Template:Did you know nominations/Tenjukoku Shūchō Mandala
- 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) 06:22, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Tenjukoku Shūchō Mandala
[edit]... that the extant version of the Tenjukoku Shūchō Mandala is compiled from parts of both the original and of a replica created over 600 years later?
Source: "In the Edo period, remains from the original embroidery and parts of its replica made during the late Kamakura period (late 13th century) were gathered into the present form." Tokyo National Museum. Original dates to 622, therefore late 13th C = over 600 years later.
- Reviewed: Sea Bright-Monmouth Beach Seawall
Created by Yunshui (talk). Self-nominated at 10:52, 15 May 2017 (UTC).
Interesting unique piece of art, on good sources, Japanese source accepted AGF, no copyvio obvious. In the article: Please have a link or explanation of mandala (or mandara, as one source has it. - Hook: can you work in that the older colours were preserved better than those from 600 years later? Seems to add extra interest. Should the name be styled as in the article? I miss the image!! If no image, at least say Japanese, no? - I'd like to see dates, size and provenance in an infobox, compare this ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:05, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
- How about
- ALT1:
... that the original seventh-century elements of the Japanese artwork Tenjukoku Shūchō Mandalaremain better preserved than the replica created 600 years later? - Infobox added
(modern dimensions are currently unknown, leastways I haven't found them in any of the sources), mandala linked, styling in hook changed. I don't think the image looks especially good at 100px, which is why I didn't include it in the nomination (it just ends up looking like a blurry brown square). Yunshui 雲水 11:23, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
thank you! Perhaps a detail could be shown as an image? Asking David Levy. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:32, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
- How about this → ? Yunshui 雲水 08:13, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
- Looks good to me. What would you say about what's pictured? Perhaps also more details in the commons description? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:31, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
- I'm actually thinking this might be a better option, since it actually appears in the article. Not sure what more is necessary for a description - I would have thought the link to the article provided all the necessary detail. Yunshui 雲水 13:13, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you for images, and yes, it has to be in the article. Hook for example:
- I'm actually thinking this might be a better option, since it actually appears in the article. Not sure what more is necessary for a description - I would have thought the link to the article provided all the necessary detail. Yunshui 雲水 13:13, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
- Looks good to me. What would you say about what's pictured? Perhaps also more details in the commons description? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:31, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
- How about this → ? Yunshui 雲水 08:13, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
- ALT2: ... that the original seventh-century elements (detail pictured) of the Japanese artwork Tenjukoku Shūchō Mandala remain better preserved than the replica created 600 years later? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:02, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
- Works for me! Yunshui 雲水 08:06, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
- --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:33, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
- ALT2: ... that the original seventh-century elements (detail pictured) of the Japanese artwork Tenjukoku Shūchō Mandala remain better preserved than the replica created 600 years later? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:02, 19 May 2017 (UTC)