Jump to content

Talk:Konrad Rupf

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you know nomination

[edit]
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 (talk09:42, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Created by LouisAlain (talk) and Gerda Arendt (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 17:01, 29 January 2021 (UTC).[reply]


General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: A nice compact but comprehensive (3.6k chars, DYKCheck) article, sources part-checked with tools, some AGF on offline and German language sources, tone cool and encyclopedic throughout, Earwig OK. On citations - close but of the three hook facts, the last is cited clearly, the middle is perhaps covered by the citation half a sentence further (but the DYK requirement is the end of same sentence, so this needs checking), and the first is unclear - in the article's sentence on Leipzig, it says he started in 1980 and retired in 1984, which is not "long term", while in the next sentence it mentions 1994 (mid-term?), and later a mention re. honorary membership. On the hook - reasonably interesting, though it would be nice to make it sharper; the Leipzig point needs to be clarified (see hook citation point above, and then decide if it is a good fit or not). Overall, looks good for DYK (and I know, coming from experienced nominators), so if the citation point can be sorted (same citation at end of the relevant sentence if it does cover the first performance point), and Leipzig timing clarified, I think good to go. This is my first review, so I would welcome any feedback, or further review. There is one other c/e matter, I will address this, as it does not affect reviewer neutrality. SeoR (talk) 10:12, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

SeoR, thank you for the review! I am sorry, "1984" is just a typo, corrected to 1994, which was the official end but he kept singing beyond. We could drop "long-term" if you think he doesn't qualify ;) I doubled the ref for the 1955 role. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:13, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Gerda Arendt, it was a pleasure, and it looks great now; 1955 was just a technicality. I checked and 14 years on the front line, and hon. membership after, seems good for "long term". SeoR (talk) 11:46, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]