Jump to content

Template:Did you know nominations/Venezuelan cinema in the 1890s

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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:42, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

Venezuelan cinema in the 1890s

(
)
The dentist operates in an 1897 short film
The dentist operates in an 1897 short film

Created by Kingsif (talk). Self-nominated at 08:46, 16 September 2019 (UTC).

  • The article is long enough and new enough with no copyright violations. I assume good faith on the references that I can't read. The image is in the public domain. A QPQ has been completed. The image isn't in the article. ALT0 is not in the article. For ALT1, proto-horror would need to be referenced. I don't see ALT3 in the article. The only workable hooks right now are ALT2 and ALT4, but those aren't the most interesting hooks. The information for the hooks can't just be in similar articles and they must be in the nominated article. SL93 (talk) 01:26, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
  • Alt 3 is in the article, near the bottom of the Themes section. I can add the ref for Alt 1. Kingsif (talk) 15:50, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
  • @Kingsif: That section states that there were few of such films to show medical practices, but it doesn't explicitly state anything about being one of the few such films "showing a medical procedure". Medical practices is a broad term. SL93 (talk) 19:29, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
  • I wanna say "what?" but after re-reading, I think your objection is that the article says 'practices' and the hook says 'procedures'? In essence, serving as synonyms based on what fits most fluidly in each sentence. If the other hooks are good, though, I don't think defending alt 3 over semantics is necessary. Kingsif (talk) 20:06, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
  • @Kingsif: It's more than semantics. At least in the United States, medical practices would refer to the facilities that provide healthcare. My point is that practice (someone doing something, such as the practice of medicine or law) is different from a procedure. SL93 (talk) 20:52, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
  • (edit conflict) By your definition, 'practicing medicine' = 'performing medical procedures'. They both mean 'doing medical stuff', formally, no? But, for the point I think the original comment couldn't quite make: would you like me to change the word in the article? Kingsif (talk) 20:57, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
  • True, but it's more than semantics and more so the meaning of the words. The article doesn't say "practicing medicine" at the moment. You can change the word if you want a 4th hook approved. SL93 (talk) 21:00, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
  • I'm approving ALT1 ALT2, or ALT4 (without the picture). SL93 (talk) 20:56, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

@Kingsif: I've pulled and reopened this one, per recommendation by the reviewer, SL93, which was made here. You can resolve any issues here and it can be promoted back if reapproved. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 21:51, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

  • @Amakuru: Though The promoted hook just seems to have some confusion, there were others approved, couldn’t one of those just be subbed in? Kingsif (talk) 21:59, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
    @Kingsif: Sorry to be a pain, and I didn't have time to look at ALT2 or ALT4 yesterday, but I have to say I think they need to be a bit more directly stated and sourced in the article. ALT2 says scholars disagree on whether the influence was French or American, but the section in question simply mentions various scholars mentioning those nationalities as influences, but without saying that they actually disagree on the matter. The guys saying it's French-influenced might not disagree with the points made by those saying it's American-influenced, and vice versa. To say they disagree needs a bit more solid sourcing IMHO. On ALT4, the article mentions three films that were possibly shown before Alegoría sobre la doctrina de Monroe and, although they're marked as "dubious", I don't know if that's enough to categorically say that Allegoria was the first... @SL93: what do you think ?  — Amakuru (talk) 10:06, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
  • @Amakuru: Maybe changing ALT4 to among the first? Though I think that it makes it less interesting. SL93 (talk) 14:14, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Kingsif, just an idea: could you add a column called something like 'Subject' or 'Theme' or 'Plot' to the table 'National films', and give a summary of what each film is about? (with sources, of course) Then you would have the info needed for the original hook in the article. You could also include the dentist image in the article, say next to the para starting "A distinctly Latin American identity ..." - both that para and the one above mention that film. (I would suggest lightening the image, though - it is rather dark and hard to see.) RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:08, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
  • @RebeccaGreen: Yeah, I could do that with the table. I'm not sure about the image, adding it might make the article be a bit image-heavy for its length (but thanks for the suggestion on where it could fit). Kingsif (talk) 14:06, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • @Narutolovehinata5: oh yeah, added refs and summaries per suggestions, and some other clean up. Forgot to add comment. Kingsif (talk) 17:33, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Following expansion of the article by the creator, ALT0 is now in the article and sourced. Both "proto-horror" and "slapstick", as in ALT1, are mentioned in the article, but the source for slapstick does not include anything that seems to me to reflect that meaning - it says the scene "allows a first attempt at staging". Staged fights are not necessarily slapstick. (Horror is mentioned in the source, but I think "early horror" would be more accurate than "proto-horror".) So I have struck ALT1. ALT2 is struck as per discussion above (if it were rewritten to say something about scholars seeing influences of both France and the US, that would fit better with what the article says). ALT3 is in the article; the source is offline, so AGF. Per the article, it is not clear what the first film shown in Venezuela in the 1890s was, so ALT4 can't stand.
Approving ALT0 and ALT3 (I prefer the first), without the image, which is not in the article and so can't be used, and per full review by SL93 above. RebeccaGreen (talk) 11:15, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Hi, I came by to promote this, but I don't find a man getting into a brawl with a stagecoach driver to be close enough in meaning to the article's description of The titular entertainer gets into a slapstick fight with a coachman. Yoninah (talk) 21:40, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
  • @Yoninah: Really? Because I see "a man" = "the titular entertainer", "brawl" = "fight", and "stagecoach driver" = "coachman", no? Kingsif (talk) 23:36, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Yes, but there's a difference between a "slapstick fight", which is comedic, and a "brawl", which sounds serious. Yoninah (talk) 23:44, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Ah, well that's easily solved - if you think that "slapstick" implies something about the tone, that can be removed easily, I'll do it now :) Kingsif (talk) 01:39, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, Kingsif. So we now have in the article: "The titular entertainer gets into a fight with a coachman." This corresponds to "a man getting into a brawl with a stagecoach driver", so I am re-ticking this hook. Please let us know if there are any other problems. :-) RebeccaGreen (talk) 06:20, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Venezuelan_cinema_in_the_1890s&oldid=924500776"