Template:Did you know nominations/Gilopez Kabayao
- 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 Nineteen Ninety-Four guy talk 03:44, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Gilopez Kabayao
- ...
that violinist Gilopez Kabayao was the first Filipino to perform at New York's Carnegie Hall in 1950?
- Source: "As the first Filipino violinist to perform at the prestigious Carnegie Hall in New York in 1950, Gilopez Kabayao broke new ground and brought pride to the nation." —Philippine Daily Inquirer / Inquirer.net; "He performed in prestigious venues, including Carnegie Hall in New York in 1950, making him the first Filipino violinist to do so." —SunStar
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Anatolii Brezvin
- Comment: Many sources state that Kabayao's Carnegie Hall performance in 1950 was done when he was 19 years old, but this is impossible if he was born in 1929 so I omitted this from the article and therefore the hook. This error might affect the hook under WP:EXCEPTIONAL and especially since a different source (Manila Bulletin) says, "Kabayao is widely believed to be the first Filipino to play at the prestigious Carnegie Hall in New York City".
seav (talk) 23:53, 3 November 2024 (UTC).
- Considering the exceptional claim of him being the first, and thus the related uncertainty, maybe we could go with a different hook angle here. How about:
- ALT1 ... that Filipino violinist Gilopez Kabayao was nicknamed the "Mozart to the Barrios"?
- No opinion on the state of the article itself, although admittedly it is rather lacking in hooky material. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:04, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
Article was new and long enough for DYK at the time of nomination. The opening paragraph reads a little puffy to me, with the nicknames and the virtuoso quote, especially since we don't say who gave him all these impressive sounding nicknames (ie, the press in general through his career? One guy one time and it stuck?). Is there a way to tone it down a bit, perhaps by giving them some context - he was given those names because he went to unusual places to play, and that's not even mentioned in the article. Otherwise, no concerns about CV, all similar phrases are basic facts or proper nouns. No other policy concerns. NLH's suggested hook is present and referenced and reasonably interesting. No QPQ required, no other concerns. Pinging Seav to advise. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 03:53, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- I am OK with ALT1 if we feel that the originally proposed hook is not sufficiently attested by the sources. As for the puffiness of the article, I am not sure how that can be remedied as these nicknames or sobriquets are cited and I couldn't find other available sources stating why these nicknames were given to the subject. There is actually a primary source book (written by his wife) that could potentially provide insight, but I'm not sure if using this as a source is acceptable enough for Wikipedia. Besides I don't have access to this book either. —seav (talk) 12:08, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Seav, okay, you don't have info about who gave these nicknames, but the sources already cited in the article do say they were given because of his tendency to go to out-of-the-way places to perform, and that isn't in the article. Having that context would certainly reduce some of the appearance of puffery, and is easy to cite from the sources you already have. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 12:11, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Premeditated Chaos, I updated the article in line with your suggestion. —seav (talk) 02:24, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Seav, okay, you don't have info about who gave these nicknames, but the sources already cited in the article do say they were given because of his tendency to go to out-of-the-way places to perform, and that isn't in the article. Having that context would certainly reduce some of the appearance of puffery, and is easy to cite from the sources you already have. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 12:11, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- I am OK with ALT1 if we feel that the originally proposed hook is not sufficiently attested by the sources. As for the puffiness of the article, I am not sure how that can be remedied as these nicknames or sobriquets are cited and I couldn't find other available sources stating why these nicknames were given to the subject. There is actually a primary source book (written by his wife) that could potentially provide insight, but I'm not sure if using this as a source is acceptable enough for Wikipedia. Besides I don't have access to this book either. —seav (talk) 12:08, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
Good to roll here with ALT1. 07:15, 16 December 2024 (UTC)