Template:Did you know nominations/Christ Is Risen! Christ Is Risen!


 * 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) 12:38, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

Christ Is Risen! Christ Is Risen!

 * ... that one half of Gilbert and Sullivan wrote a tune for the Easter hymn "Christ Is Risen! Christ Is Risen!" (pictured)?
 * ALT0a: ... that Arthur Sullivan, part of Gilbert & Sullivan, wrote a tune for the Easter hymn "Christ Is Risen! Christ Is Risen!" (pictured)? Source: Hymnary
 * ALT1 :... "Christ Is Risen! Christ Is Risen!" (pictured) ?
 * Reviewed: 1920–21 Cardiff City F.C. season
 * Comment: For Easter Day (21 April), Alt is tongue-in-cheek

Moved to mainspace by The C of E (talk). Self-nominated at 17:13, 27 March 2019 (UTC).


 * Symbol question.svg Thank you for thinking of Easter early and do something about it! - Interesting facts, especially the two changes against the author's will, - wouldn't that be a hook? - Few but good sources, sadly the source for most of the article (including the nice quote) is offline but I accept it AGF, no copyvio obvious. - I don't like ALT1 at all, we played it already, and it didn't go well. - Sorry, I also don't like the image at all because it sems unrelated to the hymn. Mary of Magdala is not mentioned. I suggest you find something picturing Jesus braking the chains of death, and please from the mid 18th-centure 19th century, matching the style, or leave it without (also in the article), or picture the writer. (I was reminded of Why seek ye the living? 2 years ago, where the match of image and style and topic was perfect, and then it couldn't appear because of sources issues ... - I'd love to use that image some day!) - Now the hook: I think the wording "one half of Gilbert and Sullivan" is unkind ;) + only speaks to those knowing G&S which may not be so many as their fans think. How about a fair link to the author? The fans WILL make the connection. - Repeating: a hook about the different versions would be more to my liking. - Article: I'd mention the chains of death in the lead because I think that's a difference to other songs with similar titles. I'd also carefully say that "the chains of sin which had restricted humanity until his resurrection" is a belief, not a fact. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:26, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Gerda I think you missed that comment I said about tongue in cheek, plus I think you'll recall there was not factual objection to the similar hook until a personal opinion a few days later. if the promoter wishes to use it, it is there. I said one half because I don't think that the majority of people would connect Arthur Sullivan but they're more likely to recognise Gilbert and Sullivan (even if they are not fans).  The C of E God Save the Queen!  ( talk ) 10:34, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
 * For ALT1, you will to find a different reviewer, as for this image. - I think you missed my comment that people knowing Sullivan will recognise him alone, while to the others, the whole opening makes no sense. Imagine I told you "half of unknown name and another unknown name". I learned about G&S on Wikipedia, and for the longest time of my life had no idea. Don't build the hook on such a thing, readers will leave before they even get to Christ is risen. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:50, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
 * The majority of the English speaking world (and much of the non-English speaking one I'm sure) know them as a duo rather than by their individual names (I certainly never knew Sullivan's Christian name before this but I knew of G&S). I'm not seeing a policy based reason to object to the hook so I'm happy to leave it as it is, thank you.  The C of E God Save the Queen!  ( talk ) 16:01, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Whenever I base a hook on a name which I think is familiar, I am reminded that it is not to the world which we address on our main page. I guess we need another pair of eyes then. You seem not to see that the wording "half of two people", even if familiar names, is not fair, and also doesn't do justice to the one who actually wrote the melody.
 * Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Article issues are not resolved, and I will not approve any of the hooks as worded, nor the image which is only decorative but wrong topic and wrong period. - It's for Easter, and should be of highest possible quality. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:03, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Striking ALT1 as inappropriate in Wikipedia's voice. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:24, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
 * "One half of Gilbert and Sullivan" is not encyclopedic. We need a new hook, please. Yoninah (talk) 17:01, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Fine, I have made the change .  The C of E God Save the Queen!  ( talk ) 17:52, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Hmm. But most people don't know who Arthur Sullivan is. Could you try a different angle? Yoninah (talk) 18:07, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I suggest to link him, and Gilbert&Sullivan is well-known (even to me), we have a Wikiproject for them. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:32, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
 * (sigh) That was exactly why I didn't want to do that in the first place. Nevertheless I have reworded it accordingly for approval.  The C of E God Save the Queen!  ( talk ) 21:40, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Can we try something else please? And what about changing the image? I've reserved an image slot in Prep 4.
 * ALT2: ... that the 1862 Easter hymn "Christ Is Risen! Christ Is Risen!" (pictured) by Gurney was virtually unknown until two revised versions were transported to the United States? Yoninah (talk) 20:40, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Fine, I only went with G&S because I thought it was more recognizable but I'm OK with this one.  The C of E God Save the Queen!  ( talk ) 21:06, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Pinging for a review of ALT2 and also for advice on the image. Yoninah (talk) 21:13, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Symbol voting keep.svg ALT2 without picture. I would like this image to leave the article where it's only picturesque, but without any relation. In the article, the title page of the English hymnal could be used. My image advice: no image on Easter Sunday but Good Friday. Another suggestion for the article: write more lead. Another "chains of sin" seems not a frequent term in English, appearing only two more times in the English Wikipedia, "chains of death" at least seven times. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:22, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid you are wrong Gerda, the image is of Jesus appearing to Mary Magdaline after his resurrection. Something which is very much appropriate for Easter day.  The C of E God Save the Queen!  ( talk ) 21:24, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I actually think this image is very clear and colorful. I don't mind it. I found the Good Friday image for Die sieben Worte Jesu Christi am Kreuz to be particularly bloody. Yoninah (talk) 21:36, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
 * As I said, picturesque. The scene with Mary of Magdala is not topic of the hymn, and we will get problems with ERRORS for the caption which would need something like "Depiction" or make clear it is the title of the painting. Is it? Like Pilate, washing my hands, - I don't approve the image, and I said not even in the article. Third time: it has nothing to do with the hymn, is even the wrong period, and is thus misleading the readers we want to attract. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:55, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Could you recommend another image? Yoninah (talk) 22:20, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I have absolutely no idea why Gerda is objecting to it. The image shows the Risen Christ, which the hymn is about. It shows him appearing after the Resurrection, which is what the hymn is about and it certainly is showing the right period as it is a portrayal of Jesus at the time of the Resurrection, which the hymn is about. Honestly, I agree with you Yoninah that it is fine to use on Easter.  The C of E  God Save the Queen!  ( talk ) 22:24, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

