User talk:Cg2p0B0u8m/Archive 2

This page 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.

I am gradually gearing up to put the Offenbach article forward for FAC. You, I and other interested editors have had extensive discussions on the talk page, and I should be most grateful if you would, at a time convenient to you, check to see if there are any points unresolved that worry you or seem to you need further attention before we take the article to FAC. Tim riley (talk) 23:08, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

I don't think many of my points are still outstanding, apart from 48, 50-52, and 56, but I will have another look; I have another opera to put up shortly. Perhaps someone else will come forward with suggestions. Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 18:52, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Excellent new article! Most interesting, and beautifully illustrated, too. Tim riley (talk) 13:20, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you - the photos were of course 'borrowed' from other articles; unfortunately I couldn't find one of Ox himself. Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 23:54, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited Jean-Paul Fouchécourt, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Les Arts Florissants (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:08, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Wild and Charlton 2005, p. 333, says the 1874 production at the OC was in 4 acts (as does Robert Letellier 2010, p. 361). I think maybe we should mention Wolff's information in the footnote, as it may be an error. I'll make the change and hope it will be OK. [Update: the 5-act version was on 29 November 1889, according to Wolff, but Wild and Charlton say it was given in 3 acts, and a 5-act version not until 13 March 1901 (but with cuts in acts 4 & 5). The 5-act version close to Gounod's original intentions was Hahn's in 1939, on which everyone seems to agree.] --Robert.Allen (talk) 07:36, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Here is a review of the OC revival of 1874 which seems to state that the opera was actually given in 5 acts. If so, the information in Wild and Charlton as well as in Wolff is incorrect. If you get a chance could you please take a look at it. My reading of French is very slow and often inaccurate. (Also, I'm wondering whether it sheds any light on whether Mme Carvalho sang the revised "Air de la Crau" in the revival, since it had apparently been dropped altogether at the Théâtre Lyrique shortly after the first performance. It seems unlikely to me that the OC could have done the 5-act version without it. She was further along in her career and maybe her voice had changed, and she was able to do it?) Thanks! --Robert.Allen (talk) 23:17, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Well, Monsieur Bernard was rather grumpy that night! I think the important thing is how much music was performed rather than the division into tableaux or acts. From this review it seems that the only cuts from the basic full score (assuming we know what that is) were mainly in the first tableau of Act IV. One phrase does not make sense to me: “sauf le grand air de Mireille: Trahir Vincent, qui du deuxième acte où il était a été reporté au quatrième, où il arrive beaucoup moins bien” – this seems odd – this major air was moved from the 2nd to 4th act where it would have been placed next to another solo (Heureux petit berger) and the Crau scene, unless they were cut (although he mentions later the ‘longueur’ of the Crau scene*) – I wonder if he is simply adhering to the original five-act format because 90% of the music was played, whereas Wolff and Charlton have another source which shows that from what remained from the first tableau of the old Act IV to the end of the opera was played as one act?. He mentions a cut in the Act 2 finale on page 362 middle of second paragraph. It says in the next paragraph that Carvalho did sing the awful waltz song (I assume it replaced Trahir Vincent in Act 2?). It also says that Galli-Marié sang the shepherd boy as well as Taven, but if much of that tableau was cut, she would have lost her Chanson and have hardly anything to sing. It’s a bit of a mess! (*interesting comment about preferring David…) Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 11:12, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Maybe Bernard is trying to say that 'Trahir Vincent' was moved to Act 4 as a replacement for Mireille's grand air (the 'Air de la Crau'). The waltz song 'O légère hirondelle' (Walsh, p. 177) was added in December 1864 and is usually sung in Act 1, no? (That's where it is in the 1901 score.) Also, I would be willing to bet that Galli-Marié sang Andreloun's chanson, probably just before 'Heureux petit berger'. According to Huebner (pp. 148–149) both were in tableau 2 at the premiere, but by the third performance had been moved to the first tableau of Act 4, since tableau 2 was removed altogether. Ferrant, p. 45, says both were in tableau 1 at the premiere, but Huebner implies that this is a common misconception. Huebner also states they weren't moved back to tableau 2 until 1901 (p. 149), but that may not be entirely correct. In 1874 there was no tableau 2, but what was performed was apparently closer to tableau 2 than the original tableau 1, since the choeur des moissoniers was omitted and apparently the farm setting was not used in the event, although originally it was supposed to be included (see RGM 1 Nov 1874, 4th small item, top of left hand column). Unfortunately Huebner only has one short sentence about the 1874 production (p. 141) saying it was in 4 acts with the tragic ending and not all the original music was used. --Robert.Allen (talk) 10:22, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

