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) 05:53, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
Article is new and long enough, hook (ALT0 is my favorite) is cited inline and interesting, article's layout is fine and it is stable. QPQ needed. Now, I also think the title of the article is too vague. Why not something like the "Jesus water miracle in Mumbai" or something like that.
MX (
✉ •
✎) 21:05, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
Aside from this, there are a few copyright issues. This paragraph is exactly as the source: The Archbishop of Mumbai asked Edamaruku to apologise in exchange for dropping the charges, while the All India Catholic Union said the law was being applied incorrectly. Colin Gonsalves, the founder of the India Center for Human Rights and Law, stated his opinion that no criminal offence had been committed. There were further complaints that the law was being misused to suppress free speech. Same goes for the following: Edamaruku was challenged to investigate and he went to the site with an engineer and traced the source of the drip backwards ... Moisture on the wall the statue was mounted on seemed to come from an overflowing drain, which was in turn fed by a pipe that issued from a nearby toilet.
Copyright issues fixed, article title discussion has been resolved. The rest of the review stands. This article is ready for the main page.
MX (
✉ •
✎) 03:56, 10 October 2019 (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) 05:53, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
Article is new and long enough, hook (ALT0 is my favorite) is cited inline and interesting, article's layout is fine and it is stable. QPQ needed. Now, I also think the title of the article is too vague. Why not something like the "Jesus water miracle in Mumbai" or something like that.
MX (
✉ •
✎) 21:05, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
Aside from this, there are a few copyright issues. This paragraph is exactly as the source: The Archbishop of Mumbai asked Edamaruku to apologise in exchange for dropping the charges, while the All India Catholic Union said the law was being applied incorrectly. Colin Gonsalves, the founder of the India Center for Human Rights and Law, stated his opinion that no criminal offence had been committed. There were further complaints that the law was being misused to suppress free speech. Same goes for the following: Edamaruku was challenged to investigate and he went to the site with an engineer and traced the source of the drip backwards ... Moisture on the wall the statue was mounted on seemed to come from an overflowing drain, which was in turn fed by a pipe that issued from a nearby toilet.
Copyright issues fixed, article title discussion has been resolved. The rest of the review stands. This article is ready for the main page.
MX (
✉ •
✎) 03:56, 10 October 2019 (UTC)