Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:17, 6 April 2022

Template:Shabbat banner

This talk page is archived. To browse the archives, press "Show" and select the month of posts you want to view. 2020 — Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2021 — Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2022 — Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2023 — Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2024 — Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2025 — Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

DYK for How Civil Wars Start

On 23 March 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article How Civil Wars Start, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Barbara F. Walter's How Civil Wars Start argues that the United States is no longer a true democracy? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/How Civil Wars Start: And How to Stop Them. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, How Civil Wars Start), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:03, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Can I tell you something? This is one of those times where I could give a damn what the people think. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 00:08, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 14,195 views (591.5 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of March 2022 – nice work!

the automation of this function is in beta testing mode—please let me know if I've screwed up! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 23:27, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

psst! hey! gerda!

over here now... theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 09:32, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

March, you mean? - look and listen today --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:57, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Gerda, am I reading "engaged" incorrectly? I'm thinking engagement... theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 09:01, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Engagement (theatre)  - I read the term in many articles, - wrong? Think of it as a relationship of some duration between a person and a company, perhaps. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:26, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

thank you for understanding in the Panorama case, and I did what I could to make Alice Schwarzer's article more presentable. This year's women's month had its moments, and her picture on the Main page is one of them, but I wonder a bit why - again - 10 biographies of woman by me alone were written in March but will appear in April or May - as in past years. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:55, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

hey! a new FA! - I translated a woman to German, so was absent most of the day, - it was a promise to self Unita Blackwell. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:42, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: a shiny new FA indeed! WP:WiR is, as we all are, very thankful for you. Check out our April Fools' Day shpiel! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 00:46, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

I like it. For the German DYK, I sharpened the Caesar hook by rendering the full name ;) - i like "yours" best, but what about people who have no idea "who" Darth Vader is? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:12, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: presumably, they will find humour and mirth in one of our other fantastic AFD hooks :D theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 08:31, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

sure but not exactly what I mean, - i couldn't help thinking that we will have to live the fact that our readers don't have the same background, and trying to please all will narrow what we present. the quirky hook is funny for those who know what Darth Vader means, but still interesting to those who don't but who can assume in good faith that something interesting is told, or it would not have landed in the DYK section, and click to find out, or not. - i go for presenting a broad spectrum of things good to know, regardless if the "ordinary reader" always wanted to know. - did you see that "my" women in March came from 10 countries? - In yesterday's hook, more people clicked on the pictured woman than the man who refused and the magazine that was bold ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:00, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Ainsley Hayes

On 29 March 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ainsley Hayes, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that The West Wing faced criticism for a scene in which Ainsley Hayes defends a sexist and objectifying remark made at her? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ainsley Hayes. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Ainsley Hayes), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

can i take this muffin? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 00:08, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

In a white bathrobe dancing in the basement of the White House. YES you may take the entire tray, Leek! BusterD (talk) 02:04, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 10,222 views (425.9 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of March 2022 – nice work!

the automation of this function is in beta testing mode—please let me know if I've screwed up! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 23:27, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

Which goes to show you: everybody loves them some Ainsley Hayes! Congrats, again. BusterD (talk) 23:35, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

thanks! :D p.s. what have i done for you lately? vetted your preakness jockey, that's what :P theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 05:28, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Nebraska v. One 1970 2-Door Sedan Rambler (Gremlin)

I am confused. This does not seem to be in the queu for April Fool tomorrow's main page DYK? Or at least I couldn't find it at links to the page.
Memorialzing my effort for the DYK I won't get on April 1. Template:Did you know nominations/Nebraska v. One 1970 2-Door Sedan Rambler (Gremlin). Oh well. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 12:57, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

confused - April Fool is not tomorrow, and it's in the queue for it. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:27, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Doh! 7&6=thirteen (☎) 19:40, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Can hardly wait to see what nonsense you guys will put on the main page tomorrow

First time I'm actually looking forward to April 1. Even though the preps are now on my watchlist, I've intentionally stayed clear of DYK anticipating your team's contributions to the folly. BusterD (talk) 19:38, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

just - see above - you'll have to wait another day --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:51, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

and here we see gerda, frustrated with the fact that no one else is aware of March 31st... theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 20:11, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

or, i suppose, 31 march. yuck. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 20:11, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

@BusterD: the crop wasn't fantastic this year, but we did our best with the harvest :) looking forward to it too! And a special edition of DYK's wrapped, if I can find the wherewithal to write it... theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 19:59, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

