Template:Did you know nominations/St John the Evangelist's Church, Kirkham


 * 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 — Maile (talk) 20:28, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

St John the Evangelist's Church, Kirkham

 * ... that the peal of bells in St John the Evangelist's Church, Kirkham, (pictured) is said to have been the first to be rung in a Catholic church since the Reformation?
 * Reviewed: Thomas Elfe

Created by Peter I. Vardy (talk). Self nominated at 14:49, 2 June 2014 (UTC).


 * Symbol confirmed.svg New enough, long enough, QPQ done. Well-cited, including the good hook. Checking the sources available online shows no close paraphrasing or copvios. NPOV. Image suitably licensed for front page. Good to go. Edwardx (talk) 19:13, 3 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Symbol possible vote.svg This was pulled from the main page after less than an hour due to the unlikelihood that no Catholic church anywhere has rung a peal of bells in hundreds of years. New hook needed, and then it can be reviewed. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:56, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
 * :Surely just adding the two words "in England", at the appropriate place, would solve this (if the source(s) allow)? Martinevans123 (talk) 21:35, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
 * My apologies, and thanks to Martin. Of course you are right.  Would this be OK?
 * ALT1 ... that the peal of bells in St John the Evangelist's Church, Kirkham, (pictured) is said to have been the first to be rung in a Catholic church in England since the Reformation?
 * --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 08:34, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I suspect that the original "first to be rung" idea is likely to have come from a 19th century news article written at the time of consecration of the church, or at the installation of the bells - often a ceremonial occasion in which the bells arrived from the railway station on several decorated carts pulled by beribboned horses. The bells would be ceremoniously consecrated, then there would be a beanfeast afterwards with long speeches by the mildly inebriated bishop, various local clergy and rich benefactors, and exaggerated claims would be enjoyed, often to much laughter - and the reporter happily wrote it all down, between glugs of wine. If you could find the ultimate source for this claim, then fair enough. If you can't - then surely Pugin is the real hook? A Pugin church is a national treasure - if it wasn't, it wouldn't be listed.--Storye book (talk) 10:11, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
 * ALT2 ... that Augustus Pugin, architect of Big Ben, also designed St John the Evangelist's Church, Kirkham (pictured) and its interior decoration? --Storye book (talk) 10:11, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Quite agree this is better and certainly has more significance to the encyclopedia as a whole. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:45, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Strictly speaking, Big Ben is just the bell in the Elizabeth Tower, see Big_Ben. Perhaps "Big Ben" in ALT2 might be more accurate. Edwardx (talk) 11:57, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
 * ALT3 ... that Augustus Pugin, architect of the Big Ben clock tower, also designed St John the Evangelist's Church, Kirkham (pictured) and its interior decoration? --Storye book (talk) 13:32, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Refs for ALT3 are citation 6 in this nom article for design of St John's church, and Rosemary Hill, God's Architect: Pugin & the Building of Romantic Britain (2007) p. 482 (citation #10 in Big Ben) for design of Big Ben.--Storye book (talk) 11:38, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Reviewer needed for ALT3.--Storye book (talk) 11:27, 19 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment. A pity that the original hook is not acceptable.  It is taken from a website that is the official collaboration between the Catholic Church and English Heritage and, as such, I took it to be reliable and authoritative.  There are questions about the comments above and ALT3.  We can assume that Pugin designed the interior decoration, but the sources do not specifically say that, and it may be better to leave it out.  He did design some of the fittings, but they have been moved and/or altered.  As for it being a "national treasure", I'm not so sure.  Regarding this particular church, Pevsner said "It is a modest building and, like so much of Pugin's, really very impersonal.  He was unquestionably greater as a publicist than as an architect, although he could rise to occasions".  And if it were really a "national treasure", surely it would have been graded at I or at least at II*. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 15:39, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, it is a pity. Could we mention the 110 ft spire? Although it's shorter than St Michaels' 150 ft, it is still quite a landmark across the town. It was also significant in the locality as being the first Catholic church built - St Joseph's Wesham, Holy Family Freckleton and St Anne's Westby (built by Pugin's son) all came later. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:52, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
 * If you want a different ALT, then of course that is fine. But as for Pugin, Pevsner is the last person to be considered an authority on 19th century Gothic Revival style. He hated it, and did not understand it, and favoured C18 neo-classical and older works. He was overridden as critic of Gothic Revival in the mid-C20 by other critics who loved that style, encouraged by John Betjemen. As for the original hook, I have no doubt that somebody did say that about the bells, but I think we need a citation which tells us who said it and in what context, because at the moment it's too vague.--Storye book (talk) 16:40, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
