Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/St. Michael's Cathedral, Qingdao/archive3

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by SandyGeorgia 02:47, 26 June 2010 [1].

St. Michael's Cathedral, Qingdao

St. Michael's Cathedral, Qingdao (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 11:02, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This article has been through two other FAC's, and been significantly improved each time. Hopefully third time's the charm. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 11:02, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sources issues

  • Ref. 26: Two citations are apparently to a signboard outside the church (unless I mistake the meaning). These relate to the reopening in 1981, and the height of the terrace between the two towers. Isn't there a reliable print source for this information?
  • Retrieval dates: the months January, March and April should be written in full, not abbreviated.

Otherwise, sources look OK, no other issues. Brianboulton (talk) 16:20, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by TonyTheTiger
  • "St. Michael's Cathedral (Chinese: 圣彌格爾主教座堂) is a Roman Catholic cathedral, seat of the Diocese of Qingdao, Shandong, China." seems ungrammatical.
  • What is "legal extraterritoriality"? Does it have a link?
  • I would prefer note 3 after the punctuation in Church rather than the word source.
  • Rm spaces between punctuation and refs.
  • This sentence begs for about 3 or 4 links ""The denunciation of anything Western as 'capitalist,' 'bourgeois' and representative of the 'imperialist world' reached a peak during the ideological extremism of the Korean War (1950–53) when the final vestiges of the Western economic and cultural presence were eradicated."
  • Shinan District should be linked.
  • Northern China – Tianjin, Beijing, Dalian, or Jinan are not places entirely familiar to English readers. Please link.
  • Same with Han Village and Yucheng County.
    • Not Fixed Han Village is so small as to not be searchable in English or appear on maps that I can find. Yucheng County exists in more than one province and the one on Wikipedia is the wrong one, so if you want links, they'll be redlinks. Let me know. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 02:30, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would link mural although others might disagree.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 23:29, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support All issues resolved. This article has come a long way since FAC1.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:24, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per 1b and 1c. From a cursory Google search I learned information that seems to be lacking in this article. For example, the name of the original German architect, information about the bell tower and the bells, that the church is a tourist attraction (the numbers of tourists annually are available). Also, information about why the Dutch missionaries were in the region seems relevant, as well as the style in which the Germans rebuilt the village. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 12:41, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support : issues resolved. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 11:44, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Support I find the article is now coherent and provides a good description of the historic context and present day appearance of the cathedral. The architectural context is however less clear as there is limited information about the architect (Any formal qualification? Did he design other buildings too?) and the design (was the design based on a particular European example? How does it differ from other Romanesque cathedrals in China? Did it influence church architecture in China in any way?), however I understand no sources providing such information could be identified. One minor correction I would like to see (as discussed at the first FAC review): the quote "...the cathedral is far too large for the scale of Qingdao..." should be presented in historical context by clearly indicating the year this was written, given that it does not reflect the present situation. --Elekhh (talk) 06:05, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was written in 1994, so not that long ago. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 08:30, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If the scale of the city changed in those 15 years than is relevant. --Elekhh (talk) 09:23, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know if it has. To find out when other (modern) buildings in the city were built is beyond me. That photograph is not what you see entering the harbor, I can tell you that. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 23:35, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see why do you think it would hurt to add "(1994)". --Elekhh (talk) 21:30, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Two reasons: 1) Date is already included in the footnote; 2) There's not a parenthetical date note anywhere else in the article; so in my brain, it seems odd. THAT SAID, if you still really want me to add the date, I will do so. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 00:59, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am still the same oppinion, BUT if there is no consensus otherwise you do not need to change it. --Elekhh (talk) 23:56, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
New Info
How to Present?

I just found a new source here [2] (translated from German) that solves the mystery of why some accounts of the cathedral's construction list the architect as Arthur Bialucha and others list Alfred Fräbel, SVD. Fräbel designed the cathedral, but Bialucha was actually the one who built it. The source says he appears on a list of people owning construction companies in Qingdao. The link gives an account of other buildings that Bialucha built as well. Should his name go into the infobox as well, as an architect? ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 08:30, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. His role appears to have been closer to General contractor than architect (and there is a field in the infobox for that). --Elekhh (talk) 09:23, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, good. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 23:35, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redlink needs fixing

Comment - Redlink to John Baptist von Anzer needs to be fixed. --Richard S (talk) 08:33, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

fixed ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 01:58, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support on the basis of 1a. But here are some comments concerning the top half.

