had been doing, and that's how that section got doubled up. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:59, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
 * What a bore... I spent yesterday getting nets up to stop the birds eating my cherries, always a tricky job. I've woven transhumance into the text, arranged images, and will now trim the horse bit. Then I think we can nominate it, but I'm increasingly concerned at the GA process - either I wait for months, or worse I get a newbie reviewer who either just passes it, only for the powers that be to undo the pass, or a single-issue opinion-monger who uses the GA review button to make a comment. Meanwhile, experienced editors continue to feed in articles on trivial subjects with the narrowest possible scope, while not bothering to review articles themselves. Feels to me as if it's on the verge of collapse. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:10, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I have removed chunks of "Environmental impact". For example, it mentioned "Dead zones", and when I looked at the sources I found that agriculture (not animal systems) were one of a range of causes of eutrophication and therefore unnecessary for us to include. As to GAs, I think you are referring to the "Biology and medicine" section, and a fair part of the excess nominations there are in connection with students' coursework. Fine for the students and Wikipedia, but not so good for the creaking GAN section. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:55, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination
Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Ruschi's rat at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; if you would like to continue, please link the nomination to the nominations page as described in step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with db-g7, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 10:22, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Caddisfly
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Caddisfly you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sabine's Sunbird -- Sabine's Sunbird (talk) 06:40, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

DYK for White-barred piculet
Mifter (talk) 00:03, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Varzea piculet
Mifter (talk) 00:03, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Ochre-collared piculet
Mifter (talk) 00:03, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Ocellated piculet
Mifter (talk) 00:03, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

DYK for White-wedged piculet
Mifter (talk) 00:03, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Caddisfly
The article Caddisfly you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Caddisfly for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sabine's Sunbird -- Sabine's Sunbird (talk) 08:21, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Congrats! Sabine's Sunbird  talk  08:34, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Incidentally we should probably knock off woodpecker in the next few weeks. It won't take much for it to GA and from there FA. Sabine's Sunbird  talk  08:36, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, I have been distracted by other things, currently Animal husbandry, which I am working on with Chiswick Chap for the Core Contest. I will get back to Woodpecker shortly. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:42, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
 * It's all good, I've been spending time with other articles myself. ;) Sabine's Sunbird  talk  08:58, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Yawn
Hi, I know that everyone has different tastes, and that hooks that I don't see much potential in turn out gaining thousands of hits. But if two reviewers have said a hook is boring, why should we promote it if the nominator insists? And give it the image slot, too? Yoninah (talk) 10:24, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Actually, I think this boring/interesting to a wide audience business is very subjective. An article creator writes an article, or in this case improves it to GA, and submits it to DYK with the hook he likes. If he doesn't mind that fewer people may click on the link than might have done if it mentioned something exciting like Scrooge, so what? Why should we care? Mind you, I did fancy changing the hook to mention over 100 readings, but thought that was rather too large a "tweak". The Indian physicist in the hook set is much less interesting, in my opinion, because his field of research is so obscure. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:53, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
 * We care because the hooks are going to make or break the DYK project. If people aren't clicking on the hooks as much as they do the FA or ITN, the project could be voted off the main page. As I stated at the outset, I know that interest is subjective. But this is a patently boring hook for a GA that contains many other interesting tidbits. If you yourself could immediately think of a way to salvage the hook, I think you should have said so on the nomination template before promoting it. Yoninah (talk) 14:13, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't think DYK is going to fail because more people are clicking on OTD and ITN. I think it is is more likely to fail for other reasons which I won't enumerate here. I think the hook in question is perfectly adequate and I like the image of the young Charles Dickens. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:31, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Count me in with a "yawn" as well. That Dickens gave public readings of his work is not news to anyone, really - Simon Callow has been recreating them for years. If you want interesting hooks about A Christmas Carol, how about: And I haven't even got to the end of the article. This is the dullest possible hook and the image is (literally) dull and unappealing at main page size. Is this really the best DYK can offer? BencherliteTalk 17:48, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
 * ... that Dickens developed A Christmas Carol in his head while taking night-time walks of 15 to 20 miles around London?
 * ... that the character of Ebenezer Scrooge in A Christmas Carol has been considered to have been based on Dickens's fears about himself?
 * ... that all 6,000 copies of the first edition of A Christmas Carol were sold within five days?
 * ... that within two months of the publication of A Christmas Carol, there were eight rival theatrical productions of it in London?
 * ... that it was A Christmas Carol that popularised the phrase "Merry Christmas" among the Victorian public?
 * Agreed. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:02, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I'd like to open this up for further discussion by the community at WT:DYK. I'm IAR and returning the hook to the noms area while it's being discussed. Yoninah (talk) 18:03, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I have no objection to it being reopened. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:08, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Yoninah (talk) 18:15, 24 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Thank you, Cwmhiraeth. Please withdraw the hook. All the best, The Bounder (talk) 23:36, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry this nomination ended this way and hope you will not be discouraged from contributing to DYK again in the future. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:56, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

white pine sawfly
Hi, almost all the Google hits indicate "Neodiprion pinetum" as "white pine sawfly", whereas approx. only a couple of sources relate "Diprion similis". Not sure about this common name. IMHO this species has a synonym "Diprion simile" with nice photos in Commons :) (or this larva photo). Plus, other scientific names such as
 * Diprion eremita
 * Diprion simile (Hartig)
 * Lophyrus eremita Thomson
 * Lophyrus simile
 * Lophyrus similis Hartig
 * Neodiprion simile
 * Neodiprion similis
 * Pteronus similis (Hartig)

Or, this site provides even more details.

Hanberke (talk) 19:05, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, CABI, which is very authoritative, calls it "white pine sawfly". You're welcome to add photos or add the synonyms yourself. I'll have a look and do some sort of disambiguation, but must go out first and shut up my poultry before it gets dark! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:14, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
 * :) Great, please consider this CABI link as well at your convenience for detailing. These guys might be twins :). Now I'll add the gallery section. Cheers! Hanberke (talk) 19:17, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Although I'm not sure about the authoritative status of the sources, there are hundreds of sites and reference sources all finger-pionting the "Neodiprion pinetum" as "white pine sawfly". They might have co-hosts which lead to some confusion, but "Neodiprion pinetum" will be better at least mentioned briefly where "white pine sawfly" is provided as a common name of "Diprion similis". Otherwise, when "Neodiprion pinetum" is created, it will bear the same common name for sure. Hanberke (talk) 19:41, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
 * For now, I will rewrite the lead. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:54, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Guess what species I might be doing tomorrow? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:07, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Yay, Neodiprion pinetum'd be awesome! Meanwhile, I'll create disambiguation page for "white pine sawfly". Hanberke (talk) 04:22, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Here it goes. Hanberke (talk) 04:37, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Hevea
Hello! Your submission of Hevea at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 20:52, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

DYK for White woodpecker
Mifter (talk) 00:04, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Nematus oligospilus
Hello! Your submission of Nematus oligospilus at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:12, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Nematus spiraeae
Mifter (talk) 00:48, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

WC claims over 10 days
How is this in any way fair? I spot at least 3 submissions (Ellen Pompeo GA, Sévérine GAR, and Sara Ramirez GAR) that are over 10 days old. And he's been active on WP since the start of May. —Bloom6132 (talk) 03:41, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
 * These submissions were made yesterday. I will look into them when I work through the submissions log before approving each entry. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:09, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Re: 10W40 & GA review of Proconsul
Hi, just a note. I wished you had informed me of the history of this editor & this article. My initial reaction was to fail it for GA for the reasons in my review, but I was extending a bit of good faith towards the nominator by leaving it open for him to do the necessary work to bring it up to GA standards. Had I known of the first sketchy nomination, I would have just failed it & saved us all some work. -- llywrch (talk) 20:52, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I am sorry about that. I was not really in a position to know whether the article met the GA criteria or not, only that the original GA was unsatisfactory. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:35, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Hevea
Mifter (talk) 00:04, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Hevea benthamiana
Mifter (talk) 00:04, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Hevea microphylla
Mifter (talk) 00:04, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Hevea guianensis
Mifter (talk) 00:04, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Hevea nitida
Mifter (talk) 00:04, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Hevea rigidifolia
Mifter (talk) 00:04, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Hevea spruceana
Mifter (talk) 00:05, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Where in the U.S.A. is Carmen Sandiego? (1986 video game)
You just promoted this, it's got just one bare URL but that seems to link to a Wiki, so would not be considered reliable. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:48, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, it is probably sufficiently reliable for the name of the composer. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:59, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Not at all. Wikipedia is not a reliable source so what makes that Wiki any better? The Rambling Man (talk) 11:39, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Tropical ground squirrel
Mifter (talk) 00:02, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Diprion similis
Mifter (talk) 00:04, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

