Template:Did you know nominations/Luis Cadena
- 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The result was: withdrawn by nominator, closed by Narutolovehinata5 (talk) 09:46, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Luis Cadena
.jpg)
Cadena in 1877
- ... that in 1857 the Ecuadorian painter Luis Cadena (pictured) travelled on a government bursary to Rome, where he enrolled at the Accademia Nazionale di San Luca? Source: Alexandra Kennedy, revised Cynthia Neri Lewis (2003/2019). Cadena, Luis. Grove Art Online. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/gao/9781884446054.article.T012936. (subscription required).
- Reviewed: to follow
Created/expanded by Justlettersandnumbers (talk) and ContributorECU (talk). Nominated by Justlettersandnumbers (talk) at 21:25, 28 August 2020 (UTC).
- Article is new enough (created 22 August) and long enough (1,500 characters of prose).
- It is written in NPOV and contains sufficient inline citations. No copyvio concerns from Earwig.
- Hook is of sufficient length. I would put a comma after the year and remove "the" before "Ecuadorian".
- Hook fact is cited in the article; AGF on source behind a paywall.
- I don't find the hook particularly riveting. I noticed that one source mentioned that a Cadena painting was the first 19th-century Ecuadorian painting added to LACMA. I think that fact, for example, could be added to the article and would make for a slightly more interesting hook.
- QPQ is not done yet.
- Image is free, is appropriately licensed on the Commons, is used in the article, and shows up well at 100 × 100 px.
This looks pretty good so far. Would like to see how you feel about my hook suggestions, and waiting on QPQ. Armadillopteryx 06:15, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you for your comments, Armadillopteryx! If the hook isn't interesting enough perhaps I should just withdraw this. In my opinion, the fact that the government of an emerging South American nation was prepared to finance a three-year trip to Rome for an artist is a lot more significant than the acquisition of one painting by a pretty minor museum, but others may disagree. Neither of the edits you suggest to the hook would be correct in the kind of English I speak. I'll try to find a QPQ I can do. Thanks again, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:59, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
- Justlettersandnumbers, once you explained why the hook is interesting, I got it, and I agree that that's pretty cool. What I'm concerned about is that the hook shouldn't require further explanation to appeal to a broad audience. I don't know if many people would put those pieces together themselves. Not everyone will think to consider the history of South America/Ecuador to figure out why the hook is interesting (and plenty might not even have the background knowledge). Could we build a hook from another fact in the article? Or try working in some of the clarification you gave here into the original hook? It's obviously not ideal to make it longer, but if we can keep it below 200 characters, it will be okay. Armadillopteryx 12:47, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
- (By the way, I had seen you wrote "to follow" in the QPQ section, but according to QPQ check, you don't have any previous DYK credits, which means you don't have to do a QPQ if you don't want to.) Armadillopteryx 12:52, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
- Armadillopteryx, I do see your point about the hook – it's not thrilling, it's just the most significant thing I can find to say about him. If the aim here is to "appeal to broad audience" then I don't think a relatively obscure nineteenth-century Ecuadorian painter will fulfil it, and I should probably just withdraw this and let people get on with posting yet more mind-numbing trivia about football, rap and YouTube "influencers" – all of which do of course appeal to that audience. If on the other hand our aim is to present a cross-section of what is in Wikipedia, then perhaps this has a chance. I've added a little on the origins of these scholarships, of which there were only three, to the article. Could I ask you to take a quick look and see if you think that material might be used to clarify why the hook fact is significant? – I will of course understand if you can't be bothered. If this goes ahead I will indeed need to do a QPQ – the QPQ tool doesn't work properly for those of us who archive our user talk pages by moving them, and I have a number of DYK credits. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:57, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
- Justlettersandnumbers, I didn't mean to suggest that historical subjects aren't appealing to a broad audience—far from it, in fact. I was referring to the WP:DYKRULES, which say,
The hook should include a definite fact that is mentioned in the article and interesting to a broad audience.
I interpret this to mean that it should at least be self-evident why the hook is interesting to most people. We could either modify the existing hook to provide more context, or we could try something with the facts you recently added to the article, such as:- ALT1: ... that Luis Cadena was the first painter to receive a 6,000-peso bursary from the Ecuadorian government to travel to Italy for artistic study?
- [And just to clarify, was he truly the first? The article text said,
Cadena was the first to receive of one of these grants
; I assumed that the first "of" was erroneous and removed it, but I don't know if you meant something else by that. I would have checked the source to figure it out, but I don't have access behind the paywall.] - Anyway, how do you feel about a hook like that? I'm open to changes in wording or even a new hook altogether. We could also build one around the fact that he was only one of three people to receive such a bursary, for example. This is just an example of a hook that I think is more conspicuous in its appeal.
- Also, thanks for clarifying that the QPQ check doesn't work for people who archive their talk pages by moving them—I didn't know that! Armadillopteryx 23:04, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
- Justlettersandnumbers, I didn't mean to suggest that historical subjects aren't appealing to a broad audience—far from it, in fact. I was referring to the WP:DYKRULES, which say,
- Armadillopteryx, I do see your point about the hook – it's not thrilling, it's just the most significant thing I can find to say about him. If the aim here is to "appeal to broad audience" then I don't think a relatively obscure nineteenth-century Ecuadorian painter will fulfil it, and I should probably just withdraw this and let people get on with posting yet more mind-numbing trivia about football, rap and YouTube "influencers" – all of which do of course appeal to that audience. If on the other hand our aim is to present a cross-section of what is in Wikipedia, then perhaps this has a chance. I've added a little on the origins of these scholarships, of which there were only three, to the article. Could I ask you to take a quick look and see if you think that material might be used to clarify why the hook fact is significant? – I will of course understand if you can't be bothered. If this goes ahead I will indeed need to do a QPQ – the QPQ tool doesn't work properly for those of us who archive our user talk pages by moving them, and I have a number of DYK credits. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:57, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you for your comments, Armadillopteryx! If the hook isn't interesting enough perhaps I should just withdraw this. In my opinion, the fact that the government of an emerging South American nation was prepared to finance a three-year trip to Rome for an artist is a lot more significant than the acquisition of one painting by a pretty minor museum, but others may disagree. Neither of the edits you suggest to the hook would be correct in the kind of English I speak. I'll try to find a QPQ I can do. Thanks again, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:59, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Justlettersandnumbers: Please return to the nomination and respond to Armadilloteryx's concerns. The nomination may be marked for closure if no answer remains forthcoming soon. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 09:34, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
- Armadillopteryx, Narutolovehinata5, I'm withdrawing this nomination – I seem to have exhausted whatever enthusiasm I had for this process. Thank you for the time and effort you have spent on it, I'm sorry that it was for nothing. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:45, 9 September 2020 (UTC)