Template talk:Did you know/Dacian bracelets

Dacian bracelets

Archived nomination

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as 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 Crisco 1492 (talk)

Dacian gold bracelet, dated to 1st century BC - 1st c. AD, from Sarmizegetusa, Romania

• ... that Dacian bracelets were also used as currency and votive offerings?

• Reviewed: If you reviewed another article before listing this DYK nomination, put it here

5x expanded by Boldwin (talk), Codrinb (talk). Nominated by Codrinb (talk) at 20:25, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Please add a comment and signature (or just a signature if endorsing) after each aspect you have reviewed:

Hook

• Length, format, content rules: long enough; but perhaps too long -- see comment below. --Epeefleche (talk) 19:39, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
• Source: AGF; off-web source.--Epeefleche (talk) 19:42, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
• Interest: Fine.--Epeefleche (talk) 19:47, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
• Image suitability, if applicable: --Epeefleche (talk) 19:39, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
• ALT hooks, if proposed: NA--Epeefleche (talk) 19:47, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Article

• Length: --Epeefleche (talk) 19:39, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
• Vintage: --Epeefleche (talk) 19:48, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
• Sourcing (V, RS, BLP): AGF; largely off-web sources.--Epeefleche (talk) 19:50, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
• Neutrality:
• Plagiarism/close paraphrasing: AGF; largely off-web sources.--Epeefleche (talk) 19:50, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
• copyvio (images): OK, assuming the National Museum of Romanian History allows photos to be taken of its objects.--Epeefleche (talk) 19:57, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
• Obvious faults in prose, structure, formatting:

Comments/discussion:

• 1) The hook needs some fine-tuning. It uses the word "also", without clarification as to what is being referred to in the first place (presumably, the sense is "in addition to being worn as jewelry", but I think it would read better with something spelling that out if we are going to use the phrase "also". 2) The article is great and very complete, but now at 140K bytes; I would suggest that some of it be made into a separate article, to bring it closer to 100K bytes (or below).--Epeefleche (talk) 19:47, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

• * 1.A) I requested the Guild of Copy Editors to help with it. And, I am going to add the url of the books (google books). I am revisiting the article.Boldwin (talk) 03:19, 9 August 2011 (UTC)