School first, learning to be world-class writer later. BusterD (talk) 20:07, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Are we seeing two sets of DYKs on 4/1? BusterD (talk) 20:32, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

@BusterD: one set this year, but not necessarily eight hooks... depends, we've got some ERRORS discussion going at the moment. We're at ten hooks for the moment. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 20:55, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

So proud of you. You are a good egg. BusterD (talk) 21:14, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

thanks, buster :D holding my breath on college transfer apps, i'll email you when they come back. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 01:48, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

DYK for C. J. Cregg

On 31 March 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article C. J. Cregg, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that despite perceived sexist tropes in The West Wing's women, C. J. Cregg is widely considered to be one of the show's most complex and witty characters? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/C. J. Cregg. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, C. J. Cregg), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:03, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

Sound file on DYK nomination

I managed to find a public domain recording for Iowa Corn Song which I started. Just seeing what your thoughts are on using the sound recording for a DYK hook. SL93 (talk) 01:43, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

@SL93: not bad, not bad—truth to be told, audio hooks aren't always the novelty our audience is looking for, so it may not make it through promotion—but I'd give it a shot, you never know, it might get picked up. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 01:48, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

I'm not so sure about the audience bit since normally only images are used. SL93 (talk) 01:51, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

i remember running an operetta recording from Kavyansh not too long ago—if memory serves, it flopped. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 01:52, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

well, didn't make the stats page, at least. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 01:52, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

I think I will give it a go since there is only one such recent hook for comparison. SL93 (talk) 01:54, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

I uploaded a new version with the excess content removed. The only problem is that I don't know how to add an audio file to a DYK like an image. SL93 (talk) 02:08, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

I spoke too soon. It was simple - Template:Did you know nominations/Iowa Corn Song. Although what to add instead of (pictured)... SL93 (talk) 02:17, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

Might be looking for Template:Did you know nominations/Boy Scouts of America (march). Yes, it wan't a huge hit, despite the fact that it was run on 112nd anniversary of the formation of the Boy Scouts of America. We used "(audio featured)" with the hook; see Misplaced Pages:Main Page history/2022 February 8b. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 06:43, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Zoosphaerium darthvaderi

On 1 April 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Zoosphaerium darthvaderi, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Darth Vader's anal shield has a "pronounced bell shape"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Darth Vader Giant Pill-Millipede. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Zoosphaerium darthvaderi), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

~ ONUnicornproblem solving 00:04, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 19,721 views (821.7 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of April 2022 – nice work!

the automation of this function is in beta testing mode—please let me know if I've screwed up! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 07:31, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Promotion of Pronunciation of GIF

April songs

congratulations! - what's next? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:55, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

Mrs. Landingham! what's next? :D i have no idea, honestly. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 01:12, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

it crossed my mind - when I translated most of Unita Blackwell - that she might also be good for FA, - what do you think? If yes, do you have plans for a FAC, or could you nominate it. the author left Misplaced Pages, but that's not a reason to not have a worthy topic. Viva-Verdi died, and nonetheless, Falstaff was made a FA to honour him, and when Brian died, there was also an unfinished article that a team brought to FA honours. I might try that for Nabucco. Right now, I have a FAC that will take a while, so need help ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:00, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: On spec, she doesn't look too far off; but I'm just exhausted, and going to all the trouble of acquainting myself with a new topic just to go from GA to FA sounds like a lot right now. Spring break is coming up, so maybe then :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 01:14, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

understand, do your things, she can wait, - she seems liked in German --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:36, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

I'd recommend accessing newspapers.com through WP:TWL—when you get the hang of the interface, it's a gold mine for this kind of thing. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 21:29, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Did you know this? (Kniefall von Warschau) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:33, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: I'm sorry, i can't really figure out what's going on in the video... theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 21:28, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, - that means no, you didn't know already. It's described in the article, an iconic gesture of reconciliation, by Willy Brandt who was mentioned in a DYK hook also mentioning Der Spiegel, remember? Which I now mentioned in the hook for Levin. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:53, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Der Spiegel again, ignore German, look for cover photo by Maks Levin. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:01, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

DYK wrap

I do enjoy your DYK wraps. Here's something about one of my hooks that ran during March; do with it as you see fit. Weston House was part of a triple nom. Stunning architecture, highest heritage rating, and it got bowled soon after the Christchurch earthquakes. Once I had written the article, I contacted the owner; really just to draw her attention to it as it was clear from her blog that she had a deep affinity for the building. She loved it! Got a real thrill out of seeing her old house on Misplaced Pages. Told me that her husband, with whom she had a shared love for the building, had since died. She dug out some neat photos and I coached her how to upload them to Commons. That's where we got the eventual lead hook photo from, with that photo classes better than the one it replaced while the hook sat in the queue. And to top it all off, by pure coincidence we had this on the MP on her wedding day, which she was very pleased with.

