Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Firebird/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by FrB.TG via FACBot (talk) 20 November 2023 [1].

The Firebird[edit]

Nominator(s): MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 17:32, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Back for another ballet (and popular orchestral work)! A personal favorite and choreographic masterpiece, this work was Stravinsky's breakthrough in the international music scene, setting the stage for Petrushka and The Rite of Spring. This article was promoted to GA in March with a review by Chiswick Chap, rewritten in July per an inquiry by Wretchskull. Just recently it received a PR by Corachow and Schminnte, and now here we are! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 17:32, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Gerda[edit]

Sorry, I missed the PR. As usually I'll look at lead last, but know already that the plot is too detailed for my taste, while I miss more about first reception, later performances and recordings.

Infobox

  • What I usually do for works with a foreign title which didn't make it to common name is still put it on top of the infobox, with the translation below, - here the French. I wonder if the French name should come before the Russian in the Native names, as it was for a premiere in France.
  • Caption: I doubt that the image had an English title. As the image caption is the first thing people will look at, it's perhaps worth saying that it is a sketch for a costume in the premiere, - the person is not mentioned in the lead.

Background

  • I like the concise para for Fokine much better that the composer's which I find overly detailed. Is it relevant that his father was a bass, or that he studied law, for examples? - need sleep --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:46, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
All addressed, and no worries over the PR, very glad to have you here! Thanks for all thus far! Also, somewhat unrelated- I saw The Company of Heaven in your stories list on your user page and gave it a listen out of curiosity, what a wonderful work! Britten's vocal music is glorious and diverse, and this one was no exception! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 02:15, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! - resuming (and if you follow my stories you may have met Firebird "on the side", - a suite was played in the concert of the NWPh right after the Invasion of Ukraine, dedicated to the victims by (then) conductor Jonathon Heyward.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:32, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Background

  • Thank you for some trimming. We have now R.-K. twice in short succession. I don't think we need to say "major works" when they also carry "first performed" and such.
  • I suggest to begin a new para for Diaghilev's background ("D. had founded ...")
  • *Koschei, the immortal king, and the captive Princess" reads like three characters.
  • watch out for ref order (after "deadline", for example)
  • "to the Rimsky-Korsakov household with Andrey Rimsky-Korsakov, the son of Stravinsky's teacher, and to whom Stravinsky dedicated the score" - split?
  • "While the composer worked, Diaghilev arranged ..." - I don't see one working, the other arranging simultaneously, - does it mean it was arranged before the work was finished?

Development

  • "April", - as this is a new section, where readers may arrive per toc, please provide a year (which is also not the year of December.
  • I wonder if "rehearsals began" should come before the two dress rehearsals.
  • I wonder further if there could be a section with narration of the plot and a list of roles, not in the lead, but before rehearsals.
    • Well
  • I see some contradiction between the Firebird first just described as classical, and then as revolutionary.

Premieres

  • "Diaghilev's circle of Mir iskusstva collaborators" - that's too mysterious.
  • The image is lovely, but not even the headers show that size, - no idea what to do.
  • Can the section please provide the dates, locations and performers of the two premieres?
    • I just noticed that I moved the info about the Russian premiere to "Subsequent" so the heading has been changed to "Premiere", singular. The date location and dancers for the premiere are stated in para 2 of the section. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 21:13, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Subsequent

To be continued. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:30, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have a few minutes. Thank you for resolving the above! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:13, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Background

  • Only after finding the Stravinsky background too long did I see that the equivalent passage of The Rite of Spring is much more elaborate. I like it short, but do as you see fit.

Structure

  • I don't see "Synopsis" justified, and Structure would be redundant to the header.
  • why Original Episodes Titles? vs. French episodes titles? (same for English)
  • if all these are titles, why not italic?

Instrumentation

  • on my display, the five completely normal strings occupy space with a lot of white space next to them.

Music

  • "call the princesses back into the palace, but when Ivan pursues her" - plural - singular
  • "Before Koschei turns Ivan into stone" sounds as if he does.

Suites

  • The titles of the first two suites have different capitalisation, - intentionally?

