Template talk:Did you know/Approved/week-3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page transcludes a subset of the nominations found on the page of all the approved nominations for the "Did you know" section of the Main Page. It only transcludes the nominations filed under dates of the fourth-most recent week. The page is intended to allow editors to easily review recent nominations that may not be displaying correctly on the complete page of approved nominations if that page's contents are causing the page to hit the post-expand include size limit.

Estoppey D-series[edit]

Estoppey D-1 in the nose of a Martin MB-2 bomber.
Estoppey D-1 in the nose of a Martin MB-2 bomber.
(
)
  • ... that the Army Air Corps were so unimpressed by the Estoppey D-8 that one member stated he would rather use nails and a wire? Source: McFarland, 141
    • Reviewed:
Created by Maury Markowitz (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 196 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Maury Markowitz (talk) 23:28, 15 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • Article definitely long enough and presentable (although is almost entirely sourced to one source, so introducing other sources would probably be advisable.) The hook is verifiable by searching "nails and wire" on the Google Books page. Still needs the QPQ for official sign off, of course. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 23:01, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, as written, this would deserve {{more sources needed}}, so definitely needs more sources.--Launchballer 10:46, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Maury Markowitz: Please provide a QPQ, or this nomination may be closed as unsuccessful. Z1720 (talk) 14:00, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Generalissima: Sorry, no pings on this one and I forgot about it. QPQ 2024 Loblaw boycott Maury Markowitz (talk) 15:38, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I added an image to the article which might be suitable if cropped. I don't see any others for this day with an image, is it worth adding? Maury Markowitz (talk) 15:39, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good to go as at the current juncture, though Launchballer's point that a more sources needed tag could very well get added is salient. I'd recommend doing a little more digging just to flesh this out if possible. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 15:48, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As a DYK promoter, I would be inclined to think that at least one more source needs to be added, a concern that Launchballer expressed earlier. Also, the wiki article doesn't make it clear that the quote was stated by one Army Air Corps member. PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:23, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PrimalMustelid: added cite changed wording. Maury Markowitz (talk) 12:42, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Better. Does the Description section need a source?--Launchballer 15:26, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the first sentences need to either be merged with another paragraph or be cited. PrimalMustelid (talk) 19:50, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Simone Murphy[edit]

(
)
5x expanded by Launchballer (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 219 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Launchballer 15:53, 16 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: DYK tool was reading earlier versions of the article and not showing 5k. WP:5X clearly specifies the last version of the page before expansion, which occurred a week after the removal of the WP:BLP-violating material, so I think we're good on that front. The article cites ellesse-en for some of the hook, but you have The Face here (which also supports it). Personally, I feel like The Face may be more reliable than a commercial clothing store that featured her as a model.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 19:23, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • A few more referencing comments: Could not get a DOB on her Instagram post (WP:ABOUTSELF allows this, but I'm only seeing 'late 20s' at the source); the Danny Lomas podcast could benefit from {{cite podcast}} (the minutes, for example; one shouldn't need to review a 57 minute podcast); Bristol Post reference is underformatted; not sure about the reliability of Planet Woo. These aren't part of the DYK nom per se; please think of them as pre-GAR comments.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 19:31, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Replaced the Ellesse-en source with The Face. If you scroll down on Instagram you should see her comment "gentle reminder my birthday is this saturday". The podcast should have a button saying "Transcript", which is what I used. Planet Woo is a media brand belonging to ITV, although I've just read on a press release that "the team behind VICE, i-D, Boiler Room and LADbible" founded it and WP:VICE has them in yellow. I'm not using it for anything controversial though, just an interview and attributed opinion.--Launchballer 08:43, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

United States' Telegraph[edit]

(
)
Created by Generalissima (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 39 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 06:32, 16 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Wonderful work! I enjoyed reading this (I just love old newspapers! ). Looks good to go. BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:51, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • The fact does sound interesting, but unfortunately, according to Fletcher M. Green in "Duff Green, Militant Journalist of the Old School," Duff Green "denied that he was armed or that he gouged Sparhawk's eyes," and it doesn't help that it was Sparhawk who made the original charge. There's not much of a way to prove that this for sure happened, so a different hook might need to be picked unless I can for sure confirm that this truly happened. PrimalMustelid (talk) 20:19, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Boot Monument[edit]

(
)
The Boot Monument at Saratoga National Historical Park
The Boot Monument at Saratoga National Historical Park
  • ... that the Boot Monument (pictured) never mentions the name of its honoree because he was a traitor? Source: [1] [2] and Martin, James Kirby (1997). Benedict Arnold, Revolutionary Hero: An American Warrior Reconsidered. New York University Press. ISBN 0814755607
Improved to Good Article status by Relativity (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has less than 5 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

‍Relativity ⚡️ 00:54, 17 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • Comment: It has appeared on DYK before, but not in bold print. (See talk page for more details) ‍Relativity ⚡️ 00:58, 17 April 2024 (UTC)-->[reply]
  • I'll review this. Have read about this subject before. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:37, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
QPQ: None required.

