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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spain 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.SpainWikipedia:WikiProject SpainTemplate:WikiProject SpainSpain
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Galicia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Galicia 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.GaliciaWikipedia:WikiProject GaliciaTemplate:WikiProject GaliciaGalicia
A fact from Feast of Saint James appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 25 July 2023 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that a year when the Feast of Saint James falls on a Sunday is designated a Jacobean Holy Year, and the Holy Door(pictured) at the Cathedral of Santiago de Compostela is unblocked for all to enter?
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.
Comment I have submitted these to the GOCE. Please hold off on reviewing these until that review is complete. --evrik(talk)18:09, 30 April 2023 (UTC) All done[reply]
I think that the lack of objection was a tacit approval. BTW, the point is moot until the articles are reviewed. --evrik(talk)14:04, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Discussions off-wiki aren't policy ... in any case, we're currently sitting at nine weeks. If this sits for three more week, it will be at six weeks. --evrik(talk)01:24, 22 May 2023 (UTC):[reply]
Firstly, we go by nomination date and not review date, so even if we wait three weeks, the request cannot be granted without an explicit discussion that gives an IAR exemption. Secondly, for an IAR request to be granted, there has to be explicit approval. "Silence means approval" is not how things work on Wikipedia. In any case this probably should run as a regular, non-special occasion hook instead. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 14:21, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
perhaps we should give this a rest for now – nomination awaits full review anyway. I'll also go ahead and throw in my support for the special occasion and associated exemption – if WT:DYK isn't interested, a small local consensus should suffice. If NLH5 and the reviewer agree, that's more than enough. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 15:11, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Overall: - I see no issues and have no objections to proposed front-page date etc. Let me know if should be doing something else to move this through otherwise thanks everybody and cheers. jengod (talk) 03:06, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure why people are having policy discussions off-wiki, as they don't carry any weight here. I'll go ahead and promote this for July 25. Edge3 (talk) 16:05, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]