![]() | 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 55 | ← | Archive 58 | Archive 59 | Archive 60 | Archive 61 | Archive 62 | → | Archive 65 |
I have just created an article on Thomas and Sally and have substantially added to Artaxerxes. I would appriciate some feedback and an assessment on the talk page. Thanks. Nrswanson ( talk) 10:23, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Since we have already completed the list for this month perhaps we could add a few more operas to the list? Nrswanson ( talk) 14:44, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Some thoughts: CotM is a kind of advert. It's at the top of the page to attract new members and show we are active as well as providing a focus for our efforts. For that reason it's better if there is some kind of coherent idea behind the selection. In the case of the list [1] the operas were chosen on the basis of (very roughly) comparable importance. It's a good selection that will help us work towards some kind of even coverage.
There's no point in putting every opera that you are interested in on the CotM list - much simpler to just go ahead and write it! If you have a recording of a rare work that should give you enough information to do a good article even if it isn't covered in Grove, Viking or Oxford - if you don't have all the historical information you can at least do a good synopsis. (Please add any article you do to the The opera corpus!) -- Klein zach 23:54, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
This page seems to be lacking detail of her career in Europe: we get detail about her start and then her later work with Opera North, but not much to explain how it came to pass that it was she partnering Domingo - and doing such a job of it - in the 1989/1990 Salzburg Festival Ballo. almost- instinct 20:00, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
I would like to suggest Antonio Vivaldi as the composer for the month of July. We lack articles on 39 of his operas so I am not sure we could realistically tackle them all. However, it would be good to put a dent in that number. What do you all think? Nrswanson ( talk) 02:43, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
We now have 4,794 articles (see the total on the Category:WikiProject Opera articles page). By comparison the New Grove Dictionary of Opera apparently has 11,000 articles. (Interestingly they have a greater emphasis on composers than we do: 2900 articles devoted to them compared to 1800 on operas.) However our rate of production must be considerably higher than Grove ever achieved. We will soon have three times as many articles as two years ago. (The May 2006 figure was 1,835 pages.)
Should we celebrate when we reach 5,000 and if so how? I suppose one idea would be to put a notice in the Signpost (though that might attract more undesirable box warriors etc). Or a time-coordinated toast to our efforts to make Wikipedia (to paraphrase J Wales) "not suck"? Any thoughts . . . ideas . . .? -- Klein zach 02:25, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
If one of the project's GA-class articles were improved to FA-class, it could be put on the Main Page to commemorate the occasion. Best regards, -- Ssilvers ( talk) 17:51, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
I just noticed that we do not have assessment criteria for composers. Maybe we should create one. Nrswanson ( talk) 21:55, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
No. We only have nominal, automatic assessments based on the proposal made by GT on 14 March which is here. For an explanation of the trial assessment system (done by myself, GT and Peter Cohen) for the Wagner Project, see this report. To see an actual assessment check for example Die Meistersinger. Details of the Opera Project assessment system have not yet been discussed. There are large numbers involved and there are potential problems, not least of which is the question of who is going to do the work as opposed to the talk. -- Klein zach 03:09, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Since I'm being pressed on this: I made some suggestions (one of which was identical to the one you have just made) to GuillaumeTell on 30 May, and I was hoping he'd lead off a full discussion. I don't want to do it myself because (1) to do it properly would be time consuming, and (2) I'm not a big enthusiast for assessments. If GuillaumeTell doesn't want to do it, I suggest we ask Peter Cohen who is keen on rating and worked on the Wagner ones. (Incidentally, during the five or six hours I spent cleaning up the problems after the bot run, I did move the obvious articles provisionally to B, precisely to avoid people thinking we were losing our marbles, as suggested.)
BTW composer assessments would be the worst way to start. Based on the Wagner experience - and common sense - it would be much easier to start with opera title articles, which have already been edited according to our detailed guidelines, rather than the composers articles which have been done outside the project. The opera articles follow a consistent structure which makes it easy to apply a points scale. There are 1,330 opera title pages so to do real assessments, rather than nominal ones, which would take a considerable time. IMO we would need a dedicated assessment team to take it on - of workers not talkers! -- Klein zach 08:49, 9 June 2008 (UTC) (P.S. Of course articles can be assessed individually at any time. In the case of Giuseppe Verdi all you have to do is start, or in this case add to, a page called Talk:Giuseppe Verdi/Comments.) -- Klein zach 09:03, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Here is my proposal for an opera composer point system. Nrswanson ( talk) 16:02, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Elements | Points |
---|---|
Family background/studies | 10 |
Early career, with coverage of significant compositions/patrons and notable performances of works | 10 |
Mature career, with coverage of significant compositions/patrons and notable performances of works | 20 |
List of compositions (if available - with dates of composition completion and dates of premier performances) | 10 |
Critical appreciation (with full sources) | 15 |
Bibliography (if any) | 10 |
Illustrations | 10 |
Inline references, notes, sources, internal and external sources | 15 |
Comment The problem is it's impossible to fulfill some of those criteria for many composers (especially the earlier ones) because the relevant information does not exist. User:Moreschi made this point when the biography project was on its assessment drive. He knew he had written short articles on singers that contained every known fact about them. It would be pointless to rate such pages "Start" because, even with the best will in the world, they aren't going to get any longer.
