Talk:The Coloured Women's Club of Montreal
Appearance
A fact from The Coloured Women's Club of Montreal appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 3 September 2021 (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: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
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 Theleekycauldron (talk) 02:01, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
( )
- ... that in 1907, The Coloured Women's Club of Montreal helped found the Union United Church (pictured), the oldest black church in Montreal? Union United, the city’s oldest Black Church founded in 1907, it became apparent there were a number of organized entities that were key to the development of the community. One of these was the CWCM. [1]
- ALT1:
... that The Coloured Women's Club of Montreal was founded in 1902 by seven African-American women whose husbands worked on the railways as sleeping-car porters?
- ALT1:
- Reviewed: Pierre Kaufmann
Created by Whispyhistory (talk), Edwardx (talk), and Philafrenzy (talk). Nominated by Whispyhistory (talk) at 04:22, 14 August 2021 (UTC).
- Comment I'm not a fan of ALT1—If the article is about The Coloured Women's Club of Montreal, the hook shouldn't be focused on their husbands. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 18:55, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
- OK, it's just that the original hook is rather dull. According to North of the Color Line, at their foundation they were the first women's organization in Canada. It seems unlikely in 1902, but if it could be verified, it might make a good hook. Philafrenzy (talk) 22:28, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
- Interesting group that were "key to the development of the community", on good sources, no copyvio obvious. I'm fine with the original, but not keen on the "first" bit, - could we say this "key to the development of the community" thingy instead. - The image is licensed, but not specifically related to the group, and we have many suggestions which would profit more from illustration, if you ask me. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:37, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you @Gerda Arendt:. Leave the image. How about:
- ALT2... that The Coloured Women's Club of Montreal has made significant contributions to Montreal’s Black community? The CWCM is a case example that illustrates the valuable contributions of African-Canadian women working together to provide much needed services for the Black community in Montreal.[2] Whispyhistory (talk) 09:15, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you but that's too drastic a change ;) - I just meant to replace the half sentence about "first black church", because - given 1907 - "first" is no surprise, and "black" could be told from "Couloured". - The prep builder will decide about the image. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:30, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you @Gerda Arendt:...Try again I think...
- ALT3 ... that in 1907, The Coloured Women's Club of Montreal helped found the Union United Church (pictured), key to the development of the community? The CWCM and other groups in the community promoted the Union Congregational Church and it became the focal institution in Montreal’s Black community Whispyhistory (talk) 10:22, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you, but I'd turn it around:
- ALT3a ... that the The Coloured Women's Club of Montreal helped developing the community, for example in co-founding the Union United Church (pictured) in 1907?
- still better wording welcome, of course, and leaving the original in case a prep builder prefers that. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:29, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you but that's too drastic a change ;) - I just meant to replace the half sentence about "first black church", because - given 1907 - "first" is no surprise, and "black" could be told from "Couloured". - The prep builder will decide about the image. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:30, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- Interesting group that were "key to the development of the community", on good sources, no copyvio obvious. I'm fine with the original, but not keen on the "first" bit, - could we say this "key to the development of the community" thingy instead. - The image is licensed, but not specifically related to the group, and we have many suggestions which would profit more from illustration, if you ask me. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:37, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- OK, it's just that the original hook is rather dull. According to North of the Color Line, at their foundation they were the first women's organization in Canada. It seems unlikely in 1902, but if it could be verified, it might make a good hook. Philafrenzy (talk) 22:28, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
- Comment I'm not a fan of ALT1—If the article is about The Coloured Women's Club of Montreal, the hook shouldn't be focused on their husbands. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 18:55, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
- The hooks are still all awful. How about:
- ALT4 ... that one of the first activities of The Coloured Women's Club of Montreal was to help veterans returning from the Boer War in South Africa? Philafrenzy (talk) 11:15, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- @Gerda Arendt: I'd rather promote ALT4 if you're willing to approve it. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 02:04, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
Categories:
- Wikipedia Did you know articles
- C-Class African diaspora articles
- Unknown-importance African diaspora articles
- WikiProject African diaspora articles
- C-Class Canada-related articles
- Low-importance Canada-related articles
- All WikiProject Canada pages
- C-Class Women's History articles
- Low-importance Women's History articles
- All WikiProject Women-related pages
- WikiProject Women's History articles