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 Montanabw(talk) 17:04, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
Comment: Needs going over by a native speaker, & many links added. Johnbod (talk) 22:36, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
Ok, done that. Odd you don't mention that the high altar is hoisted some 5 metres above the nave! There may be an issue of copyvio with the Spanish source. A better hook might be "... was partly funded by the head of the Spanish Inquisition". I can't review it. Johnbod (talk) 23:07, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
Thank you so much, Johnbod, I came to add you to the credits. I'd mention the altar position if I'd find it in a source, but don't read Spanish. I tried to rephrase, - perhaps not yet enough so. This must be mentioned in books, even in English, would you find something? - I just saw it and was impressed! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:20, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
Full review needed. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
It could be more hooky for DYK if you use the museum of art being on the premises than a prince who is probably unknown in the anglosphere, however, I'll suppose that to be a matter of preference and say, passed, thanks o/ ~ R.T.G 12:05, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
That prince, crown prince and only child making it to adulthood and then died age 19, should be known more then. Many former monasteries house some museums. For the prince's moniment, the main altar was completely changed. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:47, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
Some people may get finicky if I suggest a diff and a review at the same time, but I would like to suggest a variation on ALT1 which mightn't not otherwise be supposed, ALT1a: ... that the Real Monasterio de Santo Tomás, now a museum of Oriental art (pictured) in Ávila, dedicated to Thomas Aquinas, became the burial place for John, Prince of Asturias? ~ R.T.G 06:40, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
I think it's misleading, because an estimated 5% of the building house that specific museum, while an estimated 70% are a normal monastery museum, and the rest is the church, still functioning as a church, which houses the burial. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:43, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
See what you just said about museums in the modern day, that, I believe, is going to attract more hits than simply saying a medieval prince is buried there. That a prince is buried in a museum, especially one housing an art museum, people are going to say wow, I want to see the pictures.. But to say a medieval prince is buried in a church in Europe, people are not going to be surprised by that. They sre going to read that and say to themselves there was nothing further interesting about that church to write as s hook. However, if you added to art museum they'd say mmmm art museum... and take a look, ~ R.T.G 14:32, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
But he is not buried where the (rather small) special museum is. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:47, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
"Today, it houses the Museum of Oriental Art, showing art which Dominican missionaries brought to Spain from their travels in East Asia." ~ R.T.G 17:06, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
"Houses", yes, a few of the many rooms are that museum. The pictured burial is unique in the world, displacing the altar. Made me much more curious than any little little museum in some side rooms, - and made me write the article. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:38, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
The goal here is the hook itself, Gerda. The article comes after that. ~ R.T.G 18:22, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
There is probably room to mention them both and be as hooky as possible then. ~ R.T.G 16:20, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
If you want to, please propose. I am behind with things overdue for Christmas. We have an approved hook here, right, even if that might get lost ;) --— Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])
Thank you for the offer. No need to repeat "church", many former monasteries still have an active church. I like the link to the topic in front, no period needed when with picture, §real§ means "royal", so:
Approved ... Actually, according to Google translate, in Spanish and the Italian "reale" the words are interchangeable, as in authentic. The Real Highness :P ~ R.T.G 13:30, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
Thank you! - "real" can mean both, but this one, of the [[Catholic Monarchs]] and burial place of their only child who lived to adulthood (and then died age 19), I am sure that it's "Royal". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:01, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
Ah, that's very hooky, where you said he was the oldest of a family who died, in or at, the end of their childhoods, now enshrined in his tomb in this monastery of museums. ~ R.T.G 16:20, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
During peasantry, a prince would be more physically powerful through knowledge and lifestyle than the strongest peasants. Even the princes blood would appear thicker and darker and clot faster owing to their diet (considered healthy to be lighter today but appearance is none tenths of assumption). Although I cannot find it written, if the princes were to be more substantial in this way, and to be called "Real", it is difficult to imagine that the idea was not in the public consciousness. Even the peseta of the time was the "real", at a time when the quality of metal in the currency, the realness of it, was often a significant issue in related cultures. I could not search up a confirming statement of these assumptions, but they are based on evidence. In those days a "prince" was not necessarily a description of royalty but of influence, i.e. "merchant prince". "Real" and "reale" seem to have been synonymous to "material" and "substance" in the senses where it notes a quality. Seems to lace all the way up in other aspects, it meant "royal", but it also meant "real", more real than a merchant prince :)~ R.T.G 01:56, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
Comment: Hello. Ávila requires disambiguation. Usedtobecool TALK ✨ 16:08, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Full review needed. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:43, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
Passed ~ R.T.G 02:06, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
~ R.T.G 12:05, 29 November 2019 (UTC)