Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Opera/Archive 49

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 45

←

Archive 47

→

Archives Table of Contents

Diletta Rizzo Marin

I just discovered an article on the soprano Diletta Rizzo Marin. It looks like a puff piece to me. What do you all think? Is this another "Bright Young Thing" article?Nrswanson (talk) 23:02, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

She's singing in Toulouse at the moment. My feeling is that although young, she just about meets the notability criteria. Perhaps we can have some other opinions? The references are in Italian and Spanish. Best. -- Kleinzach (talk) 01:45, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Interesting. Well if that is the case the article needs some improvements. Right now it reads more like a fan page by someone who doesn't speak English very well. Also, do performers warrant pages if they haven't achieved sucsess over a period of time? She's only 23 years old and hasn't been performing very long.Nrswanson (talk) 02:14, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

That's all true, but IMO she does meet the criteria we've used in the past. -- Kleinzach (talk) 02:39, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I visited her website - For someone very young like her, she has an impressive repertoire. But can someone verify whether the list is true or not, other than that, the locations of the performance are as important as the “total number”. We also need to see her performance review (by expert of course). With all that info only we can determine whether she really fulfilled the criteria to be in here. This is just my opinion. - Jay (talk) 06:07, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I think she just about makes the cut, notability-wise. See my more detailed comments on Talk:Diletta Rizzo Marin (and the revised version of the article). Voceditenore (talk) 10:33, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I removed the PROD tag as I felt that, following the addition of further references and material, the subject was sufficiently notable for an article. However, it has now been nominated for deletion via AfD by Nrswanson. The deletion discussion page is here for any project members who may wish to comment. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 15:17, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

You did a good job improving the article Voceditenore and although I applaud your efforts I still hold to my former opinion.Nrswanson (talk) 19:06, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Up to today, she sang one opera only: La sonnambula, at Santander. She is the daughter of it:Roberto Scandiuzzi. On it.wiki the article has been already deleted. Her father definitely deserves an article, but she is a debutante. --Al Pereira (talk) 16:21, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Some new articles that are perhaps too well-written?

Marleau, who seems to have started editing on Wikipedia about 3 weeks ago, has created (or significantly expanded) quite a lot of new articles, mainly on Italian or Italian American singers, many of whom were prominent at the Met. The articles are very well-written... er... perhaps too well-written. The editor's first language is not English and you can see this in the leads he writes for the articles. But then in the body of the article, the writing switches to very polished prose, e.g. Sesto Bruscantini, Mario Sereni. Quite a few of the articles list these as sources:

Metropolitan Opera Encyclopedia, David Hamilton
The Metropolitan Opera Guide to Recorded Opera, Paul Gruber

They're not online, so I suppose if they were copied by hand from the books, no one will notice, or will they? Voceditenore (talk) 18:47, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I have the Gruber, and it isn't obviously quoted verbatim in those articles. I think it's a perfectly legitimate source for singers' discographies. --GuillaumeTell (talk) 22:34, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I'm sure it's a legit source, I was just concerned that the stuff appears to have been copied verbatim from somewhere - long experience spotting plagiarism and bringing it to the attention of the miscreants when I was a university lecturer.;-) Best, Voceditenore (talk) 07:28, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I have the Hamilton book and neither article is copied verbatim from the Hamilton nook eitherRlendog (talk) 00:14, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Renee Fleming infobox

Doesn't the Renee Fleming infobox violate the Opera Project rule? How is it this has survived while all others appear to have been expunged? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nickbigd (talk • contribs) 21:05, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I've fixed it. If you find any more of these please go straight ahead and take them out. Best. - Kleinzach (talk) 23:44, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Here's some more I've found that have pop music infoboxes (leaving out the cross-over/popera crowd). I'll list them here, because I've not got the time to remove them myself right now and besides I hate the occasionally ensuing kerfuffle on the talk pages which is even more time consuming.

