Template:Did you know nominations/Ahu Akivi
- 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 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:50, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Ahu Akivi
[edit]
... that in 1960 archaeologists William Mulloy and Gonzalo Figueroa García-Huidobro who had found the moai statues at Ahu Akivi in knocked down condition restored (pictured) them to original position?
5x expanded by Nvvchar (talk). Self nominated at 02:10, 18 August 2013 (UTC).
- Suggest Alt1 Hook with another image.--Nvvchar. 02:18, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
Alt1 Hook ... that in 1960, at Ahu Akivi (pictured) in Easter Island archeologists took one month to restore the first moai in place but less than a week to fix the remaining six?
Approve Alt1 and the second picture that accompanies it. This is a fantastic picture with a valid PD license. The hook is verified and interesting. The one issue with the article was that the etymology section was (in my opinion) based on a misreading of the source. I have removed this section, but even with the removal the article is still well beyond 5x expansion. I see no copyvio or close paraphrasing concerns here. The one outstanding issue is that a QPQ is needed. IronGargoyle (talk) 12:35, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review. QPQ done now. --Nvvchar. 14:13, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
Good to go. IronGargoyle (talk) 17:57, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
Pulled from queue for hook accuracy reasons. I quote: — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:12, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
"I think this source has been misunderstood. Firstly, it doesn't tell us how long it took to actually restore the moai, just how long it took to raise them. Secondly, it didn't take them less than a week to raise six moai. What the source actually says is: "During the restoration, it took a full month—using a stone ramp and two wooden levers—to raise the first of the seven moai. By the time they got to the last moai, the same task took them less than a week." That is, it took a month to raise the first moai, and less than a week to raise the seventh. We don't know how long it took to raise the other five. DoctorKubla (talk) 06:08, 12 September 2013 (UTC)"
- I was mistaken in my first point – I thought the "restoration" mentioned in the source meant some kind of repair work was done, but it simply refers to the raising of the statues. Anyway, I've asked the nominator to propose a new hook; I know we've got two already, but the original is pretty dull. This is an interesting article, I'm sure we can find something more hooky. DoctorKubla (talk) 06:49, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
- OK. I propose Alt2 Hook ... that in 1960, at Ahu Akivi (pictured) in Easter Island archeologists took a month to raise the first moai, and less than a week to raise the seventh one? --Nvvchar. 13:39, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
- Alt2 seems to address the concerns. Sorry about the oversight on the first review. I thought when the hook talked about the remaining six it meant each of the remaining six (as opposed to the remaining six cumulatively), but even that infers too much about what the reference actually said. My bad. IronGargoyle (talk) 14:27, 12 September 2013 (UTC)