Wikipedia talk:Did you know: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 22:07, 18 May 2015

The more the the the better?

... that the terrorist attack carried out in Mostar in 1997 by the al-Qaeda remains the most serious terrorist attack in Bosnia and Herzegovina?

"the al-Qaeda"??? Really??? Isn't this the preoccupation beyond the pale now? EEng (talk) 22:17, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. The worst is "the hoi polloi". Too many people do that. Edwardx (talk) 22:38, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Especially the hoi polloi. EEng (talk) 07:14, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Apart from the redundant repetition (not even the above, "terrorist attack" is also mentioned twice) and the vague term "serious", the article does not actually say it was carried out by al-Qaeda. "Linked with" and "carried out by" are two very different things. Fuebaey (talk) 16:47, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Are there non-serious terrorist attacks? EEng (talk) 07:14, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It clearly should have been "deadliest". But then you DYKers know best. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:12, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why not just get it right each time before it's posted to the main page? Looks like quality of DYK is heading south right now. Any one of you give a toss about that? Avoid redirects, avoid disambiguations, avoid grammar fails, pay attention to English variations. That stuff is simple; for you Americans, let's call it DYK 101. Please try harder, and (as you have done with me) avoid chasing people away who are trying to help stop making DYK the regular laughing stock of the main page. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:09, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I for one would be happy to see you helping out again, but please for God's sake give the bitter denunciations a rest. You have an amazing talent for alienating people, with the result that they don't attend to your real message. EEng (talk) 21:18, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have many amazing talents. Getting the encyclopedia right is one of them. I'll ask nicely. Please stop sending errors to the main page guys. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:13, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You do not have a talent for "getting the encyclopedia right" because that requires many hands, whereas you regularly offend people so they don't want to participate. You're not asking nicely but with highhandedbess and sarcasm. "For you Americans, let's call it DYK 101"‍—‌go soak your head, will you?

I defended you for a long time hoping you'd eventually cool it, but I must now say that you're one of the most consistently unpleasant good-faith editors I've ever run into‍—‌the word toxic comes to mind. Either stay and help, or go away, but cut out the snotty, superior tsk-tsking. It's not helping. EEng (talk) 13:02, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

All I can say to that is a heartfelt amen. I think the overwhelming majority of people here would agree with you. Prioryman (talk) 13:10, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You're all proud of being the regulars at ERRORS? I don't understand why. As for consistent unpleasantness, I really only mirror others' behaviour EEng. You should take a closer look. As for your claim that you have defended me and wanted me to return, you were the sole reason I left. Things don't seem to have improved.... The Rambling Man (talk) 13:26, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No one's proud of errors, but you're not helping improve things. As for the rest I'll let others decide. EEng (talk) 13:49, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Just a point of information, none of the "others" can help you with the absolute fact that it was solely you that drove me away from DYK. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:51, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I meant that others can decide whether that's a reasonable charge, based on our public interactions. In any event it was never my intent. EEng (talk) 16:04, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No, of course they can't. It's entirely down to me to decide why I left. And it was due to you, regardless of your intent. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:06, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Only you (if, indeed, anyone) can say for sure what goes on in that talented mind of yours, but the rest of us are left to judge the reasonableness of your plaint using only what is externally observable. For myself it's hard to imagine anyone or anything, short of a straitjacket, leg irons, and a muzzle, dissuading you from particupating wherever you choose. Please now you have the last word, ~~Rumbling Man~~Grumbling Man. EEng (talk) 16:25, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. Your hounding and "joking" and criticisms pushed me off fixing the very things that are reported at ERRORS every single day. You are indignant and proud. Good for you. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:38, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

How lovely that you two shy wallflowers have finally found friendship and are getting along so well. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:08, 17 May 2015 (UTC) [reply]

