Template:Did you know nominations/Neanderkirche


 * 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) 07:17, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Neanderkirche

 * ... that the organ (pictured) of the Neanderkirche has served summer concerts for more than 50 years? Source:
 * Reviewed: Salinee Tavaranan

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 22:02, 23 December 2016 (UTC).


 * I will start to review this now. Side note I changed "sommer" to "summer" in the hook, looked to be an accidental inclusion of the German word for summer.  MPJ  -DK  22:55, 25 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Source review - I am not seeing how source #6 supports the claim of being part of "Evangelische Kirchengemeinde Düsseldorf-Mitte." I don't see that mentioned on the page (and yes I read German). Is there something I am missing?
 * I simply took it from the official website. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:25, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
 * But that is not the source you cited so I am confused why that citation is there?  MPJ  -DK 00:53, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
 * The reason was a bit of a rush, sorry ;) - I moved the citation. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:03, 26 December 2016 (UTC)


 * is New enough
 * is Long enough (by 44 bytes)
 * is Neutral
 * Has a cited hook
 * Is free of copyright violations.
 * QPQ: I find it a little lacking, it does not address all DYK criteria - Nothing on being new enough or long enough, both of which it passes the review does just not state that. Please try to remember to state all criteria reviewed
 * Question: Since this is English Wikipedia should it be called "Neander Church"? Not sure what the proper naming convention is for something that probably does not have a lot of English language sources??


 * Hook: To me "has served" sounds weird to me, "been used for" or words to that effect makes more sense for an inanimate object such as an organ.
 * Symbol question.svg Passed for everything but the wording of the hook.  MPJ  -DK 01:42, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm comfortable with "served" in the hook, it seems common usage for navy ships, pieces of equipment and especially church instruments. I'd also keep the article title Neanderkirche. Place/structure names like this tend to lose meaning if translated too much, and even .en articles on more famous buildings are titled in local language (see: Oude kerk, Amsterdam) Ultracobalt (talk) 04:53, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you, both. "has been used for" is nothing special, all organs used for church concerts do that, - any other wording for that the (then new) organ has made the concerts possible / given the idea to run them / are the focus of / ... - all more complicated, it seems. The term Neander Church would be our construct, no common name. - It might be a funny hook to say that the church is named after the same Neander as the Neandertal and thus the Neanderthal, but would probably be undue weight for the article ;) - See how translating to English gets a strange "h" in, that changes pronunciation (but became the common name, unfortunately)? - qpq: if an article is not new enough etc I'd say so. Why blow up a review by such trivia, extra characters to be stored and to be read? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:55, 27 December 2016 (UTC)


 * If you don't state it how will we know if you checked for it? Following your logic a review could simply state "this is approved" but that is not acceptable. And I am concerned with the hook now, you state yourself "nothing special" - so if it is nothing special then it is a very boring hook. not sure why you start to bring up stuff not in the article when I just asked about naming conventions.  MPJ  -DK 13:51, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I do believe that a review just saying "checked against all criteria and found fine" is nicer to read than lines of text about "new enough", etc., but that's old-fashioned me. I can make an exception if you wish. I performed more than 150 DYK reviews in 2016 my way, DYK? - "served" IS special, while "has been used for" is not, - I asked for better wording, if that is not clear. How would "inspired" be? Trying harder:
 * ALT: ... that the 1965 organ (pictured) made the church Neanderkirche in Düsseldorf a venue for a series of summer concerts with local and international organists? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:18, 27 December 2016 (UTC)


 * I am okay with the naming, I am also okay with "served" based on the explanation that was given by Ultracobalt. I think the original hook is better than the ALT personally. Good to go, meets all the criteria. Symbol confirmed.svg — Preceding unsigned comment added by MPJ-DK (talk • contribs) 21:44, 29 December 2016 (UTC)