I am getting more and more confused; re-reading Huebner's chapter 8 is hard work. Every production seems to have different changes - although as you say he gives 1874 in four acts. He doesnt' specify which act the waltz song was in - I am sure you are right about Act 1, (although to me that is formally the most perfect of the tableaux and would be wrecked by this insertion). He does have that nice quote from Turgenev to say that Ismaël as Ourrias was like "a miserable provincial butcher"... Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 23:32, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

I couldn't agree more. It sounds like the autograph got modified with each of the early productions, making it rather difficult to know for sure what was used when. Does Huebner mention the waltz song? I was looking but didn't find it in his book. [Update: I see it's mentioned as in Act 1 and footnoted as p. 153 in our article. (How quickly we forget. You added the info, I added the page no. and then promptly forgot it.) As you say, Huebner doesn't seem to mention which act. It's probably not surprising we aren't sure. I have the video and the Plasson recording, and it's omitted in both. (I don't have the Büsser score, but the video and recording probably use Büsser.) I know the piece because it's on Dessay's recital album.] BTW, its's also in the first act in the 3-act Italian/English score at IMSLP, presumably for English performances. Did you happen to come across anything else in his book concerning the 1874 production? I've only noticed that one sentence, but I usually am skipping around a lot when I read it. (Plus, his index is not the greatest, and the book is not even "snippet view" at Google Books, so one can't search it that way either.) --Robert.Allen (talk) 03:47, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Probably not the most reliable, but Reynaldo Hahn wrote “Au premier acte, Gounod introduisait une valse-ariette, « O Légère Hirondelle », composée sur des vers insipides…”. Hahn R. Version Originale de Mireille. Revue d’Arles, Juin 1941, p119 & 122. So that's one more vote for Act 1. Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 20:12, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Great quote! [Update: I imagine the Büsser-Hahn score doesn't even include it as an appendix, even though Gounod himself interpolated it for Mme Carvalho. He must have not been terribly inspired when he did this. It's almost like a parody of her style in some respects (I'm thinking of those rising dotted-note runs on pp. 35–36 of the 1901 score), but clearly popular. What a contrast to the Gounod of Sapho!] --Robert.Allen (talk) 20:38, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

'Gounod even marked in the manuscript that the roulades at the end of her Act 2 air were demanded by her.[11]' = this is page 48 of Ferrant. + In my Choudens vocal score (c1948, renew 1976) « O Légère Hirondelle » is a Supplément, No 21 on pages 279-89. Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 21:56, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

It's amazing to me that I never saw that Bizet wrote Mireille in that list, after all the times I've gone over it. It really takes fresh eyes sometimes! --Robert.Allen (talk) 04:14, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

I think it most noble of you to plough through the Fauré piano music article despite its lack of interest to you. Bless you! I shall enjoy following up your suggestions. Now, Monsieur, are you willing to be co-nominee of Jacques Offenbach if I put him up as as Featured Article candidate? We've done all the hard work, together with three or four other dedicated contributors, and I think the old boy's time has come. I hope you will consent to be co-nom, because your contribution to the article has been of incalculable value. Regards. Tim riley (talk) 13:48, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for asking me.

In terms of the process, I have never done this, so I have tried to work out from the page on featured articles and it isn’t too clear what a person nominating has to do, but I guess it means replying to any comments which people make. I don’t have a large amount of time, but could help a bit with this.

On the question of content, it is very nice article but I think there is about 5-10% which might be improved, here are some things which ought to be settled (some are repeated from before):

