Talk:Antoine Brumel

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

When he died[edit]

The usually reliable "Golberg" says that Brumel died after 1520. http://www.goldbergweb.com/en/news/espana/2004/01/17502.php Ogg 10:27, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wish they'd say where they got that date from; I've never seen it anywhere else. The most recent Grove entry has 1512-1513; the 1980 Grove says "approximately 1515." Nothing certain is known about his life or activity after about 1512, unless something has been discovered in the last few months. Antandrus (talk) 16:05, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Composer project review[edit]

I've reviewed this article as part of the Composers project review of its B-class articles. This article is B-class; it needs at least a complete works list, but would also benefit from an image and more inline citations. My full review is on the comments page; questions and comments should be left here or on my talk page. Magic♪piano 16:59, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Antoine Brumel/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)Press [show] to view →
;Composers Project Assessment of Antoine Brumel: 2024-05-12

This is an assessment of article Antoine Brumel by a member of the Composers project, according to its assessment criteria. This review was done by Magicpiano.

If an article is well-cited, the reviewer is assuming that the article reflects reasonably current scholarship, and deficiencies in the historical record that are documented in a particular area will be appropriately scored. If insufficient inline citations are present, the reviewer will assume that deficiencies in that area may be cured, and that area may be scored down.

Adherence to overall Wikipedia standards (WP:MOS, WP:WIAGA, WP:WIAFA) are the reviewer's opinion, and are not a substitute for the Wikipedia's processes for awarding Good Article or Featured Article status.

Origins/family background/studies

Does the article reflect what is known about the composer's background and childhood? If s/he received musical training as a child, who from, is the experience and nature of the early teachers' influences described?

  • ok
Early career

Does the article indicate when s/he started composing, discuss early style, success/failure? Are other pedagogic and personal influences from this time on his/her music discussed?

  • ok
Mature career

Does the article discuss his/her adult life and composition history? Are other pedagogic and personal influences from this time on his/her music discussed?

  • ok
List(s) of works

Are lists of the composer's works in WP, linked from this article? If there are special catalogs (e.g. Köchel for Mozart, Hoboken for Haydn), are they used? If the composer has written more than 20-30 works, any exhaustive listing should be placed in a separate article.

  • No complete works list
Critical appreciation

Does the article discuss his/her style, reception by critics and the public (both during his/her life, and over time)?

  • ok
Illustrations and sound clips

Does the article contain images of its subject, birthplace, gravesite or other memorials, important residences, manuscript pages, museums, etc? Does it contain samples of the composer's work (as composer and/or performer, if appropriate)? (Note that since many 20th-century works are copyrighted, it may not be possible to acquire more than brief fair use samples of those works, but efforts should be made to do so.) If an article is of high enough quality, do its images and media comply with image use policy and non-free content policy? (Adherence to these is needed for Good Article or Featured Article consideration, and is apparently a common reason for nominations being quick-failed.)

  • no images; a short sound clip.
References, sources and bibliography

Does the article contain a suitable number of references? Does it contain sufficient inline citations? (For an article to pass Good Article nomination, every paragraph possibly excepting those in the lead, and every direct quotation, should have at least one footnote.) If appropriate, does it include Further Reading or Bibliography beyond the cited references?

  • Article has references; few inline citations.
Structure and compliance with WP:MOS

Does the article comply with Wikipedia style and layout guidelines, especially WP:MOS, WP:LEAD, WP:LAYOUT, and possibly WP:SIZE? (Article length is not generally significant, although Featured Articles Candidates may be questioned for excessive length.)

  • ok
Things that may be necessary to pass a Good Article review
  • Article requires more inline citations (WP:CITE)
  • Article needs (more) images and/or other media (MOS:IMAGE)
Summary
This is a decent Renaissance composer bio. It could use an image and a complete works list, as well as more inline citations. Article is B-class. Magic♪piano 16:58, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 16:58, 20 March 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 08:00, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Antoine Brumel. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:54, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Merge proposal uncontested. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 06:29, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I propose that Missa pro defunctis (Brumel) be merged into Antoine Brumel. I think that the content in the Missa pro defunctis (Brumel) article can easily be explained in the context of Antoine Brumel (most of it already is) and the Antoine Brumel article is of a reasonable size that the merging of Missa pro defunctis (Brumel) will not cause any problems as far as article size or undue weight is concerned. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:48, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment I had previously nominated this page for proposed deletion. user:SimonPerera here removed the PROD tag with summary "Removed deletion proposal. Reason: at least two points (number of voices and time of composition) are not covered in Brumel's article." Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:06, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Antoine_Brumel&oldid=1206459869"