Template:Did you know nominations/Tilman Michael

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 AirshipJungleman29 talk 11:45, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Tilman Michael

(

)

.~~.. that Tilman Michael was appointed chorus master of the Metropolitan Opera from the 2024/25 season, after ten years at the Oper Frankfurt?~~ Source: [1]
- Reviewed: Margrit Waltz
- Comment: Many papers took that press release - it's sort of breaking news for a change, I tried to reserve this for his first production at the Met but couldn't yet find it. The season opens on 23 September with a piece that seems to be without chorus, and for the second night I couldn't find details yet, - it's a repertoire piece that may have been prepared by his predecessor.

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 2116 past nominations.

Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:06, 28 August 2024 (UTC).

Right now the main issue I have with the article is the sourcing of the article. A lot of it is cited to the Metropolitan Opera press release, which isn't an independent source. I'm not sure about his relationship to the Dresdner Philharmonie (it's not made clear in the article), but if he was affiliated with them at that point, that would mean most of the article is not cited to an independent source. Citing to non-independent sources isn't prohibited and it's often fine, but it's not ideal and there are editors at DYK that may object to it as not meeting WP:PRIMARY. If he was never affiliated with the Dresdner Philharmonie then my issue is resolved since that counts as an independent source; otherwise, the article will need to be beefed up with additional sourcing.

Another concern is the hook. I have mixed feelings if it meets WP:DYKINT. On the one hand, being appointed to such a position in an institution as prestigious as the Met is a great achievement. On the other hand, DYK is not fond of these "people doing their jobs" hooks and other editors have objected to similar hooks in the past. At best, the hook may marginally meet DYKINT and I'm inclined to decline the hook at this point, especially if alternatives can be proposed.

Otherwise, the article appears to meet DYK requirements: a QPQ has been done and the article is both new enough and long enough, with the hook being cited and referenced. For now, my suggestions are to clarify his relationship in this nomination page about his relationship with the Dresdner Philharmonie, and to suggest alternate hooks (ideally ones that aren't just simply "he is doing his job" hooks). The article is somewhat lacking on his personal life or information about his life before starting his career, so if those are expanded, there may be some usable hooks. The "Opera of the year" fact might be a good starting point for an alternative hook, especially if the article can't be expanded further. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:18, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Also pinging CurryTime7-24 for possible hook suggestions as well as help regarding the sourcing, as they usually know how to make effective non-specialist opera/classical music hooks. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:21, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for thinking of me. Let me take a look at this tomorrow and see if I can come up with some ideas. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 05:21, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

@Narutolovehinata5: For what it's worth, I gave it a try. I found a couple more articles on Tilman Michael, including one from the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. All of them repeat the information already cited from other sources here. Couldn't find anything that really pops for an appealing alternative hook. Sorry to not be of more help. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 00:57, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

User:Narutolovehinata5, what in the term "breaking news" did you not understand, stress on "news"? Do you understand "Press release". How many news organs should be cited? The FR, BR and Stuttgarter Zeitung are already there, with "the same news". There are also SWR, FAZ /subscription), Die Zeit (subscription), The New York Times (subscription), countless others. The secondary sources repeat the primary, and what else could they do? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:12, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

The sources you provided aren't currently in the article, that is the issue. They have to be added to the article to address the concerns about primary sourcing. Yes, I understand press releases: they are generally not considered independent sources for Wikipedia purposes. Actually, I'll ping Epicgenius and ask him to explain what the issue is with independent and non-primary sourcing here as there seems to be confusion about the problem. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:30, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

The New York Times source is "By Javier C. Hernández", so its not a primary source. Grimes2 (talk) 09:04, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

@Grimes2: I was referring to the sources currently in the article, specifically the Metropolitan Opera press release. Adding the New York Times source to the article (since it's not currently there) would actually help solve my concern. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:11, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, Grimes2, for adding the NYT (as I found when I wanted to add it). User:Narutolovehinata5, I still don't understand why the NYT solves your "problem", but FR doesn't solve it. Because it is written in German? ... by a woman? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:44, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

