Template:Did you know nominations/Great Divine Temple
- 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 13:47, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Great Divine Temple
The Qian-Kun ball
- ... that the Great Divine Temple in Tay Ninh, Vietnam is the only Caodaism temple that is allowed to have the Cosmos ball representing the Jade Emperor's universe (pictured)? Source: Giang, Ngoc; Nguyen, Thi (2016). "A Study on the Tay Ninh Holy Tower of Caodaism in Vietnam: The Axis Mundi and Cosmic Cross Represented by the Temple". Procedia Engineering. 142: 252–259. (exact page is 255)
- Reviewed:
- Comment: This is my third nomination, so QPQ does not apply.
Created by Đại Việt quốc (talk). Self-nominated at 23:44, 13 November 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Great Divine Temple; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.
- Comment: it might be better for the sake of the general reader to follow the source's translation of "Cosmos" ball (and perhaps explain what it represents). It's a pity that the source itself does not tell us why the other temples aren't allowed to have one. KINGofLETTUCE 👑 🥬 02:21, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Kingoflettuce:
Done Đại Việt quốc (talk) 03:36, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
- I also wonder if the hook could be rewritten. It seems to assume the reader is familiar with Caodaism and is a bit complicated for non-specialists. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:35, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
- Reading the article I would also suggest that it be given a copyedit. Suggesting an alternative hook, even though I think some variant of ALT0 could work if it was rewritten/copyedited:
- ALT1 ... that the Great Divine Temple is the most important temple of Caodaism in Vietnam?
- Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:37, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Narutolovehinata5: Not sure what you actually meant by "Reading the article I would also suggest that it be given a copyedit"? Do you mean the hook should be copyedited or the whole article needs to be copyedited? Đại Việt quốc (talk) 05:10, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
- The whole article. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 05:17, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Narutolovehinata5: Well, okay... but I don't think it's very helpful to simply state that the whole article needs copyediting. Could you please at least suggest where it should be copyedited, or point out what the issues are (grammar, spelling mistakes...)? Đại Việt quốc (talk) 06:48, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
- From reading the article, it's mostly the Architecture section that needs work. I don't really see any spelling mistakes but the grammar could be improved. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:51, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Narutolovehinata5: Thanks! But still, the feedback is too general, which gave me almost no clue on where to start. I checked everything very carefully before posting and nominating, so from my point of view it seems fine. What exactly is wrong about the Architecture section? Is it its tone, its content, structure...? I would really appreciate it if someone could point out in detail. Đại Việt quốc (talk) 01:51, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
- It's a bit hard to explain, but the grammar and writing style isn't exactly the best. For example, the paragraph that starts with
The middle part of the temple is Cuu Trung Dai.
could probably flow better. Maybe another editor could explain it better than I could, I apologize if it's hard to explain exactly what needs to be rewritten. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:08, 23 November 2023 (UTC)- @Narutolovehinata5: Well! Then unfortunately there's nothing much I can do here. However, based on how you described it, the issue is simply the writing style. To my impression, the only other two criteria of a DYK candidate (apart from newess and length) are external policy compliance and presentability, and I think this article met those. Careful examination of the writing style has more to do with Good article and Featured article nominations. I wouldn't say that DYK does not look at writing style, it does but only to some extent. (Or maybe I'm completely wrong about this, and if I do feel free to correct me) Still, I'm more than happy to correct and adjust my writing style in this article where necessary, but only if someone can point it out and give a more detailed explanation of the issue (not just general ones). Đại Việt quốc (talk) 18:44, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Narutolovehinata5: Have your concerns been resolved? Is this ready for another review? Z1720 (talk) 03:30, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
- The article still needs a copyedit in my eyes, the review will continue once that is accomplished. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 05:43, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
- @Narutolovehinata5: Like I mentioned last time, it's really hard for me to address your concerns without you being able to describe them in detail. Like... are you expecting me to be able to read your mind? I'm not sure if this is how a review should go. @Vaticidalprophet: Do you have any suggestions on what I should do? Đại Việt quốc (talk) 08:17, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
