Template:Did you know nominations/Albert Methfessel
- 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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:39, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Albert Methfessel
[edit].jpg)
Albert Methfessel as illustrated in 1864
... that German composer Albert Methfessel acquired a Ph.D on his 80th birtday?Source: "Einen Lichtblick gewährte ihm das Jubiläum, welches man in Braunschweig dem greisen Sänger zu Ehren anläßlich seines 80. Geburtstages am 6. October 1864... Anläßlich dieser Feier wurde ihm von der Universität Jena das Diplom eines Doctors der Philosophie verliehen." Josef Sittard (1885), "Methfessel, Albert Gottlieb", Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie.
- Reviewed: Macon Whoopees (SHL)
Created by 78.26 (talk). Self-nominated at 17:11, 12 February 2018 (UTC).
- will review --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:15, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
Interesting life, on good sources, no copyvio obvious. The image is licensed and shows clearly, however, obviously not at age 80 ;) - It sounds to me more like an honorary Ph.D., so not so much "acquired", no? - Or perhaps about what he did, instead? - Do you say in English "lost his eyes"? Are you sure that the father's name should be given as just "Johann" (instead of "Johann Christian" or "Christian")? - German has some works, could have interlanguage links for those? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:54, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks Gerda! You are correct, the illustration was made when Methfessel was age 80, but it clearly does not depict him at what was then his current age. That is why I said "as illustrated in 1864" not just "in 1864". I'm not sure how to make that distinction more clear. Regarding the honorary degree I think "acquired" is an apt description, as opposed to "earned". You could say "received" but to me that has no difference than "acquired" in this context. I left out "honorary" to make it more hooky, and I'm not sure if the distinction was as clear then between an "honorary" and an "earned" degree. Regarding the father's name, I agree. The English source, which of course I am more comfortable with, gave the father's name as merely "Johann" but I should have used the German source, which is obviously superior here. Your further thoughts are always appreciated. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 22:07, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
- Understand, thank you. Too late for more thoughts.
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:52, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
- Hi, I came by to promote this, but think the hook is misleading. It should say in the article that he was awarded an honorary doctorate, not a Doctor of Philosophy. Honorary doctorates are quite common for older people who are well-regarded in their field. Yoninah (talk) 00:00, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
- @Yoninah: the source says "1864 feierte und an welchem die ganze deutsche Sängerwelt durch Ehrengaben und Grüße sich betheiligte. Anläßlich dieser Feier wurde ihm von der Universität Jena das Diplom eines Doctors der Philosophie verliehen." which I translated as Doctor of Philosophy. I don't think that's misleading, and I don't think my translation is incorrect, but I've made worse mistakes. What do you think? 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 00:47, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
- @78.26: I think it's an honorary doctorate. He didn't study for it. Yoninah (talk) 01:22, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
- @Yoninah: Well, this has been an education on higher degrees. Yes, it was absolutely an honorary degree, he didn't study for it. According to the unreliable source Wikipedia, a person who is granted an honorary degree "may use the approved post-nominal letters" but are generally discouraged from using "Dr." before their name. So it would seem "Ph.D" is appropriate, but if this is not in fact general practice and you truly feel this is *factually* misleading, as opposed to *hooky* misleading, then I'll be happy to propose an alt. Well, mostly happy.
78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 15:55, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
- ALT1: ... that while his parents wanted him to serve in the church, Albert Methfessel (pictured) pursued his interest in music, becoming a key figure in German folk singing and male vocal singing in the 19th century? Yoninah (talk) 00:25, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
- <humor>That's not a hook, that's an article lede!</humor> Not that it should matter, but I approve of the above hook. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 14:33, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
-
thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:55, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
-
- <humor>That's not a hook, that's an article lede!</humor> Not that it should matter, but I approve of the above hook. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 14:33, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
- @Yoninah: Well, this has been an education on higher degrees. Yes, it was absolutely an honorary degree, he didn't study for it. According to the unreliable source Wikipedia, a person who is granted an honorary degree "may use the approved post-nominal letters" but are generally discouraged from using "Dr." before their name. So it would seem "Ph.D" is appropriate, but if this is not in fact general practice and you truly feel this is *factually* misleading, as opposed to *hooky* misleading, then I'll be happy to propose an alt. Well, mostly happy.
- Thanks Gerda! You are correct, the illustration was made when Methfessel was age 80, but it clearly does not depict him at what was then his current age. That is why I said "as illustrated in 1864" not just "in 1864". I'm not sure how to make that distinction more clear. Regarding the honorary degree I think "acquired" is an apt description, as opposed to "earned". You could say "received" but to me that has no difference than "acquired" in this context. I left out "honorary" to make it more hooky, and I'm not sure if the distinction was as clear then between an "honorary" and an "earned" degree. Regarding the father's name, I agree. The English source, which of course I am more comfortable with, gave the father's name as merely "Johann" but I should have used the German source, which is obviously superior here. Your further thoughts are always appreciated. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 22:07, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
