Wikipedia

Template:Did you know nominations/Golconda diamonds

< Template:Did you know nominations
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: rejected by Vanamonde93 (talk) 15:37, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

Golconda diamonds

(
)
Hope Diamond is one of Golconda diamonds.
Hope Diamond is one of Golconda diamonds.

or

  • ALT1: ... that the 16th and 17th centuries were the peak period of the Golconda diamond industry, with 23 mines in the region—it produced diamonds for 2000 years until the 17th Century? Source: multiple references cited in the article.
    • Reviewed:

Improved to Good Article status by Omer123hussain (talk). Self-nominated at 10:52, 23 August 2022 (UTC).

  • Comment only: This article might benefit from some more copyediting. --LordPeterII (talk) 15:04, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
@LordPeterII thanks for your c/e, and furthermore while FA reviews a lot of c/e sessions will have. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Omer123hussain (talk • contribs) 07:33, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
  • Not a review, but just a note that if you want this to run with an image it needs to be one that appears in the article (see Wikipedia:Did_you_know#Images) - Dumelow (talk) 07:54, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation

Image eligibility:

QPQ: None required.

Overall: Nomination would pass if the picture is removed. CSJJ104 (talk) 13:30, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

... or if it was added to the article :) I have done just that, @CSJJ104. –LordPeterII (talk) 16:11, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
@LordPeterII: The picture is now in the article, but the caption used in the article contains information about the relationship between the Hope Diamond and the French Blue which is uncited within the article. CSJJ104 (talk) 19:16, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
True, I have added some sources and a word that hopefully signifies we are only 99.9% sure that they are related. –LordPeterII (talk) 19:47, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
All issues addressed. Happy to pass nomination. CSJJ104 (talk) 20:21, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
  • I'm sorry, but what in the world is meant by Although the Golconda mines have been depleted since 1830, they hold value as antique gemstones? Mines are not gemstones. And how can it possibly be that Several literary legends were inspired by the Golconda diamonds and mines. These include such examples as the gem lore of the Priestly breastplate from the Old Testament -- you're saying the O.T. somehow references a mine in India? And later we have Further the author describes that it was first cited in the 4th-century treatise of St Epiphanius (of Cyprus), as Gem lore, the Breastplate of the high priest of the Temple from Old Testament, and it was finally derived from Herodotus—430 BC -- the meaning of which utterly escapes me. What the hell is going on here? EEng 19:56, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
Indeed, seeing these sentences singled out I am wondering... @Nolabob and Omer123hussain: I think the GA review was not thorough enough on criterium 1a especially, even though the article does look good in other regards. Pinging also @CSJJ104 as the DYK nom reviewer. –LordPeterII (talk) 20:07, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Adding to EENg's point, which was what prompted me to pull yesterday rather than tweak the hook myself; there is content in the lead about some exceptional diamonds (Florentine Yellow, Akbar Shah, etc) that isn't cited, and isn't in the body. This is a fairly basic verifiability issue, and lacking citations, it should have been caught at GAR; it didn't need a spotcheck. I don't want to dump too much on the nominator before they've had a chance to respond, but we should note this isn't a problem just for DYK. Vanamonde (Talk) 07:19, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
    I understand there are some grammatical mistakes, as a non-native speaker we could not make deep corrections, but you may find the rest of the article is very well cited, neutral, with images applied and covered the topic. In fact, after your all support to copyedit it now look more meaningful. Hope it may reach DYK. :)Omer123hussain (talk) 07:58, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
    @Omer123hussain: I appreciate the difficulties a non-native speaker of English may face. There are many places where you can find support with things that you find difficult, such as GOCE, who can help you with copy-editing, or the WP:TEAHOUSE, where new editors can ask for assistance. However, you need to be able to understand and respond when people point out issues with your work, like I did above. I listed a specific instance of content that fails WP:V, and EEng pointed to a sentence that is just incorrect. You haven't fixed any of that. How do you expect the article to be featured at DYK without fixing those issues? Vanamonde (Talk) 08:06, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
    @Vanamonde93: thanks for your advise and reply, this weekend I was traveling, so could not check WP inbox, anyway I will make all corrections recommended by you and update you here. :)Omer123hussain (talk) 09:46, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
    Dear reviewers, I had fixed and responded to all the suggestions, and made some c/e, due to WL of Diamond names that are not much discussed in articles I had escaped citing-anyway now it is fixed by citing. Hope we can proceed with DYK now. :)Omer123hussain (talk) 14:18, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
    @Omer123hussain:, thanks, the citation issue has been addressed. However, there are still issues with the prose. I'm not demanding that you handle it yourself, given that English isn't your first language, but if you cannot, you need to ask for help from people you can. I already suggested GOCE as one venue; another might be WT:INB, where a more experienced editor may be willing to rewrite the prose. I am not personally willing to promote this as it stands. Vanamonde (Talk) 15:04, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
    I'd also like to ping @Nolabob again. Not because I want to accuse you of negligence, but because I want to point out that these issues were present in the article you reviewed and likely escaped your attention. It almost got promoted here as well, because at a glance the article looked fine, when in detail, there were clear errors present. In the future, you might need to be more thorough with the prose itself when doing GA reviews. –LordPeterII (talk) 16:04, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
  • On an unrelated note, the image is a computer-generated simulation of a reconstructed earlier form of what was later cut into the Hope diamond, not a photo and not of the diamond as it appears now. We should not combine it with a caption that suggests it to be an actual image of the Hope diamond. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:11, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
  • @David Eppstein: Indeed, I raised this question back when the nom was still in prep. The information in the article is correct (after I researched a bit on the image), but that it was presented incorrectly in the caption here earlier is another of those several mistakes that have been found. I suggest Computer reconstruction of the French Blue, previous form of the Hope diamond or something similar. –LordPeterII (talk) 21:11, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
  • It's been almost a month since the last comments here. Are there any updates on the status of this nomination? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:56, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Note that, due to issues listed here and more issues I listed at the article talk page, I have removed the GA status from this article, as the GA review clearly wasn't up to standards. Accordingly, this DYK nom should be closed as the requirement of being a GA is no longer met. Fram (talk) 08:24, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Closing. Factual accuracy issues do not appear to have been resolved. Vanamonde (Talk) 15:37, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Golconda_diamonds&oldid=1115257431"