Not a joking matter really, considering the abject decline in the quality of DYK once again, now that User:Fram and I have been chased away. Still, keeps us busy day-on-day at ERRORS fixing up the usual DYK fare. EEng, Prioryman etc must be so proud. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:11, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There's no point to this drama. Someone made a minor grammatical error in a queue. It was fixed five days ago and ran a day after that. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 21:22, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Um, I think you miss the point entirely. These kinds of errors are in every DYK listing every day. A few of us who cared to make the main page more professional were given short shrift and have since left DYK to its own "quality control" which apparently means an almost daily appearance at ERRORS for something that could be fixed by someone who cared before it made it to the main page. Worse, for entire hooks which are entirely inappropriate being pulled. Still, Jakob, you seem so sure about it, it would be great to see you helping out fixing all the errors in the queues and pulling the hooks that are noted as being inaccurate, offensive, etc despite making it to the mainpage as a result of the "quality control" around here. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:39, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-[[Category:DYK/Discussion pages]]<!--
--->
-<div class="toccolours" style="float: right;"><small>'''[[#footer|SKIP TO THE BOTTOM]]'''</small></div></br>
-{{ombox
- |style=color:black; background-color:#fff; padding:1em; margin-bottom:1.5em; border: 2px solid #a00; text-align: center; clear:all;
- |text=<div style="font-size:150%;">'''Error reports'''</div>Please '''do not''' post error reports for the current Main Page template version here. Instead, post them to [[Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors]]. If you post an error report on one of the [[T:DYK/Q|queues]] here, please include a '''link''' to the queue in question. Thank you.
-}}
-{{DYKbox|style=font-size:88%; width:23em;  table-layout:fixed;}}
-{{shortcut|WT:DYK}}
-{{archives|• [[Wikipedia:Did you know/2011 reform proposals|2011 reform proposals]]
-|style  = font-size:88%; width:23em;
-|auto   = yes
-|editbox= no
-|search = yes
-|prefix = Wikipedia_talk:Did you know/Archive
-|index  = /Archive index
-|bot=MiszaBot II
-|age=7
-<!-- |1=<p style="text-align:center;">[[/Archive index|Archive index]]</p> -->
-}}
-{{User:MiszaBot/config
-|archiveheader = {{aan}}
-|maxarchivesize = 250K
-|counter = 115
-|minthreadsleft = 5
-|algo = old(7d)
-|archive = Wikipedia talk:Did you know/Archive %(counter)d
-}}
-{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn
-|target=/Archive index
-|mask=/Archive <#>
-|leading_zeros=0 |indexhere=yes
-}}
-{{DYK-Refresh}}
-This is where the '''[[Wikipedia:Did you know|Did you know]]''' section on the main page, its policies and the featured items can be discussed. Proposals for changing how Did You Know works were being discussed at [[Wikipedia:Did you know/2011 reform proposals]].
-== Non-English text ==
-May I again remind colleagues to use {{Tl|Lang}} when including non-English text in hooks, {{diff|Template:Did you know|661463082|661453011|like this}}, for the important reasons explained in the template's documentation? We need to get this right, especially on such a high-profile page. <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">[[User:Pigsonthewing|Andy Mabbett]]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); [[User talk:Pigsonthewing|Talk to Andy]]; [[Special:Contributions/Pigsonthewing|Andy's edits]]</span> 21:22, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
-:I added a little rule-let [https://en.wikipedia.org/?diff=next&oldid=654245049]. [[User:EEng|EEng]] ([[User talk:EEng|talk]]) 23:24, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
-::We shouldn't clutter up the DYK rules with non-DYK-specific rules. We already have [[User:Mandarax/litterally|litterally]] millions of DYK-specific rules. I suppose we ''could'' make a page listing some general Wikipedia rules and guidelines which should be observed. [[User:Mandarax|<span style="color:green">M<small>AN</small>d<small>ARAX</small></span>]]&nbsp;<span style="color:blue">•</span>&nbsp;[[User talk:Mandarax|<span style="color:#999900"><small>XAЯA</small>b<small>ИA</small>M</span>]] 08:18, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
-:::Nothing wrong with repeating general WP stuff that comes up a lot in hooks and is frequently overlooked. They should ''not'' be on a separate page -- too many of those at DYK already. I stuffed this into the "C-series" of "rules" because I couldn't see where else to put it. [[User:EEng|EEng]] ([[User talk:EEng|talk]]) 16:10, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
-::{{Ping|EEng}} Thank you. <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">[[User:Pigsonthewing|Andy Mabbett]]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); [[User talk:Pigsonthewing|Talk to Andy]]; [[Special:Contributions/Pigsonthewing|Andy's edits]]</span> 09:40, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
-== Problems with hook in Queue about to hit the Main Page ==
-There are problems with the last hook of {{Queue|6}}: ... that ''[[The Guardian]]'' thinks [[Nigel Farage]] is better at [[Ed Miliband bacon sandwich photograph|'''eating a bacon sandwich''']] than [[Ed Miliband]]?
