Difference between revisions of "Template:Did you know nominations/Petronius Maximus"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>JLJ001 (is fine) |
imported>Cwmhiraeth (Passed for DYK) |
||
Line 46: | Line 46: | ||
*Hi {{u|JLJ001}}. Apologies for the delay. I was on holiday and wanted to get back to my sources. But on reflection, having a debate on how thorough the sack was is bootless on a DYK nom. Your Alt 2 seems fine to me, probably better than my original. (Alt1 was mostly a joke and I agree that it is too self-referential.) [[User:Gog the Mild|Gog the Mild]] ([[User talk:Gog the Mild|talk]]) 12:12, 29 May 2018 (UTC) | *Hi {{u|JLJ001}}. Apologies for the delay. I was on holiday and wanted to get back to my sources. But on reflection, having a debate on how thorough the sack was is bootless on a DYK nom. Your Alt 2 seems fine to me, probably better than my original. (Alt1 was mostly a joke and I agree that it is too self-referential.) [[User:Gog the Mild|Gog the Mild]] ([[User talk:Gog the Mild|talk]]) 12:12, 29 May 2018 (UTC) | ||
::It's really not a problem at all, I would definitely have approved this myself if it wasn't for the recommendation for new reviewers to get a second opinion. [[User:JLJ001|JLJ001]] ([[User talk:JLJ001|talk]]) 13:03, 29 May 2018 (UTC) | ::It's really not a problem at all, I would definitely have approved this myself if it wasn't for the recommendation for new reviewers to get a second opinion. [[User:JLJ001|JLJ001]] ([[User talk:JLJ001|talk]]) 13:03, 29 May 2018 (UTC) | ||
+ | *[[File:Symbol question.svg|16px]] This is a newly-promoted GA, and is long enough and nominated soon enough. The article is neutral and I detected no copyright issues, although Earwig was concerned about [http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?698720-History-A-Look-in-the-Politics-of-the-Western-Roman-Empire-(454-480) this site], I think that the Total War Centre post was derived from Wikipedia and not vice versa. As for which hook to use, if you want to go with ALT2, you will need a suitably worded sentence in the Aftermath section with a citation at the end. [[User:Cwmhiraeth|Cwmhiraeth]] ([[User talk:Cwmhiraeth|talk]]) 18:14, 15 June 2018 (UTC) | ||
+ | |||
}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.--> | }}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.--> |
Revision as of 18:14, 15 June 2018
DYK toolbox |
---|
Petronius Maximus
- ... that after Petronius Maximus angered the king of the Vandals the Vandals sacked Rome so thoroughly that their name is still used to describe wanton destruction? Source: Cameron. The Cambridge Ancient History, Volume 14: Late Antiquity: Empire and Successors, A.D. 425–600 pg. 125. Encyclopædia Britannica (1926). Norwich. Byzantium: The Early Centuries pg. 162. Merrills and Miles. The Vandals pg. 9–19.
- ALT1:... that after Petronius Maximus angered the king of the Vandals the Vandals sacked Rome so thoroughly that their name is still used to describe misbehaviour on Wikipedia?
- ALT2:... that after Petronius Maximus angered the king of the Vandals the Vandals sacked Rome and defaced so many objects of cultural significance that defacement is still called Vandalism today?
- ALT1:... that after Petronius Maximus angered the king of the Vandals the Vandals sacked Rome so thoroughly that their name is still used to describe misbehaviour on Wikipedia?
- Reviewed: My 5th nomination, so I will 'cash in' Sultanate of Dahlak.
Improved to Good Article status by Gog the Mild (talk). Self-nominated at 09:33, 22 May 2018 (UTC).
- This is not very accurate. the 455 sack of Rome was in no way through (city not burnt, citizens not murdered etc). Nor did the vandals wantonly destroy anything. What they did was deface the cultural content of Rome, hence why vandalism means defacement, rather than destruction. With that in mind I have drafted ALT2. JLJ001 (talk) 01:26, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
Lua error: expandTemplate: template "y" does not exist.
- Hi Template:U. Apologies for the delay. I was on holiday and wanted to get back to my sources. But on reflection, having a debate on how thorough the sack was is bootless on a DYK nom. Your Alt 2 seems fine to me, probably better than my original. (Alt1 was mostly a joke and I agree that it is too self-referential.) Gog the Mild (talk) 12:12, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
This is a newly-promoted GA, and is long enough and nominated soon enough. The article is neutral and I detected no copyright issues, although Earwig was concerned about this site, I think that the Total War Centre post was derived from Wikipedia and not vice versa. As for which hook to use, if you want to go with ALT2, you will need a suitably worded sentence in the Aftermath section with a citation at the end. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:14, 15 June 2018 (UTC)