 * ALT4: ... that Augustus Pugin, architect of the Big Ben clock tower, also designed St John the Evangelist's Church, Kirkham (pictured)? --Storye book (talk) 16:40, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
 * But the article doesn't say that Pugin designed the Big Ben tower, so that fact cannot be confirmed in the article's references. This has run into a bog where personal knowledge conflicts with sources whose reliability is not really questionable.  I think it is time to withdraw this nomination. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 21:09, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, but there's a slight chance we can get out of the bog. It would be a pity for this lovely church to lose this DYK nom, so I'm currently researching to see whether a better source can be found for the bit about the bells. I would be very grateful if you could kindly bear with me while I upload what I find. If you would like to monitor this, I'm uploading to Commonscat St John's Kirkham - as I write this I've just uploaded a news article on the consecration and a picture from the same source. At the moment I don't intend to edit the WP article unless you would like me to, and it's up to you whether you want to use this new material as citation(s). There is mention of the bells in the news article, but nothing yet to support the original hook. Still looking.--Storye book (talk) 12:01, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Update: @ Peter I. Vardy. I've searched all the online newspapers to which I have access, and have uploaded to the above link all that I could find. I searched for several hours for the foundation stone laying ceremony and the installation of the bells, but if it is there it has not been indexed and cannot be found. The next place to look would be the church records but I do not live near enough to the archive to do that. I would support the original hook (and its derivatives) if I could, but you would need the original quote, original source, and ideally a named speaker to ensure that admin would agree to promote it. I am now hoping that you might find something hooky in the news article about the consecration. Perhaps I should say that IMO if the 1845 news reporter had known about the "first to be rung" story, he would have mentioned it and so would the merry bishops speechifying at the beanfeast; the reporter wrote everything down. The subject of Catholicism was hot at the time; these articles appeared contemporaneously with kindly editorials abhoring the past persecution of Catholics and with nasty green-ink letters berating Puseyite (high church) Anglican clergy. --Storye book (talk) 14:57, 20 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment and idea: @ Storye book. Many thanks.  I really appreciate the trouble you have taken over this, and feel rather guilty about your time being so consumed by it.  I have gone back to the article, and started from scratch, forgetting bells, Big Ben and the rest.  This [[File:Interior of St John the Evangelist, The Willows, Kirkham - geograph.org.uk - 466416.jpg|40px]] must be Pugin's altered and moved rood screen (its position and description fit).  How about a hook based on this?  Using this as the image, the hook could go something like:
 * ALT5: ... that the rood screen (pictured) in St John the Evangelist's Church, Kirkham, designed by Augustus Pugin in the 1840s, was moved and altered by the parish priest in 1906?
 * I think this is safe, interesting enough, and confirmed by Ref 1. (Personal note. I used to pass St John's every day on my way to school, but must admit that I was much more impressed by the other church in the town, St Michael's and its fine steeple by Edmund Sharpe).  --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 16:00, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Peter I. Vardy. FYI, my researches today revealed Anglican church St Michaels being opened (or reopened?) in 1846 with a heavy peal of 8 bells (biggest 22.5 cwt), ringing a massive long peal on its opening day and repeated soon afterwards, clearly in competition with the recently-installed bells of St John. Rivalry!--Storye book (talk) 16:25, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg I think I am permitted to review ALT5 as I did not write it and I have not edited the article (but get another reviewer if you need to). ALT5 is acceptable and short enough (169 characters) and it checks out with online citation #1. Initial review of nom article at top of this template by Edwardx still stands and is taken on trust. Hook image is free. Issue: Hook image must appear in the article - please put it there? Thank you. When image is in article, this nom should be OK.--Storye book (talk) 16:25, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks again. The photo is now in the article.  Are we there? --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 17:22, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I've added the year to the move of the rood screen and also added Pugins's name in the image caption. Should that tag on the description of the bells now be removed? And might it be useful if a note on the diligent research by Storye book could be copied over to the Talk Page? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:27, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I had a look at Mowbreck Hall and The Willows: A History of The Catholic Community in the Kirkham District of Lancashire by F. J. Singleton (1983). The opening of The Willows is covered in some detail on pages 32-38, but again it just says "said to be the first to ring out in a Catholic church since the Reformation." It does say that there was a detailed description of the church and its opening in the Preston Chronicle and Lancashire Advertiser for 26 April 1845 and that "there is also a very readable account in Hewitson's Our Country Churches and Chapels (1872)." Singleton's book also says that the church is "the only church by the elder Pugin in the Fylde." Martinevans123 (talk) 12:09, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Wow, thank you, Martinevans123 for your interesting research. It does make you wonder whether the bells story is apocryphal - though it is a lovely story. Please could you kindly put your research results on the article talk page? I love the way WP gets editors and researchers working together sometimes, and we end up with so much more information. One puzzle - have you seen that 17 June DYK banner on the article talkpage? It doesn't link to any record of an entry.