Jump to content

Template:Did you know nominations/Gernot Roll

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 SL93 (talk) 23:30, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

Gernot Roll

(
)
Gernot Roll in 2015
Gernot Roll in 2015

5x expanded by Gerda Arendt (talk) and Grimes2 (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 10:59, 17 November 2020 (UTC).


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
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Article is clean. Couple of quick questions. Filmography section is not sourced within the segment. I know this article went recently to homepage / RD, so, the sourcing must be good, but, I am not able to see the links. Also, is there something we can do on the hook's interestingness? Is there anything about these two works in particular that makes them interesting? Cheeers. Ktin (talk) 16:57, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

I duplicated the ref. Well, I picked two titles that sound attractive in English, and show a long career and diversity. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:14, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
Gerda Arendt, Thanks Gerda. The leading line says "films for which Roll was the cinematographer" but the table below says "Director", please can we fix that as well. Not fully convinced on the interestingness of the two movies in specific. Is there anything else that can be an interesting hook? Don't get me wrong, but, as a cinematographer one would have movies for which they would have handled cinematography for. Not sure that is interesting per se. But, if you do not find something more interesting, perhaps we go with what you have.Ktin (talk) 17:22, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
I don't think we list one where he was also director, because they didn't get articles in English, and his photography was what got him prizes, not directing. - What would interest you? The film about Mann's novel was received as spectacular, but there's not much room in a hook. Would people know the names of directors if mentioned? I can't tell. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:33, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
Gerda Arendt Marked the citation complete. Also, marked the interestingness portion complete. Should be good to go. If there is a more interesting hook, I am open to reviewing that. Let me know. Cheers.Ktin (talk) 18:01, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
  • @Ktin: you should also check for hookiness. Oh, you did. But you approved it anyway. Why is this hooky? If I don't know who he is and have never heard of these films, why would I click on this? Yoninah (talk) 17:42, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
  • Yoninah, Greetings. I do not know what you mean by "hooky". If you meant interestingness, you will see that I have asked the question above and have AGF by marking interestingness portion complete. You will see that specific note (suggesting that if an alternate / more interesting hook comes available that should be used) in my edit summary as well. Good luck. Ktin (talk) 17:46, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
  • @Ktin: "Did you know that ... X=Y" is not considered a hook. I can assure you that no one will click on this, and it certainly does not belong in the image slot. If another hook cannot be found, this should be closed as unsuccessful. Yoninah (talk) 17:53, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
  • @Yoninah:, I do not dispute anything of what you say and in fact you will see that my messages above are in agreement to what you are suggesting. However, I want you and myself to be respectful of the other person (in this case the nominator) 's perspective on interestingness. Interestingness is a subjective construct and the nominator does provide a rationale in one of the comments. Also, I do not follow what you mean by "does not belong in the image slot". Please feel free to proceed as you feel fit. Good luck.Ktin (talk) 18:00, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
  • Can you give me a direction? It's not a subject I know much about. With all these awards, he deserves to be remembered, and I'd find mentioning awards much more boring than what he actually did. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:57, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
  • You're right, there's almost nothing to work with here. How about:
  • ALT1: ... that Gernot Roll (pictured), a founding member of the Deutsche Filmakademie, was regarded as a master of literary films?
  • But I don't see this in footnote 1; please verify the translation there. Yoninah (talk) 18:07, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
  • Yoninah, please don't take my comment as a 'tit-for-tat'. But, I dont think the above statement is interesting either. A founded B and was good at making C films. Ktin (talk) 18:11, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
  • @Ktin: You're right. And there's nothing else to work with here. The whole article is a series of facts without any "color" (detail, description of those facts). But ALT0 is the same as saying: "Did you know ... that D. W. Griffith filmed The Birth of a Nation?
  • It might be helpful for you to review the pageviews on recent DYK hooks to see what our readers find "hooky". Or even try and build a prep set yourself. Yoninah (talk) 18:35, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
  • @Yoninah:, I am not holding a defense for ALT0. Just noted my observations. As an aside, I also feel in the quest for interestingness far too many DYK hooks are taking liberties from facts or end up being deliberately 'click baitey'. Case in point -- this one on today's DYK link. Have a look if you have a moment. Ktin (talk) 18:42, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
ALT1 is impossible if not saying that he was mainly cinematographer (vs. script writer and director). If you give me some time I can get the 900 candles over from sources to article. I bet readers would be interested in the burping etc in one of his farces (directed), but I'm not willing to supply that, even with time. Probably not today. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:46, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
Thank you. Yoninah (talk) 18:52, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
Gerda Arendt, Yoninah -- if you folks end up going for ALT1 go ahead and use this source. Source text: "Roll was a specialist in literary adaptations and biographies." Der Spiegel Ktin (talk) 18:54, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
Nowhere in Africa won an Oscar (for ALT0?) Grimes2 (talk) 19:02, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
  • ALT2: ... that Gernot Roll (pictured), the cinematographer for the Oscar-winning film Nowhere in Africa, was an expert in literary adaptations and film biographies? Grimes2 (talk) 20:41, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
    Thank you for the idea, but that would have to be (and sourced) in the article, and - can't believe it - is not even in the film article, but a source! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:49, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
    You se how little I know about the subject, - it's probably Academy Award. Still needs link and mentioning in the article. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:30, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
 Done Grimes2 (talk) 21:33, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
Yes, the Oscars are the Academy Awards. Grimes2 (talk) 06:42, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
  • Please add information from the Der Spiegel source that Ktin provided above (it's in German). It is more correct to say in the lead that he was an expert in literary adaptations and film biographies than that he was an expert on literary material, whatever that means. Yoninah (talk) 21:48, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
 Done Grimes2 (talk) 22:39, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
Thank you. I'll wait - too tired anyway - with trying to say something sensational. Can't help thinking that mentioning Buddenbrooks, a giant novel by Thomas Mann, is more precise than "literary adaptations". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:54, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
  • Thank you for the alts. I would suggest putting back in his description and getting rid of the director:
  • ALT3a: ... that Gernot Roll (pictured), considered an expert in literary adaptations, filmed The Buddenbrooks based on Thomas Mann's novel in 11 television episodes?
  • I would like to note that the Filmography is completely unsourced. Yoninah (talk) 21:23, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
    • Yoninah, I thought Gerda had [9] and [10] as refs for filmography, didn't she? This went to ITNRD with those refs. Ktin (talk) 19:31, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
      • @Ktin: Looks like she added them after I mentioned it. I'll return to this review. Yoninah (talk) 19:54, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
        • OK, the Filmography is sourced. ALT4 is way too detailed and blue-linked, so I struck that. Both ALT2 (I tweaked it a bit) and ALT3a are suitable. Both hooks have foreign-language hook refs that are AGF and cited inline. Let's let the promoter choose. Good to go. Yoninah (talk) 20:04, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
          Just for my language understanding, is the term "filmed" enough to make clear that he was the person with the camera? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:42, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
  • No. Usually when we say someone filmed something, we're referring to the director. We'll have to write:
  • ALT3b: ... that Gernot Roll (pictured), considered an expert in literary adaptations, was the cinematographer for The Buddenbrooks based on Thomas Mann's novel in 11 television episodes? Yoninah (talk) 20:48, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Gernot_Roll&oldid=996331432"