Template:Did you know nominations/The Wrath of the Gods (1914 film)

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 BlueMoonset (talk) 01:33, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

The Wrath of the Gods (1914 film)

edit

Sessue Hayakawa and Tsuru Aoki in The Wrath of the Gods.

Created by Skr15081997 (talk). Self nominated at 11:05, 14 May 2014 (UTC).

  • Approved --TIAYN (talk) 11:56, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
  • The review needs more details, in accordance with. DYK review instructions please begin with one of the 5 review symbols that appear at the top of the edit screen, and then indicate all aspects of the article that you have reviewed. Details that are supposed to be checked in a review can be found at DYKReviewing guide — Maile (talk) 13:13, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
  • ... that Sessue Hayakawa, who played the role of Tsuru Aoki's father in the film The Wrath of the Gods (screenshot pictured) married her in the same year the film was released? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skr15081997 (talkcontribs) 14:41 15 May 2014
  • @Soman and Skr15081997: Good, sufficient length, recent enough, Hook interesting and referenced. Approved --TIAYN (talk) 09:16, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Hold on. The article is, alas, poorly written, with little punctuation, various styles of quoting (only one of which complies with the WP:MOS), and plain grammatical errors such as: "The film was screened at the 30th Los Angeles Asian Pacific Film Festival on May 4,1914 along with Sessue Hayakawa's another film The Dragon Painter." Dahn (talk) 10:06, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
  • I am still concerned about the chaotic formats used for references (and intrigued in particular by the use of full dates in the publishing details... of books). If anybody wants to have a go at cleaning them up, I would appreciate it (I tried to myself, but could no longer focus my eyes between all the spaghettilinks). That said, I feel that these are not concerns that would disqualify the article from being DYK-featured. Good to go (by a small margin). Dahn (talk) 18:23, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
  • @Dahn: I have removed the publication dates in the book sources and let me know what problem do the references pose.--Skr15081997 (talk) 12:10, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
  • My sincere thanks for taking the trouble to fix the referencing format problems even after I had passed the article -- this shows real commitment. I also apologize for going this long without replying -- but that is because I was caught up elsewhere, and believed that my earlier reply clarified that I had in fact verified and passed the article. I am re-adding the "approved" symbol to this current reply to emphasize, yet again, that the article is indeed a fine addition for the DYK queue. @Skr15081997: dear fellow wikipedian, I suppose that the only reason why this article was not picked up for the queue in the meantime is simply because it was not yet noticed by the DYK reviewer; this should happen some time in the coming days. Just in case you were worried: don't be, you did a fine job and I congratulate you yet again. Dahn (talk) 00:45, 1 June 2014 (UTC)