Template:Did you know nominations/Zhenjiu dacheng
- 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 SL93 (talk) 20:36, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Zhenjiu dacheng
- ... that the Zhenjiu dacheng has been described as "the greatest comprehensive survey of acupuncture in China ever to be produced during classical times"?
Created by Kingoflettuce (talk). Self-nominated at 14:35, 26 December 2022 (UTC).
Article was created within 7 days of nomination. Prose is over 1,500 characters. Article is written in a neutral tone with inline citations. QPQ is done. The hook seems based on subjective opinion though; I think having the hook based on how the writings were reprinted over 53 times before 1911 might be a more interesting fact. lullabying (talk) 19:44, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
- Lullabying Hey, thanks for the review, but I am struggling to see why the average reader would be interested to know that something was reprinted x number of times. It seems exceedingly pedestrian. KINGofLETTUCE 👑 🥬 20:16, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
- Do you have another one you can suggest instead? The original hook seemed to be based on a subjective opinion from one individual. lullabying (talk) 20:27, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what's wrong with that either. Happens all the time KINGofLETTUCE 👑 🥬 20:39, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
- This is exactly what WP:AESTHETIC is about -- we are appropriately mentioning how this work is received and giving the reader an idea as to its place in the acupuncture/medical literature. Of course it's a subjective opinion from one individual, but so what? We are not endorsing it, just reporting what has been said about it (and not by a nobody, mind you!) KINGofLETTUCE 👑 🥬 20:44, 26 December 2022 (UTC) KINGofLETTUCE 👑 🥬 20:44, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
- eg [1] [2] [3] and so forth KINGofLETTUCE 👑 🥬 20:48, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
- Based on the sources provided, it's only one person that said this and to any common reader like myself, you'd also have to describe the significance of the person making the statement. I think you could add some clarity in the hook by stating who made this statement. lullabying (talk) 01:52, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
- Scratch that, I've expanded the article a little. How about ALT1: ... that the 1601 medical text Zhenjiu dacheng recommends acupuncture-based cures for mental illness? KINGofLETTUCE 👑 🥬 11:52, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
I like that one better. Thanks for being flexible. Print sources are assumed in good faith and the DYK looks good to go. lullabying (talk) 18:40, 27 December 2022 (UTC)- Hey, sorry, I forgot to mention that you need to also include the source for your new ALT with the hook. Then it's good to go. lullabying (talk) 18:55, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
- ? Engelfriet 2021, pp. 263–264. KINGofLETTUCE 👑 🥬 17:38, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
- eg [1] [2] [3] and so forth KINGofLETTUCE 👑 🥬 20:48, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
