Template:Did you know nominations/Ru ware
- 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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:31, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Ru ware
[edit]
similar Ru ware bowl
- ... that in 2012 a small Ru ware bowl from the Song dynasty was sold for $US 26.7 million? Sotheby's, Hong Kong, Sale "Ru - From a Japanese Collection", only lot, 04 April 2012
- ALT1:... that ...? Source: "You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (and [link], or briefly cite, the source)
Created by Johnbod (talk). Self-nominated at 04:21, 11 October 2016 (UTC).
detailed article, well sourced, offline sources accepted AGF. Hook sourced and interesting, image free and a good illustrations, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:36, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
@Gerda Arendt: Your review does not appear to include a copyvio check. Pppery 00:16, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
- For users such as Johnbod, that seems not necessary. If you think it is, please go ahead and do one. There's AGF, DYK? Many sources offline, so can't be checked anyway. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:34, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
- Well, I've done it - Earwig 41.2%, with the Sotheby's ref, picking up bits I quoted and museum names. Johnbod (talk) 17:45, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
- For users such as Johnbod, that seems not necessary. If you think it is, please go ahead and do one. There's AGF, DYK? Many sources offline, so can't be checked anyway. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:34, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
- @Johnbod: Also, your review used as QPQ does not mention a copyvio check either. Pppery 00:48, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
- Ok, added there. Johnbod (talk) 03:11, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
- @Pppery: Are you happy that this nomination now complies with the DYK criteria? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:02, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
- @Cwmhiraeth: I'm not sure whether modifying a review to add missing criteria after it has been promoted is valid or not. Otherwise, this would be good to go. Pppery 12:08, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
- I would be inclined to be lenient here and accept it. Johnbod will probably be more careful with his review next time. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:23, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
- @Cwmhiraeth: I'm not sure whether modifying a review to add missing criteria after it has been promoted is valid or not. Otherwise, this would be good to go. Pppery 12:08, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
- @Pppery: Are you happy that this nomination now complies with the DYK criteria? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:02, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
- Ok, added there. Johnbod (talk) 03:11, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
- I don't understand how any of this interlude improved Wikipedia, but guess I can restore the tick now? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:29, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
- I think so. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:12, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
- --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:14, 22 October 2016 (UTC)