The article leaves me a bit curious about dates, people and styles of further recordings. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:44, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Most of this article is modeled after The Rite, but I think you were right on the extensive bio. For synopsis: I'm not sure what you mean, there's no header with '"Synopsis" since that's part of "Music and plot". Also, are you suggesting the table with episode titles be cut?
As for dates and people, I'm not sure what you mean. There are numerous names mentioned since many people were involved, and I tried to keep the ones focused on to a minimum so it wasn't confusing. The main three subjects here are Stravinsky, Diaghilev, and Fokine, as shown in "Background". Lastly, on the topic of recordings: I cannot find any reliable sources about the history of video recordings of The Firebird. I can find a few questionable reviews (like this) but I'm not comfortable citing that, and none of the book sources/journal articles seem to be very up to date with recordings. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 00:51, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ping for @Gerda Arendt (also, to clarify, there is one sentence about a film version of the ballet under "Recordings") MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 00:51, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Some replies to right above
  • The title of the table is "Synopsis and structure ", - I don't think we need any. Sorry that it wasn't clear.
  • I don't see any dates and people mentioned for the many recordings. Sorry if that wasn't clear. I have no idea if any stand out. Gramophone usually has good reviews. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:08, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Noting that you will probably have to be quite selective, as a Google Search for site:www.gramophone.co.uk "Firebird" + "Stravinsky" gives over 170 results, although there are some false positives. Schminnte [talk to me] 15:27, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
When I let Google do the picking by a more generic question, this one comes first. I agree with you, MyCat, that classical.net is rather useless for the purpose. I'd like musicweb-international.com better. There are also newspapers, such as TNYT. And most recent is fun ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:43, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think that the synopsis and structure table should likely be incorporated into the prose. The plot section should mention the significant scenes. voorts (talk/contributions) 23:27, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks to all for the input, I now see what @Gerda Arendt meant. That being said, I'm not sure that adding more is necessary. The "Recordings" section as it stands discusses the pianola rolls, names the first recordings, and briefly touches on the film version- much like The Rite, which this article is modeled after. Much of the commentary there is Stravinsky commenting on recordings, but I don't find this particularly important to the reader; understanding which recordings came first is important to the history, but knowing Stravinsky's favorite doesn't seem very notable. Also, there are numerous dates and names- the reason there aren't names of conductors is because the sources do not list them. Thanks for the specificity, though, always looking for ways to improve an article's readibility. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 00:30, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Taken so far. As usual, lead last. You said you took The Rite of Spring as a model.

  • There, the plot is a half-sentence, - I suggest you move the detailed plot further down in the article, and leave just what's essential.
  • There, we have the last sentence about influence and recordings, while the many recordings of the Firebird are not mentioned in the lead, and popularity is only given for the suites.
  • There, Firebird is mentioned as preceeding, and similarly, the Firebird lead might look foreward at Sacre. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:16, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Gerda Arendt, thanks again for the comparisons. Cut down plot in the lead, added a bit more about recordings. The mention of how Firebird looks forward to The Rite is in the last sentence of lead para 1. Thank you again! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 02:06, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for trimming the lead, but where did the nice table go?
In the lead, I'd like even less, believing that a list of the characters - as in Appalachian Spring, with a specific note about how unusual the Firebird role was at the time.
In the article, I'd like even more of a plot than we had in the lead before (again as in AS, and compare FAs about operas, such as Falstaff), and the best place for it would be after the table. The table offers the original names, valuable for some readers, and their English counterparts. coming again in the and those not interested can easily skip the section.
Regarding the points below, the technical term word for performing a role in opera and ballet the first time is "create", but some readers misunderstand that. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:17, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I had suggested cutting the table. I don't have strong feelings about it, however, so @MyCatIsAChonk should feel free to put it back in. voorts (talk/contributions) 23:23, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Gerda Arendt, I've shuffled the lead around, let me know what you think. For the table, thanks for the clarification voorts- I do agree that this table is mildly unnecessary, as I only included it because it was present before the revision. Gerda, regarding the plot, I'm not sure there's much more to add. One difficulty I had in writing the "Music and plot" section was that there is no clear definition of the plot as recorded by Fomine/Stravinsky that I could find. Whereas Falstaff has a thorough plot explanation in many program booklets and websites, I can't find the same for Firebird- most sites give only a sentence or two about the plot, and I was lucky to find the explanations that I found in Philip 2018 and the three sites. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 01:35, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, and understand. I miss the table, but so be it if I'm the only one. Support. I suggest you move - in the lead - the sentence about the music before later performances, but won't change my mind overall ;) --(didn't complete signing yesterday but better sign the support) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:07, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator note[edit]

This has been open for three weeks and has yet to pick up a support. Unless it attracts considerable movement towards a consensus to promote over the next three or four days I am afraid that it is liable to be archived. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:46, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by SilverTiger[edit]

I'm think I've heard music from this and liked it so... here goes nothing?