1. “Other orchestral compositions include a piece in 17th-century style with cello solo" - what is this?
2. In terms of including something about influences on Offenbach, Traubner has some nice things in his opening chapter, including this sentence (p8 of the paperback)“When Offenbach paid hommage to Rossini and Mozart in his second season at the BP by mounting Il Signor Bruschino and Der Schauspieldirektor, he admitted his influences… Both Offenbach and Sullivan knew their Italian operas thoroughly; and Rossini rather graciously called Offenbach ‘le Mozart des Champs-Elysées’. The Rossini of the Champs-Elysées might have been just as apt.” I think generally the phrases on musical influences on Offenbach need strengthening (ie the French opéra comique school, Rossini, Hervé) but find it hard to find really good referenced quotes!
3. . In terms of others who were in some way formed by Offenbach there is the remark that Saint-Saens (Piano Concerto No. 2 (Saint-Saëns) starts as Bach and ends as Offenbach. Plus Chabrier – L’Étoile; possibly Sousa, others?
4. . is ‘(dubbed "Musical Snobs Ltd" by Gammond)’ needed?
5. . Most of the Legacy and reputation sub-section is about Offenbach’s reputation immediately after his death (and mainly from London and New York). I wonder if there should be something from elsewhere and more from the 20th century?
6. . I know that there is some caution about the length of this article, but I think the following are missing: his sociability - parties in Paris and Étretat (or maybe include a photo of the Villa d’Orphée?), physical description of the man, early recordings (Juliette Simon-Girard made some, but there may be others),
7. . the fact that English versions in London had the 'naughty' parts removed
8. the Keck edition.
9. Music in the Tuileries could be mentioned as well (Manet) - or a close-up of the painting.
10. . The banning of his music by the Nazis in Germany and occupied France – although as Frederic Spotts claims on page 211 of 'The Shameful Peace', German officers would have heard the ‘can-can’ every night at the nightspots of Montmartre… Also Eine Kapitulation (http://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/Une_capitulation). I think these would all help give more breadth.
11. . I still worry about the reliance on Gammond. (Maybe ’Cigarette’ could be removed, as it is dealt with on the list of operettas page). The lack of an English translation of Yon to use for more sources is a problem, I know.
12. There is a slight contradiction I noticed: in the Introduction the influence of Offenbach on Strauss is powerful, but under Influence it is not clear how he was influenced. Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 14:46, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

I had stupidly not spotted your remarks above until now. I'll work through them and report back. Meanwhile, grateful thanks for being willing to be co-nominator. Being co-nom does indeed mean being available to respond to queries. I can deal with drafting points (and most comments at Featured Article discussion are on drafting, layout, referencing and so on), and I can probably deal with most biographical queries, but you unquestionably know more about Offenbach's music than I do, and there will, I think, be some queries that you are better able than I to deal with authoritatively. More soonest. – Tim riley (talk) 16:40, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

I was reading through Cg2p0B0u8m's excellent comments and suggestions. I just wanted to add two-cents, and this seemed like an OK place. When an article is on a French topic, and probably the most definitive biography is in French, I don't think there should be any hesitation in using it as a source, despite the fact that it is not in English. (Perhaps aiming for Featured Article status can sometimes be an inhibiting factor, not always beneficial.) --Robert.Allen (talk) 22:59, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you both for replies - Timriley, am I not sure of the protocol of leaving replies, may be I should have put it on your talk page and you see it earlier. I will wait to hear from you - somewhere.

Robert.Allen - I think in this case until there is an English translation of Yon it should have sort of priority, as long as there are English language sources as well. I always try to include at least one English reference in articles, even when most of the information is from non-English sources. Of course someone may object and be very pedantic and insist on the rules. Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 11:19, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

As you know, I am a huge fan of Yon's book. Just wish my ability to read French would improve a bit more quickly! --Robert.Allen (talk) 11:00, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

My conscience pricks me. I have the above questions on my to-do list, I promise! Tim riley (talk) 14:20, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited Die Rheinnixen, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bingen (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:50, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited Jane Glover, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stephen Oliver (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:20, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

I'd be delighted to work with you on the article. I have Canarina's biography, and a good history of the LSO, but not much else, apart from Grove. Tim riley (talk) 14:19, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

That would be good. I have both those (the LSO is the Morrison one, fine but not a lot of material). I will type up my list of articles (including several in-depth record reviews) to suggest, but I do have the Mousnier book (which is written from the point of view of a recording producer, and a Frenchman) and Doris's volume. It would be good to cover the pre-Rite period adequately, as his musical experiences in those years was astonishing. Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 17:22, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

I am working backstage on the early years: here. It's a very early draft, but by all means leave comments on my talk page (or even edit the sandbox if you feel comfortable doing so – you're most welcome). Ignore the pseudo-Latin gibberish in the lead - it's just there to give me a feel for the proportions of the page. The British Library has a copy of the J-P Mousnier book that I can consult, but my French is inexpert and laborious, so you're much more likely than I am to find what we want in Mousnier. The BL has Doris's book, of course. Do you recommend my reading it? Tim riley (talk) 16:22, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I am sorry I have not yet started writing any material; I do need to make some comments on the new Carmen article.