Overall: @Relativity: Nice work. ALT0 is good. I'm not sure ALT1 works however as the source only says that it is Arnold's only monument on American soil whereas the hook seems to apply to all American traitors. I also thought of another potential hook that might be decent: ... that a boot is the only monument in the United States to traitor Benedict Arnold because it "was the only part of Arnold not to later turn traitor"? That would require another reviewer, though. Let me know what you think; but ALT0 is good to go. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:54, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fine with ALT0. Thank you for taking on the review! ‍Relativity ⚡️ 01:50, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ALT2 checks out and would make a good quirky.--Launchballer 09:21, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zapad 2009[edit]

(
)
Landing craft Mordowija 782 during Zapad 2009
Landing craft Mordowija 782 during Zapad 2009
5x expanded by Piotrus (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 507 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:11, 18 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

PS. I forgot to mention - there are plenty of images available for this hook. See https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Zapad_2009 --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:31, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You'll want to add one of these to the nom for consideration.--Launchballer 19:44, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Launchballer: I am not sure how to do it post-nom. But I'd suggest File:Zapad-2009 military exercises.jpg. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 00:01, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
By finding another nom that does it successfully and adapting it. I'll leave it to you to add a caption and will call for a reviewer.--Launchballer 15:47, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Caption: "Landing craft Mordowija 782 during Zapad 2009". --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 23:42, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Added.--Launchballer 23:54, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New enough (5x expansion), long enough, well-written. Image is appropriately licensed as far as I can determine. QPQ is done. The hook is interesting and supported by an inline citation but not supported in its current format by what is written in the article. The article is a bit ambiguous on this point. On the one hand it asserts that "[...] it also simulated an amphibious landing in Poland, as well as - and most controversially - a nuclear attack against Poland (hitting Warsaw)." In my reading, this is a claim that the exercise did in fact contain such a simulation. Later, however, it is stated that "Other sources noted that the exercise involved nuclear-capable ballistic missiles (Iskander), but not necessarily a simulation of a nuclear attack on another country." I think this could be easily solved by re-phrasing the first sentence, but it should be resolved before I give the green light. Otherwise all criteria are fulfilled. Yakikaki (talk) 19:34, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Yakikaki: Can I trouble you to suggest an alt hook with a revised wording that I can then review and adopt? I am not sure what exact minor wording change you suggest, but I am pretty sure I'd be fine with it and I'd propose it myself if I wasn't too tired to figure it out myself now. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 00:52, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Alt 1a ... that Russian and Belarussian Zapad 2009 military exercise about repelling a NATO attack might have included simulated nuclear strikes on another country?
@Piotrus and Yakikaki: thoughts? --evrik (talk) 17:08, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • There's nothing wrong with the original hook, and Alt 1a doesn't solve the problem. The issue, which I think is very easily fixed, is that the article isn't clear on the point whether it might have included a simulated nuclear strikes on another country, or whether it in fact did. That needs to be clarified. I can then greenlight it. Yakikaki (talk) 18:03, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yakikaki, The article cites the sources; some of which say this happened and some which are more cautious. Not sure how to word it better than what we already have, both in the hook and in the article. If you think you have a better wording, be bold. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:16, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed it for you. You'll need another reviewer to do the review again, though. Yakikaki (talk) 14:37, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Maybe User:Evrik would like to do this? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:53, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I will approve the original hook. I can't approve my hook, but will leave that for the promoter. 15:43, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
With sources disagreeing, I don't think we should be front paging one or the other. I'd like to see a completely different hook.--Launchballer 11:54, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew Charles Johnson[edit]

(
)
Moved to mainspace by GMH Melbourne (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has less than 5 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

