Template:Did you know nominations/Holger Mühlbauer

Add links
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 SL93 (talk) 23:35, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

Holger Mühlbauer

(
)

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 21:43, 10 January 2022 (UTC).

  • Nomination should be put on hold until the deletion discussion has been completed. With that said, the hook as currently written isn't very interesting. He's the managing director of a company an organization that's not very well-known, so the hook doesn't raise much interest. Right now the article is also lacking details about aspects of his life and reads more like a resume in prose form, so finding an alternative hook fact may prove difficult unless the article is expanded further. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:29, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
    I'm sorry to say that you haven't read the article well enough. TeleTrusT is not a company but a nationwide association of the key players in internet security, or "German and international competence network in IT security". It would make the hook a bit long to say so, but if it's misunderstood we may have to do that. - Some people want to have there private life away from the media, and I'd respect that. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:53, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
    Regardless, it doesn't change the fact that the hook as currently written is not interesting to a broad audience. Most people have never even heard of this organization and I imagine it's not that well-known in Germany either. To the average reader, the hook reads like "person is an executive at organization X", which by itself doesn't make for an interesting hook. Can something else be proposed here? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:57, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
    ALT: ... that Holger Mühlbauer, who has worked for technical standards including ISO, became managing director of TeleTrusT, the German international competence network in IT security, in 2009?
    Did you know that the reason this article exists is you, because I missed the deadline to nominate TeleTrusT, and was too proud to ask for mercy? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:17, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
I'm going to be honest here, I don't think this hook fact about Mühlbauer being a managing director is working out since the ALT doesn't really address the main issue of the hook fact (him being a director in an organization) not being innately interesting to a broad audience. If more information could be added about career, perhaps that could also be a starting point for other hooks. One possible path could be a focus on the ISO aspect, since the ISO is much more well-known internationally. In any case, another issue with the article right now is that it is in need of copyediting: there's a typo in the article ("brand evaluationa" instead of "brand evaluation"), and there seems to be an excessive use of quotation marks for proper nouns. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:30, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
I wonder why you don't correct an obvious typo, instead of writing a long sentence here. I fixed that "evaluations". I'm unsure how to mark project names, such as "Brand evaluation", to distinguish from proper nouns. I'll word a more ISO hook in case the article is kept, but otherwise why bother? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:25, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Full review needed now that AfD has closed as "no consensus". BlueMoonset (talk) 02:36, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: The article was new enough when it was first created. The length is more than adequate. It is well sourced (not AGF needed because it's German), neutral, and without known copyright violations. Alt 1 is better (and can be referenced from the article. The QPQ is still missing KittenKlub (talk) 17:19, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. I reviewed now Template:Did you know nominations/Elysia timida. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:44, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
@Gerda Arendt: Cool, it is a pass. KittenKlub (talk) 18:46, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
I hate to be a downer, but I agree with Narutolovehinata5 on both hooks not being interesting to a broad audience. SL93 (talk) 16:11, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
Courtesy ping to reviewer KittenKlub for their thoughts. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 16:17, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
I think we just have a different view on what "interesting" means. I see it as something that is new and offers a perspective, you seem to think that it measn something they alreay want to know. We recently had a nom where I gave in, we said something to please the common reader, about Angela Merkel. St. Martin, Moosach, less than 1000 views (773). Then we had something about the specific jobs of choral conductor and a less familiar role: Elena Guseva, more than 1000 views, + 477 for the opera, - while Merkel doesn't need extra views ;) - I believe we shouldn't think that our audience is not interested before even offering it. International standards influence all our readers, - how do we predict that they will not be interested in who makes some? Data security concerns many of our readers, why not tell them about an influential person in the field?? How is that less interesting than some pop song??? I vote for letting the hook run, preferredly during the time that Europe is awake, and see what happens, and take it from there next time. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:31, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
Some articles just aren't meant to be for DYK. If the article in question has no information that could work as hooks, it's better to simply not nominate it at all and focus efforts on another article which does have information that works has hooks. I've known from personal experience that it's not feasible or practical to nominate every article I've written for DYK, only the ones that do have information that could be broadly interesting. If there's nothing usable, I simply don't nominate it. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 16:48, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
I seem not to speak English: this man did great things in both international standards and data security, I believe that for many common readers, that's more interesting than some little hymn or garden which I nominated without such concerns. - You didn't comment the views for the two noms compared. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:24, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
Maybe one or more of the great things he did could be in the hook. SL93 (talk) 20:49, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
?? Being head of THE German competence network isn't enough? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:27, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you don't understand. The hook doesn't state how important the company is. That would require a lot of background knowledge which shouldn't be needed. SL93 (talk) 21:44, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
The hook - we talk about the ALT - says "the German international competence network in IT security". If we get into technical details, we might indeed get into loosing interest of the common reader. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:19, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