White-footed ant
Species seemed to be re-identified: The white-footed ant, Technomyrmex difficilis Forel, has become an important pest ant in Florida. Previously identifed as Technomyrmex albipes (Fr. Smith), it was correctly identified in 2007 as Technomyrmex difficilis (Bolton 2007). Hanberke (talk) 04:35, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
 * On the other hand, I found this, too: Closely related to Technomyrmex albipes but separated by the presence of setae on the dorsum of the head behind the level of the posterior margin of the eye (never developed in albipes) and by having the promesonotum somewhat longer and more slender, DTI 127 – 135 (as opposed to DTI I 10- 124 in albipes). This species has been confused many times with albipes, and isolated specimens with the characteristic cephalic setae abraded away are difficult to identify. Hanberke (talk) 04:39, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
 * It's a bit confusing. It means I can't use the Florida source because it's not clear whether it is the same species. Interesting ant, however. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:55, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 9 June 2017
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:18, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Hmm...
Well, I can understand the ironic satisfaction of leaving the IP's errors, but restoring them serves no purpose except to prove a point, in my view. It certainly doesn't benefit other readers. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 10:08, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
 * You are of course right, but don't you think that people who criticise the editing of others should take care to write accurately and coherently themselves? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:42, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Lol. A typo on a procedural talk page versus a factual error on an article written to appear on Wikipedia's front page. Ultimately, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and we should be respectful of our intended audience when creating content. But, you caught me in a typo. SCORE! I'm a scientist, I've actually been wrong. In public. Not just on Wikipedia, where I've also been wrong. It happens. Again, score! --2600:387:6:805:0:0:0:C1 (talk) 10:53, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

I corrected your typo of "United states," and moved Quebec and Ontario to Canada. In an article. --2600:387:6:805:0:0:0:C1 (talk) 10:55, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Was it around April 2014 when you retired from Wikipedia? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:06, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
 * 2009. --2600:387:6:805:0:0:0:C1 (talk) 11:18, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
 * But I'm not curious who retired in April 2014. Thanks for the guess. --2600:387:6:805:0:0:0:C1 (talk) 11:19, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Dendroctonus valens
Hello! Your submission of Dendroctonus valens at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. (Minor issues, should be easy to fix.)  diff  (talk) 01:20, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Hoplocampa testudinea
Mifter (talk) 00:03, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Lathrolestes ensator
Mifter (talk) 00:03, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Platypus cylindrus
Hello! Your submission of Platypus cylindrus at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 21:48, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Nematus oligospilus
Mifter (talk) 00:13, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I saw your DYK for Nematus spiraeae on main page two weeks ago... have you got any more single-sex sawflies? -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 11:50, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
 * There are others, for example the two species mentioned in this paper, but you would do better to ask Burklemore1 or Chiswick Chap because they brought the article Sawfly to GA a few months ago. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:35, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
 * OK... how come this managed to be DYK twice?, as above, and ? -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 09:23, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
 * (watching:) they use old DYK to fill the section when there's no balance of the two sides of the Main page. I don't like it, but it's been done. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:27, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I had not noticed that. As Gerda says, in order to try to balance the main page when the right hand side is a bit long, they occasionally reuse a DYK hook that has appeared before, so there are nine, or even ten, hooks instead of the usual eight. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:32, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
 * My first thought was "oh, Cwmhiraeth has found another single-sex sawfly, let's read about this one" - but then I saw the text "in the Northern Hemisphere both males and females occur", which was kinda familiar; then I realised that the link was purple, not blue, so had previously been visited. That's when I started investigating. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 09:48, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I had noticed nothing. I think it's a bit unfair ;) The TFA today is extra short, no image, that's why they added 2, and late. I slept over it, as practically every new set because of living in Europe where it's 2am when the new set is on time. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:53, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination
Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Technomyrmex albipes at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; if you would like to continue, please link the nomination to the nominations page as described in step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with db-g7, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 12:21, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Discussion at Template:Did you know nominations/Henry Wade (surgeon)
You are invited to join the discussion at Template:Did you know nominations/Henry Wade (surgeon). North America1000 21:56, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Dendroctonus valens
Hello! Your submission of Dendroctonus valens at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 21:43, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

RM at Talk:How I Met Your Music
I started an RM discussion at Talk:How I Met Your Music, where I invite you to comment. --George Ho (talk) 23:05, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

WC claims over 10 days
I understand that you haven't reached that far down the submissions log yet. But when you do, please note that some of these claims were promoted over 10 days ago. And there's nothing from the editor's contribution log to suggest that we should "AGF" as he instructs us to do in his ES. —Bloom6132 (talk) 00:35, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Ruschi's rat
Vanamonde (talk) 05:33, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Grasshopper
Seen what's happened over there? Best left alone, or taken to WP:WikiProject Insects? Its Names and titles section makes it clear that common names are preferred; and a WP:FORK isn't great. OTOH pouring petrol on fires may not be wise; for a longtime editor and professional the recent actions are interestingly unpromising of sober discussion. Given that a talk page discussion he'd started was under way, he has neither consensus nor due process on his side. I really don't think I can be bothered. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:20, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Grasshopper is a common name for Caelifera. I think Grasshopper needs a Phylogeny section. If he wants to copy it, fine, but I don't think he should remove it. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:26, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Where is the talk p[age discussion? I am inclined to replace the Phylogeny section in Grasshopper anyway. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:45, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict)
 * Indeed. Nor should he copy to fork. Choices are ignore; revert; talk page (draw attention to policy on Names, Fork, Editwarring before consensus, as desired); WP Insects. It's all risky. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:57, 19 June 2017 (UTC)


 * It's at Talk:Grasshopper - you may have missed it as he started it at the top not the bottom, suggests that discussion ain't something he's familiar with, perhaps. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:57, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I am just about to stop for the night, so we'll see what tomorrow brings. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:02, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I knew it was a good thing not to be overhasty. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:41, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Penicillaria (moth)
There is also Penicillaria (moth), a genus of moths of the Noctuidae family. Will it be wise to call your recent Penicillaria as and Penicillaria (order)? It is written like this in phylogeny section of Anthozoa. Hanberke (talk) 18:07, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Indeed, I have just been trying to work out what to do and how to distinguish it from the moth and the grass Pennisetum where it redirected before. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:13, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Renaming that as Penicillaria (anemone) might be a solution (see Penicillaria (moth)). Hanberke (talk) 18:22, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
 * After this issue is solved, I will revise all Penicillaria-links. Hanberke (talk) 18:24, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, as the genus article Penicillaria (moth) exists, I think we can leave Penicillaria as it is. Revising the links would be most helpful. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:28, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
 * OK, thank you. Hanberke (talk) 18:31, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Do you think you could have a look at my sandbox I am working on Anthozoa at the moment and I plan to replace the gallery there with the table currently in my sandbox. Now I don't know much about making tables; I could do with column 5 being wider than the other columns, but I don't know how to do that, and you might have some suggestions with regard to other aspects of the table. My monitor is relatively small, and it might look different with a larger monitor. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:40, 20 June 2017 (UTC)\
 * It looks fine and proportionate in widescreen. One thing is that col4 name "Name" seems irrelevant, it might be better as "Species". Hanberke (talk) 18:52, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
 * How does it sound to rename col4 name as "Specimen" instead of "Example"? seems technically correct. Hanberke (talk) 06:28, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, the image is an example of each order, chosen for reasons such as being a clear image, the right shape, informative etc, and I don't think "specimen" would be suitable. "Species" might be OK. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:38, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Yellow-crested woodpecker
IronGargoyle (talk) 01:55, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Miriam Makeba
Cwm, I had specifically requested the image be used in the nomination, given that it's an excellent image that has missed two opportunities to be on the main page already. Last I checked you didn't have an image hook for prep two; surely you could use this one? Vanamonde (talk) 05:45, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
 * OK. I was in two minds about the image and knew I had seen it before, but I didn't notice your request. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:00, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'd nominated it with Soweto Blues and with Music in the movement against apartheid, but it wasn't selected either time (which is okay); but it really nice is a nice photograph, and this article is the logical one to use it for, is it not? Regards, Vanamonde (talk) 06:02, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 June 2017
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:32, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Dendroctonus valens
Vanamonde (talk) 01:24, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK Review
Thanks very much for taking the time to review my contribution at Template:Did you know nominations/Neasa Hardiman. I believe I've addressed your query, if there's anything else please get back to me on the nomination page.Eshlare (talk) 11:59, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi there
Hey, hope you are doing good. I had a small question: The article Amami Rabbit, if I am not wrong, is present on 5+ Wikipedias (assuming the number of Wikipedias can be seen from the Languages section at the left, I count it as 29). So, there may be some bonus points for its GA. However, the bot has given none. Could you say where I am going wrong? Thanks a bunch. Adityavagarwal (talk) 18:19, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree that it deserves bonus points. Was the article's name changed at some point, like the capitalisation or something? That tends to confuse the bot. The article seems to be on 30 Wikipedias including English, so should get a 2.2x multiplier, I think. I will add it manually. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:55, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Nope, buddy, as far as I know, I do not think that the name was changed (at least since one month). Also, thanks a bunch for the fix. I din't notice any bonus points yet (I mean, I din't notice about the bonus point multiplication of 2.2x these 5 days, until after Mallard got 3x), until it crossed my mind when the Mallard article just passed the GA when I saw the 3x for that. Adityavagarwal (talk) 19:24, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
 * We need the bot to pass and recalculate the scores, so be patient! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:29, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Yep. Not an issue. Adityavagarwal (talk) 19:41, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I believe the total is now correct. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:35, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Claiming special occasion DYK noms for Cup
Hi Cwmhiraeth! Under the scoring rules, it says that "[i]f a hook is being held for a specific date after the end of the round and you need to claim the points, talk to the judges". Well, I need to claim the points for either one or both the DYK noms I have held for July 1, which have already been approved into the prep areas. It doesn't look likely that I'll be able to progress without it/them. This of course means I relinquish the right to claim it/them in the semifinals (should they suffice in getting me there) when they do get posted to the MP. Cheers! —Bloom6132 (talk) 19:13, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
 * At the moment, I think you will progress to the next round without needing to claim these extra points. The round closes at 23.59 UTC tonight. If you need more points to progress I will add one or both as necessary to your submissions page tomorrow before deciding who will progress. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:20, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks! As it stands, I've been knocked out of the 8 "fastest losers" category.  I've calculated that I need to claim only my Flag of New Brunswick DYK to progress.  Cheers! —Bloom6132 (talk) 00:30, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I have submitted Flag of New Brunswick as you requested. I have adjusted the score thus: (1.6x multiplier, 5 extra base points, 13 bonus points) = 29 points. I hope the bot will come through and confirm my calculations. Scoring for all competitors at this time is subject to confirmation. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:17, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Neodiprion lecontei
IronGargoyle (talk) 00:02, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

