Talk:Tully Lough Cross

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts

Middle Ages

	Middle Ages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Ireland Low‑importance

	Ireland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ireland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject IrelandTemplate:WikiProject IrelandIreland
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from Tully Lough Cross appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 14 April 2022 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the divers who found the c. 9th-century Tully Lough Cross in 1986 were convicted for trying to sell it to American museums?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2022/April. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Tully Lough Cross.

Wikipedia

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 Theleekycauldron (talk) 21:49, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

The Lough Cross

... that the 8th or 9th century Irish Tully Lough Cross (pictured) was found in 1986 at the bottom of a lake by divers who were later convicted for attempting to sell a national treasure to an American museum? Source: "State Papers 1987: 30 things we've learned from 30 years ago]". RTE, 29 December 2017. [1]
- Comment: qpq to follow

Created by Ceoil (talk). Self-nominated at 01:58, 12 March 2022 (UTC).[reply]

I shall review this. Storye book (talk) 12:15, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Thank you for a fascinating article. I'm so glad that the authorities were able to rescue the artefact.

~~Just the QPQ to complete now.~~
~~Also the hook is slightly long at 201 characters. I suggest changing "discovered" to "found"?~~

~~When that is done,~~ this nom should be good to go.

Just one suggestion, which does not affect the nomination. It is usually unwise to fix the size of an article image, bearing in mind that many editors have chosen a particular image-size in their preferences, to fit their devices - but that choice only works for them on thumbnails. So I would suggest reverting your infobox image to a thumbnail. But that is up to you.

Note: I have copyedited the article, because there were so many ce issues that it would have taken too long to explain them all to you. (That copyedit does not affect the nom., and it has not affected content.) Storye book (talk) 13:13, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Ceoil, for sorting out the image issue, and for shortening the hook. For future reference, please create a new ALT for the corrected hook, even if the change is minor, so that other editors can see where we are. Just waiting for the QPQ now. Cheers. Storye book (talk) 14:28, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

great, thanks for the review and copyedit! Will ping when qua is done. Ceoil (talk) 02:32, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

QPQ SS Chester A. Congdon

Hi User:Storye book) QPQ now done for recent GA SS Chester A. Congdon. Ceoil (talk) 03:23, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ceoil: Thank you for the QPQ. Please see my comment on that template. This nom is now good to go. Storye book (talk) 11:12, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Update. There have been issues with your QPQ, although as far as I can see you have resolved them. Next time, to avoid hassle, I suggest the following: 1. Use the reviewer's template, as a checklist of reviewer's duties. 2. If you are reviewing, list issues in the review; don't edit the article beyond basic copyediting (typos, punctuation etc) i.e. don't change content, otherwise you may count as a co-editor and disqualify your review. 3. Don't overwrite hooks unless your change is very minor, e.g. wikifying (bold, "pictured" etc.). 4. If you want to change the content of a hook, however minor, write a new ALT and request that someone else reviews it. Hope that helps. Storye book (talk) 11:04, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Repeat green tick to confirm. Storye book (talk) 11:04, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Modified ALT0 to T:DYK/P1