Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Opera/Archive 105

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 100←Archive 103Archive 104Archive 105Archive 106Archive 107→Archive 110
Archives Table of Contents

Category:Operas by Czech composers?

The Category:Operas by Czech composers has been created in April this year. That category doesn't seem to fit within the category tree at Category:Operas, and is indeed not categorised there, although the category is bannered as belonging the Opera Project. Is such a category needed? Should there be a Category:Operas by composer's origin and all the possible categories within that? I think not and suggest to nominate the category for deletion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 04:57, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

I'd favour CfD. I also notice that Category:Opera composers has one sub-category (Category:Ukrainian opera composers). We could put that up for discussion too, or we could (if anyone has the energy) create Category:Czech opera composers (et al) as a sub-cat of Category:Czech composers and Category:Opera composers. --GuillaumeTell 10:19, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Both proposed for deletion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 October 11. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 12:23, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Opera categories to be renamed

I notice that someone is proposing to rename lots of opera categories, and that the proposal has received much support here: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 October 20. Note the hidden sections containing lots of proposals. Click on "show". -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:30, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

No more italics

This edit removed the automatic italics for titles of articles which use Template:Composer navbox. According to the edit summary, italicising each article title individually is simpler.

That edit also changed the text alignment for the list entries from left to center and reduced the font size – not an improvement in my opinion. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 14:17, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

I don't mind the smaller type face. It has advantages in that it makes the box less bulky when expanded and helps with titles than used to run over 2 lines. The center-alignment + bullets looks a bit goofy, but I can live with that. Actually they used to be center aligned without bullets until someone else told us we had to have bullets and left-aligned text. Sigh! The worst thing was removing the Italics thingy. In one fell-swoop this has de-italicized the titles of over 1000 articles! Can we at least put that back? Voceditenore (talk) 14:54, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
PS. I left a note on the editor's talk page: User talk:Thumperward#Template:Composer navbox. – Voceditenore (talk) 15:09, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
I think it was generally an improvement, but we will need a coordinated effort if we are going to remove the "italic title". It should first be added by bot to all the transcluding articles. In the mean time, I have added back the italic title feature and the text-align:left. However, I generally agree that we don't need to override the default styles provided by sidebar. Frietjes (talk) 15:21, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for putting the italic thingy back. What kind of co-ordinated effort did you have in mind? This is a very small project and most of us are content creators. In fact, the majority of us were quite happy with or actively preferred non-italic article titles, until that became a dictum from on high. I'm certainly not going to spend my time organizing a bot run even if I knew how. Anyone else up for it? Voceditenore (talk) 15:33, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
In my mind, a coordinated effort would involve, first making a request at WP:BOTREQ to have a bot add {{italic title}} to every article using the template, then second, remove this feature from the template. At that point, editors can choose on a case-by-case basis if the title should be italicised. Frietjes (talk) 15:42, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for Frietjes for cleaning up after me, and sorry for the fallout folks. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 16:37, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Der Freischütz

As I just realized, there is room for improvement on a major opera, Der Freischütz, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:49, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Voice Type of Ännchen

In the article of the opera (Der Freischütz), her voice type is stated as mezzo-soprano, I think this might be incorrect. 1. In wikipedias article on fach(i.e more advanced voice-type) the role is stated as being for soprano (more specifically soubrette). 2. The aria-database states that the role is for soprano (soubrette). http://www.aria-database.com/search.php?sid=23e9cdb619c50384570059b76824e928&X=3&individualRole=507 3. A close friend of mine who sings the role at her opera-school assures me that the role is for soprano.

I will therefore change the voice-type in the article until someone can find a descent source for Ännchen being a mezzo-soprano. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djingis Khan (talk • contribs) 19:07, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

