Talk:Welsh National Opera

Welsh National Opera has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: March 6, 2016. (Reviewed version).

Opera

This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Opera, a group writing and editing Wikipedia articles on operas, opera terminology, opera composers and librettists, singers, designers, directors and managers, companies and houses, publications and recordings. The project discussion page is a place to talk about issues and exchange ideas. New members are welcome!OperaWikipedia:WikiProject OperaTemplate:WikiProject OperaOpera articles

Cardiff High‑importance

	Wales portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cardiff, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Cardiff-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CardiffWikipedia:WikiProject CardiffTemplate:WikiProject CardiffCardiff articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wales High‑importance

	Wales portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wales, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Wales on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WalesWikipedia:WikiProject WalesTemplate:WikiProject WalesWales articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was created or improved during the "The 20,000 Challenge: UK and Ireland", which started on 20 August 2016 and is still open. You can help!

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Welsh National Opera/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Ritchie333 (talk • contribs) 13:16, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy to review this. I've had a quick skim through the article and it looks well written; I can't imagine there will be too much required for this to meet GA status.

Specific comments will follow. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 13:16, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Lead[edit]

Should the opening sentence not contain the Welsh translation? Post devolution, it's got equal status, after all.
- Indeed, and someone has very kindly added this. Tim riley talk 18:42, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, I did. I thought of discussing it first but then I decided to JFDI. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 18:57, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is "company" the right word to use? Maybe "group" or "ensemble" would fit better. Presumably the performers are paid in the same way one would pay for a "company"'s service, but it's not the main focus on what people know them for.
- "company" is the usual term for such large-scale performing groups: cf D'Oyly Carte Opera Company, British National Opera Company, Royal Shakespeare Company, Carl Rosa Opera Company etc. – Tim riley talk 18:42, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, after I closely read the rest of the article and some associated sources it does seem this is the correct term to use. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 18:57, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"... it moved into the new Wales Millennium Centre from where it tours Wales, the United Kingdom and the rest of the world extensively" - this looks a little strange. Firstly, it implies the group tours the world from the Millennium Centre, which doesn't make sense (how would you move the centre around from one location to another?) Secondly, Wales is part of the United Kingdom, so this looks a little odd (it also implies they tour Northern Ireland as much as England and Scotland, which might be true but it might not be what you want.
- Tweaked. – Tim riley talk 18:42, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to intrude (I know it's a sensitive time). Re the sentence in the Lead “The company tours Wales, the rest of the United Kingdom and internationally.”; as the company is the 'Welsh National Opera', anything outside that nation is international, which makes “the rest of the United Kingdom” redundant. Daicaregos (talk) 22:47, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've had a tweak. Saying it "tours .... the rest of the United Kingdom" also implies it might regularly play Belfast and Glasgow, but that's not represented by the rest of the lead. "Nationally and internationally" sounds the best bet. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 11:39, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Background[edit]

I wonder if it's worth mentioning (provided sources adequately cover it) that at the turn of the 20th century, Welsh culture was geared more towards choral singing (notably the eisteddfoddau) rather than classical opera?
- There was a strong choral tradition, certainly. I'm away from my shelves for a few days, and can look a reference up on my return if wanted. Tim riley talk 18:42, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've dropped a sentence in, which I think should cover it. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 14:28, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"A local newspaper commented" - is this is the Merthyr Times? I can see a Western Mail piece dated 1890 in a British Newspaper Archive search that refers to the "Welsh National Opera", though annoyingly my subscription has just expired. I have a feeling this is the source you've used at the end of the first paragraph.
- It is; I didn't feel the name of a defunct local journal warranted specific mention in the text. – Tim riley talk 18:42, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
"They promulgated their plan" - "promulgated"?
- Indeed. OED: "To make known by public declaration; to publish", which is what I am trying to convey here. Just "published" wouldn't quite cover the matter as we are talking of word as mouth at least as much as printed publication. Tim riley talk 18:42, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. I think my concern is while I don't mind learning new words in the context of an article review, a casual reader just wanting to know some more about the WNO won't want to get stuck on a "difficult" word. How about "publicised" - if I want to make a local event known by telling people, that sounds like an appropriate word to use. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 18:57, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not quite the nuance I was after, but it will do. Changed. Tim riley talk 20:17, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Owen recruited a local businessman, W. H. (Bill) Smith (1894–1968)" - I don't think we normally put "years lived" directly in the prose. Is this relevant to the article anyway?
- We don't usually put people's dates in if they have their own WP articles, but if they haven't it is normal to add them. We often do this for the dates of biographees' parents, for instance. See, e.g. here or here. – Tim riley talk 18:42, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, as there is precent in featured articles to do this, I'm happy to leave it. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 18:57, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Early years[edit]

