Talk:Richard Wagner/GA1

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Starting first read-through. - Tim riley (talk) 14:48, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Initial comment: quotes do not conform to WP style - double, not single, quotes are the norm. This will need to be fixed. Tim riley (talk) 15:18, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think I have now fixed these. Incidentally I have left out quote marks for blockquotes, as I believe this is WP style. Furthermore, while we are on this topic, I am led to understand that titles of essays where cited should be in normal typeface but within double quotes, and that titles of books should be in italic typeface without quotes - is this correct?. --Smerus (talk) 14:46, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Blockquotes – yes, no quotation marks wanted. Essays (like poems, songs etc) – yes, double quotes. Books titles – quoteless italics. I think your changes to the quotes remove the one barrier to passing this fine article for GA. One more read through and I'll be ready to come to a considered judgment. – Tim riley (talk) 15:51, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've made a couple of copy edits, and add a few passing comments, none of them of anything like enough importance to affect this review, but which I hope you might wish to address:

Liszt proving "friend indeed" – a bit florid for an encylopaedia article, perhaps?
"Gesamtkunstwerk, or total artwork" – might this be more comprehensibly translated as "total work of art?" – Artwork suggests something graphic designers send to the printers.
philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer – is the blue link needed for "philosopher"?
1861 saw the lifting of the political ban – some editors (not me) get very agitated by the notion that years see things
Ludwig assumed the throne – this sounds vaguely usurpatory; acceded to the throne might be more neutral
amongst members of the court – what has "amongst" got that "among" hasn't?
Männerlist grösser als Frauenlist. – fair play, guys – let's have a translation!
Meyerbeerean Grand Opera – caps really needed for grand opera?

More to come – Tim riley (talk) 16:59, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have made changes to most of these in line with your comments, save for:

'Gesamtkunstwerk' for which I propose 'total art work' to avoid confusion with 'artwork'
'Grand Opera' which as a genre is generally referred to with two capitals (including the WP article on the topic).--Smerus (talk) 20:04, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You only changed one of the incidents of "total arwork". I've changed the other but I do notice that we now match none of the interpretatiosn given at Gesamtkunstwerk. I think it's something we need to consider before we go for PR.--Peter cohen (talk) 22:16, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wagner's late dramas are considered his masterpieces. True, but you'd better cite someone for the statement
at Köln – English article, so English spelling
followers (known as Wagnerians) – or Wagnerites? – cf. Ernest Newman

Now that I see from your comments, above, that you're planning to take this to peer review I'll abandon these minor quibbles, which will be picked up at PR and are certainly not enough to stop the article as it stands being promoted to Good Article. Do let me know when it's at PR if you want my further input. – Tim riley (talk) 09:46, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Overall summary[edit]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria In my opinion this article could be a worthy candidate for WP:FAC.

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:

B. MoS compliance:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:
Well referenced

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
Well referenced

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
Well illustrated

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Well illustrated
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

I found this an interesting and instructive article to review. It gives me great pleasure to affirm its GA-status. - Tim riley (talk) 09:46, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]