Talk:Utroba Cave

Did you know nomination

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 Schwede66 (talk) 19:37, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

Utroba cave

• ... that Utroba Cave (pictured) is also called Womb Cave based on its appearance? Source: Source
  • ALT1: ... that Utroba Cave (pictured) was made to resemble female genitalia, and the cave puts on a show with natural light to symbolize fertilization? Source: source
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Selling Mother's Milk: The Wet-Nursing Business in France, 1715–1914
  • Comment: No freedom of panorama in Bulgaria, however this was created by Thracians four centuries BC. So I believe the photo is allowed. The next issue is whether or not we should have this photo on the front page.

Created by Bruxton (talk). Self-nominated at 23:08, 18 February 2022 (UTC).

• All seems well for me. The image is fine for the Main Page; one could make the argument for its gratuity and thus "exemption" from WP:NOTCENSORED were it actual genitals, but per the spirit of that guideline I think something merely yonnic won't run afoul of anything worthwhile. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 21:29, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
  • I'm wondering if we could locate a phallic-looking rock formation to create an article about and then have it at DYK at the same time. Though that will probably pass the threshold of gratuity. – Uanfala (talk) 21:05, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
    • @Uanfala: If you're interested, Yang Yuan Stone is currently a redirect. I'm not sure whether or not it's notable. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 15:58, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
      • That looks interesting, thanks, but I don't think I'll have enough time these days, so I'll leave it someone else to get inspired and write about it. – Uanfala (talk) 16:28, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

The sunlight phenomenon

The article currently contains the following paragraph:

In the middle of the day at certain time of year the light which is in the shape of a phallus penetrates deep into the cave all the way to the alter.<ref name="Randolph"/> The light creates the phallus every day at noon, but it only reaches the alter on one day of the year.<ref name="Malcheva"/> There is an opening in the ceiling which allows the light into the cave. In February or March the light takes the shape of a phallus and enters a hole at the alter: the light then flickers for 1-2 minutes. The penetrating and flickering light is thought to symbolize fertilization.<ref name="Nicodia"/>

It seems to describe two different phenomena of sunlight entering the cave and illuminating the altar. But that's in fact one and the same event, right? Unless there is a single source that describes them both? – Uanfala (talk) 03:14, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

@Uanfala: Hello, and thank you for your help editing. Regarding your removal of 2001, you have presented no evidence that the reference is incorrect, and in your edit summary you are making an assumption that it must have been discovered. "...it is an extraordinary claim that a cave out there in the open, in the middle of a densely populated region of a country with developed speleological traditions, would have only been discovered in the 21st centrury".

I feel like we have to follow the RS. I think this cave is like any other archeological discovery - people might stumble around it not knowing what it is, but when someone identifies it as an archeological site it is studied and the examination begins at that time. Bruxton (talk) 03:48, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for creating this article though – I'm delighted to see such interesting topics being promoted to DYK. As for the claim about the cave being discovered in 2001, if that refers specifically to the first realisation of its archaeological significance – then yes, this is plausible. But to say that the cave itself was discovered that year – when all indications are that it was known to people before that – then we'd need a good source. A tourism website is not a good enough source for such a claim. – Uanfala (talk) 14:14, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Sunlight phenomenon II

The article says that the sunlight only causes the special phenomenon once a year, in February or March. But except on Winter and Summer solstice, the sun is in every point of its circuit twice a year. So the phenomenon must occur twice a year. Wis2fan (talk) 04:09, 23 March 2022 (UTC)