Template:Did you know nominations/Yaxha

The following discussion 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 Allen3 ^talk 10:06, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Yaxha

(

• Back to T:TDYK
• Article history

)

• ... that Yaxha, the third largest Maya ruin in Guatemala, is one of very few Maya cities to have built a twin pyramid complex, an architectural arrangement characteristic of Tikal?

Reviewed: Thor amboinensis

• Comment: QPQ review to follow. Plenty of possible hooks in this article if the above doesn't appeal. 5x expansion.

Created/expanded by Simon Burchell (talk). Self nom at 11:48, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

• An interesting and pretty comprehensive article. Date and length are fine, and the sourcing is of high quality. Well illustrated and written. A few points that need to be addressed before I sign it off: the "Location" section needs more sourcing (the last 3 sentences have no source). Also, the lead should really be a bit more comprehensive to meet the requirements of WP:LEAD. The hook is mostly OK, but "almost unique" is a tautology; something is either unique or it isn't. How about "only seen elsewhere in...", or something like that? Finally, the QPQ needs to be done. Prioryman (talk) 21:56, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

• I've cut the unsourced info (a relic of the pre-expansion article), even without it it's still over 5x, and I've rephrased the hook. I'll sort out the lead and the review when I have a bit more time - hopefully tomorrow. Thanks for the review, Simon Burchell (talk) 22:53, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
• All should be OK now, expanded the intro - just need to do that review! Simon Burchell (talk) 08:17, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

• Needs a review. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:01, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

• Sorry, I'd forgotten about this. With the improved intro, the rewording and the QPQ review done, we're good to go now. Prioryman (talk) 08:34, 28 October 2012 (UTC)