-The article says no such thing. According to the article, "''[[The Guardian]]'' said that the sliced bread which Farage ate was easier to eat than the [[bread roll]] which Miliband had", which is not even close to what the hook says.
-The [http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/02/nigel-farage-shows-ed-miliband-how-to-eat-a-bacon-sandwich source], which is a four-sentence blog entry, says "Farage couldn't miss an opportunity to show him how it's done", which is a little closer, but still not good enough to support what the hook says.
-More minor issues: a newspaper can't "think", and the Queue's lead hook is about a UK politician and it would be better not to have another in the same set.
-The hook was proposed by {{U|Ritchie333}}, who also reviewed and approved  [[Template:Did you know nominations/Ed Miliband bacon sandwich photograph|the nomination]]. This is why one shouldn't review one's own hooks.
-The Queue is set to hit the Main Page in about 20 minutes, so please take care of this problem quickly.  [[User:Mandarax|<span style="color:green">M<small>AN</small>d<small>ARAX</small></span>]]&nbsp;<span style="color:blue">•</span>&nbsp;[[User talk:Mandarax|<span style="color:#999900"><small>XAЯA</small>b<small>ИA</small>M</span>]] 02:28, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
-:Without reviewing the problem myself, posted to [[WP:Main Page/Errors]] and several admins pinged. [[User:EEng|EEng]] ([[User talk:EEng|talk]]) 03:02, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
-::Pull it. I'll go write 100 lines saying "I must not be funny on the main page". To be fair, there were 2 ALTs proposed, I asked the prep builder to choose, and also pinged EEng for a second opinion at the time. [[User:Ritchie333|<b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b>]] [[User talk:Ritchie333|<sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk)</sup>]] [[Special:Contributions/Ritchie333|<sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)</sup>]] 06:25, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
-:::::The problem was ''not'' an attempt to "be funny on the main page". It's perfectly fine to have a funny hook as long as you comply with the DYK rules. And to be even more fair, I'd like to point out that your attempted ping of EEng did not appear to be for a second opinion about the article or any existing hook; it appears to be merely soliciting a funnier hook. [[User:Mandarax|<span style="color:green">M<small>AN</small>d<small>ARAX</small></span>]]&nbsp;<span style="color:blue">•</span>&nbsp;[[User talk:Mandarax|<span style="color:#999900"><small>XAЯA</small>b<small>ИA</small>M</span>]] 00:04, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
-:::I just reviewed my Notifications log and it's not in there (though you clearly made it -- I've seen people discussing this phenomenon). So I'm off the hook, thank God. <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:EEng|EEng]] ([[User talk:EEng|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/EEng|contribs]]) 17:49, 11 May 2015 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->
-How about one of the other hooks instead of pulling? --[[User:Gerda Arendt|Gerda Arendt]] ([[User talk:Gerda Arendt|talk]]) 06:49, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
-:: My original hook said what has been suggested here, about the sliced bread over the bread roll. If this ever goes back up, consider this hook or another. [[User:The Almightey Drill|&#39;&#39;&#39;tAD&#39;&#39;&#39;]] ([[User talk:The Almightey Drill|talk]]) 10:09, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
