Talk:Simon Neal (baritone)

Did you know nomination

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that Simon Neal portrayed complex characters in 20th-century operas, including Dr. Schön and Jack the Ripper in Lulu, and Nekrotzar in Ligeti's Le Grand Macabre? Source: several reviews
  • Reviewed: Shefa Salem

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 2134 past nominations.

Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:27, 25 February 2025 (UTC).

• The issue with the hook is that it is, to quote Launchballer, "person-does-their-jobby", and thus may not meet WP:DYKINT ("The hook should be likely to be perceived as unusual or intriguing by readers with no special knowledge or interest in the topic"). I can't see much else usable in the article that isn't "Neal doing this and that role" other than the review, but review hooks have tended to underperform on DYK, so it might not be worth it to pursue that angle. If more information could be found about his business career (the article doesn't elaborate on if he actually pursued business or not, or what the details were), then maybe that would work. Also pinging 4meter4 or CurryTime7-24 for possible hook suggestions, particularly for anything I may have missed. Otherwise, the nomination may have to be rejected for lack of a hook that meets WP:DYKINT. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:36, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  I don't think that "Jack the Ripper" needs any special knowledge, - and "Le Grand Macabre" should raise curiosity without special knowledge. - If you say performing a role is "doing their job", you could say the same of an architect creating a house, or a painter creating a portrait, but no: al these things are more than just doing their job. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:42, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  I haven't found the slightest bit about his business career beyond the mentioning, and even if, I'd not want to make something a living person left behind a hook, while what that person does exceptionally well, recognised from Australia to the UK, would not be mentioned. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:46, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

I'm commenting because I was pinged. I would have suggested just leaving the operas out because being known for playing complex characters in 20th century operas is a highly niche career and I think interesting. However, we can't do that because in looking in the sources that part of the hook fact isn't verifiable to the cited materials which do not describe the characters as "complex" or name Simon in association with that rep as a career focus. They very well may be compex, but the sources don't support that fact. In other words, that claim is original to the article and should be removed as WP:SYNTH. I also agree that role listings doesn't work except in rare circumstances as a hook. At this point, I see nothing "hooky" in the article.

I'm also concerned about the sourcing, because Gerda has once again submitted an article built almost predominantly from theatre bios which are PR materials that lack independence from the subject. This could end up at WP:AFD/WP:ERRORS if it heads to the main page in this state for lack of independent sourcing. I'm not saying these sources are unreliable, but that there aren't enough independent ones with WP:SIGCOV to demonstrate WP:GNG currently. The article should not be largely built from artist bios on the websites of theaters that employ the subject. For one, those are often written by the subect or their talent management, and on top of that they tend to have nothing original to say about the artist which is why the article is boring. Using these types of sources a little here or there is ok, but currently more than half of the citations are to those sources. It shouldn't be hard to track down some newspaper/magazine reviews of the performances and swap them out with the theatre bio citations. That would stop the article from having an issue during its run at DYK.

Even better, it would be good to locate some sort of original coverage of the singer in a secondary source that isn't just a production or performance review (an artist profile piece). Those type of materials tend to have more personal information which often lead to more suitable hooks. Gerda, once again please stop submitting articles cited predominantly to non-independent materials, and ones where independent coverage of the artist is fleeting in secondary sources. I'm not seeing one particularly strong independent source. None of the independent sources are about Neal as the primary subject which is problematic, and the reviews are mainly only a sentence or two long in focusing on Neal. The reviews of Lulu are the strongest sources. I've also found a couple cited places which the content they are supposed to be verifying can't be found. Perhaps you put in the wrong source when juggling between references? One ot the sources didn't even name Simon at all anywhere. Once the referencing has been significantly improved we can revisit this, but not until then. Ping Narutolovehinata5 and me when this is ready for a second look. Best.4meter4 (talk) 15:08, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