  • "Following the Treaty of Nanjing (1842), the British established the first treaty ports. Such other foreign powers as France, the United States, Portugal, Germany, Japan, and Russia won additional concessions." This is a little cryptic, particularly "additional" (to the treaty, more than the British got?). Um .. " Following the Treaty of Nanjing (1842), the British established the first treaty ports, followed within a decade by similar concession for France, the United States, Portugal, Germany, Japan, and Russia won additional concessions." I've guessed all this. And I removed the "such as" assuming there were no other powers. — Tony 17:13, 14 June 2010 — continues after insertion below
  • "(alternately romanized as Shantung or Shan-tung)"—not alternating, surely? "Alternatively"and/or perhaps even in a footnote to reduce clutter?
  • "a rarity in large parts of Asia at that time and later"—was it just the last item in the preceding list that was a rarity, or the whole package of infrastructures? The "and later" is a bit awkward. Either omit or find a better way?
  • "The city reverted to Chinese rule in December 1922"—I removed "at the end of the war", but maybe readers won't know that ... unsure. Either way, wasn't this five whole years after the war? You're not saying the Japanese ran it then, are you? Perhaps a little more explanation here would be good.
  • "The changes are evident in drawings published before completion of construction, which show the roofs of the towers as bell-shaped. However, the roofs of the completed structure were changed to spires."— Errr ... so the spires were cheaper? I've lost the point.
  • That's as much information as the sources provide: There were money troubles, so the bell shaped towers were changed to spires. I had the same reaction as you (Errr ... so the spires were cheaper?), but I thought it was important to include. I can omit if you like. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 00:59, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • My "Chinese government control"—better check.
  • The dreaded User:Tony1/Noun plus -ing, which is often inelegant: "The cathedral was badly damaged during the Cultural Revolution, the crosses topping the twin steeples being removed by the Red Guards, with two men falling to their deaths during the crosses' removal." ing ing ing. "The cathedral was badly damaged during the Cultural Revolution, when the crosses topping the twin steeples were removed by the Red Guards; during the removal, two men fell to their deaths." That's better, but you may be able to improve it further.

I've looked only at the top half. It's a worthy article, with just a few surface glitches. Tony (talk) 17:13, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oh, and the infobox is a problem: it squashes the lead text pretty badly unless you widen your window considerably. If the infobox is wide to accommodate the large pic, right reason, bad outcome (big pics are good, but the overall effect is cluttered and squashy, right when we need to be smoothly sailing. I guess it's not possible to ditch the infobox and display the pic at the top nicely? Only a pipe-dream. I also don't like the Chinese character box right at the top, but where else would it go ... Tony (talk) 17:20, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with Tony about the layout. Maybe the Chinese character box could be placed at the bottom as a Note, or the talk page or at least adjusted to the same width as the infobox. As for the lead image landscape format would be more efficient, but I guess there is no alternative. --Elekhh (talk) 21:27, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The width of the infobox is to accommodate the map. I agree with Tony that the Chinese character box right at the top doesn't look good, but also agree that there is no where else to put it. It has to be at the top, to let people know that they might have trouble displaying all the characters if their software doesn't support Chinese characters. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 00:59, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Support A worthy article, apart from a few minor prose issues. However I have a couple of observations. — Xandar 19:24, 17 June 2010 — continues after insertion below

