Template:Did you know nominations/Talia Or

Talia Or

(

)

Talia Or in 2022

... that Talia Or (pictured) recorded the soprano solo of Bach's cantata Wachet auf, ruft uns die Stimme, BWV 140, with the Israel Philharmonic Orchestra conducted by Zubin Mehta in Jerusalem? Source: [1], [2]
- Reviewed: Andriy Kovalchuk

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 13:58, 11 October 2022 (UTC).

While the article meets DYK requirements, a QPQ has been provided, and the hook is cited inline and verified, the hook doesn't seem to be one that is interesting to a broad audience due to reliance on names and terms that general readers may not be familiar with. Personally I thought it was interesting that she's German but was born (and later active) in Israel. Maybe hooks about that angle could work? Personally it seems interesting for her to have such a background. Thus, I'm suggesting the following hooks:

ALT1 ... that German operatic soprano Talia Or (pictured) has performed with the Israel Philharmonic Orchestra?

ALT2 ... that German operatic soprano Talia Or (pictured) was born in Israel?

ALT3 ... that German operatic soprano Talia Or (pictured) was born in Israel and later performed with the Israel Philharmonic Orchestra?

If there is a desire to promote BWV 140, the orchestra, or Mehta, readers could always learn more about that by reading Or's article. They don't necessarily have to be in the hook. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 07:21, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

calling for help --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:30, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

With a bit of time, explaining once more:

I don't like "German", - yes she is based in Germany, from age four to now, but has a strong Jewish identity. "German" - or any nationality - is misleading (and perhaps I change the article).
I don't like "operatic soprano", because while she did some opera, she is stronger in concert (and perhaps I change the article).
All three ALTs say nothing about her art - taste - repertoire - colleagues. Being born somewhere really isn't interesting to me, ever. You should know me for long enough to not even propose such things.
While you may not know Zubin Mehta, there will be readers who will, and it places her in a (high) class.
While you may not know BWV 140, there will be readers who do, and know it comes with two tender love duets, and - as DYK told a while ago - "without a dull bar, technically, emotionally and spiritually of the highest orde". I also like the subtle combination of German music played in Israel with an indian conductor.
I thought long about what to say for a hook, would have loved Verdi, but the recent review wasn't specific about her (and behind a paywall), and I couldn't find an earlier one. I am open to something about operatic Frau Fluth, with a great review, but that festival is not known well.

Summary: you will not change my wish to say something substantial about a subject (not just where she was born), because millions read the Main page , but only thousands go to the article. How about reviewing topics you know better? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:04, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

I used "German operatic soprano" in the hooks because that's how the lede describes her. If you don't want her to be described as "German" or as an "operatic soprano", then why use those terms in the lede? In addition, the hooks are not for you, they are for our readers. Even if they don't appeal to you, they may to a wider audience. When we write hooks, we write with readers' interests in mind, even if they don't necessarily match our own. Hooks musn't necessarily be about the subject's works, but rather be about one or more facts that encourage readers to read the article and learn more. That's why they're called "hooks". In any case, as I proposed new hook facts, I wouldn't be able to give the nomination a final approval anyway, so in any case another reviewer would have been needed to check the hooks. What we could do, as a compromise, is to let an uninvolved editor review all the hooks and leave the final choice in hook to the promoter. Let someone uninvolved make the final decision. Would you be okay with that? If the promoter decides to promote your preference I won't oppose, but ideally I'd like a fresh pair of eyes to review both your hook and mine. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:50, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

I fixed the article, not saying German, not saying operatic. While both are true, they are too narrow for her. We'll see what a new reviewer has to say. If it's an approval of ALT2 I'll talk to them ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:15, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

(Edit conflict)

@Narutolovehinata5: Oh dear, I'm sorry but I find your hooks ALTs 1,2,3 embarrassing. This biography has a European subject, and your hooks are only about the (implied historical-political) relationship between Germany and Jewish people (whether or not you realised that). Ouch. Yes, the article tells the truth about her national background, but you don't need to isolate that factor as clickbait for our majority readership of US citizens. I suggest that you watch her on YouTube to get what she's really about. She has a naturally beautiful and big voice, and is a knockout in front of large crowds. So let's hook about the music, shall we? Storye book (talk) 10:31, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: I agree that it's the music that counts here, because Or is a musician. Re ALT0, Bach is such a household name worldwide, that you have not needed to link it. That tells us something. Bach is certainly not "names and terms that general readers may not be familiar with", as has been suggested above. Also, this is a European article, and most Europeans have heard of Zubin Mehta, one of the greatest European conductors of our times. (OK, Israel itself is an associated state of the European Union, but Mehta performed in effect as a pan-European citizen). We all heard his music and saw him conduct on TV. There is lots of him on YouTube, mostly conducting music that we all recognise (whether orchestral/opera fans or not). I think that ALT0 is an example of an appropriate sort of hook for a European musician, and we are supposed to include on our main page roughly half US-centric hooks and half Rest Of The World hooks.

for ALT0 as explained above. Storye book (talk) 10:31, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

If possible, I'd like to ask for another opinion from another uninvolved reviewer, ideally one who is not a classical music fan, so that a detached and fair review can be given. If they prefer ALT0 and approve only that, I won't oppose, but I think it would be better for another editor to take a look at this also in order to give the interestingness criterion a fair chance. I do want to point out that for me, the idea was that it was unusual that a German musician was born in another country and later became active in that country, and the Israel/Jewish connection was just happenstance and I would have suggested something similar even if she was active in China instead. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:39, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