  • What's an impresario?
    • Linked the first instance of the word
  • Diaghilev commissioned Stravinsky to orchestrate music by Chopin for the ballet Les Sylphides, and the composer was finished by March 1909. Can you specify the month when Diaghilev commissioned Stravinsky, since you also specify the month it was completed?
    • Can't find anything about the specific months in the two sources cited, Walsh and White. They only state that Diaghilev commisssioned him; no date attached. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 22:47, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The group drew from several books of Russian fairy tales, notably Alexander Afanasyev's collection and Pyotr Pavlovich Yershov's The Little Humpbacked Horse. Add links- a piped link to Russian Fairy Tales at "collection", and The Little Humpbacked Horse. Yes, the latter redirects to a section but readers are going to be curious and want to be able to click on it.
  • What Muscovite anthology?
  • ...Stravinsky finished the work in nearly six months,.. If six months is a relatively short time to write a ballet in, then say "only" instead of "nearly". If not, then change it to "just under".
  • ..who originated the titular Firebird role,.. "originated" does not work here. Find another way to say that she was the first to play the role.
  • ..while female dancers often danced princesses, swans, and lovers,.. I think you're missing a word in there?
  • Throughout the score, Stravinsky used a system of leitmotifs (short, recurring musical phrases associated with a particular person, place, or item) placed in the harmony he later dubbed "leit-harmony". - "leitmotif" needs some kind of in-line explanation, same as impresario.

And that's all from me. Good luck, SilverTiger12 (talk) 04:44, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from voorts[edit]

  • "had recently come to love" - change "come to love"; feels a bit informal
  • "Benois recalled that Pyotr Petrovich Potyomkin, a poet and ballet enthusiast in Diaghilev's circle, brought forth the subject of the Firebird, citing [or reciting if he actually read it aloud] with the 1844 poem "A Winter's Journey" by Yakov Polonsky, which includes the lines" - "brought forth" when?; in what context; to whom?
  • "Fokine read much Fokine drew on the stark contrast between good and evil in skazki (Russian fairy tales) in developing the ballet's characters. to find suitable tales; in writing the characters, Fokine displayed a stark contrast of good and evil commonly seen in fairy tales.
  • "Originally, Tcherepnin was to compose the music, as he had previously worked on Le Pavillon d'Armide with Fokine and Benois, but he withdrew from the project soon after." - is there a specific date for when "originally" and "soon after" were?
    • Sources don't really say when, and I assume this is because this info is found in undated letters/documents. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 02:01, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • If that's the case, I would change the "soon after" because that's comparative, but there's nothing to compare it too. voorts (talk/contributions) 01:32, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "fearing public disappointment from the public."
  • "portraying ideas of expressiveness, naturalism, vitality, and stylistic consistency." I'm not sure how these are "ideas" that have been "portrayed", rather than descriptions of the choreography.
  • "was revolutionary to thefor ballet scene"
  • "However, Russian audiences had less favorable views towards the work, and the Russian premiere was not well-received by much of the audience" (not well-received seems like an understatement).
  • "which Stravinsky took his family to from their home in Ustilug." - which production? do you have a date (or month and year)?
  • "Andrey Rimsky-Korsakov quickly traveled to Paris to see the ballet, and he later praised the production in a letter to his mother." - this is in the section about subsequent productions, but seems related to the initial production.
    • The details of all post-premiere performances, including the extended run, are discussed in "Subsequent performances", but the reception to some others are mentioned in the last section for the sake of keeping reception in one place. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 02:01, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'm still not quite understanding. When did Rimsky-Korsakov "quickly travel[] to Paris to see the ballet"? voorts (talk/contributions) 01:32, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "it was impossible to mistake the genius of the composer, or of the artist who had designed the setting...'" - remove ellipsis at end of quote.
  • "inon the Iberian peninsula"
  • I would recommend moving the first paragraph of the "General character" subsection to the bottom of "Music" in its own subsection called "Critical reception". Also, is there any more recent criticism, particularly in scholarly works?
    • You raise a very good point- I moved it to a new subsection called 'Musical legacy'. As for modern critiques, not too sure about that- yes, there's a bit of commentary on the music itself, but not many modern analyses of The Firebirds lasting legacy, which is rather disappointing since it's such a seminal work in Stravinsky's repertoire. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 02:01, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • You cite several sources regarding the choreography in the final paragraph of the "Development" section. Do those sources also comment on the choreography? Have you located any more contemporary sources that cite those works? If you're not sure about whether there's more modern analyses of the choreography / design / music, then I'd be concerned about whether the article meets FA's comprehensiveness requirement. voorts (talk/contributions) 01:32, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
        @Voorts, fixed the other two. For this, I entirely forgot about the choreo, my mind was focused on the musical analysis... I'll try to expand upon this soon, thank you! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 02:11, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's all I have for now. voorts (talk/contributions) 00:13, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Schminnte[edit]

