![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 40 | ← | Archive 45 | Archive 46 | Archive 47 | Archive 48 | Archive 49 | Archive 50 |
Two particular options might be worth considering:
First Gioachino Rossini (1792-1868) for a second consecutive month because so much needs to be done on his articles.
Second the suggestion from Adam Cuerden (see above) to work on lesser-known English composers of the mid 18th to mid 19th centuries, including:
Charles Dibdin (1745-1814), Stephen Storace (1762–1796), Julius Benedict (1804-1885), Michael Balfe (1808-1870), William Vincent Wallace (1812-1865), Edward Loder (1813-1865) and Alexander Mackenzie (1847-1935).
Some other candidates:
I thought it might also be interesting to see which composers have the largest number of red links in The opera corpus. Here is a list of those with 7 or more red lnks.
Any opinions/comments/ideas? -- Kleinzach 04:16, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
I'd be inclined to Hindemith; Saint-Saens has a great many lacunae. Will Rossini take that long, given the coverage existing in it.wiki? If anyone deserves a second crack at CotM, I guess it would be Verdi first! Kleinzach has a good point above; should we be bold and replace CotM with various ongoing projects which could be removed from the project page after a certain period (10 days?) of inactivity? Sparafucil ( talk) 22:11, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
I have recommended this for deletion, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 December 15. -- Kleinzach ( talk) 03:25, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
If I might go a little off-topic: The Whistle-register article looks pretty good, but has somewhat infelicitous writing in places. Anyone a little more knowledgable up for some light copyediting? Adam Cuerden talk 16:12, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
I've prodded Piceleo’s Davanto as non-notable or a hoax, but I know that many sources for lesser known older works are not on line (and I know next to nothing about opera). If someone would like to do a spot of research to prove or disprove the existance of this, feel free. Thanks! -- Fabrictramp ( talk) 17:53, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Waacstats has removed the opera stub from all English and German operas and replaced it with 'English language opera' and 'German language opera' stubs. He was apparently about to do the same for French and Italian (but not other languages). I've asked him to hold off until this has been discussed here.
The main problem with the removal of the 'opera stub' is that it's used by the bot for automatic classification of stub articles - the red tab that appears in the bottom left of the banner. (This is specified in the banner code.)
In any case is it useful to subdivide the stubs by language? Does it help us maintain and develop the articles (and keep statistics)? Probably more than half the creators of new articles remember to add stub tag. What will happen if they have to remember four, or five or more template tags (or whatever they are called) rather than one? -- Kleinzach ( talk) 23:37, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Adam Cuerden is asking the right questions and the more I think about it the basic answers are in the negative. We have identified a lot of things that need doing - starting assessments, reforming the voice categories, adding IPA pronunciation for foreign-language title articles, and probably lots more - and stub template development has not been one of them.
Has anyone actually found the opera stub category too big for a specific purpose? Besides being useful for automatic assessment of a large number of articles, I've used it to see the percentage of stubs to total articles as an indicator of the 'maturity' of the project (and yes, it's still very young!)
IMO we are still at the first stage of development - concentrating on creating new articles (through CotM, SotM etc.) As we have seen, once articles are created other (outside) editors start working on them and a large percentage take off and become viable articles. So my conclusion is that we don't need stub development campaigns or new 'sub-stubs' - at least not now. -- Kleinzach ( talk) 01:54, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Should we vote? GuillaumeTell is in favour of subdividing the stub tag/cat by language. I and Folantin are against. But what do other people want? (Incidentally I've checked and there are now 127 articles with the new stubs). Best -- Kleinzach ( talk) 09:57, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
OK. In that case there is a clear majority against subdividing the stub tag/cat by language. -- Kleinzach ( talk) 22:52, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
Following the discussion above (Opera navigation boxes/Ordering of works) I propose we add the following ('GuillaumeTell rules') to Section 10 (articles), with a link to Section 14 (navigation boxes), of the project page:
Chronological lists of operas (in articles and navigation boxes) are arranged by the date of first performance if the opera was first performed during the composer's lifetime, or shortly after his/her death. If the first performance was greatly after the composer's death, the date of composition is used. Non-chronological lists should be in alphabetical order.
