Template:Did you know nominations/Helen Quach


 * 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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:47, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Helen Quach

 * ... that in 1977, symphony conductor Helen Quach was one of two women who led major orchestras anywhere in the world? Source: "Take two fingers and count the number of women, world-wide, who are conducting major orchestras. There's Sarah Caldwell... And there's Helen Quach, who seems well on the way to fulfilling Leonard Bernstein's prophecy." (Honolulu Star-Bulletin, March 25, 1977.)
 * Reviewed: Céleste Mogador
 * Comment: Created as part of WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/49 (Women in Music)

Created by EricEnfermero (talk). Self-nominated at 07:35, 1 August 2017 (UTC).


 * Symbol question.svg Interesting life, on good sources, subscription source accepted AGF, no copyvio obvious. - The hook: I can see DYK critics coming and asking for precise definitions of "major". Can we say "very few" or whatever? She conducted Hong Kong in 1977, - was that "major"? - Article: Please repeat the links from the lead when they first appear in the body. I am not sure about of the sentence "As Quach was breaking into conducting under Bernstein", - "as" or "when"? "breaking into conducting"? - Possibly my lack of English. Thanks for adding a woman in music! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:40, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I apologize for the delayed response; I didn't realize that the article had been reviewed. As far as the wording issue with major, I didn't endeavor to define anything one way or the other; I simply aimed to keep the wording of the cited source (without creating a close paraphrasing situation), because the writer is certainly more of an authority on this than I am. I don't know if I should speculate on what causes him to use this wording; maybe he considers Hong Kong to be major, or maybe her guest conducting or her previous experience under Bernstein is influencing his wording. It seems odd to me to use something like "very few" if it's supported by a source that specifically tells the reader to "take two fingers and count the number of women ..." If it's a sticking point and we can't find another source to clarify, I'm sure we can come up with another hook. I'll think that over.


 * My longtime (and possibly flawed) understanding of MOS:DUPLINK is that as a rule we link the first occurrence of a term (lead or body), and only as an exception do we link both the first occurrence in the lead and the first occurrence in the body. Respectfully, I think it might be beyond the scope of DYK to require the exceptional case of wikilinking. However, if anyone does decide to add those links, I don't think I would revert them. On the when/as question, I think both are okay, but when might be a little more straightforward. "Breaking into" in this context is when a person is first establishing success in a career, getting their first position/role, etc. I would not object if we want to use the more formal/plain "When Quach was conducting under Bernstein". EricEnfermero (Talk) 04:39, 7 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Symbol voting keep.svg You can have my blessing for the hook, but please keep it watchlisted for further discussions. What I say regarding a reviewed article is typically suggestions, not requirements. In FAs, you typically link in both lead and body. My rule of thumb is: the further away two mentionings of a term from each other, the better link. I wanted to find out about a name (forgot which), and had to return to the lead, - that's all. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:59, 7 August 2017 (UTC)