"During the week-long season the new company also gave Faust, with Davies in the title role." - "gave"?
- As in "performed". I was surprised it surprised you, so I checked with the OED: "To read, recite, sing, act (anything) in the presence of auditors or spectators; to perform, produce (a play, etc.)" – Tim riley talk 18:42, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As a casual reader, I parsed the sentence up to "gave Faust" and then thought "gave Faust what?" I'd go with "performed". Again, I'm thinking of offering the "principle of least astonishment" to the reader. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 18:57, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Changed to "staged". Tim riley talk 20:17, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Consolidating: 1950s and 60s[edit]

"built for the Festival of Britain), with the Bournemouth Municipal Orchestra replacing the previous ad hoc ensemble" - I'm confused; what has this got to do with the Welsh National Opera?
- clarified that the BMO was now playing as the WNO's orchestra. – Tim riley talk 18:42, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

1990s[edit]

"the BBC commented that WNO was one of the most respected opera companies in the world" - as this is a direct quotation from the source, it should be presented as such
- It could go in quotes, but I don't know that it would be an improvement. Tim riley talk 18:42, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm not going to name names but some people have a tendency to wander along to articles (particularly those queued for DYK or FAC) and shout "close paraphrasing!" so it doesn't hurt to be on the safe side. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 18:57, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Thank you for the warning. I don't much care for the quotes but better safe than sorry, as you say. Tim riley talk 20:17, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

21st century[edit]

"The centre included an acoustically excellent 1,900-seat theatre" - I'm not sure where the "acoustically excellent" comes from in the source given
- I can't recall where it was from if not from that source. Deleted. Tim riley talk 18:42, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
"The production won superlatives from reviewers" - do you mean "The production was given superlative reviews"?
- Just so. That's clear, I think. As in "won praise from" or "won congratulations from" – Tim riley talk 18:42, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
An image of the Wales Millennium Centre would be useful
- I must be going even dottier than usual. I went through all the pictures of the building in Commons and picked the one I wanted. Then – presumably – promptly forgot to add it. Now done. Tim riley talk 18:42, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've swept the whole article now, and can't see any other issues, so I'll put the review on hold while the above comments are addressed. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 17:10, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for reviewing the article – and so quickly, too. Comments addressed, as noted above. Tim riley talk 18:42, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I believe all issues have now been addressed, so I can pass the review. Well done. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 14:28, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox[edit]

Is there a particular reason this article doesn't have an infobox? – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 19:06, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably because previous editors have not considered that an info-box would add anything of value. I agree that it would be otiose—pointless clutter, not helpful to readers. I can think of two other opera companies that have got to FA without the encumbrance of an info-box. I doubt that a consensus would be forthcoming in support of adding an info-box to this article. Tim riley talk 20:55, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Infoboxes gives a full and unbearably tedious insight into the entire arguments, but essentially views are split between "an infobox is good for consistency" and "an infobox should be appropriate for the topic and enhance it". As Tim says, neither argument is part of the GA or FA criteria. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 14:39, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]