Talk:Index Thomisticus

A fact from Index Thomisticus appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 16 January 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the Index Thomisticus covered 10,631,980 words in fifty-six volumes and took an estimated one million hours to create?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2021/January. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Index Thomisticus.

Wikipedia

Catholicism Low‑importance

Index Thomisticus is within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism, an attempt to better organize and improve the quality of information in articles related to the Catholic Church. For more information, visit the project page.CatholicismWikipedia:WikiProject CatholicismTemplate:WikiProject CatholicismCatholicism articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Catholicism task list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : see Draft articles
Assess : see Category:Unassessed Catholicism articles; Category:Unknown-importance Catholicism articles
Cleanup : Blessed Virgin Mary (see the talk page)
Collaborate : Invitation template needed, see Category:WikiProject invitation templates
Copyedit : Cuthbert Tunstall
Expand : Angelus; Roman Catholicism in Kosovo; Bishop Adolph John Paschang; Cum sæpe accidere; Altar Society; American Board of Catholic Missions; Bernard Häring
NPOV : Americanism (heresy); Ensoulment
Photo : see Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of Catholicism
Stubs : see Category:Stub-Class Catholicism articles; Category:Catholic Church stubs
Update : Peer review; John Aloysius Maguire
Verify : Archdiocese of Glasgow; Archbishop of Westminster; Bishop; Saint Mungo; Sanctification; Westminster Cathedral
Other : Watch recent changes for Catholicism articles

Literature Low‑importance

	Literature portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Literature 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.LiteratureWikipedia:WikiProject LiteratureTemplate:WikiProject LiteratureLiterature articles
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 Yoninah (talk) 17:30, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that the Index Thomisticus covered 10,631,980 words in fifty-six volumes and took an estimated one million hours of work to create? Source: The texts indexed contain 10,631,980 running words . . . forty-nine volumes . . . an additional seven volumes one cannot help but notice the 56 volumes of the Index Thomisticus it took about . . . 1 million human hours to finish

Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Hyde Park pet cemetery

Created by Eddie891 (talk). Self-nominated at 17:53, 27 December 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Comment. Thanks for the nomination. I will pick this up. Ktin (talk) 07:34, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[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: Done.

Overall: Plagiarism checks look good. Article meets eligibility criteria for DYK (i.e. size / newness). Hook sourcing - preview of paper on JSTOR validates the ~10M words. The NYT article validates the million human hours. The Project Muse website is behind a hard paywall, but, the abstract has some inkling of 56 volumes mentioned, will go with it. Assuming good faith overall for these sources behind access controls. QPQ done. I have two comments that I will paste below for your response. Thanks. Ktin (talk) 03:30, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, @Eddie891:, are you open to a rewrite of the hook. Nothing major. As a reader, I found this hook a tad hard to grasp. Can you start with a word or two describing what Index Thomistic is? Follow that up what you mean by covered. Follow that up with why that number is huge by way of comparison with something that the lay person can relate / compare the volume to. E.g. The digital humanities project Index Thomistic which aimed to <insert aim here> took <volume of effort> <comparable to this effort / volume>.

Similarly, on the article, some amount of rewrites for a lay reader to follow along will be good. Hopefully this feedback is helpful. Please let me know if you'd want me to be more specific. Cheers Ktin (talk) 03:30, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Ktin, I've given the article a copyedit that will hopefully make it easier to understand but I think the most helpful thing to do here is have links to concordance (publishing) and lemmatisation so the reader can click on them if they aren't sure of the meaning. I kinda disagree that the hook needs to be clarified, because the point of a hook is to hook the readers interest, and have them asking things like "What is this? And why is it important?", and clicking on the article. I'd argue that 10 million words and one million hours of work would seem big in any context, no comparison needed. I'm also not sure where the comparison would fit in the article, as it is essentially trivia. There are possible alternate hooks or phrasings, such as

ALT1 ... that IBM sponsored a Jesuit priest as he developed one of the largest printed works of the 20th century?

or any number of mixings of the 10 million words/70,000 pages/56 volumes/one million hours/early e-book statistics. I'd be happy to clarify anything in the article if you could be more specific, and I don't maintain that I'm right to not want to clarify the hook, I'm open to changing my mind. Let me know what you think. Thanks again for the review and wishing you and yours a happy new year. Cheers, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 21:51, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note. Prefer ALT0 to ALT1. Marking it as approved. Cheers and Good luck. Ktin (talk) 08:05, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]