Just a wee reflection how we have given an individual a lot of joy. Schwede66 01:03, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

I'm glad that the new image was added before the articles hit the main page. Great story. SL93 (talk) 01:54, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

Refactoring

Please do not delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at User talk:Narutolovehinata5. Such edits are disruptive. Venkat TL (talk) 09:16, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

@Venkat TL: WP:REFACTOR (a guideline you linked in your edit summary) doesn't disallow the removal of personal attacks; his ego won, Misplaced Pages lost is, in my view, a textbook attack against narutolovehinata5's personality. On another note, my apologies for not leaving you a note on your own talk page about my removing your uncivil comment. That was an oversight on my part, and I hope this situation can now be resolved here. However, I stand by the original removal of your comment, as I consider it combative, unconstructive, and not at all legitimate. For those playing along at home, see this diff and this diff—I struck the final sentence of the former message, which was reverted by Venkat along with this note. Feel free to read the entire discussion for broader context, if you'd like. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 09:39, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Disagree with your opinion on PA. Please do not remove it. It is not your talk page nor that is a PA as you believe. So I hope you will not remove my comment again, if you still want to remove it, please pursue this at proper avenues. That page was on my watch-list, so no harm done in not leaving me a note. Venkat TL (talk) 09:46, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Saying that someone is doing something because of their ego is a personal attack. I highly doubt you meant it in a positive way. SL93 (talk) 15:00, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Lucy Feagin

Just seeing when you will return to the GA nomination. SL93 (talk) 14:38, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

I'm getting a bit frustrated because it took a little over a week for the initial review and you haven't returned to the nomination for almost two days. I don't get it. SL93 (talk) 22:57, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

well, I'm not active on shabbat, and I didn't have any time throughout the day to sit down and respond. I'll have time tonight. my apologies for the delays. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 00:23, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Ok. Thank you for letting me know. SL93 (talk) 00:27, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Part of my issue is that I was hoping for the GA nomination to be completed before the article hit the main page for DYK. I was hoping that because you picked the review up on March 24 and now the hook runs tomorrow at 7 pm central time. I'm not trying to rush you with this comment, but I'm just trying to explain my thought process. SL93 (talk) 04:56, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

@SL93: if it's any comfort, the article is preeeeeeetty much at GA quality—the minute changes that span the distance from where the article is now to the green button are not going to make much difference to the end user. that said, we'll be good to go once we hammer out the necessary pedantry, which hopefully means we can be done by tomorrow, either before or during its mainpage run. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 05:01, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

As for DYK in general, we are very close to 120 approved nominations. I want at least a break from building preps that I plan on fulfilling. We don't have the prep builders that are needed though. I'm not sure of how many DYK contributors realize the gravity of the situation if the two of us just dropped the promoting. SL93 (talk) 05:12, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

I'm hoping you can leave a list of what needs to be fixed for close paraphrasing in your opinion. I can't really work much on the article without knowing. SL93 (talk) 05:45, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

The article wasn't listed among the other Education GAs at Misplaced Pages:Good articles/Social sciences and society. SL93 (talk) 00:17, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

From what I understand, adding that to the relevant list is the last step for the GA reviewer. SL93 (talk) 12:31, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

sorry, thought that step was automated. should be done now :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 17:30, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

It's fine. Thanks for reviewing the article. SL93 (talk) 21:52, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

