Talk:Paragon (diamond)

Proposal for content-based split
...to a new article called "The Paragon (diamond)". This would be essentially the second paragraph and cites from the current article. This assumes 1) that the term in paragraph 1 is an actual gemological term worthy of its own article; 2) that the diamond The Paragon is worthy of its own article. (I wouldn't know.) Doprendek (talk) 21:22, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
 * The first paragraph of the article is moved to Paragon though it serves as a disambiguation page. I have also moved the reference alongwith but a google search of the mentioned google book page does not reveal the term. The specific page number is not view-able so a grey zone exists. Even the internet in particular does not mention details of gemological term. But context wise there is a possibility of validity of the information and so I have retained it on that page. A separate page for the first paragraph is therefore irrelevant. I have also created and redirected The Paragon (diamond) to this article. Split label removed.  D ip ta ns hu Talk 12:45, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
 * The gemological term is found in multiple books as evident here.  D ip ta ns hu Talk 13:04, 4 July 2013 (UTC)