Template:Did you know nominations/Jingchu Suishiji

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 Yoninah (talk) 22:02, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Jingchu Suishiji

(

• Back to T:TDYK
• Article history

)

• ... that the Record of the Year and Seasons of Jingchu shows how religious, calendrical, culinary, and entertainment changes led to a new canon of major Chinese holidays between the Han and Tang dynasties?
  • ALT1:... that the Record of the Year and Seasons of Jingchu describes a medieval Chinese inoculation against smallpox—redbean porridge?
  • ALT2:... that the declining use of sexagenaric dating in early medieval China led to new holidays, as shown by the Jingchu Suishiji?
  • ALT3:... that the Chinese New Year, Lantern, Tomb Sweeping, Dragon Boat, Double Seven, Ghost, and Double Ninth Festivals all took most of their present form between the Han Dynasty and the composition of the Jingchu Suishiji?
  • ALT4:... that the Record of the Year and Seasons of Jingchu is one of the few texts from the Sixteen Dynasties that mention its Ghost Festival?
  • ALT5:... that one source for the 7th-century Jingchu Suishiji survives only in an incomplete Japanese manuscript?
  • ALT6:... that the 7th-century Record of the Year and Seasons of Jingchu seems to have been completely lost under the Song but was then stitched together again by Ming and Qing scholars?
  • ALT7:... that the Record of Jingchu originally only discussed the festivals of medieval Lianghu, but Du Gongzhan's revision added notes about his homeland in northern China?
  • ALT8:... that the Jingchu Suishiji is a contemporary guide to the festivals of early medieval China?

• Reviewed: Will do Mishmar HaEmek.
• Comment: Note to reviewers: Don't worry, you only need to check the cites on the hook(s) most interesting to you.

Created by LlywelynII (talk). Self-nominated at 09:23, 3 December 2017 (UTC).

Substantial article, on good sources, Chinese and offline sources accepted AGF, no copyvio obvious. I like the original hook best, but suggest a link to the dynasties. What do you think of unpiping the subject? Festkalender would translate to "calendar of feasts", instead of "Record of the year and seasons", - when several translation are possible, I tend to stick with the original. You don't have to bold the items in the note list, even if they are redirects. ALT8 works for me, but is a little bland. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:37, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

So was there a problem with the article? or you just accidentally used the wrong tick mark?

If you were just waiting for a reply, it's faster to ping the editor. To address your concerns: Extraneous links in hooks are a terrible idea and should actually be against policy. Curious readers can click through, see the page that has been worked on and is being promoted, and maybe even find something interesting that make them stay and learn more. Similarly, I think unpiping the links is a great idea: we should just use the redirects directly. Unfortunately, an admin brought it to my attention that they prefer to using piping rather than link to the redirects and it's not necessary to change the policy just for this nomination. We need to keep the article where it is owing to policy considerations but that's not a reason to make the hooks any more off putting than they need to be; hence, the translation. "Festkalender" is a terrible translation of Suishiji, I agree, but it's not the German wiki, so I'm not sure how that became an issue.

But, since none of that is about policy issues and the article and hooks are (presumably?) good to go, can that be noted? You checked the cites on the original hook? I'm fine with using it. — LlywelynII 12:23, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

I indeed waited for a reply, but there was no rush, no time limit, right? I trust on nominators to watch their noms. I don't know how you feel about many pings, - for me it can easily be too many. - I was just curious about Festkalender, thanks for the clarification. - "Record" can mean more than one thing, that's why I would avoid a translation beginning with that word, but this is your nom, nom mine. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:09, 17 December 2017 (UTC)