Our Lady of Absam is within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism, an attempt to better organize and improve the quality of information in articles related to the Catholic Church. For more information, visit the project page.CatholicismWikipedia:WikiProject CatholicismTemplate:WikiProject CatholicismCatholicism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Saints, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Saints and other individuals commemorated in Christianliturgical calendars on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SaintsWikipedia:WikiProject SaintsTemplate:WikiProject SaintsSaints articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Austria, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles about Austria on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project.AustriaWikipedia:WikiProject AustriaTemplate:WikiProject AustriaAustria articles
This article falls under the scope of WikiProject Paranormal, which aims to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the paranormal and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, help with current tasks, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and discussions.ParanormalWikipedia:WikiProject ParanormalTemplate:WikiProject Paranormalparanormal articles
Latest comment: 1 year ago15 comments8 people in discussion
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: rejected by RoySmith (talk) 15:29, 15 November 2022 (UTC)Reply
Comment: The sources linked for the first version of the comment is applicable to ALTs 1 and 2 as well. Please let me know if anything is to be improved!
Overall: Alt1 should be implemented, it is much more interested and detailed than the rest suggested hook. JeBonSer(talk | sign) 10:00, 4 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
Comment: The article is properly sourced and consists of illustrations. So, it's good to go. Toadboy123 (talk) 09:33, 5 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
@theleekycauldron - Would it be appropriate, then, if we removed the word "miraculous" and still go with ALT1? I don't have an issue with that. Removal of the word doesn't drastically alter the uniqueness of the windowpane. — That Coptic Guy (let's talk?) 22:06, 18 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
It's a bit punchier, and I think our users will know who the Virgin Mary is. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 17:09, 26 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
Can I ask about the sources used in this article? www.miraclehunter.com, www.roman-catholic-saints.com, www.sudariumchristi.com, www.catholicculture.org... are these reputable scholarly sources? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 17:10, 26 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
Reliability of sources questioned, not ready for promotion yet. –LordPeterII (talk) 18:41, 29 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
Since TCG is on wikibreak, we should close this up in ten days or so if they're not around to fix the issues. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 21:38, 4 November 2022 (UTC)Reply
Maybe one of us can adopt this nomination to get it unstuck? Lightburst (talk) 15:48, 8 November 2022 (UTC)Reply
Sure, but someone actually has to step up and do that. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 01:43, 12 November 2022 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 1 year ago4 comments3 people in discussion
The text seems to say that the image was successfully removed ("With the application of a lead polish, the glass allegedly became transparent and the image had disappeared"), as does the source, but the overall impression and the 2011 photograph seem to affirm that it still exists. Was it removed the last time but came back again or was it partially removed and then stopped before removing the entire image? Does anyone know what year the Commission investigated and reported? Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:50, 13 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
Hey Randy - this was honestly a question I had as well and one that was in the back of my head. I did wonder if they stopped removing the image and kept most of it intact, or if the image re-appeared on its own after that. I'll do more research as I agree it is a point of confusion here. I would also have to assume that the investigation was done around the same time of the miracle in 1797. — That Coptic Guy (let's talk?) 01:24, 14 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
That Coptic Guy I was confused by that too. I wasn't able to find anything that could clear up the confusion though. It seems that the image has returned despite the removal, but I can't be sure without a source. Scorpions13256 (talk) 17:56, 16 October 2022 (UTC)Reply