Wikipedia

Template:Did you know nominations/Stephen Gunzenhauser

< Template:Did you know nominations
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 Aoidh (talk) 16:35, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

Stephen Gunzenhauser

(
)

5x expanded by Thriley (talk) and Tim riley (talk). Nominated by Thriley (talk) at 03:15, 3 October 2022 (UTC).

  • Comment: Article is technically still classified as a stub somewhere, but I'll review the other bits first Kingoflettuce (talk) 22:23, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
Would be willing to pass this bearing in mind the offline sources, once the stub listing is addressed--and maybe there's something more interesting than being 5th in something? Kingoflettuce (talk) 22:24, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
I also looked: it's not a stub, but I miss references for the recordings, and the ref for his retirement - the one for the hook - I can't see. Also: you should link the Violin Concerto by Brahms, not the composer. This is one example, - probably most works he recorded have an article. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:22, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
@Thriley and Kingoflettuce: I was considering proposing a hook based on the claim that he is Delaware's "First Cultural Ambassador", but it seems that it might not be the case? It's also not exactly clear what "First Cultural Ambassador" means from the sources and pages I've found. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 07:04, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
  • I like the fact that he is the 5th most recorded. Seems interesting and “hooky” to me. Thriley (talk) 12:26, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
    Frankly it does sound a bit pedestrian. Being the fifth-most in something is not necessarily as eye-catching as being 1st/2nd/3rd without addition context. Maybe we need a new direction here? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:28, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
    I think that fifth-most is a surprise for someone you never heard about. Caught my attention immediately. However, I can't see the source for the that, nor do I see references for the recordings, as said above. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:24, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
    I'd opine that while this could be considered a pass for the consensus of DYK's interestingness criteria, I'd warn Thriley that my best guess (being very familiar with the stats pages) is it wouldn't fare overly well on the Main Page. However, interestingness aside, I think the more salient problem is that the cited source isn't nearly reliable enough for the claim it's making. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 22:21, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
    Agree, so why not say something specific about what he conducted, or how, instead of just quantity? (.. and add sources) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:33, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
    If I may be so blunt, I have significant reservations re: the notion that that'll improve the catchiness of the hook. If you think it's worthwhile for other reasons, do go for it :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 09:11, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
  • On questions of sourcing and interestingness, I don't see a clear consensus to run this hook – Thriley, would you have another suggestion? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 00:32, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
    Maybe ALT1 "... that Stephen Gunzenhauser was the music director of the Lancaster Symphony Orchestra for 40 years?" Thriley (talk) 15:14, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
    @Tim riley: Any ideas? Thriley (talk) 15:15, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
    Hmm, not a big fan – it's impressive, but a little too straightforward? Doesn't leave much to be answered. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 01:40, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
  • @Thriley: without clear consensus for a hook, I don't see a path forward for this nomination, so I'm gonna move to close. If another hook is found before closing, I'd be happy to consider it. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 06:17, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
    Let's not forget that the discography would also need to be referenced. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:19, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
FWIW, the discography already has a note at the bottom saying it's cited to this link. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:16, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
I'm sorry: I don't understand what that link shows. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 00:22, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
I have a feeling the link was incomplete and was probably supposed to be this, which gives a more complete discography of works he's been involved in. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:25, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

I still like the initial hook. It has a fun hooky quality. What readers would actually know that fact? I feel like classical music isn’t being treated fairly here. If this were another musical genre, I feel we might be so dismissive of the initial hook. @Gerda Arendt: do you still like the primary hook? Thriley (talk) 00:26, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

I would disagree slightly with this assessment. I mean, we did just recently have a discussion about concerns about there being too many Taylor Swift hooks on DYK, and it's not like hooks about pop music don't get rejected either. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:31, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
I don’t think that’s comparable though. I guess this would be like saying (I’m making this up) that Phil Spector is the 5th most prolific pop-music producer. Thriley (talk) 00:44, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
In my opinion that would also be a rather pedestrian hook without additional context. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:03, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
I’d say it is an interesting accomplishment. I’d be curious how many clicks it would get. Thriley (talk) 02:16, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
Why don't we make an experiment: we run one now, and the other the same day in the week the same time in four weeks, and ask readers or look at the stats? - If I was there reviewer, I'd say I don't care much about quantity but the nominator's wish is more important, and approve the original. - I am happy to see that the link was not not what I needed because I was afraid that was another of my failures to understand. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:21, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

