Talk:Philip Moger

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you know nomination[edit]

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 Valereee (talk) 17:15, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Created by Maximilian775 (talk). Self-nominated at 22:55, 5 December 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • Hi Maximilian775, review follows; article created 28 November and exceeds minimum length; sources used look to be reliable for the subject matter (though I am not familiar with this area) and are cited inline throughout; I didn't pick up any overly close paraphrasing from the online sources; hook fact is interesting, mentioned in article and checks out to source cited. You look to be exempt from QPQ requirements. Couple of comments: the birth date and ordination dates are stated but not supported by citations, can this be fixed? - Dumelow (talk) 10:33, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dumelow! thanks for the speedy review. i just added a birth date source in the second paragraph, and there has been an ordination citation in paragraph three since yesterday. hope this helps and feel free to ping me for anything else! Maximilian775 (talk) 15:39, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Maximilian775, the exact date of ordination wasn't stated. I've copied the reference to the infobox on the assumption that this covers it? Looks good to go - Dumelow (talk) 15:42, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

oops! Dumelow i now see what you meant - thanks for doing that! Looks good to me as well. Maximilian775 (talk) 15:46, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Maximilian775 and Dumelow: Given the frequent trouble DYK has with "first" hooks, I'm wondering whether catholicireland.net is a reliable source? No masthead, and it's hosted on Wordpress... theleekycauldron (talkcontribs) (she/her) 10:14, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It states it is part of the Church Support Group which is confirmed by their website. It looks to be a provider of media to the Catholic Church in Ireland. Not an expert in this area, so happy to receive input on the reliability of this source, or to look at different hooks - Dumelow (talk) 10:22, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It's possible that I've been bonked over the head and forgotten a crucial point in DYK procedure, because I'm beginning to doubt myself. Cwmhiraeth and Bruxton have both promoted this nomination, despite the fact that it's not approved and my objections haven't been resolved. Am I missing something here? I don't know that Dumelow's explanation was a definitive "yes" on it being an RS. theleekycauldron (talkcontribs) (she/her) 06:29, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps a symbol will help. Maximilian775, are you able to provide any further info on the source used? Thanks - Dumelow (talk) 07:30, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I understand the concern. I saw the question above about the use of the word "first" in the hook. It was a rather obscure first and it was sourced to what looks to me like a regional Catholic news source (more than a church bulletin), and similar to a trade publication. Being made honorary cannon to a cathedral probably will not have interest beyond the parish so it likely has no SIGCOV. If we are rejecting that regional CatholicIreland.net source we have to explore another hook. Bruxton (talk) 15:19, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sourced to an interview in a publication by The Catholic National Shrine of Our Lady. Sadly it is also not a significant publication. Bruxton (talk) 16:32, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Works for me, I think it's probably fine as an WP:ABOUTSELF type of thing - Dumelow (talk) 18:16, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, not sure if I can promote it: I shall ping theleekycauldron for guidance on promotion of the hook. Bruxton (talk) 19:55, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Bruxton and Dumelow: well, you can't promote your own hook, or variations on it, unfortunately. I'm also not sure I love the wording, because it implies in wikivoice that there is a "call" that can be "sensed", which seems more like dogma than established fact. Probably, honestly, because it's WP:CLOSEPARAPHRASING from the source. How about: theleekycauldron (talkcontribs) (she/her) 22:41, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Bruxton: for a DYK nomination to be promoted, it needs to have the substed {{DYKyes}} () tick at the last point of the nomination. That means that three different people need to be involved in the proposal, approval, and promotion of the hook, respectively. Since these hooks are just variations on yours, someone else will have to approve and promote them. Sorry about that, and hope it clears things up :) you're doing a great job with the preps, I saw how many you promoted today! theleekycauldron (talkcontribs) (she/her) 06:04, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
ALT1a and ALT1b look fine - Dumelow (talk) 06:56, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notability question[edit]

Pbritti, could you tell me if Moger's set of titles meet WP:NPRIEST? I'm a little lost on the terminology... theleekycauldron (talkcontribs) (she/her) 22:41, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Theleekycauldron: Yes! It's confusing, but this person holds a fairly high office in the Catholic Church in the UK. If you have more concerns, the WP Catholicism gang can offer additional insight. Let me know if you need any more here or elsewhere! Happy holidays! ~ Pbritti (talk) 23:18, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Aha, gotcha – Happy holidays, Pbritti! Thanks for helping me out on such short notice :) theleekycauldron (talkcontribs) (she/her) 22:50, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Always a pleasure. ~ Pbritti (talk) 22:57, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]