WikiCup 2017 July newsletter
The third round of the competition has finished in a flurry of last minute activity, with 288 points being required to qualify for round 4. It was a hotly competitive round with all but four of the contestants exceeding the 106 points that was necessary to proceed to round 4 last year. Coemgenus and Freikorp tied on 288, and both have been allowed to proceed, so round 4 now has one pool of eight competitors and one of nine.

Round 3 saw the achievement of a 26-topic Featured topic by MPJ-DK as well as 5 featured lists and 13 featured articles. PanagiotisZois and SounderBruce achieved their first ever featured articles. Carbrera led the GA score with 10, Tachs achieved 17 DYKs and MBlaze Lightning 10 In the news items. There were 167 DYKs, 93 GARs and 82 GAs overall, this last figure being higher than the number of GAs in round 2, when twice as many people were taking part. Even though contestants performed more GARs than they achieved GAs, there was still some frustration at the length of time taken to get articles reviewed.

As we start round 4, we say goodbye to the fifteen or so competitors who didn't quite make it; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them (some people have fallen foul of this rule and the points have been removed).

If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 05:37, 30 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Hello Cwmhiraeth! as you seem to be heavily involved with the WikiCup, I decided to come here. I am writing a piece on the WikiCup for The Signpost, and was wondering if you would allow me to use part of the WikiCup Newsletter for the piece, and if so, who I should attribute the text to. Thanks! Eddie891 Talk Work 12:09, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the slow response, I have been away for the weekend. You are welcome to use text from the newsletter for the Signpost. I wrote it but it was sent out on behalf of the three judges. I would be interested in seeing the proposed item before the Signpost is published, or can help with its preparation if you wish. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:06, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I apologize for the slow response myself, as I as away for the week. The item in question is located at Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/Wikicup any changes you would like to make are appreciated. Eddie891 Talk Work 20:44, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

A Voz do Brasil
...Heya, I had asked for a special request date on that DYK (July 22). Is there a reason it's being put in Prep now? Raymie (t • c) 05:52, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry! It hadn't been moved to the special holding area and I missed that request. I will put it there now. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:58, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Dendroctonus terebrans
IronGargoyle (talk) 00:03, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Rhizophagus grandis
IronGargoyle (talk) 00:03, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Karimata Strait
Cwmhiraeth, I was hoping you could return to your review here when you get the chance, now that the QPQ you requested has been submitted. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:09, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Hālaliʻi Lake, Halulu Lake
Hi, do you realize you promoted your own hook? Yoninah (talk) 19:16, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, but I did not review the nomination, and I made sure that someone else approved the hook that I suggested. Those are the important elements in my view, not who actually suggested the hook. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:37, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Since we're the only ones promoting hooks, I don't mind if you do the honors. But I was under the impression that if you write or review a hook, another editor should promote it. Yoninah (talk) 19:43, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Indeed. There's not a great deal of difference between suggesting to the nominator some facts they could use in a hook and suggesting the hook yourself. The third party review is the important thing in my view. When I am filling a prep set, I start at the top of the "Approved" list and work downwards. If you do likewise, we should be able to deal with most of them, as long as you avoid reviewing my nominations and I avoid reviewing yours. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:03, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Yoninah, that's been my impression, too. I think it's best practice, as well, going forward: don't promote a hook that you yourself suggested. There will be someone else around who can promote the hook, and it's always a good idea to get a third pair of eyes beyond the suggester and the reviewer. If the approve nomination's been sitting around for a while, then ping another promoter. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:17, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
 * OK, I will try to avoid doing it again. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:23, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Melanerpes
Hello! Your submission of Melanerpes at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 22:07, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Adam Clark (engineer)
Re: Template:Did you know nominations/Adam Clark (engineer), you promoted the article to the prep area with the hook "ALT2: ... that Scottish engineer Adam Clark spent ten years of his life building the Chain Bridge in Budapest?". That boils down to little more than "man built a bridge", which frankly is about the most boring hook imaginable. The reason I nominated the article at DYK was because of the unusualness of Clark's situation – British immigrants to Central/Eastern Europe are rare nowadays, let alone in the 19th century (as per this category and others like it). The fact that a Scotsman is regarded so highly in Hungary – not particularly known for its love of foreigners – is especially interesting and noteworthy. I would appreciate if the hook could be altered to reflect this, preferably to one of the ones I originally suggested. Marvello123 (talk) 16:53, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
 * OK, I will change it. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:21, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Technomyrmex albipes
Alex ShihTalk) 00:03, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Dendroctonus micans
Alex ShihTalk 00:03, 10 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi, great work with the articles as always. Sorry I totally missed the in prep 3, I apologize for the edit conflict. Alex ShihTalk 05:57, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
 * That's OK. I usually build the whole set before I save it, but knowing there would be an edit conflict in advance, enabled me to deal with it easily. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:07, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Melanerpes
Alex ShihTalk 12:02, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Golden-naped woodpecker
Alex ShihTalk 12:02, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Yellow-tufted woodpecker
Alex ShihTalk 12:02, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for White-fronted woodpecker
Alex ShihTalk 12:02, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Yellow-fronted woodpecker
Alex ShihTalk 12:02, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Promoting a stub
Montgomery Industrial School for Girls in prep 5 was tagged as a stub when you promoted it. I've fixed it but I thought you should know. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:44, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks, it is useful knowing that someone else is there, picking up things I miss. I wanted to completely rewrite the hook but managed to resist the temptation. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:22, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK help
Hey, I have a DYK nomination drowning in bureaucracy right now. I was hoping to have you review it, and in return I'll review one of your nominations. Thanks, alphalfalfa(talk) 06:45, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I have reviewed and passed the article at DYK. The next stage is that someone else will move it to a prep set prior to it appearing on the main page. This may take several weeks.


 * With regards to the article, it would be good to have a reference at the end of the main paragraph to show the source for the later information. Also, a useful tool is this Google books citation tool, which reduces the url of the Google book to a fraction of its original length. If you need any other help, please ask. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:57, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Acantholyda erythrocephala
Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:02, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you Sagecandor, it is much appreciated. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:40, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Leiopathes glaberrima
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:03, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Aiptasia pallida
Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:03, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Gonactinia
Alex ShihTalk 00:02, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 July 2017
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:48, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Edwardsiella
I think Edwardsiella (Edwardsiidae) would be better and correct to rename as Edwardsiella (sea anemone). Using related kingdom name rather than a family name to differentiate homonym genera seems correct as in Aotus (plant) vs Aotus (monkey) plus plenty such cases? Hanberke (talk) 08:19, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
 * If you find it is OK, I'll go through with disambig page and renaming. Hanberke (talk) 08:43, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I guess you are right. Pre-existing articles such as Edwardsiella andrillae and Edwardsiidae were already using that form so I did too. Is it worth changing? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:45, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I think, it is. One is Edwardsiella (sea anemone) and other is Edwardsiella (bacterium) + disambig page, otherwise mere family name (Edwardsiidae) would not add extra information to direct the users to what they are seeking for. Hanberke (talk) 09:13, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
 * OK, do you want to do it or shall I? I plan to write an article on Edwardsiella lineata shortly, which was why I created the genus article. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:24, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Almost done :) Hanberke (talk) 09:30, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Platypus cylindrus
 So Why  12:02, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Teleost scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the Teleost article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 2 August 2017. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Today's featured article/August 2, 2017. Thanks! Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 15:50, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Neodiprion pinetum
IronGargoyle (talk) 00:02, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