Best, Voceditenore (talk) 09:17, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Do you have a method for finding these? I'll make a start on removing the boxes starting at the top. Can I have some help? -- Kleinzach (talk) 23:30, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I do a search on soprano, baritone, bass, or tenor + genre + opera. Not perfect, but the non- relevant results are fairly easy to spot. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 09:14, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

non-standard pitch names

A number of (to me) unfamiliar pitch names have been placed under the OP banner, such as Low C (my middle C) 'Deep C' and Soprano C (???), the last a result of splitting high C. The only one referenced, Tenor C, certainly seems a non-standard name, though it at least bears directly on opera. If it can be shown that any of these have some currency, I think they should at least be mentioned in note and/or the articles on Scientific pitch notation and Helmholtz pitch notation, but otherwise it might be best to make a verifiable article out of high C and dump the rest. Any better ideas? Sparafucil (talk) 08:11, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree. Some of these terms are completely unfamiliar to me and I have two degrees in music. I don't think Low C or Deep C are terms that are used. I certainly have never heard of them. I have heard the term Soprano C used interchangeably with high C. I think Tenor C is really more of an organ term and that the information about the tenor voice was put into the article just to clarify the difference. It certainly isn't standard practice to refer to Tenor C in vocal music.Nrswanson (talk) 05:20, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Question: On the subject of notes... originally the climactic note in Nessun Dorma was listed as B4 in the article. Then someone changed it to B5. Then someone changed it back to B4 pointing out that B5 was a soprano note. Then someone else changed it to a B3 on the basis of an "opera Karaoke" web site. [1]. So which is it? Best, Voceditenore (talk) 10:07, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

French capitalization

I've just moved La reine de Saba to La Reine de Saba but cant remember where I read the thread on La Juive vs. La juive which spelt out the rule. In any case the Project page, which now reads "in Italian and French, only proper names are capitalized" should be updated to something like "in French unlike Italian, a noun refering to a character is capitalized; thus Il barbiere di Siviglia but Le Barbier de Seville" Sparafucil (talk) 01:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

The project has well established rules on capitalization which are explained on Wikipedia:Naming conventions (operas), also on the project page see Article titles. We follow the same capitalization rules as Grove. These are not the only capitalization systems in existence (especially in the case of French names), but they are the ones we follow. Can you please change La Reine de Saba back to La reine de Saba? Thank you. -- Kleinzach (talk) 06:25, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the link to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (operas), which is clear enough; I've clarified the project page to avoid confusion. I dont have any insight into why Grove does this; clearly it is a house style, since Steven Huebner's Grove articles follow it while his own publications (including The Operas of Gounod) do not. It seems to me this is not a long term solution unless we can convince the rest of anglophone WP to go along... Sparafucil (talk) 01:08, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Please respect the project consensus. If you want to change project guidelines please make a proposal here first. If everybody agrees the new text can be inserted. Otherwise please leave it alone. I am reverting the changes you have just made to the project page. -- Kleinzach (talk) 03:05, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

I did not "change" any guideline, but reworded a section that implies French and Italian capitalization are the same, after proposing the same above. Do you have a reasoned objection? Sparafucil (talk) 21:59, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

For the record, you added this text to the project page:

For now we follow Grove in treating French the same way: 'La reine de Saba', 'Les Indes galantes', 'La Juive', 'L'Africaine' (note however that it is standard in French to capitalize nouns referring to a character: La mère coupable (the opera) but La Mère coupable, (the play); likewise 'Il trovatore' becomes 'Le Trouvère'

So, you added a sentence contradicting the guideline, stating it was only to be followed temporarily ("For now"). No one agreed to that. Your text would confuse contributors. Many people find foreign capitalization difficult enough without giving them contradictory instructions. If you want to suggest changes in the way we write and edit articles, this is the place to do it - here on the talk page. -- Kleinzach (talk) 14:23, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

The reason La Reine de Saba is moved is that this contributor was confused by the text as it stands. Would you have a go yourself at wording the guidelines so they dont invite "corrections" to Grove capitalization? Sparafucil (talk) 21:31, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

I've now added the agreed (unambiguous) sentence in Wikipedia:Naming conventions (operas) (Capitalization should follow the usage in the most recent editions of New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians and New Grove Dictionary of Opera.) so it also appears on the project page.

Once again I'm asking you to correct La Reine de Saba etc.. Please do it now. There are several hundred French opera articles, not to mention all the references to them. Changing one or two of them to make a point is called a WP:Point attack. The WP policy says: "Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point". -- Kleinzach (talk) 00:20, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Um... The 'system' for title capitalization in French that Sparafucil is referring to isn't to capitalize nouns referring to a character. It's to capitalize the first word + the first noun (any noun) if the first word isn't a noun. It's the most commonly used system and also the one used in the French Wikipedia [2] and by the Paris Opera. [3] But... there seem to be at least 3 competing 'systems' used in France for titles: (a) first word + first noun if the first word isn't a noun (as above), (b) First word only, even if it's not a noun (a la Grove), (c) all important nouns. The most common is (a) and the least common is (c). I once ran a check on several French opera house sites and French newspapers to see how they capitalized the opera titles and found both Le Trouvère and Le trouvère, La Fille du régiment and La fille du régiment, etc.

