![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 21 April 2014 (UTC). The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
|
This will be a Wikipedia version of a document created by subscribers of the e-mail list OPERA-L of fictional works that have something to do with opera. kosboot 22:56, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
In response to the deletion suggestion: What may appear as an indiscriminate list is the product of at least 25 people working over a period of about 5 years to compile a list where opera is an plot element. The mere fact that this topic has arisen multiple times on numerous e-mail lists (MLA-L, OPERA-L, CLASSICAL-L, not to mention on Usenet newsgroups) over the past 15 years demonstrates a need to codify this information which is not otherwise available.
There are over 100 such works, so it's going to take quite a bit of time listing them all. I ask that the Wikipedia Police have some patience as titles, authors, descriptions, and sources/references are added. kosboot 06:40, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
(This is a revised version of comments that I've made at User talk:Kosboot about this article.)
This list doesn't appear to justify its own existence as an encyclopedic topic (in other words, it's WP:LISTCRUFT). The list apparently has no standards for how meaningful the opera reference has to be for a book to be included, nor any kind of justification for why it's significant that these books mention opera. (There are also no citations, for what that's worth.) It doesn't address the question of why someone who's not personally an opera fan should care that any of the books listed happen to mention opera, nor (as far as I know) is there any other article about opera in fiction that does address that point. I respect the work that's gone into compiling this list on the e-mail listserv, and I totally understand why such a list would be interesting to a specific community, but it doesn't seem appropriate for Wikipedia and I'm inclined to bring it up at Articles for Deletion for discussion. Propaniac ( talk) 14:07, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
(Below is a revised version of comments that I've made at the Opera Project talk page)
Some suggestions. I would tend to agree with Propaniac. Without minimal bibliographic information, the entires are not verifiable. Most of the entries are bare mentions of the work with no way of telling just what role opera plays in it. Is it a passing mention or allusion (listcruft) or a key aspect of the plot, setting, or characters? For now, I would suggest drastically pruning the list to those you know be of the latter type. Then for each of those add a sentence or two describing the role opera plays in the work. You also need to include full bibliographical information about the work, including date of first publication and what language it was originally written in. Bibliographic information for modern editions and/or translations of older works should also be included. That would take care of the referencing problems. Subcategorizing by themes is one way of organizing the list, although probably takes a lot of work. I would list the works individually with title first, Then I'd break the list down into time periods, e.g. 1800-1850, 1851-1900, etc. and list the books under their time periods chronologically, e.g.
Re an introduction, there are articles and books that address the relationship between literature and opera, some in a more general way (Literature & Opera by David Rosen; En Travesti: Women, Gender Subversion, Opera by Corinne E. Blackmer and Patricia Juliana Smith; Essays on Literature and Music (1967-2004) by Stephen Paul Sher). Others in relation to specific authors, e.g. Willa Cather, E.T.A, Hoffman, Balzac, etc. Voceditenore ( talk) 18:05, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Ok, so I surmise there are varied ways some people would like the list organized:
I think filling out bibliographic information for each book can be easy enough - finding the right format is the dfificult part. Should be as a table (I like tables) or should it just be an entry as an unnumbered list? Responses welcome! -- kosboot ( talk) 19:07, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Also, "mentioning opera" is not great: that leaves open the possibility for a really vast list. "Significantly featuring" would be better. Moreschi ( talk) ( debate) 21:57, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Comment (outdent) I agree with Peter and Kleinzach. Trivial or "fleeting" mentions shouldn't be in the list, e.g. something like a character simply saying at one point that she had been to see The Magic Flute or was meeting her mother after Rigoletto. Or someone mentioning in passing that they hated opera. That might be useful on another web site, but it's frowned on Wikipedia. It's the same thing as mentioning every single film or TV advert that uses snatches of Cavalleria rusticana. They get removed and rightly so. For the purposes of this article/list, it should be pruned to only those works where opera is a significant component. There's still plenty of scope for a good sized list without the trivial mentions, and it has the potential to be a really good article. I personally prefer "featuring" in the title rather than "relating", which is somewhat ambiguous, and more prone to encouraging the addition of listcruft by 'drive-by' editors. Best, Voceditenore ( talk) 10:51, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 21 April 2014 (UTC). The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
|
This will be a Wikipedia version of a document created by subscribers of the e-mail list OPERA-L of fictional works that have something to do with opera. kosboot 22:56, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
In response to the deletion suggestion: What may appear as an indiscriminate list is the product of at least 25 people working over a period of about 5 years to compile a list where opera is an plot element. The mere fact that this topic has arisen multiple times on numerous e-mail lists (MLA-L, OPERA-L, CLASSICAL-L, not to mention on Usenet newsgroups) over the past 15 years demonstrates a need to codify this information which is not otherwise available.
