Talk:Amulet MS 5236

	Amulet MS 5236 was a History good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones Date Process Result December 14, 2010 Good article nominee Not listed
	A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on November 22, 2010. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the Greek gold amulet MS 5236 was created by block printing as early as the 6th century BC?

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Greece Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greek history on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Classical Greece and Rome Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Typography Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Typography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Typography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TypographyWikipedia:WikiProject TypographyTemplate:WikiProject TypographyTypography articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. Visual arts This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts articles Books This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles Writing systems Low‑importance This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Writing systems, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating to writing systems on Wikipedia. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project’s talk page.Writing systemsWikipedia:WikiProject Writing systemsTemplate:WikiProject Writing systemsWriting system articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The content of this article has been derived in whole or part from Text which is described in the OTRS ticket. Permission has been received from the copyright holder to release this material . Evidence of this has been confirmed and stored by VRT volunteers, under ticket number 2010111510035654. This template is used by approved volunteers dealing with the Wikimedia volunteer response team system (VRTS) after receipt of a clear statement of permission at permissions-enwikimedia.org. Do not use this template to claim permission.

This article appears to rely on two unpublished studies, both incompletely referenced. Can someone explain why they should be treated as reliable? hamiltonstone (talk) 01:11, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

After a lengthy discussion the German wikipedia has decied to delete this article. Main reason was very douptful sources, mainly one "unpublished" document, which never will reach a peer-review as long it stays in this status. The second source was a private memo and it seems douptful if the author intended it for publication or if he still believed in into before his death. See: de:Wikipedia:Löschprüfung/Archiv/2010/Woche_48#Amulett_MS_5236_.28erl..2C_gel.C3.B6scht.29 --Eingangskontrolle (talk) 16:56, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What you call "doubtful" sources were actually written by international experts (see author links) and your claim that one of them "may not have believed in into before his death" is exactly one of those claims totally made up of out of thin air which made the German discussion such a mockery. A discussion which became in fact lenghty only because the deletion was first disapproved by an admin for a lack of real reasons. I freely acknowledge that peer-reviewed sources would be more preferable to the studies now cited, but trying to transplant the somehwat dishonest arguments from the German WP is in no way helpful in determing the real worth of the sources on which this article is based. Regards Gun Powder Ma (talk) 19:41, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]