  • The city is referred to throughout the article as Qingdao, which is the modern Pinyin name. However for most of the 19th and 20th century (and in the literature from those periods) the town will have been known as Tsingtao - which is so different from Qingdao as to require some explanation. So can Tsingtao be used early in the lead to avoid confusion.
  • You've not added this to the lead, which I think is important for identification. I've made an alteration to show you what I mean.
  • The History section starts with the word, "Following..." I think "After..." would be grammatically better in this context, particularly since the next sentence more properly starts with "Following..."
  • The subsection "German presence in Qingdao", mentions the Qing government. This isn't wikilinked, and probably should be.
  • The section "Design and construction" has a couple of unclear sentences: "Commissioned by Bishop Augustin Henninghaus, the cathedral's original architect designed a three-aisled Gothic church, and Father Franz Bartels, SVD [note 1] purchased some land on Qufu Road and began buying building materials." - Clumsy sentence. It could indicate that Bishop Henninghaus was the original architect. Do we not know who he was? Also the Father Bartels bit should be a separate sentence.
  • "Before the cathedral was started, an SVD mission hall (pictured above) was built on that same parcel of land, in 1902. It was initially used as a school[note 2] in 1922,[9] and was operating as of May 2010." - If it was built in 1902, and initially used as a school, why was it then said that the school use began in 1922? What was it used for between 1902 and 1922?
  • The section "1949–1976: St. Michael's under Maoist China" does not make it clear what happened to the Cathedral during most of this period. We are told that the Bishop was arrested in 1952 and that the Church was desecrated in the Cultural revolution of 1968. What happened in between? Was the Church open and functioning, or was the Church closed in this period? The section mentions the Diocese being "shuttered", what does this mean? If the Church WAS closed, what did the former parishioners do in this period? Xandar 21:30, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Concerns addressed. Xandar 19:24, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Dtgriffith's General review findings

Noraft, I have come up with the following:

  • I capitalized "province" in a few instances of "Shandong Province" where it was lowercase.
  • Lead, 2nd paragraph - this sentence is a bit confusing: "The cathedral was defaced and abandoned during the Cultural Revolution and repaired in 1981, reopening for services that year." Was the Cultural Revolution also in 1981?
  • Restoration - you have a quote containing "cultural revolution" in double quotes, I believe they should be single quotes.

Overall, this looks great! dtgriffith (talk) 02:02, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 12:42, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Noraft, I am slowly working my way through the article tonight and Tuesday. I am taking the copy edit and readability POV, as that is where I can make the most useful contributions for this article. dtgriffith (talk) 01:52, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support with the remaining edits addressed. This is article is coming together very well from my point-of-view. dtgriffith (talk) 00:42, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments by Ruhrfisch. I peer reviewed this and made comments at the last FAC. I was recently asked to comment on this FAC by both Noraft and Truthkeeper88. While I find this article has improved substantially and is generally well-written, I still have some issues that need to be resolved. These fall into three broad categories: MOS issues (minor), a clarification of when it became a cathedral (unclear in the article), and concerns about comprehensiveness (criterion 1b: "It is (b) comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details and places the subject in context;"), mainly about not including pertinent details from reliable sources already used in the article.