A rather better source than any of those three, the score, agrees: "Sopran" almost-instinct 19:32, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
Yup. (I've sung part of this role - if I'd noticed, I'd have changed it straight away! Thanks for catching it.) –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 19:56, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
However, I see that the change from soprano to mezzo was made by User:Robert.Allen on 21 June this year, and his edit summary says that the roles table was amended per the Freischütz article by Clive Brown in New Grove ("a decent source"). I checked the article and that is indeed what it says. I googled Johanna Eunicke, the first Ännchen, and it looks as if she was indeed a mezzo (e.g. she is listed as such in Undine (Hoffmann)). Maybe it's one of those either/or roles like Octavian? --GuillaumeTell 12:12, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
Looks to me rather that she was one of those either/or singers. Three mezzo-sopranos appeared in Frankfurt in Orlando furioso (alongside a contralto, Sonia Prina, in the title role), but I learned here, that there was no mezzo-soprano in Vivaldi's time, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:54, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
Regrettably, the WP article on mezzo-soprano doesn't go into any of this, as it's obsessed with the fach system. Grove Opera, however, has an excellent article (J. B. Steane was one of the contributors) which says the term first appeared around 1750, but Mozart, for example, never used it. The paragraph on nineteenth-century German opera points out that Eglantine in Euryanthe was written for a mezzo but premiered by a soprano; the soprano Wilhelmine Schröder-Devrient created Adriano in Rienzi and Venus in Tannhäuser, and so on. BTW, there are images of Johanna Eunicke (1800-1856) here, where she is described as "Sopranistin und Schauspielerin", and here. --GuillaumeTell 17:21, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
The footnote cites the source New Grove Opera for the mezzo-soprano voice type (although this may not be totally clear since the ref tag was only added to the role column). As it is now the voice type does not agree with the cited source. (BTW, the score at IMSLP is a Dover facsimile of an 1895 edition, which I would venture is not likely to be a totally reliable source.) I'm changing the voice type back until an appropriate citation supporting the change to soprano is provided. --Robert.Allen (talk) 08:43, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Let me understand: are we talking voice type as proposed by the composer? Then the oldest score might be the best source: soprano. Or are we talking what is actually performed? Looking at all recordings listed: soprano. Or do we believe in a source that is believed to be relevant? - Please don't forget that the main purpose of this entry was to improve the article of the whole opera, not a rather marginal question. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:03, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
I think since now we have two sources cited for soprano, as long as we have the footnote, soprano is OK to put in the table. Gerda, you say the "oldest" score. Which score do you mean? None is currently cited by the article. Does anyone have access to Oxford Music Online? Do they still use Brown's 1992 article, or has it been revised? Is there a critical edition of the score? --Robert.Allen (talk) 17:04, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Ahem! I've actually met Clive Brown and have his email address. I'll email him tomorrow and see what light he can throw on the subject. I might add that it's one of my favourite operas; Gerda - what, exactly, do you think needs improving in the article? Apart from the stilted synopsis (Leo Melitz, perhaps?), it doesn't seem any worse than most of our articles about operas. --GuillaumeTell 01:02, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
I meant the tags for bar urls and missing citations, but those are gone (sorry I didn't check sooner), thank you for the improvements! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:00, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Richard Wagner

Can people pease help to deal with a very difficult situation here. User:Major Torp has embarked on rewriting this article with major distortions (I set aside his grammar etc.). I don't know how to set about this but it would be very helpful to freeze the article for editing at my last edit (which reverts a slew of User:Major Torp's edits) until we can get this properly sorted. This is an important article consulted by many users, on which many worked to get it up to good article status, and I wish to prevent it being destroyed.--Smerus 15:28, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Actually it is now getting rather silly. After I posted a polite notice on User:Major Torp's page asking him to refrain from drastic changes without consultation, he has done the same to me. Is there an administrator around please who can advise?--Smerus 19:45, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
I tried to have a look at this (against my general rule of not getting involved on WP in topics in which I'm actually qualified) but I'm afraid Major T's language has defeated me: even when he's vaguely grammatical I can't follow him :-( IMO a discussion which can't be understood is unlikely to produce good text for a WP article. Maybe its just me being impatient. almost-instinct 11:10, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

RfD on WP:WPOMOS

The discussion of WP:WPOMOS redirect is happening on Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2011_November_12. Anyone interested is welcome to join it. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 18:01, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Shortcut now changed to WP:WPOSG. - Voceditenore (talk) 14:45, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Reinhard Febel

Reinhard Febel was started as a university teacher, but he seems especially important as a composer of operas, help welcome, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 00:05, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Now on the Main page, with great improvements by Scarabocchio! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:42, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Opinions welcome

An editor has suggested a page move at Talk:List of opera companies in Asia, Australia, and Oceania. Please feel free to comment.4meter4 (talk) 15:06, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Mark Herman and Ronnie Apter

As the banner says, "this article has multiple issues", autobiography being the core one. Anyone brave enough to enter this thicket? (I'm not!) almost-instinct 14:16, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

