Talk:The Mysteries: Renaissance Choros
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
 | A fact from The Mysteries: Renaissance Choros appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 7 March 2022 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
 |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors |
Did you know nomination
- 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 Theleekycauldron (talk) 10:46, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
( )
- ... that a composition by David Sampson is based on a poem inspired by the Eleusinian Mysteries?
Created by Kingoflettuce (talk). Self-nominated at 00:13, 8 February 2022 (UTC).
The article is well-written, well-sourced and long and new enough. The subject is interesting and no Copy vio was observed. The hook is interesting and is supported a by a reliable source immediately coming after it in the text. However the body of the article would better be sectioned as per MOS:SO and MOS:SECTIONS. --Mhhossein talk 06:14, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
- Done Kingoflettuce (talk) 16:56, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
- Kingoflettuce: Can you also add more lines from P.88 of this source which you have used? I believe there are useful portions regrading the Christ. --Mhhossein talk 02:57, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- @Mhhossein: based on my reading, the "useful portions" refer to the 1933 "Magician" poem so I don't think it has the most relevance here. Kingoflettuce (talk) 03:02, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- It has still merit to be included since the 1931 poet is compared with the 1933 work. Thoughts? --Mhhossein talk 03:07, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- @Kingoflettuce: For you. --Mhhossein talk 04:03, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- Seems excessive and outside of the DYK criteria, that's my thought. Kingoflettuce (talk) 14:22, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- @Mhossein: Add: you can look up any article on a poem or film or book, etc. When "influences" are talked about, it's only worth mentioning the points of similarity between poem A and B. In this instance, the only thing similar between this poem and "Magician" is the allusion to Christ as a magician. Anything else is excessive/unnecessary. A third-party opinion would be most welcome, and I'm happy to stand corrected, but I don't think so. Moreover, I don't think it's part of the DYK criteria to be discussing this--it's far from "essential" to a reader's understanding of the poem. Kingoflettuce (talk) 22:47, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- @Kingoflettuce: I did not receive your ping due to the misspelled username. Anyway, I don't think this is mandatory for a DYK, too. It was a suggestion. --Mhhossein talk 11:46, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
We can go with the proposed hook. --Mhhossein talk 11:46, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- @Mhossein: Add: you can look up any article on a poem or film or book, etc. When "influences" are talked about, it's only worth mentioning the points of similarity between poem A and B. In this instance, the only thing similar between this poem and "Magician" is the allusion to Christ as a magician. Anything else is excessive/unnecessary. A third-party opinion would be most welcome, and I'm happy to stand corrected, but I don't think so. Moreover, I don't think it's part of the DYK criteria to be discussing this--it's far from "essential" to a reader's understanding of the poem. Kingoflettuce (talk) 22:47, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Seems excessive and outside of the DYK criteria, that's my thought. Kingoflettuce (talk) 14:22, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- @Mhhossein: based on my reading, the "useful portions" refer to the 1933 "Magician" poem so I don't think it has the most relevance here. Kingoflettuce (talk) 03:02, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- Kingoflettuce: Can you also add more lines from P.88 of this source which you have used? I believe there are useful portions regrading the Christ. --Mhhossein talk 02:57, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- Done Kingoflettuce (talk) 16:56, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
Citation format?
I noticed that these citations are in an odd format. I wanted to link to the new article for Adalaide Morris, but I can not because of the references? What is the best practice here. Thank you for your patience with me. LoveElectronicLiterature (talk) 19:03, 20 March 2024 (UTC)