I have switched to support - there are still a few quibbles left (adding tomb image, adding date for Japanese surrender (August 1945), explaining that Qingdao was the base for the United States Seventh Fleet) but I trust Noraft will resolve those and they are not enough to stop me from supporting. Thanks for all your hard work and for an interesting article. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 03:41, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
MOS issues and nitpicks
  • First paragraph of History section - why is "Unequal Treaties" in quotation marks the first time and not the second? Should be consistent, either way is OK with me.
  • German presence in Qingdao section - It is unclear from the sentence what is meant by "the area" - assume it means Qingdao or Shandong, but there is no real antecedent In 1891 the Qing government decided to make the area a defense base against naval attack and began to improve the existing fortifications of Qingdao ...
  • I think the sentence Jiaozhou was romanized as Kiaochow, Kiauchau or Kiao-Chau in English and Kiautschou in German. should immediately follow this sentence German naval officials observed and reported on this Chinese activity during a formal survey of Kiautschou Bay in May 1897. to make it clearer that Kiautschou and Jiaozhou are the same. Perhaps something like German naval officials observed and reported on this Chinese activity during a formal survey of Kiautschou Bay in May 1897. The Bay is now known as Jiaozhou, but originally was romanized as Kiaochow, Kiauchau or Kiao-Chau in English and Kiautschou in German.
  • Since the article has alredy said Qingdao = Tsingtao, is the repetition here needed? On gaining control of the area, the Germans outfitted the impoverished fishing village of "Tsingtao" (Qingdao) with wide streets,... (your call)
  • Tsingtao is in quotations twice and not once, again should probably be consistent
    • On second thought I am OK with quotes or not, but I just noticed Qingdao = Tsingtao is in the lead twice (in two consecutive sentences). Again I think once in the lead and once in the body of the article is enough. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 11:51, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Divine Word Missionaries section - should there be a wikilink for Apostolic Vicariate on first use as it is not a term most readers will know?
  • Design and construction section - unclear sentence The World War I conquest of Qingdao by the Japanese on November 16, 1914 ended construction. Construction of what? The SVD Mission Hall was completed in 1902 (so its concstuction could not be meant), and there is no previous sentence that construction of the cathedral had actually started, just "Before the cathedral was started, ...". A few paragraphs later there is this sentence Construction began in 1931, but was frustrated in 1933,... so this needs to be clarified.
  • Possible error in this sentence "The Vicariate Apostolic of Southern Shan-tung was renamed Vicariate Apostolic of Yanzhoufu on December 13, 1924, and on February 22, 1925, the Vicariate Prefecture of Qingdao was established from its territory, with Bishop Georg Weig, SVD, appointed prefect on March 18 of that same year." I am not sure what a "Vicariate Prefecture " is and think it should read "on February 22, 1925, the Apostolic Prefecture of Qingdao was established" per the Roman Catholic Diocese of Qingdao article. I would also link Apostolic prefecture here
  • Would "Bundesarchiv Bild 137-041054" be better in a footnote?
  • 1938–1949: occupation, liberation, and civil war section - this sentence does not seem to follow WP:Logical quotation That year, the Japanese placed a large sign over the main door of the cathedral that read "Under Management of the Japanese Army."[12] (should be ...that read "Under Management of the Japanese Army".[12])
  • 1949–1976: St. Michael's under Maoist China section - per WP:HEAD the name of the article should not be repeated in headers if at all possible - could this header just be "1949–1976: under Maoist China" or perhaps "1949–1976: Maoist China"?
  • Could the years for the Cultural Revolution be given? Even though the year for the removal of the crosses is not known, adding the years for the Cultural Revolution at least gives this event some context.
  • I would wikilink ordinary in The diocese went without an ordinary until the state-run Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association consecrated and appointed Bishop Paul Han Xirang, OFM without papal sanction in 1988.[20] I also wonder if this sentence about an event in 1988 really belongs in a section which the header says is about events from 1949 to 1976? it seems more like it belongs in the Restoration section
  • There are two images on Commons that seem like they might be added to the article. File:Bishop Georg Weig Tomb.JPG could perhaps go in the Maoist China section (as it shows damage from then) and File:Qingdao 05.JPG could go in the Restoration section as it shows a different (modern) perspective of the cathedral and city