WP: BEETLES Barnstar!
Zakhx150 (talk) 12:18, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I do seem to have been beetling away and have had four beetle DYKs in the last month or so. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:46, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

FA nomination for Underwater Diving
Hi Cwmhiraeth, I want to put Underwater diving up for FA. This will be my first FA nomination, and while reading through the instructions again I saw the recommendation for taking advice from a mentor for first nomination. I see that you are on the list for general subjects and have seen your work often enough to be familiar with your username (I also do a little work in marine biology), so would appreciate if you would consider mentoring for this nomination. Cheers, • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 06:26, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for honouring me by making this request. I will be pleased to do some mentoring although I am not sure that I will be of much use. A brief inspection of the article shows that it is in pretty good shape. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:42, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I assume that my next step would be to nominate? &bull; &bull; &bull; Peter (Southwood) (talk): 19:39, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm about to stop for the night, but I will have a detailed look at the article tomorrow and see if I have anything to suggest before you nominate it. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:50, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
 * No rush. I will wait for your comments. &bull; &bull; &bull; Peter (Southwood) (talk): 05:51, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Underwater diving is now a featured article. Although there is no control to compare with, I feel your help made this possible on the first try, along with a rather good response all round from the reviewers. It was quite hard work, and a bit stressful at times, but I think it went well, and I think it illustrates the best side of Wikipedia. Thanks again for your mentoring and support at the review. Cheers, &bull; &bull; &bull; Peter (Southwood) (talk): 17:38, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Actinostola callosa
Alex ShihTalk 00:03, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Acropora rudis
IronGargoyle (talk) 12:57, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Eunice norvegica
Hello! Your submission of Eunice norvegica at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 15:48, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK promotion of Charmayne James
I just wanted to say thank you for promoting my DKY of Charmayne James to prep3. It's only my second DYK so I'm still wearing baby shoes. I appreciate it, and when I've become a knowledgeable editor of the process with many more DYKs on my belt, I hope I can return the favor. dawnleelynn (talk) 19:45, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Well I wish all our DYK articles were of such a high standard as yours. Are you going to nominate the article for GA? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:55, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

clavigera vs viridis
Following statement is from WoRMS link for Eulalia clavigera. "Often referred to Eulalia viridis (L. 1767), which is a boreal species, and as such specimens captured in the Channel and identified as E. viridis are according to Bonse et al. (1996) referrable to E. clavigera." Plus, acc to Google hits, both species are called as "green leaf/greenleaf/green-leaf" worm. I think, this point is worth to be considered. Hanberke (talk) 18:49, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
 * This page (A Student's Guide to the Seashore - Page 167) has detailed explanation. Hanberke (talk) 18:56, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
 * E. viridis seems to be the better known species, but I agree, we need to deal with the discrepancy. Do you have access to the full version of this? It is discussing the worm's feeding habits but the abstract does not mention what conclusion it comes to. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:31, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, no full access. I intend to add common name disambig page for these articles, yet I can't decide which form would be OK. Would you please advise "Green leaf/greenleaf/green-leaf" worm? Hanberke (talk) 04:03, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I would have thought it would be sufficient to make the redirect go to E. viridis and then point the reader to the correct article from there. The MARlin source states the worm can be 2.5 cm wide but I think it means 0.25 cm. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:06, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Oops, redirect is already there. That'd be sufficient I think.Hanberke (talk) 05:25, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I've added syn for both articles, with Cite error in reference part. May be you'd like to look at that. Hanberke (talk) 11:09, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:21, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
 * That's great, cheers. Hanberke (talk) 11:51, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

a request
Hi Cwmhiraeth, thanks for all do at DYK. About this nom and this diff, I like to request a rewording from "a musical education" back to the original "music". The article says "a musical education" so I understand why you phrased it so; however, in reading the source I am convinced that the goal of the eleven year old was primarily "playing music" in the school’s band, rather than "education". Though in the wiki article it makes sense to precede the school's name with the word "education". My request is akin to a suggestion, I yield to your opinion. Bammesk (talk) 18:59, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I had a look at the source and she did seem more interested in the all-female orchestra than in having a musical education, so I made the change in the hook. In the article, "piqued" is certainly better than "peaked"! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:21, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Definitely :-) Bammesk (talk) 19:37, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Liriomyza sativae
IronGargoyle (talk) 00:02, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Woodpecker
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Woodpecker you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dunkleosteus77 -- Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 06:00, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Prep 3
Two things, there were two Ghana bio hooks in that set so I moved one out, and secondly the article about Antimonium tungstate seems to have serious concerns over whether the drug was ever actually called "Antimonium tungstate" (as evidenced by the inline tag and discussion on the talk page from a week ago) so I'd suggest you pull that back to noms until it's resolved. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:08, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I see you have moved the secong Ghanaian bio hook, thank you. Rather than pull the other hook, I will look into the naming matter and move the page, as discussed on the talk page, if that seems best. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:54, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Plumapathes pennacea
Hi, I just promoted this hook to Prep 4. Do you want to add anything about the black coral barnacle growing on Plumapathes pennacea to the black coral barnacle article? Yoninah (talk) 15:46, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:55, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Yoninah (talk) 19:51, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Gorgonia mariae
Alex ShihTalk 00:02, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

iBuyPower and NetcodeGuides match fixing scandal
I hate to sound like a broken record, but I also had a date request on this one. Was it too far out or did you just not see it? Raymie (t • c) 18:13, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that, I didn't see it. What I'm concentrating on when promoting hooks is whether the nomination has a valid tick, which hook has been approved, does the source back up the hook, is the hook comprehensible and is it appropriate as part of the balanced set I am creating? It would probably be wise, if you have other hooks wanted to run on a particular date, if you organised the moving of the nomination to the special holding area. I will move it there now. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:26, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Colletes halophilus
Hi, thank you for reviewing this DYK nomination. I have responded and hope I have answered your points. Shouldn't you have put the relevant template on my alerts. Sorry, I am relatively new to this DYK process. Quetzal1964 (talk)  19:51, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Plumapathes pennacea
Alex ShihTalk 00:03, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Oxynaspis gracilis
Alex ShihTalk 00:03, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

CAMS 54
Thanks for the DYK nomination of that article. It might be better, though, to call the flight a trans-Atlantic attempt, as they only got as far as the Azores. That was a long over-water flight in those days; the intention was to stop there, refuel, and fly on. Cheers,TSRL (talk) 10:27, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
 * OK. I will change the proposed hook. The article came to my attention because I looked you up after noticing your citation needed tag in Grasshopper. DYK needs article creators like you! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:35, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Paranthus rapiformis
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:03, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Thank you Comment
This is just to say thank you for your work on Template:Did you know nominations/David Asante-Apeatu. Greatly appreciate it. God bless. Cross Temple  Jay  09:34, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Woodpecker
The article Woodpecker you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Woodpecker for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dunkleosteus77 -- Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 19:21, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Eunice norvegica
Alex ShihTalk 00:03, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Prep 4
Hi, thanks for filling Prep 4. You could find another bio for the set at my nomination, Template:Did you know nominations/Florence E. Bamberger. Best, Yoninah (talk) 18:44, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
 * There seems to be a shortage of bios at the moment. I thought Prep 4 was quite well balanced so I have added your hook to Prep 5. Meanwhile, please note that a number of the older approved nominations were reviewed by me and need to be promoted by someone else. I am happy to review some extra nominations, but that is not so good if nobody then promotes them. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:19, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
 * OK. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 19:55, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Busy searching out your reviews... You could go ahead and approve Template:Did you know nominations/Boruto Uzumaki, since you just rephrased the nominator's ALT2, and then I'll promote it. :) Yoninah (talk) 20:09, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Dostana (2008 film)
Your ping isn't showing and I can't gt my tick to show. SL93 (talk) 00:20, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Something very odd was happening with that template. Both my edit and your edits show in the history but are / were not visible on the screen. Very strange. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:01, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Diadumene leucolena
Alex ShihTalk 00:02, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Allantactis
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
 * That was a very good little article, I enjoyed reading it. Abductive  (reasoning) 18:30, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you. It was an interesting species. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:44, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Anthozoa
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Anthozoa you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dunkleosteus77 -- Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 04:40, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Anthozoa
The article Anthozoa you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Anthozoa for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dunkleosteus77 -- Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:41, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Liriomyza huidobrensis
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you for the honour! Your participation in writing the article was most helpful. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:28, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Edwardsiella lineata
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:04, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Haloclava producta
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:05, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 5 August 2017
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Tebyan Cultural Institute
Hello. Thanks for indicating the references for this article. I have added them to its page on Wikipedia.Amidewiki (talk) 06:59, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Diopatra cuprea
Alex ShihTalk 00:02, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

