Jump to content

Template:Did you know nominations/Saint Gregory Seminary

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 Launchballer talk 23:22, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Saint Gregory Seminary

The Institutum Divi Thomae taught graduate-level science to both religious sisters and lay people at St. Gregory.
The Institutum Divi Thomae taught graduate-level science to both religious sisters and lay people at St. Gregory.
Created by Maximilian775 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 13 past nominations.

Maximilian775 (talk) 12:31, 21 March 2025 (UTC).

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
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Recently created, well-written, no paraphrasing issues, and ALT1 is a very interesting hook. GTG. Makeandtoss (talk) 12:00, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

@Maximilian775: Hey, this a fascinating one. I checked the source and clipped the relevant part if you want to link the URL from the article's reference: https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-cincinnati-enquirer-250-birds/170494608/ I have a question. I assume the hook means that the priest taught them "to recognize" or "to distinguish between" the phrases. (Birds can learn a lot of human speech without full comprehension.) But the newspaper source is pretty vague. Is there a more explicit source? I would prefer not to promote an ambiguous hook, but if the sources just trust the reader to know what a bird is capable of, I also don't want to assume or speculate. If more explicit sources are not available, this isn't a deal breaker for DYK. Regards, Rjjiii (talk) 05:53, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

@Rjjiii: I have no more sources about that. However, I've always thought the silkworm tag was the more interesting of the two, and, IIRC, its newspaper citation is a bit more out-and-out. Maybe this means that the WWII / silkworm one should be advanced instead? Maximilian775 (talk) 12:10, 17 April 2025 (UTC)