Template:Did you know nominations/As with Gladness Men of Old


 * 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 Yoninah (talk) 10:54, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

As with Gladness Men of Old

 * ... that "As with Gladness Men of Old" is the only Epiphany hymn that doesn't describe the Biblical Magi (pictured) as "magi" or "kings" or state their number? Source:  The Christmas Carol Reader. Haworth Press. pp. 71–72. ISBN 1-56024-974-9.
 * Reviewed: Dunkirk (2017 film)
 * Comment: For Epiphany (6th January)

5x expanded by The C of E (talk). Self-nominated at 06:16, 1 January 2018 (UTC).


 * Symbol possible vote.svg This is unfortunately not a 5x expansion, but about 3x, from 823 prose characters prior to The C of E's deletions from the article a few weeks ago to the expansion earlier today to 2550 prose characters. Given that it's the same editor doing the deletions and additions not that far apart in time, this is not eligible for DYK unless it is ultimately expanded to 4115 prose characters, requiring an additional 1565 to attain 5x. If that proves infeasible, should the article eventually become a GA, it would be welcome as a resubmission to DYK. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:06, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Strictly speaking, WP:DYKSG isn't too clear on that, I had intepreted it as being the previous version and I had felt that 1 month after cleanup would make that sufficient for the starting point. Nevertheless I have carried out the additional expansion to the length as you requested.  The C of E God Save the Queen!  ( talk ) 22:47, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
 * The C of E, I think you'll find that it will be far more than a month or even several will be needed if the same editor does the "cleanup" and the subsequent buildup. Rehabbing an article that you come across a shell of its former self is one thing; gutting it and also doing the subsequent rehab is another. Each case will probably decided on the then-current interpretation of the letter vs. spirit vs. intent of the DYK rules/guidelines by the reviewer and other DYK editors.
 * I have done a copyedit of the article, which is now 3461 prose characters, so a further expansion will be needed. I had to delete two long phrases because they didn't reflect the information in the sources, on Dix's father, and on the change to the tune making it more "moral". I also condensed the prose where there was repetition between sentences and the like. The two sources I checked used "Conrad Kocher" rather than "Konrad Kocher" (Robert Morgan and Hyperion), so I modified the spelling accordingly. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:48, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I have now increased the character count.  The C of E God Save the Queen!  ( talk ) 08:30, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
 * The C of E, please check my latest edits to make sure I haven't introduced any inaccuracies. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:19, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I asked Cwmhiraeth for a suggestion, since the original hook's claim of "the only Epiphany hymn" is not backed up by the source, which merely says it's the only famous Epiphany hymn that didn't mention these things, not the same thing at all. She offered the following ALT1:
 * ALT1: ... that the common Epiphany hymn "As with Gladness Men of Old" doesn't describe the Biblical Magi (pictured) as "magi" or "kings", or even state their number?
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Approving ALT1 for promotion; striking the original hook for the reason noted above. While my last round of edits left the article with 4098 prose characters, I'm not going to hold up this nomination for 17 characters; it's close enough under the circumstances. I'll be moving this to the special occasions section; with luck it will be able to be slotted into Prep 4 (or, if promoted, Queue 4). BlueMoonset (talk) 06:32, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Just realized I forgot a few details for the review: 5x expansion is new enough and I'm counting it as long enough, article and hook appear to be neutral and are adequately sourced, no copyvio or close paraphrasing noted, QPQ review looks okay, hook is a valid length and is interesting enough, image is from Commons and appears original (per description). BlueMoonset (talk) 07:00, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg I'm not clear how you came up with that expansion figure of 4115 prose characters. Looking at the history, it appears the article reached its largest character count of 869 characters before The C of E/The Royal C began his expansion. That would call for a 5x expansion of 4345 characters. Right now the article is holding at 4130 characters, some 200 characters short. I have opened a slot in Prep 4 in case the expansion can be made in time. Yoninah (talk) 10:27, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I've made the expansion so it can be promoted now.  The C of E God Save the Queen!  ( talk ) 10:44, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Terrific, thanks! Restoring tick for ALT1 per BlueMoonset's review. Yoninah (talk) 10:51, 3 January 2018 (UTC)