-:::The six minutes on the Main Page should not prevent this from getting another shot. The author should not be penalized for a bad hook proposed and approved by a reviewer as part of a, frankly, horrible review. I don't understand the reviewer's dismissal of the original hook as "misleading". That hook, unlike the reviewer's hook suggestion, seems to accurately say what both the article and the source say. (However, the source is that same four-sentence blog entry, so I'll leave it to the new reviewer to evaluate that.) The "review" was woefully incomplete. Other than dismissing an apparently correct hook and suggesting and approving an incorrect one, the only thing mentioned as being reviewed was "Article is brand new". All around, a truly horrible excuse for a review. I've reinstated the nomination, and it will require a full, actual review from a competent reviewer. [[User:Mandarax|<span style="color:green">M<small>AN</small>d<small>ARAX</small></span>]]&nbsp;<span style="color:blue">•</span>&nbsp;[[User talk:Mandarax|<span style="color:#999900"><small>XAЯA</small>b<small>ИA</small>M</span>]] 00:04, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
-== Wild card entry? ==
-Can a did you know have a wild card entry?<tt> Charlotte, the baby monkey, has gained lot of attention, can any news by the royal family can be there at any time</tt><br>[[Special:Contributions/117.198.184.5|117.198.184.5]] ([[User talk:117.198.184.5|talk]]) 23:55, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
-:It can be as predicted (not promoting crystal ball):
-*''Duke and Duchess have no problems with Charlotte name of baby monkey''
-*''Charlotte, the baby monkey is renamed as XYZ''<br>Or it can be a news article as well!<br>[[Special:Contributions/117.198.184.5|117.198.184.5]] ([[User talk:117.198.184.5|talk]]) 23:58, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
-::I assume the above refers to [http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/may/07/japanese-zoo-rethinks-naming-baby-monkey-after-britains-princess-charlotte this news story] but please note that DYK is for highlighting new or improved ''articles''. A hook without an article defeats the purpose of this project. I think your best bet is to create a 1,500 character article for the park the monkey lives in, mention the above fact, and then nominate it for DYK. [[User:Fuebaey|Fuebaey]] ([[User talk:Fuebaey|talk]]) 03:04, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
-:::I sense a notability problem -- see [[WP:Notability (monkeys)]]. [[User:EEng|EEng]] ([[User talk:EEng|talk]]) 05:39, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
-::::{{re|EEng}} It is a red link.<br>[[Special:Contributions/117.217.114.126|117.217.114.126]] ([[User talk:117.217.114.126|talk]]) 09:22, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
-:::::I was joking with the link -- there's no notability guideline for monkeys. But I think there really is a notability problem here, and I can't tell what you're proposing with respect to DYK. [[User:EEng|EEng]] ([[User talk:EEng|talk]]) 22:07, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
-== Notability of [[Sliding bookcase]], now in {{Queue|5}} ==
-Is it just me, or does anyone else agree that this article is nothing more than a collection of random examples, with no sources directly addressing the subject itself in any significant way? [[User:EEng|EEng]] ([[User talk:EEng|talk]]) 22:06, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
 ==The more the ''the'' the better?==
 Now in {{Queue|5}}:
@@ Line 105: / Line 20: @@
 ::::::::I meant that others can decide whether that's a reasonable charge, based on our public interactions. In any event it was never my intent. [[User:EEng|EEng]] ([[User talk:EEng|talk]]) 16:04, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
 :::::::::No, of course they can't.  It's entirely down to me to decide why I left.  And it was due to you, regardless of your intent.  [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]] ([[User talk:The Rambling Man|talk]]) 16:06, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
-::::::::::Only you (if, indeed, anyone) can say for sure what goes on in that talented mind of yours, but the rest of us are left to judge the reasonableness of your plaint using only what is externally observable. For myself it's hard to imagine anyone or anything, short of a straitjacket, leg irons, and a muzzle, dissuading you from particupating wherever you choose. Please now you have the last word, Rumbling Man. [[User:EEng|EEng]] ([[User talk:EEng|talk]]) 16:25, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
