Jump to content

Talk:Mauatua

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Tapa cloth is not woven

[edit]

Sources referenced in the article and WP elsewhere consistently describe Tapa cloth as MADE or BEATEN, but never WOVEN. Weaving interlaces two sets of perpendicular fibers. Tapa, in contrast, begins as a sheet of bark that is beaten to become extremely thin, wide, and long. Various sheets are then beaten together in a wet process to create larger pieces, similar to Felt. Justaxn (talk) 02:53, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Justaxn, my misunderstanding. Thanks for leaving a message - I'll go and track down where I've used the incorrect terminology. Best Lajmmoore (talk) 09:49, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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 Theleekycauldron (talk11:14, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Created by Lajmmoore (talk). Nominated by Victuallers (talk) at 13:43, 29 November 2021 (UTC).[reply]

  • New enough, long enough. Article complies with major content policies and is very solidly sourced, no copyvio issues detected. QPQ done. I find ALT1 more interesting and have edited to make it more succinct, feel free to revert if this isn't felt to be an improvement. I was able to verify the hook through the source given and it is also present in the article with an inline citation. I must note that whilst the person relating this fact is a distant relative and this possibly raises a COI issue at face value, I would expect an extensive degree of the bloodlines mixing after a given number of generations in a tiny tiny community like Pitcairn, so in all likelihood there isn't a plausible reason for this author to exaggerate the role of this particular person. I wonder if adding the year of this event (1838) would make the hook even more interesting. Regardless of the small print though, this is good to go. Thank you very much for a well-written article, I thoroughly enjoyed reading it. --GGT (talk) 02:58, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
ALT1 to T:DYK/P4