A fact from Copper Bull appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 29 July 2010 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that the Copper Bull sculpture found in Iraq in 1923 was over 4,500 years old?
This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
This article relates to the British Museum. Please copy assessments of the article from the most major WikiProject template to this one, as needed.British MuseumWikipedia:GLAM/British MuseumTemplate:WikiProject British MuseumBritish Museum-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sculpture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sculpture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SculptureWikipedia:WikiProject SculptureTemplate:WikiProject Sculpturesculpture articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts articles
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
First, of course, this article cries out for a photo of its subject. A picture is worth 1,000 words. Second, the text of the article even states "The sculpture as shown...", despite that there's no picture, strongly implying that the passage in question was lifted wholesale from another work without even editing for place.
--Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 12:24, 29 July 2010 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Well I'm surprised at you. The article was written to go with a picture on Flickr which never arrived. So Yes someone should have made best efforts.... oh yes! see here. and .... I thought the article read a bit kludged so in one way I'm flattered that you think it was "lifted wholesale from another work" on the other hand ..... I am very surprised that you/anyone would make such an accusation without checking your facts.....
Now, let's not get edgy... I like to assume good faith, but the lack of a photo, combined with an apparent reference to a photo, looked a little odd, no? Maybe my diplomacy skills are a bit rusty; I'm sorry if you took offense.
--Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 15:11, 29 July 2010 (UTC)Reply
.jpg){kind=small}