Pretty much what SL93 said. If a hook relies too much on background information that the average reader likely doesn't know or doesn't immediately understand, it's unlikely to be interesting to a broad audience. Him being a part of a major German IT security firm is important and I'm sure he's done a lot of great work, but there's a difference between important and interesting to a broad audience, and while there is an overlap, the two are not mutually inclusive. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 22:57, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
@SL93: Perhaps you can also explain here what makes a hook broadly interesting and explain how a potential hook about Mühlbauer could meet the interestingness requirement? I'm not sure if I can explain my thoughts well here. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 22:59, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
(ec) 3 things: 1) Sorry, I don't see that difference, - if something is important, it should be interesting (not sensational, not what they always wanted to know, not sexy), just good to know - isn't that the key to DYK? - 2) I don't see why you think the whole hook has to be understood, - how often was I told not to tell the whole thing in the hook but make curious? - 3) the part about the international standards (ISO) should be known, to make a connection. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:07, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
  • Let's just put it this way: a person becoming a director of a company is by itself not going to catch the attention of readers unless the company itself is well-known or there was additional context that made such a hiring unusual (for example, being the first African American CEO of a company that had its roots in discrimination against Blacks, being the first woman CEO of a Fortune 500 company, or the person being hired as a CEO coming from a completely different background: for example a former American football team coach being hired as an executive of a financial services company). A hook about a person being an executive at a company could also work if the circumstances that led to the hiring were, for lack of a better word, "funny": for example, if the executive was hired after a meeting that was held at the previous executive's son's wedding, or something else that's out of the ordinary. The ISO is a well-known organization, but merely being an executive working for it at some point isn't by itself going to catch attention without additional context. In this case, TeleTrusT isn't well-known outside of Germany (and I imagine even within Germany it isn't particularly well-known), so him being an executive of a company isn't going to appeal to a broad audience unless there was something unusual about it.
  • And this is the point I was talking about earlier, about how sometimes, articles just aren't meant for DYK. If an article otherwise meets DYK requirements, but there isn't any information in the article that would work as a broadly-interesting hook, it would be better to just not nominate it for DYK at all and instead put focus and effort on an article which does have potentially hooky facts. An article doesn't need to be forced to be nominated for DYK if there simply isn't anything that can be used as hooks, and the way I see it, this is the case with Mühlbauer's article. Editors don't need to nominate for DYK every single article they write or expand even if they're technically eligible, because at the end of the day, "a hook must be interesting to a broad audience" is still an important criterion, and if it can't be met, the article can't be approved for DYK and such nominations would just be a waste of time and effort that could have been directed towards more deserving articles. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:27, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
    I don't know what to say when you still think TeleTrusT is a company. Not much time, not even to read at the moment (still just reading my watchlist): it's a double fact, ISO for all, and an organization with a name that makes curious just by it's name to expand knowledge. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:32, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
    • Regardless if it's a company or an organization, the point largely stands: neither ALT0 nor ALT1 are hooks that would appeal to a broad audience. Simply working for a company or organization without additional context isn't really going to catch attention. With that said, the article does state that prior to him working for the ISO and all his security work, he trained as a metalworker. Now that is information that is hooky: a typical person wouldn't expect someone whose background is metalworking to later focus on IT security, thus going back to my earlier point about how a person's career or hiring being very different from their background can be a source of a good broadly-appealing hook. I think a hook based on his experience in metalworking would work much better than either of the currently proposed hooks. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:46, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
  • Giving the metalworking angle a shot:
ALT2 ... that prior to holding the position of Secretary in the International Standards Organization, Holger Mühlbauer trained as a metalworker?
ALT3 ... that Holger Mühlbauer, who currently serves as the managing director of the German IT security association TeleTrusT, originally trained as a metalworker?
ALT4 ... that German jurist and information security specialist Holger Mühlbauer originally trained as a metalworker?
Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:19, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
Courtesy ping to @KittenKlub and SL93: regarding the new hooks. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:22, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for thinking about it, but for my life I'll not understand that this little bit of early doing would be more interesting than ISO. Please abbreviate ISO, or would you spell out British Broadcasting Corporation? Striking ALT2 because Secretary has such a special meaning for ISO than secretary that it really would need explanation. Striking ALT4 as way to general. I still believe that ALT - which does give an explanation for what TeleTrusT is - is better than ALT3 but if KittenKlub can approve that's better than nothing. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:49, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
(Responding to call for opinion). @Gerda Arendt: @Narutolovehinata5: You guys - a marathon ping pong game of each repeating the same argument in turn. Thank you - we now know that non-Europeans don't care if a European gets an impressive job with far-reaching powers, but that Europeans probably do care ... and that Europeans don't care if that European was a little guy who became a big guy, but that non-Europeans probably do care. Maybe this is why there is DYK guidance that says that each DYK slot should ideally contain a proportion of US-based articles plus a proportion of rest-of-the-world-based articles - something for everybody (Yes, that again).
There is nothing wrong with ALTs 0, 1 and 3. I prefer ALT3 because it contains the same info as the other two, but it does add that our hero did not have an easy start in his ride to the top. Why not just pass this nom for promotion with all three of those ALTs and see what happens? Then we are all happy bunnies.
By the way you are both right that the article has copyediting issues. I'll take a look at that tonight or tomorrow. (Done) Storye book (talk) 23:05, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
My thoughts to a T, Storye book—I appreciate you having the courage to express them here :) I'll tick ALT3 in good faith (can't translate the german document), just push this hook on through. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 00:00, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Holger_Mühlbauer&oldid=1070726550"