Please agree/disagree or propose any necessary changes. Thanks and regards. -- Kleinzach ( talk) 02:23, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Thank you. I've now added this to the project page - section 9.7 and 14. -- Kleinzach ( talk) 10:40, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Porgy and Bess has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 17:12, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Just wanted to check about operas with "Noted arias" sections. This upsets my desire for precision, but, at the same time, many operas do not divide up easily, so this may be better than just giving a scene list, or giving the numbering used in the score, which may file the famous arias under the material leading into them. But it still seems a second-rate compromise at best, and so I think it best if it not be used where avoidable. Adam Cuerden talk 10:36, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Adam mentions "giving the numbering used in the score, which may file the famous arias under the material leading into them". I wouldn't favour using the actual numbering at all, but I do favour formulations such as "Abscheulicher! ... Komm, Hoffnung" or "È strano ... Ah, fors'è lui ... Sempre libera". -- GuillaumeTell ( talk) 18:55, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Her Majesty's Theatre is a current GA nominee, please feel free to improve the article. It has been adopted by this project and presented opera for many years, including many premières of Handel's operas. I would appreciate your input. Cheers Kbthompson ( talk) 16:06, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
I need project members to look at Joan Sutherland page – it is about her unpleasant feeling when she was interviewed by a Chinese or Indian officer for her Australian passport (pretty much controversial before). The page has been heavily edited and don’t forget to read comments in the talk page. I need members in here to stop edit warring that has been going on for many days - Jay ( talk) 09:35, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
I have nominated the falsetto page for deletion for the following reasons: This article contains material that is covered in other wikipedia articles, most notably the falsetto register page. Furthermore, this article fails to incoporate itself within the larger topic of vocal registration and is highly biased towards a vocal pedagological perspective that fails to incorporate the perspective of speech pathologists. I considered merging the two articles initially but the understanding of the term register between the two articles is so different I doubt this is possible. The falsetto article uses some controvercial perspectives on head voice and chest voice which are not widely embraced by the vocal pedagogical community. Read the vocal registration article for clarification. Nrswanson ( talk) 03:47, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
(Not sure if this is the logical place to post this,. If not, please re-post. Thanks.)
From
Aida: "Aida ... based on a scenario written by French Egyptologist
Auguste Mariette (although there are scholars who argue that the scenario was really written by
Temistocle Solera)." -- Can anyone cite the assertion the scenario was really written by Temistocle Solera? (The Wikipedia article on Solera is a brief stub which does not mention this.
Auguste Mariette also says nothing about any dispute on authorship.)
Wikipedia:When to cite,
Wikipedia:Citing sources --
Writtenonsand (
talk)
15:52, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi everyone. I just just joined your group and wikipedia for that matter. I look forward to working on articles related to opera with you all. I hope if I make any mistakes to begin with you will be forgiving. lol Just to let you know a little about me: I am a voice teacher in NYC and a lyric tenor and I I have degrees in voice from the Oberlin School of Music and Indiana University. If you have any suggestions for me in getting started please let me know. Ringnpassagio ( talk) 17:09, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 40 | ← | Archive 45 | Archive 46 | Archive 47 | Archive 48 | Archive 49 | Archive 50 |
Two particular options might be worth considering:
First Gioachino Rossini (1792-1868) for a second consecutive month because so much needs to be done on his articles.
Second the suggestion from Adam Cuerden (see above) to work on lesser-known English composers of the mid 18th to mid 19th centuries, including:
Charles Dibdin (1745-1814), Stephen Storace (1762–1796), Julius Benedict (1804-1885), Michael Balfe (1808-1870), William Vincent Wallace (1812-1865), Edward Loder (1813-1865) and Alexander Mackenzie (1847-1935).
Some other candidates:
I thought it might also be interesting to see which composers have the largest number of red links in The opera corpus. Here is a list of those with 7 or more red lnks.
Any opinions/comments/ideas? -- Kleinzach 04:16, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
I'd be inclined to Hindemith; Saint-Saens has a great many lacunae. Will Rossini take that long, given the coverage existing in it.wiki? If anyone deserves a second crack at CotM, I guess it would be Verdi first! Kleinzach has a good point above; should we be bold and replace CotM with various ongoing projects which could be removed from the project page after a certain period (10 days?) of inactivity? Sparafucil ( talk) 22:11, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
I have recommended this for deletion, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 December 15. -- Kleinzach ( talk) 03:25, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
If I might go a little off-topic: The Whistle-register article looks pretty good, but has somewhat infelicitous writing in places. Anyone a little more knowledgable up for some light copyediting? Adam Cuerden talk 16:12, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
I've prodded Piceleo’s Davanto as non-notable or a hoax, but I know that many sources for lesser known older works are not on line (and I know next to nothing about opera). If someone would like to do a spot of research to prove or disprove the existance of this, feel free. Thanks! -- Fabrictramp ( talk) 17:53, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Waacstats has removed the opera stub from all English and German operas and replaced it with 'English language opera' and 'German language opera' stubs. He was apparently about to do the same for French and Italian (but not other languages). I've asked him to hold off until this has been discussed here.
The main problem with the removal of the 'opera stub' is that it's used by the bot for automatic classification of stub articles - the red tab that appears in the bottom left of the banner. (This is specified in the banner code.)