- The article still needs a copyedit in my eyes, the review will continue once that is accomplished. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 05:43, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
- @Narutolovehinata5: Have your concerns been resolved? Is this ready for another review? Z1720 (talk) 03:30, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
- @Narutolovehinata5: Well! Then unfortunately there's nothing much I can do here. However, based on how you described it, the issue is simply the writing style. To my impression, the only other two criteria of a DYK candidate (apart from newess and length) are external policy compliance and presentability, and I think this article met those. Careful examination of the writing style has more to do with Good article and Featured article nominations. I wouldn't say that DYK does not look at writing style, it does but only to some extent. (Or maybe I'm completely wrong about this, and if I do feel free to correct me) Still, I'm more than happy to correct and adjust my writing style in this article where necessary, but only if someone can point it out and give a more detailed explanation of the issue (not just general ones). Đại Việt quốc (talk) 18:44, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
- It's a bit hard to explain, but the grammar and writing style isn't exactly the best. For example, the paragraph that starts with
- @Narutolovehinata5: Thanks! But still, the feedback is too general, which gave me almost no clue on where to start. I checked everything very carefully before posting and nominating, so from my point of view it seems fine. What exactly is wrong about the Architecture section? Is it its tone, its content, structure...? I would really appreciate it if someone could point out in detail. Đại Việt quốc (talk) 01:51, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
- From reading the article, it's mostly the Architecture section that needs work. I don't really see any spelling mistakes but the grammar could be improved. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:51, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Narutolovehinata5: Well, okay... but I don't think it's very helpful to simply state that the whole article needs copyediting. Could you please at least suggest where it should be copyedited, or point out what the issues are (grammar, spelling mistakes...)? Đại Việt quốc (talk) 06:48, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
- The whole article. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 05:17, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Narutolovehinata5: Not sure what you actually meant by "Reading the article I would also suggest that it be given a copyedit"? Do you mean the hook should be copyedited or the whole article needs to be copyedited? Đại Việt quốc (talk) 05:10, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
- Reading the article I would also suggest that it be given a copyedit. Suggesting an alternative hook, even though I think some variant of ALT0 could work if it was rewritten/copyedited:
Hey @Narutolovehinata5:, I did a little copyedit of the article last night. Thoughts? ♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:19, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
- Apologies for the delay in replying! There are still some parts that read a little weird to me but I think the writing is now at an acceptable state that this can proceed. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:21, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
Since no one else has taken this up for review, I'm going to give this a review. The article was new and long enough at the time of the nomination and everything is adequately sourced. The hook is mentioned in the article and is verified in the source. No QPQ is required for a nominator with less than five nominations. I'm requesting Premeditated Chaos if she could copyedit the hook a bit as the wording seems weird to me. I also wonder if an ALT1 saying that the temple is the most important in Caodaism might work since not all readers may be familiar with Caodaism and thus ALT0 might be too specialist. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:24, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
- ALT1 ... that the Great Divine Temple of Caodaism holds the Cosmos ball which represents the Jade Emperor's universe (pictured)?
- ALT2 ... that the universe of the Jade Emperor can be found in the Great Divine Temple of Caodaism?
- Thanks. @Premeditated Chaos: I'm ready to approve this, but would adding "of Caodaism" after "Great Divine Temple" in ALT1 also work, just for context purposes? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:48, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
- Sure, added. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 04:27, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
Thank you. Either ALT1 or ALT2 should be okay (it shouldn't be hard to include a pictured for ALT2 in case there's a desire to include the image). Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:20, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
- Sure, added. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 04:27, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks. @Premeditated Chaos: I'm ready to approve this, but would adding "of Caodaism" after "Great Divine Temple" in ALT1 also work, just for context purposes? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:48, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
