Talk:St Melangell's Church

St Melangell's Church is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.

St Melangell's Church is part of the Melangell series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on August 9, 2024.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
March 5, 2024	Good article nominee	Listed
May 22, 2024	Peer review	Reviewed
June 13, 2024	Featured article candidate	Promoted
December 21, 2024	Good topic candidate	Promoted
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on October 21, 2009, and March 6, 2024. The text of the entries was: October 21, 2009: Did you know ... that the shrine at Saint Melangell's Church, Pennant Melangell* is reputedly the oldest Romanesque shrine in Britain, dating from the early 1100s?* March 6, 2024: Did you know ... that Saint Melangell's shrine* was reconstructed from pieces of the 12th-century original found in the walls of the church and lychgate?*
Current status: Featured article

Wales Low‑importance

	Wales portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wales, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Wales 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.WalesWikipedia:WikiProject WalesTemplate:WikiProject WalesWales
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Architecture Low‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture 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.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Anglicanism Low‑importance

	St Melangell's Church is part of WikiProject Anglicanism, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Anglicanism and the Anglican Communion. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AnglicanismWikipedia:WikiProject AnglicanismTemplate:WikiProject AnglicanismAnglicanism
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archaeology Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology 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.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Did you know nomination

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 AirshipJungleman29 talk 01:11, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that Saint Melangell's shrine was reconstructed from pieces of the 12th-century original found in the walls of the church and lychgate? Source: Britnell, W.J.; Watson, K. (1994). "Saint Melangell's Shrine, Pennant Melangell". Montgomeryshire Collections. 82: 147.
- Reviewed:
- Comment: this ran as a DYK in 2009; recently the DYK guidelines were changed to allow multiple runs for an article (see here and here)

5x expanded by Sawyer-mcdonell (talk). Self-nominated at 00:21, 17 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/St Melangell's Church, Pennant Melangell; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

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: None required.

Overall: This is looking good so far, but I have one fix to ask for before I can approve this. The first couple sentences in § Architecture need to be rewritten, as they're too closely paraphrased. See the report. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 04:23, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

that little bit in the architecture section is a leftover from before my rewrite; fixing it now. :) sawyer * he/they * talk 04:32, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

rewrote that section; hopefully it should be good now! sawyer * he/they * talk 04:45, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Approved. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 04:47, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

Passed. Geardona (talk to me?) 20:33, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This review is transcluded from Talk:St Melangell's Church, Pennant Melangell/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Geardona (talk · contribs) 02:33, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewing later (reminder for me) Geardona (talk to me?) 02:33, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): no huge problems I can see, auto ed came up with nothing. b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): , just did a few spot checks of the online sources, dont see any problems. b (citations to reliable sources): A few yellow sources, but nothing huge, all of the tagged yellow sources are fine. c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): ran it through earwigs It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): , the articlr leaces nothing I can think of untouched b (focused): ,, fixed by nom, sections are all consistently on topic, no huge suprises when opening a section, you can find what you need by section title. It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

The text seems to wander off in some sections.

@Geardona could you give more detailed feedback on where the text becomes unfocused? I could certainly go ahead & trim some sections (eg the veneration of hares paragraph) but I'd like to hear what specifically you think could be changed. sawyer * he/they * talk 20:02, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure!
The location section needs to be refocused a little, and possible make the thing about the namesake of the area a section.

Thanks Geardona (talk to me?) 20:25, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The location section is quite short - do you think it could simply be renamed to something like "location and surroundings" to more accurately reflect the contents of the section? Also, I can definitely make Melangell into a section. sawyer * he/they * talk 20:28, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, that would make the scope more defined for both! (ping me when done) Geardona (talk to me?) 20:29, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Geardona done! sawyer * he/they * talk 20:32, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

TFAR

Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/St Melangell's Church -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:43, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question about an item in the bibliography

I just added the page range to the source below:

Crossley, Fred H.; Ridgway, Maurice H. (1947). "Screens, Lofts, and Stalls Situated in Wales and Monmouthshire". Archaeologia Cambrensis. 99 (1): 1–56. hdl:10107/4740418. ISSN 0306-6924.

When checking the first page I noticed that Ridgway isn't listed as an author. A keyword search shows that he is mentioned in the footnotes, but unless I'm missing something (disclaimer: it is late on a Friday night) I don't think Ridgway co-authored the article. User:sawyer777, what do you reckon? Richard Nevell (talk) 23:29, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i was very confused about this too when you pointed to it, but i've figured it out. the section that i'm citing is part 5 (beginning on p. 179), which is co-authored by Crossley & Ridgway. i will update the bibliography entry accordingly. ... sawyer * he/they * talk 23:57, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A multi-part article spread across parts, I forgot that was an option. Thanks for bearing with me (and fixing the incorrect page range that I introduced). Richard Nevell (talk) 10:22, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

no worries! i missed adding the page range in the first place. ... sawyer * he/they * talk 19:45, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]