  • MOS:IMAGES says in part not to sandwich text between images, but this is done in the Interior subsection - would {{double image}} work here? Anoither possibility is to allow the images to be thumb size - if they were smaller, this would not be as much of a problem
  • Need to be consistent on abbreviations - is it SVD or S.V.D.? Both are used. Or OFM or O.F.M.?
  • Watch out for vague time expression as these can easily become out of date - for example "today" in The church is active and today more than 10,000 Catholics in Qingdao attend services there.[33] or currently in Note: Oversaw the diocese from Beijing until 2005. Currently lives in Qingdao. (I mentioned this in the last FAC)
  • References are much better - I would still like to see a ref for The other tomb contains part of the ashes of Bishop of Qingdao Paul Han Xirang, OFM, the rest having been buried in his hometown, Han Village, Yucheng County, Shandong Province. and the two notes in the Ordinaries section
  • I think a brief explanation of what an ordinary is in general and relevant specifics would serve as a nice introduction to the Ordinaries section
  • Note 3 is currently for example, chinaculture.org [1] and many travel websites (e.g. AsiaHotels [2] and Synotrip [3]) I would prefer something like For example, chinaculture.org and many travel websites (e.g. AsiaHotels and Synotrip). I did not see any mention of the words Emil or church on the Synotrip site - is it still there?
When did it become a cathedral?
  • I think the article needs to be clearer on when the church became a cathedral - my understanding (quoting from the Cathedral article here) is that The church of a diocesan bishop is known as a "cathedral". — Ruhrfisch — continues after insertion below
    • The church of a diocesan bishop is known as a cathedral, but not ONLY churches of diocesan bishops are known as cathedrals. So the article is right, but that statement is misleading: all churches of diocesan bishops are cathedrals, but not all cathedrals are churches of diocesan bishops. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 03:10, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • If that is the case, then this became a cathedral on April 11, 1946 when the Diocese of Qingdao was created. I also note the Bundesarchiv photo caption uses Kirche (church) and not Dom or other German terms for a cathedral. I asked someone I know who has a Masters in Theology from a Jesuit university if the main church of an Apostolic Vicariate or Prefecture was a cathedral and she did not know either, so if it has been a cathedral from day one - say so. In fact if having an ordinary makes a cathedral, then what was the church before this one was built (since the article says there have been bishops in Qingdao since 1925)? — Ruhrfisch — continues after insertion below
    • Tell your associate that the Vicar Apostolic of Qingdao was a titular bishop (consecrated Titular Bishop of Antandrus on the same date as appointment as Vicar Apostolic). That might give him/her the information necessary to make a determination. I don't have any sources that state it wasn't a cathedral, and lots that state it was...however this doesn't mean they are right, and canon law will say for sure. I know a priest who has a doctorate in canon law, and will see about asking him as well. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 03:10, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I also note the photo of Bishop Weig's tomb refers to him as first bishop (if my redimentary Latin is still working) but I did not see any reference to cathedra just ecclesiam. So was there a church that was the cathedral (bishop's seat) before this one, or did it become the first cathedral at its dedication, or was it made a cathedral later?OK, I am saving this for now and will add the other part soon, hope this helps, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 21:03, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I trust you will resolve this and correct or clarify if / as needed. I am way over my head trying to figure out if was cathedral from day one or not, and suspect I may be committing the dreaded WP:OR. I did look at the webpage for the Apostolic Vicariate of Alexandria of Egypt on GCatholic.com. It lists a minor basilica, but does not designate it as a cathedral - see here where it does note a cathedral in Egypt. Of course even if the rules today are clarified, they could well have been different in 1934. Since all of your sources say it was a cathedral from day one, lets keep it there for now. Please do check with the cacnon law expert priest you know and go from there. This point is not worth holding up the FAC over. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 20:53, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comprehensiveness concerns from the previous FAC

