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 12:23, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

• ... that fans of Johnlock used "the set designer's fondness for elephants" to make the case that their preferred pairing would be written into the show?

• ALT1: ... that the relationship between Sherlock Holmes and John Watson in Sherlock is one of the most studied examples of queerbaiting? Source: "Scholarship on the 'queerbaiting' tactic has focused primarily on the BBC's Sherlock (Fathallah, 2015; Sheehan, 2015)." https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1367877916631050, note that this article was published in 2016 so it's possible this information is out of date
• ALT2: ... that well before fans of Sherlock shipped Johnlock, Graham Robb argued that Sherlock Holmes had a "distinctly homosexual lifestyle"? Source: "Holmes has a distinctly homosexual lifestyle", https://archive.org/details/strangershomosex0000robb, page 264, book was published in 2003
• Reviewed: Did you know nominations/Christ's Entry into Jerusalem
• Comment: Hooks in order of my preference, but pick whichever is your favorite. Will fill in QPQ later today, I wanted to get the hooks written up.

Rusalkii (talk) 20:45, 22 February 2025 (UTC).

• This is a really, really interesting article on such an interesting topic and I really think that with a little bit more expansion it deserves a chance for GA! There are no sourcing issues or any other issues I can see, article is long enough, and earwig does not show any copyright violations. I have also run the IABOT so more of the sources have now been archived :) QPQ has also now been done. I have two small suggestions (though they are not make or break) - I think the lead could be slightly expanded, and I suggest that the "Queerbaiting" subheading could maybe perhaps be changed to something like "Accusations/discussions of queerbaiting"? However, the article is good for go to DYK - Well done, you should be very proud! :) I think ALT1 or ALT2 should be used (with a slight preference for ALT1) - ALT0 is also good, but I think some readers could find it a bit difficult to understand and hence I think the second and third hooks would be best. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 06:17, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Also slightly prefer alt 1. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:53, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Happy to go with Alt1 if people without context find Alt1 confusing. It was rather difficult to write the hooks (and article!) without contantly slipping into unexplained fandom jargon and I'm afraid that left the hook rather convoluated (the way I'd phrase this in fandom contexts would be "... that Johnlock shippers used "the set designer's fondness for elephants" to argue that their ship would become canon?", and I think you can sort of still see the circumlocutions.

Re: GAN, I've tried to nominate at GAN twice now and I just find something about the process really stressful, I think because the wait is so long that all my excitement about the article disappears and it turns into this unpleasant obligation. I've changed the Queerbaiting heading. I'll think about the lead, it definitely could use expansion but I left it so short because I wasn't really sure what to say. Rusalkii (talk) 22:18, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

If it helps at all; if you bring it to GAN, I would be happy to review it immediately :) I think this has a chance to get to GA and I'd love to help you! DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 06:39, 26 February 2025 (UTC)