--Storye book (talk) 12:49, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Likewise yours! Martinevans123 (talk) 12:57, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg All issues resolved, and congratulations Peter I. Vardy on an excellent and worthwhile article. Good to go (at long last) with ALT5 and image.--Storye book (talk) 12:49, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I hope that, if I am remembered at all in conjunction with this little journey, it is as the irritant around which the pearl formed. Good work! EEng (talk) 22:43, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
 * "Don’t have the inclination to look back on any mistake". Martinevans123 (talk) 22:53, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Christ, it's like having a walking epigram-generating automaton in tow all the time. EEng (talk) 01:40, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 * indeed Martinevans123 (talk) 21:47, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Keeping tick visible. Still GTG. --Storye book (talk) 21:34, 22 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Symbol confirmed.svg I'm not sure what happened to this article, it must have been incorrectly pulled from the queue with no note left here, but I can confirm that ALT5 is now fully sourced and the article should therefore be ready for promotion now. Gatoclass (talk) 13:23, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg I added a cite to the hook fact in the article, but couldn't find the year "1906" for moving the rood screen in footnotes 1 or 8. Am I missing something? Yoninah (talk) 23:19, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
 * You are quite right as it stands; the article has enjoyed the attention of multiple editors! I have amended the second para of the History section and added a citation.  Ref 1 confirms the moving and the date; Ref 4 the alteration to the screen.  If accepted, I guess it should be a Symbol voting keep.svg rather than a Symbol confirmed.svg.  And, as a matter of "interest", following all the above, I still think that the original hook merits a Symbol confirmed.svg.  But that's history now.  How are we doing? --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 07:58, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * @ Peter I. Vardy. Yes a nice Gothic Revival church brings all the usual suspects out of the woodwork - the only one missing this time is Hassocks5489 who has been known to glance beyond Sussex if a church is good enough. --Storye book (talk) 09:10, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg Update review of ALT1 and ALT5 following further edits. Re ALT5: Not quite there yet. Citation #1 says Gillow moved the screen during his incumbency 1895-1927. "1906" is in the following sentence and refers to a list of other stuff starting with the pulpit and ending with benches and Stations, but not including the rood screen. If you can confirm that 1906 is in citation #4, then all is well. If there is no precise citation for 1906, then what about replacing it with "the early 20th century"? (169 → 187 characters). Re ALT1: I'm not striking it because I don't yet see a consensus for doing so, and assuming you can sort out the above issue I would like to offer ALT1 for promotion as nominator's first choice, with ALT5 as an alternative. --Storye book (talk) 09:10, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Anything of use here? Martinevans123 (talk) 09:20, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * @ Martinevans123. Your link didn't work for me. Did you mean this: Puginfoundation.org: English buildings-Lancashire-Kirkham? This link gives a date of 1895-6 for moving the screen. If you call it 1896 (the completion date for the move) then that would be fine in the hook IMO. --Storye book (talk) 10:08, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, I did mean that one sorry. Looks like a new date shoud be added. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:13, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * @ Martinevans123. If you are happy with the new date of 1896, please could you kindly give us another ALT and add the new date and the new citation to the article? Then we can hopefully kick this nom upstairs. Thank you. --Storye book(talk) 11:02, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Time for bed, I think. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 13:12, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Blimey, that was a long night!? But don't Zeb out on us, Peter! By current DYK standards, this one's a breeze. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:20, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Ah, the temptation to follow that with naughty wisecracks ... (shakes self and assumes angelic pose) ... um ... anyone got an ALT6 with 1896 instead of 1906 please? --Storye book (talk) 13:26, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

ALT6: ... that the rood screen (pictured) in St John the Evangelist's Church, Kirkham, designed by Augustus Pugin in the 1840s, was moved and altered by the parish priest in 1895-6? Martinevans123 (talk) 17:55, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Review of ALT6: Thank you, Martinevans123. I have struck ALT5 which is superseded by ALT6, and I have formatted the ref in the article (minor edit). ALT6 checks out with online citation #5 and offline citation #4 taken AGF. --Storye book (talk) 18:17, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Symbol voting keep.svg Good to go with ALT1 (preferred by nominator and checks out with online citations #1 and #12, and offline citation #6), or ALT6 which checks out with #5 and #4 (note: grey tick due to mixed online and offline citations). --Storye book (talk) 18:17, 1 July 2014 (UTC)