In answer to your question, there is a lot of overlap between Mousnier and Canarina but it is a serious book and he is worth quoting from. Doris’s book is a good read although some people have said that it is not very reliable/objective. On the first section in your sandbox, here are some superficial comments:

I think we could amend and expand the third sentence to focus on his mother’s musical ability/instrument etc. We should mention somewhere his siblings and relations (brother Henri was an actor in Paris) and some information about those that died in the concentration camps. Maybe this would be lower down.

I think it is worth mentioning that he attended the premiere of Franck’s symphony and that (with the Geloso) he played for Grieg (there is a photo).

We need to check the position on children.

Sorry for the short reply, but I will try to get something typed soon.

Somewhere we should mention the fact that, like Boult, Walter, Klemperer and Toscanini, he split the firsts and seconds; this would be important when discussing the ‘Monteux sound’. (ref = Boult A. The Art of Conducting: IV. Arranging Orchestras. In: Boult on Music. Toccata Press, 1983, p146). Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 20:57, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Excellent! I'll follow all these up. I so agree about splitting first and second violins, and will definitely include this in the music section. I look forward to further comments at your leisure, but there is no rush! Tim riley (talk) 22:45, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Later: I've followed some of these points up. I spent an hour this morning dipping into Mousnier and a couple more with Doris's book. The latter is to be quoted with caution, I feel, though Canarina draws heavily on it. I've moved the work-in-progress from my sandbox to the Pierre Monteux article, where I very much hope you will add and amend ad lib. I have a horrible feeling that, like Offenbach, this is a subject of which you know a great deal more than I do, so please don't hold back! (But there is absolutely no rush.) Tim riley (talk) 19:33, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

I admit I have not read these books for a while, so your reading is more up to date.

These are some quotes from Grove I noted down:

Cooper M, Bowen J, Barber C. Pierre Monteux. In: The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 2nd edition. Macmillan, 2001.

Conducted at Paris Opera during 1913-14 season

1924-34 second conductor of the Amsterdam Concertgebouw Orchestra

SFSO – “he raised the standard of the orchestra to an international level”

“was never and ostentatious conductor, preparing his orchestra in often arduous rehearsals and then using small but decisive gestures to obtain playing of fine texture, careful detail and powerful rhythmic energy” … “retaining to the last his extraordinary grasp of musical structure and a faultless ear for sound quality”

Thank you for balancing the quotes about M's views on Rite of Spring! Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 19:58, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

While looking at Mousnier I was struck by the fact that where I dipped in he never, refers to "Monteux" tout court, but always to "Pierre Monteux". Is that en règle in French biographies, I wonder? Tim riley (talk) 17:36, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Images of Monteux

The article is not very strong on images on Monteux. Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 21:06, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

You're right, and I am doing my damndest to find pictures that won't fall foul of the image police. Apropos images, have a look at the one here - note the cellos on the right and weep! Tim riley (talk) 21:49, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

That was worrying - I quickly looked at You Tube and the three videos there are thankfully 'correct'.Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 23:05, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

One public domain image of Monteux, wife and daughter circa 1919 added. I had also hoped for something from Le Figaro's archive, but rien, alas! Anything you can find that is public domain will be most welcome. Tim riley (talk) 17:36, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Children

Key P V R. Pierre Key's Musical Who's Who. Pierre Key, Inc, New York, 1931, states: "married 3 times; 3 children: Jean (musician, Casino de Paris) by 1st wife; Denise and Claude by 2nd wife" Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 22:56, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

He legally adoped Doris's two, as well. Not sure yet whether to try to fit all these into the main text or have a separate "family" section. I prefer the former, but sometimes the latter is the only way to preserve a coherent narrative. Comments welcome! Tim riley (talk) 17:36, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

