Talk:San Michele Arcangelo ai Corridori di Borgo

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you know nomination[edit]

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) 18:57, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(
)
View of the church of San Michele Arcangelo with the passetto in background (1900 ca.)
View of the church of San Michele Arcangelo with the passetto in background (1900 ca.)
  • Reviewed: Old City of Hebron
  • Comment: In case of decision in favour of ALT1 we could substitute the picture of the church with that of the fresco, also in the article

Created by Alessandro57 (talk). Self-nominated at 12:29, 16 February 2020 (UTC).[reply]

  • The English needs a going over - I've put in Nursing Madonna instead of the wholly unidiomatic Virgin of the Milk with the Child! Johnbod (talk) 04:04, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • You are absolutely right @Johnbod: my mother tongue is Italian, and this is immediately apparent from reading the text. P.S. Maybe if you have time you could also have a look to the via Giulia article, which I expanded but, having been already on DYK, I cannot propose here. Alex2006 (talk) 10:34, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have just requested that the article receive a copyedit at the Guild of Copy Editors request page; given the current rate of reviewing there, it will probably be completed by the end of the month, at which point the review here can resume. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:19, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hallo @Johnbod: & @BlueMoonset:, I tried to copyedit the article (which was really in a shameful state, SOM!). You can either give green light for a review or wait for a professional copyedit. Thanks, Alex2006 (talk) 12:22, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
copy-edited. Ready for review now. Johnbod (talk) 18:00, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I have copy-edited this article on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors, as requested. The article had been erroneously removed from the GOCE's Requests page. The prose should be in good shape now. I left a couple of {{Clarify}} templates where I was unable to understand what was meant in the prose; editors may need to refer to sources to clear up these issues. Good luck with your DYK nomination, and feel free to ping me with any questions. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:27, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Approving ALT1 only. I have addressed one of the clarify tags, the other two need sources, but I also don't find that they affect reading enough to need to be addressed before this can appear on the front page. DYK check looks good, being new and long enough at the time of nomination. Subject is interesting and there is an inline citation for all the hooks. However, I only really find alts 1 & 2 interesting, and I think that of these, only alt 1 will be widely understood - the phrasing may make it difficult for people to see the point of alt 2 (and alt 0 for that matter, I'm not quite sure whether it means people think the church ended the plague or not). I also think that uncovering cool art may be the most interesting of the three. If the nominator is really set on one of the other hooks, we can work to rephrase them :) AGF because I read the Italian quotations provided, but the sources are largely offline. Kingsif (talk) 16:32, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hallo @Kingsif:, and thanks for reviewing! For me ALT1 is OK: do you think that we should change the image of the church with that of the nursing virgin (also in the article)? Alex2006 (talk) 16:51, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Either image works: the church is the subject, but the painting is also a good image. Re. these two images: both are in the article and suitably commons licensed. Kingsif (talk) 16:53, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I tested the other image, but it is too faint: let's stay with this one! Alex2006 (talk) 17:06, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi, I came by to promote ALT1, and added a "citation needed" tag to one paragraph. The lead is also too short. Yoninah (talk) 23:06, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you, that looks much better. Restoring tick. Yoninah (talk) 18:55, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Clarifications[edit]

Hallo @Jonesey95:, and thanks again for your copyedit!

Below the required clarifications:

Example of Orifiamma
  • "oriflammes": from Italian "Orifiamma" (pl. "Orifiamme") is an architectonic decoration (a kind of little obelisks) used above the facade of a church. You can see two of them at the ends of the tympanum of the church of San Giacomo in Rome and, of course, on the picture of the front of San Michele Arcangelo. Unfortunately this is a very technical term and I did not find its translation in English. Maybe "Candlestick"?
  • This means "To the god Michael, the Archangel" and is the dedication inscription of the church.
  • "Crucifix" here means "Crucifixion of Jesus". Altars in the catholic churches can be dedicated to saints, Jesus, Mary or also single episodes of the gospel, like the crucifixion. It Italian this kind of altar (and also a chapel) is called "altare (or cappella) del crocifisso" (please see here and here)

If something is not clear, you can ping me here. Cheers, Alex2006 (talk) 10:12, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo @Kingsif:, the clarifications are here since a week. Alex2006 (talk) 16:48, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:San_Michele_Arcangelo_ai_Corridori_di_Borgo&oldid=1208319386"