Talk:Wolfgang Wieland

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: rejected by reviewer, closed by NightWolf1223 talk 15:53, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

Wieland in 2006

• ... that the lawyer Wolfgang Wieland (pictured), a co-founder of the Berlin Greens and their speaker in the city parliament, represented the joint plaintiff in the Mykonos restaurant assassinations? Source: several
  • Reviewed: Pulpit in the Pisa Baptistery

Created by Jmanlucas (talk) and Gerda Arendt (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 18:26, 11 December 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Wolfgang Wieland; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

• Article is new enough, long enough, well-sourced, and written neutrally. No plagiarism is evident. The hook is cited, interesting, and properly formatted. QPQ has been done. The article recently appeared at ITN, but in recent deaths, so is not disqualified. A brief mention of Wieland at the Mykonos restaurant assassinations article would be nice. The image is freely licensed. If used, I would suggest going with a cropped version without Stefan Gelbhaar in the background. Good job. gobonobo ^{+ c} 19:50, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
  •  Note: @Gerda Arendt and Jmanlucas: I don't find the hook that interesting, as a simple "person does their job" hook. As DYK slots are currently under high demand, I won't be promoting it; other promoters may disagree. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 02:04, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
    • You think that "a co-founder of the Berlin Greens and their speaker in the city parliament" is not interesting? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:04, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
      • Not particularly; again, other promoters may disagree. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:01, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
        • I think this person's job involving a case with "the Mykonos restaurant assassinations" rather elevates the hook into being interesting. It's at least as interesting as one of the hooks on the page yesterday, which boiled down to 'a book was published 27 years after a different book was published'. P-Makoto (she/her) (talk) 16:38, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

I just checked and I am not sure we have any hooks in the article which would be interesting. I think we might reject if someone cannot conjure up a good hook. Lightburst (talk) 05:29, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

How is being a founder and speaker of the Greens in a city as famous as Berlin at that time (!) not interesting? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:09, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

To be fair, I would probably have passed this, with one caveat; for me, the phrase 'the lawyer' neuters the interestingness of it, because it tells me that was his job.--Launchballer 09:08, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

To Launchballer, I would ask, why is it that being a lawyer makes representing a plaintiff in an assassination case less interesting? Isn't it the assassination case itself which is interesting? If this hook had been "air chief marshal Hugh Dowding led the Fighter Command in fending off the Luftwaffe during the Battle of Britain", I don't quite see how the topic's chief marshal-ness would immediately make the hook boring.

To Gerda Arendt I would point out, you seem to find the Greens and Berlin themselves very interesting, and you make this comment about it being especially interesting for "the time", but the hook and article don't actually clarify the time or its interestingness (was something interesting going on?) or make clear who the Greens are or why they're remarkable. If you think co-founding the Greens in Berlin is the most interesting part of the book, then I think some contextualization is needed.

All this to say, while I don't find the Greens as inherently interesting as Gerda Arendt says (a little more contextualization is warranted), I also don't think the topic is as inherently uninteresting as AirshipJungleman29, Lightburst, and Launchballer say (a little more curiosity is warranted). P-Makoto (she/her) (talk) 09:29, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

(no time for detail right now) Today climate and environment are common topics but when the Greens came up with them, it was different. That needs no detail in article or hook, I think, because it's in the parties' article. I find interesting that this person wasn't a full-time politician, though, - that sort of case takes stamina and more. Help to better wording appreciated. Back to Seiji Ozawa (on the Main page and still not good) and Helga Paris (last chance today). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:49, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

marking this as rejected, as the nomination is well over two months old and two experienced promoters have found the hook non-interesting. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:42, 12 February 2024 (UTC)