It is frustrating that something like “that conductor Stephen Gunzenhauser eats only purple jelly beans on days he performs” would probably get featured, but stating that he is the 5th most recorded is not. I don’t see why the hook shouldn’t be featured, other than the fact that classical music hooks don’t always inspire major interest. Thriley (talk) 17:48, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

I certainly understand, Thriley – I'm really sorry about the fuss. For what it's worth, pop music hooks don't perform very well at DYK either – I imagine that the proposed Phil Spector hook would not succeed based on star power or storytelling quality. But the original hook currently has a sourcing problem, so even if we wanted to run Gerda's test (which I'm not closed to), the hook still needs to pass muster. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 22:03, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
In the future, I'd recommend going to WT:DYK if you disagree with the closure of your nomination – a direct reversion comes with the risk of causing a bit more tension than necessary. Plus, there's always the chance that more eyes on the nomination produce a viable hook or shift consensus your way. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 22:04, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

@Theleekycauldron: Sorry for getting a bit carried away. I think I lost focus of what actually is the issue. Bringing the jelly beans out was going too far! Thriley (talk) 04:32, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

What about: ALT2... that Stephen Gunzenhauser started a classical music festival after being inspired by the gaslights on the Main Street of Wellsboro, Pennsylvania? Thriley (talk) 04:36, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
Well, I have a cheekier suggestion :)
I prefer ALT2a. Both link to actual gas lamps (a statement which would have a certain meta-humour if they didn't), but I think it's okay to give a momentary impression. It's not a BLP violation, we're not saying he's a gaslighter. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 06:19, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
I'd actually prefer ALT2b as a compromise since ALT2a might be prone to misinterpretation. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:30, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
You're telling me that we can't gaslight readers in a hook about gaslighting? Fiiiiine :P we can go with ALT2b if you'd like. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 11:07, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

I like a fun hook, but I feel sort of bad that we are making a gaslighting joke about a living person. It’s not as fun, but could we go with: ALT3: ... that the gas lighting of Wellsboro, Pennsylvania inspired Stephen Gunzenhauser to start a classical music festival? Thriley (talk) 00:08, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

  • For what it's worth, Thriley, I think the hook is pretty careful to not say that Gunzenhauser was himself gaslit or a gaslighter. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 03:15, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
    I guess it’s also that I really like the idea of a little town in Pennsylvania being on the front page. Thriley (talk) 03:59, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
    • I think it's great when we get to put little towns on the Main Page; speaking with my promoter hat on, it's not as uncommon as you might think. But when we do, I think it should mean something significant for the hook. In the preps, I regularly trim out information that isn't important to understanding the story or punch of the hook; I'm not sure what special purpose it's serving here. That said, I'll let someone else have the final call on this hook, if the other ALT2s are still up for consideration as well. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 10:46, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

 Reviewing... Flibirigit (talk) 22:38, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy @Thriley:, I will post a full review by tomorrow at the latest. The introduction is too short as is, and makes the article look like a work in progress. A good introduction will have at least some mention of each section in the article, except the personal life section. Flibirigit (talk) 22:46, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: No - ?
  • Interesting: Yes
QPQ: Done.

Overall: The readable prose was expanded more than fivefold within seven days prior to nomination. Length and sourcing are adequate. The article is neutral in tone, and no plagiarism was detected. There are currently no images used in the article, although an image of a gas light from Category:Wellsboro,_Pennsylvania may be appropriate. QPQ requirement is complete. I have struck ALT0 as not interesting, and per the above comments. I don't see an ALT1 proposed. ALT2, ALT2a, ALT2b and ALT3 are all interesting enough. Each of those hooks is verified with the source, but a more-detailed citation template is needed beyond a title and a URL. Overall, this nomination is in good shape. It only needs a better citation template for the DYK hook, and an expanded lead section. Please see my comment above for the introduction. Flibirigit (talk) 23:25, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

  • @Flibirigit: Thank you! The lead is now expanded. Thriley (talk) 19:52, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
    I have filled in the missing attribution details on the citation template which supports the hook. Flibirigit (talk) 21:16, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
    Each of the three citations within the "Recordings" section are problematic. The citation for "He is the 5th most recorded American conductor", redirects to Google. The incomplete citation template only states "TownLively" which gives no indication whether the source is reliable. The other two citations in the section do not have proper citation templates. Please complete the details and insert a recent access-date field. Flibirigit (talk) 21:34, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
    I was able to verify the Town Lively page today, and updated the citation template. Flibirigit (talk) 15:02, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
    I fixed the remaining issues. Nomination now good to go. Flibirigit (talk) 02:13, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Stephen_Gunzenhauser&oldid=1137506419"