There are over 100 such works, so it's going to take quite a bit of time listing them all. I ask that the Wikipedia Police have some patience as titles, authors, descriptions, and sources/references are added. kosboot 06:40, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
(This is a revised version of comments that I've made at User talk:Kosboot about this article.)
This list doesn't appear to justify its own existence as an encyclopedic topic (in other words, it's WP:LISTCRUFT). The list apparently has no standards for how meaningful the opera reference has to be for a book to be included, nor any kind of justification for why it's significant that these books mention opera. (There are also no citations, for what that's worth.) It doesn't address the question of why someone who's not personally an opera fan should care that any of the books listed happen to mention opera, nor (as far as I know) is there any other article about opera in fiction that does address that point. I respect the work that's gone into compiling this list on the e-mail listserv, and I totally understand why such a list would be interesting to a specific community, but it doesn't seem appropriate for Wikipedia and I'm inclined to bring it up at Articles for Deletion for discussion. Propaniac ( talk) 14:07, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
(Below is a revised version of comments that I've made at the Opera Project talk page)
Some suggestions. I would tend to agree with Propaniac. Without minimal bibliographic information, the entires are not verifiable. Most of the entries are bare mentions of the work with no way of telling just what role opera plays in it. Is it a passing mention or allusion (listcruft) or a key aspect of the plot, setting, or characters? For now, I would suggest drastically pruning the list to those you know be of the latter type. Then for each of those add a sentence or two describing the role opera plays in the work. You also need to include full bibliographical information about the work, including date of first publication and what language it was originally written in. Bibliographic information for modern editions and/or translations of older works should also be included. That would take care of the referencing problems. Subcategorizing by themes is one way of organizing the list, although probably takes a lot of work. I would list the works individually with title first, Then I'd break the list down into time periods, e.g. 1800-1850, 1851-1900, etc. and list the books under their time periods chronologically, e.g.
Re an introduction, there are articles and books that address the relationship between literature and opera, some in a more general way (Literature & Opera by David Rosen; En Travesti: Women, Gender Subversion, Opera by Corinne E. Blackmer and Patricia Juliana Smith; Essays on Literature and Music (1967-2004) by Stephen Paul Sher). Others in relation to specific authors, e.g. Willa Cather, E.T.A, Hoffman, Balzac, etc. Voceditenore ( talk) 18:05, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Ok, so I surmise there are varied ways some people would like the list organized:
I think filling out bibliographic information for each book can be easy enough - finding the right format is the dfificult part. Should be as a table (I like tables) or should it just be an entry as an unnumbered list? Responses welcome! -- kosboot ( talk) 19:07, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Also, "mentioning opera" is not great: that leaves open the possibility for a really vast list. "Significantly featuring" would be better. Moreschi ( talk) ( debate) 21:57, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Comment (outdent) I agree with Peter and Kleinzach. Trivial or "fleeting" mentions shouldn't be in the list, e.g. something like a character simply saying at one point that she had been to see The Magic Flute or was meeting her mother after Rigoletto. Or someone mentioning in passing that they hated opera. That might be useful on another web site, but it's frowned on Wikipedia. It's the same thing as mentioning every single film or TV advert that uses snatches of Cavalleria rusticana. They get removed and rightly so. For the purposes of this article/list, it should be pruned to only those works where opera is a significant component. There's still plenty of scope for a good sized list without the trivial mentions, and it has the potential to be a really good article. I personally prefer "featuring" in the title rather than "relating", which is somewhat ambiguous, and more prone to encouraging the addition of listcruft by 'drive-by' editors. Best, Voceditenore ( talk) 10:51, 5 June 2008 (UTC)