However, given the inconsistency even in French usage, the fact that the Grove does use one of the actual French systems, and the vast number of references to French operas in Wikpedia, it's better to stick to only one system. And... not get into discussions of French grammar on the guidelines page, and certainly not to start randomly changing the titles of existing articles. So yes, Sparafucil, please change them back to the titles used in Grove. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 08:08, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I just made a minor grammatical change in the bit on the Project page about capitalization [4]. The use of "Whereas in English, we capitalize all the major words" instead of are "all the major words are capitalized" is not congruent with the succeeding clauses (all of which use the passive) and is potentially slightly confusing. It is presumably Grove that does this, not "we". Voceditenore (talk) 10:55, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm. I see this might run and run, after noticing a recent series of changes in French opera titles with accompanying page moves etc., e.g. [5], [6], [7], and the ensuing kerfuffles on the talk pages. Anyhow, the guidelines we use are currently stated here as:

Capitalization should follow the usage in the most recent editions of New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians and New Grove Dictionary of Opera. (Please note that capitalization rules vary. Whereas in English, all the major words are capitalized e.g. ' I Was Looking at the Ceiling and Then I Saw the Sky', in Italian and French, only proper names are capitalized, e.g. 'Il diluvio universale', 'Ugo, conte di Parigi', 'Le nozze di Figaro', 'Les mamelles de Tirésias', 'Les Indes galantes', 'Les contes d'Hoffmann', 'La vie parisienne'. In German, only nouns are capitalized, e.g. 'Die lustige Witwe', 'Die tote Stadt', 'Die ägyptische Helena').

But... I think they should be reworded to make it clear that we are not stating a categorical rule about capitalization rules in various languages but we are stating the Grove rules, which we follow. Thus, reword simply to:

Capitalization should follow the usage in the most recent editions of New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians and New Grove Dictionary of Opera:

In English, all the major words are capitalized e.g. ' I Was Looking at the Ceiling and Then I Saw the Sky'.
In Italian and French, only proper names are capitalized, e.g. 'Il diluvio universale', 'Ugo, conte di Parigi', 'Le nozze di Figaro', 'Les mamelles de Tirésias', 'Les Indes galantes', 'Les contes d'Hoffmann', 'La vie parisienne'.
In German, only nouns are capitalized, e.g. 'Die lustige Witwe', 'Die tote Stadt', 'Die ägyptische Helena').

Voceditenore (talk) 09:08, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes I agree with your rewording. (Actually I think Oxford follow the same rules so we might consider adding their books as well). It is of course a no-win situation, given the confusion in France itself. We originally decided to follow Grove for simplicity and to avoid having people refer to complicated rules every time there was a new article. We had a problem with contributors trying to use English capitalization everywhere and so we adopted a simple system to counter it. -- Kleinzach (talk) 09:51, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

The The Oxford Dictionary of Opera also uses the Grove system, which is more generically known as the 'sentence captialization' system for titles. I'll wait to see if anyone objects to the new wording and then I'll change it to include the ODoO in addition to Grove. Voceditenore (talk) 10:11, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I object vehemently! The current system is absurdly incoherent. It treats literary works differently from musical works for the reason that one non-French-speaker (Mr. Grove) established a separate rule for Opera, and the whole rest of Wikipedia has to swallow it. Besides, in the French Wikipedia, the abovementioned rule (a) is followed throughout, which should be respected. Kraxler (talk) 05:11, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

For Grove see the New Grove Dictionary of Opera. Sir George Grove (1820–1900) is not actively involved. Please respect this forum and remember that hundreds of articles are involved. This is not some kind of ego-battling argument about who is right, and who is wrong.

Also, see Project France Conventions on French names, places, titles where it explains "In Wikipedia article titles, French titles are currently listed in several different ways" , and twice remarks that "capitalization is currently chaotic" . -- Kleinzach (talk) 07:14, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

The Grove way is also the system used by Viking, so it looks like there is a consensus among English opera manuals. It's the simplest way of doing things and it's currently the status quo. Changing over to another system would entail hours and hours of pointless labour. --Folantin (talk) 09:15, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Comment "Chaotic" is putting it mildly. First of all the 'rule' for capitalization on the French Project page on the English Wikipedia is at variance with the Manual of Style for the French Wikipedia. The French Wikipedia does not treat the indefinite article (un, une) the same way as the definite article (le, la, les) and also capitalizes any pre-posed adjectives or adverbs. See [8] But frankly, the Manual of Style on the French Wikipedia is itself at variance with both Le Petit Robert, and the Dictionnaire de citations françaises which treat all determiners (articles, numbers, demonstratives, etc.) the same.

