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
Cwmhiraeth (
talk) 05:22, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
Created by
Zanhe (
talk). Self-nominated at 07:23, 15 May 2019 (UTC).
Date, size, neutrality, hook, copyvio spotcheck, QPQR, all GTG. My only concern is the references - university homepage and two obituaries. Is he notable per
WP:NPROF? The claim " a pioneer in scientific archaeology and a founder of quantitative archaeology in China" is significant, but sourced to his own university, and the one in the hook for "proposed the first chronology for Palaeolithic China" is sourced to an obituary. I'll ping
User:DGG and
User:Randykitty for a 30. Can we AGF this as notable (I am leaning towards yes) AND put it on the front page with those (non-English) sources (here I am a bit wary of peacocking in present not very independent sources...)? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus|
reply here 09:25, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
apparently notable on account of the books.I removed the sentence quoted above, which is unnecessary; the specific accomplishments in the following paragraph show his status more clearly and unambiguously. Obit writing tends to be praise, even in scientific obits, so it is not a RS for judgments, but it is for the actual accomplishments listed there DGG (
talk ) 10:42, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
@
Piotrus and
DGG: To be honest, I'm a bit shocked by the questioning of his notability. Academics, even distinguished scientists, do not appear in mainstream news very often, and when multiple major media outlets call someone "a famous archaeologist", it's a sure sign that he was at the top of his field. And this is borne out by a search of his name on
Google Scholar and
Google books (and these do not even include Chinese publications which are generally not online). His publications are frequently cited in prestigious and definitive works such as Science and Civilisation in China[1] and
The Archaeology of China. Obituaries tend to be praise, but they don't make up facts. And the hook is sourced to a major newspaper The Beijing News, which is completely independent of the subject. I've dug out my copy of the Dictionary of Chinese Archaeology and added info from his entry in that book which confirms the media report. Unfortunately it's not on Google, like 99% of Chinese books. -
Zanhe (
talk) 19:09, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
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
Cwmhiraeth (
talk) 05:22, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
Created by
Zanhe (
talk). Self-nominated at 07:23, 15 May 2019 (UTC).
Date, size, neutrality, hook, copyvio spotcheck, QPQR, all GTG. My only concern is the references - university homepage and two obituaries. Is he notable per
WP:NPROF? The claim " a pioneer in scientific archaeology and a founder of quantitative archaeology in China" is significant, but sourced to his own university, and the one in the hook for "proposed the first chronology for Palaeolithic China" is sourced to an obituary. I'll ping
User:DGG and
User:Randykitty for a 30. Can we AGF this as notable (I am leaning towards yes) AND put it on the front page with those (non-English) sources (here I am a bit wary of peacocking in present not very independent sources...)? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus|
reply here 09:25, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
apparently notable on account of the books.I removed the sentence quoted above, which is unnecessary; the specific accomplishments in the following paragraph show his status more clearly and unambiguously. Obit writing tends to be praise, even in scientific obits, so it is not a RS for judgments, but it is for the actual accomplishments listed there DGG (
talk ) 10:42, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
@
Piotrus and
DGG: To be honest, I'm a bit shocked by the questioning of his notability. Academics, even distinguished scientists, do not appear in mainstream news very often, and when multiple major media outlets call someone "a famous archaeologist", it's a sure sign that he was at the top of his field. And this is borne out by a search of his name on
Google Scholar and
Google books (and these do not even include Chinese publications which are generally not online). His publications are frequently cited in prestigious and definitive works such as Science and Civilisation in China[1] and
The Archaeology of China. Obituaries tend to be praise, but they don't make up facts. And the hook is sourced to a major newspaper The Beijing News, which is completely independent of the subject. I've dug out my copy of the Dictionary of Chinese Archaeology and added info from his entry in that book which confirms the media report. Unfortunately it's not on Google, like 99% of Chinese books. -
Zanhe (
talk) 19:09, 16 May 2019 (UTC)