![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
The result of the move request was: No consensus to move. Angr ( talk) 15:50, 11 May 2013 (UTC) Angr ( talk) 15:50, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
– As a title in English, "Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra" is obviously the best.
I have never seen BPO's records, CDs, DVDs, and MP3-sites written only "Berlin Philharmonic" in unfinished English. They are all credited " Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra" in decent English (below/above "Berliner Philharmoniker" in German). Apparently " BPO" is an abbriviation for "Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra" in English, not for its old official name " de:Berliner Philharmonisches Orchester ", in spite of the explanation in the header of the article. It seems that German people has been mistaking selfishly, though it may be only the result of edits of English persons who are not familiar about how popular Furtwängler BPO(VPO) and Karajan BPO(VPO) have been all over the world. For example, BPO and VPO conducted by Furtwängler and Karajan have been more and more highly evaluated in Japan and still now selling overwhelmingly and constantly more than other conductors and orchestras.
Berlin Philharmonic what? Vienna Philharmonic what? It is obvious that such a question, for example, cannot happen in case of " RCO", namely, " Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra", locally " nl:Koninklijk Concertgebouworkest".
" BPO" has been still now very frequently used as an abbriviation for " Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra" everywhere in the world, because "Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra" as well as "BPO" is already established as its global name historically. I mean, very very impressive Furtwängler BPO and Apollo-like Karajan BPO. Therefore, I have to say, BPO's title in English Wikipedia should be " Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra", not "Berlin Philharmonic", and, such a unfinished English title should be thrown away. English is not German.
Please see Wikipedia's Five Criteria; "Recognizability", "Naturalness", "Precision", "Conciseness", "Consistency". The title "Berlin Philharmonic" fulfills only "Conciseness" at best, while the title "Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra" fulfills other four criteria. Moreover, the problem of "Berlin Philharmonic what?" has been remained unless it is renamed to "Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra", "Berlin Philharmonic Brassband", "Berlin Philharmonic Eurobeat", "Berlin Philharmonic Jazz", or something else. So current unfinished English title, "Berlin Philharmonic", should be abandoned after all.
Totally the same thing can be said in case of " VPO", that is, " de:Wiener Philharmoniker", " Vienna Philharmonic", and " Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra". NPThomas ( talk) 20:24, 2 May 2013 (UTC), 22:36, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
Comment: Is it accepted procedure that each person's vote is negatively characterized by the same person? The user NeedsLove has commented negatively on all those who oppose but has not provided a convincing argument in support - just that we're all wrong and invalid. Seems to me that's some kind of violation and certainly not in the spirit of Wikipedia. -- kosboot ( talk) 13:27, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
I am not sure what this article is about, and the name is no help. Is it about the orchestra Berliner Philharmoniker or their concert halls in the building Berliner Philharmonie or both? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 11:51, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
The hall is officially called the Berlin Philharmonie in English, see here. Gerda is arguing for all these names to be in German, but that isn't the way Wikipedia has done this in the past. If the institution itself uses an English version, we have always adopted that name for the English Wikipedia article. -- Klein zach 23:12, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Surely there is more to be said about the Berlin Phil's attitude to women. The brief mention of its first female member doesn't seem quite to do justice to the issue, both historically and still (remarkably few female violinists for example at the Prom I went to at the weekend) 128.41.63.54 ( talk) 13:23, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Berlin Philharmonic. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:00, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Berlin Philharmonic. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 13:14, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
Should the lead paragraph of this article contain reference to the fact that the orchestra is/has been consistently ranked in the top three recording orchestras in the world? It's easily referenced and seems like a major point of distinction among orchestras—and a prime candidate for lead paragraph inclusion. However other editors feel this is either not supportable or subjective: It is supportable by reference and WP:Opinion does not apply to referenced source(s) from professional recording critics. What am I missing? Lexlex ( talk) 19:22, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
I looked up this article to find the answer...and it doesn't say anything about the partition of Berlin after World War II, and what that had to do with the Philharmonic. This is pretty important information to include in the article. 68.173.24.203 ( talk) 13:41, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 23:12, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
The result of the move request was: No consensus to move. Angr ( talk) 15:50, 11 May 2013 (UTC) Angr ( talk) 15:50, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
– As a title in English, "Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra" is obviously the best.
