Talk:Anna Nekhames

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 Dylan620 talk 20:58, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that coloratura soprano Anna Nekhames performed first in the Bolshoi Theatre's children's chorus, and in 2023 at the Oper Frankfurt as Venus and Chief of the Gepopo in Ligeti's Le Grand Macabre? Source: several
  • Reviewed: Self-Portrait as a Tahitian

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 09:49, 24 November 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Anna Nekhames; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

• The article is long enough and was new enough at the time of the nomination and I did not detect any close paraphrasing. A QPQ has been provided. While she undoubtedly has had an impressive career, the currently-proposed hook probably only really appeals to a very specialist audience, opera fans who are familiar with the names involved.

I'd like to see more expansion to the article (right now it's just barely above the 1500 character mark), ideally about her personal life or interests if such information could be found. I would have proposed a hook myself had anything stood out, but the article is basically a filmography in prose form and doesn't really give any "hooky" information that would appeal to non-opera fans. If none can be found, then unfortunately the nomination could be failed for lack of a suitable hook. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:27, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

I will happily expand but only next year, because of travel and company until then. I disagree with your evaluation of interestingness. The hook could stop at Bolshoi, and readers to whom that name means nothing would really be mislead. Everything else is extra. Any reader can understand that Gepopo is an allusion to Gestapo, and can get interested in why one person is both Venus and that character in the same piece. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:18, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

• Just asking for an update on the status of the expansion, including if anything about her personal life or non-opera life could be found. If there's nothing else to be found the nomination will unfortunately probably be failed for lack of a suitable hook/hook fact. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:21, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

  I explained above about the interestingness of hook parts, and beg you to reply to those. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:19, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

To answer your questions: I do not think that the Bolshoi significance will be obvious to non-classical music fans or broader readership, and the "Gepopo = Gestapo" connection is probably not going to be obvious either and assuming that readers will get the connection is probably overestimating their knowledge of the relevant subjects. As such, I don't think any of those elements or suggestions are suitable for hooks. I'm sure performing at the Bolshoi Theatre is a very big accomplishment, but in terms of hookiness to non-specialist audiences, readers may not get it. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:40, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

I try to explain (although I have little time):

• I don't believe any hook has to be understand by all readers the same way, - with different levels of background, that's impossible to start with.
• I didn't mention Bolshoi to make understood big accomplishments, but three other things: early achiever, choir background, coming from Russia.
• Not mentioned before: I believe that a title such as Le Grand Macabre is interesting, period.
• Ligeti, whose centenary was last year, will be a name people may recognize who just listen to daily news.
• Even if not, I trust that our readers are curious to find out.

Again many words for the basic: "Did you know ...?" should bring things that readers don't yet know, but may want to know. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:03, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Considering role hooks have consistently been among the least-viewed hooks on DYK (and this is backed by statistics, you can look at the stats posted by Theleekycauldron about it), I very much doubt that readers are curious to find out at least with these kinds of hooks. This of course does not mean that readers are wholly uninterested in opera performers, and I'm sure with the right hooks they will be encouraged to read about them and click, but it has been proven with statistics that hooks that primarily focus on their performances or roles underperform.

I have to stress this again, given that it has been a recurring theme among your nominations and work: you seem to be assume too much about the average readers' familiarity with classical music. They would definitely know who Mozart or Beethoven are, they would be far less likely to know who Ligeti is, and as someone who reads the world news on a daily basis he is not someone who reads the news daily is likely to recognize since his centenary came and went with relatively little mainstream news coverage. You have to understand that almost all readers of the main page don't have as much knowledge or background in classical music as you do, and thus what seems interesting or obvious to you may not be the case to others.

Making the hooks very reliant on specialist knowledge means they appeal mainly to classical music fans but this comes at the expense of appeal to general readers. As has been seen with the viewership statistics for several of your hooks over the years, this desire has not had the desired outcomes. This can be seen with how they almost always underperform among readers, an observation made by multiple DYK regulars; there are some exceptions, particularly if it's an image hook, but these are not the norm. Remember that not too long ago we had a whole RfC regarding the broad audience criterion, which was the result of one of your own nominations, and in fact the change in language (which was supported by most participants) was intended to prevent cases like this where the hooks were targeted only towards a niche and not the non-specialists.