(ec) See above: the title page of the hymnal, but such things are not liked for DYK. I looked for "chains of sin" and "chains of death" on the commons, - nothing. - The C of E: I said three times that Mary of Magdala is not mentioned in the hymn, and that the image is not from the 18th century as the hymn is. That was the last time I said that. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:31, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
 * The hymn is from the 19th century, and dated only 60 years before this image. Yoninah (talk) 22:38, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I had the century better further up. Little do we know about the image, when made, and promoted by whom. I'd feel uneasy exposing an image from thebiblerevival.com on the Main page, and even in the article, let's put it like this. We had enough controversies on Easter in the past. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:34, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
 * , I don't understand why you are so uptight about an Easter image. I know we had a problem with an Easter hook in the past, but this hook is very straightforward and so is the image. Would you feel comfortable writing it this way? (I wanted to suggest this anyway, since the image is not depicting the hymn):
 * ALT2a: ... that the 1862 Easter hymn "Christ Is Risen! Christ Is Risen!" (Jesus after Resurrection pictured) by Gurney was virtually unknown until two revised versions were sent to the United States? Yoninah (talk) 14:09, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
 * You will have to find another reviewer for that, sorry. I explained several times now, it's a sad waste of time. I friend died, a cathedral burnt, sad enough already. You could do what you do for Good Friday: no image. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:41, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
 * ps: the image caption is better than the pictured-clause. The resurrection is not pictured, a scene afterwards is pictured, with Mary Magdalene (who doesn't recognize him, of course, at his grave mourning). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:10, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Then you just switch it around and say "Jesus after Resurrection". Simples.  The C of E God Save the Queen!  ( talk ) 15:18, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Tweaked image caption:
 * ALT2b: ... that the 1862 Easter hymn "Christ Is Risen! Christ Is Risen!" (Resurrection scene pictured) by Gurney was virtually unknown until two revised versions were sent to the United States? Yoninah (talk) 18:45, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

I am willing to approve the ALT2 (etal), as basically the same prose. I've read the sources and believe your hook is accurate. I've added an URL for online access to Source #2. The Image: If you read Resurrection of Jesus, the technicalities of "resurrection" varies according to the account, according to differences from one faith to another, or etal. Was it when the stone was rolled away? Was it when Jesus actually opened his eyes and rose? Was it when he appeared outside the tomb? Was it considered part of the ascension? While there are many images of this on Commons, what you have linked above is one of the more suitable ones. I refer to Commons:Category:Paintings of Resurrection of Christ by century and just browse. Many have him carrying a flag, either white with a red cross on it File:Alonso López de Herrera - The Resurrection of Christ, or the plain white banner File:Noel-coypel-the-resurrection-of-christ-1700.jpg I don't remember any story (Biblical or otherwise) of Jesus that mentioned a flag in his hand. — Maile (talk) 22:41, 16 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Just a reminder: ALT2 without image IS approved, the only thing extra is the pictured clause. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:00, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

ALT2a approved with the image. Now the promoter can make their choice. Gerda approved ALT2 without the image. And I have approved ALT2a with the image. Two approved hooks - promoter chooses which one — Maile (talk) 22:38, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Picture is blatantly unsuitable. It simply isn't an illustration of the topic. Christ Is Risen! Christ Is Risen! is a song. The image doesn't illustrate the song. It illustrates the topic that the song is about, but that's not the topic of our article. A picture of the sheet music of this song would be an illustration. This isn't. Putting "(pictured)" after the title of the song is a classic use-mention mismatch. This is yet another version of this same nominator's long-term attempts at smuggling Christian proselytizing declarations of faith onto the mainpage in the guise of such Easter DYK hooks, just like he did again in the earlier "ALT1" hook. He's been trying this same stunt for years, always employing the same deliberate use-mention trick. It's blatant, willful disruption. Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:37, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
 * The image doesn't even illustrate the topic the song is about, as explained further up. The specific scene is not topic of the hymn. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:09, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
 * The hymn is about the Resurrection, the image illustrates Jesus shortly after Resurrection.  The C of E God Save the Queen!  ( talk ) 08:22, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

''Posting by banned user removed. – Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:44, 19 April 2019 (UTC)''


 * But why stop with a composer's portrait?  What's wrong with a picture of a choir singing the hymn in Westminster Abbey (but then you would need a reliable source confirming that that is what they were singing, as opposed to another hymn).   The limitation is illogical. 81.147.157.90 (talk) 11:19, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Sorry, how would anybody know from a choir's image what they sing? The article is supposedly about a hymn (not about Easter, not about a choir, not ... you name it.) We should illustrate by something related to that specific hymn, such as a page from the first print. If we don't have such a thing, we should not illustrate at all. An image should not be just pretty eye-catching illustration. We probably even have a guideline about that. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:17, 20 April 2019 (UTC)