Template:Did you know nominations/Type of Constans

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) 05:12, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Type of Constans

(

)

... that Pope Martin I was abducted and tried for high treason because of his opposition to the Type of Constans? Source: Bury, John B., A history of the later Roman empire from Arcadius to Irene, Volume 2. London: Macmillan (2005) ISBN 1-4021-8368-2 pg. 296; Siecienski, Anthony Edward (2010). The Filioque: History of a Doctrinal Controversy. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0195372042 pg. 74.
- ALT1:... that after his death, Pope Honorius I was excommunicated by the Sixth Ecumenical Council because of his support for the Type of Constans? Source: Norwich, John J., Byzantium: The Early Centuries. (1988) London: Penguin ISBN 0-670-80251-4 pg. 326.

Reviewed: QPQ up to date, see here. Review being 'cashed in' is Template:Did you know nominations/Bruce McArthur.

Improved to Good Article status by Gog the Mild (talk). Self-nominated at 20:16, 16 June 2018 (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: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Sorry for the delay. I did the GA review of this article. The first source checks out. I am pretty sure that the second citation is also legitimate, but because I obtained an Epub version of it without page numbers, I would request a quote so I can trace it. Also, I have added a comma to the ALT1 hook, so it reads better. Finally, you might want to replace support for by support of, which seems more common. Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 23:57, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

@Farang Rak Tham: No need to apologise. This is one of the faster reviews I have had.

"Norwich, p 326: "The Council was to hold eighteen plenary sessions... the almost unanimous findings... Those who maintained otherwise were condemned and cursed – including the now defunct Pope Honorius."

Thanks, found it. I hate to be fuzzy, but condemned and cursed isn't quite the same as excommunicated—do you have another source to indicate a formal excommunication?--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 11:17, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

@Farang Rak Tham: Actually it is. "Excommunicate" is a modern word. "Curse and condemn" was the form of words and it was known as anathematization. However, I take your point. Try Ostrogorsky, George, History of The Byzantine State. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press. (1957) OCLC 422217218, p 114. "the Patriarchs Sergius, Pyrrhus and Cyrus and Pope Honorius, were excommunicated." Gog the Mild (talk) 11:30, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Okay, confirmed.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 12:01, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the comma.
I would prefer to keep "for". However, I have tweaked ALT1 to avoid two for's and to, I think, read a little more smoothly. What do you think? Gog the Mild (talk) 09:04, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Good, great! Gog the Mild.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 11:17, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Passing both hooks.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 12:01, 18 June 2018 (UTC)