DYKs
I mostly like to make some changes such as adding pics, species authority wikilinks, templates, synonyms, common names to newly created articles and sometimes some additional info, plus typos etc. It is just a hobby for me. Recently your courtesy regarding my such contributions, my talk page now has a number of DYKs. Please feel free not to nominate me in DYKs, if not obligatory, unless I made a considerable contribution. Cheers! Hanberke (talk) 06:24, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Seems fair enough. Thank you for your useful contributions. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:34, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK for CAMS 54
Alex ShihTalk 00:04, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Banded woodpecker
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:03, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

Request (low priority)
I see that the William A. Starrett nomination has been placed in Prep 6. That is great! Just throwing this idea out = if it were in #1 position with the Empire State building picture, I believe it would get a high number of hits. If its too late to change that, that is alright. Or if you feel it is better where it is, that's fine with me = as it will be #495 DYK for me. Like I say it is low priority and I am just throwing the idea out for the #1 slot position. I accept your judgement on this. Thanks.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:24, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
 * It's a bit of a fine judgement call. There are always more image nominations than #1 slots. Some nominations need their images to make sense, others, like this one they are optional. This article is about a man not a building, and that influenced me too. Then there is the question of whether people specifically asking for image slots should have priority over those that don't. Your articles are always interesting and worthwhile and they have had their fair share of image slots in the past, but on this occasion this one lost out to another nomination (the footballer was already in the image slot when I added the rest of the hooks). Sorry! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:10, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for reply and explanation. Yes, I know I have had several in the image slot and appreciate that. I'll keep making some more DYKs and hope to have my 500 Ribbon Award by the end of the year.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 10:35, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Syllis ramosa
Seems a massive shame not to have used the fact it was the first such worm discovered with one mouth and multiple anuses. That would definitely be interesting! The Rambling Man (talk) 08:15, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Indeed. The worm is quite bizarre in other ways too. How about


 * ALT1 ... that the branched worm Syllis ramosa lives inside a deepwater sponge and has a single mouth and many anuses? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:39, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I think banging my "broad audience" drum, us non-specialists would definitely find the latter fact more interesting than the former, so combining is a good compromise. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:42, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I had better not change the hook in the prep area without formal approval. Do you want to mention it on the DYK discussion page or shall I copy this thread there? The new hook would be best in the quirky spot anyway. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:56, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Copy this thread, it shows you're in agreement, the new hook etc, it's just a formality. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:27, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

GAN stuff
Hey Cwmhiraeth, not sure where you are on reviewing others' GANs if they aren't in the wikicup (I washed out this time already, dang), my Mission Mountain Wood Band article has been languishing for months and needs someone to review it. Montanabw (talk) 23:17, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
 * As you mention, I avoid reviewing anything by a current WikiCup competitor, but I will have a go at your one, even though bands are not my scene at all. Could you reciprocate by filling a prep set, using some of the oldest approved nominations, the ones that I can't promote because I have approved them. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:10, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Woodpecker
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:47, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Wildlife of Turkmenistan
Hello! Your submission of Wildlife of Turkmenistan at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! GregorB (talk) 12:04, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Corythucha ciliata
Vanamonde (talk) 00:02, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Syllis ramosa
Alex ShihTalk 00:03, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Animal husbandry
Hello! Your submission of Animal husbandry at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Cognissonance (talk | contibs) 10:44, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Ophiothrix angulata
Hello! Your submission of Ophiothrix angulata at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 21:05, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

You made me laugh
I love your Syllis ramosa DYK! Your hooks were amazing. Thanks for all the stuff you create. Your fan, Barbara (WVS) ✐   ✉  23:55, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks Barbara. I really enjoy finding out about these strange creatures, and they do add variety to DYK. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:03, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Polydora ciliata
Alex ShihTalk 00:02, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Eulalia viridis
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Pest control
Hi, hope you had a good summer. Do you fancy bringing Pest control to GA with me? We already did Biological pest control. The article isn't in too bad a state but has some uncited generalities in the early sections, and is subject to mild attempts at advertising. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:25, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
 * OK. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:21, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
 * If I were writing the article from scratch, I think I would arrange it differently, dividing it by type of pest rather than its present arrangement by type of pest control. Headings might be Crop pests, Pests of goods in storage, Rodents, Insect pests (mosquitoes, cockroaches, fleas) etc. but I can see that that approach has its disadvantages and overlaps too. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:01, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
 * We can do it either way. I guess that given the topic is control, type of control is the logical division of choice. To some extent it reflects type of pest, too. A heading like 'insect pests' overlaps pests of storage and of crops so that wouldn't be good, but a division into crop methods, storage methods etc is sensible, and would result in fewer main sections than at present. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:36, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
 * OK. I'll make a start tomorrow. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:58, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I would like to limit pest control to animal pests. I'm not sure about endo- and ecto-parasites, are they pests? Alternatively one could consider weeds, certain fungi, bacteria, viruses etc as pests, but I think that is stretching things. I have rewritten the lead to express my view. What do you think? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:43, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, very wise. This matches the Oxford definition, but alas Pest uses the (obsolete? American?) definition which includes plants and plague. I suggest we at least wikilink the Oxford def. here and we might wish to do something about the other article, at least pointing out there are alternative meanings. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:28, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

I've boldly split Crop vs Urban, I think this makes more sense of the material. I fear we'll have to delete and rewrite quite a bit of it. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:52, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Good move. I'm going to concentrate on the agricultural part for the time being. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:03, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Ok, I'll leave you to it and see what you did later. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:07, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

I see you've added a section on controlling birds. However, the other sections in the urban chapter focus on methods: it's alone in focusing on a target group. Further, bird control arguably applies in the countryside also. Do you think we should have a third chapter on groups (controlling insects, birds, rodents, ...)? That would face the question of overlap with the other two chapters... on the whole I think we should merge bird control into the other existing subsections (bait, etc). Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:57, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, I knew it was wrong! Feel free to reorganise anything I do. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:04, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * :) Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:13, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I have created a section on Pantry pests, and plan to do clothes moths, carpet beetle, bookworms, furniture beetles etc which really don't fit into the present structure. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:17, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
 * In that case, all of those should go in a subsection "Household pests" within the existing Urban section. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:05, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Having said that, the section (listing and describing household pests) fits uneasily (coatrackishly...) within the article. I wonder if we shouldn't split it out leaving a main link and a brief summary. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:25, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
 * this was definitely the right move! Peter coxhead (talk) 08:35, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I am not sure that I agree because I like the article as it is (or at least the article up to and including "Household pests"), but I will leave the matter in your capable hands. If you want to hive off the household pests section, the main article will need additional sections on the exclusion of pests, other pest control methods, hygiene, bird deterrence (could include airfields) etc. What is the average reader looking for when they visit Pest control? If they want to know about fumigation, wouldn't they go straight there? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:57, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
 * No, I mean we hive off the description of the list of pests, leaving the control measures. Alternatively we may be able to merge item-by-item so there's a link and a very brief description of each type of pest, with the measures used to control it. I'm not suggesting cutting the entire household section, if you read what I said again. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:10, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, I dunno. It's certainly not a COATRACK, but I agree that the article's structure is not ideal, but it seems to me that you are proposing removing what I feel are important parts of the article. You need to know something about the lifestyle of a pest before you attempt to control it. Why don't you copy the article into a sandbox, sort it out as you think fit and see how it would end up. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:46, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Not sure what I could do with it. We agree, I think, that the section is out of line with the structure of the other sections (agriculture etc) where we don't describe all the groups of pests, either separately or merged. I agree it isn't a classic coatrack, but it's uncomfortable nonetheless. Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:22, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
 * OK. You can do what you like. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:32, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

I think we need to find a solution together as it's not very obvious what would be best here. I've suggested a general vs specific methods approach (in the article now) which may roughly work, perhaps now requiring copy-editing. What do you think of that? Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:09, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I think it is good. Shall we leave it at that? I think the article is a great improvement over its original state. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:15, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Ok, you mean you want to nominate it now? Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:24, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Only with your agreement. If we do, I suggest I nominate it as you have several articles waiting for reviews already. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:30, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Incidentally, the article Ostreopsis which is a DYK today, might be relevant to the plight of beach-goers who experienced ill health in an incident at Birling Gap recently. My sister-in-law lives a few miles inland from there and had to use her inhaler for the first time in several years. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:37, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * OK, go right ahead. Interesting to hear about Ostreopsis. Hope your sister-in-law is better now. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:37, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Ophiothrix angulata
Alex ShihTalk 00:03, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Alderia modesta
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Promoting a stub
We've been here before, haven't we? In this edit you promoted a stub. Please stop doing that. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:57, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
 * And again. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:32, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't think much of your second example. I checked that article and was amazed to find that anyone thought it B class, and because it was 1491B in length, I added a couple of words to bring it over the 1500 mark. So what's the problem? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:48, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * It was marked as a stub. Come on. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:58, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Da iawn. :) Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:14, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Solecurtus strigilatus
Alex ShihTalk 00:02, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

FIlmography section of Cátulo Castillo
You just promoted this but a whole section is unreferenced and (not by me) tagged. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:27, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Sure. It is not a dispute tag which is what Rule D6 is referring to. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:39, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry, plese see D2. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:47, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Wildlife of Turkmenistan
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

WikiCup 2017 September newsletter
Round 4 of the WikiCup has ended and we move forward into the final round. In round 4, a total of 12 FAs, 3 FLs, 44 GAs, 3 FLs, 79 DYKs, 1 ITN and 42 GARs was achieved, with no FPs or FTs this time. Congratulations to Peacemaker67 on the Royal Yugoslav Navy Good Topic of 36 items, and the 12 featured articles achieved by Cas Liber (5), Vanamonde93 (3), Peacemaker67 (2), Adityavagarwal (1) and 12george1 (1). With a FA scoring 200 points, and bonus points available on top of this, FAs are likely to feature heavily in the final round. Meanwhile Yellow Evan, a typhoon specialist, was contributing 12 DYKs and 10 GAs, while Adityavagarwal and Freikorp topped the GAR list with 8 reviews each. As we enter the final round, we are down to eight contestants, and we would like to thank those of you who have been eliminated for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia. The lowest score needed to reach round 5 was 305, and I think we can expect a highly competitive final round.

Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews Needed. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck, and let the best man (or woman) win! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 06:26, 1 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Well I'm back. Hello Cwmhiraeth! as you seem to be heavily involved with the WikiCup, I decided to come here. I am writing a piece on the WikiCup for The Signpost, and was wondering if you would allow me to use part of the WikiCup Newsletter for the piece, and if so, who I should attribute the text to. Thanks! Eddie891 Talk Work 14:23, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I hate to bother you again, but it appears that User:Yellow Evan's DYK for Typhoon Hattie was counted twice. It there a reason for that, or is it a mistake? Eddie891 Talk Work 15:56, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Looking at my user talk page, it appears to be my mistake. With so many DYK's, it can get confusing. YE <sup style="color:#666660;">Pacific <sup style="color:#666660;">Hurricane  16:02, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I noticed that it was claimed twice but the clever bot seems to have realised this and only gave the points once, so that Yellow Evan got credited with 12 DYKs rather than the 13 claimed. As for your original questions, yes you can use the text of the newsletter, and you can attribute it to me. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:46, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Well, thank you. A problem at the moment is that I am ineligible to promote so many of the older approved hooks because I have reviewed the nominations, suggested hooks etc, which means that I have to promote newer hooks and nobody promotes the older ones. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:35, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I see. I'll look through these older approved hooks sometime today and build some sets too. Alex ShihTalk 06:42, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Some words of appreciation from TRM, one of my other fans! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:29, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Prep 6 hook promotion
Hi, you forgot to close the template for Template:Did you know nominations/Donald Trump's handshakes. Yoninah (talk) 14:41, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Ostreopsis
Alex ShihTalk 00:03, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Animal husbandry
Hello! Your submission of Animal husbandry at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 21:45, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 September 2017
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:44, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Palythoa toxica
Alex ShihTalk 00:04, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Bare URLs again again
Here in Honyestewa. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:24, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
 * If you care to look at the instructions for promoters on the Preps and Queues page immediately above the first prep set you will see some instructions that start:

1) Check to make sure basic review requirements were completed.
 * Select a hook from the nominations page that has a tick as the bottom post
 * a. Any outstanding issue following the tick needs to be addressed before promoting.

None of the other instructions is relevant to your complaints. I understand instruction 1 to mean that I should check that the reviewer completed the basic review requirements, not that I should recheck whether they are all met. Things you sometimes mention - bare urls, stub status, orphan status, lead too short, unreferenced paragraph, interestingness of the hook, etc are not the duty of the promoter to check. Nor is the length, date of creation or expansion, hook length, copyright issues, plagiarism, neutrality, image licensing in article or anything else that the reviewer should be checking, none of these things are part of my duties as a promoter. My duty is to select a hook, check the hook facts and their sourcing, check the image licensing if it is a hook with image, and create a balanced set of hooks.

So please stop telling me to do things that I am not required to do. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:52, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm no telling you to do anything, just reminding you that you continually promote hooks that fail basic DYK requirements whether you think it's your responsibility or otherwise. Plain statements of fact. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:36, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Another stub promoted here. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:50, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Have to keep you on your toes! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:30, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Bonnemaisonia hamifera
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Flabellum curvatum
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:04, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Phyllodoce mucosa
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Tubulanus polymorphus
Alex ShihTalk 00:02, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Ramisyllis multicaudata
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Mussidae
Alex ShihTalk 12:03, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Manicina
Alex ShihTalk 12:03, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sea anemone
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Sea anemone you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:21, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Pavona maldivensis
Alex ShihTalk 12:03, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sea anemone
The article Sea anemone you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Sea anemone for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:02, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Animal husbandry DYK
I've replied to Fram's comments with a fuller quote - his was selective, giving a misleading result. I think both the paragraph in the article and the hook have it exactly right, but it would be good to support this from more sources, both in the article and on the DYK talk page - these will have to be top quality and unrelated to partisan groups like CIWF who of course have their own axe to grind. Would be glad if you could lend a hand, I'm very busy! The other possibility is to try another hook, of course. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:19, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Forget it! Go and do something more useful instead. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:34, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I seem to be making a mess. If that's what you meant, then yes, I should leave it alone, in fact, I'd already (too late) decided to do just that. Chiswick Chap (talk)
 * In my experience, it is impossible to win an argument with Fram, and it is generally unclear whether anyone else agrees with Fram's point of view. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:42, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Ah. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:54, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Or, to put it more accurately, "it is" nearly "impossible" for Cwmhiraeth "to win an argument with Fram", and usually a lot of other people agree with my point of view. Attempts by Cwmhiraeth to get some action against me for my DYK comments failed miserably. I have no problem admitting when I am wrong, but Cwmhiraeth usually fails to show that I am wrong or that they are right, hence the frustration. Fram (talk) 10:05, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your comments, Fram. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:10, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Japanese bamboo weaving
Hallo Cwmhiraeth, could you please help again with filling out the bare urls? I am not good at this. Thank you. Gryffindor (talk) 11:58, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Done. I just fed the article into the REFLINKS tool, https://tools.wmflabs.org/refill/ . It doesn't work with all unformatted urls, but it seems to work with yours. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:26, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Birds' Head Haggadah
Hi, thanks for promoting my hook to Prep 4. Please remember to close the nomination. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 19:45, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
 * What happened there was that I forgot at first to add the main page image to the prep set, and when I went back to add it, I thought I had already closed the nomination but had not in fact done so. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:55, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Housefly
Cwmhiraeth, knowing your affection for things pestilential, do you fancy working on Housefly with me? Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:32, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
 * You got in first! I was just about to suggest that we work on Mite, but I am happy to do housefly first. I will make a start on the Description section. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:29, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Excellent! There are pests enough to go round. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:39, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I have briefly started a taxonomy section, and used an excellent online book by Hewitt. I suspect it will be cited many times to different pages, and there is material in the introduction that could be the basis for a history section. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:24, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I did not get far with the Taxonomy section, but am basically about finished with the article. I did a section on Control but I am not sure where in the article it should go. It would be nice to have a better in situ image of larvae and pupae as I don't think much of the present one, but I couldn't find one. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:00, 26 September 2017 (UTC)


 * OK, I've put the taxonomy with the evolution and phylogeny, should be all right for a species article. Image choice was indeed a bit restricted, I've done my best here. Could always grow and hatch some larvae of course. I think we're ready. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:12, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
 * It needs a reference for the last sentence in the "In literature" section. I have my doubts whether the larvae image shows cow manure, it is too dry and fine, and looks more like poultry litter to me. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:22, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
 * OK, and I'll do a finer-grained cladogram too. Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:51, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Perhaps there should be something on feeding, in particular of the lapping mouthparts and how food is partially digested and then sucked up? A detailed photo and maybe a diagram of the proboscis would be worthwile in that context. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:48, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I will add some information. I just ran Mite through Earwig and had concerning results so I have queried the article at the Copyright problems noticeboard but I am not sure I have done it right. I see you posted there three days ago about another matter. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:14, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, there's been a lot of flaky practice in the past. I've added a mouthparts image, maybe I can find a better one. Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:58, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I think the other "mite" sites may have copied the Wikipedia article. With regard to Housefly, the bit I added was in the Ecology section but I ought to reconsider that. On my screen, the mouthparts image pinches the electron microscope image, and I wouldn't mind getting rid of the latter, which doesn't look much at thumbnail size though better when enlarged. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:31, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Do you think Housefly is ready for GAN? And by the way, Pest control is under review. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:12, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I hadn't seen. I haven't done the lit. refs, maybe if you're feeling strong .... Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:25, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:48, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Well, we've nearly doubled it in length and quadrupled it in quality. I've added a bit for the evo-devo control of sex determination, so I think it's ready. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:09, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Good. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:35, 28 September 2017 (UTC)


 * I just noticed that PC isn't fully cited. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:44, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

We haven't got around to nominating this. Is now the time? I seem to have lots in the queue so maybe you could do the honours? Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:55, 30 October 2017 (UTC)


