Template:Did you know nominations/Lady Gouyi


 * 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) 06:49, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Lady Gouyi

 * ... that more than 2,100 years after Lady Gouyi (pictured) was ordered by the emperor to die, her mausoleum was robbed and more than 1,100 artifacts were stolen? Source: Lee 2015, China Daily 2017
 * Reviewed: Mount Mian

Created by Zanhe (talk). Self-nominated at 03:13, 2 December 2017 (UTC).


 * Symbol question.svg The article is new, quite long, and is well-referenced. Hook length is OK. QPQ is done. However, I would have to note that many parts of the prose appears to be closely paraphrased from the first reference. Examples: "Her surname was Zhao but her given name is not known" vs. "her surname was Zhao but her given name is not recorded"; "The Book of Han records that she died of 'anxiety'" vs. "The [...] History of the Han Dynasty records that she died of 'anxiety'"; and "It was said that she had a pregnancy that lasted 14 months" vs. "after a pregnancy said to have lasted fourteen months". Also, the sentence "The mausoleum was robbed in July 2016." which is directly implied by the hook ("more than 2,100 years after"), has no immediate inline citation and is not supported by the citation on the next sentence. —seav (talk) 18:07, 5 December 2017 (UTC)


 * thanks for the review. I've reworded the sentences, hopefully ok now. These simple sentences are the trickiest to paraphrase. I've also found an English source that reports the recent tomb robbing and added it to the article. See Xinhua. -Zanhe (talk) 19:51, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Thank you for the changes. I think this is OK now. —seav (talk) 05:32, 6 December 2017 (UTC)