Talk:Homeric laughter

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: rejected by reviewer, closed by Theleekycauldron talk 17:32, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

Lovis Corinth: The Homeric Laughter, 1909 (Munich, Bavarian State Painting Collections)

• ... that Homeric laughter delves into the comedic elements of ancient Greek literature, uncovering the role of humor and laughter in the works of Homer, and shedding light on the intriguing interactions between the gods and mortals in the epic tales of the Iliad and the Odyssey? Source:
  • Reviewed:

Created by Infinity Knight (talk). Self-nominated at 12:17, 2 November 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Homeric laughter; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

• Comment: Infinity Knight, your first hook doesn't appear in the article and is hard to parse. Would you consider adding an ALT hook or two? Also, the hook does not need to summarize the subject of the article (Some do, but it's not required). Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 02:44, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
  • Certainly, Rjjiii! Here are some alternative hooks:
  • ALT1 ... that Homeric laughter delves into humor in the Iliad and the Odyssey, shedding light on divine interactions between gods and mortals?
  • ALT2 ... that Homeric laughter uncovers humor in Homer's epics, revealing divine laughter in ancient Greek mythology?
  • Infinity Knight (talk) 04:11, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

There's nothing surprising, interesting to a broad audience, or hookworthy in these hooks, since it is to be expected that literature contains humorous elements. "Homeric laughter" is also not an actor that is capable of "delving" or "uncovering" anything. (t · c) buidhe 09:31, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Humor in Homeric epic poems is unexpected because these narratives primarily revolve around serious and heroic themes, focusing on heroic deeds, battles, and complex human and divine interactions, making the inclusion of comedy and laughter a surprising and intriguing element.

• • ALT3 ... that Homeric epic poems, known for their serious themes, unexpectedly feature comedy and laughter, adding an intriguing dimension to their narratives?

Infinity Knight (talk) 03:41, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

• As a drive-by comment, shouldn't this article be at Homeric laughter, without the capital? The rest of the article doesn't use it as a proper noun. Even this nomination is located at the lowercase version. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:13, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

I'm not totally sure about that. Right now, we've got links leading to the same page with both capitalized and non-capitalized names. Initially, the article title didn't have a capital letter, but "Homeric Laughter" might be seen as a proper noun, like a specific name or title, and those usually get the capitalization treatment. The OED dictionary, they don't bother with the capital letter in 'laughter', however describe it as "a noun .... created within English through compounding". Infinity Knight (talk) 02:15, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

You can have compound nouns that aren't proper nouns though, take "high school" for example. The title of the article should be consistent with the text, which should be consistent with itself. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:06, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

It looks like they capitalize the 'L' in 'Laughter' for titles—check Halliwell's "Greek Laughter". But in the text, they don't really fuss about it. Infinity Knight (talk) 03:32, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Doesn't that suggest that they're capitalizing it there because of title case, not because it's being treated as a proper noun? ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:50, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

I'm on the same page. It appears to be more of a descriptive term. Without a specific and widely acknowledged context, it isn't considered a proper noun. Infinity Knight (talk) 20:43, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

• Comments:
  • See the discussion on the article creator's talkpage about apparent AI generated content in this and other articles Infinity Knight has created. Pinging @Doug Weller:
  • That apart, this article is a mess! The definition for "Homeric laughter" given in the lede sentence (humorous elements found in ancient Greek literature) is unsupported WP:OR afaict; the definition provided in the etymology section (inextinguishable or irrepressible mirth) is correct and the rest of the article appears to be a WP:COATRACK to hang general discussion of humor in Homeric/Greek literature on that thin dictionary entry.

Abecedare (talk) 16:57, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

• • I dropped huge chunks into two AI detectors which said they were AI generated. This shouldn't be allowed.Doug Weller talk 18:05, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
    • Is there a policy against it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:4FBB:D000:2CEB:DBB7:9119:8A4A (talk) 23:56, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
      • Who are you? An IP with only one edit asking this question looks like someone logged out. Doug Weller talk 07:30, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
      • According to my understanding, Wikipedia's content policy emphasizes accurately representing reliable sources with a neutral point of view. When engaging in rephrasing, it is essential to adhere to content policies, including maintaining verifiability, avoiding original research, providing proper citations, refraining from synthesizing information, and preventing plagiarism. Infinity Knight

(talk) 08:59, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

• • • • • And even this is written using AI. And it's not in anyway adequate for someone who isn't checking their sources. No wonder you are now blocked indefinitely. Article needs to be fixed now. Doug Weller talk 11:39, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
• Per WP:IAR/WP:TNT, I have redirected the flawed AI-written essay to the wiktionary entry for Homeric laughter. Anyone is welcome to change the target, speedy-delete the article, or move it to draft space if they plan to rewrite it in compliance with WP:N and WP:V. Any idea as to what should be done with this DYK nomination? Pinging @Buidhe, Doug Weller, and ScottishFinnishRadish:. Abecedare (talk) 13:34, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

  I'm not super familiar with dyk protocols, but a decline seems reasonable. No need to waste any more time than necessary on this. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:38, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

  Agreed and am on same boat. So will let someone more familiar with the DYK templates etc close it formally. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 15:43, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

  @Abecedare and ScottishFinnishRadish: Just saw this, I can take it from here :) normally, I'd say that an article that's this level of broken hovers between a quickfail and "let's see if the nominator wants to take a whack at fixing it" – reviewer's discretion – but given that the nominator isn't around to fix anything and that the article's been redirected, I'm happy to close up shop. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 17:32, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

References

AI-generated

While the concern about the article containing inaccurate claims or fictitious references is valid, there is no supporting evidence for it. Infinity Knight (talk) 09:22, 23 November 2023 (UTC)