Royal Gold Cup is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on July 10, 2010. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
June 23, 2010. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the
enamelled
Royal Gold Cup (pictured) has a documented history since 1391, in the course of which it has been given away three times,
pawned twice, and sold three times? | |||||||||||||
Current status: Featured article |
This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Date, Secular or not., wt of a marc, figure on tripod, Fastes, Read. When was tripod/ upper tier of pearls last recorded? How was tint applied?
Johnbod (
talk)
10:50, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
Please do not consolidate or change the format of the references for now. I hope to get page numbers for those so far only seen online, & to see the items in further reading, which may add some citations here. Johnbod ( talk) 13:08, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Johnbod, if you are working off a scan and dont have the page numbers, the thing to do is to move the full citation from the biblo and merge all the refs. Its acceptable to ref a range of pages. I can easily do this if you wish. Ceoil ( talk) 12:26, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
Congrats!
Amandajm ( talk) 02:17, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
This article is PC protected, and semi protected? And it went back and forth between three admins? I'm confused as to what's going on here. Should it be semi, PC, or both? And if it is both, why don't we just go full, because that's almost what it is anyway. -- Fbifriday ( talk) 04:59, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
Does anyone have, or know where to find the original language texts of the rim inscription and the inventory manuscript both mentioned in the article? Thanks, Iustinus ( talk) 07:40, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
What information is contained in the second clause of the third sentence that is not contained in the second and fourth sentences? That the cup is an example of late medieval French plate is contained in the second sentence; that it is an outstanding survival is contained in the fourth sentence. If the third sentence is saying something different, then it needs a citation. A minor point: the two clauses of the second sentence are unrelated to each other except that they both deal with the cup. Bootboy41 ( talk) 13:08, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
I reacted early on to the rather high level of detail about the dimensions of the cup in the lead. When I read through the entire article, I noticed that this information is really only found in the lead. Since the lead is supposed to be an article summary, I would not expect to be informed about the exact size of an object of art right now. Perhaps in one sentence but not in exact centimeters and direct quotes. Shouldn't there be a section or sub-section dedicated to this in the article itself? The inscription on the custom case is also only found in the lead.
Also, there's very little about the history of the cup in the lead, something I was actually expecting. Could some be added?
Otherwise, a nicely written, highly details and well researched art history article.
Peter Isotalo 19:39, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
Minor observation: I don't see an explicit translation of the inscription on the case:
Probably valuable to include that if the inscription is going to be mentioned. It obviously repeats the names of Jesus and Mary. But I'm not sure what the "O" in that context is supposed to mean (my knowledge of conventions for Latin inscriptions is quite poor). -- Mcorazao ( talk) 21:17, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
The Grocs stats have several missing days, including the main page day, but total 13,190 views for July 2010. The stats on Wikipedia:WikiProject Visual arts/Popular pages for the same month show 31,225. Johnbod ( talk) 22:29, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Any reason why we would hard-code the image sizes? WP:IMGSIZE seems quite clear that we allow logged-in users to set their own sizes. -- John ( talk) 14:38, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
OK kids, that's quite enough of that. I don't know if you two have "history" arguing with each other elsewhere on-wiki but it seems clear you're now both playing the man instead of playing the ball. I will politely request you both stop arguing over this issue and leave the contested sections (images and words) as the were at the status they were upon successfully passing FA nomination. That's the best I can achieve by way of a neutral status quo without merely taking a side of one or the other. I hope that will be an acceptable (if not desirable) conclusion to this. Sincerely, Witty lama 23:59, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Royal Gold Cup. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 00:20, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Royal Gold Cup. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 05:06, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Royal Gold Cup. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:59, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
Royal Gold Cup is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on July 10, 2010. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
June 23, 2010. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the
enamelled
Royal Gold Cup (pictured) has a documented history since 1391, in the course of which it has been given away three times,
pawned twice, and sold three times? | |||||||||||||
Current status: Featured article |
This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Date, Secular or not., wt of a marc, figure on tripod, Fastes, Read. When was tripod/ upper tier of pearls last recorded? How was tint applied?
Johnbod (
talk)
10:50, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
Please do not consolidate or change the format of the references for now. I hope to get page numbers for those so far only seen online, & to see the items in further reading, which may add some citations here. Johnbod ( talk) 13:08, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Johnbod, if you are working off a scan and dont have the page numbers, the thing to do is to move the full citation from the biblo and merge all the refs. Its acceptable to ref a range of pages. I can easily do this if you wish. Ceoil ( talk) 12:26, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
Congrats!
Amandajm ( talk) 02:17, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
This article is PC protected, and semi protected? And it went back and forth between three admins? I'm confused as to what's going on here. Should it be semi, PC, or both? And if it is both, why don't we just go full, because that's almost what it is anyway. -- Fbifriday ( talk) 04:59, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
Does anyone have, or know where to find the original language texts of the rim inscription and the inventory manuscript both mentioned in the article? Thanks, Iustinus ( talk) 07:40, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
What information is contained in the second clause of the third sentence that is not contained in the second and fourth sentences? That the cup is an example of late medieval French plate is contained in the second sentence; that it is an outstanding survival is contained in the fourth sentence. If the third sentence is saying something different, then it needs a citation. A minor point: the two clauses of the second sentence are unrelated to each other except that they both deal with the cup. Bootboy41 ( talk) 13:08, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
I reacted early on to the rather high level of detail about the dimensions of the cup in the lead. When I read through the entire article, I noticed that this information is really only found in the lead. Since the lead is supposed to be an article summary, I would not expect to be informed about the exact size of an object of art right now. Perhaps in one sentence but not in exact centimeters and direct quotes. Shouldn't there be a section or sub-section dedicated to this in the article itself? The inscription on the custom case is also only found in the lead.
Also, there's very little about the history of the cup in the lead, something I was actually expecting. Could some be added?
Otherwise, a nicely written, highly details and well researched art history article.
Peter Isotalo 19:39, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
Minor observation: I don't see an explicit translation of the inscription on the case:
Probably valuable to include that if the inscription is going to be mentioned. It obviously repeats the names of Jesus and Mary. But I'm not sure what the "O" in that context is supposed to mean (my knowledge of conventions for Latin inscriptions is quite poor). -- Mcorazao ( talk) 21:17, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
The Grocs stats have several missing days, including the main page day, but total 13,190 views for July 2010. The stats on Wikipedia:WikiProject Visual arts/Popular pages for the same month show 31,225. Johnbod ( talk) 22:29, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Any reason why we would hard-code the image sizes? WP:IMGSIZE seems quite clear that we allow logged-in users to set their own sizes. -- John ( talk) 14:38, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
OK kids, that's quite enough of that. I don't know if you two have "history" arguing with each other elsewhere on-wiki but it seems clear you're now both playing the man instead of playing the ball. I will politely request you both stop arguing over this issue and leave the contested sections (images and words) as the were at the status they were upon successfully passing FA nomination. That's the best I can achieve by way of a neutral status quo without merely taking a side of one or the other. I hope that will be an acceptable (if not desirable) conclusion to this. Sincerely, Witty lama 23:59, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Royal Gold Cup. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 00:20, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Royal Gold Cup. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 05:06, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Royal Gold Cup. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:59, 6 October 2017 (UTC)