Template:Did you know nominations/Armenian Orphan rug
- 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 97198 (talk) 23:37, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Armenian Orphan rug[edit]
... that the Armenian Orphan rug (pictured) was woven by four hundred orphans and contains over four million hand-woven knots?
Created by EtienneDolet (talk). Self nominated at 04:34, 19 November 2014 (UTC).
Date, size, refs, hook neutrality, copyvio spotcheck, all green. I'd however suggest that a more interesting hook could mention the words Armenian Genocide. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 14:22, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
@EtienneDolet:, the talk page and history have reflected active disagreement on sections of the article by User:Tiptoethrutheminefield. Is the page stable now? Yoninah (talk) 16:09, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
- I think EtienneDolet was trying to get this to DYN while the rug was still on public display, so was rushing things a bit. The content I objected to was wording that was stating as fact something that was only an opinion, and which did not give anything of the context. EtienneDolet then removed that content so that the DYK could proceed. I would actually like to see that removed content put back sometime but worded more neutrally and with the context explained. As far as stability goes I don't think there will be any future content disagreement, but there is more content that could be added (just like for most articles, so it is not a DYK impediment). I'm sure there is more material that could be added about the circumstances of its creation (for example, there seems to be a connection with Jakob Künzler, who is not mentioned in the article). None of the current content seems derived from the only book on the subject (Deranian's 2013 book "President Calvin Coolidge and the Armenian orphan rug") - not having seen the book I don't know if this is resulting in any omissions but it might be more specific about when the weaving of the rug was started (rather than the vague "early 1920s"). Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 16:34, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
- Hi Yoninah (talk · contribs), as Tiptoethrutheminefield says above, there really isn't an active disagreement anymore and I don't see why this nomination shouldn't move forward. Of course, expansion can always be a big plus, but this expansion is no different from any other expansion of any other article. I look forward to working with Tiptoethrutheminefield to make this article even better. As for this nomination, Yoninah, would you be willing to rereview this nomination? If so please provide the proper tick accordingly. Étienne Dolet (talk) 17:31, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
- I'm happy to restore the tick based on the review by User:Piotrus. Based on his suggestion, I suggest adding the part about the Armenian Genocide, as follows:
- ALT1: ... that the Armenian Orphan rug (pictured) was woven by four hundred orphans of the Armenian Genocide and contains over four million hand-woven knots?
- ALT1 good to go Yoninah (talk) 18:13, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
- I have added some content on the 2013 proposed exhibition, which was the major omission in the article I think. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 20:02, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
- Please add at least one cite to the second paragraph under Exhibition, per DYK rules. Yoninah (talk) 20:05, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
- Have added it. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 22:06, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you. Every paragraph is cited, and I don't see any close paraphrasing in the recently added sources. ALT1 good to go. Yoninah (talk) 23:25, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks for cleaning up the references, Yoninah. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 23:39, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
- I have added some content on the 2013 proposed exhibition, which was the major omission in the article I think. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 20:02, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
- Hi Yoninah (talk · contribs), as Tiptoethrutheminefield says above, there really isn't an active disagreement anymore and I don't see why this nomination shouldn't move forward. Of course, expansion can always be a big plus, but this expansion is no different from any other expansion of any other article. I look forward to working with Tiptoethrutheminefield to make this article even better. As for this nomination, Yoninah, would you be willing to rereview this nomination? If so please provide the proper tick accordingly. Étienne Dolet (talk) 17:31, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
