- 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) 19:46, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Eileen Sharp
edit
Eileen Sharp, 1922
- ... that only a year after joining the D'Oyly Carte Opera Company at age 21, Eileen Sharp (pictured) was promoted to be the company's principal mezzo soprano?
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/James Larratt Battersby (4 articles reviewed, using QPQ#1 of 4)
Created by Ssilvers (talk) and Jack1956 (talk). Nominated by Pgallert (talk) at 09:09, 19 November 2015 (UTC).
The article is long enough, nominated timely, and I found no copyvio. QPQ was done. The photo is public domain. The hook is interesting but there are problems with its citation. Per DYK rules, all the information in the hook needs to be specifically stated in the article. However, two facts in the hook are only implied or deduced, rather than being directly stated: "age 21" and "principal mezzo". "Age 21": We could do the math, but if it is to be in the hook, it should be specified in the text as the age when she joined the company. "Principal mezzo": the article just says she was "promoted to these parts"; it does not state that she became the principal mezzo. Do we imply it from the roles she played? Or do we imply it from the fact that Catherine Ferguson used to play these roles? Actually we have no source for the fact that Ferguson was the principal mezzo. The pinafore.www reference describes them both as "soubrettes" which is not the same thing. The other possible citation is the offline Rollins & Witts reference; does it call her the principal mezzo? If so please state it specifically and reference it. These problems are easily fixable by some editing of the article, and once they are fixed the nomination will be fine. MelanieN (talk) 01:07, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
- MelanieN, I have made these edits to address your comment above. Rollins & Witts is an encyclopedia of the company's performances during all these years and makes this clear. The fact is also mentioned in this source. Is the entry OK now? All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 07:19, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
