Talk:Hermann Gutzmann

Did you know nomination

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 Z1720 (talk) 23:59, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that Hermann Gutzmann died of sepsis after suffering a stab wound from a gramophone needle? Source: [1]
  • ALT1: ... that Hermann Gutzmann ran a treatment centre for soldiers with speech and voice disorders during World War I? Source: [2]
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Flag of Azerbaijan

Created by Ploni (talk). Self-nominated at 20:48, 29 June 2022 (UTC).

Interesting life and work, on fine sources, and I can read the German. No copyvio obvious. I like the ALT - about his merits - much more than the quirky death. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:50, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

What's wrong with the original hook? The second hook seems a bit bland whereas the first hook seems more eye-catching and surprising. It's not a BLP thing either as the subject has been deceased for decades. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:29, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

On the other hand, if there is a desire not to use the death hook, we could probably go with a different angle. ALT1 is rather pedestrian in my opinion especially compared to other material in the article. Here are some alternate suggestions:

ALT2 ... that Hermann Gutzmann is considered the founder of phoniatrics as a medical discipline?

ALT3 ... that Hermann Gutzmann outlined the close relationship of speech therapy to other areas of medical practice?

Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:35, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the offers, but I like the precision of ALT1. I'd have to look up what phoniatrics are (always a bad sign if the only thing mentioned is not familiar, - I'd accept such a thing as something additional), and would like to run a competition of ALT1 and ALT3, finding ALT1 more attractive. But you may find someone else to have them approved. I don't like that your icon overwrites a valid approval, but what can we do? (You could add extra noms without an icon, for example.) We have so many unreviewed noms, - why spend any time on a little bit more attractive? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:26, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

Fair enough. We can have another editor review ALT2/3 and let the promoter choose between either of the two hooks or ALT1. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:37, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

You didn't hear me. Why ask the promoter but not the nominator? If all this is needed at all? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:43, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I'm ambivalent on ALTs 2 and 3, so I'll let someone else get the final call. As for ALT0, it is within policy, cited (AGF on an RS), and interesting – without a given policy or even subjective reason to strike the hook (liking another hook better doesn't count), I've unstruck it. I do like ALT1, so I'll just refrain from promoting entirely and let someone else pick. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 10:46, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

this is also still good to go for promotion at any time – newly proposed hooks shouldn't hold up the process entirely. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 10:48, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

ALT0 would be my preference (I think it's more "hooky"), but if we went with something else I'd be equally fine with ALT1 and ALT2. –Ploni (talk) 14:58, 10 July 2022 (UTC)