- 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 Yoninah (talk) 23:59, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Saimaluu Tash edit
Petroglyphs at Saimaluu Tash
- ... that in Saimaluu Tash meaning "embroidered" or "patterned stones" is the "most celebrated site" of petroglyphs (pictured) in Central Asia of the Aryan, Scythian and Turkic people?
5x expanded by Nvvchar (talk). Self-nominated at 03:12, 30 November 2015 (UTC).
I had to remove the hook claim as cited - I couldn't find it in the source, and Lonely Planet, Central Asia is not really the best source for a claim like this. I've looked at the main 3 refs, and none mention the Aryans or Scythians. Turkish peoples are mentioned, but these certainly don't trace back to 4000 BC, the article text mentioned. Suggest re-writing, new hooks, and careful checking of claims by a re-reviewer. Johnbod (talk) 16:10, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
- Johnbod The text from the Lonely Planet reference on page 631 reads “Over the millennia Aryan, Scythian and Turkic peoples have added to the earliest Bronze Age carvings. The carvings are spread over two slopes and depict hunting, shamanistic rite and battle scenes, some dating back more than 4000 years.” As you have deleted the text considering the reference as not very reliable, I am now suggesting the following
ALT1 hook. ... that Saimaluu Tash, a petroglyphs site (pictured), has black-and-white rock paintings which are a globally important collection of rock art? Nvvchar. 09:04, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
- Ok, what you put in the article was "It is the "most celebrated site" in Central Asia of the period of more than 4000 years ago of the Aryan, Scythian and Turkic people." which isn't the same, is it? Most of the images seem to come from the last 2000 years more or less. I still don't see where "most celebrated site" comes from, and Aryan is a dubious term best not used in this way. And a Lonely Planet quide is still not a very good source for this sort of thing. Johnbod (talk) 15:46, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
- Johnbod The text from the Lonely Planet reference on page 631 reads “Over the millennia Aryan, Scythian and Turkic peoples have added to the earliest Bronze Age carvings. The carvings are spread over two slopes and depict hunting, shamanistic rite and battle scenes, some dating back more than 4000 years.” As you have deleted the text considering the reference as not very reliable, I am now suggesting the following
New review needed. Johnbod (talk) 15:46, 11 December 2015 (UTC)- Review
Good to go! New article, timely nominated. Meets core policies and guidelines, and in particular: is neutral; cites sources with inline citations; is free of close paraphrasing issues, copyright violations and plagiarism. DYK nomination was timely and article is easily long enough. Every paragraph is cited. Earwig's copy violation detector: Saimaluu Tash report gives it a clean bill. ALT1 Hook is hooky enough, I think, and relates directly to the essence of the article. It is interesting, decently neutral, and appropriately cited. Picture is clear, used in article and properly licensed. QPQ done. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 18:26, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
- The "most celebrated site" quote is no longer in the article, and anyway, something like that could easily be paraphrased in a hook. Do you have another hook suggestion, @Nvvchar:? Yoninah (talk) 23:34, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
- Comment I specifically endorsed ALT1. What is wrong with that? 7&6=thirteen (☎) 23:36, 4 January 2016 (UTC)