We should prefer English sources for English Wikipedia, if available. Grimes2 (talk) 09:55, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes, that's why the press release is there. Otherwise we could do without it. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:01, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Agree. Found this: Uncontroversial Information – Press releases can be used if the information it is citing is uncontroversial. This could include things such as a company name change, product release, or someone’s employment. Grimes2 (talk) 10:09, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

There seems to be a language barrier here as the issue was never about the other sources being in German. The issue is that multiple statements in the article were referenced either to the Metropolitan Opera press release (which is not an independent source as Michael is affiliated with them), or the Dresdner Philharmonie profile. I inquired if he was ever affiliated with the Dresdner Philharmonie and I never got a proper response, so here's the issue: if he was affiliated with them at some point, that would mean the Dresdner Philharmonie source is also not independent, meaning most of the article is cited towards non-independent sources. However, if he was never affiliated at all, then that means the Dresdner Philharmonie is independent, and thus it would mean my concern about the article being heavily based on non-independent sources was mistaken. Regarding the use of independent sources: for uncontroversial information it should be fine and I'm willing to accept that in this case, but the problem is that other DYK regulars can be pretty strict regarding that and may raise objections. The New York Times article does help since it adds variety to the sourcing, but if most of the article is still based on the Met Opera link, that might raise eyebrows from other editors or the promoter (not necessarily from me). Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:32, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Done I've added some additional sources. Grimes2 (talk) 11:44, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, I added you to the authors. I added about the selection process from ref Blum (The Independent). Dresden: it's in the article that he worked for the Semperoper in Dresden. I picked the Dresden bio - of several similar ones - because it is in English. It's just a standard bio of factual stations of a career. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:21, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

You are wrong, three news sources are provided in the article, one (FR) with an author. I added some notable others 'here" but 1) I see no need for repetition, 2) I don't believe that subscription sources help our readers much, 3) I can't see those so hesitated to use them. However, I'll add NYT now to please you, but can't see why you don't trust the information, when all these publications do. "There seems to be confusion about the problem." --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:28, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

I appreciate the ping, Narutolovehinata5. The issue with press releases is that they would be considered both self-published and primary sources, and press releases in general tend to only highlight one side of the story. As such, they don't contribute to a subject's notability, and articles that rely on press releases are more likely to be challenged at articles for deletion. With a newspaper like the New York Times, they have a fairly robust fact-checking process, so they would be able to analyze information critically and report on facts that aren't mentioned in the press release. Thus, I would recommend using the secondary, independent source when possible, rather than the press release.

(talk) 13:51, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Did you read, Epicgenius, that three such references were in the article, only in German? ... that the press release was given as something in English? ... that the New York Times is now also there, only - as pay-walled - of limited help. Can you see the NYT? Then please feel free to add from it to the article. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:42, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Gerda Arendt, sorry about that, I actually missed that the German-language references were in the article. I'd personally prefer the German-language secondary sources over the English-language press release. For what it's worth, I do have access to the NYT article. Here's a gift link to that article, which you can view without a paywall (you could also use archive.org to bypass the paywall). Epicgenius (talk) 15:45, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the gift! (I'm in the tedious process of making Alexander Goehr fit for the Main page, which came mostly unreferenced and full of copyvio, leaving me little time for this topic today and days to come. Jessye Norman was tough but this seems worse.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:52, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

ALT1: ... that Tilman Michael was appointed chorus master of the Metropolitan Opera from the 2024/25 season, after ten years at the award-winning Oper Frankfurt? Grimes2 (talk) 08:55, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for the offer but when a person is appointed to the #2 house, we don't have to say that where he comes from is also important. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:28, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
The choral award is an indication, that he has done a good job in Frankfurt. Grimes2 (talk) 09:47, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
ALT1 doesn't specify "choral", and that the house received 4 awards in 2023 is actually stronger than choral alone which was one of them, but - as explained - not needed. Also: "Oper Frankfurt" was on DYK a lot (26 times, + 13 for "Frankfurt Opera"), and people who care about this news probably know already. We can keep it simple. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:59, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
I've been thinking about this for a while, and after some pondering I would suggest dropping the "appointed chorus master" angle and instead proposing a completely different hook fact. I am not denying that him being appointed to the position is a major accomplishment, but I have reservations that it would meet WP:DYKINT. More specifically, I have doubts that the hook will appeal to non-specialist audiences. It's not the kind of hook that will attract readers to possibly click on the article and read more about Michael.

