Wikipedia

Template:Did you know nominations/Wilhelm Kempf (bishop)

< Template:Did you know nominations
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) 06:12, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

Wilhelm Kempf (bishop)

edit
(
)
Relief bust of Wilhelm Kempf
Relief bust of Wilhelm Kempf

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 08:03, 2 October 2018 (UTC).

  • Good article that reads well. I've only made a couple of minor style tweaks. Checklist: hook validated directly from www.limburg.de source, checkY, length checkY, timescale checkY, sufficiently referenced, albeit some taken in good faith checkY, structure and style checkY. As far as I'm concerned this is good to go. Bermicourt (talk) 20:09, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
Hello, I came to promote this, but perhaps the hook could be rewritten to make it snappier? It doesn't seem that clear right now, particularly the part that says "introduced the changes of the Second Vatican Council in which he took part". Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:39, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
Not sure what you mean, - could you make a suggestion? My try (and sorry that I am not gifted with snappyness):
ALT1: ... that Wilhelm Kempf (pictured), Bishop of Limburg from 1949 to 1981, took part in the Second Vatican Council, and introduced its changes in his diocese?
The council changed the church's view on/of itself dramatically, but tough to say that in few words. Or could you? Or someone watching? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:53, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
The hook seems to imply that it was Kempf who proposed the changes done in Vatican II (as in during the council itself), which is contrary to what the article says (which merely says that he introduced the Vatican II changes in Limburg). As for ALT1, I don't think it works since Vatican II was implemented throughout the Catholic world and thus being the one to introduce it in a diocese is not uncommon (disclosure: I'm Catholic so I'm actually familiar with Vatican II and the changes implemented because of it). Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:11, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
ALT2: ... that Wilhelm Kempf (pictured), Bishop of Limburg from 1949 to 1981, took part in the Second Vatican Council?
No room to say that he enthusiastically introduced the changes, and was criticised for it, while others may have done only what they had to. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:40, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
@Bermicourt: Thoughts on ALT1 and ALT2? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 20:53, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
I like the source which says: "Bishop Wilhelm Kempf carried the ethos [from the end] of the Second Vatican Council, of which he was one of five sub-secretaries, to his Diocese, which - although small in area and numbers - soon set an outstanding example [in terms of the reforms]." I wonder if part of that could be woven into a hook? Just trying to help. Bermicourt (talk) 18:37, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
Gerda Arendt, Narutolovehinata5, this has been sitting for over a month. Where does this stand now, and whose response is needed at this point? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:51, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
I was happy with the original hook, but Narutolovehinata5 wasn't and so Gerda and he or she suggested some alternatives. I wasn't convinced so I cited a source directly which I felt could be used and left the ball in Narutolovehinata5's court. To move this along, here's another suggested hook based on that source: Bermicourt (talk) 18:29, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
ALT3: ... that Wilhelm Kempf (pictured), Bishop of Limburg from 1949 to 1981, set an outstanding example in introducing the reforms of Vatican II to his Diocese?
I struck the original, as it was explained that it's not clear whether he took part in the Council or the changes. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:05, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
@Bermicourt: I kind of like ALT3 but the hook fact isn't explicitly mentioned in the source. @Gerda Arendt: , the "The church historian Friedrich Kempf [de] was his younger brother" statement lacks a footnote. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:50, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
