![]() | F. Andrieu has been listed as one of the
Music good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: January 24, 2021. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | A fact from F. Andrieu appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 5 February 2021 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Smerus ( talk · contribs) 22:49, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
I am taking this on, and will aim to complete the review over the next few days.-- Smerus ( talk) 22:49, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
Very interesting article - I know very little about ars nova music and this is on a first read very informative and certainly at or very close to GA level. The odd thing is that, because of the information available, it is invevitably more about Armes, amours than about its composer - you may want to add a redirect on WP of Armes, amours leading to it. Incidentally you have enabled me to hear this piece for the first time and it is fabulous.
The following, mostly copyediting, points have struck me:
-- Smerus ( talk) 12:13, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the above, and for the rewrite of the music overview. But this does I think introduce or extend other problems which I didn't cotton on to in my first reading, notably the issue of cantus/tenor/countertenor. There isn't a WP article for cantus in this sense, so one needs to explain what it means (the Wiktionary definition is not entirely helpful). By the way is plural of "cantus" in this sense "cantuses", "canti" or what (I have no Latin)? Then one ought to link tenor and countertenor, which articles however don't seem to me to be entirely satisfactory in dealing with these roles in early polyphony - but having introduced the terms you need I think to give some brief clarification of their roles.
But the more you address such issues for Wikipedia readers (which I think is a priority in my understanding of the WP ethos) the more the article becomes about the piece, and then there arises an issue about its title. You mentioned your disinclination to have "two short articles about the composer & piece". But actually there is virtually nothing to be said about F. Andrieu and you have a lot to say about Armes, amours/O fluor des fluors. In fact (I suggest tentatively) you might be better to split the two subjects, and make what you have to say about Armes, amours/O fluor des fluors (to include what there is to say about the composer's identity) and make that the GA candidate; with F. Andrieu (who only rates after all five or six lines in Grove) either a brief summary of what little there is to say about the man or simply a redirect to the music article. If the article was about the piece, of course, there would then be no problem about including all the text (but of course there might be copyright problems in including a full translation).
One further minor point about the text: under the two headings Editions and Recordings you have the first line in italics. That means that under Recordings Armes, amours/O fluor des fluors is not differentiated from the rest of the sentence. It might be better for both these lines to be in normal text with the title of the pice in italics as elsewhere in the article.
It was the Solazzo I listened to, by the way.-- Smerus ( talk) 19:54, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi Aza24; as the article now stands, I would ask just for consideration of the following two minor detials before preparing my summary:
Best, -- Smerus ( talk) 16:52, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
...and thanks again for introducing me to this fascinating piece of music....
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
-- Smerus ( talk) 11:14, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
The result was: promoted by
SL93 (
talk)
06:40, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
Improved to Good Article status by Aza24 ( talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt ( talk) at 20:43, 28 January 2021 (UTC).
![]() | F. Andrieu has been listed as one of the
Music good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: January 24, 2021. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | A fact from F. Andrieu appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 5 February 2021 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Smerus ( talk · contribs) 22:49, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
I am taking this on, and will aim to complete the review over the next few days.-- Smerus ( talk) 22:49, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
Very interesting article - I know very little about ars nova music and this is on a first read very informative and certainly at or very close to GA level. The odd thing is that, because of the information available, it is invevitably more about Armes, amours than about its composer - you may want to add a redirect on WP of Armes, amours leading to it. Incidentally you have enabled me to hear this piece for the first time and it is fabulous.
The following, mostly copyediting, points have struck me:
-- Smerus ( talk) 12:13, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the above, and for the rewrite of the music overview. But this does I think introduce or extend other problems which I didn't cotton on to in my first reading, notably the issue of cantus/tenor/countertenor. There isn't a WP article for cantus in this sense, so one needs to explain what it means (the Wiktionary definition is not entirely helpful). By the way is plural of "cantus" in this sense "cantuses", "canti" or what (I have no Latin)? Then one ought to link tenor and countertenor, which articles however don't seem to me to be entirely satisfactory in dealing with these roles in early polyphony - but having introduced the terms you need I think to give some brief clarification of their roles.
But the more you address such issues for Wikipedia readers (which I think is a priority in my understanding of the WP ethos) the more the article becomes about the piece, and then there arises an issue about its title. You mentioned your disinclination to have "two short articles about the composer & piece". But actually there is virtually nothing to be said about F. Andrieu and you have a lot to say about Armes, amours/O fluor des fluors. In fact (I suggest tentatively) you might be better to split the two subjects, and make what you have to say about Armes, amours/O fluor des fluors (to include what there is to say about the composer's identity) and make that the GA candidate; with F. Andrieu (who only rates after all five or six lines in Grove) either a brief summary of what little there is to say about the man or simply a redirect to the music article. If the article was about the piece, of course, there would then be no problem about including all the text (but of course there might be copyright problems in including a full translation).
One further minor point about the text: under the two headings Editions and Recordings you have the first line in italics. That means that under Recordings Armes, amours/O fluor des fluors is not differentiated from the rest of the sentence. It might be better for both these lines to be in normal text with the title of the pice in italics as elsewhere in the article.
It was the Solazzo I listened to, by the way.-- Smerus ( talk) 19:54, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi Aza24; as the article now stands, I would ask just for consideration of the following two minor detials before preparing my summary:
Best, -- Smerus ( talk) 16:52, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
...and thanks again for introducing me to this fascinating piece of music....
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
-- Smerus ( talk) 11:14, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
The result was: promoted by
SL93 (
talk)
06:40, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
Improved to Good Article status by Aza24 ( talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt ( talk) at 20:43, 28 January 2021 (UTC).