I noticed that, as well as violating WP:AUTOBIO, they've been hopping around opera articles (Maria Stuarda, La bohème, etc.), adding their singable English translations under the heading Editions. Looks like "Spam, spam, spam, wonderful spam..." to me. AfD, anyone? --GuillaumeTell 17:55, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
Regardless of whether they're notable, the article is unsalvageable advertisement, but we don't even have to bother with AfD because it's also a copyvio of several pages. Speedied. Has the spam on other pages been cleaned up already? –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 19:30, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
Not when I was looking briefly earlier on. Individual pages might have been undone. Is there a way of doing it non-painstakingly? almost-instinct 22:08, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
Eh, I used rollback and most and manually removed the rest. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 22:11, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
Its astonishing how quickly a conversation about WP tools can go over my head ;-) Thank you very much for sorting that out. If I hadn't been in a hurry earlier on I would have mentioned that account at WP:SPAM. Still worth doing that, do you think? almost-instinct 22:16, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
I was previously in a hurry to do various things, but came back here to get rid of the spam and now find that I don't need to. As for Speedy Deletion, I sort of assumed that articles could only be nominated for SD when fairly new (this one is nearly two months old), but that clearly isn't the case. Thanks, Roscelese! --GuillaumeTell 22:40, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
Result! [[1]] --GuillaumeTell 00:23, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Since that's now a red link and thus the history gone, this might be useful:

almost-instinct 10:39, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

AfD: Dell'arte Opera Ensemble

The discussion is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dell'arte Opera Ensemble. – Voceditenore (talk) 17:57, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Update: the decision was "Keep". Voceditenore (talk) 10:13, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Or che il dover – Tali e cotanti sono

I've just started a short term project to improve the quality of this article on one of Mozarts early concert arias. Online information seems to be short on the ground, so I'm going to need help tracking down good offline references. Help writing sections for the article will also be greatfully appreciated.Graham1973 (talk) 00:37, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Falsetto

Could someone look at revising this article? I disagree with some of the information in the article, and I've added some recent comments to that effect on the talk page. First, the article suggests there is only modal voice and falsetto, without consideration of head voice, chest voice, blends or transition technique. Second, the section on "female falsetto" sounds like crackpot theory written by some guy in a cloister who never talked to a woman about vocals. Third, the section on rock and pop use of "falsetto" is far too limited. Many popular singers make use of head voice techniques. Lastly, the use of falsetto in speech varies according to culture. The last section has a strong cultural bias in stating that it is a speech pathology. I'm sure I could go on, but I'm not expert enough on the literature to revise it myself. Pkeets (talk) 05:40, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Nevermind. Fixed it myself. Pkeets (talk) 06:20, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
Not my area of expertise at all, but if anyone else is interested in contributing, the discussion re more recent changes is still on-going at Talk:Falsetto. – Voceditenore (talk) 11:01, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Albert Herring

Could a member of this project please have a look at the Performance History section of this article: it seems to be a little "out of sync". Regards. 94.226.159.151 (talk) 20:16, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

In this context, I am a bit uneasy about the performance history - is it useful or meaningful to give, as here, lists of productions in universities etc.? Shouldn't this section be reserved for productions by major opera houses and producers, or at least those that have generated significant critical or other comment? Are there guidelines for performance history sections? Otherwise, in time, these sections will overwhelm the rest of the article for this and many other operas. --Smerus 06:36, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
I agree. I think perfomance histories are mostly used for the first few performances to demonstrate how the work spread; mentioning premieres in various countries is quite common. After that, unless a production is of extraordinary significance, I see no need to list any further performances. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 07:00, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
IMO when a work that once a piece is established in the repertoire, only truly exceptional performances should be mentioned. And even then only with caution. (Exceptional might mean a production that alters the general conception of the work, or maybe one in which a gold-plated cast were at the peak of their powers) almost-instinct 14:38, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Mentoring

(Cut from from a thread in Self-assessment: How can this project expand?)

