The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify it. 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
Orlady (
talk) 18:53, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
I did a partial review. I don't like the first hook -- "appropriate" is an opinion, not an objective fact. The article and hook could say that a critic said he sang it appropriately, but that hook would not interest me. The ALT hook is supported by at least one cited source, but it's not in the article. --
Orlady (
talk) 13:36, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
As for appropriate: perhaps I am lacking the right term, "passende Verzierungen" is a heading in the review, referring to the proper (?) ornamentation - embellishment - of the simple musical line written. It was expected by the singer, not a matter of opinion. I would prefer the ALT as well, but don't know how to include the very special fact of one duet - the only true duet of the whole piece - in the article. It's for alto and tenor, the alto was Scholl, so it's kind of implied. It's also supported by the photo in the source showing this only duet. --
Gerda Arendt (
talk) 13:47, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
Hmm... I agree with you that "appropriate" is a reasonable translation of "passende." I imagine that "passende Verzierungen" has a meaning that is not communicated by the literal translations of the component words (with "Verzierungen" corresponding to the topic of
Ornament (music)). As for the duet, it's clear that these two sang it, but the photo doesn't have a caption indicating who is singing the duet. The critic who wrote
this review seems to have been impressed with Cordes' performance, but does not mention the duet. If the critic's comments are included in the article or hook, I think they should be identified as what a critic said, not as fact. For a hook, what do you think about this one:
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify it. 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
Orlady (
talk) 18:53, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
I did a partial review. I don't like the first hook -- "appropriate" is an opinion, not an objective fact. The article and hook could say that a critic said he sang it appropriately, but that hook would not interest me. The ALT hook is supported by at least one cited source, but it's not in the article. --
Orlady (
talk) 13:36, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
As for appropriate: perhaps I am lacking the right term, "passende Verzierungen" is a heading in the review, referring to the proper (?) ornamentation - embellishment - of the simple musical line written. It was expected by the singer, not a matter of opinion. I would prefer the ALT as well, but don't know how to include the very special fact of one duet - the only true duet of the whole piece - in the article. It's for alto and tenor, the alto was Scholl, so it's kind of implied. It's also supported by the photo in the source showing this only duet. --
Gerda Arendt (
talk) 13:47, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
Hmm... I agree with you that "appropriate" is a reasonable translation of "passende." I imagine that "passende Verzierungen" has a meaning that is not communicated by the literal translations of the component words (with "Verzierungen" corresponding to the topic of
Ornament (music)). As for the duet, it's clear that these two sang it, but the photo doesn't have a caption indicating who is singing the duet. The critic who wrote
this review seems to have been impressed with Cordes' performance, but does not mention the duet. If the critic's comments are included in the article or hook, I think they should be identified as what a critic said, not as fact. For a hook, what do you think about this one: