Talk:Coat of arms of Naples

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Italy Low‑importance Italy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Italy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Kingdom of Naples (inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Kingdom of Naples, a project which is currently considered to be inactive. Heraldry and vexillology Heraldry portal Coat of arms of Naples is within the scope of the Heraldry and vexillology WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of heraldry and vexillology. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

A fact from Coat of arms of Naples appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 13 April 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows: Did you know... that one legend on the origin of the coat of arms of Naples (pictured) claims that it alludes to the colors of the sun and moon cult practiced by the city's pre-Christian inhabitants? A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2021/April. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Coat of arms of Naples.

Wikipedia

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 SL93 (talk) 02:19, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

Coat of arms of Naples

• ... that the coat of arms of Naples (pictured) has a large and curious history that can interest someone?

Created/expanded by Borteddd (talk). Self-nominated at 19:39, 8 February 2021 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy compliance:

• Adequate sourcing:
• Neutral:
• Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing: - Direct quote needs to be incorporated in article.

Hook eligibility:

• Cited:
• Interesting: - N

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: None required.

Overall: Is the large Italian-language direct quote needed? I think it should be rewritten and cited in the body of the article. Perhaps suggest a more specific and interesting hook that has an in-line citation. I added the image from the article. TJMSmith (talk) 02:33, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

@TJMSmith: A hook about the Constantine colors tradition angle could potentially work (as long as it's made clear that the information was legendary and not the truth), the issue right now (other than the reference needing to be duplicated for DYK purposes) is that it's not clear who the "they" in "which they were welcomed" is referring to. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 12:49, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Giving writing a possible ALT a shot. How does this sound?

ALT1 ... that one legend on the origin of the coat of arms of Naples (pictured) claims that it alluded to the colors of the sun and moon cult practiced by the city's inhabitants pre-Christianity?

The Constantine angle is the one I was trying to refer to, but the wording remains vague on what that meant (it isn't clear what "welcomed" means in this context). The hook makes it clear that it was just a legend and probably not real (reflecting what was said in the article as well). Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 11:45, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith Interesting:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: None required.

Overall: Assuming good faith on the scholarly Italian-language source. Approving ALT1 which is interesting. Updating status to until the question below is answered by the nom. TJMSmith (talk) 03:07, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

@TJMSmith: Given that the wording of the "welcome" text remains vague, the nomination should probably not be signed off until that is resolved. I've left the nom a message and am awaiting a response from them. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 03:04, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

I've updated my review. Awaiting the response from the nom. TJMSmith (talk) 03:07, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy ping to SounderBruce who helped reword some unclear phrasings but also left clarify tags on the article. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 13:08, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

The nominator hasn't edited in 10 days as of this post; I've left them a final message, but unless they return or another editor can address the wording concerns then we may need to start looking at the possibility of this being closed. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 15:00, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

@Borteddd: Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 00:54, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

@Narutolovehinata5: ?w Borteddd (talk) 10:03, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

@Borteddd: There are some statements in the article that need to be reworded or clarified; they are tagged with "clarification needed" tags. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 10:52, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

@Narutolovehinata5: i clarified the not-clarified sentences with sources. Borteddd (talk) 11:41, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

@TJMSmith: Have your concerns been addressed? Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 11:54, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

• The reviewer hasn't edited in a week so someone else may be needed to finish reviewing this nomination. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 03:44, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello! I agree, I think this DYK nom would benefit from another review of the new alternate hook. TJMSmith (talk) 14:18, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Approving Alt1 hook in good faith to the Savorelli article behind a paywall. Article's clarification issues have been addressed. The article is new enough and long enough and within policy.4meter4 (talk) 22:42, 9 April 2021 (UTC)