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

From blackwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>PlanespotterA320
imported>Usernameunique
(New review needed please)
Line 21: Line 21:
  
 
:*Meh, doesn't seem notable enough for a DYK. Maybe need to add something about who this person is.--[[User:PlanespotterA320|PlanespotterA320]] ([[User talk:PlanespotterA320|talk]]) 15:36, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
 
:*Meh, doesn't seem notable enough for a DYK. Maybe need to add something about who this person is.--[[User:PlanespotterA320|PlanespotterA320]] ([[User talk:PlanespotterA320|talk]]) 15:36, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
 +
::*{{u|PlanespotterA320}}, he's an honorary fellow at [[University of Oxford|Oxford]] who wrote an important book on Anglo-Saxon art and who is currently working on the finds from the [[Staffordshire Hoard]]. Is that what you're looking for? --[[User:Usernameunique|Usernameunique]] ([[User talk:Usernameunique|talk]]) 15:57, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
 +
:::*Not enough. The DYK would be full of "some person associated with some college who wrote some book". Besides, scholars have to reconstruct artifacts all the time. This is not the first scholar to do a thousand-piece "puzzle" and wont be that last. Not very interesting either.--[[User:PlanespotterA320|PlanespotterA320]] ([[User talk:PlanespotterA320|talk]]) 17:25, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
 +
::::*{{u|PlanespotterA320}}, if you would like to conduct the full review, consistent with the DYK criteria, in addition to the drive-by commentary please feel free, but otherwise I'm marking this as needing one. We all find different things interesting; [[Aircraft spotting|planespotting]] doesn't interest me, for instance, but that would be a poor reason to hold up a DYK on the subject. --[[User:Usernameunique|Usernameunique]] ([[User talk:Usernameunique|talk]]) 18:24, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
  
:{{u|PlanespotterA320}}, he's an honorary fellow at [[University of Oxford|Oxford]] who wrote an important book on Anglo-Saxon art and who is currently working on the finds from the [[Staffordshire Hoard]]. Is that what you're looking for? --[[User:Usernameunique|Usernameunique]] ([[User talk:Usernameunique|talk]]) 15:57, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
+
[[File:Symbol redirect vote 4.svg|16px]] Full review needed. --[[User:Usernameunique|Usernameunique]] ([[User talk:Usernameunique|talk]]) 18:24, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
  
::*Not enough. The DYK would be full of "some person associated with some college who wrote some book". Besides, scholars have to reconstruct artifacts all the time. This is not the first scholar to do a thousand-piece "puzzle" and wont be that last. Not very interesting either.--[[User:PlanespotterA320|PlanespotterA320]] ([[User talk:PlanespotterA320|talk]]) 17:25, 11 April 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 18:24, 11 April 2018

George Speake

Horse head terminal from the Staffordshire helmet
Horse head terminal from the Staffordshire helmet
  • ... that George Speake is currently reconstructing the more than 1,000 pieces (one pictured) of the Anglo-Saxon Staffordshire helmet? Source: ICON 2016: "The last great discovery of the Hoard will be the final form of the helmet, currently worked on by George Speake and Chris Fern." Butterworth et al.: "The Anglo-Saxon Staffordshire Hoard contains, alongside the well-publicised gold and silver objects, a large collection of over 1000 fragments of die-impressed silver sheet.1 These gilded metal sheets, when pieced together with other structural fragments of the hoard, provide us with a large portion of what is considered to be a highly-decorated, high-status helmet."

5x expanded by Usernameunique (talk). Self-nominated at 03:13, 11 April 2018 (UTC).

  • Meh, doesn't seem notable enough for a DYK. Maybe need to add something about who this person is.--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 15:36, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Not enough. The DYK would be full of "some person associated with some college who wrote some book". Besides, scholars have to reconstruct artifacts all the time. This is not the first scholar to do a thousand-piece "puzzle" and wont be that last. Not very interesting either.--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 17:25, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Template:U, if you would like to conduct the full review, consistent with the DYK criteria, in addition to the drive-by commentary please feel free, but otherwise I'm marking this as needing one. We all find different things interesting; planespotting doesn't interest me, for instance, but that would be a poor reason to hold up a DYK on the subject. --Usernameunique (talk) 18:24, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed. --Usernameunique (talk) 18:24, 11 April 2018 (UTC)