I had my say at the peer review, where my prose comments were promptly dealt with. The only outstanding comment I had during the peer review was that I personally would like to see a more technical detailing of the music; in retrospect I think the level of detail is fine. I believe the article meets the FA criteria, so I'm happy to support. Schminnte [talk to me] 23:02, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks @Schminnte, hope to review A (For 100 Cars) soon! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 02:10, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Source and image review[edit]

Image licence, sourcing etc. look fine for me. Placement seems reasonable too. I did not review the song things in the "Music and plot" section.

Source wise, spot-check only upon request. Don't think we need to archive Google Books links. Is the New York Public Library really the author of "Stravinsky and the Dance: A Survey of Ballet Productions"? Except for Presto Classical we seem to be talking high-profile sources every time - famous orchestras, noted authors and reputable university presses. Source formatting is consistent. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:57, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jo-Jo Eumerus, I believe Presto is ok to cite here, as it is cited the same way in another FA, The Rite of Spring. For Stravinsky and the Dance; The author is Selma Jeanne Cohen, but I believe that the NYPL is the publisher- the first pages of the book give little information. Cut archive links for Google Books- if I missed any, let me know. Thank you very much! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 18:32, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Mmm, who authors Presto and what reputation do they have? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:43, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Jo-Jo Eumerus, Presto is an online retailer for recordings and other music things. If I'm understanding WP:VENDOR correctly, I believe using the page just to see the number of commercially available recordings is appropriate. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 12:02, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OKish, although I notice that the linked webpage does not directly reference the number. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:26, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Jo-Jo Eumerus, not sure if it shows up on your device, but I see "Showing 1 - 10 of 181 results" in the top left corner. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 16:38, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
For me it says 197, and does that number mean what we are interpreting it as? Search hits can mean a number of things, not all of them relevant. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 16:40, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Jo-Jo Eumerus, ah, now I see what you mean. Cut the source and preceding claim. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 16:53, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like this is a pass, source and image wise. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:04, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not a pass on sources. Too many pages ranges with just p. And individual pages with pp. You need to check dates dashes too: there are a few hyphens rather than dashes used. - SchroCat (talk) 00:17, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @SchroCat, will fix pages- not sure what you mean by the dates, though. All the date ranges I see use endashes, am I missing something? MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 01:48, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry (flaming auto correct): you need to check dashes on page ranges, as there are hyphens mixed in there - possibly only one, but there may be others. - SchroCat (talk) 06:25, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A few others:
  • There is some inconsistent formatting in having some books in with the refs (59 and 74) and the rest in sources
  • Ditto with journals - why are some in the refs and some in the sources?
  • Griffiths: as he's contributor and editor, you need detail of which essays the cites are from
  • Hamilton: space for W.W. on publisher
  • White (1957) needs an oclc
  • Not part of a source review, but I noticed some LQ issues too ," instead of ",
- SchroCat (talk) 08:55, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@SchroCat, fixed page ranges. The justification for having some sources in the refs rather than the sources is that they were only used once. If I cited a book/article and I cited different pages for different things, it went in sources- If I cited one page from one book/article and that was it for that source, there was no need to use sfns. Griffiths: how would I clarify which one it came from? The various citations through come from many different essays. Fixed Hamilton. Added ISBN to White 1957. What's LQ mean? MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:58, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK for the sources/refs, but FNs 81 (Howerton) 82 (Papanikolaou) and 100 (Macaulay) don't have a page number at all (just the page ranges); these should have a page number(s)
  • For Griffiths you can do it the same way you do for Carbonneau. Separate entries for each chapter used. At the moment it just says he's the editor, which looks a little odd
  • LQ: See WP:LQ - it's logical quotations, having the quote marks inside the punctuation, rather than outside.
- SchroCat (talk) 12:10, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@SchroCat, fixed Griffiths source and quotations. I see the confusion about those three sources: for those, I found them online databases like Brill or ProQuest, where just the text was present without page numbers, and those databases are linked in the refs. The page ranges are the article's actual location within the printed material, but I didn't get the sources from the book- therefore, page range. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 22:59, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK, no problems for the Brill/ProQuest refs
  • Just the LQ point to sort out for all those non-sentences with full stops ( a "delicious musician.", "sudden crash.", played on a piano." etc)
- SchroCat (talk) 08:23, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@SchroCat, forgot about the periods- fixed. Thanks for the thorough review even outside of sourcing! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 12:00, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK, Source formatting pass. I haven't done a search for additional sources or any spot checks, just focused on the formatting. - SchroCat (talk) 12:52, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Ian[edit]

