- 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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:03, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
The equatorie of the planetis
Equatorium indicating the orbit of Saturn, 1551.
- ... that the 14th-century The equatorie of the planetis, sometimes ascribed to Chaucer, describes an equatorium (example pictured)? Source: "You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/WNSD.
- Comment: The hook is a bit lame. I might could play around with the cipher, and the Arabic provenance, but I don't have enough material for that right now.
Created by Drmies (talk). Self-nominated at 22:59, 10 December 2019 (UTC).
- Hi Drmies, I'll review this. epicgenius (talk) 14:36, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
| General: Article is new enough and long enough |
|---|
Policy compliance:
- Adequate sourcing:
- First paragraph of "Manuscript" needs one source, per WP:DYKSG#D2. - Neutral:
- Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:
- Other problems: - The link [[Nicholas Trivet] is broken.
Hook eligibility:
- Cited:
- Interesting: - I guess you can write something about Chaucer's authorship. I have to head to class soon, but will think about this as well.
| QPQ: Done. |
Overall: 
epicgenius (talk) 14:36, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- epicgenius, those two things are done. I don't really want to overplay the authorship angle since that takes away from the actual book, but if you think that's more hooky, we can try. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 17:25, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Drmies: OK. I was thinking of another hook that deals exclusively with authorship, but let's try these:
ALT1 ... that though authorship of the 14th-century The equatorie of the planetis is disputed, one person ascribed the work to Chaucer based on the use of "Romance vocabulary"?- ALT2 ... that the 14th-century The equatorie of the planetis, which describes an equatorium (example pictured), is sometimes ascribed to Chaucer?
- I can't think of anything else at the moment (ALT2 was just your original proposal, but with the phrases reversed). Maybe EEng might have something, he's better at catchy hooks than I am, or we can ask somebody else. epicgenius (talk) 21:42, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- Hmm OK--we can't go with the first one, since no one really says "ah yes absolutely it's Chaucer", and more than one person may put stock in the vocabulary bit, and etc. There's just not enough clarity to make categorical statements like that. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 03:47, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
- I think ALT2 is decent, then, but
we still need another reviewer to look at it, since I can't approve my own proposed hooks. epicgenius (talk) 13:47, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
- I don't see any reason not to include a picture, so I've gone ahead and added it.
- ALT3: ... that the 14th-century The equatorie of the planetis, sometimes ascribed to Chaucer, describes an instrument (example pictured) used to calculate the positions of the planets?
- (For ALT3, an additional ref would be required immediately after the instrument's description.) I think it's better to say what the instrument is rather than just naming it and having people click on equatorium to find out what it is. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 23:53, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
- Mandarax, thanks, I appreciate it, and I like your hook--but reference? where? for what? The entire paragraph under "Content" describes the thing, and is cited. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 15:36, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
- I meant that, per WP:DYK#Cited hook, the ref at the end of the paragraph would have to be repeated after the sentence describing the instrument. (I would've done it myself if I had access to the source.) MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 20:12, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
- Mandarax sure, but which sentence? Since the entire paragraph describes the instrument... I mean, "... that contain the data for each planet" is a necessary part of the entire description. Drmies (talk) 23:38, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
- I was talking about the first sentence of the section, which contains the specific extra fact that I added to the original hook to make ALT3: that the instrument is used to calculate the positions of the planets. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 06:26, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
- User:Mandarax,
Done. Drmies (talk) 15:29, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
- Mandarax sure, but which sentence? Since the entire paragraph describes the instrument... I mean, "... that contain the data for each planet" is a necessary part of the entire description. Drmies (talk) 23:38, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
- I meant that, per WP:DYK#Cited hook, the ref at the end of the paragraph would have to be repeated after the sentence describing the instrument. (I would've done it myself if I had access to the source.) MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 20:12, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
- Mandarax, thanks, I appreciate it, and I like your hook--but reference? where? for what? The entire paragraph under "Content" describes the thing, and is cited. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 15:36, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
- I think ALT2 is decent, then, but
- Hmm OK--we can't go with the first one, since no one really says "ah yes absolutely it's Chaucer", and more than one person may put stock in the vocabulary bit, and etc. There's just not enough clarity to make categorical statements like that. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 03:47, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Drmies: OK. I was thinking of another hook that deals exclusively with authorship, but let's try these:
- epicgenius, would you please take a look at ALT3? Thanks, MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 08:05, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
ALT3 good to go. epicgenius (talk) 14:41, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
