Template:Did you know nominations/Mariachi Divas de Cindy Shea

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 PFHLai (talk) 00:39, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Mariachi Divas de Cindy Shea[edit]

Created by Rnickel (talk). Self nominated at 21:14, 30 June 2014 (UTC).

  • Article is right length and is new enough. Both hooks are interesting (main and ALT1 are the same thing, just reworded), and while I personally lean towards the Disneyland hook as being the more interesting of the two, the Grammy nomination has better sourcing (the Disneyland cite comes from a photo caption, so not sure how others feel about this). Only concern I have about article is its use of peacock prose that makes the article sound more promotional than encyclopedic. That can be fixed, I think. --McDoobAU93 21:53, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the feedback! I added a better citation for the Disneyland date, and reworded the "peacock prose". Best, Rnickel (talk) 23:41, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
There are some minor issues with the article's phrasing, but I've alerted the editor to them. Nothing that should stop the hook from being accepted, in my opinion. Editor did produce sourcing for the Disneyland hook, so it comes down to whichever hook the community prefers or finds more interesting. If it's the primary hook, might I suggest this rewording: "... that the first all-female mariachi band nominated for a Grammy Award, the Mariachi Divas de Cindy Shea, was also the first to win a Grammy?" --McDoobAU93 13:36, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the work on this, and for the suggested hook. I did play around a lot with wording along those lines, but ultimately felt there was room for confusion that way... might be taken as "they were the first nominated, and then finally years later after numerous failed attempts, they also were the first to win", when in fact, they won on their first nomination straight out of the box, which I think has more punch. Does that make sense? That said, if it's a strong preference to change it, I think it's really fine either way. --Rnickel (talk) 14:20, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • It does make sense, but the problem is that the hooks usually don't end with a parenthetical sentence at the end, which is why I would like to incorporate their win into the sentence itself. Maybe change the end to this: "... that the first all-female mariachi band nominated for a Grammy Award, the Mariachi Divas de Cindy Shea, won the award on their very first nomination?" What do you think? --McDoobAU93 14:32, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • No need for the stalker tag, as all commentary is welcome, Melanie! I like it, but I think the nominator would say (as I would) that it loses the punch of them winning on their first nomination. It does respond to my comment about the parenthetical phrase. --McDoobAU93 15:21, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
  • If we don't like the parenthetic phrase, then I think MelanieN's suggested phrasing is a good alternative. Or we could just make this whole discussion moot and go with the Disney tag... McDoob, didn't you like that one better anyway? :-) --Rnickel (talk) 00:48, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
  • I do like MelanieN's version, actually, and since it's the primary hook you proposed, let's go with that one. I like the second one as I'm a Disney fan, but that makes the first one no less valid and no less interesting. --McDoobAU93 18:28, 4 July 2014 (UTC)