Forgive a bit more autobiography, but my own experience may also suggest a way of attracting responsible editors for this and similar projects. I came to Wikipedia while I was preparing a doctoral dissertation after 30 years away from University. I found that by editing and creating articles, mostly related to my topic, under the generally supportive aegis of the Opera and Composers Projects, I was able to practice writing clearly, citing appropriate sources and responding to criticism.(Though not always suitably gracefully :-}). I therefore owe Wikipedia and the Project fulsome thanks for their help in my thesis (and indeed for the book based on it now being published). So how about taking this experience (and similar ones) to music departments at universities and colleges as an example for students of how helping Wikipedia can help them as well?--Smerus 16:56, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

I like the idea (and thanks for the autobiographical insight!). I'd be prepared to push for this. Does anyone have experience in mentoring WP newbies? Scarabocchio (talk) 20:42, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
I do. For the last four years, I've mentored a small class at Longy School of Music, whose professor uses Wikipedia as an assignment. They mostly work on articles related to contemporary classical music. It's a lot of work, but can be very rewarding. Voceditenore (talk) 21:28, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
I gave a seminar for my fellow postgraduate students on WP article creation (including creating an article in real time). It was good fun - don't know how many of them carried on to be editors themsleves though - --Smerus (talk) 15:22, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
I've been thinking about this, both about where to find the potential contributors and what sort of incentive/ target/ purpose can be provided. It seems that contributors are easier to find than purposes. "Come and play" is just not good enough. Scarabocchio (talk) 15:33, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
I served as an Online Ambassador for a semester - nothing to do with opera, just showing the students the ropes and commenting on their articles, talk page etiquette, etc. Good interaction with one or two of them, zero interaction with others, but, of course, all online rather than in person. --GuillaumeTell 18:06, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Capitals

Ooh look, someone's put a capital F on La Favorite .... almost-instinct 19:01, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Cut and paste move of La favorite

An editor made cut and paste moves from La favorite and Talk:La favorite to La Favorite and Talk:La Favorite with no discussion after the pages had been at their original location for years, claiming that this is the title on Italian Wikipedia as the sole justification. This was not an uncontroversial move even if it had been done properly. As it is all, the page histories have been lost. I've requested an admin to move them back over the redirects to La favorite and Talk:La favorite so that a requested move discussion take place without further complicating the histories of the talk pages. The request is here

I couldn't discuss this with the editor who made the cut and paste move, User:Dodecalog, as they have redirected their own talk page to their user page. Voceditenore (talk) 19:19, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

I fixed it. Looking at, for example, the article on Donizetti in the New Grove, it's always rendered La favorite. Antandrus (talk) 19:25, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
Wow! I was writing to you about it as you were fixing it. Thank you! Best, Voceditenore (talk) 19:32, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
You're welcome! Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 19:34, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Diacritics (again)

I would like to know the opinion of the members of this project on this edit, and several like them made by user Robergreer. If WP aspires to being an encylopedia, I believe this sort of simplification is unacceptable. In my opinion, this "foreignchar" template should be deleted alltogether. Regards. 94.226.156.237 (talk) 20:15, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

The edit is ridiculous. My keyboard doesn't 'have' this character, but, like all others, has ways of accessing it. And who is it exactly that gives gracious permission that 'Where it is unavailable or not desired, the name may be represented as Les fetes de Polymnie'. ? What is the meaning here of not 'desired'? The whole drift of this edit is 'unencyclopaedic' and all such edits should be reverted - so I agree with 94.226.156.237 (talk) - but......are there formal guidelines about this template? - I can't find any.--Smerus 20:50, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
I agree with both these editors. I would support a nomination to delete the template. --Robert.Allen (talk) 02:57, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
Foreignchar does have the occasional legitimate use, such as with umlauts ("Goetterdaemmerung" etc.) –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 03:52, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
How would the template {{Foreign character}} be a more legitimate use on Götterdämmerung than on Les fêtes de Polymnie? The template was probably useful before Wikipedia's search facility was greatly improved. One can type pretty weird stuff into the search box nowadays, and still find the intended article. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 04:11, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
Is its purpose as a search aid? I thought it was informational, not navigational. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 04:28, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
Good point; either way, I have no idea what the template's purpose is, and judging by Template talk:Foreign character, many others don't either, although it has survived 2 deletion proposals. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 05:29, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

The last attempt to delete the template was 3 years ago -shall we try again? --Smerus 06:38, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Well, I'll vote to delete if you do. Ozob (talk) 11:08, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
I will do so, too. The template is not helpful, rather confusing, in the prominent position at the very beginning of an article, when the reader wants to get to the topic, not this, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:24, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
Me too. The template was created in 2005 when (I'm fairly certain) a number of foreign characters couldn't be used in titles. I've also noticed recently that there's no need to type characters with accents (say, ê) into the search box as exactly the same results appear if you omit the circumflex. --GuillaumeTell 11:29, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
Ditto. I've always found it silly. Voceditenore (talk) 12:22, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
Very well, I will gird my loins.....--Smerus 13:00, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

