Template:Did you know nominations/Hieromonk Mardarije

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 Allen3 ^talk 11:12, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Hieromonk Mardarije, Hegumen Mardarije

( Back to T:TDYK )

( Article history links:

)

... that 16th-century srbulje printers Hieromonk Mardarije and Hegumen Mardarije were misidentified in some sources?

Reviewed: List of terrorist attacks in France and Shankill United Predators F.C.

Created by Antidiskriminator (talk). Self nominated at 10:11, 8 January 2015 (UTC).

Article seems to be neutral and adequately sourced, but all of them are in a foreign language in books, which makes it somewhat difficult to check for paraphrasing. Would someone familiar with these books be able to check? I believe that the hook appears to be catchy and long enough and is sourced in the article. The article is new enough to match the nomination date. length wise, it is also long enough. I would definitely say that the same eval would be appropriate for the article for Hegumen Mardarije.--GouramiWatcher^(?) 02:52, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. If the problem was hook, I provided two quotes and translation (diff and diff). If you are concerned about foreign language sources, that is usually resolved by assuming good faith, if I am not wrong. I sincerely believe there is no close paraphrasing issue here.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:18, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Gourami Watcher, I need to point out that two articles have been nominated here, Hieromonk Mardarije and Hegumen Mardarije, and you need to specifically review each of them. (You also get two DYK credits for reviewing two articles, which is what you currently need.) Other checks you have not mentioned include newness (nominated within seven days of creation/expansion) and length (minimum of 1500 prose characters each); you can use WP:DYKcheck on the articles to determine both. There's also an unusual situation here, in that the same material (the Misidentification sections) is used in both articles. As the articles were created within minutes of each other, and both had Misidentification sections, the thing to do is exclude the 456 prose characters from one of the article's prose character counts. (Normally, it would require a 5x expansion if copied from one to another, meaning a minimum of 2280 prose characters including the 456, but it seems to be a common creation so I don't think this would make sense.) As Antidiskriminator points out, offline sources are usually accepted AGF (there's a specific icon for approving a hook based on such offline sources); you can check the quotes in the references using Google translate to get a basic idea of what is being said in the source. I do think the articles could both use a copyedit; the sentences are sometimes unclear. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:26, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

@BlueMoonset: I tweeked my eval to add the rest of the requirements. I also stated that the exact same evaluation could go with the second article that was nominated, which I'm hoping could also work. Thanks, and let me know if I'm still not doing it right! :) --GouramiWatcher^(?) 03:06, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Gourami Watcher, I apologize for not getting here sooner. This looks very close, enough for QPQ credit and at this point I think your own nominations can continue. The things I wonder about, that perhaps Antidiskriminator can help clear up, is why "Hieromonk" and "Heguman" are capitalized in the hook above when they are typically in lowercase in their respective articles, and why the "Hegumen Mardarije" article says "Hegumen Mardarije or Hieromonk Mardarije" as its opening, directly below its "Not to be confused with Hieromonk Mardarije." admonishment. Instead of "or" in that opening line, something like "sometimes called Hieromonk Mardarije" (or "also" instead of "sometimes") would be less confusing to the reader. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:49, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing to this issues.
1. Hegumen or Hieromonk: When I began preparing drafts of this two articles I noticed that some sources refer to both of them as hieromonks, so I added the hieromonk title to hegumen Mardarije also. When I later discovered that many sources mistakenly identify hegumen and hieromonk Mardarije I failed to correct the text of the article about hegumen (which I did now).
2. "Capitalized H or not?" I left capitalized H because some sources use capitalized letter H as part of their names (i.e. this source for Hieromonk/Jeromonah Mardarije and this source for Hegumen Mardarije) and because it is also capitalized in the names of the articles. Your point is correct, H should be capitalized at both hook and text of the respective articles, or none of them. I am uncertain about what to do because English is not my native language, but I guess any solution would be ok. Thanks for your review.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:31, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

New review request to check over this stalled nomination. Fuebaey (talk) 18:01, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
Both article were nominated in time, and at over 2,000 characters each, are plenty long enough. Each of them has the hook fact suitably referenced inline, and I've done some tidying on both articles. The sources are exclusively foreign-language, so I AGF for the facts and any plagiarism concerns. Good to go. Harrias ^talk 08:42, 9 April 2015 (UTC)