Template:Did you know nominations/Pedro Pablo Caro
- The following discussion 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 Miyagawa (talk) 08:23, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Pedro Pablo Caro
edit
- ... that Pedro Pablo Caro (pictured) celebrated the golden wedding of his professional work as a lawyer in 1952?
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Knuthenborg
- Comment: May provide translations of the sources if requested.
Created by Lester Foster (talk). Self nominated at 21:44, 6 June 2013 (UTC).
New and long enough, sourced, including the hook, allthough only one source seems to deal with him in some depth. And the notability of the person isn't quite clear for me: he is a lawyer, a local judge and seems to have attended one party congress. So, I wonder if artice writer could make clearer what the notability claim is. Regards, Iselilja (talk) 08:27, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
- The subject is part of the Caro family of Pichilemu, his father José María was the first mayor of that commune, his brother Francisco Adriano was one too. José María, his brother, became the first cardinal of the Chilean Catholic Church. He was one of the first professionals that came out of his birth town. His work and life has been covered in detail in the book Biografías de chilenos. And there are several web sources out there (most of them used in the article) on him, and this little piece of local history. If that does not make him notable, I'm not sure what would. Lester Foster (talk | talk) 17:38, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
- Hello, I saw your reply, but I am still not quite convinced about the notability here. A person doesn't normally gain notability from family connection, and local history without some substansial coverage in national sources is also normally exlcuded. I read the entry in "Biografías de chilenos" (which much of the article appears based on), and I still couldn't quite what makes him more notable than any lawyer and judge. But the fact that he is included in the biography on Chileans, might of course indicate that he is regarded important. So, I a a bit unsure here, and need to think about it a little bit. Other reviewers are of course most welcome to chime in, (and people of Chilean background may be better at assessing notability here). Maybe I will put up a question at WP:Chile. Regards, Iselilja (talk) 18:02, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
- Hi. I have added two new sources, one from a 1989 journal and another from a 1923(?) publication from the Chilean Ministry of Justice. Lester Foster (talk | talk) 19:22, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
- My concern here is that the references (including the entry in Biografías de chilenos) mainly seems to confirm that he had a degree in law and was a civil servant. But civil servant at a level a bit below what we normally consider notable for Wikipedia. It's a fine written article with photos, so I would like to promote it, but unfortunately I can't really get away from the concern that this man had a respectable career, but not quite notable for Wikipedia. Regards, Iselilja (talk) 19:53, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
Rather agree with Iselilja here, and have put the article at AFD. If it survives, however, the notability question will have been resolved. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:01, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
- Spanish-language review: I cannot help evaluate reliability because I cannot coax the first source into loading (in fact, attempting to load it bombed out my browser), nor can I determine how the translation error occurred here or what the original source says, but boda de oro literally refers to 50th wedding anniversary, and would not be an accurate translation for his 50th anniversary in the profession of law. A more accurate hook (depending on what the source says) would be something like 50th professional anniversary. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:00, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
- Indeed. However, the source calls the 50th anniversary Caro's "boda de oro profesional", so I don't know if it would be best to leave the literal translation ("golden wedding of his prof...") or a correct English translation ("fiftieth anniversary of his professional..."). Regards, Lester Foster (talk | talk) 20:12, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
- I'm not sure we must follow a literal translation of a source when a colloquialism renders the phrase awkward in English. And then the link to golden wedding in the hook complicates matters. We paraphrase sources in our words on Wikipedia (or at least, we are supposed to) and when we don't do that in translations, it can also be plagiarism (not saying if it is or is not here, since I haven't seen the source): it would not be an inaccurate paraphrase to a) remove the confusing link to golden wedding, and b) just use our own words ("celebrated his 50th anniversary as a lawyer", or some such thing) ... designing hooks is not my area, but paraphrasing to avoid awkward translations is perfectly acceptable. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:27, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
AFD closed as keep, so the notability question is resolved. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:51, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
- IMO, it is entirely valid to call this a "golden anniversary" of his career. When I entered the text into Google Translate, it offered several alternative translations for the "golden wedding" part of the statement, including "golden anniversary" and "golden jubilee". The biographical entry that this is based on is somewhat cryptic, which undoubtedly complicates translation. I changed the article to use the "golden anniversary" wording, and I suggest the following hook wording:
- ALT ... that Pedro Pablo Caro (pictured) celebrated the golden anniversary of his professional career as a lawyer in 1952?
I'm not at all convinced of the notability of the topic, but it's long enough and new enough, it passed AFD, it's thoroughly footnoted, and the hook source is verified. Image license looks OK, based mostly on the notes on the image from which this image is cropped. --Orlady (talk) 05:45, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
