Talk:Pearl of Lao Tzu

message: I have just returned to this article after being away from it for many years. I see that is has been completely edited and is now factual. I am very happy to see this finally cleaned up. ~~Quetlin~~ 11/6/2016.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quetlin (talk • contribs) 18:11, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Accuracy

message: Is there any evidence that the Pearl of Allah is the Pearl of Lao Tzu?  Eg, do the rubbings match, can the artificial core be detected, etc?   Somegeek 18:52, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Evidence? 

message: When I first saw this article, in 2007, I had the facts, and knew what was lies and fake myths. My first try at editing was to rewrite the whole thing. I was a newby to Wikipedia and thought the truth would be appreciated, even if the entire article had to be rewritten. I was quite thoroughly quashed. It has now been rewritten to my original specifications- without my help. The first time I tried to edit this in 2007 Borocay Bill should have helped me instead of undoing the whole thing. This is almost 10 years later and it only just got to be a factual article. Makes me wonder how many other articles have been falsely defended from major change for as many years. I am kind of P-O'd. ~~Quetlin~~11/6/2016  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quetlin (talk • contribs) 18:22, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: The last word- I was right all along.

message: What is currently the last sentence of the third paragraph reads, The GIA has changed its policy and no longer refers to non-nacreous mollusc pearls as 'calcareous concretions'.  What is the GIA?  I bet that if I look up “GIA” in the Wikipedia that I will get a disambiguation page listing several different things that can be referred to by this acronym, one of which will obviously fit the context here.  But I shouldn't have to do so.  If one is going to use an obscure acronym in the context of such an article as this, shouldn't one be obligated to clearly define it?   Bob Blaylock (talk) 06:32, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. See Wikipedia:MOS#Acronyms_and_abbreviations. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 03:10, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is the GIA?  

message: There have been some recent reports of a larger pearl. I live on Boracay island where the pearl is said to be on display, but I have not gone to look at it. Some googling turned up the following:
*
*PEARL OF THE KING: IS BORACAY HOME TO THE WORLD’S LARGEST PEARL?, November 5, 2013, Boracay Informer.
*Pearl of the King, philnews.ph.
Also, I see that (contrary to the article) the keepers of the Guiness World Records don't currently list the Pearl of Allah as the largest pearl in the world (see ). Wtmitchell  (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 04:27, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reports of a larger pearl 

message: I wrote what I think is the most accurate version of this story so far and posted it on my blog. http://www.desertcrone.com/the-pearl-of-allah-the-story-of-a-fraudulent-provenance/ 
Quetlin (talk) 06:30, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: The Pearl of Allah: The Story of a Fraudulent Provenance

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Pearl of Lao Tzu. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060311073810/http://www.imperial-deltah.com/Education/famous_pearls.htm to http://www.imperial-deltah.com/education/famous_pearls.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:26, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This article basically says all of the Pearl of Lao Tzu stuff is a fabrication. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/06/the-pearl-of-lao-tzu/559109/  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.110.24.41 (talk) 23:26, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accuracy, new information 

message: No photo? Seriously? Fig (talk) 20:05, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo?