This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Opera This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Opera, a group writing and editing Wikipedia articles on operas, opera terminology, opera composers and librettists, singers, designers, directors and managers, companies and houses, publications and recordings. The project discussion page is a place to talk about issues and exchange ideas. New members are welcome!OperaWikipedia:WikiProject OperaTemplate:WikiProject OperaOpera Biography: Musicians This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians.

• ... 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

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

• 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)[reply]

  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)[reply]

  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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

• Regardless of the sourcing issues, there's really still the issue with the hook, which needs to be addressed. @4meter4: Do you have any suggestions for a broadly interesting hook here? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:04, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. I'm hoping Gerda can locate better sources about this singer, because currently there is nothing in the references used that is particularly interesting/unique.4meter4 (talk) 01:18, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, I am not even interested in a DYK (said above). Secondly, before I can turn to him, I have a Bach cantata (for tomorrow) and a recent death article (for asap) to deal with before turning to him. I think, 4meter4, that the "excessively" tag is no longer justified as it is, because only a few non-controversial facts have no other source right now, but will not take it away myself. I'll add that he appeared on stage of the Royal Opera House on a horse, but would not like such a trivial thing that only mentions his ability to ride, nothing of why he is called to great houses of the world, for a hook. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:42, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And yet, riding a horse on the stage of the Royal Opera House is unique and interesting and far more hooky. The trivial is often the better choice at DYK unless the core facts themselves are exceptional which they are not in this case. I'll take a look at removing the tags once you tell me you are done editing so I don't have to keep checking back and forth. I suggest proposing the horse fact as a new hook at the same time. There is no reason not to let this get featured at DYK after you have put in so much work, and it appears you have found a fact of interest. Best.4meter4 (talk) 13:03, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You can propose such hook, I will not, as explained ;) - I put the work into the article to get rid of shame, not for DYK. You can check the article right now, - I don't think "excessively" describes well the few instances of use for non-controversial facts. I may not get to expanding until next week. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:23, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the tags as requested; although I still think the article lacks a clear independent source with WP:SIGCOV. I'm rejecting this as you have indicated you are not interested in featuring this at DYK or proposing a usable hook. That's your choice.4meter4 (talk) 14:36, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I replaced all opera house refs by others, mostly reviews, some press releases. Some bits are still commented out (where the bios just mentions houses without details). Too tired for that tonight. As expected, the refs support what the houses wrote. He could go to DYK now, I think. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:19, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We just need a verifiable hook of interest. Please propose alt hooks below.4meter4 (talk) 21:42, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You can give it a start, I'm out today. Dr, Schön/Jack the Ripper is interesting (and I saw it). Le Grand Macabre is interesting (and I saw it). Pizarro and the horse seem less interesting to me because less unusual (and I didn't see it), but Beethoven is always good, - feel free to try. Out now. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:12, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unless the DYK is for an opera article, I don't think opera character or opera plot facts are appropriate for a DYK hook. The hook needs to be about Neal. I'm not finding any of the cited reviews of his performances particularly compelling to someone who doesn't know opera, nor his repertoire interesting to someone who isn't already an opera aficionado like you or I. The hook needs to target a general audience. I know it's not your favorite but the horse bit probably is the most interesting tid bit to the general public. I am proposing alt1 below. @Narutolovehinata5 please review this alt hook. Best.4meter4 (talk) 16:53, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ALT1: ... that baritone Simon Neal's 2020 performance as Don Pizarro in Beethoven's Fidelio included riding a horse on the stage of the Royal Opera House?

edit conflict, I proposed at the same time:

ALT0a: ... that when Simon Neal portrayed the double role of Dr. Schön and Jack the Ripper, a reviewer noted that he was convincing in the facets of his obsessive relationship to Lulu?

