Template:Did you know nominations/Snowflake (software)
- 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 SL93 (talk) 16:09, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Snowflake (software)
- ... that you can keep a snowflake in a browser tab? Source: https://www.zdnet.com/article/tor-snowflake-turns-your-browser-into-a-proxy-for-users-in-censored-countries/ (per Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources, "ZDNet is considered generally reliable for technology-related articles.")
- Reviewed: 3Y0J Bouvet Island DXpedition
- Comment: Other hook suggestions welcome. This is censorship-related software, so warning for political content, mostly Russia- and Iran-related.
Created by HLHJ (talk). Self-nominated at 23:42, 15 October 2022 (UTC).
Reviewing... Howard the Duck (talk) 02:38, 24 October 2022 (UTC)- I've withdrew my nomination that caused this QPQ review, so I won't be proceeding with reviewing this. Howard the Duck (talk) 12:35, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
| General: Article is new enough and long enough |
|---|
Policy compliance:
- Adequate sourcing:
- Possible issue, see below - Neutral:
- Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:
| Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
|---|
|
| QPQ: Done. |
Overall: 
The hook itself is interesting enough that it made me want to click on it to review it, so I think it should be okay; the alternatives I could concieve of were some statements about censorship but none of them felt as "hooky" as this one. The only concern I have with the article is that "it can relay any sort of content, some of its uses are illegal in any country."
and "In countries where Tor itself is illegal, knowingly operating a Snowflake node may be illegal."
are unsourced, and I know per WP:NOLEGAL it's not considered legal advice and it's entirely possible I'm just being a stickler here, but if an article is going to advise on the potential illegality of a thing, I think that's definitely the kind of statement that should be sourced. Would it be possible to add sources for that, or adjust or remove those statements? As far as I can tell, that's the only thing that would be cause for the essay-like template on the article. As far as I am aware that tag isn't a barrier to proceeding, as Wikipedia:Did you know/Reviewing guide#Review the article(s) says that templates listed at Wikipedia:Template index/Disputes are the ones that would cause an issue, and essay-like doesn't appear to be listed there. - Aoidh (talk) 04:15, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you, Aoidh! I've cited the rest of it, but still want to update some of the surrounding articles and try to find some 3rd-party sources for a bit more info. I originally wrote the "how it works" passage without sources (which did make it flow better), and the template was added before I went back and found and inserted refs. I'll ping MaxnaCarta and ask them, as they added it. HLHJ (talk) 03:03, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
