Talk:Virtual unfolding

Did you know nomination

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. You can locate your hook here. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Jeromi Mikhael talk 07:17, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

Severely charred Diss Heywood scroll

• ... that non-destructive virtual unfolding was used to read burned or otherwise highly damaged scrolls (example pictured)? Source: Scientists have developed brand new techniques to reveal the hidden text inside damaged and unreadable scrolls., etc, see in the article
  • ALT1: ... that non-destructive virtual unfolding was used to read burned or otherwise highly damaged scrolls (example pictured) from Pompeii, Ancient Egypt, Medieval England, Mongolia, and other places? Source: same as ALT0 but with more details. for each scroll see sources in the relevant section
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Albert Gatschet

Created by Artem.G (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 28 past nominations.

Artem.G (talk) 12:23, 5 September 2025 (UTC).

This is a great article and a good start on a DYK hook, and there are a few things that should be addressed before it's good to go: The citation provided doesn't totally support the DYK text; this is quibbly, but the cited source doesn't actually use "virtual unfolding"; it talks about "virtual unravelling", which is also not one of the alternate terms used in note "a" in the first sentence. Unfolding doesn't seem to the be most common term among the sources I looked at -- is it the best title for the article? I wonder if there's a source that addresses the multiple name, and if it ould also make sense to list all the names in the first sentence rather than using the hovertext note. I also note that paragraphs 1 and 15 (Virtual_unfolding#Herculaneum_papyri) lack citations. Everything else is good -- recency, length of DYK hook, size of article, neutrality, copyright, licensing. I would 100% support this nomination with just a bit of work. Kenirwin/(talk) 18:20, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

@Artem.G: Nice one! I had a DYK hook on 5 January 2025 that's related to this ("... that archaeologists read an ancient inscription by "unrolling" it virtually?") However, Frankfurt silver inscription isn't currently mentioned at all in virtual unfolding. I'm happy though that I finally have something to wikilink from there for the unrolling process. Renerpho (talk) 14:01, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

Renerpho, nice article, I didn't know about the Frankfurt silver inscription; will add later, or you are welcome to do it if you want. Artem.G (talk) 15:26, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

Kenirwin, thanks for the review! I'm mostly offline now and for the next ~week or so, will address everything when I'm back. Artem.G (talk) 15:26, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

hm, "virtual unraveling" is used only related to this one scroll. I checked the sources used in the article, and all three terms are in use:

unrolling - 1, 2, 4, 5, 15, 23, 41*, 43, 44 (9)

unfolding - 6, 8, 9, 16, 39, 40 (6)

unwrapping - 3, 4, 10, 12, 17, 24, 25, 28, 38 (9)

unraveling - 13, 14 (2)

Unwrapping and unrolling are often used in articles about Herculaneum papyri, but unfolding is, IMO, a more general term that can be used not only for scrolls, but for letters, amulets, etc. Artem.G (talk) 21:11, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

@Artem.G and Kenirwin: The nomination turns two months old in four days. Has this been resolved? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:38, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

• Approving Alt0 only. The reviewer has been inactive for the last few weeks. As this is about to time out, I am taking it on. The citations were added to the paragraphs by the creator after the review, so that issue is fixed. I fixed the naming issue in the lead by making them unhidden and bolding the alternative names as is common practice for topics known by more than one name. Alt1 doesn't work because, while the fact is verifiable to the source, not all of that content is found/cited in the article body itself. AltO is verifiable and is found in the article with an inline citation. It can be promoted.4meter4 (talk) 23:00, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

@4meter4: Thanks, that satisfies my concerns and I do love the hook and want it to go forward! Kenirwin/(talk) 12:37, 27 October 2025 (UTC)