+::::::::::Only you (if, indeed, anyone) can say for sure what goes on in that talented mind of yours, but the rest of us are left to judge the reasonableness of your plaint using only what is externally observable. For myself it's hard to imagine anyone or anything, short of a straitjacket, leg irons, and a muzzle, dissuading you from particupating wherever you choose. Please now you have the last word, <s>Rumbling Man</s>Grumbling Man. [[User:EEng|EEng]] ([[User talk:EEng|talk]]) 16:25, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
 :::::::::::Indeed.  Your hounding and "joking" and criticisms pushed me off fixing the ''very things'' that are reported at ERRORS '''every single day'''.  You are indignant and proud.  Good for you.  [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]] ([[User talk:The Rambling Man|talk]]) 16:38, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
 ::::::::::::<small>How lovely that you two shy [[Shrinking Violet (album)|wallflowers]] have finally found friendship and are getting along [[House on Fire|so well]]. [[User:Martinevans123|Martinevans123]] ([[User talk:Martinevans123|talk]]) 10:08, 17 May 2015 (UTC) </small>
@@ Line 111: / Line 26: @@
 ::::::::::::::There's no point to this drama. Someone made a minor grammatical error in a queue. It was fixed ''five days ago'' and ran a day after that. --'''[[User:Jakec|Jakob]] ([[user talk:Jakec|talk]]) ''' <small><small>aka Jakec</small></small> 21:22, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
 :::::::::::::::Um, I think you miss the point entirely.  These kinds of errors are in every DYK listing every day.  A few of us who cared to make the main page more professional were given short shrift and have since left DYK to its own "quality control" which apparently means an almost daily appearance at ERRORS for something that could be fixed by someone who cared before it made it to the main page.  Worse, for entire hooks which are entirely inappropriate being pulled.  Still, Jakob, you seem so sure about it, it would be great to see you helping out fixing all the errors in the queues and pulling the hooks that are noted as being inaccurate, offensive, etc despite making it to the mainpage as a result of the "quality control" around here.  [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]] ([[User talk:The Rambling Man|talk]]) 21:39, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
-==University of Michigan Athletics==
-Is there an article about how many times blurbs about University of Michigan sports have occurred on DYK? If not there surely should be. [[User:Saratoga Sam|Saratoga Sam]] ([[User talk:Saratoga Sam|talk]]) 02:24, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
-:First comes the article about how many times blurbs about creeks and streams in Pennsylvania have appeared. [[User:EEng|EEng]] ([[User talk:EEng|talk]]) 02:41, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
-== RfC ==
-{{RfC|style|rfcid=3B9EEE3}}
-Some people on the main page don't like the formatting of the Did you know section, and have proposed an alternate wording and are looking for a bold admin.  See/participate in [[Talk:Main Page#FoSelectedrmatting/Layout of "Did you know..."|this discussion]]. ~ ''[[User:ONUnicorn|<span style="color:#0cc">ONUnicorn</span>]]''<sup>([[User talk:ONUnicorn|Talk]]&#124;[[Special:Contributions/ONUnicorn|Contribs]])</sup><small>[[WP:P&amp;S|problem solving]]</small> 18:00, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
-:This has been discussed at considerable length, but I can't find the archive to reference it. [[User:Harrias|<b style="color:#00cc33">Harrias</b>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Harrias|<span style="color:#009900">talk</span>]]</sup> 06:36, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
-*If this particular problem was discussed before, I missed it. As of now, what we have at DYK is this:
-Did you know…
-From Wikipedia's new and recently improved content:
-... that in 1742, Zoroastrians built the Udvada Atash Behram?