I have never seen BPO's records, CDs, DVDs, and MP3-sites written only "Berlin Philharmonic" in unfinished English. They are all credited " Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra" in decent English (below/above "Berliner Philharmoniker" in German). Apparently " BPO" is an abbriviation for "Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra" in English, not for its old official name " de:Berliner Philharmonisches Orchester ", in spite of the explanation in the header of the article. It seems that German people has been mistaking selfishly, though it may be only the result of edits of English persons who are not familiar about how popular Furtwängler BPO(VPO) and Karajan BPO(VPO) have been all over the world. For example, BPO and VPO conducted by Furtwängler and Karajan have been more and more highly evaluated in Japan and still now selling overwhelmingly and constantly more than other conductors and orchestras.
Berlin Philharmonic what? Vienna Philharmonic what? It is obvious that such a question, for example, cannot happen in case of " RCO", namely, " Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra", locally " nl:Koninklijk Concertgebouworkest".
" BPO" has been still now very frequently used as an abbriviation for " Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra" everywhere in the world, because "Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra" as well as "BPO" is already established as its global name historically. I mean, very very impressive Furtwängler BPO and Apollo-like Karajan BPO. Therefore, I have to say, BPO's title in English Wikipedia should be " Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra", not "Berlin Philharmonic", and, such a unfinished English title should be thrown away. English is not German.
Please see Wikipedia's Five Criteria; "Recognizability", "Naturalness", "Precision", "Conciseness", "Consistency". The title "Berlin Philharmonic" fulfills only "Conciseness" at best, while the title "Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra" fulfills other four criteria. Moreover, the problem of "Berlin Philharmonic what?" has been remained unless it is renamed to "Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra", "Berlin Philharmonic Brassband", "Berlin Philharmonic Eurobeat", "Berlin Philharmonic Jazz", or something else. So current unfinished English title, "Berlin Philharmonic", should be abandoned after all.
Totally the same thing can be said in case of " VPO", that is, " de:Wiener Philharmoniker", " Vienna Philharmonic", and " Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra". NPThomas ( talk) 20:24, 2 May 2013 (UTC), 22:36, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
Comment: Is it accepted procedure that each person's vote is negatively characterized by the same person? The user NeedsLove has commented negatively on all those who oppose but has not provided a convincing argument in support - just that we're all wrong and invalid. Seems to me that's some kind of violation and certainly not in the spirit of Wikipedia. -- kosboot ( talk) 13:27, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
I am not sure what this article is about, and the name is no help. Is it about the orchestra Berliner Philharmoniker or their concert halls in the building Berliner Philharmonie or both? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 11:51, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
The hall is officially called the Berlin Philharmonie in English, see here. Gerda is arguing for all these names to be in German, but that isn't the way Wikipedia has done this in the past. If the institution itself uses an English version, we have always adopted that name for the English Wikipedia article. -- Klein zach 23:12, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Surely there is more to be said about the Berlin Phil's attitude to women. The brief mention of its first female member doesn't seem quite to do justice to the issue, both historically and still (remarkably few female violinists for example at the Prom I went to at the weekend) 128.41.63.54 ( talk) 13:23, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Berlin Philharmonic. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:00, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Berlin Philharmonic. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 13:14, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
Should the lead paragraph of this article contain reference to the fact that the orchestra is/has been consistently ranked in the top three recording orchestras in the world? It's easily referenced and seems like a major point of distinction among orchestras—and a prime candidate for lead paragraph inclusion. However other editors feel this is either not supportable or subjective: It is supportable by reference and WP:Opinion does not apply to referenced source(s) from professional recording critics. What am I missing? Lexlex ( talk) 19:22, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
I looked up this article to find the answer...and it doesn't say anything about the partition of Berlin after World War II, and what that had to do with the Philharmonic. This is pretty important information to include in the article. 68.173.24.203 ( talk) 13:41, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 23:12, 1 February 2021 (UTC)