See here for deletion proposal.--Smerus 13:58, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Please note this has been for some reason relisted as from December 18th although the comments were owerwhelmingly to delete. Please feel free to comment if you haven't already (or even if you have).--Smerus (talk) 17:37, 18 December 2011 (UTC)


Doctor Ox's Experiment (Bryars)

I've just created this article and am in the process of building it up. I wasn't sure what to call it. The original short story is at Dr. Ox's Experiment and mentions a work of the same name by Offenbach which put me of using (opera) as the qualifier. What do other's think?--Peter cohen (talk) 21:59, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

The 1877 Offenbach operetta is called Le docteur Ox (or Le Docteur Ox in French Wikipedia), so it doesn't have the same name. I don't see why the article here shouldn't be called Doctor Ox's Experiment without any qualifier. --GuillaumeTell 22:46, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
Even with the similarity to the short story name, which Blake Morrison writes out in the same form as the opera title in his article on the genesis of the opera in the programme book.--Peter cohen (talk) 23:08, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
No need to agonise about this - the redlink in my post above demonstrates that, as of now, there is no WP article with the same name. I suggest that you [[WP:BB|Be Bold] and move the article's current title to the redlink. If you like, I'll be happy to create a WP:DAB page for the various other forms of the title. --GuillaumeTell 00:29, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
I've gone for making Doctor Ox's Experiment a disambig page and Doctor Ox's Experiment (opera) the article name.--Peter cohen (talk) 01:16, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
Than one could also use a few links turn from red to blue, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:08, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Les pêcheurs de perles– Featured Article candidate

The discussion is here. – Voceditenore (talk) 10:53, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

I linked a few orchestras, choir and companies in the discography. Can we add articles on the premieres cast singers, if not more? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:20, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
I made Léontine de Maësen today and will get one on Jean-Vital Ismaël up tomorrow. However, Nadir will be a tough nut to crack. There's very little information about François Morini, apart from the fact that his real name was.. er... Franz Schumpff. ;-) Voceditenore (talk) 18:05, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
So sweet of you! Will you nominate the soprano for DYK? I could do it, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:24, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
You know me, I can't resist obscure topics.:) I was thinking of nominating it for DYK, but probably don't have enough time to review another candidate. If you want to do it, that would be great. I'd suggest as a hook:
...that Georges Bizet dedicated his song "Rêve de la bien-aimée" (Dream of the beloved), to Léontine de Maësen (pictured).
Her image is public domain. OK, off to attack Monsieur Ismaël now. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 13:12, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
Done, excellent preparation! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:23, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
How about something like ...that baritone Jean-Vital Ismaël, who later created roles of Georges Bizet and Charles Gounod, was refused admittance to the Paris Conservatory because he could not read or write? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:47, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
I think this one might be better:
...that French baritone Jean-Vital Ismaël, who later sang in the premieres of Bizet's Les pêcheurs de perles and Gounod's Mireille, had left home at 16 to become a street singer?
I have multiple references for that, including one in English. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 16:16, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Jon Vickers

I just looked at this page.....its in an awful state, covered with well-merited tags. Does anyone feel like trying to re-write it line-by-line, or shall I just remove everything problematic and let people start over again? (I'm not very knowledgeable about his career, and am remembering my own maxim: "be bold need not mean be ignorant and hasty") almost-instinct 10:57, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Interestingly, the problematic section was merged into the article in 2006, from another article created under the wrong title (John Vickers) [2]. The material is quite well written and basically true (in my view), but obviously unencyclopedic. I'd suggest removing it to the talk page. Other editors can then work on rephrasing and finding references to support the gist of the assertions via reviews. Voceditenore (talk) 17:40, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
Ok I'll do that tomorrow - will be my first attempt at improving via that method so much interference would be appreciated ;-) almost-instinct 22:43, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Edit War/NPOV issues at Falsetto

For the love of God, can I please get some support at the falsetto article. I don't care whether you agree with the content I've added or not, but I know all of you will at least have a healthy respect for wikipedia policy and back me up in that reguard.4meter4 (talk) 10:00, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

