Talk:Holy Door (Santiago de Compostela)

Latest comment: 1 year ago by Edge3 in topic Did you know nomination

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 Edge3 (talk16:06, 19 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

 
Holy door at the Cathedral of Santiago de Compostela

Created by Evrik (talk) and Reidgreg (talk). Self-nominated at 03:43, 30 April 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Holy door (Cathedral of Santiago de Compostela); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply

It appears that the discussion was archived without a response. Does this count as a soft decline of the special occasion request? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:55, 17 May 2023 (UTC)Reply
I think that the lack of objection was a tacit approval. BTW, the point is moot until the articles are reviewed. --evrik (talk) 14:04, 17 May 2023 (UTC)Reply
I asked Theleekycauldron about this off-wiki and it doesn't seem to be the case: they said that for an IAR request to be granted, there has to be an explicit approval, rather than a lack of disapproval. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:10, 17 May 2023 (UTC)Reply
Discussions off-wiki aren't policy ... in any case, we're currently sitting at nine weeks. If this sits for three more week, it will be at six weeks. --evrik (talk) 01:24, 22 May 2023 (UTC):Reply
Firstly, we go by nomination date and not review date, so even if we wait three weeks, the request cannot be granted without an explicit discussion that gives an IAR exemption. Secondly, for an IAR request to be granted, there has to be explicit approval. "Silence means approval" is not how things work on Wikipedia. In any case this probably should run as a regular, non-special occasion hook instead. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 14:21, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply
  perhaps we should give this a rest for now – nomination awaits full review anyway. I'll also go ahead and throw in my support for the special occasion and associated exemption – if WT:DYK isn't interested, a small local consensus should suffice. If NLH5 and the reviewer agree, that's more than enough. theleekycauldron (talkcontribs) (she/her) 15:11, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

REVIEW 1 of 3: Feast of Saint James

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
  • Cited:  
  • Interesting:  
QPQ: Done.

Overall:   QPQ Template:Did you know nominations/Trump alternate electors controversy is dated to July 2022 which I presume is fine just wanted to mention; also this is REVIEW 1 of 3 jengod (talk) 22:31, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

REVIEW 2 of 3: Holy door (Cathedral of Santiago de Compostela)

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited:  
  • Interesting:  
  • Other problems:  
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
QPQ: Done.

Overall:   Template:Did you know nominations/Loli (district) done 2022-August jengod (talk) 03:06, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

REVIEW 3 of 3: Jacobean Holy Year

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
  • Cited:  
  • Interesting:  

QPQ:   - Template:Did you know nominations/Diane Burns done 2022-April
Overall:   jengod (talk) 03:06, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

Overall:   - I see no issues and have no objections to proposed front-page date etc. Let me know if should be doing something else to move this through otherwise thanks everybody and cheers. jengod (talk) 03:06, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

I'm not sure why people are having policy discussions off-wiki, as they don't carry any weight here. I'll go ahead and promote this for July 25. Edge3 (talk) 16:05, 19 July 2023 (UTC)Reply