Template:Did you know nominations/Carthage Treasure
- 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) 08:41, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Carthage Treasure edit
.JPG)
... that the 4th century silverware in the Carthage Treasure (bowl pictured) was found in Tunisia, but it is thought to have been made in Serbia?
- Reviewed: QPQ = Lily Bristow
Created by Jononmac46 (talk), Victuallers (talk). Nominated by Victuallers (talk) at 10:44, 4 April 2014 (UTC).
interesting treasure, thank you for the find. The hook is interesting, but I couldn't find the Serbia ref, also found the bowl there that is not pictured above. I actually find that bowl picture more attractive in small size, how about a hook around it? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:08, 5 April 2014 (UTC)- Sorry. You need to click on "related objects" on the page to find this bowl. I thought the url took you directly there. Victuallers (talk) 09:46, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
- (alt1)
... that the 4th century silver bowl in the Carthage Treasure (pictured) was found in Tunisia, but it is thought to have been made in Serbia? - (alt2)
... that the 4th century silver bowl in the Carthage Treasure (pictured) is thought to have been made near the Danube?
- I found the entry now, but think it's a bit tricky to understand, the Danube is long, and the term Serbia had many meanings in history, - a link to today's Serbia is probably not helpful. If that line, I would reword, but feel free to say something interesting about the objects rather than their provenance.
- ALT3:
... that the 4th century covered silver bowl (pictured) in the Carthage Treasure was found in Tunisia but is thought to have been made in today's Serbia?--Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:16, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
- I'm happy with alt3 if you are OK with everything else. I think the most interesting thing about the bowl is its appearance - which is tricky to describe. It looks to me as if it was made 200 years ago not nearly 2000 Victuallers (talk) 15:05, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
ALT3 preferred, please with the stunning licensed image, which illustrates beyond words, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:48, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
Pulled from prep by Fram due to hook issues with the promoted ALT3. The issue would affect all the hooks, so I'm striking them. A new ALT hook is clearly needed. See WT:DYK#Template:Did you know nominations/Carthage Treasure for further information. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:41, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
- If someone would like to take over this nomination then please feel free to offer a hook Victuallers (talk) 16:26, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
- I offer the hook as in the discussion (which in my simple thinking could have replaced ALT3) and pray that a reviewer will come along:
- ALT4:
...that the 4th-century covered silver bowl (pictured) in the Carthage Treasure is similar to objects made in today's Serbia?--Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:39, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
- As I noted on that very discussion, "to me, 'today's Serbia' means modern Serbia, not the ancient land that is currently located within the boundaries of modern Serbia, so Gerda's ALT proposal is confusing to this reader". This remains true now that it's been renamed ALT4. Even more important is that the article still contains the claim that the bowl is thought to have been made in Kostolac, which does not accurately reflect the source (which is at the link Fram gives). I'm also curious why the text refers to "a silver hemispherical lidded bowl", but the (uncited) caption of the picture of the bowl (the one used for this DYK) refers to it being "one of the hemispherical covered bowls". Was there one of these, or several? The article needs to be fixed and a new hook suggested for this to proceed. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:25, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
- I changed the article and show a quote. I am not the author and say what I understand: The treasure contains two lidded (covered) bowls, one of them is held by the British Museum. What can we say for a hook: that the bowl is similar to some found across the Mediterranean Sea? Help? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:55, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
.JPG)
- ALT5: ...that a silver bowl (pictured) from the 4th-century Carthage Treasure shows chased and hammered pastoral scenes in relief around the edge?
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:53, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
HOOK: "Serbia" is impossible; it's an anachronism. ALT5 highlights the underlying problem with this nomination: the statement is true, yes, but it's completely unremarkable. All sorts of bowls of chased and hammered scenes in relief around the edge. If we want to mention the place of origin, the correct term is "Moesia" or "Roman Moesia" or "the Roman province of Moesia.
NOMINATION: The difficulty of finding an adequate hook stems, in great measure, from the article's lack of notability. There's not a ton of coverage; a sensationalist TV program, an exhibit case in the British Museum, and Wikipedia. There's no mention I see in CAH, which discusses several other Roman silver hoards in its article on "silver". MarkBernstein (talk) 16:23, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
- DYK shows notable and less notable things. This hoard is more precious than Men's parking space, if you ask me. If you don't like ALT5, you are welcome to suggest another. Serbia is not mentioned in an active hook. The correct term, which most readers will have to look up, seems correct but not too interesting. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:11, 4 May 2014 (UTC)