Jump to content

Template:Did you know nominations/Kharkhorin Rock

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion 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  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:07, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Kharkhorin Rock

[edit]

Created/expanded by Dr. Blofeld (talk), Nvvchar (talk), Kelapstick (talk). Nominated by Dr. Blofeld (talk) at 13:33, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Needs the sentence saying that the penis is 24 inches to have a reference. Secretlondon (talk) 22:08, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
Done. Nvv will QPQ.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 22:46, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
The article seems to make a mistaken claim that there are two statues, with one being in the monastery. In fact, the cited source is clear that the 24 inch statue is the only one, with it being over a mile (two kilometers) away from the monastery. Leaving the obviously tongue-in-cheek nature of the hook aside, it does not appear that the claim about the monastery having this statue is even accurate. I would suggest a more accurate and less provocative hook, perhaps noting the legend of the statue itself.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 22:00, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
You're wrong. The 24 inch statue is in the monastery ground. There is an even larger one on the hillside to the southeast of the monastery, a large white one on a pedastal. So yes, technically the monastery does have a 24 inch penis statue. ♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 14:49, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Made amends in the article. Propose the following Alt 1 hook.
ALT 1: ... that a phallic rock has the function of reminding the monks of Erdene Zuu Monastery in Mongolia to remain celibate?--Nvvchar. 07:43, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
  • New ALT hook and article changes need reviewing. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:21, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
  • New enough, long enough, well-sourced, no close paraphrasing seen. Hook ref is verified; I tweaked the hook for grammar and links. ALT1 good to go. Yoninah (talk) 17:40, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
  • We would prefer it to appear as soon as finally approved and not wait for April Fool's day. Thank you.--Nvvchar. 11:25, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
Agreed. And original hook please.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 12:19, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Which original? Original original or ALT1? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:24, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Okay, tick based on above review — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:35, 21 December 2012 (UTC)