I have copied our exchange, above, to the Monteux article's talk page. I think other interested editors should be able to see our preliminary discussions. Meanwhile, I have more or less finished my first pass at a complete overhaul. How do you want to take this forward? I should prefer it if you took possession of the article for a while and made any additions, deletions or amendments you wanted, before we jointly put it up for peer review. Alternatively I could put it up as it stands for peer review, where you could add your comments, but that, I think, is a less attractive option. Please let me know how you'd prefer to proceed. Tim riley (talk) 17:58, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I saw you have done a lot of very good work on the article. I am willing to go through in the next few weeks, and am happy if you want to have a peer review. If I think I am doing something controversial I will post it on the talk page first to avoid too many edits. Also my formatting may not be exactly right. Of course, I may not find much to add or change... Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 17:48, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Good. Please wade in with changes. I'll certainly let you know if I disagree with any of them, and you can leave the formatting to me. I'd much sooner wait until you have had your say before we go to peer review. Over to you – and there is no hurry whatever. If we must set a deadline, what about the end of April? Tim riley (talk) 18:26, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

The end of April is possible. Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 18:05, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

There is still no rush, so please don't worry that April has gone. I'm certainly not worrying. Tim riley (talk) 11:52, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

We need a strategy for taking the maître to PR/FAC. Let me know when you're happy with the text of the article and we can move things on. (No hurry) Tim riley (talk) 21:32, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

You are the expert on PR/FAC so I would be guided by you. On the article, I have finished my notes, (although it was confusing for a few days as I lost the sheets of paper, so did bits from memory, then found them again...) but I'd still like to look through and maybe flick through Doris and Mousnier again and have another good read through the article. I think the structure and general content is fine. A picture of him conducting would be good, perhaps a few more sound files (is this any good http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mahler_-_Kindertotenlieder,_III_(Anderson,_Monteux,_1950).ogg). The Catalans are using this - http://ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitxer:Folies_Bergere.jpg; maybe we could use http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:P1030058_Paris_II_Place_Bo%C3%AFeldieu_Op%C3%A9ra-comique_rwk.JPG ? I will go through once more and see if I can find anything more of importance. Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 22:06, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

At present I'm busy navigating Alec Douglas-Home through FAC, so that fits in nicely with your final read-through of the Monteux article and the sources, after which we can put the article up for peer review. Tim riley (talk) 11:05, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

I have closed the peer review (having gratefully followed up your tip about early recordings) and now have the article up for Featured Article Candidate here. If you care to look in and comment it would be esteemed a favour. Tim riley (talk) 11:51, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

A silly question. Should musical examples in Wikipedia articles be complete – a whole piece or movement, not cut off in mid phrase? I made myself listen to the Jean Racine work on your Fauré page, and I could not get to the end (it stopped after five and a half minutes). Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 19:10, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

It isn't a silly question, but it's one I can't answer. I have, in truth, grabbed whatever sound files I could and annexed them for the article. I suppose an excerpt is better than nothing. Tim riley (talk) 19:44, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for replying - I wondered if there was a size or time limit, perhaps based on the length of popular songs. Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 20:15, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

I have emerged unscathed from my recent FAC for an English politician, and am now ready to take Monteux to peer review. Unless you sternly forbid it I'll put it forward for PR in both our names tomorrow and we can see what comments our Wiki-colleagues care to offer us. Tim riley (talk) 18:09, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

I remember seeing him in Buckingham Palace Road years ago a few times (did he live in Chester Square or some such?), with a benign smile. Do go ahead with peer review, I can always add other things at a later stage, if I need to. Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 11:08, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

I don't know where he lived when in London. I never saw him. He conducted in Liverpool when I was a boy there, but I was not taken to any of his concerts. Delighted with the green light for PR. Away we go! Tim riley (talk) 11:40, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I meant Alec Douglas-Home. Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 11:44, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Oops! Dim of me! In the 1970s my work took me to the House of Commons about once a week. I recall Douglas-Home sitting on the government front bench and stretching his legs out to rest his feet on the Dispatch Box table. For some reason this was common practice on both front benches for members with long enough legs. Of course there were no cameras in the Commons in those days. Tim riley (talk) 18:11, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Crisco1492 and Wehwalt have completed their peer reviews. I suggest that first of all I go through them over the next few days, (i) dealing with the non-controversial suggestions, and (ii) flagging up more difficult ones where you and I need to agree a joint position. I'll then hand over to you to check that you agree with what I've done about (i) and to give your views on (ii). Does that sound like a workable modus operandi? Tim riley (talk) 18:11, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