@Narutolovehinata5: Firstly, I did not write my comments and review on the basis of "classical music" fandom. My area of "fandom" if you like, is early music, using either northern-European singing-style (like early church choral music), or Arabic singing style (which refers back to how plainsong began). to be honest, I can't stand Or's warbling, which throws the middle and higher notes off-key. It may be appropriate for her genre, and her need to both act and project across large crowds and over big orchestras, but it's off-key to me. Nevertheless, I have to be objective in DYK reviews just like everyone else. Just because you yourself put a blanket term of "classical music" over everything which happened musically before, say, 1950, that doesn't give you the right to pronounce on my objectivity. Secondly, whether unintentionally or not, you trod on some very sensitive European toes when you picked on the idea of being both German and Jewish in all three of your hooks. I think, my friend, that you just want to win here? If so, please do not try to do it by insulting my intentions as a reviewer. Storye book (talk) 10:51, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

I don't appreciate the insinuation that a reviewer is biased (especially on account of their interests); however, I'm inclined to uphold the request for a new reviewer to give the final tick, on account of the fact that Storye book was pinged directly to this discussion. I'll leave my own hook preferences out of this. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 10:56, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

with ALT0. Not every hook derives its appeal from universally accessible content. In the interest of brevity, I'd suggest cutting the "BWV 140", but it's not a dealbreaker. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 03:48, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
Thank you, - I left BWV 140 because for some English-speaking readers that might better recognisable than the longish title in German. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:35, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Reopening this; Gerda has requested for the hook to run on 20 November (or thereabouts). Schwede 66 23:20, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Just noting that a new hook is required, as the current one does not satisfy 3a, "interesting to a broad audience". Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 14:11, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Cheers! Newcomers to this discussion may want to review some prior discussion here. I'd like to propose:

ALT4 ... that German operatic soprano Talia Or was called "the undisputed ruler of the scenery"?

Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 14:38, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Yes, I definitely like that one. One point though - I wonder if "scenery" is the right word. I see from the dictionary that the German word can either mean "Gesamtheit dessen, was sich von einem Standort aus dem Blick des Betrachters darbietet" (that which is presented to an observer from a location, which is the English sort of scenery), or it can mean "Bühnenbild", which is like a stage design. I think in English we might call that a "set" rather than "scenery". Do you concur, as a German speaker, @Gerda Arendt:? — Amakuru (talk) 15:42, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Actually, never mind, I see from Merriam Webster that the theatre usage is found in English too. Just my ignorance then. Let's go with the scenery hook if Gerda and others agree. — Amakuru (talk) 15:48, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

I feel like the hook is rather confusing? Like, what scenery? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 19:41, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

A delicate line there is, between hooky and confusing. I can see this being on the wrong side of the line (Storye book suggested the same about a similar proposal). If so, I don't think we can fix it with explanation, due to length and hookiness issues, and we should probably search elsewhere for the hook. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:52, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

@Firefangledfeathers: @Theleekycauldron: @Gerda Arendt:. When I saw the first incarnation of that scenery hook on the DYK errors page, I checked the source in the Talia Or article, in the hope of understanding it. The problem was two things: 1. the source had been translated in a rather obscure manner from the original language (probably some idioms don't translate well), and 2. the hook facts had been taken out of context, so that it needed explanations that would be too long to fit into the hook. So I agree with the above comment about the scenery hook being redundant. But there are other issues going on here, and I think we need to be aware of them:

A. A few reviewers are well-intentioned in trying their best to get really good quirky hooks to bring in lots of clicks for WP's benefit. But I think they need to re-assess the value of those click numbers. We are already getting plenty of click-value out of the top DYK entry which has the picture. The other hooks will always get far fewer clicks, whatever we do. Is it really worth distressing our well-meaning and dedicated nominator by banging on about pleasing a "broad audience" when we could perfectly harmlessly let this hook, and others, go through DYK. The right way to deal with this is at amending-the-rules level, not harassing the nominator.

B. Our nominator/creator is doing her best and has worked hard to create maybe hundreds of articles by now, in the service of WP and the subject at hand. That is the motive of most nominator/creators. We need to lay off a bit, and find a kinder way to deal with this.

C. My aim as a DYK reviewer has always been to try to get DYK noms through the system as quickly and smoothly as possible, without risk of being thrown out of prep, while offering full respect to the nominator/creator. That means that there always has to be some sort of compromise - by me. For me it is not about just pushing for what I want or like. It's about making the system work. Respect and consideration towards nominators/creators comes before numbers of clicks. Maybe I've tried too hard to stand up for that policy of mine, but like you, I'm trying to do my best.

So to sum up, I think we are all attempting to do our best for WP, and we are all probably hurting other people in the process, without helping or improving WP very much at all. I think we need to lay off this template for now, and see what we can do to correct matters at amending-the-rules level. That way, no-one gets hurt, and no-one gets blamed, and who knows - we may end up with a set of rules that we can all use, in peace. Storye book (talk) 22:27, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank you as always for your insight, Storye book :) I would respectfully submit that the discussion at WT:DYK seems to have lost its steam, and will not come to a consensus to allow this nomination forward on its own, barring the materialization of a hook we can all agree on. If you, Gerda Arendt, or another user wish to amend the rules, I believe the time to start that discussion would be sooner other than later. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 07:56, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, theleekycauldron. I have not done that before, so please give us a link to the amend-the-rules page? Thank you. Storye book (talk) 09:19, 5 November 2022 (UTC)