I think the reasons that no-one here commented immediately on Pkeets's post up above here are a) that, as Voceditenore, who did eventually comment, said, it isn't the area of expertise of most of us - probably none of us except you -, and b) the only bits of Falsetto that are relevant to opera, AFAICS, are the use of falsetto for comic effect in operas and musicals, and use by Countertenors, where there is a separate article. Speaking for myself (I am a baritone of limited range who can just about sing in tune), I have had zero vocal training and I avoid the articles on voice-types like the plague, especially the stuff on vocal fachs. --GuillaumeTell 11:22, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
I understand. The voice articles also often invite edit wars because it is a content area with a great deal of subjectivity. I have done my best on the voice articles to avoid getting too technical and give even weight to all opinions; a task which is not easy. My hope is that anyone reading the article will never even guess what my own opinion is. I'm rather proud of the article on vocal resonation for example. Unfortunately, there are those who don't like the results of these articles because their view is not the only one presented. In this instance though, I am somewhat perplexed because a controversy is occurring in an area which I didn't think was controversial in the singing community. Ah well. My main issue here is getting the naysayers to actually produce published sources for their opinions. Once I get those, I can attempt drafting a more balanced article if it is warranted. In the meantime, it appears like an attempt to insert OR on their part.4meter4 (talk) 11:43, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Theater stubs

Not visible in Music, but Germany: Dr. Blofeld created many stubs which include opera houses (or theaters, where opera is performed among others). There is room for expansion. I so far expanded Schlosstheater Schwetzingen and Ruhrfestspiele, please check, there are many terms I don't know in English, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:55, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Hmmm, yes. That creator's version of Pavillon 21 MINI Opera Space may well have been a record for the "Stubbiest Stub on Wikipedia". ;-) I've now sourced it and expanded it as much as possible, but I fear it will always remain somewhat stubby. I'll have a look at the other two you mentioned in a couple of days, if someone doesn't beat me to it. I redirected Hamburger Stadttheater to Hamburg State Opera (just as it does on the German WP) and another editor made some sense out of Oper am Gänsemarkt. The two remaining relevant sub-stubs (completely unreferenced), are Opernloft and Schilleroper. Have I missed any? Voceditenore (talk) 14:40, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

"Operas of the Month" and "Composers of the Month"

I've filled these in for January as I'm leaving for deepest darkest Tuscany tomorrow and will be without computer access until January 6th when I return. But I think we should discuss these monthly "collaborations" in the new year. Do we we want to focus on other types of articles, for example? Does anyone have any suggestions for the February OoM and CoM? Etc. etc.... Voceditenore (talk) 18:37, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

I like having an opera and a composer of the month, but I wonder if we might also suggest tackling those genres at List of opera genres that don't yet have articles or that have only short articles with little information about style and content. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 18:42, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
I'm beginning to feel that we're rather scraping the barrel, especially in respect of minor composers' works. Much as I love Der Vampyr, I've never heard of any of the Marschner operas listed for December, and Mondonville rings no bells at all. I'd certainly support continuation of OoM and have had an eye on a couple of the December ones, but other things have intervened. (However, I'm afraid that none of the January choices fill me with any enthusiasm...) Other types of articles that I think might be worth pursuing are directors, designers, impresarios and suchlike, plus perhaps improving some singers' articles. And indeed articles on operatic composers, as noted by Scarabocchio up above. --GuillaumeTell 19:15, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
Last comment before I start throwing things in the suitcase. :-). We could take an opera as the OoM, but request not only its improvement, but also the creation or improvement of "supporting" articles, e.g. on their genre, role creators, librettist, the opera house they premiered in, etc. For the CoM, I agree with GT about barrel scraping, we're getting down to pretty obscure ones which are still red-linked. We could change it from creating new articles on their works to improving composers' biographies + the "supporting" articles, e.g. their operas. Anyhow, I'll leave you all to mull over the possibilities. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 19:31, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
PS I filled in the January XoMs pretty much off the top of my head, as I didn't want a blank notice box to appear automatically on January 1st. As you can see, the January OoM basically resulted from "I spy with my little eye, something beginning with A". Please feel free to change them to something more appealing, although technically it ought to be done by the 31st. The boxes are at January 2012 Composer of the Month and January 2012 Opera of the Month. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 08:08, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Opera/Archive_105&oldid=1190140717"