I fixed the wrong links (I hope). - I struck "complex" in the hook. May readers find out themselves. (Sorry, I was in a hurry when I noticed that it was last hours to nominate, and already regret that I tried.) The biographies of the four houses that I used are strictly informative about performances, - please explain what's not neutral about that. If he had begun his career when the GLS was compiled, it would also be a list of performances when and where, no? - I tried and added more reviews, but need to pursue a few other things before searching for more. There are more detailed reviews, but in German and paywalled, - I'd try to avoid that. - I found an interview where he says that he is Irish-British and began singing on stage at age 36. Please check if that is acceptable as a ref. - I found no other source for a place of birth than one of the theatre bios, - help welcome. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:46, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Seriously? Gerda Arendt you should be able to understand the difference between the Großes Sängerlexikon and a theatre bio. The GLS is an academic Single-field dictionary independently published by De Gruyter. It is a WP:TERTIARY source mainly; although in places Karl-Josef Kutsch and Leo Riemens provide critical assessment and commentary making it somewhat WP:SECONDARY. In contrast, opera house websites are entirely WP:SELFPUBLISHED by the theatre, and they are not Wikipedia:Independent sources as they employ the artist who is paid by them. Opera house websites are WP:PRIMARY sources, and artist bios (usually written by talent agents) are WP:PRSOURCEs and WP:COISOURCEs. The artist bios have no named authors nor do they have editorial oversight. Are they reliable? Usually (although I have caught some errors over my years of editing; such as artists who worked as a cover singer and never actually performed the part claiming a role at a particular theatre.) Reliability is not the main issue; independence is as is not overusing primary/self-published/PR materials per WP:No Original Research and WP:Verifiability policies. Best.4meter4 (talk) 20:54, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

I think we have a misunderstanding, possibly my fault. I see - let's take Oper Frankfurt for example - a neutral list of performances. What do you see there that is not neutral? I like the sentence "Simon Neal built up a substantial repertoire while a member of Theater Dortmund's ensemble from 2006 - 2011." That spares a lot of individual opera names if it can be used. It sounds neutral and independent to me. - He would be mentioned in GLS had he performed earlier ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:32, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

I think that quote was written by either a PR talent agent who counts Neal as their client or by the marketing team on staff at Oper Frankfurt, so I don't think we can or should use that quote. Critical assessment needs to come from an independent writer like a critic or academic, not from PR machine created document. I'm not going to get in a back and forth with you on this. You need to reduce the number of citations to non-independent promotional sources, and replace them with independent publications or we can reject the hook. Put in the work to fix it if you want this hook approved.4meter4 (talk) 21:53, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

I don't care if this goes to DYK, - as I said, I already regret to have nominated. I'll keep working on adding more refs, but not today, - close to midnight. We will have to disagree about the sentence. I think it describes well, in no promotional tone, what about every singer will do in his first engagement. I'll remove it to please you, because - as you know - I hate these tags. - You have still not told me if you saw anything questionable in the Oper Frankfurt entry, nor if we can use the interview for personal things like at what age he began, which probably nobody can know better than the person. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:54, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

I think the fact that I tagged it with a "better source" needed, and spent a considerable amount time explaining why theatre bios are not independent sources and that materials written by PR agents should be avoided wherever possible (by that I mean as a last resort). I strongly encourage you to get out of the habit of using these types of sources altogether per WP:NIS. It's fine as a reference point while doing a search for better materials while building an article (such as to learn what they sang where so you can find a review in an independent source) or for using as an external link like IBDB or IMDB, but what makes it in the actual article as a cited source really should be independent materials. If there is a certain fact that you can't support elsewhere it's ok to use these minimally; but by minimal I mean like only two or three sentences of content supported by this type of reference across the entire article; not sixteen citations supporting entire paragraphs of text. Most of what you are supporting with these sources should be supportable through other materials. You can (and must for DYK purposes) dig through German newspaper and opera/classical music magazines and replace the PR materials with independent ones.4meter4 (talk) 23:14, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Understood. Understood before you repeated it. Did you see that I moved two already to external links and commented out much of the other uses? - I'll see for what I can find sources, and then bring back, but it will take time, - I have a Bach cantata waiting for Sunday. - You still didn't answer if the interview can be used as a ref for personal matters, and if you saw anything promotional in the Oper Frankfurt entry. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:37, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

I thinks its fine to use it to source non-controversial biographical material per WP:ABOUTSELF.4meter4 (talk) 00:30, 28 February 2025 (UTC)