-Those who feel that the “From Wikipedia's new or recently improved content:” disrupts the sentence “Did you know that in 1742, Zoroastrians built the Udvada Atash Behram?” suggest that any of the following flows better / avoids fracturing the syntax:
-Did you know…
-... that in 1742, Zoroastrians built the Udvada Atash Behram?
-From Wikipedia's new or recently improved content
-From Wikipedia's new or recently improved content
-Did you know…
-... that in 1742, Zoroastrians built the Udvada Atash Behram?
-Did you know…
-... that in 1742, Zoroastrians built the Udvada Atash Behram?
-... that the above are drawn from Wikipedia's new or recently improved content?
-As we know, very few people participate in discussion concerning the Main Page, but of those who have voiced an opinion, six say the present sequence is broke and needs to be fixed, two say it ain’t broke.
-Cheers, [[User:Awien|Awien]] ([[User talk:Awien|talk]]) 12:10, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
-:I can't find the previous discussion either, but I know it happened because I was part of it and made the same suggestions then. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 12:31, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
-:::::Perhaps the [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know/Archive_97&oldid=579042708#Proposed_change_to_Main_Page_presentation Sept 2013] started by you? Or [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&oldid=601690929#Why_.22did_you_know.3F.22 March 2014]? [[User:Maile66|— Maile ]] ([[User talk:Maile66|talk]]) 15:18, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
-:::Can you please keep the discussion "over there"? It's pointless to present alternatives shorn of their typographic details, and no "bold admin" is going to change the MP layout without clear consensus. [[User:EEng|EEng]] ([[User talk:EEng|talk]]) 13:15, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
-*This has been the format, at least as far back as Wikipedia keeps screenshots of the main page [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Main_Page_history/2011_January_1].  History says, it ain't broke.  [[User:Alanscottwalker|Alanscottwalker]] ([[User talk:Alanscottwalker|talk]]) 14:41, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
-*I have reformatted this as a Request for Comment, so editors can weigh in here and an administrator can ultimately close the discussion. [[User:Yoninah|Yoninah]] ([[User talk:Yoninah|talk]]) 15:21, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
-::If we are going to have an RfC, let's do it properly with a <nowiki>{{rfc|style|rfcid=326B452}}</nowiki> tag to get it listed, and centralise the discussion either here, or on [[Talk:Main Page]]. [[User:Harrias|<b style="color:#00cc33">Harrias</b>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Harrias|<span style="color:#009900">talk</span>]]</sup> 15:31, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
-:::OK, thanks. I think the discussion should be held here, because it affects DYK primarily, and because all the DYK editors weigh in on this page. The discussion was started on the Main Page talk page by someone who seemed to be looking for a "bold administrator". An RfC is more effective. [[User:Yoninah|Yoninah]] ([[User talk:Yoninah|talk]]) 15:37, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
-:::{{Done}} <span style="font-family: sylfaen">[[User:Eman235|<font color="green">E'''man'''</font><font color="#6643d1">2'''35'''</font>]]/[[User talk:Eman235|<font color="brown">''talk''</font>]]</span> 23:38, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
-*'''Support change'''. I agree that it's better to make a direct connection between "Did you know..." and "... that in 1742, Zoroastrians built the Udvada Atash Behram?" That catches the reader's eye. At the end, we could make the line into a sentence: [[WP:Recent additions|See more new and recently improved content here]]. [[User:Yoninah|Yoninah]] ([[User talk:Yoninah|talk]]) 15:21, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
-*'''Support change''', as I have already said on the MP. <span style="font-family: sylfaen">[[User:Eman235|<font color="green">E'''man'''</font><font color="#6643d1">2'''35'''</font>]]/[[User talk:Eman235|<font color="brown">''talk''</font>]]</span> 23:38, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
-*'''Support change''' for the reasons already explained on the main page: no amount of formatting redeems garbled wording, and no amount of "seniority" is justification for letting it stand. [[User:Awien|Awien]] ([[User talk:Awien|talk]]) 00:07, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
