Difference between revisions of "Template:Did you know nominations/Arikamedu"

From blackwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Johnbod
(Unneeded "as that" removed from hook.)
imported>BlueMoonset
(New reviewer needed to check rest of review aspects)
Line 24: Line 24:
 
::* {{ping|Bruzaholm}} Thanks for the review. QPQ done. May now like to give a green tick.--'''[[User talk:Nvvchar|<span style="font-variant:small-caps;color:#003366">Nvvchar</span>]]'''. 15:20, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
 
::* {{ping|Bruzaholm}} Thanks for the review. QPQ done. May now like to give a green tick.--'''[[User talk:Nvvchar|<span style="font-variant:small-caps;color:#003366">Nvvchar</span>]]'''. 15:20, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
 
:::Unneeded "as that" removed from hook. [[User:Johnbod|Johnbod]] ([[User talk:Johnbod|talk]]) 17:41, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
 
:::Unneeded "as that" removed from hook. [[User:Johnbod|Johnbod]] ([[User talk:Johnbod|talk]]) 17:41, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
 +
 +
*[[File:Symbol redirect vote 4.svg|16px]]  Review needs to be completed: QPQ will need checking, and close paraphrasing and neutrality should be checked as well, since original review did not cover these aspects. Hook sourcing was not mentioned, so it should probably also be checked. [[User:BlueMoonset|BlueMoonset]] ([[User talk:BlueMoonset|talk]]) 17:19, 10 June 2015 (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 17:20, 10 June 2015

Arikamedu

Ruins of entry gate and structures in the Arikamedu site

5x expanded by Nvvchar (talk). Self-nominated at 02:46, 20 May 2015 (UTC).

  • Interesting article, long enough expansion; well-written and illustrated; the article is sourced; well... reading the article and sources, Mr Bebreuil's discoveries seem to be overshadowed by later, more thorough excavations, yet, Mr Debreuil's allegation "in a short note" that the site was a "true Roman city" based on his own discoveries seem correct. I'd suggest that the article is ready for DYK. --Bruzaholm (talk) 13:23, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Template:Ping Thanks for the review. QPQ done. May now like to give a green tick.--Nvvchar. 15:20, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Unneeded "as that" removed from hook. Johnbod (talk) 17:41, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Review needs to be completed: QPQ will need checking, and close paraphrasing and neutrality should be checked as well, since original review did not cover these aspects. Hook sourcing was not mentioned, so it should probably also be checked. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:19, 10 June 2015 (UTC)