Template:Did you know nominations/St Matthew's Church, Burnley
- 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 22:29, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
St Matthew's Church, Burnley
[edit]( )
- ... that St Matthew's Church (pictured) in Burnley, Lancashire, England, burnt down on Christmas Day in 1927, and was subsequently rebuilt?
Created/expanded by Peter I. Vardy (talk). Nominated by PFHLai (talk) at 14:07, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
There is some confusion in the article about the year that the organ was replaced (1920 is before the fire). Also, the hook fact about Christmas Day in 1927 requires a citation no later than the end of the sentence containing that fact. I've taken the liberty of moving "was" in the hook from before "burnt" to before "subsequently"; where it had been carried the implication of arson, rather than what happened, which is said to be an electrical fire, and presumably accidental.
- A thought: since what is pictured is the rebuilt church, perhaps it would make more sense (assuming the picture is used) to flip the clauses: England, was rebuilt after it burnt down on Christmas Day in 1927? BlueMoonset (talk) 05:34, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
- Hmmm.... frankly, I don't get the implication of arson. I prefer having the active verb on the main event of the hook -- getting burnt down on such a day! May be we can leave out the rebuilding part. It's obviously rebuilt if we show a colour photograph of the church. Anyway, I'll ask the author about the organ. Thanks. --PFHLai (talk) 13:32, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
- The organ, built originally for another church in 1920 was moved to this church in 1933. Added a few words to clarify this. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 08:07, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Restoring approval for hook as currently constituted; hook fact now supported by source at end of (extended) sentence; organ dates have been clarified. Rest of article review per Rosiestep's original approval. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:05, 8 September 2012 (UTC)