Oh dear, wir drehen uns im Kreis... @Narutolovehinata5: I've reworded the lede in line with the hook which is explicitly mentioned in the first reference of the article which states: "Bischof Wilhelm Kempf trug die Aufbruchstimmung des Zweiten Vatikanischen Konzils, zu dessen fünf Subsekretären er zählte, ins Bistum, das - obwohl klein an Fläche und Katholikenzahl - schon bald eine herausragende Stellung gewann." The article is this one. Bermicourt (talk) 08:51, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
@Bermicourt and Gerda Arendt: Again, the hook fact is not in the article. Either the article needs to be reworded, or a new hook needs to be proposed here. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:15, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
I'd like to write in the article what is in a German source "er trug die Aufbruchstimmung des Konzils in seine Diöcese", but there's no good word for "Aufbruchstimmung", I asked translators and they come up with "enthusiasm", "departure", "awakening". None of them conveys "Stimmung" (= mood, atmosphere). "Aufbruch" - departure - literally means "break up". Help? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:52, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
I am really sad that there's no English term for Aufbruchsstimmung. The best I find is "atmosphere for new beginnings", as if there were old beginnings. It's when crusts need to be broken to begin something new, - something like disruption ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:47, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
ALT4: that Wilhelm Kempf (pictured), Bishop of Limburg from 1949 to 1981, brought the sense of expectation from Vatican II into his Diocese, which soon became a leading light for the reforms? Bermicourt (talk) 18:33, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
Thank you, but "leading light" is not in the article. Can we instead word that he took part in the Council? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:45, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
It's a translation of "herausragende Stellung". But only a suggestion. And I thought you wanted to include Aufbruchstimmung? Bermicourt (talk) 21:33, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
I'd think "outstanding" was better for "herausragend". Feel free to add it to the article, - I have a few other topics where I am behind. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:44, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
It's more literal, but I was trying to be more poetic. :) I'm running out of time as we're off to Germany shortly, but I'll try and look at it tonight. Bermicourt (talk) 07:44, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
First time I hear of "poetic" on DYK, - love it! Only, I'm afraid we are supposed to stay factual.
ALT5:... that Wilhelm Kempf (pictured), Bishop of Limburg from 1949 to 1981, took part in the Second Vatican Council and introduced its changes in his diocese in an outstanding way? ... in an exemplary way? ... with enthusiasm?
... instead of "changes" perhaps "new concepts"? "drastic changes"? or what? - Have a god trip, Bermicourt? I'd have Christmas music recommendations for Idstein (8, 9, 24) and Wiesbaden (16, 25), if you are in that area. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:46, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
Let me have a think about that. Well our family trip is not quite that cultured. I'm going to see my boyhood favourite football team, Borussia MG, play Stuttgart. And we're all going to the Christmas market in Düss. The cultural bit is more local: the BSO's New Year Concert. Bermicourt (talk) 19:43, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
Actually I still like the vitality of ALT4 and think it faithfully reflects the spirit of Aufbruchstimmung and herausragende Stellung. Maybe we should utilise "groundbreaking" since that echoes Aufbruch both literally and figuratively. How about this modification:
ALT6: that Wilhelm Kempf (pictured), Bishop of Limburg from 1949 to 1981, brought the sense of expectation of groundbreaking change from Vatican II into his Diocese, which soon became a leading light of the reforms? Bermicourt (talk) 19:57, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
Good ideas, but now we have four words (sense expectation groundbraking change) before we get to the Council, - a word (Council) I'd not want to miss. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:05, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
I think we've ended up with a bit of role-reversal here lol. You're supposed to suggest the hooks and I'm supposed to comment and, hopefully, approve them! I'm sorry, I was trying to be helpful, but maybe I'm just muddying the waters. So I'll stop now and let you make the running! (but don't worry, I'm on your side, honest). GB. Bermicourt (talk) 21:06, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

no problem, it happens - also to me - when you get engaged with a topic. New reviewer: we have six ALTs to look at, and the article, nothing else ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:52, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Well, well, well. I'm quite undecided between ALT3 and ALT6 but I guess I'll go with ALT3. :) Off to the preppy please. VincentLUFan (talk) (Kenton!) 05:46, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
Thank you! ALT3 please, because ALT6 has parts that are not (yet at least) in the article. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:19, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
  • @Gerda Arendt and Vincent60030: Pulling, with due apologies. I think the current hook strays too far from neutral encyclopedia language. I'd be fine with just saying "introduced the reforms"; but "set an outstanding example", or the equivalent, requires also saying from whose perspective that was true; it's too heavy an editorial voice, otherwise. I would have swapped in one of the alts, but there's a similar issue with those. Vanamonde (talk) 21:26, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
    Did you read the above? I didn't suggest it, you have many choices, such as ALT1. - While you pulled I added to the article, supporting it ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:31, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
    @Gerda Arendt: My apologies, I missed ALT1 (the others had the same problem as the one I pulled). I'm not going to replace this immediately, because I'm thinking it might make a good picture hook for the next prep. Restoring tick per previous review. Vanamonde (talk) 22:14, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
    Fine, just that - as suggested on DYKTALK - I'd prefer a photo of an exemplary Wikipedian to a plant (in prep 4), and also to bronze. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:27, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
    Sorry, reversing this yet again as Yoninah has expressed reservations about ALT1. Yoninah, any suggestions? Also, Gerda, while you're at it, could you fix the unsourced sentence at the end of the first paragraph in the body? Vanamonde (talk) 22:43, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
    yes --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:56, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
    Note to Vanamonde: "yes" means that it was actually done, not that it could be done. Yoninah, any suggestions about what to do with ALT1 (or what to replace it with)? Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:11, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
    I can't follow how ALT1 seems to imply that the changes by council of several hundred people would be his changes, - "it's changes" are the council's, many changes by many people. Clearer wording welcome. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:25, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
  • BlueMoonset per your ping on my talk page: all I said at WT:DYK was that ALT1 wasn't interesting. Looking at it again, it's okay, but not for an image slot. Now Gerda seems to be asking for different wording for ALT1. Perhaps she should set on a hook and then a reviewer could finalize it. Yoninah (talk) 17:27, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
No, I'd still go with ALT if you can take it, and the implication is not there. Repeating because it's so far away:
ALT1: ... that Wilhelm Kempf (pictured), Bishop of Limburg from 1949 to 1981, took part in the Second Vatican Council, and introduced its changes in his diocese?
I assume that you either know that these changes were major, drastic, fundamental - you name it -, or will not care about him anyway. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:51, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Thank you, but Narutolovehinata5 had an objection to the wording, above. Narutolovehinata5, can you help us with better wording? Yoninah (talk) 18:03, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
I'm afraid I won't be able to help out much here, as the topic is outside my line of expertise. My only suggestion could be to basically go with ALT1 but only focusing on his participation in Vatican II (i.e. removing the part about the changes). However, I don't know if that hook could appeal to non-Christian readers. Sorry if I couldn't be of more help. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 06:27, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
Participation is something he shares with thousands of others. The fervent - enthusiastic - determined - introduction of the changes is what set him apart. Any wording help? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gerda Arendt (talk • contribs) 12:44, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
I understand why Gerda has watered the hook down, but it's a shame that the real impact Kempf made, stressed by the sources, has now been lost. The hook has become a camel: a horse designed by a committee. :( Bermicourt (talk) 20:49, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
My suggestion here would be to use in-line attribution for any superlatives attached to his introduction of the reforms, and then use that in the hook (that needs to be done in the article in any case; it's a bit too heavy a use of an editorial voice. Vanamonde (Talk) 00:26, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
Bermicourt, would you do that? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:22, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
Could I ask which hook we are talking about? I'd rather not spend time working on the wrong one. Bermicourt (talk) 17:03, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
We talk about a hook which you could word. Or we could perhaps keep it simple and say something like:
ALT1a: ... that Wilhelm Kempf (pictured), Bishop of Limburg from 1949 to 1981, took part in the Second Vatican Council, and introduced its innovations in his diocese? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:13, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
I am honestly fine with that, and given the difficulty of wording the superlatives neutrally, I think I would be willing to pass this, but I don't want to unilaterally overrule Yoninah, so pinging her. Yoninah, would you be so kind as to take a look? Also: the hook may be okay, but the lead of the article does need in-text attribution, and as I do not speak German I don't want to be the one doing that. Vanamonde (Talk) 18:05, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
The lead summarizes info sourced in the body. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:15, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
Yes, you're right, but the body needs fixing too. To be clear, I would object to that wording in any biography, and this has nothing to do with who Kempf was; neither "exemplary" nor "outstanding" is a word we should be using in Wikipedia's voice. I would suggest "A 2018 church biography stated that Kempf had set an outstanding example in introducing the reforms to his diocese" or something like that. Even that is borderline, because really, we need an independent source for anything along those lines. Vanamonde (Talk) 18:37, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
It's kind of independent because it's not the church saying source saying the church is brilliant c.f. other churches or organisations but the church saying one of its members was brilliant compared with other members. Bermicourt (talk) 21:51, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. That addresses its use as a source, but not the language issue I have described above, which is independent of the source. Vanamonde (Talk) 21:56, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
  • This is stuck between a rock and a hard place. The superlatives aren't liked and omitting them results in a bland uninformative hook. This could be resolved with a weasely "was said to <superlative><deed>" but that makes for clunkiness and hooks are meant to be snappy. I suggest a completely different hook to resolve this;
SpinningSpark 12:28, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the offer, but no. Too little to say about such a giant, and will be the hook for that choir. - ALT1 has no superlatives, - you can help by wording the article to conform with that. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:35, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
Well, no I can't, and if you stick to that the nom may end up rejected. ALT1, and just about all the rest in my opinion, are too bland to get past the "likely to draw the readers in to wanting to read the article" requirement. SpinningSpark 13:00, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
The sticking point is the superlatives, but since they are used in the sources, I don't see why that should be a problem. Especially as the sources are independent of the individual. Is the underlying issue that the sources are in German? If so, I'm happy to translate them as, I'm sure, is Gerda whose English is impeccable. Bermicourt (talk) 13:19, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
  • In the interest of this moving forward, I have to say that ALT7 is a very bland hook for a person with an interesting career. The part about the Second Vatican Council is actually promising, the issues regarding hooks related to that are more to do with wording or anything else. @Gerda Arendt, Bermicourt, and Spinningspark: Do you have any suggestions on how else to move forward here? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:10, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
What about ALT1a then? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:15, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
  • I don't see an ALT1a. I think the way out of this is to avoid Show, don't tell. Don't say it was "exemplary", show why it was exemplary. Something like:
  • ALT8: ... that Wilhelm Kempf (pictured), Bishop of Limburg from 1949 to 1981, promoted spiritual discourse and open dialogue in his diocese following the Second Vatican Council? Yoninah (talk) 20:44, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
ALT1a was just a little above, repeated:
ALT1a: ... that Wilhelm Kempf (pictured), Bishop of Limburg from 1949 to 1981, took part in the Second Vatican Council, and introduced its innovations in his diocese? including your suggestion:
ALT9: ... that Wilhelm Kempf (pictured), Bishop of Limburg from 1949 to 1981, took part in the Second Vatican Council, and introduced its innovations in his diocese, including spiritual discourse and open dialogue? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:27, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
  • ALT9a: ... that Wilhelm Kempf (pictured), Bishop of Limburg from 1949 to 1981, introduced spiritual discourse and open dialogue to his diocese after attending the Second Vatican Council? Yoninah (talk) 21:36, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
May be my English, but "attending" sounds rather passive to me, while he was active. Also I'd prefer to mention the Council early, for a time stamp. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:15, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
  • OK. Reviewer needed for ALT9. Yoninah (talk) 23:24, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
  • ALT9 ok, slightly under 200 characters (193), citations in the article, but in German. Above reviews covered that issue. Good to go. Zeete (talk) 17:00, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Wilhelm_Kempf_(bishop)&oldid=881850901"