A fact from Dear Land of Guyana, of Rivers and Plains appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 26 May 2020 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that two separate contests were held to determine the words and the music of the national anthem of Guyana?
This article is within the scope of WikiProject South America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to South America 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.South AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject South AmericaTemplate:WikiProject South AmericaSouth America articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs 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.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles
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.
ALT1:... that the committee which chose the music of the national anthem of Guyana were not given the identities of the composers? Source: (same as main hook)
@Buidhe: You're right, it's not implausible. But to me, it's just rare – most of the well-known anthems I know were already popular before they were officially adopted (hence, the composer would've already been known). My apologies that you didn't find any of the hooks above suitable. —Bloom6132 (talk) 02:10, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@BlueMoonset, Yoninah, and Maile66: sorry to trouble you DYK veterans again. The issue this time is whether the hook (any of the 4) will be interesting to a broad audience. I'd like to get this on the MP next Tuesday (May 26) and everything else seems to check out fine. —Bloom6132 (talk) 08:39, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
To me, ALT0 (the original) seems the most interesting, with ALT2 as a distant second and the others... not interesting. I'd say go with the original, if any, but it seems to have already been vetoed. Kingsif (talk) 23:08, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Kingsif: Thanks for the input! No worries, the original hook is still in play, since it hasn't been struck out by either me or the first reviewer, who said he's fine with you providing a third opinion. —Bloom6132 (talk) 23:38, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Great - I think the word 'respectively' is unneeded, but otherwise ALT0 is what I would go with, approving based on original review. Kingsif (talk) 03:35, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith
Otherwise eligible, but neither of the hooks is particularly interesting or unusual. buidhe 01:22, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
Requesting a second opinion for the hooks. —Bloom6132 (talk) 02:15, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
Great - I think the word 'respectively' is unneeded, but otherwise ALT0 is what I would go with, approving based on original review. Kingsif (talk) 03:35, 19 May 2020 (UTC)