ALT0b: ... that Simon Neal portrayed Nekrotzar, Le Grand Macabre in Ligeti's opera?

for starting points. After edit conflict: I tried not even to focus on opera, to please you ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:58, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I won't ping a favourite reviewer. For the horsy thing, can you express that he made his entrance on horse, to make it more impressive/interesting? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:03, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I like ALT1, although I wonder if it could have less links in order to encourage more readers to Neals' article. ALT0's variants are uninteresting to a broad audience and require knowledge about these specific roles (ALT1 is somewhat of a role hook, but the point is the horse riding and not the role itself, so it's not actually reliant on knowing Don Pizarro or Fidelio). Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 03:28, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Narutolovehinata5 Gerda typically likes linking operas and opera houses in her noms on singers... I'm ok with it, but we could remove the wikilink to Fidelio (although Gerda may protest). Can we give Alt1 the approval tick? I think it is the best we can do with this article. I agree the other alts are not compelling.4meter4 (talk) 03:50, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't seen an actual full review of the article so far, so until that's done then ALT1 can't get the tick. I could do it later today. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:05, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please explain why you are afraid of people clicking on Fidelio? With the bold article in front, why would they? ... and if, what would be wrong about that? If a link less is needed (and why, I don't understand, it's just a service for people seeking background by hovering over it, imho), better delink the opera house which is famous enough not to need a place name. - I like to mention (and better with a link) the operas because they characterise the singer. Hundreds of people have sung Pizarro, some two-digit number Dr. Schön, but for Nekrotzar, described as Le Grand Macabre (which should be interesting for any reader), he we are in one-digit territory.--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:18, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's not being afraid, it's wanting to make sure that people read Neal's article. Yes, I would be fine with delinking the opera house for the same reason. However, for the record, you may be overestimating the general population's familiarity with opera houses (most would probably only be able to name the Sydney Opera House and maybe the Met Opera). This is another recurring issue with you where you overestimate the hoi polloi's familiarity with what you know and you assume that what you know is well-known when that's not necessarily the case. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:42, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't understand my point, sorry. I believe we can delink the house because people will be impressed by "Royal" (or not) without a link, without knowing it, just by sounding important. It doesn't matter much for the hook if the house is in London, Copenhagen or Stockholm. Fidelio, however, may be new to them, and a link can help them finding background. - Repeating: Nekrotzar is not only more rare then Fidelio, but also sounds more interesting, and I understand that DYK is content now with just an unusual name. Also: the hook is more concise and direct to the point. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:04, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gerda, I think you missed my main point: that you may be overestimating the average person's familiarity with opera and classical music in general. It may be hard for you to understand as you're a performer yourself, but things that may seem obvious to you (such as the Royal Opera House being a big deal) may not be to the general public. Perhaps 4meter4, as a fellow performer, might be able to explain the idea better than I can, but the point is that you should understand that we are writing for general audiences, not fellow classical music fanatics. It's the reason why the riding-a-horse-onstage aspect, while not your preference, is the best option here, and why your preferred options, like the focus on roles that only the biggest classical music or opera fans would recognize, are frankly bad ideas. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:46, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, I'm personally fine with the links to Fidelio and the opera house remaining (although ideally we'd want to avoid excessive blue links). I just want you to understand where I'm coming from, and how the context you provide in the discussion is not going to change the main issue I brought up above regarding your familiarity vs. the layperson's familiarity. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:49, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am afraid that you misread my point that the word "Royal" may imply for the most general of readers that the thing (opera house or whatever) is important, without the slightest bit of familiarity with the whatever. My story today is about a hymn that I proposed in 2019, remember? Yoninah finally approved. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:19, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Again, you might be overestimating the general public's familiarity or even their ability to get the point. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:43, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Which point? That the attribute "Royal" makes something sound important? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:25, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. They might just see it as part of a name but otherwise not think so much about it. Kind of like how people don't necessarily take notice about the Royal Mail being, well, Royal. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 15:07, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• The discussion is already quite long but a full review has not yet been done, so might as well. The article was nominated for DYK seven days after creation. I did not find any close paraphrasing, and a QPQ has been done. All hooks have been struck apart from ALT1 for reasons that have been detailed at length above. My main concern with ALT1 is more of a wording: according to the article, Neal has actually portrayed Don Pizzaro at least twice: once at the Sydney Opera House, and one at the Royal Opera House. If he actually did horseback in the Sydney Opera House performance, that might actually work far better since the Sydney Opera House is far more well-known especially among laypeople than the Royal Opera House. Otherwise, @4meter4: it might be a good idea to rephrase ALT1 to make it clear it happened in a specific 2020 performance, rather than it being a general thing. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 15:07, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  We don't know anything about the Sydney performance besides that it happened. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:10, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Narutolovehinata5 I added 2020 as suggested.4meter4 (talk) 16:27, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Simon Neal didn't perform in Die ersten Menschen in Frankfurt. It was Iain MacNeil. Grimes2 (talk) 18:33, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, sorry. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:36, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]