That sounds fine ; there seem to be some which are mainly asking for the prose to be more clear, or re-phrased, most of which seems sensible. I will prepare a short justification for the sentence about the Beethoven quartets, which I feel should stay. In such a long and ‘action-packed’ life, there are probably things which are missing. Let me know any other comments you would like my view and I will respond. This weekend I will be without internet. Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 22:37, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

The sentence about Beethoven string quartets illustrates (1) his remarkable musical memory (2) the degree in which he was immersed in the classical quartet repertoire in his early years (3) an important part of his formative musical experience. Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 21:59, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

I've added my first batch of responses. These are all to Crisco1492's comments. If you like to review my comments and add anything you wish, I'll move on and repeat the process with Wehwalt's and Brianboulton's comments. No rush! Tim riley (talk) 11:58, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Me again. Sorry for my silence throughout July: I have been away, with no internet access. I'll crank myself up and get back to our Monteux project over the next few days. I am most grateful for your forbearance. Tim riley (talk) 16:43, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll keep an eye out. I hope your holiday was nice. Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 21:01, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

I am sending this note to Wikipedians with whom I have most closely collaborated over the last six years or so. After pondering hard during a month's wiki-break in July I have sadly decided to withdraw fully from contributing. I have been worn down by continual carping, sniping and belittling from a wearisome few (you know the sort of people I refer to); the joy has gone out of taking part in this wonderful enterprise. I should be more resilient, but alas it's finally got to me.

Working with you has been a pleasure and a privilege: I count myself fortunate to have had such colleagues. My warmest wishes go with you for the future. I shall be happy to do any research, copy-editing, fact-checking etc you may ever feel inclined to ask me to do – but safely offline.

I am painfully aware that I am letting you down rather badly by abandoning Wikipedia while we were jointly working on Pierre Monteux, but it is already a top-notch article, and we can both be proud of it. As to getting Offenbach to FA, there are several editors who will, I think, be willing to take the lead in due course.

With my very best wishes,
Tim. (Tim riley (talk) 16:13, 10 August 2012 (UTC))

Just to let you know that The Rite of Spring, which you recently helped improve via the peer review, has now been nominated at FAC. Any further observations will be welcome there. I have followed the PR consensus, and removed the substandard soundfile; it is possible that this decision will be challenged, but we shall see. I have had some very useful suggestions offline from Tim, which have been incorporated, so his influence lives on. Brianboulton (talk) 22:26, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

	operas and performers
	Thank you for quality articles on less known operas and their performers, including Pierre Monteux, - you are an awesome Wikipedian! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:08, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

That’s very kind of you. I may have a few more less known ones to come, not just from Offenbach. Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 12:55, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

As you were Tim's co-worker on this article, are you intending to proceed with it towards a FA nomination? I ask, because I recently mentiond to Tim that I would be prepared to steer it through the process if he so wished and he is agreeable to this, but your view is clearly important. If the article does go forward to FAC, it should be under Tim's name as main editor. Brianboulton (talk) 18:20, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

• Thank you for mentioning this. I am not really familiar with all the processes of featured articles and peer review, so if Tim had been still on Wikipedia I am sure he would have taken the lead (we had sort of finished the peer review, I think, although there are three loose ends I will try to deal with as soon as possible). If he/you think it can go further, that would be a nice tribute to Monteux. Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 12:55, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

• Good. I am a bit occupied at the moment, but I'll definitely take this up shortly. Brianboulton (talk) 08:48, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Recent edits

I deleted the Berlioz-Colonne information because initially it lacked a source - the apparent reference turned out to be another uncited statement. Now that you have properly sourced it, there is no problem. I have slightly altered the wording to provide link to Édouard Colonne who is otherwise not identified.

On the "Stravinsky's representative" issue, I am not so sure. The statement that I deleted reads: "Leading up to the 1913 London performances, Diaghilev's authority was challenged when Monteux declared that he was "Stravinsky's representative" in matters related to Rite of Spring." You say in your edit summary that this "sheds more light specifically on M’s character: standing up to Diaghilev..."; that is one interpretation, but not the only one. Without going into more detail, surely unjustified, the statement is inconclusive; whatever Monteux's meaning, it did not destroy his relationship with Diaghilev, who continued to employ him.