Recusing coord duties to review as this was one of the works that got me hooked on modern classical, thanks to my mother, a big ballet fan. Also I recall with pleasure reviewing Brian Boulton's Rite of Spring article, so high time for the piece that broke Stravinsky onto the world stage...

  • Copyedited as I reviewed, so pls let me know any concerns. Outstanding points:
    • Stravinsky finished The Firebird in about six months, and had it fully orchestrated by April 1910; the orchestration was finished mid-May -- what's the distinction between "fully orchestrated" and "the orchestration was finished"?
    • When the company arrived in Paris, the ballet was not finished, causing Fokine to extend rehearsals -- can we be more specific here, e.g. is it the choreography that was incomplete, since I gather the music was all ready and orchestrated?
    • After the premiere and subsequent performances, Stravinsky claimed to have met numerous figures in the Paris art scene, including Marcel Proust, Sarah Bernhardt, Jean Cocteau, Maurice Ravel, André Gide, and Princesse Edmond de Polignac. -- not sure of the significance of this, at least the way it's written, and especially if it's only "a claim"...

That's it for now, hope to get the remainder before long... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:51, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ian Rose, thanks for the review! Point one, I've no idea where that confusion came from, all fixed. Point two, the source does not elaborate further, just saying that ballet was unfinished and not saying why. Point three, I believe listing these people is important because it shows his popularity, and they all had some effect on Stravinsky: Princesse Edmond de Polignac commissioned numerous works of his, Gide was the librettist for Persephone, Cocteau was the librettist for Oedipus rex (opera), etc. Thanks for the CE- the entire article reads much better now! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 02:00, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, tks re. point one. Re. point two, I can wear that for now at least. Re. point three, I understand, although without the clarification you've just given the significance might be lost on the average reader; ideally that bit might best come straight after Diaghilev's "eve of celebrity" quote, though chronologically it probably wouldn't work. If you keep it, think you at least need to re-phrase slightly and say Stravinsky recalled that after the premiere and subsequent performances he met many figures in the Paris art scene..., assuming that's all cited to his autobiography (you might chuck the relevant citation to the end of that sentence as well). Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:01, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Resuming...

  • Backtracking a bit, re. Stravinsky arrived in Paris around the beginning of June for the premiere. It was his first visit to the city and the premiere of his first stage work. -- mentioning the premiere twice really did make it appear the premiere was like, now, when in fact it didn't happen till a few weeks later. Can we re-phrase to Stravinsky arrived in Paris around the beginning of June to attend the premiere of his first stage work; it was his first visit to Paris.?
  • Rimsky-Korsakov's Sinfonietta on Russian Themes -- can we link, or at least date, this piece?
  • Re. the 1919 Suite, The score contained many errors -- I think an example or two might not go astray here...
  • The 1961 Columbia recording -- is this one conducted by Stravinsky himself? If so, worth mentioning that.

