Talk:Leonkoro Quartet

Attached is the discussion that I had with User:Scope creep after my original submission, discussing how the article could be improved. This was on his talkpage. By the end we seemed to have reached consensus that it has been improved sufficiently for resubmission, and in particular that the quartet did indeed meet WP:Notability criteria (particularly #9). If there are any queries about the revised text, it would be helpful if these could be asked to me directly and see whether they can be resolved before making a decision, as an "against" decision seems to cause some months' delay due to the waiting time for reviewing. It seemed that once the reviewer had made their decision, they could not change it when the article had been suitably modified. Please forgive any formatting errors on this talk, I am not a very regular editor. Hyperman 42 (talk) 17:47, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Evaluation of draft article on Leonkoro Quartet

Thanks for reviewing this. I am somewhat puzzled that it was not accepted, and would like to check with you about the perceived issues. I've briefly edited the draft to add a couple of separate sources. However it's not clear to me what else might need to be done and I wanted to explore the reasons for your decision before proceeding further, hope that is OK.

Firstly, there seems to be a challenge on notability grounds, yet this quartet has achieved the remarkable feat of winning two of the world's most notable string quartet competitions (Wigmore Hall and Bordeaux) in a single year. This would be like someone getting an Oscar and Golden Globe award in the same year. Virtually all previous winners of the Wigmore Hall competition have their own Wikipedia page. The quartet now perform regularly at various international concert venues.

Secondly, the level of detail and references provided is comparable to other string quartets such as the Esmé_Quartet (2018 Wigmore winners), Marmen Quartet, etc.

So I would appreciate your suggestions on what you feel is currently lacking in the article. Hyperman 42 (talk) 14:46, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Hyperman 42: How goes it? The Esmé_Quartet quartet article is hanging by a thread. Winning a competion, and even prestigious competition or even a series of competitions, is a "good thing" for notability, but it doesn't automatically prove the subject is automatically notable. This article has a single reference. The Esmé Quartet has a couple of refs but again only competitions. Is that what all these quartets actually just do, just compete. It makes them prestigious and makes then stand out I suppose, but where is the WP:SECONDARY sourcing out with that. Where is their work to pass WP:MUSICBIO, WP:BAND or any of these other notability criteria around musicians. It was decided before 2010 that notabilty can't just be established by winning competitions. There needs to be more. I think it was in 2009 I vaguelly remember it being discussed. I hope that helps. scope_creepTalk 10:26, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi and thanks for getting back to me. But no, all these quartets perform regularly in classical music concerts at prestigious commercial venues, so it is like a major rock band that does tours. It feels like there's a bit of a misunderstanding of how the classical music world actually works and that the notability criteria are being set too high. Recordings are less of a major output in classical music because it's not playing original work and there are many recordings of the great classics already. Rock bands aren't required to give listings of all their gigs to prove that they are "notable". I could try to engage fellow workers on the WikiProject on classical music, but I thought it would be better to see if the two of us could reach an understanding instead. The sources I've added for the Leonkoro are from solid independent sources. Hyperman 42 (talk) 17:34, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Also in WP:BAND, which you cross-reference, the Leonkoro (and the Esme) comfortably meet notability criterion 9, "Has won first, second, or third place in a major music competition." They could qualify under a couple of the other criteria as well. In both cases the sources include not only the quarter's website (which is just for cross-reference) but accounts of the competition wins from Wigmore Hall and other independent sources. Note that both Wigmore hall and the competition itself are rated as sufficiently important that they have their own Wikipedia articles. Hyperman 42 (talk) 17:40, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

I can see one thing that could have caused confusion - I haven't mentioned the publishers specifically in the various references (magazines, concert halls, the BBC etc). I'll add those now, hopefully that will make it clearer that these are multiple independent sources. Hyperman 42 (talk) 17:55, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

@Hyperman 42: It isn't immediately clear from the article that that they are not just competitors. Your best bet to resubmit it and wait for another WP:AFC reviewer to take a look at it. It will be some weeks, but you will be guaranteed a review at some point. scope_creepTalk 18:56, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

OK, thanks very much for the hints on improvement which I think have made the article better now and hopefully will get a more positive result this time round. Is there any mechanism by which you can change your original decision if you now feel the article has been improved sufficiently? It took 2-3 months before it was initially reviewed. I get the impression that Wikipedia is struggling a bit to keep reviewers and authors - some articles don't seem to get updated as regularly as they did in the past, on a range of subjects. Hyperman 42 (talk) 20:57, 18 September 2023 (UTC)