I've never been mad keen on the idea of an Opera Project assessment drive and I doubt if I'll be taking part, but I think using common sense is a better idea than any rigid points system. -- Folantin ( talk) 18:18, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Opposed I am against adopting the points scale above. Working towards assessment for composers should be done within the Composers Project - to which most of us already belong. -- Klein zach 23:41, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
I see the whole list of operas of Tommaso Traetta have all been red linked, together with all the names of the librettists. Is this a good idea? The WP article on the subject ( Wikipedia:Red link) says "Do create red links to articles you intend to create, . . . or topics which should obviously have articles. . . . Do not create red links to articles that will never be created" . There is also another problem. If the red linked names are incorrect (apparently the case for some names on the Traetta page) it's misleading and encourages the creation of duplicate articles. Best. -- Klein zach 05:09, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
When I'm working on an article, I often put linking brackets around everything that moves. Eventually, I click the "Show preview" button. This tells me which links are blue (and I check those via popups in case they link to the wrong article or to a disambiguation page, and alter as necessary) and which are red. It's then a matter of judgement which ones to leave red and which to remove the brackets from. I sometimes click promising-looking red links and then click "What links here" in case there are other articles (or a page in Wikipedia:Music encyclopedia topics) where a red link already exists. After sorting all this out, I click Show Preview again to check, then Save page. Sounds cumbersome, but it works. Doesn't do much for my Edit Count, though. -- Guillaume Tell 16:16, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
The Gilbert and Sullivan opera, Trial by Jury, is nearing its featured article nomination. If anyone would like to review it, we would appreciate it. Shoemaker's Holiday ( talk) 00:12, 7 June 2008 (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 55 | ← | Archive 58 | Archive 59 | Archive 60 | Archive 61 | Archive 62 | → | Archive 65 |
I have just created an article on Thomas and Sally and have substantially added to Artaxerxes. I would appriciate some feedback and an assessment on the talk page. Thanks. Nrswanson ( talk) 10:23, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Since we have already completed the list for this month perhaps we could add a few more operas to the list? Nrswanson ( talk) 14:44, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Some thoughts: CotM is a kind of advert. It's at the top of the page to attract new members and show we are active as well as providing a focus for our efforts. For that reason it's better if there is some kind of coherent idea behind the selection. In the case of the list [1] the operas were chosen on the basis of (very roughly) comparable importance. It's a good selection that will help us work towards some kind of even coverage.
There's no point in putting every opera that you are interested in on the CotM list - much simpler to just go ahead and write it! If you have a recording of a rare work that should give you enough information to do a good article even if it isn't covered in Grove, Viking or Oxford - if you don't have all the historical information you can at least do a good synopsis. (Please add any article you do to the The opera corpus!) -- Klein zach 23:54, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
This page seems to be lacking detail of her career in Europe: we get detail about her start and then her later work with Opera North, but not much to explain how it came to pass that it was she partnering Domingo - and doing such a job of it - in the 1989/1990 Salzburg Festival Ballo. almost- instinct 20:00, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
I would like to suggest Antonio Vivaldi as the composer for the month of July. We lack articles on 39 of his operas so I am not sure we could realistically tackle them all. However, it would be good to put a dent in that number. What do you all think? Nrswanson ( talk) 02:43, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
We now have 4,794 articles (see the total on the Category:WikiProject Opera articles page). By comparison the New Grove Dictionary of Opera apparently has 11,000 articles. (Interestingly they have a greater emphasis on composers than we do: 2900 articles devoted to them compared to 1800 on operas.) However our rate of production must be considerably higher than Grove ever achieved. We will soon have three times as many articles as two years ago. (The May 2006 figure was 1,835 pages.)