Secondly, if you actually look at the way titles of works are rendered on the French Wikipedia, there is massive inconsistency, even according to their own rules. Below is a small sample of titles of works (operas, novels, paintings, etc.) as given in the French Wikipedia:

La Petite Renarde rusée

Richard Cœur de Lion (note also the inconsistency in the article itself. In the role list it is Richard Cœur-de-lion. Likewise on the dedicated page for Stendhal's novel, it's listed as Le Rouge et le Noir but it is listed on the Stendhal page as Le Rouge et le noir)

La fée carabine

Un bar aux Folies Bergère

Jeune Homme en costume de majo

La Musique aux Tuileries

La mère au chapeau

La Distribution des Aigles

The system we use is one of the 'systems' used in France, albeit less commonly, and it is also the system used by the Bibliographie nationale française in their catalogue. Here's a sample page. [9] Note the following:

Un bal masqué

Le trouvère

Des hortensias sous la pluie

Look, no one here is trying to argue as to which of the sytems used in France (or on the French Project or on the French Wikipedia or on the Opera Project) is the "correct one". Or that "we know better" about the French language than anyone else. For one thing, the anyone else's don't seem to know themselves nor do they agree with each other. What we use is one of the systems used in France, and a system that gives a consistent guidance and format for opera titles. Note also that the Wikipedia French project only "suggests" a particular system. Voceditenore (talk) 09:41, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

PS It's not just hundreds of articles that are involved, it's literally thousands. In addition to the 226 French language operas which have their own Wikpedia articles, those operas (and others which don't have their own article) are multiply mentioned and linked in articles about other operas, opera composers and librettists (French and otherwise), in singers' biographies, and in opera house histories. And I should point out that the French Project's suggestion is currently not followed consistently in their non-opera articles on the English Wikpedia either. Just a few out of hundreds of examples: The Red and the Black (French title given as Le Rouge et le Noir, which capitalizes both nouns not just the first one), The Black Tulip (French title given as La Tulipe Noire). Not to mention the multiple inconsistencies of capitalization for the French title in The Lady of the Camellias. Ditto the list of works in Alexandre Dumas, fils and in Stendhal, and the French painting titles in Jean-Honoré Fragonard. Voceditenore (talk) 10:58, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Regrettably, I have just had to revert WP:POINT attacks by Kraxler to the Opera Project page and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (operas). -- Kleinzach (talk) 04:36, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Grove is definitely wrong. See here the statement of the Académie française concerning titles of artworks:

I asked: "Il y a une règle pour écrire des titres des oeuvres d'art concernant l'usage des majuscules? La graphie correcte serait "Le Mariage de Figaro" ou "Le mariage de Figaro"; "Les Pêcheurs de perles" ou "Les pêcheurs de perles" ou "Les Pêcheurs de Perles"?

and received the following answer: "Monsieur, La règle est de mettre une majuscule au premier nom et aux éléments (articles ou adjectifs) qui le précèdent, et de ne plus en mettre ensuite. On écrira donc Le Mariage de Figaro et Les Pêcheurs de perles. Cordialement, Patrick Vannier <dictionnaire@academie-francaise.fr>"

Translated: "Dear Sir, The rule is to capitalize the first noun and the elements (articles and adjectives) which precede it, and not capitalize the following elements. One writes correctly Le Mariage de Figaro and Les Pêcheurs de perles. Cordially, Patrick Vannier

As you see, there is a definite rule about this, the abovementioned rule (a) is correct, whereas the variant usages are mistaken, even if they are used by people who do not know the rule. Grove's editor has chosen the wrong usage, but since Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and not a teenage-blogspot, we should correct it. Instead of haggling like religious zealots, I did the logical thing: research and ask the authority on the subject. Do not say that because there are so many wrong things, we should let it be, correctness is necessary, even if it needs work. And it is never too late to start to do the right thing. Kraxler (talk) 04:39, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