This of course, does not mean that classical music hooks are not allowed, far from it, and I will be the first to defend your hooks if anyone ever suggest banning opera from the main page, but hooks need to have broad horizons and not assume too much from readers. They need to be easily understandable even to someone who knows nothing. Requiring hooks to only target a niche, when DYK's mission has always been to appeal to broader audiences, goes against the whole point of DYK. If there were two hook possibilities about an Italian opera singer named Mario Rossi, what do you think would readers appreciate more and thus want to know more about Rossi: the fact that he was the star of an opera that they never heard of before, or that prior to starting his opera career he served the Italian Army? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:18, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

• Our guidelines both state that hooks must be likely to be perceived as unusual or intriguing by readers with no special knowledge or interest, and that nominators and writers should not assume everyone worldwide is familiar with your subject. The currently proposed hook, unfortunately, does not meet either of these. Given that there really doesn't seem to be anything in the article that is hooky to a non-specialist audience, regretfully I am marking the nomination for closure for a lack of a suitable hook. If there was one, I would have proposed one myself, and I'm still open to suggestions, but at the article's current state it just seems like a bad fit for DYK and is probably one of those cases where there's simply no hook to be found. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:18, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Should we a) discuss that on WT:DYK, or b) discuss the guidelines, or c) (low-key) I ask for a different reviewer? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:30, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

I would really suggest just letting this go. Not every article is a good fit for DYK and not every article has suitable hook facts; I can personally attest to this myself in which I have created or written multiple articles but did not nominate them for DYK simply because there was nothing there that was suitable as a hook. Take for example Yurina Uchiyama, which I nominated for DYK and which ultimately failed. Just like Uchiyama's article wasn't meant to be for DYK, other articles are also like that, and Nekhames's may be one of those cases. I can bring up multiple other similar examples from other editors, showing there is no shame in letting a DYK nomination fail, as well as proving the point that not all Wikipedia articles are meant for DYK, something that other DYK regulars like Epicgenius or Trainsandotherthings can attest to. Asking for a discussion regarding the interestingness criterion is almost certainly a non-starter considering how strong consensus was at the RfC. Again, as much as it would be disappointing, I would highly suggest you either withdraw this nomination or let it be failed and focus your efforts on other people and subjects who may have better hook potential. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:22, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

I gave you three options. Here this very young singer performed one of the hardest roles, this double role in Le Grand Macabre, in the German premiere awaited since 1958 of the 1996 revised version, and I didn't mention any of that because of you, as seeemingly too opera-focused, and you think it's not interesting. Just say option a-b-c please. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:07, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

If I were you, I would choose A. Again, I'm not denying that she has had an impressive career, and I am not downplaying her achievements or efforts. The issue here, as has often been the case, is that the hook is too reliant on specialist knowledge to be interesting to a broad audience. The facts you gave, while undoubtedly impressive, are very specialist: only someone deeply versed in the realm of classical music would get and appreciate the context, and again, not all of our readers are like that. It is right there in the DYK criteria, under WP:DYKINT: The hook should be likely to be perceived as unusual or intriguing by readers with no special knowledge or interest. Hooks that do not meet that criterion, regardless of subject (this applies not just to opera), can and should be rejected. And I am going to be honest here: a person who is not well-verse in classical music like you is unlikely to find the hook unusual or intriguing. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:22, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Well, the consensus at WT:DYK is overwhelmingly against the hook, even if the first two-thirds are removed. The nomination should probably be rejected. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:22, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

ALT1 ... that the Russian coloratura soprano Anna Nekhames performed the double role of Venus and Chief of the Gepopo in Ligeti's Le Grand Macabre in the 2023 production at the Oper Frankfurt? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:07, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

To recap, in the WT:DYK discussion, there was no consensus in favor of this hook. Indeed, Fram objected to the wording proposed above. There were two other proposals, one by Tamzin and one by Remsense (and since modified by me), which I am presenting here for reference:

ALT2 ... that Anna Nekhames played the dual roles of the goddess Venus and a chief spy in Le Grand Macabre with coloratura acrobatics that "seem[ed] to go beyond the vocal limits"?

ALT3 ... that soprano Anna Nekhames had to be "acrobatic" in her dual role as both Venus and the Chief of the Gepopo in a 2023 production of Le Grand Macabre?

Based on the discussion, and given how there seems to be more support for either suggestion than ALT1 even if there wasn't exactly consensus for either, it appears that the nomination will end up being closed, and there is some support from some editors regarding this, unless either ALT2 or ALT3 is agreed on. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:07, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

I objected to ALT3 actually as being factually incorrect (she didn't "had to be" acrobatic, she performed vocal acrobatics). I objected to the to me weird word sequence "coloratura acrobatics" in Alt2, and in the article this has been changed to "acrobatic coloratura". I objected to the original hook, not against Alt1, apart from the fact that it is an utterly boring "singer performed" hook. If used, I would change Alt1 to "the dual role of" though, as it is a standard "double", not two separate roles she for some reason combined. Fram (talk) 09:20, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, Fram, I was not aware of the slight difference in meaning. I am not in favour of ALT3 as "acrobatic" is downright misleading there.

