Template:Did you know nominations/Antonín Cyril Stojan

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. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Yoninah (talk) 23:32, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Antonín Cyril Stojan

(

• Back to T:TDYK
• Article history

)

• ... that Antonín Cyril Stojan was titled as Venerable by Pope Francis?

• Reviewed: Street vacation

Created by Lord Sidious 82 (talk) and Cloudz679 (talk). Nominated by Cloudz679 (talk) at 10:19, 6 February 2017 (UTC).

• @Cloudz679:: New enough, long enough, no copyvio problems. The hook, while cited, is going to put me to sleep, and I think it would put readers who aren't aware of the Catholic meaning of Venerable to sleep as well. Unfortunately, the article doesn't have anything better to offer in terms of a hook. QPQ pending. At this point, it's about the hook and QPQ to get this approved. Raymie (t • c) 05:36, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

• Adding icon to reflect nomination status. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:39, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

• @Raymie: Have now completed QPQ. I appreciate that, as the reviewer, you may not be interested in the Catholic church, but I imagine many readers might be. I tried to make the hook "short and punchy" per WP:DYKHOOK. C679 19:22, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

• A couple of possible alternates with a bit more detail and interest (ALT2 may have more than necessary):

• ALT1: ... that Antonín Cyril Stojan, who led a life of heroic virtue, was given the title of Venerable by Pope Francis?
• ALT2: ... that Antonín Cyril Stojan, who led a life of heroic virtue, was given the title of Venerable 92 years after his death by Pope Francis? —BlueMoonset (talk) 19:56, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
• I like ALT1 (ALT2 is almost redundant). If that's good, we're good to go with this nomination. Raymie (t • c) 22:57, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
• Adding icon to reflect nomination status. --MopTop (talk) 03:37, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

• MopTop, you should never add an approval tick unless you have actually reviewed the nomination, in which case you should be explaining what it was you reviewed; however, it's generally considered polite to allow the original reviewer to take that step once he or she is satisfied. In this case, Raymie is courteously waiting for Cloudz679 to say whether, as nominator, the ALT1 hook is okay, and if it is the tick will be added, but as reviewer Raymie should be the one to apply the tick. Thank you for your understanding. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:09, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

• @BlueMoonset: Sorry, I misunderstood, but I meant well. The user had forgotten to include an icon before and I assumed they had forgotten again. --MopTop (talk) 16:23, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

• MopTop, that's very understandable, and I'm glad you want to help. It's just that the one thing we can't ever assume is the tick. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:31, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

• @Raymie: agree with ALT1, thank you for your time. C679 13:39, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

• Good to go. Raymie (t • c) 17:02, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

• Hi, I came by to promote this, but added a "citation needed" tag for the dates mentioned at the end of the first paragraph under Beatification process. Yoninah (talk) 22:52, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

• @Yoninah: I was unaware of this DYK 'requirement' and cannot find mention of it in the rules. However I have attempted to improve the referencing by citing the ones I could find support for, and removing the others. C679 23:27, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

• When a fact in an article stands out, it should be cited, regardless of DYK. Thank you for adding that cite and tidying up. Restoring tick per Raymie's review. Yoninah (talk) 23:30, 26 February 2017 (UTC)