Template:Did you know nominations/Tobias and the Angel
- 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 AirshipJungleman29 talk 20:40, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Tobias and the Angel
example by Titian
- ... that, unusually for a religious subject, depictions of Tobias and the Angel usually show his dog?
- Source: Hall, James, Hall's Dictionary of Subjects and Symbols in Art, 1996 (2nd edn.), John Murray, ISBN 0719541476, page 304
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Arthur Fulton (sport shooter)
- Comment: sorry, a day or so late ...
Johnbod (talk) 01:46, 14 May 2024 (UTC).
- This was mentioned in Special:Diff/1223744932. I suggest just dropping the "unusually..." bit:
- ALT1: ... that depictions of Tobias and the Angel usually show his dog?
- really says everything that has to be said, in less space. RoySmith (talk) 13:27, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
- I think that it is unusual-and it is very unusual-is the hooky bit. It's a short hook anyway. Johnbod (talk) 14:25, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
- The point of a hook is to be short and sweet, and leave just a little mystery, enticing the reader to click through to the article. There's no need to tell people this is a religious subject, that's obvious from the title of the painting. And there's no need to tell them it's unusual, the fact that there's a dog speaks for that itself. RoySmith (talk) 15:16, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
- Dubious - gaming/superhero culture is chock full of angels with no religious context at all, & I'm sure vast numbers of our readers have no opinion at all on the frequency with which dogs appear in Christian religious art. Johnbod (talk) 15:36, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
5× expansion of 6 May 2024 version completed from 898 characters to 4,527 and nominated eight days later (calculating from this version as opposed to the 2 May version makes this just one day late, so I'm willing to invoke WP:IAR). No copyvios detected (AGF sources which can't go through Dup detector). Article is well-sourced. Main hook is 97 characters long (ALT1 is 61); both are under 200 character max. and are interesting. AGF book for ref 7 (verifying the hook) which is offline. QPQ done. Image is free and in the public domain. Looks good to go! —Bloom6132 (talk) 19:01, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
@Johnbod and Bloom6132: Just noting here that the current character count is 9,819 and the approved version was 4,527, so at least half this article hasn't been approved. This should probably get another review.--Launchballer 15:12, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
- If you must, but a large part of the additions is pictures, captions and new refs I think only 2 shortish text sections are new. Johnbod (talk) 18:29, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
- Dubious - gaming/superhero culture is chock full of angels with no religious context at all, & I'm sure vast numbers of our readers have no opinion at all on the frequency with which dogs appear in Christian religious art. Johnbod (talk) 15:36, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
- The point of a hook is to be short and sweet, and leave just a little mystery, enticing the reader to click through to the article. There's no need to tell people this is a religious subject, that's obvious from the title of the painting. And there's no need to tell them it's unusual, the fact that there's a dog speaks for that itself. RoySmith (talk) 15:16, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
- I think that it is unusual-and it is very unusual-is the hooky bit. It's a short hook anyway. Johnbod (talk) 14:25, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