GMH Melbourne (talk) 05:04, 18 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Full review needed.--Launchballer 06:43, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Article is new and long enough. Sourcing looks good though Earwig found a handful of word-for-word similarities with "theage.com.au" source. A minor issue with each of the proposed hooks: ALT0 says that Williams was Victoria's most high-profile prisoner - the body of the article supports that but the sources seem to claim he was just a high-profile prisoner. ALT1 says they threw feces at a member of the jury but the article and sources only say "excrement". Both hooks are interesting however. QPQ is not required so just need hooks fixed and that should be all. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 15:31, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PCN02WPS: Thank you for taking the time to review! I have reworded the article in most cases where Earwig's Copyvio Detector identified an issue but I think a lot of it falls under WP:LIMITED, or are quotes. Let me know if this needs to be addressed further. In paragraph 249 of that source, it mentions Williams as the "highest profile prisoner in Victoria". I have changed the wording of ALT1 from 'feces' to 'excrement' — GMH Melbourne (talk) 03:12, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Very sorry, totally forgot about this nom. Missed the "highest profile" bit in that source so thank you for that info. Both hooks look good so we are GTG. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 15:15, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Boyz Unlimited[edit]

(
)
Created by Launchballer (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 220 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Launchballer 15:58, 18 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • 5x expanded by nom. Article is adequately sourced, no issues arose upon checking. The largest similarity result from Earwig is just due to a quoted passage from a critic. Hooks are interesting, I personally like the first hook and ALT2 the most, but all are good and work. QPQ OK. Nicely done! Good to go. B3251 (talk) 15:25, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A tag was placed on this for {{tone}}, which I believe I've addressed - a promoter should probably double check this.--Launchballer 11:35, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Antimonumento 5J[edit]

(
)
Antimonumento 5J
Antimonumento 5J
  • ... that the Antimonumento 5J (pictured) was installed to commemorate police repression during a protest in response to Giovanni López's arrest four years ago today and his subsequent death? Source: Milenio[5]: "se realizó un acto de memoria pacífica donde también se develó un antimonumento con el objetivo de no olvidar los actos de opresión que ejercieron las autoridades de seguridad pública en contra de ciudadanos manifestantes durante el 4, 5 y 6 de junio del 2020, protestas que se realizaron en torno al asesinato de Giovanni López a manos de policías municipales de Ixtlahuacán de los Membrillos." (Translation: "an act of peaceful remembrance was held where an anti-monument was also unveiled with the objective of not forgetting the acts of oppression exercised by public security authorities against protesting citizens during 4, 5 and 6 June 2020, protests that took place around the murder of Giovanni López at the hands of municipal police officers of Ixtlahuacán de los Membrillos.")
Moved to mainspace by Tbhotch (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 45 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

(CC) Tbhotch™ 07:03, 18 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • Length, date, qpq ok, no close paraphrase found. Image on Commons. Not sure we'd time the DYK to match what the death anniversary, though. --Soman (talk) 09:46, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I recommend promoting this on 5 June, the anniversary of its installation.--Launchballer 16:24, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, if valid and if required: (CC) Tbhotch™ 17:52, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

155 Mercer Street[edit]

(
)
155 Mercer Street
155 Mercer Street
  • ... that firefighters were alerted to a fire in their fire station at 155 Mercer Street in Manhattan by a ring-tailed monkey named Jenny throwing billiard balls down a flight of stairs? Source: "One time she woke the sleeping company to a fire in its own building by throwing billiard balls down a flight of stairs." [6]
Moved to mainspace by Found5dollar (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 19 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Found5dollar (talk) 19:39, 19 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation

QPQ: No - Not done
Overall: hinnk (talk) 22:16, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

September 2023 New York floods[edit]

(
)
Created by Tails Wx (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 21 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

~ Tails Wx (🐾, me!) 02:29, 20 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation

QPQ: No - Not done
Overall: Well done on the GA review @Tails Wx :) preference for ALT1. Nothing else of note, really. Just ping me if the QPQ is done. ‍  PSA 🏕️  (talk) 07:21, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review, PSA, I've provided the QPQ above! :) ~ Tails Wx (🐾, me!) 13:55, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, @Tails Wx. Good to go ‍  PSA 🏕️  (talk) 02:01, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I quite enjoyed ALT1 but it's not really correct @Tails Wx and PSA: the source includes the quote "the sea lion remained inside the zoo, never breaching the zoo’s secondary perimeter" and is clear that she only managed to escape her enclosure. I've thus struck the hook; it will need rephrasing as ALT1a if it is desired that it runs. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:30, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
AirshipJungleman29, how about this:
~ Tails Wx (🐾, me!) 17:56, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Andrena astragali, Toxicoscordion venenosum[edit]