First off here are items from my comments in the previous FAC that do not appear to have been addressed yet, quoted verbatim, with correction in square brackets []

  • The German concession ended in 1914 - what were the Germans still doing in Qingdao to build a cathedral in the early 1930s?
    • Your question seems to be based on the assumption that when a state loses a claim to territory, all the nationals from said state leave. There were Germans in Qingdao after after the concession ended for the same reason there were British in Hong Kong and Singapore after their claims ended...the sociopolitical environment was tenable for expatriate residency. I don't have a specific source for this, as it is so commonplace as not to be noteworthy. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 12:52, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • OK, I have struck this, but still wonder if some brief explanatory phrase or sentence (the city remained home to many German expatriates China until the Communists took power in 1949) might be useful here. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 13:53, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • While the Japanese conquest of the city in 1914 is mentioned, it would help provide context to the reader to mention that this was part of World War I, and that this effectivley ended the German concession - see WP:PCR
  • When did the Japanese occupation during WWII end?
  • There is a 20 year gap from the Marin[e] Band on the steps (1946) to the Cultural Revolution starting (1966)
  • What happened to the congregation during the Cultural Revolution?
  • Also I think that some general information on churches in the Cultural Revolution would be useful (though specifics would be even better).
  • The Ordinaries section is very bare bones - can more details be added about the individual bishops or what they did?
  • The function of the building is important too - the fact that the Chinese government paid for the restoration is mentioned in one of the Chinese sources. More could be said about the power struggles between the Vatican and Beijing - based just on the what is in the article arleady, a careful reader can learn that the cathedral reopened in 1981, but without a papal mandate for the bishop, then there is an eight year gap with no bishop, then the current bishop is appointed in 2000 but does not arrive in town until 2005 - this should all be explained in more detail.
    • Which source? I looked and didn't find it. ɳorɑfʈ Talk!05:42, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • As for the source, how about In 1982, the church was reconstructed by the government and reopened. Might be others. My point here is that just as the article goes into some (appropriate) detail on the Cultural Revolution and its end, I think it would help to go into a bit more detail on the whole Vatican vs the Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association struggle. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 21:05, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • I don't see anything about the Cultural Revolution in that article. I have added that the government financed the renovation. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 15:47, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
          • Sorry to be unclear - my point is that there are seven sentences on the repudiation of the Cultural Revolution in the Restoration section before its effect on the cathedral is mentioned in two sentences. I like that and do not have a problem with it, but I think that, in a similar fashion, some details on what happened to Christians in general under Mao could be added. I also think that some more details on the Vatican vs Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association struggle could be added (why was the first post-Mao bishop not Vatican approved, why was there an 8 year gap between the current bishop and his predecessor?). The material would not have to be as long as the 7 sentences, and it would not be specific to just this cathedral, but it would be useful background / context. It seems to me I keep saying this in different ways and I not sure how else I can say it to make it clear. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 17:33, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
New comprehensiveness concerns (stuff that should be in the article but is not)
  • Noraft found a new source on Bialucha - this is a machine translation of a German article from www.tsingtau.org (which is used elsewhere in the article). It includes both the start date of construction (May 8, 1931) and the dedication of the building (October 29, 1934) which should definitely be in the article. I think at least some of the Bialucha material should be in the article, not just in the Infobox.
  • Current ref 8 in the article has the area (2470 square meters)
  • Current ref 12 (Google translation) refers to Weig's tomb and its location, which needs a ref in the article now.
    • The reference already sources that Weig is entombed there and only vaguely gives the location of Weig's tomb ("west"). He's in northwest arm of the transept (which runs NW-SE). ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 07:07, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • I figured a vague ref was better than none. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 21:05, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • Yeah, but I can't say "It's west" (west what?) and I can't use the source to say where it is. Suggestions? ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 23:54, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
          • Currently there is no source at all - this at least says that Weig's tomb is in the cathedral, which is better than any other source for the tomb being there. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 03:36, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
            • What do you mean there is no source at all? Footnote 12. First paragraph of Design and construction: "...built during the tenure of Bishop Weig, who is entombed in the cathedral.[12]" Am I misunderstanding something? ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 05:34, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
              • Sorry to be unclear and sorry to have missed the other use of this ref for the tomb - I was referring to this part of the Interior section which currently has no ref: "It also contains two tombs. One is of the first Vicar Apostolic of the Vicariate Apostolic of Qingdao, Bishop Georg Weig, SVD who supervised the construction of the cathedral." It might work to recast the paragraph this is in. Start with "The cathedral contains the remains of two bishops..." and put the Weig tomb information there with this ref, then the other tomb (that also has no refr, mentioned before). Then the start of the paragraph about these being in the north transept and describing what else is there could end the paragraph. As long as there is a ref that the tomb is there and the photograph which identifies it (since a signboard is a RS, surely a tomb inscription is too), I am OK with not having a direct ref for what corner of the transept it is in. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 11:23, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Current Ref 14 gives month and year for the Kuomintang Government reasserting control of Qingdao after WWII
  • Current ref 16 explains why a US Marine Band was on the steps of the cathedral - it was the base for the "Western Pacific Fleet of the US Navy"
  • Current ref 21 (Google translation) mentions Italian Rennasiance decorations and seven chandeliers inside
  • Current ref 30 gives more on the stained glass and gives the number of pipes in the organ destroyed by the Red Guard and the fact that it was one of the two largest pipe organs in Asia before it was destroyed.
  • Current ref 36 (Google translation) gives more details on the current bishop, how his ordination was approved by the Vatican, and his life story as a Catholic in CHina (imprisonment, etc)
    • That tells me we should write an article on him. I don't know how much of that is applicable to the article on the cathedral. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 07:07, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • As I said above, I think if details on the congregation under Mao are not available, brief mentions of the current bishop's time in prison could be used here - the attentive reader will likely draw the conclusion that it was not easy to be a professing Catholic in Mao's China. Again the fact that his predeccessor was not Vatican approved but he was (and the 8 year(?) gap between them) seems to me to be worth including to help the reader understand some of the issues - China restores and reopens the cathedral, appoints its first bishop in decades but the Vatican does not approve, fast forward a few decades and the next bishop is not controversial. There's a story there that helps understand the cathedral's role in society and vice versa. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 21:05, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • I have added the details of Li Mingshu's life to the Under Mao and Restoration sections. There is no explanation as to why there is an 8 year gap, but this is common among all the dioceses of China (I don't have a source for that either, it is just an observation). ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 02:29, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So my concern is that looking at just the internet refs, in most cases I was able to find things that could be added to the article, in some cases very major things like the dates of consecration andstart of construction. I have tried to point out every place I thought the article needed work - hope this helps, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 03:59, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PS XS is not linked and I am not sure which order it is - probably not this one sometimes known as "XS" Ruhrfisch ><>°° 21:13, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You mean SX? They are the Xaverian Missionary Fathers. No article about them on Wikipedia that I can tell, from a very quick search. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 23:54, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, sorry for the mixup. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 03:36, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Noraft, forgive me, I don't usually strike through issues that have been resolved when I support. Support, I guess, means I take it on trust that the points will be accepted or rejected with your good judgement, as they have been. Thank you. Just one point: I'd link "cruciform"—seems to be a reasonable link-target, and it's kind of technical. I searched for "Jäger & Brommer", the organ building company, and not even WP.de has an article. Oh well. Tony (talk) 08:14, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Strikes make it much easier to scroll through 9,000 words of text (which is how long this review is now) and quickly find what issues have not yet been addressed, so I encourage you to consider adopting the practice, especially on reviews that Ruhrfisch comments on! lol. I will link cruciform; thanks for catching that. And thanks for the review. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 09:14, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • That's what you get for asking me to comment on the FAC ;-) Thanks for all the replies and edits in response to my points. I believe I have struck everything and even if I have not I have meant to. I am done here, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 11:53, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image Review

