Jump to content

Template:Did you know nominations/Old-Fashioned Cupcake

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 Cielquiparle (talk) 11:15, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

Old-Fashioned Cupcake

(
)

Created by Lullabying (talk). Self-nominated at 19:06, 27 December 2022 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Yes
  • Interesting: Yes
  • Other problems: No - Personally, I'd prefer to see the term yaoi used directly, rather than boys' love, which — especially for a work where the protagonists are clearly adults — feels inappropriate.
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Everything is sourced fine except the plot section, which does not need inline references per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction#Plot summaries of individual works. Please use {{lang}} within Template:Graphic novel list to apply language tagging to the original titles of the manga. Consider rewording the hook to use yaoi rather than BL. Good work! OwenBlacker (he/him; Talk; please {{ping}} me in replies) 09:55, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

  • @OwenBlacker: Thanks for the review, but I fail to see what the problem is with using "boys' love." It's what all the Japanese-language sources use and the genre itself doesn't have a specific age limit for its characters or readership. lullabying (talk) 22:50, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
    • Referring to what reliable sources call it is fine. Approving. SL93 (talk) 07:22, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

I'm afraid the hook falls rather flat for me. It's a neat fact, but it's not very hooky – I'm not reading that and wanting to know more about the article. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 02:53, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Good for you I guess. Re-approving. SL93 (talk) 03:08, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
  • Disclaimer: I came to this discussion after seeing a WT:DYK discussion about this nomination, although my comments and thoughts are my own.
I do agree that the hook could be better. For one thing, I'm not much of a fan of how the hook is currently written as it seems to be more about Takeda rather than Cupcake itself. I am not totally opposed to a hook focusing on Takeda instead of Cupcake (I've admittedly done similar hooks in the past myself), but if focusing on Takeda is desired, I don't think the current hook wording is the best option. It seems to rely on specialist knowledge, particularly knowing the relationship between this series and boy's love works. If we do want to focus on Takeda rather than Cupcake specifically, I think a hook about this particular part: Kimura prepared for his role by doing muscle training at a gym, and he also stated that, during filming, he had to eat pancakes and drink coffee while talking for eight hours, even on a full stomach. is actually a better angle than "he got interested in this because his co-stars worked on similar projects". I understand this angle would mean that the mention of boy's love would have to be dropped, but I personally think that it would be a more intriguing hook overall than the original proposal.
@SL93: I should note that two editors have already objected against the original hook, and if you include me as a third objection, that means approving it would mean going against consensus. Courtesy pings to OwenBlacker and Lullabying regarding the above concerns. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:53, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
I have no intention to break consensus, which is something that I have sometimes been annoyed at theleekycauldron about. SL93 (talk) 04:57, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
To be clear, the use of the term "boy love" was not the rationale for me not approving straight-off — hence "consider". I don't particularly like the term personally — not least, I'm a queer man and accusations of pædophilia have long been directed at queer people as homophobic invective. It is a term of art and I can live with it, I just think using the term yaoi is preferable. Had there not been a need to add {{lang}} as well, i would have approved with the same "consider…" comment.
Personally, i like the existing hook — that a popular actor only became interested in performing in queer art after talking with other (presumably cis-het) artists struck me as interesting.
Given the language-tagging is in place now, I would be happy to approve; I'm sorry I didn't see that that was the case sooner — OwenBlacker (he/him; Talk; please {{ping}} me in replies) 08:16, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
@Lullabying, SL93, and Narutolovehinata5:
@OwenBlacker: Do you have other suggestions for a new hook? You and SL93 are fine with the current hook but Leeky and I have concerns, so it doesn't seem like there will be consensus anyway to go with the original hook unless some form of compromise can be reached. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:21, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5: Not off-hand, but I can give it some thought later, after my working day. What is it about the original hook that you dislike; is there room for compromise there or do we need to work with Lullabying to find a different fact to excerpt? — OwenBlacker (he/him; Talk; please {{ping}} me in replies) 10:09, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
@OwenBlacker: I'd personally prefer a different hook fact altogether, although I'm not opposed to a rewording of the original. My original concern was that the original hook seemed reliant on specialist knowledge, specifically what boys love is. I also had some minor reservations since the hook seemed to focus less on Cupcake and more about Takeda, but I'm not against totally against the idea and I think a Takeda-centric hook could work albeit with a different angle (I gave a possible suggestion above). Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:16, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
ALT0a ... that actor Kouhei Takeda was interested in starring in the boys' love television drama Old-Fashioned Cupcake because his co-stars from Kamen Rider Build also starred in similar shows?
ALT1 ... that actor Tatsunari Kimura prepared for his role in the television drama Old-Fashioned Cupcake by doing muscle training at a gym?
ALT1a ... that one main cast member of the television drama Old-Fashioned Cupcake prepared for his role by doing muscle training at a gym?
ALT2 ... that actor Tatsunari Kimura once ate pancakes and drank coffee while talking for eight hours during the filming of the television drama Old-Fashioned Cupcake?
ALT2a ... that a main cast member of the television drama Old-Fashioned Cupcake once ate pancakes and drank coffee while talking for eight hours during filming?
I understand ALT0a is basically a re-wording of the original, but I hoped to give the hook additional context for the benefit of non-specialists. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:17, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for giving this more thought, Narutolovehinata5; that's very helpful. My first impressions are that this ALT2 feels a bit "wtf?!" clickbaity, so it might work better with a little more context perhaps and ALT1 doesn't feel very remarkable (surely many actors prepare for roles in the gym?), but I'm happy with any of those. (I still prefer the term yaoi over BL, but I won't block approval over it.) — OwenBlacker (he/him; Talk; please {{ping}} me in replies) 09:30, 27 January 2023 (UTC)4
@OwenBlacker: Thank you for the response. I guess we should wait now for a response from the others before a final choice in hook is made? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:31, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
  • I'm fine with the new ALTs, but the actor mentioned in ALT1 and ALT2 is Tatsunari Kimura, not Kouhei Takeda. lullabying (talk) 01:03, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
I've also added alternative versions of ALT1 and 2 in case the "don't mention people who don't have articles by name in hooks" thing still applies. Unless, of course, Lullabying would be willing to write him up an article. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:17, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
I think, while I gather my thoughts, it would probably be best for me to stay off this page. SL93'll know what to do. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 03:44, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
@SL93: Are you okay with ALT0a/ALT1/ALT1a/ALT2/ALT2a? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:58, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
@Lullabying, OwenBlacker, and Narutolovehinata5: Not sure what happened, but I'm not finding the fact stated for ALT2 in the source cited in the article. (I scanned through all four pages of the article.) Possibly some footnotes got switched as hooks were being reworked, etc.? (Hopefully I'm wrong...but if I'm right, this article can't go to the main page yet.) Cielquiparle (talk) 20:47, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
Here's the correct source: https://www.fujitv-view.jp/article/post-595393/ lullabying (talk) 07:40, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Old-Fashioned_Cupcake&oldid=1137208486"