 * I have nominated it now. What about Host (biology), are we giving that one a miss? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:45, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Many thanks. I think Host (biology) is nearly ready, but the 'Definitive and secondary hosts' section remains too listy, and the containing 'Parasitism' section is lacking a lead paragraph to get the whole thing started. We ought to be able to fix those things. I'll get started. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:01, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Protoblepharon rosenblatti
— Maile (talk) 12:02, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did_you_know_nominations/19-2_(2014_TV_series)
Yes, basing a 2014 television episode off of a 2016 event does seem improbable. Thanks for noticing that. --Usernameunique (talk) 05:32, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Thekla M. Bernays
Cwmhiraeth, there is no exception that I'm aware of for holding hooks beyond the six-week special occasion limit aside from April Fool's, which runs under very different rules from the rest of the holidays. Unless a new consensus develops, I plan to remove this hook from the special occasion section in the next 48 hours. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:17, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
 * As you wish. It seems a pretty pointless rule and it would have been an excellent hook for Christmas. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:22, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Diodora aspera
Alex ShihTalk 00:36, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Arctonoe vittata
Alex ShihTalk 00:38, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Layal Abboud
You promoted to a prep here yet her article has basic DYK failings, particularly with regard to referencing. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:25, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Also Bakyt Torobayev (in the same promotion) has a bare URL. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:35, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
 * It is good that we have someone like you who picks up errors that others miss. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 04:54, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks!
Hi Cwmhiraeth, thank you for your comments at my RfA. Your support is much appreciated! ansh 666 21:42, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Synapta maculata
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Tubulanus superbus
Alex ShihTalk 12:03, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Tubulanus annulatus
Alex ShihTalk 12:03, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Sea anemone
Hello! Your submission of Sea anemone at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Johnbod (talk) 16:44, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK for São Tomé and Príncipe at the 2016 Summer Olympics
Alex ShihTalk 00:02, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Saccoglossus bromophenolosus
Alex ShihTalk 00:02, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 September 2017
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:19, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Oxenfree
Alex ShihTalk 01:32, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Rhine Campaign of 1796
— Maile (talk) 01:03, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Oligotoma saundersii
— Maile (talk) 01:03, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Cerebratulus lacteus
Hello! Your submission of Cerebratulus lacteus at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! hinnk (talk) 03:37, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject Women in Red/The World Contest
Hi. Thankyou for your participation in the challenge series or/and contests. In November The Women in Red World Contest is being held to try to produce new articles for as many countries worldwide and occupations as possible. There will be over $4000 in prizes to win, including Amazon vouchers and paid subscriptions. If this would appeal to you and you think you'd be interested in contributing new articles on women during this month for your region or wherever please sign up in the participants section. If you're not interested in prize money yourself but are willing to participate and raise money to buy books about women for others to use, this is also fine. Thankyou, and if taking part, good luck!♦ Dr. Blofeld  14:52, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

I know it won't appeal to you, but maybe aomething you could tie to your general work like women botanists or something!♦ Dr. Blofeld  14:52, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Pest control
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Pest control you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kostas20142 -- Kostas20142 (talk) 15:20, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Pest control
The article Pest control you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Pest control for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kostas20142 -- Kostas20142 (talk) 15:22, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Phyllophora antarctica
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:19, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Iothia emarginuloides
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:19, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Plain-breasted piculet
Alex ShihTalk 04:03, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Gastropteridae
— Maile (talk) 03:48, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Alice (Alice's Adventures in Wonderland)
Alex ShihTalk 03:32, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Animal husbandry
Alex ShihTalk 03:33, 5 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Well done! Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:22, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Barn Owl Barnstar

 * Thank you. The taxonomical changes going on are not really things that interest me much and I feel the good folks at WikiProject Birds are better able to respond to them than me. I prefer describing a bird's behaviour rather than discussing whether the subspecies on remote island X is identical to the mainland bird or should be considered a separate species. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:28, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Ooh, nice one, Cwm. Vanamonde (talk) 10:52, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

DYK background colour
Hi, Cwmhiraeth, I was wondering why you picked the white-background version of the image for Template:Did you know/Preparation area 6; the discussion had narrowly plumped for a black background, as the black bits of the image are actually a transparent support. HLHJ (talk) 00:18, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I didn't consider that the discussion favoured the black background which is much inferior in my view because of the dark result from which it is difficult to pick out the detail of the helmet. The blue is better but the background is a bit overpowering rather than being neutral, and grey might be better. I can change the image if necessary. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:07, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Quatre Motets sur des thèmes grégoriens
Re: Template:Did you know nominations/Quatre Motets sur des thèmes grégoriens - You didn't have to donate a qpq, - thanks for offering, but I did one. Checking of the other criteria was questioned. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:47, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Indeed you were blameless, it was Futurist110 who had not done a proper QPQ of your nomination that I was talking about. I'm not supposed to promote anything that does not have a tick for the last symbol. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:00, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Corella eumyota
Alex ShihTalk 02:47, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Nature hooks
Hi. Until now, as a matter of course, I try to have only one nature hook in a prep set. But I'm seeing a huge number of nature hooks on the Approved page right now, so I just put two into Prep 3 and will not make any changes if you start doubling up on them in coming prep sets. We really have to get through this backlog! Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 23:07, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Sure, but there is a wider problem. I try to promote the oldest nominations first, working through the list progressively, but as I can't promote nominations I have reviewed, nominations for which I have suggested the hook or my own nominations, there is a backlog of nominations that I cannot promote. You are virtually the only other person that promotes hooks but you obviously select nominations to promote in a different way, and three of the nominations you just promoted to Prep 3 were nominated in the past six days, including one nominated on 6 October. I would have left these ones take their turn. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:18, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I hear you. You should know, though, that when I start building a prep set, I first search on your name on the Approved page and try to promote articles that you've written or reviewed. But since the majority of these are nature hooks, and I'm only going to promote one or two of those per set, I'm left with 6 other slots to fill. I also find that newer nominations, for some reason, are less complicated than older ones and easier to promote! Yoninah (talk) 13:07, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Promotion to DYK
Hi! I nominated Fawad Khan for DYK and it've been approved. It'd be kind of you to consider promoting it. Template:Did you know nominations/Fawad Khan. Thanks Amirk94391 (talk) 14:42, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I usually promote the older hooks first, but there are only about forty approved hooks altogether so it shouldn't be long before your nomination gets promoted. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:01, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Echinophyllia aspera
Hello! Your submission of Echinophyllia aspera at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 23:31, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Pocillopora elegans
Hello! Your submission of Pocillopora elegans at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 23:39, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Syllis prolifera
Hello! Your submission of Syllis prolifera at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 23:52, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Cerebratulus lacteus
Alex ShihTalk 01:32, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Sea anemone
— Maile (talk) 01:17, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Pest control
Alex ShihTalk 01:02, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Murder of Victoria Martens
Cwmhiraeth, this was pulled from prep by Ritchie333, but apparently it didn't get added back onto the nominations page at the time, and I'm guessing you didn't see the nominator's replies to you.

Can you take a look to see whether the new hooks are any good? I was thinking that this should probably be restored to the nominations page (definitely not the approved page) despite its age, since this was a new nominator and not their fault it was sidelined. I've found a few others that also disappeared after being pulled from prep, and I'm in the process of getting them active again. Thanks for your help. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:43, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Will do. Thank you for doing this sort of behind-the-scenes job. It's a pity that people are more keen to pull hooks than they are to return them to their rightful place for reconsideration. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 04:59, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
 * People do what it takes to preserve the integrity of the main page. They are not responsible for doing anything else.  The arcane machinations of DYK and inadequate reviews are the problems, not those who seek to maintain quality. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:36, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
 * It's good to have you back. :-) Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:41, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Anthrenus scrophulariae
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:46, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Konomi Suzuki
Hello, considering you're active over at DYK, and this nomination has tentatively been approved, would it be alright for you to move this to the special holding area, per the comment I left at the nomination? I would do it myself, but considering I was the DYK nominator, I'm not sure if that's allowed. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 15:18, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:43, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Mite
It seems we're about done with scratching this one. Do you feel like nominating it? Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:40, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
 * OK. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:01, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Host (biology)
I seem to be into scratchy things today (see above if I've distracted you with this edit). The Host article is basically a scrappy list of WP:DICDEFs, and to be honest while I can cite it if I need something dull and soothing to do instead of scratching my nose, I can't see any way of making a silk purse out of it. Merge it to parasite, perhaps? I think it'd mainly be broken up into footnotes even there, though it might just about warrant a subsection. It applies to parasitoid too, of course, though nowadays that's seen as a kind of parasite, which seems reasonable. Ideas? Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:46, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I'll take a look tomorrow. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:59, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The article is almost exclusively about parasitism. Unless you take a view that bugs such as aphids are parasites, the use of the term goes much wider than just parasitism. I am inclined to expand the article to incorporate non-parasitic usage. There are masses of pages that link to it so it would be a pity to merge it with anything. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:28, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, its problem is that it covers a whole host (oops, no pun intended) of things, weakly connected, so that it reads as a list of definitions. Let's expand then. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:32, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
 * OK, I've found a useful source and will initiate a non-parasitic section. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:35, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I will leave this for today so that we don't trip over each other. I think it is improved almost beyond recognition! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:07, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
 * It's immeasurably better. However, what we've made is basically an inverted form of the article on Symbiosis (sensu largo, i.e. any kind of partnership) ... but it has a different feeling and scope, so perhaps it can stand. Feel free to carry on, I'll leave you to it. Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:12, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I am on something else now and will return tomorrow. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:16, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure whether an orchid and its specialist pollinator bee can be considered as a host relationship. Nor the cleaning station interaction you have introduced. Nor am I happy with the present layout of the article. If I were starting it from scratch I would include a more general section on host / parasite relationships not a series of definitions. I would start with a statement something like this "The biological definition of a host is an organism that harbours another organism inside or near its body in a symbiotic relationship." I wouldn't put parasitism first. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:46, 20 October 2017 (UTC)


 * A lot of points, and on the starting from scratch bit, and on the definition list, I certainly agree.


