Talk:32nd anniversary of the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests and massacre

A fact from 32nd anniversary of the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests and massacre appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 17 August 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that on the 32nd anniversary of the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests, the traditional venue for memorials in Hong Kong lay empty (blockade pictured) for the first time in thirty-two years?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2021/August. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/32nd anniversary of the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests.

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

China: Politics Low‑importance

	China portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Chinese politics (assessed as Low-importance).

Freedom of speech Low‑importance

	Freedom of speech portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Freedom of speech, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Freedom of speech on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Freedom of speechWikipedia:WikiProject Freedom of speechTemplate:WikiProject Freedom of speechFreedom of speech articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Did you know nomination[edit]

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 Kingsif (talk) 16:17, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

A candle-lit US Consulate, Hong Kong on the night of 4 June 2021

... that a pro-establishment legislator said the HK government ought to be "forthcoming and tell the public that the [32nd anniversary] vigil was not ... just banned because of the pandemic as claimed"? Source: Disband or risk prosecution, vigil organisers warned, RTHK
- ALT1:... that a pro-establishment legislator said the HK government ought to admit that the 32nd anniversary memorial of the Tiananmen protests "was not ... just banned because of the pandemic as claimed"? Source: Disband or risk prosecution, vigil organisers warned, RTHK
- ALT2:... that the US consulate in Hong Kong lit hundreds of candles (pictured) to commemorate the 32nd anniversary of the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests? Source: "China Blasts US And EU Consulates In Hong Kong For Tiananmen Candles". International Business Times. AFP. 4 June 2021.
- Reviewed: see User:Ohconfucius/DYK#QPQ

Created by Ohconfucius (talk). Self-nominated at 12:20, 7 June 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Date and length fine. However I have a few issues with the hooks. First of all we should say Hong Kong, not HK (which sadly would put ALT1 over the character limit), secondly "pro-establishment" seems a little WP:LOADED to me, Would "pro-Beijing" be better? The Embassy one is good but less hooky than the originals so I'll let @Ohconfucius: decide how he wishes to proceed. Also, can you please clarify for me what you are using as a QPQ? No close paraphrasing and could you ping me when its done and I can have another look at it. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 13:38, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Pro-Beijing" would be acceptable, because it's a commonly-used term. In that case, would it be possible to simply say "the government" using a pipe? so we would have:

ALT3b:... that a pro-Beijing legislator said the government ought to admit that the 32nd anniversary memorial of the Tiananmen protests "was not ... just banned because of the pandemic as claimed"?

For the QPQ, I was thinking of applying Emrullah İşler if it remains valid. -- Ohc ^{revolution of our times} 23:29, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ohconfucius: That's from 7 years ago. I could AGF on it at a stretch but have you got a more recent one? I know there was a discussion recently about time limiting QPQs so I would feel much better if you could provide one that's more recent please. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 08:18, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get reviewing something, possibly tonight. -- Ohc ^{revolution of our times} 10:11, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ALT3: ... that on the 32nd anniversary of the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests, the traditional venue for memorials in Hong Kong lay empty for the first time in thirty-two years? Source: "A Hong Kong park that traditionally hosts huge vigils on the anniversary of China's deadly Tiananmen Square crackdown lay empty for the first time late Friday [4 June 2021] [...] Police threw cordons around Victoria Park...leaving the venue free of candle-carrying mourners for the first time in 32 years." AFP (2021-06-04) "Hong Kong park empty for first time in 32 years on Tiananmen anniversary"

@The C of E and Ohconfucius: what do you think? Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 21:46, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Seems good to me but i'd like to hear what the nominator @Ohconfucius: has to say. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 22:21, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the suggestion. It's acceptable but is not my preferred choice, but the advantage is that it gets us under the maximum number of characters. -- Ohc ^{revolution of our times} 23:29, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@The C of E: Since the nominator is OK with the new hook, this review looks like it is almost ready for completion. BuySomeApples (talk) 21:19, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@BuySomeApples: It's not the hook that's the problem, it's the fact that @Ohconfucius: has not provided a QPQ and having thought about it, I cannot accept one thats from 7 years ago. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 21:24, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see, I misread the chain of comments. In that case pinging @Ohconfucius: to provide a recent qpq, otherwise I'll mark this for closure. BuySomeApples (talk) 21:29, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry for the lack of action on my part. I'm currently on the road, and will be back properly in two weeks. If this nomination will have passed its time limits by then, you may close it. Cheers, - Ohc ^{revolution of our times} 05:53, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be willing to review a nomination and donate it for this one. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 18:51, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rotideypoc41352, please feel free to do so. This seems to be stuck without a contemporaneous review. Thank you for the offer. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:37, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@BuySomeApples: I shall donate one of my reviews to get this rolling: Template:Did you know nominations/Allen Hall Theatre – subpage Allen Hall Theatre Schwede 66 22:09, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@The C of E: courtesy pinging nom, as Schwede66 has very generously donated a QPQ. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 13:57, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

, for ALT3. Thanks User:Schwede66. Drmies (talk) 19:18, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]