Should we celebrate when we reach 5,000 and if so how? I suppose one idea would be to put a notice in the Signpost (though that might attract more undesirable box warriors etc). Or a time-coordinated toast to our efforts to make Wikipedia (to paraphrase J Wales) "not suck"? Any thoughts . . . ideas . . .? -- Klein zach 02:25, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
If one of the project's GA-class articles were improved to FA-class, it could be put on the Main Page to commemorate the occasion. Best regards, -- Ssilvers ( talk) 17:51, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
I just noticed that we do not have assessment criteria for composers. Maybe we should create one. Nrswanson ( talk) 21:55, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
No. We only have nominal, automatic assessments based on the proposal made by GT on 14 March which is here. For an explanation of the trial assessment system (done by myself, GT and Peter Cohen) for the Wagner Project, see this report. To see an actual assessment check for example Die Meistersinger. Details of the Opera Project assessment system have not yet been discussed. There are large numbers involved and there are potential problems, not least of which is the question of who is going to do the work as opposed to the talk. -- Klein zach 03:09, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Since I'm being pressed on this: I made some suggestions (one of which was identical to the one you have just made) to GuillaumeTell on 30 May, and I was hoping he'd lead off a full discussion. I don't want to do it myself because (1) to do it properly would be time consuming, and (2) I'm not a big enthusiast for assessments. If GuillaumeTell doesn't want to do it, I suggest we ask Peter Cohen who is keen on rating and worked on the Wagner ones. (Incidentally, during the five or six hours I spent cleaning up the problems after the bot run, I did move the obvious articles provisionally to B, precisely to avoid people thinking we were losing our marbles, as suggested.)
BTW composer assessments would be the worst way to start. Based on the Wagner experience - and common sense - it would be much easier to start with opera title articles, which have already been edited according to our detailed guidelines, rather than the composers articles which have been done outside the project. The opera articles follow a consistent structure which makes it easy to apply a points scale. There are 1,330 opera title pages so to do real assessments, rather than nominal ones, which would take a considerable time. IMO we would need a dedicated assessment team to take it on - of workers not talkers! -- Klein zach 08:49, 9 June 2008 (UTC) (P.S. Of course articles can be assessed individually at any time. In the case of Giuseppe Verdi all you have to do is start, or in this case add to, a page called Talk:Giuseppe Verdi/Comments.) -- Klein zach 09:03, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Here is my proposal for an opera composer point system. Nrswanson ( talk) 16:02, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Elements | Points |
---|---|
Family background/studies | 10 |
Early career, with coverage of significant compositions/patrons and notable performances of works | 10 |
Mature career, with coverage of significant compositions/patrons and notable performances of works | 20 |
List of compositions (if available - with dates of composition completion and dates of premier performances) | 10 |
Critical appreciation (with full sources) | 15 |
Bibliography (if any) | 10 |
Illustrations | 10 |
Inline references, notes, sources, internal and external sources | 15 |
Comment The problem is it's impossible to fulfill some of those criteria for many composers (especially the earlier ones) because the relevant information does not exist. User:Moreschi made this point when the biography project was on its assessment drive. He knew he had written short articles on singers that contained every known fact about them. It would be pointless to rate such pages "Start" because, even with the best will in the world, they aren't going to get any longer.
I've never been mad keen on the idea of an Opera Project assessment drive and I doubt if I'll be taking part, but I think using common sense is a better idea than any rigid points system. -- Folantin ( talk) 18:18, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Opposed I am against adopting the points scale above. Working towards assessment for composers should be done within the Composers Project - to which most of us already belong. -- Klein zach 23:41, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
I see the whole list of operas of Tommaso Traetta have all been red linked, together with all the names of the librettists. Is this a good idea? The WP article on the subject ( Wikipedia:Red link) says "Do create red links to articles you intend to create, . . . or topics which should obviously have articles. . . . Do not create red links to articles that will never be created" . There is also another problem. If the red linked names are incorrect (apparently the case for some names on the Traetta page) it's misleading and encourages the creation of duplicate articles. Best. -- Klein zach 05:09, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
When I'm working on an article, I often put linking brackets around everything that moves. Eventually, I click the "Show preview" button. This tells me which links are blue (and I check those via popups in case they link to the wrong article or to a disambiguation page, and alter as necessary) and which are red. It's then a matter of judgement which ones to leave red and which to remove the brackets from. I sometimes click promising-looking red links and then click "What links here" in case there are other articles (or a page in Wikipedia:Music encyclopedia topics) where a red link already exists. After sorting all this out, I click Show Preview again to check, then Save page. Sounds cumbersome, but it works. Doesn't do much for my Edit Count, though. -- Guillaume Tell 16:16, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
The Gilbert and Sullivan opera, Trial by Jury, is nearing its featured article nomination. If anyone would like to review it, we would appreciate it. Shoemaker's Holiday ( talk) 00:12, 7 June 2008 (UTC)