Template:Did you know nominations/K'inich Yat Ahk II


 * 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 97198 (talk) 11:16, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

K'inich Yat Ahk II

 * ... that K'inich Yat Ahk II, the last ruler of Piedras Negras, destroyed the rival state of Pomona before his demise at the hands of Yaxchilan?

Improved to Good Article status by Gen. Quon (talk). Nominated by 3family6 (talk) at 16:41, 13 November 2014 (UTC).


 * Symbol voting keep.svg Nice to find a Maya-related article, it is not a subject one sees often here! Well-written, well-referenced, prose OK, recent GA, QPQ not needed as this is not a self-nomination. AGF on offline sources. Constantine  ✍  16:12, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg Per Eligibility criteria #3, the hook fact must be cited inline, right after the phrase or sentence in question. There are 3 facts in this hook: #1, the last ruler of Piedras Negras; #2, destroyed the rival state of Pomona, and #3, his demise at the hands of Yaxchilan. None of them are cited inline. Yoninah (talk) 22:02, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I thought that didn't apply to composite hooks that rely on multiple passages in the article. Anyhow, #1 is cited by the entire first section of the article, unless one wants to be really pedantic (I mean, if he was the son of a ruler of Piedras Negras and is also called "Ruler 7", there is really no more that needs to be said), #2 is cited directly ("the latter, however, spelled the end for Pomona"), and only #3 is possibly a problem, but I've duplicated the refs so that should be OK too. Constantine  ✍  22:15, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Fact #1: Yes, let's be pedantic :) and put the cite right next to the fact. Fact #2: There's a difference between spelling the end for Pomona and the fact that K'inich Yat Ahk II was the one who destroyed it. Please put the cite after the previous sentence naming him as the destroyer. Fact #3: Where does it say he was the last ruler? Yoninah (talk) 22:31, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Hmmm, as this would involve changing the text, and this is something that, barring typos and copyedits, a reviewer should not do, I will contact the nominator and the main author. Constantine  ✍  22:47, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
 * You might say, "that K'inich Yat Ahk II, the last ruler of Piedras Negras, defeated the rival state of Pomona before his demise at the hands of Yaxchilan?" That's more inline with the citations.-- Gen. Quon   (Talk)   00:43, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
 * What about the inline cites for "the last ruler of Piedras Negras" and "defeated the rival state of Pomona"? Yoninah (talk) 00:53, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
 * The edits by and  have now cited those statements directly. Does it look okay now, ?-- &iquest;3fam  ily6  contribs 04:31, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Am I missing something? I see the cite for destroying Pomona. But I don't see a cite for last ruler of Piedras Negras. I also don't see anything about his demise; it just says he was captured. Yoninah (talk) 18:57, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
 * How'd 'bout this:
 * ALT1: ... that K'inich Yat Ahk II, the last ruler of Piedras Negras, defeated the rival state of Pomona before his capture by K'inich Tatbu Skull IV of Yaxchilan?" I added a citation for him being the last here.-- Gen. Quon   (Talk)   01:22, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
 * The new hook satisfies the requirement, it should be OK to go. Constantine  ✍  09:28, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svgSymbol voting keep.svg Yes, we are ready to go. New enough, long enough, well referenced, no close paraphrasing seen in online sources. Hook refs are verified and AGF. No QPQ needed for non-self-nom. ALT1 good to go. Yoninah (talk) 13:21, 20 November 2014 (UTC)