-*'''Oppose change''' because it's based on the Procrustean idea that everything's a sentence, and that things should be bent and twisted in obeisance to that mistaken notion. I would, however, recommend that the terminal colon be removed from
-::''From Wikipedia's new and recently improved content:''
-:[[User:EEng|EEng]] ([[User talk:EEng|talk]]) 01:30, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
-*I '''support change''' the fact that it has been like this for some time does not mean it's right, or optimal. I suggest the following flow: Did you know... ...that in 1742, Zoroastrians built the Udvada Atash Behram? The above were selected from Wikipedias new and recently improved content.[[User:Fractal618|Fractal618]] ([[User talk:Fractal618|talk]]) 03:53, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
-*'''Support change'''. The current layout puts the "from Wikipedia's new and recently improved content" between the header and the blurbs. You wouldn't write "Did you know from Wikipedia's new and recently improved content that in 1742, Zoroastrians built the Udvada Atash Behram?" but that is what the current layout implies. Just because something has been done for a long time doesn't mean it should continue to be done. Would prefer moving "from Wikipedia's new and recently improved content" to the end and rephrasing as "that the above were taken from from Wikipedia's new and recently improved content?" --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 06:49, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
-*'''Support change''', per the argument given by Khajidha. This is a better way of presenting DYK hooks.--[[User:Skr15081997|Skr15081997]] ([[User talk:Skr15081997|talk]]) 06:54, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
-*'''Support change''', This has always bugged me, but I thought I was the only one.  Alternatively, if it can't be changed as proposed, perhaps remove all the ellipses so to break the suggestion that the title and the hooks should be assembled into sentences. [[User:APL~enwiki|APL~enwiki]] ([[User talk:APL~enwiki|talk]]) 06:36, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
-*'''Question''' - It's hard to get behind an idea if you don't know what that idea even entails. So... ''what'' change are we discussing? <code style="font-size:small;white-space:nowrap">-- [[[[User:Edokter|<span style="color:#006">User:Edokter</span>]]]] {&#123;[[User talk:Edokter|<span style="color:#060">talk</span>]]&#125;}</code> 14:47, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
-**'''Answer''' Remove the words "From Wikipedia's new and recently improved content" from their present location where they intrude into the middle of the question "Did you know that blablablabla?" (i.e. "Did you know From Wikipedia's new and recently improved content that blablablabla?" and put them anywhere else, tweaked as necessary. [[User:Awien|Awien]] ([[User talk:Awien|talk]]) 15:12, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
-***Yes well... I can't endorse anything until I know where "anywhere else" is. And I don't see a suitable alternative, so '''oppose change''' for the time being. <code style="font-size:small;white-space:nowrap">-- [[[[User:Edokter|<span style="color:#006">User:Edokter</span>]]]] {&#123;[[User talk:Edokter|<span style="color:#060">talk</span>]]&#125;}</code> 16:50, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
-****Can we first agree that a change is in order, and THEN decide on what the change is? Since April 29, 2015 multiple alternatives have been suggested. Breaking up the vote into two parts, decreases the chance of a split vote leading to no change, which is the one thing most of us agree is needed.[[User:Fractal618|Fractal618]] ([[User talk:Fractal618|talk]]) 17:21, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
-*'''Questions''' - Why is it important to have the phrase "From Wikipedia's new and recently improved content:" on there at all?  Wouldn't that solve the whole thing if that was removed? Why move it to somewhere else? Where is the FA equivalent of that in their section? [[User:Maile66|— Maile ]] ([[User talk:Maile66|talk]]) 17:31, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
-::I think something like this would be an improvement http://i.imgur.com/Ev57be5.png [[User:Fractal618|Fractal618]] ([[User talk:Fractal618|talk]]) 18:03, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
