Template:Did you know nominations/Hugo d'Oignies, Oignies Abbey

The following discussion 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 PumpkinSky talk 01:47, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Hugo d'Oignies, Oignies Abbey

( Comment or view )

( Article history links:

)

... that a book cover depicting Hugo d'Oignies and Saint Nicholas was presented to Oignies Abbey?

Reviewed: Will do soon.
Comment: If you want to hold this until December 19 (St Nicholas' feast day), I'm fine with it.

Created/expanded by Dr. Blofeld (talk), Rosiestep (talk). Nominated by Rosiestep (talk) at 04:34, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Hugo created July 28; Abbey created July 24.

The last paragraph in Oignies Abbey has no citations and there is nothing to support its location in the lead - I'm guessing that ref 4 would cover that, but I don't have access. I am confused by what exactly happened in 1796 - new buildings or expulsion of the religious canons or both - the text also says that it was rebuilt in the 17th century. As to Hugo d'Oignies, he's called Belgian in the article, but French, Frankish, Flemish and South Netherlandish in sources - I'm not sure how he should be described, but I don't think that 'Belgian' is correct. Mikenorton (talk) 18:16, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

I removed the unsourced paragraph from Oignies Abbey, and clarified what happened in 1796. I removed Hugo's nationality. Rosiestep (talk) 00:42, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, but my confusion remains regarding the rebuilding - source #1 says that the remaining buildings were built between 1728 and 1767, not 1796 as the lead has it, and the article text still says "in the seventeenth century when medieval buildings were replaced by others in a neoclassical style". Also the the location of the Abbey is not covered by the cited source. I think that removing Hugo's nationality was the best solution, thanks. Mikenorton (talk) 07:40, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

I did some ce. Rosiestep (talk) 03:48, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I notice that there is a missing word in the sentence "After the revolution, however, some religious remained in the convent until 1808", should that be 'artefacts'? or something else? I've added something on the building of the church and what happened to the 'Tresor de Hugo d'Oignies'. It would be good if the present use of the Abbey was included, although it's not clear to me from the official website precisely what that is. Mikenorton (talk) 21:19, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

I clarified who remained. I added a sentence about present use. --Rosiestep (talk) 03:18, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

The article on Hugo d'Oignies is long enough and new enough and there are no problems with either the citing or plagiarism/copyvio (AGF for those texts that I don't have access to). The abbey article is also new enough and long enough and is well enough cited - no problems found with plagiarism/copyvio (AGF again for those texts that I couldn't see). The hook is interesting enough (in my view), short enough and appears in both articles with an inline citation, AGF that the cited source supports the text, as it's offline. Mikenorton (talk) 20:12, 24 August 2012 (UTC)