In any case is it useful to subdivide the stubs by language? Does it help us maintain and develop the articles (and keep statistics)? Probably more than half the creators of new articles remember to add stub tag. What will happen if they have to remember four, or five or more template tags (or whatever they are called) rather than one? -- Kleinzach ( talk) 23:37, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Adam Cuerden is asking the right questions and the more I think about it the basic answers are in the negative. We have identified a lot of things that need doing - starting assessments, reforming the voice categories, adding IPA pronunciation for foreign-language title articles, and probably lots more - and stub template development has not been one of them.
Has anyone actually found the opera stub category too big for a specific purpose? Besides being useful for automatic assessment of a large number of articles, I've used it to see the percentage of stubs to total articles as an indicator of the 'maturity' of the project (and yes, it's still very young!)
IMO we are still at the first stage of development - concentrating on creating new articles (through CotM, SotM etc.) As we have seen, once articles are created other (outside) editors start working on them and a large percentage take off and become viable articles. So my conclusion is that we don't need stub development campaigns or new 'sub-stubs' - at least not now. -- Kleinzach ( talk) 01:54, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Should we vote? GuillaumeTell is in favour of subdividing the stub tag/cat by language. I and Folantin are against. But what do other people want? (Incidentally I've checked and there are now 127 articles with the new stubs). Best -- Kleinzach ( talk) 09:57, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
OK. In that case there is a clear majority against subdividing the stub tag/cat by language. -- Kleinzach ( talk) 22:52, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
Following the discussion above (Opera navigation boxes/Ordering of works) I propose we add the following ('GuillaumeTell rules') to Section 10 (articles), with a link to Section 14 (navigation boxes), of the project page:
Chronological lists of operas (in articles and navigation boxes) are arranged by the date of first performance if the opera was first performed during the composer's lifetime, or shortly after his/her death. If the first performance was greatly after the composer's death, the date of composition is used. Non-chronological lists should be in alphabetical order.
Please agree/disagree or propose any necessary changes. Thanks and regards. -- Kleinzach ( talk) 02:23, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Thank you. I've now added this to the project page - section 9.7 and 14. -- Kleinzach ( talk) 10:40, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Porgy and Bess has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells• Otter chirps) 17:12, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Just wanted to check about operas with "Noted arias" sections. This upsets my desire for precision, but, at the same time, many operas do not divide up easily, so this may be better than just giving a scene list, or giving the numbering used in the score, which may file the famous arias under the material leading into them. But it still seems a second-rate compromise at best, and so I think it best if it not be used where avoidable. Adam Cuerden talk 10:36, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Adam mentions "giving the numbering used in the score, which may file the famous arias under the material leading into them". I wouldn't favour using the actual numbering at all, but I do favour formulations such as "Abscheulicher! ... Komm, Hoffnung" or "È strano ... Ah, fors'è lui ... Sempre libera". -- GuillaumeTell ( talk) 18:55, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Her Majesty's Theatre is a current GA nominee, please feel free to improve the article. It has been adopted by this project and presented opera for many years, including many premières of Handel's operas. I would appreciate your input. Cheers Kbthompson ( talk) 16:06, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
I need project members to look at Joan Sutherland page – it is about her unpleasant feeling when she was interviewed by a Chinese or Indian officer for her Australian passport (pretty much controversial before). The page has been heavily edited and don’t forget to read comments in the talk page. I need members in here to stop edit warring that has been going on for many days - Jay ( talk) 09:35, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
I have nominated the falsetto page for deletion for the following reasons: This article contains material that is covered in other wikipedia articles, most notably the falsetto register page. Furthermore, this article fails to incoporate itself within the larger topic of vocal registration and is highly biased towards a vocal pedagological perspective that fails to incorporate the perspective of speech pathologists. I considered merging the two articles initially but the understanding of the term register between the two articles is so different I doubt this is possible. The falsetto article uses some controvercial perspectives on head voice and chest voice which are not widely embraced by the vocal pedagogical community. Read the vocal registration article for clarification. Nrswanson ( talk) 03:47, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
(Not sure if this is the logical place to post this,. If not, please re-post. Thanks.)
From
Aida: "Aida ... based on a scenario written by French Egyptologist
Auguste Mariette (although there are scholars who argue that the scenario was really written by
Temistocle Solera)." -- Can anyone cite the assertion the scenario was really written by Temistocle Solera? (The Wikipedia article on Solera is a brief stub which does not mention this.
Auguste Mariette also says nothing about any dispute on authorship.)
Wikipedia:When to cite,
Wikipedia:Citing sources --
Writtenonsand (
talk)
15:52, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi everyone. I just just joined your group and wikipedia for that matter. I look forward to working on articles related to opera with you all. I hope if I make any mistakes to begin with you will be forgiving. lol Just to let you know a little about me: I am a voice teacher in NYC and a lyric tenor and I I have degrees in voice from the Oberlin School of Music and Indiana University. If you have any suggestions for me in getting started please let me know. Ringnpassagio ( talk) 17:09, 30 December 2007 (UTC)