The Bundesarchiv donated thousands of photographs to Wikimedia Commons, and this was one of them. Why do you think the image is non-free? ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 01:17, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Visionholder, I am also unclear how this is not free as it was donated to Commons by the Bundesarchiv (which still shows it on its web page). Could you be more specific please? Ruhrfisch ><>°° 02:27, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies. I missed the obvious: the permissions linking here. I went straight the source, which said: "For free: Nein". My mistake. I often look past the Commons permissions to make sure the source agrees with the claims on Commons. – VisionHolder « talk » 04:18, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm also not sure how the copyrights work for File:Qingdao Catholic Mission.jpg given that it's a scan of a photo from 1902, yet the source is not listed. The rest appear to be photos taken by User:Noraft, and appear to have a valid license. – VisionHolder « talk » 20:04, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a scan. It is a rephotograph that I took. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 01:17, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Noraft, I think what is needed is ideintification of the source you photographed. Was it a book or a postcard or what? Ruhrfisch ><>°° 02:27, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It was a framed photograph hanging on the wall of the church office. Will add a note to this effect to the image. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 02:39, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Things look fine to me. I'm not an expert on image licenses, particularly with old photos, but to my novice eyes, things look good now. – VisionHolder « talk » 04:20, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not comfortable with this; we need either Jappalang, Stifle, Elcobbola, or another experienced image person to take a look. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 12:18, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Notes: please ask User:Dabomb87 to run the script to remove empty parameters from the cite templates-- they clutter the article. What is Note 4? It's mentioned directly in the text, but the note could include more info about how to find that. I'm not comfortable with the note used as a tophat in the "German presence in Qingdao" section: can that be incorporated as a more traditional note? We don't usually put notes in sections like that. Shouldn't the Pieta be in WP:ITALICS (The north transept contains three large murals featuring Jesus Christ[38]: Jesus washing St. Peter's feet, the Sacred Heart, and the Pieta.)? Where is the close quote here? and "after several years of repair, [the cathedral] was re-opened in April 1981[33] for religious services. In May 1999 the church was opened to the general public, allowing entry when mass or other services are not being celebrated. Some year ranges are xxxx–xxxx, while most are xxxx–xx; please make consistent. The first six citations include three different styles of dates: please make consistent with date style used in article:

Please give the text a closer going over; these are samples only. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:28, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All has been done. There are calls out to User:Dabomb87 for the script, and User:Jappalang & User:Elcobbola for image review. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 14:02, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Discussion of WP
ACCESS moved to Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/St. Michael's Cathedral, Qingdao/archive3#Access. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:59, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Good organization, thorough info. Nice work on the research! I'm a little nervous about the one-paragraph sections at the start; any chance we could combine "German presence in Qingdao" and "Divine Word Missionaries"? I also feel that the abundance of images — while lovely to look at — make the text feel cramped and tight. Maybe drop one or two to help the article breathe? The prose is generally solid, although there seems to be a reliance on passive voice structures starting with "The". (For example: "The Chinese government's condemnation of the Cultural Revolution culminated in..." and "The change in prevailing political views was favorable...".) I'd like to see the sentence structures more varied, but it's not a deal-breaker. Scartol • Tok 13:36, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Second image opinion
  • File:LocationmapChina3.png: of what source (information, other maps) did this map come from? From what I can tell, the original base (File:China-equirect.png) provides nothing for us to verify how accurate the map is or such. Why not use File:China edcp location map.svg? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jappalang (talk • contribs)
    • The infobox template code provides a map_type= parameter that is interacted with by the geo coordinates parameters to place a dot on it. When you specify map_type=China, that is the map it serves. I decided to avail myself of the infobox map capabilities after a suggestion was made to have a map showing where in China the Cathedral was located, for readers unfamiliar with the area. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 05:44, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • I've replaced the file currently in the template for your suggested file. Hope people watching the 700+ pages it affects don't lynch me! ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 13:40, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • Looks like I did a bad here... I checked further: the template was intended for geometrically projected maps, and I recommended a conic equidistant projection. This templates seem to be a trap at times. Regardless, I made a map (verifiably in the public domain and accurate) for the template so this is resolved. Jappalang (talk) 22:45, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Qingdao Catholic Mission.jpg: something seems a bit weird here; the article's caption calls this structure "Society of the Divine Word Mission Hall in 1902"; the caption in the photo says "Qingdao Steyl Mission (Society of the Divine Word Mission) Catholic Church (or Cathedral even), completed 1902", making it seem that the structure is the article's subject (instead of a different structure). Websites call it "斯泰尔修会圣言会会馆" ("The residence of the Steyler Missionary Society").[3][4][5] The article is also using a Chinese government source that uses the referred Chinese form; the reference does not give an English name, so am I correct to presume that "Mission Hall" is a translation and not the official/common name? From the above, is there some mix up here? Is the subject a Hall (会堂), Church/Cathedral (教堂), or residence of an organization (会馆)? It might help to clarify the situation in the Description parameter on the image page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jappalang (talk • contribs) 12:40, June 22, 2010
    • Good questions. I shot that rephotograph, so maybe I can answer some questions for you about it. Yes, Mission Hall is a translation, and is one of the common English names, the other being mission house (the Germans use missionsstation, which would be "mission station" in English, which is nonstandard, so most people would translate it to "mission hall" or "mission house.") Be advised that the Chinese name is itself a translation from German, which is the source language. The subject (of the photograph) is a large multi-use building that served as a hall, a church, and the residence of the SVD. It was their mission headquarters. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 05:44, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As an aside, I am not certain as well that the photo is of 1902 (I am also presuming here that the date claimed for the photo was lifted from its caption); the date as stated in the caption is of completion (落成) and neither of the photo's publication nor creation. Compare that to the Chinese government source whose photo's caption explicitly claims the date of creation ("The residence of the Steyler Missionary Society in 1902"); We can use the photo on the government site if we are uncertain of the publishing/creation of this uploaded photo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jappalang (talk • contribs) 12:40, June 22, 2010
Was told by the priests that the photo was taken right after the building was completed in 1902, but I don't have proof. Guess maybe I should have asked to remove it from the frame and flipped it over to see if something was written on the back. Too late...there's an ocean between me and that photo now. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 05:44, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well... you can state in the image description what you have written here (it would be kind of improper if someone else writes it there); i.e. "the priests at St. Michael's Cathedral said this photo was taken in right after the building was completed in 1902; the building served several purposes, including hall, church and residence of the mission." or something to that effect. Jappalang (talk) 22:45, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Other than these two, the other images are fine (I have placed a freedom of panorama template on File:Han Xirang Tombstone.jpg just in case the text can be copyrighted; luckily, China allows FoP). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jappalang (talk • contribs) 12:40, June 22, 2010

As Jappalang has been gone since leaving these comments, and therefore unable to reply to mine, I have removed the second image to expedite the closing of this FAC. When Jappalang gets back, with his recommendation we'll either put the image back, or we'll replace it with the other one he mentioned. As of now we have all editors unanimously supporting, so I hope we can pass this FAC. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 01:27, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There is no sig on the above commentary-- will someone pls fix !! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 12:59, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I was in kind of a rush previously. Jappalang (talk) 22:45, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/St._Michael%27s_Cathedral,_Qingdao/archive3&oldid=1138472048"