Talk:Shandon Castle, Cork

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. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:54, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that Shandon Castle was destroyed in the Siege of Cork in 1690, and the sandstone from its ruin used to build the Church of St Anne in 1722? Source: "Shandon Castle (..) was destroyed during the Siege of Cork in 1690" (Bracken & Bracken, 2018); "Shandon Steeple (..) was built in 1722, using the sandstone from the old Shandon Castle on two sides" (Cork Guide, 2019); The church was built with red sandstone from the original medieval Shandon castle which stood nearby" (Irish Independent, 2018);

• Reviewed: The Best Years (story)

Created by Guliolopez (talk). Self-nominated at 15:46, 6 February 2021 (UTC).

•  Reviewing... Flibirigit (talk) 21:35, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook eligibility:

• Cited: - ?
• Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Article was created on January 28, finished on January 31, then nominated on February 6. I consider this new enough to meet requirements. Length and sourcing are adequate. Article is neutral in tone. No plagiarism issues detected. The image used in the article is properly licensed on the Commons. QPQ requirement is complete. The hook would be interesting to a broad audience. My only concern is that within the article, the corresponding sentence says "reputedly", wheres the hook states something as fact. I think the easiest solution is to remove the word "reputedly" from the article for accuracy and verification, since the cited both state it as fact rather than an accepted story. Flibirigit (talk) 21:51, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Flibirigit. Thanks for taking the time to do the review and for the comments/feedback. As you note, it is accepted as fact that sandstone from the ruin of Shandon Castle was used to build the church steeple of St. Anne's-Shandon. That part of the sentence probably doesn't need to be couched with "reputedly". I had added "reputedly" only to cover the first part of the sentence. Which refers to "other nearby buildings". I'd done so because the related sources are vague on which buildings, other than the church, were benefactors of recycled material. In any event, if we're removing the "reputedly" (and I'm happy to), I'd also then remove the "other nearby buildings" part. So we don't appear more certain than those sources. Something like: "Abandoned thereafter, red sandstone from the castle ruin was reputedly later used in the construction of several nearby buildings, including the nearby Church of St Anne (built 1722)". I'm happy to make this change. If you agree it addresses the concern (without introducing another). Let me know what you think. And thanks again. Guliolopez (talk) 01:31, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

The suggested changes are succinct and sufficient. Flibirigit (talk) 02:06, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. I've made that change. Cheers. Guliolopez (talk) 02:54, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

ALT0 approved. It is now accurately cited, mentioned inline and verified. Nomination adheres to all other DYK criteria. Flibirigit (talk) 03:09, 11 February 2021 (UTC)