Template:Did you know nominations/Tosa Yamauchi Family Treasury and Archives
- The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as 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 Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:10, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
Tosa Yamauchi Family Treasury and Archives edit
- ... that the Tosa Yamauchi Family Treasury and Archives contain the oldest extant manuscript of the Kokinshū (replica pictured), dating from the 11th century and designated a National Treasure of Japan?
Created/expanded by Bamse (talk). Nominated by Nihonjoe (talk) at 19:03, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
- Hook: Interesting enough, short enough, cited. Image is not good for main page.
- Article: Long enough, new enough. Paraphrasing is fine. Notability isn't proven yet, as it is mainly referenced to self-published sources.
Please add more sources to show notability Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:55, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
- I would consider the hook fact ("museum holds a National Treasure of Japan"), which is referenced to an external source), reason enough for notability. How else could I prove notability? bamse (talk) 12:10, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
- More third party sources per the guidelines for organizations and companies. Shame we don't have a guideline for museums. Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:18, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
- The guidelines say: Notability requires only that these necessary sources have been published, not that the names of these sources have already been typed into the article., so I assume it would be sufficient to mention a couple of independent RS for notability here instead of putting them in the article. So here it goes:
- Database of Cultural Properties published by Agency for Cultural Affairs; lists the National Treasure of Japan and a couple of Important Cultural Properties that are in possession of the Tosa Yamauchi Family Treasury and Archives (this source is already present in the article)
- this book page 97 published by World Scientific
- this article by The Japan Times,
- this book page 259, published by Tuttle Publishing,
- this website published by Visitingarts (which is funded by various UK Arts councils).
- I focused on English language sources only, but of course there are many more in Japanese. Five independent reliable sources should be more than enough to establish notability, I believe. bamse (talk) 16:35, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
- I don't see in-depth coverage but passing mentions (and a brief profile that shows existence but nothing else). I agree that it is probably notable, but this has to be shown beyond a shadow of a doubt before appearing on the Main Page. If it were put up for AFD while on the main page, someone would have our heads. The Japanese sources are fine. Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:17, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
- How about: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5] ? They have most/all info (and a bit more) that is also in the article. bamse (talk) 23:46, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
- The Nikken Times source looks decent, as does the Asahi (via Gtranslate). Add those as references to information they support (or add from them) and I will be happy to give this a tick. Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:50, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
- You're welcome to help out with this kind of thing, too, rather than telling people they have to do work not actually required for DYK. Demanding that others do everything before you'll deign to support a nomination which clearly met all the criteria before any of these additional sources is a bit much, don't you think? The museum is clearly notable for the hook contents alone, and there is absolutely no requirement that the article be sourced up-the-gills before it can be included or approved here. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 03:35, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
- As implied by the fact that I used GTranslate, I do not speak Japanese; I would not feel comfortable adding information using the so called "translation" it gives. Regarding notability, DYKs must also comply with existing guidelines and policies, and WP:N is a big one; seeing as their is no guideline for museums, the fact that it houses a national treasure of Japan would be a possible indicator of notability, but not necessarily a guarantee. I'd rather we get any questions out of the way now than have to deal with it at an inopportune time. Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:43, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
- You're welcome to help out with this kind of thing, too, rather than telling people they have to do work not actually required for DYK. Demanding that others do everything before you'll deign to support a nomination which clearly met all the criteria before any of these additional sources is a bit much, don't you think? The museum is clearly notable for the hook contents alone, and there is absolutely no requirement that the article be sourced up-the-gills before it can be included or approved here. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 03:35, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
- The Nikken Times source looks decent, as does the Asahi (via Gtranslate). Add those as references to information they support (or add from them) and I will be happy to give this a tick. Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:50, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
- How about: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5] ? They have most/all info (and a bit more) that is also in the article. bamse (talk) 23:46, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
- I don't see in-depth coverage but passing mentions (and a brief profile that shows existence but nothing else). I agree that it is probably notable, but this has to be shown beyond a shadow of a doubt before appearing on the Main Page. If it were put up for AFD while on the main page, someone would have our heads. The Japanese sources are fine. Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:17, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
- The guidelines say: Notability requires only that these necessary sources have been published, not that the names of these sources have already been typed into the article., so I assume it would be sufficient to mention a couple of independent RS for notability here instead of putting them in the article. So here it goes:
- More third party sources per the guidelines for organizations and companies. Shame we don't have a guideline for museums. Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:18, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
- I would consider the hook fact ("museum holds a National Treasure of Japan"), which is referenced to an external source), reason enough for notability. How else could I prove notability? bamse (talk) 12:10, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
Additional references have been added to better indicate notability. AGF on Japanese sources. Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:44, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
- And a big thank you to Bamse for dealing with everything quickly and professionally. Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:47, 23 August 2011 (UTC)