 * On the parasitism, I think it would be fair to say that most biologists if told "host" would immediately think "parasite", and then move on to commensalism and mutualism (of which cleaning symbiosis is an interesting subtype), so it seems a very reasonable order, but we can vary if need be.


 * On the cleaning symbiosis, biologists often call a cleaner's client a host, for instance here which says "For example, a cleaner fish eats parasites in the mouth of the host fish." This too seems a very reasonable usage, given that (as with the host of a parasite or a commensal) the cleaner's client is usually much the larger organism.


 * On pollinators and host plants, this is a very common usage (around 400,000 Google hits). For instance, The chemical basis of host-plant recognition in a specialized bee pollinator. Again, it is natural to think of the plant as the pollinator's host as the pollinator behaves like a guest, visiting a large food-rich hotel.


 * Hope these thoughts help a little. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:44, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

I shall be out of town for a week now. I've made a short 'Symbiosis' section to start the article: it needs to be extended somehow to give an overview of what being a host means in general, and ideally how the idea started from (medical) parasitology and spread to commensalism and mutualism. We agree we'd like the parasite section to be less listy: I think the way to do that will be to discuss the nature of the basic host-parasite relationship (one gives, the other takes) and how that can vary (parasite evolution favours killing the host more slowly if it's a long-term relationship, so it moves towards mutualism; fixed parasites face problem of dispersal to other hosts, hence use of vectors and intermediate hosts - so the other types then fit in logically instead of being list items).

All of this will bring the article closer and closer to being a fork of Symbiosis, so we should consider whether we shouldn't simply redirect to there and extend its coverage of the host side of things. Of course, if we think that doing that would make Symbiosis#Host unduly long, then we'd want to split that section here and introduce it with a Host#Symbiosis section and main link that briefly but accurately summarised the Symbiosis article... which tells us how the article should be structured, if it is to exist at all. Curious to know what you think of this... Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:40, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
 * As it happens, I was just looking at the articles Mutualism (biology) (with disfavour) and Symbiosis and I agree with the outline in your first paragraph and will work on it. As for the second paragraph, I would have thought a brief summary of the Symbiosis article here would be appropriate. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:59, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
 * OK, let's work with that. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:26, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

The table at http://esapubs.org/archive/ecol/E092/066/Table3C.htm is interesting - I think we've covered most of it in the various parasite articles but it's a useful reference. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:06, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Echinophyllia aspera
Alex ShihTalk 00:32, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Oxypora lacera
Alex ShihTalk 00:32, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Lineus sanguineus
Alex ShihTalk 00:20, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Question at DYK
I don't go to DYK all that much, but recently my nomination was promoted, however I don't see it on the approved page or the queue page. Am I missing it or am I crazy or did something get wonky? -- T orsodo g Talk 13:48, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
 * It is currently in Queue 3 on this page and is scheduled to go live tomorrow. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 14:08, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Colorado potato beetle
Hello! Your submission of Colorado potato beetle at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 17:31, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Horastrea
Alex ShihTalk 00:04, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Spanish copyright issues question
Hi, Cwmhiraeth. Thanks for reviewing my DYK nomination! I was just curious about one thing: what do you mean by copyright issues from Spanish-language sources? Cheers, MX ( ✉  •  ✎  ) 14:07, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
 * When the sources for an article are in a foreign language, checking the article through the Earwig tool would not throw up any useful results. There could however still be copyright issues with such an article, close paraphrasing for example if it was directly translated from a source. I was using the foreign language difficulty as an excuse for not checking copyright issues. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:36, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you. My understanding was that translating a source from Spanish to English in your own words would not count as close paraphrasing since it is "new" content. Direct translations don't often read correctly, but these issues are probably more common in languages that have similar roots. I'll keep this in mind moving forward. Cheers, MX ( ✉  •  ✎  ) 18:15, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
 * It would still definitely be close paraphrasing if all you'd done was to translate something and then treat it as your own/Wikipedia's words. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:21, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree. If an article in the Spanish Wikipedia was for example a copyvio and you translated it directly into English, I think that would also be a copyvio. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:24, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I just found something at the close paraphrasing policy page. It seems like it isn't clear about this. It says that translations are acceptable only when they are simple fact statements, just as long as there is no creative expression translation (see here). Thoughts? MX ( ✉  •  ✎  ) 18:28, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
 * If you translate a simple fact like "Marquez was born in Colombia", which can hardly be worded significantly differently, nobody is going to complain. If the translated material is more complex, you'd better attribute it, naming the author in your text and deciding whether to paraphrase or quote. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:38, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

DYK

 * Well, thank you Fitindia, you don't do too badly there yourself ! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:51, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Coprinus sterquilinus
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Krishna
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Gott sei gelobet
Please get the hymn back from prep, - I would like to see it on Reformation Day, as a comment says. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:32, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

I'd recommend Template:Did you know nominations/Den Herren will ich loben instead, which should be in October, but NOT that day, or even close, so the sooner the better ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:37, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. I'll add on DYKTALK about the plans for the 31st. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:33, 21 October 2017 (UTC)


 * I suggest that in future, when you have a special occasion hook, you mention it again at the end of the review or make sure the hook gets moved to the special occasion holding area. It's easy to miss a comment made at the beginning of the review template. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:38, 21 October 2017 (UTC)


 * I was approved while I slept, or I would have moved it. (When I wake up, I first do my routine of thanks and praises (loben and benedeien), then my longish watchlist of regularly 1000 for 24 hours.) - I think to look at the specific place in a nom where comments are to be expected would be rather easy, before promoting. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:45, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 October 2017
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:36, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

On this day, seven years ago...

 * Thanks. Shouldn't I have seven candles? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 04:55, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Heehee, good call. Teeth.png Slightly  mad  05:10, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Pocillopora elegans
Alex Shih (talk) 00:01, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Central Province, Zambia
Hello! Your submission of Central Province, Zambia at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 20:05, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Glauben können wie du
Cwmhiraeth, can you please comment on the latest proposed ALT hook here? If you can't, let me know, and I'll add a request for a new reviewer. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:07, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Also, the same for Template:Did you know nominations/Gloria (Rutter). Thanks again. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:19, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Whitefoord
Thanks. I will try to expand the "career" section if I find the time after work. By the way, John Trotwood Moore was his daughter-in-law's father--is there another word for this please? I would like to add him as a "relative" in the infobox.Zigzig20s (talk) 18:43, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't know another word for the relationship. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:47, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
 * OK thanks. By the way, the Filson article has more about his career, if you're interested.Zigzig20s (talk) 19:04, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

Prep 3
Hi, I promoted two of 's hooks for Reformation Day and also reviewed one which she feels is one of the most important: Template:Did you know nominations/Sonne der Gerechtigkeit. I'm leaving the rest for you. I'm not sure how you feel about having an all-Reformation Day hook set with all the hooks we have on the subject. Since Halloween is not a worldwide holiday, I didn't promote the Halloween card to the image slot. And the image that I did promote looks very dark; I left a note at WT:DYK asking if anyone could lighten it. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 21:58, 26 October 2017 (UTC)


 * I don't expect "all Reformation", that's why I pointed out the two most important ones, Luther's (now in a normal slot), and Sonne der Gerechtigkeit, with a rather unusual image. The dying-song could just as well go to 2 November, All Souls' Day, or later in November. - IF you want all-Reformation, more are nominated/approved, but they can also go later. There was also a completely different request for 31 Oct on DYKTALK.--Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:05, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Syllis prolifera
Alex Shih (talk) 00:02, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Halloween cheer!
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:#000; background-color:#FFB924; border-width:2px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">

Happy Halloween!

Hello Cwmhiraeth: Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!   –  Adityavagarwal (talk) 07:16, 29 October 2017 (UTC) Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you Zigzig20s. If you can master wiki markup and the writing of new articles, I feel sure you will be able to master the DYK process. Feel free to ask for help if you need it. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:15, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Musca sorbens
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 30 October 2017 (UTC)