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) 06:33, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
... that according to the traditional Catholic view that "error has no rights", non-Catholics did not deserve civil or political rights? Source: "A central component of the traditional church-state model was the principle that "error had no rights." This principle was strongly reas serted by Pope Pius IX (1846-1878). Within this framework those outside the Catholic church enjoyed no title in principle to political and civil rights because they lacked the true faith"
https://www.jstor.org/stable/23559453
You're right, Self-trout. I was citing the wrong source. Now fixed (
t ·
c) buidhe 05:44, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
The wording of the hook is a bit more extreme than the quoted text; "did not deserve" is not the same thing as "enjoyed no title in principle to". A wording like "were not entitled to" would be in line with the text. There are a couple of sentences in the article I have similar concerns about, but I have to sit down and see if I can get a copy of the sources first.
Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 07:01, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
Your suggested phrasing is, as far as I can tell, a less concise and more euphemistic way of saying the same thing. The entire point of human rights (a superset of
civil and political rights) is that they are enjoyed by all people equally. Otherwise it is not really a right, but a privilege granted by higher authority (
t ·
c) buidhe 15:48, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
@
Buidhe: It's not a euphemism—it's literally a form of the same word used in the source. Closely reflecting the language of the source is the safest thing to do. Here, "deserve" is a departure from the source, and has harsher connotations. Anyway, I'll find time tonight to take a closer look at the sources.
Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 18:15, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
There is no rule that says that Wikipedia must follow the phrasing of the source. Usually that is discouraged (
WP:Close paraphrasing). In fact, Wikipedia strives for
WP:IMPARTIAL language even if the source does not. (
t ·
c) buidhe 19:36, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
Take it up on the article talk page. The article could stand to be greatly expended. I am satisfied that the changes resolve the issues I pointed out affecting its promotion at DYK.
Hawkeye7(discuss) 20:17, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
I've done some expansion of the article. I still think the original hook has the issue that the use of the word "deserve" is not the
WP:IMPARTIAL one because it deviates from the word actually used in the source to have a harsher tone, and I encourage the promoter to use ALT1.
Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 01:43, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
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) 06:33, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
... that according to the traditional Catholic view that "error has no rights", non-Catholics did not deserve civil or political rights? Source: "A central component of the traditional church-state model was the principle that "error had no rights." This principle was strongly reas serted by Pope Pius IX (1846-1878). Within this framework those outside the Catholic church enjoyed no title in principle to political and civil rights because they lacked the true faith"
https://www.jstor.org/stable/23559453
You're right, Self-trout. I was citing the wrong source. Now fixed (
t ·
c) buidhe 05:44, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
The wording of the hook is a bit more extreme than the quoted text; "did not deserve" is not the same thing as "enjoyed no title in principle to". A wording like "were not entitled to" would be in line with the text. There are a couple of sentences in the article I have similar concerns about, but I have to sit down and see if I can get a copy of the sources first.
Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 07:01, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
Your suggested phrasing is, as far as I can tell, a less concise and more euphemistic way of saying the same thing. The entire point of human rights (a superset of
civil and political rights) is that they are enjoyed by all people equally. Otherwise it is not really a right, but a privilege granted by higher authority (
t ·
c) buidhe 15:48, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
@
Buidhe: It's not a euphemism—it's literally a form of the same word used in the source. Closely reflecting the language of the source is the safest thing to do. Here, "deserve" is a departure from the source, and has harsher connotations. Anyway, I'll find time tonight to take a closer look at the sources.
Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 18:15, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
There is no rule that says that Wikipedia must follow the phrasing of the source. Usually that is discouraged (
WP:Close paraphrasing). In fact, Wikipedia strives for
WP:IMPARTIAL language even if the source does not. (
t ·
c) buidhe 19:36, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
Take it up on the article talk page. The article could stand to be greatly expended. I am satisfied that the changes resolve the issues I pointed out affecting its promotion at DYK.
Hawkeye7(discuss) 20:17, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
I've done some expansion of the article. I still think the original hook has the issue that the use of the word "deserve" is not the
WP:IMPARTIAL one because it deviates from the word actually used in the source to have a harsher tone, and I encourage the promoter to use ALT1.
Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 01:43, 24 September 2020 (UTC)