A future hook could still mention that he was appointed as choir master, just that the hook isn't specifically about that. The current hook fact really no different from a hook that goes "that "Kelly Ortberg was appointed CEO of Boeing after previously serving as CEO of Rockwell Collins?", which other editors may object to as a "person doing their job" hook. Instead, a new hook could go something like "... that Tilman Michael, who was appointed chorus master of the Metropolitan Opera in 2024, was [interesting fact about him]?" This would be easier if the article is further expanded about his personal life. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:46, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

(I wrote this above, but it may get lost there:) The appointment to the Met happened last 17 years ago, while opera chorus of the years comes once every year, and he alone got several. I know what is more unique in my book. Adding: The world press reported it, not only for aficionados. I don't think that we should present this top news in a half sentence on the side. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:28, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Support original hook. Grimes2 (talk) 16:14, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

ALT2: ... that Tilman Michael, the new choral master of the Metropolitan Opera and successor of Donald Palumbo, is scheduled to prepare the chorus in 20 productions next season? Grimes2 (talk) 17:19, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for the offer but I assume that people rather want to know the background of someone for the highest position a choral conductor can achieve than that he is scheduled to do a number of works which seems no news at all. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:20, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
After giving this some thought, I don't think this article is a good fit from DYK as currently written, unfortunately. ALT2 sounds vaguely promotional, and DYK has had concerns about hooks sounding like advertisements in the past. The original hook and its variants don't really seem to meet DYKINT either as it's really no different about a hook about a person being appointed to a position, which by itself isn't hooky. With the lack of any other hooky facts and article expansion being unfeasible, there simply doesn't appear to be a hook that can meet the guidelines. Some articles are simply just not good fits for DYK and at the article's current state this may be one example of that. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 07:32, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
If you think that a hook that looks like the NYT headline is not feasable for DYK, we will not agree about what "Did you know?" means. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:22, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Epicgenius, CurryTime7-24, what do you think? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:27, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

If you disagree with the marking for closure and want a second opinion, then that's fine. However, would you consider a hook that goes "... that Neal Mohan was appointed CEO of YouTube after Susan Wojcicki stepped down?" suitable for DYK? Because ALT0 and variants essentially give the same vibe as that example. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:56, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

I wouldn't care about who stepped down. I think head of YouTube is interesting enough. Like chorus master of the Met.

ALT3: ... that the next chorus master of the Metropolitan Opera will be Tilman Michael? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:10, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

for ALT3. I think that looks like exciting news, and it's cited inline in the article. (Re a comment above: artists and musicians don't ever "just do their jobs", because if they did, they would not be worthy of the name "artist" or "musician".) Storye book (talk) 10:31, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Storye book commented on this nomination and approved it after Gerda left a message on her talk page. As Storye book has a history of approving Gerda's nominations when they encounter pushback, or after Gerda leaves her a message, an impartial review from a previously uninvolved editor is requested. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:36, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

@Narutolovehinata5: please stop stalking my talk page, because that creeps me out. Stop misconstruing it, and stop advertising what is written on it, as if it were all a plot. It is not a plot. And I was not on that occasion asked to approve a hook. I am not committing a crime, I am not "involved" or in a conflict of interest. You and Gerda regularly exchange more words than she and I do. And often when I comment on her nominations, it is to "bang your heads together" (a non-violent expression meaning reprimanding children, to make them shake hands and make friends). That means that on those occasions I treat you both the same. I have never communicated with Gerda off-Wikipedia, and do not know her personally in real life. I am no more "involved" with her than you are. People on WP cooperate to improve WP, and as far as I am concerned, that is what I am doing. I suggest that you drop the personal angle, and look at what will improve WP or DYK only. Storye book (talk) 15:45, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