Titles

Refreshed, musings about titles, coming from Main Title (The West Wing). We need to distinguish article title, common name, and official title. Where I come from: things in brackets mean a disambiguation, and are not part of the title. Example: Requiem (Mozart) (Mozart's Requiem), Turandot (Busoni) (Turandot is an opera by ... Busoni), Ave Maria (Beyoncé song) ("Ave Maria" is a song by Beyoncé). The first will be plain, as only a generic title, the second gets italics as a major work, the third gets quotation marks as a minor work. In all three cases, the thing in brackets is not part of the title, but just something to distinguish from another piece (or more) of the same title. So I thought that in our case, similarly, The West Wing) was only a disambiguation, and the title Main Title, which I find hard to talk about ;) - which would lead to "Main Title" is the theme music of ... The West Wing. But now you say no, this is different, and I never met a thing with a bracket as part of the title. Did I get that right so far? - What is the common name of Main Title (The West Wing). What is the official name of Main Title (The West Wing). Is it a major or a minor work? (I often don't know, Ave Maria (Bruckner) is borderline. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:02, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: well, the official title is "Main Title (The West Wing)". its common name is... ehh, there's not much of a clear consensus. I was considering going with theme music of The West Wing as a WP:NDESC, but I figured it'd be easier to go with the official title. It's hard to know how widespread the piece is; it's the major work of a major-ish television show by a minor composer. take what you will from that, i guess. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 11:05, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, let me think about it. I have an open FAC which I have neglected for too long, and this seems in no way time-critical, right? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:39, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: could not be less important the moment :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 19:49, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

I got that ping when I handled the last of the open questions in the FAC ;) - The article title should be the common name, that's a little problem. The official name can be mentioned somewhere later. We have all these articles of Universities with fancy (and changing) names, but the article title is typically just University of Xtown. The tricky thing here seems to me that the official name looks like we'd disambiguate the common name. I recommend to not start the lead with the misleading thingy, but say something as shown above. Same in the hook. - Do we happen to have any similar case? - Next musing: If it's an official title, why have part of it italic? - Next question: do we a reference that it is the official title? Have it in an external link, perhaps? On the internet, I see alternatively "West Wing Main Title" and "The West Wing (Main Title)". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:30, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

Off-WP plotting

Hi, theleekycauldron. I have received your private email and I find it disturbing, and cannot be involved in that sort of thing. It would appear that a number of unnamed people are involved in manipulating you, in your innocence, into plotting in advance a "community discussion" in which, you say, "The worst outcome for everyone involved is leaving DYK; that's not at all the objective, and it'd undoubtedly be a loss for the project". Your glaring omission here is that your potential subject of discussion has has never done anything wrong or broken any WP rules as far as your complaint is concerned, so you have no grounds for complaint or for raising formal community discussion. You are privately plotting against a veteran editor who is an expert on their subject, who has created or assisted in a huge number of well-informed articles, who has never done WP or any individual editor any harm. What you need is greater understanding, (and in the case of some other editors who may or may not be involved in this, perhaps a little more education).

As far as I can make out, there is one editor who appears to follow your quarry around, wherever the quarry nominates articles for DYK, and then they jump in and complain about opera being "niche" subject matter, and strongly push their personal wish to minimise or even remove that subject matter because only a hook specifically aimed at a broad audience has any value at DYK. There are several problems associated with that attitude. One is that opera is in no way a niche subject in, say, Italy, Germany and those countries which used to be in the Soviet bloc. So that editor is attempting to impose a New World view on Misplaced Pages subject matter. Opera has always been accepted as a valid WP subject, and most opera articles have been accepted as notable. That means that we have no right to dismiss hooks on that subject as "niche", to be minimised or substituted with human-interest material. Another point is that we all know that advertising needs to be targeted at the right audience, and a DYK hook has to work in roughly the same way. If you divest an opera DYK hook of operatic subject-matter, you will alienate the opera buffs, and cheat the general reader into clicking through to an article which will not interest them, to put it politely. WP is supposed to provide something for everyone, but that doesn't mean that every audience has to be tricked into reading everything. Thus you will get more valid views if you target the DYK hook for the appropriate audience. Ultimately, numbers of clicks are fun to list, and it's fun to get more than 5,000 clicks, but what really matters is whether those who click on the hooks reach a page (or at least an intro para) that they want to read.

I have tried at length to add information like the above to some DYK templates, in order to help a certain troll understand the situation, but there has so far been no positive improvement in their behaviour. I'm guessing that they either ignore my comments, or that they just don't understand what I'm saying. It is that troll (and maybe also the unnamed editors involved in the off-WP plot), who need to be dealt with. What they are doing amounts, in my opinion, to victimisation, even if that is not what they intend.