ALT1a ... that the Russian coloratura soprano Anna Nekhames performed the dual role of Venus and Chief of the Gepopo in Ligeti's Le Grand Macabre in the 2023 production at the Oper Frankfurt? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:46, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

ALT1 or ALT1a have the same issue as the original hook: it's not really interesting to a broad audience, basically being a hook that says that this person did their job. Indeed, if I am reading this correctly (please correct me if I'm wrong Fram), this is the actual objection. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:49, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I don't think that we have to teach our readers - in the little space DYK offers - that Venus is a goddess, and opera singers don't only "play", and I believe that the Gepopo-Gestapo allusion is stronger than "chief spy":

• ALT2a ... that Anna Nekhames performed the dual role of Venus and Chief of the Gepopo in Ligeti's Le Grand Macabre with "acrobatic" coloratura that seemed to go beyond the vocal limits?

I prefer ALT1a as more factual. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:56, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

I can approve ALT2a if the other editors who had concerns with the other hook proposals agree to it. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:05, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

To simplify things, I have struck the original hook, ALT1a (because there are several objections, to which I will add my own, about a hook that mentions a performance of roles at an opera house), and ALT3 per Fram's concerns. My problem with ALT2a is that it takes ALT2's quoted "seem[ed] to go beyond the vocal limits" and leaves the text intact while removing the quotes, which is problematic on a number of levels for a decent translation of the review in question (thus requiring quotes), not least of which is that it ignores the "almost" (the German word "fast") in the translation of that particular part of the review ("scheint fast die stimmlichen Grenzen zu sprengen"). In English, we would omit "the" in this situation as well: "vocal limits" rather than "the vocal limits". Perhaps a cleaner version, honoring the wording of that review and the "Koloraturakrobatik" (coloratura acrobatics) of the other one, can be made:

• ALT2b: ... that Anna Nekhames performed the dual role of Venus and Chief of the Gepopo in Ligeti's Le Grand Macabre with "coloratura acrobatics" that "almost seem[ed] to exceed vocal limits"?

Translation is an art, and I may have missed some nuance; doing a bit of fine tuning may be appropriate to my proposal. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:05, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: Are you okay with ALT2b? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:34, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

BlueMoonset, thank you for trying. Narutolovehinata5, define okay. It is acceptable. I don't see why we have to be so particular about quotation when what is quoted is translated. I also don't see why we would feed our readers two opinions when we could serve them the basic facts where and when this happened. So, trying one or the other, the latter one said by more than one reviewer, and "almost" and "seemed" seem to carry some redundancy if not conflict of meaning, - how can something "almost seem"?

ALT2c: ... that according to a reviewer, Anna Nekhames performed the dual role of Venus and Chief of the Gepopo in Ligeti's Le Grand Macabre with "coloratura acrobatics"?

ALT2d: ... that Anna Nekhames performed the dual role of Venus and Chief of the Gepopo in Ligeti's Le Grand Macabre with coloraturas that seemed to exceed vocal limits?

To me, her name alone seems interesting, the title of the piece seems interesting, and the dual role seems interesting, - and we have only four other articles of singers who were mentioned performing it (Susanna Andersson, Ilana Davidson, Sara Hershkowitz, Audrey Luna), not "doing their job" but creating something unique and outstanding. We'd have room for facts such as that this happened in 2023 (Ligeti's centenary year as some readers will recall), at Oper Frankfurt (again opera house of the year 2023, as 2022, as several times before), programmatically staged by the new musical director (as his second production after Mozart's Figaro). Our article about the opera mentioned that before it happened, and not by me. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:21, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

BlueMoonset is right. The quotations are needed for best results, and also for attribution purposes. As for what I meant by "fine", I was asking if you are okay with me approving it, because right now, I am only considering approving ALT2c. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:26, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

I have answered. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:51, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

I don't see how you couldn't approve ALT2c also, which has the quotation marks, but avoids the awkwardness of "almost seem[ed]", which then says what's inherent in the role, - if you can't perform that miracle you can't do it, - it's nothing special about her, but every singer of the role. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:19, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

ALT2b approved. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 03:52, 15 January 2024 (UTC)