Template:Did you know nominations/Tianfei Palace (Songjiang)
- 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) 07:22, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Tianfei Palace (Songjiang)
[edit]
- ... that, since it honors a notionally illegal cult, suburban Shanghai's Tianfei Palace is officially classified as a museum?
- ALT1:... that Shanghai's Tianfei Palace, officially classified as a museum, brings in Fujianese priests for biannual services to the sea-goddess Mazu?
- ALT2:... that Songjiang erected its Tianfei Palace, honoring a notionally illegal cult, in order to attract investment from Taiwanese businessmen?
- ALT3:... that suburban Shanghai's Tianfei Palace, honoring the Fujianese sea-goddess Mazu, doubles as a site to honor Songjiang's city god Li Daiwen?
- ALT4:... that Songjiang's Tianfei Palace was moved to Fangta Park from its original location in downtown Shanghai?
- ALT5:... that, despite Mazuism's quasilegal status in mainland China, suburban Shanghai's Tianfei Palace conducts biannual services since "it is just good business" to draw in Taiwanese and other tourists?
- ALT6:... that, once a year, you can get free soy milk and youtiao by visiting the Tianfei Palace in suburban Shanghai?
- ALT7:... that you can get free soy milk and youtiao by visiting the Shanghai's Tianfei Palace at the right time?
Created by LlywelynII (talk). Self-nominated at 11:28, 21 November 2016 (UTC).
I like the original hook best, but all others are also referenced. Interesting facts on good sources, Chinese source accepted AGF. The image is licensed and a good illustration. In the second source, I wonder why you repeat the link for the pages. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:45, 25 November 2016 (UTC)- ps: How about Tianfei Palace, Songjiang? If you move, don't move this template ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:15, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
- You do see articles like that but it's not actually properly formatted. The name is just Tianfei Palace and it has to be dabbed parenthetically. It's not a town &c. where an appositive with the city's name forms a natural synonym and, while you could dab it as the Songjiang Tianfei Palace (and in Chinese they do), that construction is not actually the common English name of the place and it's misleading to park the article there. It is odd, though, that browsing the MOS to address this and some concerns Mr Bod had about my article on the Ningbo Tianhou Palace I can't seem to find better coverage of that policy than this lovely treatment that is inexplicably buried in the MOS for cue sports.
- That said, it could certainly be a redirect. — LlywelynII 10:06, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
@User:Cwmhiraeth: Thank you for your service and time improving Wiki but reread what this hook said and realize that, if you're promoting these things, you should (a) ideally refrain from adding needless new links that siphon off the hook's views and certainly (b) avoid mangling their grammar and (c) misspelling words so badly that you turn them into unsourced and patently untrue statements. If you think there's a problem with a hook and can't manage those ideas on your own, kindly just post a comment and give us time to fix it before the hooks go live. — LlywelynII 14:16, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
Update: Cwm claims the hook was still fine when he promoted it and some other editor was responsible for the changes. No reason to doubt him and apologies for thinking he was responsible. I've only ever seen the promoting admin modify the hooks and that was my mistake. That said, whoever the other admin was still screwed the pooch on this one and should have it pointed out to them that their misspellings and grammar errors are not only not improvements but in this case made the hook untrue. They don't know as much as they think they do and (with respect for their service) need to knock it tf off. — LlywelynII 08:12, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
Update: Ok, it was Yoninah. Odd since they claim to be a professional editor and usually have pretty decent English chops. Must've been having a bad day. Still, on top of the mangled syntax ("nationally illegal" isn't a thing and this hook is now one of its prime google results), this needless link siphoned off 4000 hits from the hook, when what we're trying to do is promote this article. Yon, you're normally a force for good, but be more careful. — LlywelynII 21:55, 14 December 2016 (UTC)