If you don't like or understand certain subject-matter DYKs, just leave them alone and let others review them. There are plenty of DYK noms about popular culture out there which are better suited to your taste and expertise. If you don't do that, and continue to allow trolls to manipulate you, in your innocence, into offline plotting against a hard-working and dedicated veteran editor who has done you no harm - one day you will look back on your actions and feel terribly ashamed. Storye book (talk) 09:30, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I have no idea what this is about, but if the question is are there too many niche opera DYK hooks I'm wondering if anyone has actually crunched the data on article viewership. In any case, TLC is a very experienced DYK volunteer so I think assuming their 'innocence' is being manipulated by trolls is an unnecessarily uncivil assumption, Storye book. We all have strong opinions as passionate editors, but we're here to increase global access to free information not to break stuff for no reason. A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me! 09:49, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: I totally agree that the above is a waste of time, but I had to write it because I had to make it clear upfront that I was not associated with, or implicated in, their off-WP behaviour. Let us hope that all this ends now. All I want to do, too, is to write articles. Storye book (talk) 10:42, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

@Storye book: Hi there! I appreciate you voicing your concerns—i think there might have been some miscommunication on this one. In the interest of full disclosure, let's step back and take a look at what happened and why. Over the past week or so, I received emails and talk page messages from a few editors, concerned about the repeated discussions over @Gerda Arendt's hooks. They felt that they were having the same discussion multiple times, and wanted to find a way out of the cycle—the repetitive, one-off discussions were becoming a waste of the time and energy of not just the other dyk regulars, but gerda's as well. We didn't want to block all of her hooks or anything, but we did want the bickering to stop. Before starting to discuss anything, we agreed that the absolute worst-case this-definitely-should-be-avoided-at-all-costs scenario is Gerda leaving DYK for one reason or another. That's why we chose to keep this off-wiki—we wanted to continue talking without risking public embarrassment for one of our foremost contributors. So, we talked, and brainstormed, and looked for ways out of the Groundhog Day-esque loop we were in. But given the pool of editors, we knew there was a risk of moving too fast. Of running with something too harsh, of accidentally hurting the feelings of our colleague and friend. So, I reached out to you, and I reached out to another editor close to gerda—not to help us plot against her, but to offer a counterargument. To put the brakes on bad ideas, make sure no one went off the reservation, provide good advice as we try to navigate the problem. Of course, we hit a snag there. I'm sure that the discussions on the subject of these hooks and their interestingness to a broad audience are going to continue for a while; for now, I need sleep, so I'd like to take this last paragraph to clarify a few things.

• First, no one was engaged in plotting against gerda—the idea that we meant any ill will towards her is facially incorrect.
• Second, there are no trolls, no puppets, no puppeteers; we're all playing on one team here, and that's wikipedia's team. i even have the t-shirt to prove it! :) No one here has any distaste for anyone else or their work; we disagree on some things, and that's okay, because we respect each other as editors and people.
• Third, I actually like opera and classical music :) I've been studying classical violin for a significant majority of my life. No one here dislikes all opera hooks, or thinks it's too niche a genre for the main page. It is at a disadvantage of lower popularity within our audience, but that in and of itself is disqualifying for no one. Our aim isn't to appeal to the lowest common denominator; it's to raise it.

So that's all—we saw a problem we wanted to solve, and wanted to talk about it with some folks who'd provide insight. I'd be happy to answer any further questions you might have when I wake up tomorrow morning. take care :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 10:54, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

I have a simple solution: one particular editor leaves my nominations alone for the month of April. My nominations are open for all to inspect, I am open to listening to concerns by others, on a case by case basis.

When I review - which I did some hundred times, I assume in good faith that the nominator, who knows the subject best, suggested the best possible thing. Sometimes I think something else would be better, and discuss it with them. Check my noms, try it. I have approved many hooks that I find not interesting at all, - readers differ, writers differ: the broader the spectrum of what we say the richer is the Main page. End of sermon. - I'm writing about a German cleric right know, and that's such a welcome break from Ukrainians who died. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:31, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

@Theleekycauldron: Well now you have what you were looking for: my counterargument, above. And @Gerda Arendt:, that's a good idea. Storye book (talk) 11:38, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

Hi leek. Understanding the good work you do around here, I will echo Storye book's friendly advice to withdraw from that email discussion. I know that you had good intentions, but it sounds like it's heading towards the kind of off-wiki coordination that gets participants in trouble. DanCherek (talk) 13:13, 6 April 2022 (UTC)