After thinking about this for a bit, I was actually considering approving ALT3 myself, but there's one sticking point that gives me pause. WP:DYKHOOK states The hook should include a definite fact that is unlikely to change. Technically it should be safe as Michael has already been appointed and is next in line; however, the hook's truth will change in the future as once Michael takes the position he will no longer be the "next". Maybe this is just a case of being paranoid, but I recall similar cases being objected to in the past, so while I personally think it shouldn't be an issue, another editor may raise that concern. To be on the safe side, maybe a different hook fact or wording from ALT3 is needed; maybe even a simple rephrase that could make ALT3 avoid that possible objection. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:38, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Another possibility would still tie in with the Met Opera hook, but focuses on another fact, maybe even one that would appeal to a broader non-specialist audience. Maybe:

ALT4 ... that Tilman Michael, who is set to be the Metropolitan Opera's chorus master from the 2024/25 season, has rehearsed more than 150 operas during his career?

ALT5 ... that Tilman Michael, who is set to be the Metropolitan Opera's chorus master from the 2024/25 season, helped the Oper Frankfurt to multiple Opera choir of the year awards?

ALT4 shows how prolific he is, with a number that would make non-specialists easily get his achievements. ALT5 makes it clearer to a general reader why him being affiliated with the Oper Frankfurt was a big deal, instead of needing to rely on specialist knowledge. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:43, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

The idea of ALT5 is fine (and better than some large number without any other meaning than being a large number in ALT4). However, please take facts from the article:

the Met calls the position "chorus master"
seasons in Wikipedia are given as "2024/25"
you can't say that he led the Oper Frankfurt to "Opera of the year" - many did that - but it was he to lead it to "[Opera] Chorus of the year"
I am not sure that "set to be" is the correct verb

Please strike the "canvassing" hint. I used this nom as an example for the current DYK team's view on interestingness, and my question was about what would be accepted as a DYK for Alexander Goehr in case we can make it GA. I confess that I was tempted to pass a link to this nom - asking for a second opinion - to all who commented on ANI a while ago, but was so far able to resist. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:43, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

My use of "set to be" was based on a similar situation from Template:Did you know nominations/2025 Philippine general election. That nomination's hook initially said "... that the 2025 Philippine general election is the first", but objections were raised because the phrasing was determined to not be "unlikely to change". It was modified to instead say "... that the 2025 Philippine general election is set to be the first" (emphasis mine). I used a similar reasoning in using that wording for ALT4 and ALT5. As for the other issues, I've changed it to "chorus master" (I think I may have mixed up the positions), and changed "led" to "helped" to better reflect the article. I've also added "choir" to "Opera choir of the year" as that word escaped my mind for some reason. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 14:52, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you but for the record, next time please don't change a hook after it led to comments, - better write a new ALT5a. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:48, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

AFAIK, Tilman Michael has a contract for one season. Grimes2 (talk) 15:39, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

He is on a leave from Frankfurt for a year. The Met said nothing about duration. It has nothing to do with any of the hooks. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:48, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

I don't know what being on leave from Frankfurt, or being contracted to the Met for one season, affects the hook. ALT4/ALT5 only say that he will be the chorus master from the 2024/2025 season, but says nothing about the length of his contract or any other context. That would be an issue for the article, but not for the hook. Gerda, if you're okay with ALT5 then we can have it ready for a review? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 16:14, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

ALT5 as it reads now is fine. (I would have said if not.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:22, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. A new reviewer can check ALT5 and any possible revisions to ALT3 (I struck the original ALT3 due to the concerns I raised above, but a revised version might be possible). Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:02, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Approving ALT5, which gives the subject the respect it deserves, besides being interesting, and is cited inline for both facts, in the article. At 171 characters, the length is OK. Storye book (talk) 10:08, 3 September 2024 (UTC)