The only one here "haggling like a religious zealot" is you. We follow the method used in our major sources, thus avoiding original research. As Voceditenore has proved, this is a perfectly acceptable way of doing things. It is also the status quo and you would need a very good reason indeed to embark on the major effort required to transfer all our articles to your favoured system, especially in view of the chaos that would cause. This is a very active project and members here prefer to spend their time creating content rather than agonising over the absurdities of French capitalisation. Thank you. --Folantin (talk) 08:33, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Zut alors! ;-) Kraxler, no one is arguing that various definite rules can't be found. And we are already fully aware of the Académie française rule. It's the same one used in Le Petit Robert. As we all know, however, in practice the Academy's pronouncements are often ignored, even by French government agencies, including the Bibliothèque Nationale de France, and they are consciously ignored (not as the result of typographical error or ignorance). Once again, we are not arguing that the Académie française version is "incorrect" or that Grove is an authority on French capitalization practices. And we have never done so. Nor are we arguing that the AF version is probably still the most common in France. Rather, we have chosen a system congruent with all of the major reference works that we use for our articles, and which is acceptable in France, even if it is not the one AF advises. We have made it clear on the Opera Project page that our adherence to the Grove/Oxford/Viking/BNF system is not a generic pronouncement on the linguistic correctness of various forms of French capitalization rules. For reasons, which have now been explained numerous times, the consensus here is to retain this system. However, if you want to continue this crusade, there is still plenty of scope for you outside of opera-related articles. Perhaps you could start by advising the French Wikipedia that their style rules are 'wrong' according to the Académie française. Likewise, you can inform the French Project on the English Wikpedia that their suggestions are 'wrong'. Then you can start 'correcting' the thousands of 'errors' in all the articles on French films, plays, novels, essays, paintings, directors, writers and artists on both the English and French Wikipedias. Voceditenore (talk) 10:35, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your clarifying statement, Voceditenore. I agree that correcting all these spellings may not really be necessary, since I think the information about the opera is much more important than spelling it capitalized or not. But I still disagree with the guideline statement that says that in France and Italy spelling is the same, and so on. Fact is that there is a rule which is consciously ignored for an understandable reason, as you say. I would rather state it like that, explaining in the guideline why there is a rule but the Opera Project follows another, to avoid that any time somebody who knows the official rule (like Sparafucil above, and others before and after....), and begins to move or "correct" has to be unnecessarily antagonized by contributors who do not argue the point but feel attacked and offend as a means of defense. I certainly will edit the statement on French capitalization at the WikiProject France, with a special mention of the different usage in the Opera Project, and any time I happen to add new information to an article, I will correct the spelling of French titles in articles that are not tagged by the Opera Project. À bientôt. Kraxler (talk) 14:52, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

OK. I can see how the current introductory sentence to this section ("When listing operas by their original language title, care should be taken to respect the rules of that language, including spelling, capitalization and accents.") could seem contradictory to the stuff about Grove's capitalization system beneath it. But what that introductory sentence was referring to is inherent capitalization. For example, the capitalization of proper adjectives and the names of languages differs between languages. It's 'Italian' in English but 'italiano' in Italian and 'italien' in French. Sometimes, monolingual English speakers see a proper adjective in a foreign language beginning with a lower case letter and automatically assume it is an 'error' to be corrected. That sentence wasn't referring to the capitalization of the whole title. Anyhow, how about this:

When listing operas by their original language title (provided that language uses the Latin alphabet), the spelling in the original language, including any accents and diacritics, should be preserved, e.g. La bohème not La boheme and Götterdämmerung , not Gotterdamerung.

Capitalization in opera titles should follow the style used in the most recent editions of New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians and New Grove Dictionary of Opera (as well as The Oxford Dictionary of Opera and The Viking Opera Guide):

The Grove style for English opera titles is to capitalize the first word and all major words e.g. The Barber of Seville, The Mines of Sulphur, Summer of the Seventeenth Doll
The Grove style for Italian and French opera titles is to capitalize only the first word and any proper nouns (names of particular people or places), e.g. Il diluvio universale, Ugo, conte di Parigi, Le nozze di Figaro, Les mamelles de Tirésias, Les Indes galantes, Les contes d'Hoffmann, La vie parisienne.
The Grove style for German opera titles is to capitalize the first word and all nouns, but only the nouns, e.g. Die lustige Witwe, Die tote Stadt, Die ägyptische Helena.

Best, Voceditenore (talk) 16:55, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, thank you, I think that's an improvement. -- Kleinzach (talk) 09:19, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Can we archive this now? -- Kleinzach (talk) 04:34, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Since there seem to be no other objections/comments, I've altered the guidelines on the Opera Project page to the above version. (I also included Spanish operas in the point about Italian and French operas.) Best, Voceditenore (talk) 07:08, 8 March 2008 (UTC)