Template:Did you know nominations/The History of Java

The History of Java

(

)

Illustration of Prambanan in The History of Java

... that the illustration of ruins in The History of Java (example pictured) is more beautiful than it actually is?

Source: "Presented as unpoetically as possible in the form of technical drawings, the contrast could not be more striking between these and the romantic aquatints produced by William Daniell that depict the ruined candis surmounted by masses of luxuriant vegetation ... and his "superlatively beautiful" ruin landscapes, at least to one reviewer, rendered the candis infinitely more pleasing to the eye" 1

- Reviewed:

5x expanded by Ivan530 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

- Ivan530 (Talk) 17:20, 15 May 2026 (UTC).

Nice to see an improved article that addresses non-Anglophone culture. Prose size has been expanded from 465 bytes to 2595 bytes, so the 5x requirement is met and the nomination is timely. The article is generally well-written and Earwig confirms this is original text, but there are some tweaks needed. The first paragraph of the Publication history section needs a citation. Citation 2 needs more details; it gives an author, date, and title but it's not easy for the reader to find what kind of publication it is. If it's a book, the publisher and page number(s) need specifying and ideally there should be an ISBN or OCLC number. The lead really ought to be more than one sentence. Wherever "Raffles'" is used possessively, it needs a possessive apostrophe.

The image is highly relevant to the hook, readable at thumbnail size, used in the article, and in the public domain. QPQ not needed.

I don't find the language of the hook very elegant: there isn't agreement between the plural word "ruins" and the singular pronoun "it". The same idea can be expressed by "the illustration of ruins ... exaggerates their beauty" and I propose that change. MartinPoulter (talk) 11:18, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

@TSventon: after writing the above review I noticed your post on the article's Talk page suggesting a tweaked hook. We're agreed that the hook needs changing. I'm interested in your opinion of my suggestion above. MartinPoulter (talk) 11:30, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

@MartinPoulter: have you looked at the relevant pages of Tiffin, 539 and 540? The hook should be a statement of fact and beauty is subjective. Tiffin is describing and quoting from a rather convoluted 19th-century review. It is also well known that artists often try to make their subjects more beautiful.

Citation 2 seems to be from a book published by Brill and I agree that an ISBN and page numbers should be added. The edition in the Wikipedia Library is dated 2008. TSventon (talk) 13:00, 5 June 2026 (UTC)