	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
B	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
	This article was accepted from this draft on 4 May 2024 by reviewer Xoak (talk · contribs).

Astronomy Low‑importance

	Astronomy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

History of Science

	History of science portal This article is part of the History of Science WikiProject, an attempt to improve and organize the history of science content on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. You can also help with the History of Science Collaboration of the Month.History of ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject History of ScienceTemplate:WikiProject History of Sciencehistory of science articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating 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 Launchballer talk 23:01, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

Plato (left) and Aristotle (right) opposed the idea of a plurality of worlds.

... that Plato and Aristotle opposed the idea of extraterrestrial life?

Source: * Crowe, Michael J. (2008). The extraterrestrial life debate Antiquity to 1915: A Source Book. University of Notre Dame Press. pp. 8–13. ISBN 978-0-268-02368-3.

Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Phases of ice
Comment: The article talks about a "plurality of worlds" (meaning, other worlds similar to Earth, including local life, that may exist elsewhere), that's just the ancient way to talk about extraterrestrial life. For the hook it may be better to use the terms that any casual reader may understand.

Moved to mainspace by Cambalachero (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 117 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Cambalachero (talk) 20:04, 5 May 2024 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook eligibility:

Cited:
Interesting:
Other problems: - Hook and article wording needs to be changed. It isn't entirely clear from the article if they wanted extraterrestrial life not to exist, versus they just didn't think it actually existed.

QPQ: Done.

Overall: (t · c) buidhe 00:11, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

- Actually, it's both things. He didn't think alien life exists, and didn't want (because of his own biases) for it to exist. Yes, perhaps that is faulty logic, but we're talking about ancient Greece. Logic itself was still a recent concept, and some things we know take for granted in discussions (such as a basic scientific method when talking about scientific stuff, or that fallacies make a bad argument) were either new concepts or not created yet. The article makes this clear enough: the way in which the Greeks discussed their ideas, their biases, the slow development of the scientific method, etc. Cambalachero (talk) 17:06, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - Alright then, if the promoter is ok with it I guess it's fine. (t · c) buidhe 01:02, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cambalachero and Buidhe: As written, this article would deserve ((lead too short)), can this be expanded?--Laun chba ller 22:10, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done Cambalachero (talk) 14:52, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My objection has been resolved.--Laun chba ller 14:54, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]