-::That phrase defines the source of the facts, letting people know that these aren't just random things. The FA equivalent is the actual title "From today's Featured Article". (Although I find that somewhat ambiguous for uninitiated readers who might think that it is just any old article that is being featured and not an article determined to be of featured quality.)--[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 18:07, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
-:::I guess what I'm getting at, is aren't "random things" the very basis of today's texting on various social sites?  Why would the general public care whether or not DYK is like that...or not? At the bottom the "Archive" link points to exactly the same "Recent additions" that the linking "From Wikipedia's new and recently improved content:" does.  So, why two links, top and bottom? What purpose does it serve? [[User:Maile66|— Maile ]] ([[User talk:Maile66|talk]]) 18:44, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
-::::The general public wouldn't care, the notification is for those who decide to get involved in the DYK process. I don't know why there are two links. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 18:49, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
-:::::Understood.  But, there again, the "Nominate an article" link at the bottom is for those who want to get involved. [[User:Maile66|— Maile ]] ([[User talk:Maile66|talk]]) 18:55, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
-===Suggested change format===
-Agreed. This combines "archive" and "from recently improved content" http://i.imgur.com/IkdRP2g.png I think we are getting somewhere. At this rate we might even get bumped above "Featured Article". [[User:Fractal618|Fractal618]] ([[User talk:Fractal618|talk]]) 19:47, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
-<s>Your example is exactly what I think it should be changed to.</s> [[User:Maile66|— Maile ]] ([[User talk:Maile66|talk]]) 21:12, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
-:Oops.  Your example omits the word "that" beginning each one.  It's not a main page formatting for "that", but something built into the DYK nomination template.   Could you redo it with "that"? [[User:Maile66|— Maile ]] ([[User talk:Maile66|talk]]) 21:25, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
-== Queue 2 due to hit front page at 12:00 on 18 May ==
-Just a note that the hook for [[John Wilton (general)]] as originally written (ALT1 by the way) read "Australian General", not "'''the''' Australian General" and I think it still works better without the definite article... Cheers, [[User:Ian Rose|Ian Rose]] ([[User talk:Ian Rose|talk]]) 05:04, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
-:<small><munches popcorn> Oh boy, this should be good. [https://en.wikipedia.org/?oldid=662886265#The_more_the_the_the_better.3F] [[User:EEng|EEng]] ([[User talk:EEng|talk]]) 05:17, 18 May 2015 (UTC)</small>
-:*<small>Erm... yeah. That's sure to end well. *builds bunker*&nbsp;—&nbsp;[[User:Crisco 1492|Crisco 1492]] ([[User talk:Crisco 1492|talk]]) 15:15, 18 May 2015 (UTC)</small>
-:::Replied on the errors page. [[User:Harrias|<b style="color:#00cc33">Harrias</b>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Harrias|<span style="color:#009900">talk</span>]]</sup> 16:17, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
-::::That was literally amazing, I've literally practically written a thesis on the behaviour of the  self-obsessed editors based on this story.  Now perhaps we can focus on posting accurate and well-written (non-in-joke-not-actually-funny) hooks to the main page.  Or, you can just continue to litter the main page with the kind of shite we used to see before good editors like [[User:Fram]] gave a damn.  [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]] ([[User talk:The Rambling Man|talk]]) 21:05, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
-:::::<small>I hear that, in some countries,inappropriate use of the definitive article is a [[Mind Bomb|capital offence]]. [[User:Martinevans123|Martinevans123]] ([[User talk:Martinevans123|talk]]) 21:12, 18 May 2015 (UTC) </small>
-::::::So is sleeping on the job.  We could use those AA guns here.  [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]] ([[User talk:The Rambling Man|talk]]) 21:18, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
-:::::::<small>At times Wikipedia makes North Korea look [[Shangri-La|quite attractive]]. [[User:Martinevans123|Martinevans123]] ([[User talk:Martinevans123|talk]]) 21:23, 18 May 2015 (UTC) </small>