I think that's it for prose and coverage -- although I found a bit to edit, it generally flows well and doesn't seem to omit much, while also not being overly detailed. After we deal with the above I'll take another look top to bottom. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:01, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ian Rose, many thanks again, especially for the ce! Rephrased the sentence about Proust et al.
Point one: used your rephrasing. Point two: added date. Point three: source doesn't clarify, but I expanded the Stravinsky quote a bit. Point four: the source is no longer available on internet archive (lawsuit, probably) and I cannot access the page on Google Books, so I don't know. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 13:13, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Tks for all those. Re. the last point, I double-checked my copy of Stravinsky conducting Firebird and it is the CBS in 1961; to make things simpler citation-wise, I managed to find the relevant pages in Hamilton on Google Books and have tweaked the text accordingly. That said, I'd be very surprised if the 1961 recording was the first of the complete ballet score: Hamilton seems to be listing only Stravinsky's recordings of his works, so I don't think we can use that as a source to state unequivocally that his was the first complete recording. Unless you want to go scouring sources for someone reliable saying which was the first full score recording -- or even the first 1945 score recording, to be safe -- I'd alter that sentence to Stravinsky recorded the 1945 suite with the Philharmonic Symphony Orchestra of New York in 1946, and the complete ballet with the Columbia Symphony Orchestra in 1961.
Ian Rose, that's much better, thanks for rephrasing and clarifying- all fixed. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 13:37, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discrepancy between the source and the original text of that sentence re. the 1946 and 1961 recordings rang a small alarm bell and made me want to spotcheck a few things to see that it was an isolated case, with the following result:
  • FN18a/b -- okay
  • FN61 -- okay
  • FN84b -- okay
  • FN88b -- issue: source mentions dungarees but I can't see anything about a Chinese Communist connection
  • FN91 -- okay
  • FN103 -- okay

Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 15:05, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ian Rose, cut issue with 88b, not sure where that came from- thanks for the spotcheck MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 02:02, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Tks, happy to support now. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 10:49, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Corachow[edit]

My comments in the PR on the dance side of things were dealt with swiftly, though I'd like the following to be addressed:

  • In subsequent performances, considering adding a sentence to say that many more choreographers made their own version, not just the one listed here. Maybe named a few of them as well?
  • The only filmed recording mention is the Sadler's Wells / Fonteyn in 1959. I assume it's actually the first filmed performance? Online, I found DVDs of Firebird performed by Royal Ballet, Mariinsky and National Ballet of Canada (I believe the former two are filmed performance and the latter made for the camera). And I also recall watching the Paris Opera Ballet performing the Béjart version on video.

Personally I'd also like more details on the dancing side of things but I think it is acceptable here and I understand the difficulties with accessing sources. I'm also very sorry to have missed the Appalachian Spring review. Corachow (talk) 02:05, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Corachow, no worries about Spring- you being at the PR for this and that was immensely helpful, and it likely would've failed the comprehensiveness criteria without your comments! Point one: see the last sentence of the section, and most choreographers in Au 1998 are already listed in the section, so relisting them would be redundant. Point two: Gerda had a comment about the film versions too, but the conclusion was that there's little to no reliable coverage of this subject; I could only find sketchy sites like this. Having effective coverage of every film version would be difficult, since I cannot find a source that lists film versions, and even then, reviews of these films are few and far between. If there are any sources you're aware of, that'd be most appreciated, but my own searches have come up inconclusive. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 13:50, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I see. The Oxford Dictionary of Dance (Google Books) listed several more versions, several made after Au 1998 was published, but did not go in detail on each one. Several well-known choreographers there, though their own takes aren't necessary the best known versions of Firebird and/or best known works in their careers. There's also one version by Alexei Ratmansky that was made quite recently. Corachow (talk) 15:09, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Corachow, thanks for finding that- added some names and companies. I'm not sure how helpful the addition is (see the end of "Subsequent productions") but it ensures coverage of modern choreographies too. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 20:32, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Though all these new versions are all with completely new choreography and not Fokine. Please link Tetley and Taras. I also encourage you to add Ratmansky for American Ballet Theatre in 2012 (New York Times review), for a bit more modern coverage, and also because Ratmansky is one of the most important ballet choreographers working today. Corachow (talk) 20:40, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Corachow added- for the future, don't hesitate to add some things yourself if you deem them necessary, I trust your intuition on what's notable in ballet vs what's not. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 23:46, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. This is a support from me. In the future if I come across a source with information noteworthy I'll add them to the article. Corachow (talk) 23:52, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/The_Firebird/archive1&oldid=1186110084"