Talk:Choe Han-gi
Latest comment: 2 years ago by RoySmith in topic Did you know nomination
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | A fact from Choe Han-gi appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 12 November 2022 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
Did you know nomination
edit- 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 RoySmith (talk) 16:21, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
( )
Choe Han-gi
- ... that Choe Han-gi published a theory that aimed to replace Newtonian mechanics with one based on qi? Source: https://www.jstor.org/stable/43150781
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/The Maiden in the Tower
- Comment: Something's off with the image license. It's very likely old enough to be PD or sth, but not a recent work as currently indicated. If it can't be solved, possible quirky hook.
Created by Judokitty (talk). Nominated by LordPeterII (talk) at 16:44, 25 October 2022 (UTC).
| General: Article is new enough and long enough |
|---|
Policy compliance:
- Adequate sourcing:
- One paragraph uncited. - Neutral:
- Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:
| Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
|---|
|
| QPQ: Done. |
Overall: 
@LordPeterII: @Judokitty: Good article. There's just an uncited paragraph at the Newtonian mechanics and Western science sections that needs to be fixed. Onegreatjoke (talk) 16:37, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
- @Onegreatjoke: Thanks for the review! That sentence sounds correct, but I can't find the corresponding info in the sources; I've simply commented it out for now. @Judokitty: Great article btw, for your first one! If you know where that sentence stems from, you can reference and re-add it. –LordPeterII (talk) 20:24, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
- Onegreatjoke Is this fine now? SL93 (talk) 02:05, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
I'm going to assume that this is fine now so I will approve. Onegreatjoke (talk) 02:11, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
