Template:Did you know nominations/Cathay (poetry collection)
- The following discussion 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 BlueMoonset (talk) 04:48, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Cathay (poetry collection)
edit- ... that, in publishing his collection Cathay, Ezra Pound worked from the posthumous notes of an American who had studied Chinese under a Japanese teacher?
- ALT1:... that Ezra Pound published a translation of Chinese poetry despite not understanding the language?
- Reviewed: E.W. Hornung
Created by Victoriaearle (talk). Nominated by Crisco 1492 (talk) at 01:58, 22 February 2014 (UTC).
ALT2:... that Ezra Pound translated poetry from the Chinese despite not knowing the language?— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 18:03, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
New article. Long enough at 3303 characters. Is neutrally (and well) written, all statements are cited inline to sources. I've had to assume good faith for some of the offline material, but given the article creator's track record I am completely comfortable doing so. Article is free of close-paraphrasing concerns regarding the sources I've checked. The hooks are both compliant. I think ALT1 is much hookier (as well as being shorter). However, it should not be used because there are many translators who only read but do not speak the source language. I am proposing ALT2 in its place, which I think is hookier still, and avoids that problem.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 18:03, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
- Perhaps I wrote the hook unclearly. He not only did not speak the language, but did not write or read it either. He did not understand the language. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:20, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
- No, it was clear, and I understood from reviewing the article that he didn't read, write, or speak it. Anyway, your change in ALT1 clears up the only issue I had with it. As I said before I think either hook is good to go, but I think ALT1 is hookier. Nice work on everybody's part!— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 23:33, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks for reviewing! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:40, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
