Template:Did you know nominations/Achaemenid royal inscriptions
- 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 Cielquiparle (talk) 11:33, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Achaemenid royal inscriptions
... that the initial decipherment of cuneiform was based on the Achaemenid royal inscriptions from Persepolis?Source: Mousavi, Ali (2012-03-14). "VI. PERSEPOLIS AND THE PUZZLE OF THE CUNEIFORM INSCRIPTIONS". Persepolis. DE GRUYTER. pp. 113–122. doi:10.1515/9781614510338.113.In this way, the exploration of the ancient ruins at Persepolis proved to be one important key to the development of historical and archaeological studies in the first half of the nineteenth century.
Created by Onceinawhile (talk), पाटलिपुत्र (talk) and Falten-Jura (talk). Nominated by Onceinawhile (talk) at 20:56, 26 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Achaemenid royal inscriptions; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.
- Note: This is a replacement for Template:Did you know nominations/Decipherment of cuneiform scripts, as the other article was deemed not currently eligible. Onceinawhile (talk) 20:59, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
| General: Article is new enough and long enough |
|---|
| Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
|---|
|
Hook eligibility:
- Cited:
- Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith - Interesting:
- The hook is worded in a way that doesn't really emphasize why it's interesting. It takes it as a given that the decipherment of cuneiform occurred, when that's the "action" here. Might I suggest rewording to
- ALT0a ... that the Achaemenid royal inscriptions from Persepolis allowed for the initial decipherment of cuneiform?
Image eligibility:
- Freely licensed:
- Used in article: - Easy fix: Either add the image to the article or swap out for one used in it.
- Clear at 100px:
| QPQ: Done. |
Overall: 
@Onceinawhile: Two issues, both pretty small. Also, I've made two small changes to the article—MOS:LISTGAP compliance and labeling the Livius.org link as "External links", not "See also". And I don't really understand the sentence The Behistun inscription, at over 3,000 words, dwarfs in length and importance any other inscription totaling less than 2,600 words
; I would suggest rephrasing to be more clear. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 02:09, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
- Hi @Tamzin: thank you for your review. I have added the picture, with a detailed explanation. I have simplified the sentence you pointed out - I agree it was not clear. I am happy with your proposed ALT0a. Regards, Onceinawhile (talk) 08:09, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
- Great!
Approved for 0a. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 20:10, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
- Great!
