Template:Did you know nominations/Lapa do Santo


 * 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: rejected by Mifter (talk) 21:07, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Lapa do Santo

 * ... that Lapa do Santo, in Minas Gerais, Brazil, has evidence of human occupation around 12,000 years ago? Source:
 * ALT1 that Lapa do Santo, in Minas Gerais, Brazil, has evidence of human occupation around 12,000 years ago, as well as the oldest recorded case of decapitation in the Americas? Source:
 * Reviewed The Sensorites

Created by Strauss MAE-USP (talk). Nominated by Mike Peel (talk) at 21:51, 3 October 2018 (UTC).


 * Here's my review: epicgenius (talk) 01:15, 4 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the review. Can you have another look? I've proposed a longer hook, ALT1, above. has added references. The similar phrases look minimal to me, are there particular ones you think need rewriting? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 22:58, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
 * ALT1 looks much better. I definitely might be interested by the first recorded decapitation in the Americas. So you have my thumbs up for that one. I really only have three concerns with copyvios, and here they are:
 * "the reduction of the body by means of mutilation, defleshing, tooth removal, exposure to fire and possibly cannibalism, followed by the secondary burial of the remains according to strict rules" - possibly unattributed direct quote
 * "the oldest case of decapitation in the New World" and "were filled with disarticulated bones of a single" - these phrases are too close to the quoted text, even a paraphrase would be good.
 * "three distinct periods of human occupation" - same as above from this source.
 * That's all of the phrases I was concerned about. Now for the sourcing:
 * "The rockshelter and the archaeological site" doesn't have any sources. A general rule of thumb is to aim for at least one source per paragraph.
 * "Mobility" still doesn't have any sources.
 * The ends of many paragraphs don't have sources. In some cases only the first sentence has a source. On the other hand, all of the references look reliable and authoritative. My issue is with the placement of the sources. Could you move them to the end of the paragraph?
 * That's all of the outstanding DYK issues. Now going off on a few personal style nitpicks:
 * Although not necessary, I'd also suggest cleaning up this article to comply with some MOS guidelines. For instance, putting the periods before the references.
 * I'm concerned that there are way too many images in this article (there are 231 in total, but only about 4 thumbnail images, the rest are in galleries). WP:NOTGALLERY. Have you considered creating a gallery on Commons?
 * Sorry to bother you with all these issues. I know it sounds like a lot, but from the looks of it, this article probably does not need that many modifications to get it into good shape for DYK. On a personal note, I am impressed by 's work on this article with over 25 kB of prose size. Maybe this can be nominated as a good article later. epicgenius (talk) 17:59, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
 * sorry for the delay in following this up. I've sorted out the copyvio issues, and quickly checked through the style formatting. I don't think that a gallery on commons would be useful (they fell out of style on Commons quite a while back now), although I'd agree that there are too many pictures here right now. I started this nom after seeing work here, I don't know the subject myself, so I can't help with improving the referencing so much. Maybe  can help there? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 06:51, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
 * It's OK. I'm still monitoring this nomination. So far it doesn't look like there has been much activity on the page since I last commented. I'll give it a few more weeks before I ask someone else to look at this. epicgenius (talk) 14:02, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Has there been any progress on this article? I know that the comments above might seem like a lot, but there are really only three or four outstanding issues. Otherwise I'm going to ask for another reviewer's opinion. epicgenius (talk) 01:43, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

This has been stalled for around 2 months and nominators have not returned with updates. Vincent LUFan (talk) (Kenton!) 13:00, 14 December 2018 (UTC)