- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by AirshipJungleman29 talk 18:37, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
N. D. Popescu-Popnedea
Popnedea in 1905
5x expanded by Dahn (talk). Self-nominated at 23:19, 9 December 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/N. D. Popescu-Popnedea; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.
I'm not sure why this one has languished so long on the nominations page but I can't see any obvious problems with it. AGF verified. On second thoughts, and reading a little further into the article, the hook could be regarded as an instance of fat shaming and therefore inappropriate for the main page. @Dahn:, suggest you come up with a different hook. Gatoclass (talk) 15:27, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Gatoclass: Allow me to express my complete and utter rejection of that buzzword ("fat shaming"), as well as my dismay that a hook about the objectively interesting historical fact of his being ridiculed over this (well, "shamed") is read as an editorial voice necessarily endorsing that ridicule. If we must:
- ALT 1: ... that Romanian adventure novelist N. D. Popescu-Popnedea "generate[d] laughter" with his deposition at a political assassin's trial? Dahn (talk) 12:05, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
- Dahn, the original hook doesn't bother me personally, however, some people take exception to such things and DYK could do without any additional drama. If you really feel that strongly about it, I can pass it, but I'd prefer it if you at least offered an alternative hook. With regard to your ALT1 above, I'm not keen on that one either because there is no further information about the incident in the article, which means, in effect, that users click on it to learn nothing. So if you could find a different hook fact to offer as an alt, I would appreciate that. Gatoclass (talk) 15:08, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Gatoclass: I don't feel strongly about it either, I just don't see the issue -- even people wanting to document the history and past acceptability of "fat shaming" would presumably find the hook interesting; anyway, and before I propose a third hook, please let me know if your objection to ALT 1 stands after reading that entire paragraph, ending with the "generate[d] laughter" quote -- you'll note that there is rather significant detail on the assassination attempt and the rather funny way in which Popnedea made himself a part of it. Dahn (talk) 15:30, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
- Okay, fair enough. Gatoclass (talk) 15:47, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
| 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
|
- Cited:
 - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith
- Interesting:
|
| Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
|
|
|
Overall: 
Well sourced and comprehensive article. Both hooks AGF verified. Gatoclass (talk) 15:53, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Well sourced and comprehensive article. Both hooks AGF verified. Gatoclass (talk) 15:53, 24 January 2024 (UTC)