Template:Did you know nominations/With God, all things are possible


 * 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 Allen3 talk 13:43, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

With God, all things are possible

 * ... that Ohio derived its state motto, "With God, all things are possible" (pictured), from a passage in the Gospel of Matthew, prompting a lawsuit from the American Civil Liberties Union?
 * ALT1:... that a controversial display of Ohio's state motto, "With God, all things are possible" (pictured), was inspired by the Vidhana Soudha in Bangalore?
 * ALT2:... that the state motto of Ohio, "With God, all things are possible" (pictured), was proposed by a ten-year-old boy?
 * ALT3:... that for decades, Ohio was the only U.S. state without a state motto, until it adopted "With God, all things are possible" (pictured)?

5x expanded by Mxn (talk). Self nominated at 09:17, 21 January 2015 (UTC).


 * Symbol question.svg Really nice work! New enough (Jan 20 expansion), long enough, neutral, the "a motto of classical origin would be more dignified" didn't quite check out in the link provided, though. No copyvio found via spot check, no QPQ necessary as the nom's first(?!?) DYK. The penultimate paragraph is uncited. Hook's missing an immediate ref in article (see 3b). And for the future, I highly recommend using the "preview" feature over 150 edits in two days. Please ping me if I don't respond. czar ⨹   00:45, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
 * , thank you for taking the time to review this nomination. I've made a few adjustments based on your feedback. The bit about classical languages being preferred over English is on page 2 of . I accidentally omitted part of the URL, causing the OHJ website to drop the links to subsequent pages. Also, although the main hook is the most straightforward one, I think I prefer the first alternate because of its "wow" factor and because it directly refers to the photo. As for the onslaught of little edits... sorry, that's a bad habit of mine.  I started out intending to add a single sentence but got carried away when I realized the existing stub was largely inaccurate. I'll try to batch up my edits in the future. – Minh Nguyễn  &#x1f4ac; 10:39, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Sounds good. Have my hands full at the moment, so I'll take a look at this over the weekend, if that's okay czar ⨹   11:18, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
 * , no sweat on the number of edits—only a suggestion. Looks like my stated concerns have been allayed. A few questions on hook confirmation: where is "it is the only state motto taken directly from the Bible" sourced in ? The article doesn't explicitly state the ALT1 fact that one inspired the other. It currently states one thing happened and then another thing happened (rephrase?) Was Ohio indeed the only state without a motto? We're sourcing that fact to a 10-year-old as is. Also make sure that every fact used in a hook has a citation immediately after its sentence (3b). Almost there! czar ⨹   03:10, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
 * The word "only" isn't explicitly supported by the text of the ruling, so I moved up a citation from the Times that supports it: "Ohio's is the only one that contains a direct quotation from either the Old or New Testament of the Christian Bible." I also reworded the paragraph about Voinovich's proposal to more clearly support ALT1. Let's remove ALT3: Oregon's motto situation was a bit muddled before the late 1950s, so it'd be difficult to say definitively that Ohio was alone "for decades". Am I missing anything still? – Minh Nguyễn &#x1f4ac; 05:35, 15 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Symbol confirmed.svg Hooks (main+ALT1+ALT2) are fully supported. Image is free but doesn't show well at that size, and I'm not sure how its copyright works in the derivative image (as a photo of a sculpture of a seal... I imagine the seal of a state is in the public domain). Wonderful work. czar ⨹   15:10, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Regarding the image, does this installation count as a sculpture? It's essentially two-dimensional, even at that angle, and I think the photographer created a derivative work through his choice of angle and lighting.
 * If the installation is a three-dimensional sculpture: we could replace the photo with this CC BY-SA image: it shows the installation's context, has a better aspect ratio, and looks completely flat (due to wear). It would only make sense for ALT1, though.
 * If the photo is somehow a "slavish copy" of a two-dimensional work: that work is intended to match the reference image in an Ohio law first published in 1967 without a copyright notice (see File:Seal of Ohio (Official).svg for details). And the basic design is in the public domain per PD-laws.
 * Otherwise: the photographer placed the image under CC BY-SA 2.0.
 * – Minh Nguyễn &#x1f4ac; 00:24, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Yes, I'd consider it a sculpture, but I'm not an image copyright expert so I recommend contacting someone at one of the media noticeboards if you're interested in a definitive answer. The closer has the final say on whether to use the image or any alt image, but I think the details of the logo are too small for them to run either. Let me know if you want to hold the nom until image concerns are resolved. czar ⨹   02:25, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Copyright issues make my head hurt. I'm not terribly attached to the image; no need to hold the nomination for it. – Minh Nguyễn &#x1f4ac; 05:57, 16 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Symbol confirmed.svg reinstating check czar ⨹   13:40, 16 February 2015 (UTC)