Talk:Apologia Pro Vita Sua

Christianity: Catholicism / Anglicanism Low‑importance

	Christianity portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Catholic Church portal This article is supported by WikiProject Catholicism (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Anglicanism (assessed as Low-importance).

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

A fact from Apologia Pro Vita Sua appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 1 June 2024 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that after John Henry Newman wrote his Apologia Pro Vita Sua in response to an attack by Charles Kingsley, Kingsley compared Newman to a "treacherous ape" and implied that he was insane?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2024/June. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Apologia Pro Vita Sua.

Wikipedia

Greek

The word "Apologia" could be said to have been borrowed from Greek. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.160.202.155 (talk) 13:26, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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 17:36, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

~~... that while writing his Apologia Pro Vita Sua, John Henry Newman once worked for 22 hours straight in order to have the manuscript for the printer at Newman's door the next morning?~~

Source: "He worked hour after hour, up to sixteen hours in one day - once for twenty-two hours running, on May 20th, with Rivington's man at the door next morning." p. 334, first full paragraph

ALT1: ... that after John Henry Newman wrote his Apologia Pro Vita Sua in response to an attack by Charles Kingsley, Kingsley compared Newman to a "treacherous ape" and implied that he was insane? Source: "If I am to bandy words, it must be with sane persons." and "I cannot be weak enough to put myself a second time ... into the power of one who like a treacherous ape, lifts to you meek and suppliant eyes ... " p. 343, first two full paragraphs
Reviewed:
Comment: 2nd nom, so no QPQ needed

5x expanded by Smdjcl (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has less than 5 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Smdjcl (talk) 17:11, 2 May 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Approved: A very nice article, expanded within the window. Both hooks are good and check out. QPQ not required. I like ALT1 better: would suggest amending ALT0 to something like "the manuscript ready for the printer to collect..." in both hook and article, as the "at Newman's door" is a little confusing and not really idiomatic for someone coming to visit him - you could even cut it in the hook, as the interesting thing is the 22-hour day, not where he handed the manuscript over. Would also suggest reworking, in the article, Newman had been accused of secretly working to convert people to Catholicism while outwardly professing to be Anglican, and this belief persisted even after his conversion to Catholicism in 1845, as he would hardly be accused of outwardly professing Anglicanism after he had publicly converted to Catholicism. Still, none of these points should be an obstacle at this stage. Good work. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 05:52, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@UndercoverClassicist: Thank you for your review and the kind words, and sorry for disappearing for a couple of days! Those two sentences that you pointed out were definitely the ones I had the most difficulty phrasing (my original draft of that second sentence you mentioned implied that he was still Anglican when he wrote the Apologia!). I've rephrased the sentences in the article, hopefully for the better. As for the hooks, I have no preference, so if you prefer alt1, I'm fine just going with that rather than trying to improve alt0. (Also, looking at the source again, it's not clear if it should be "manuscript" or "proof" - I just had "pamphlet" in the article. Probably better just to avoid that altogether in the hook.) Smdjcl (talk) 02:30, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

English variant

Smdjcl, thank you for improving the article. As the article is about an English person and was originally written in UK English (honour rather than honor), I believe that UK English should be used. I hope you agree. The only US forms I noticed were two instances of gotten. TSventon (talk) 09:06, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I absolutely agree. Thank you for catching my mistakes! Smdjcl (talk) 14:50, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have two articles on US subjects going through DYK at the moment, so it will be interesting to see what mistakes I have made. TSventon (talk) 15:16, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]