( Comment or view )
Death camas miner bee on a death camas flower
Death camas miner bee on a death camas flower
  • ... that the nectar and pollen of meadow death camas (pictured) and its relatives are so toxic that no bee except the death camas miner bee (pictured) can eat them? Source: Cane, James H. (October 2018). "Co-dependency between a specialist Andrena bee and its death camas host, Toxicoscordion paniculatum". Arthropod-Plant Interactions. 12 (5): 657–662. doi:10.1007/s11829-018-9626-9 Quote: "In this study, T. paniculatum, T. venenosum and co-flowering forbs were sampled for bees at 15 sites along a 900-km-long east–west transect across the northern Great Basin plus an altitudinal gradient in northern Utah’s Bear River Range. Only A. astragali bees were regularly seen visiting flowering panicles of these Toxicoscordion."
    Cane, James H; Gardner, Dale R; Weber, Melissa (2 December 2020). "Neurotoxic alkaloid in pollen and nectar excludes generalist bees from foraging at death-camas, Toxicoscordion paniculatum (Melanthiaceae)". Biological Journal of the Linnean Society. 131 (4): 927–935. doi:10.1093/biolinnean/blaa159. Quote: "These two death-camas species are the sole floral hosts of the solitary andrenid bee Andrena astragali Ckll., which in turn was the only bee species (or any other insect) found regularly visiting these flowers across much of the plant’s geographic ranges (Cane, 2018)."
5x expanded by MtBotany (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 9 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

🌿MtBotany (talk) 19:36, 21 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • Since this is a two-article nomination, you need a second QPQ. The hook, article conditions, and eligibility check out, and I don't see any evidence of copyvio. You do need to bold the linked terms, however. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 21:19, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks for the information @Generalissima:. Sorry I missed that if two articles are nominated at once it needs two QPQ. Thanks for fixing my formatting errors. I have another review in progress for Cora Babbitt Johnson. I'll try to review another nomination in case it takes longer than I anticipate. 🌿MtBotany (talk) 03:09, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • @MtBotany: You don't need to wait for the previous review to completely finish before using it as a QPQ, as long as you have done your due diligence in the initial check for the article. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 03:11, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        • Another thing for me to learn! Educational evening. Thanks for your attention. I should still do one so I have an extra in my back pocket for next time. I'm looking at improving other plant articles for DYK in time for their blooming seasons. The meadow death camas in my garden are up and getting energy, they will be blooming in Colorado in about a week and I'm seeing current year observations on iNaturalist 🌿MtBotany (talk) 03:21, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oh, yes. This can be approved now. My bad for not stating so. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 14:13, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Generalissima: If this is approved, can you add the green tick under this comment, so the DYK bot can moved this to the approved list? Z1720 (talk) 15:43, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oops. Added. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 15:44, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@MtBotany, Generalissima, and Z1720: There are too many images on both pages and these are interfering with the table of contents. Can something be done about this?--Launchballer 12:09, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Launchballer, you're going to have to be more specific. Breaks how? I've looked at the pages on both windows and mac machines and I cannot see anything wrong. 🌿MtBotany (talk) 16:21, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I use a standard widescreen monitor and some of the images are to the right of the references, which means there's an unslightly block of whitespace - granted "presentable" is far too nebulous a DYK criterion to be useful but I would suggest some of these should be moved to a WP:GALLERY or moved to the Commons (i.e. removed from the article).--Launchballer 16:51, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nxdia[edit]

(
)
Created by Launchballer (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 223 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Launchballer 14:38, 21 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Article is new enough and long enough, it is neutral and well sourced. Earwig picks up a bit of a quote, but otherwise no close phrasing, so all OK. QPQ is done. Hook is interesting, but I couldn't see a reference to the Singles Chart in the source - could you clariy the chart part of the hook? Thanks Lajmmoore (talk) 16:35, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake, I kept rewording the hook. Try [7].--Launchballer 18:15, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Launchballer - hook is good (& citation archived here), all OK Lajmmoore (talk) 09:13, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Launchballer and Lajmmoore: am I missing something, or is the hook just not that interesting? Is there nothing better than "... that a singer sung a song which appeared (fairly low) on a songs chart?" ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:03, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The interesting bit is "queer anthem", given that neither Egypt or Sudan are known for positive attitudes to homosexuality.--Launchballer 06:09, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose. Why is she called English in the lead then? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 01:23, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Because I assumed that she was until I wrote the article, and forgot to take that bit out. I think there's some MOS dictum that says nationality should be left out of the first sentence altogether, so that's what I've done.--Launchballer 01:49, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My mistake, I just read MOS:BIOFIRSTSENTENCE and it says to include it. It now says "Egyptian alt-pop musician of Sudanese descent".--Launchballer 09:20, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:Did_you_know/Approved/week-3&oldid=1171759282"