It is quite common, when an article is being prepared for FAC, for valid information that is not central to the topic to be omitted or deleted; I do it to my own articles ruthlessly. Of course, there will be differences of view about what should be included and what left out. If you feel most strongly that this statement should be in, then by all means reinstate it, but let's be careful to remain discriminating about what is included in what is, after all, a summary article. Brianboulton (talk) 16:31, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

More proposed edits

Several of the 22 footnotes are only vaguely connected with Monteux, if at all. The following, I think, could be deleted without any detriment to the article:

• No. 2 ( Mosse de Monteux is too remote ancestrally)
• No. 6 (about Beecham, not Monteux)
• No. 9 (about Carter, not Monteux)
• No. 12 (the "deputy" system is adequately explained in the text)
• No. 13 (tangential information, not about Monteux)
• No. 17 (about the Royal Festival Hall, not about Monteux)

If you think that any others could be lost without damage, please indicate. Could you reply either here or on my talkpage, rather than on the article's talk, as I missed your earlier note there. Brianboulton (talk) 16:32, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

As you have not responded to these comments after 10 days I am assuming you have no objection to the above proposed edits and will go ahead and implement them. Please use my talkpage if you wish to comment, as this page here is not on my watchlist. Brianboulton (talk) 15:23, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

A brief (and one-off) sortie from my self-imposed exile to say how pleased I am to see Monteux promoted to Featured Article, and to thank you once again for your extensive contributions to it. Having jumped ship, I am grateful to Brianboulton for steering the vessel home in his accustomed masterly manner (and in record time, too). My warmest greetings to you both. Tim riley (talk) 15:04, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi. You may have noticed that I created the Fourestier article recently (as part of the Monteux FAC). Yesterday I came upon the list of Music Directors of the Opéra-Comique and see that Frigara was in charge from 1925 to 1932, whereas I have Fourestier as principal conductor for 1927-32. I sort of thought that the principal conductor would also be Music Director, but perhaps I'm wrong? Feel free to enlighten me! Best. --GuillaumeTell 11:38, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

The information about the musical directors I took from the Wolff book (p334-8) which is a reference for the company repertoire and personnel. It only lists Frigara for that period as musical director. Perhaps principal conductor was a separate position, not as important. Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 18:13, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

This is a note to let the main editors of

Carmen is an opera in four acts by the French composer Georges Bizet, first performed on 3 March 1875. It was not at first particularly successful and Bizet knew nothing of its later success as he died before its initial run was concluded. It tells the story of the downfall of Don José, a naive soldier seduced by the fiery gypsy Carmen (first played by Célestine Galli-Marié, pictured in costume). José abandons his childhood sweetheart and deserts from his military duties, yet loses Carmen's love to the glamorous toreador Escamillo after which José kills her in a jealous rage. The depictions of proletarian life, immorality and lawlessness, and the tragic outcome, broke new ground in French opera. After the premiere most reviews were critical. Carmen initially gained its reputation outside France, and was not revived in Paris until 1883; thereafter it rapidly acquired celebrity at home and abroad, and continues to be one of the most frequently performed operas. The music of Carmen has been widely acclaimed for its brilliance of melody, harmony, atmosphere and orchestration, and for the skill with which Bizet represented musically the emotions and suffering of his characters. (Full article...)

This is a note to let the main editors of

Carmen is an opera in four acts by the French composer Georges Bizet, first performed on 3 March 1875. It was not at first particularly successful and Bizet knew nothing of its later success as he died before its initial run was concluded. The opera tells the story of the downfall of Don José, a naive soldier seduced by the fiery gypsy Carmen (first played by Célestine Galli-Marié, pictured in costume). José abandons his childhood sweetheart and deserts from his military duties, yet loses Carmen's love to the glamorous toreador Escamillo after which José kills her in a jealous rage. The depictions of proletarian life, immorality and lawlessness, and the tragic outcome, broke new ground in French opera, and after the premiere most reviews were critical. Carmen initially gained its reputation outside France, and was not revived in Paris until 1883; thereafter it rapidly acquired celebrity at home and abroad, and continues to be one of the most frequently performed operas. The music of Carmen has been widely acclaimed for its brilliance of melody, harmony, atmosphere and orchestration, and for the skill with which Bizet represented musically the emotions and suffering of his characters. (Full article...)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Afternoon of a Faun (Nijinsky), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Assyrian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 19:24, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

What a pleasing coincidence that you and have both posted a new article on an Ashton ballet today! Yours is excellent. Mine is here. I think perhaps geography makes this forthcoming event a non-starter for you, but it would be excellent if you could be there. Tim riley (talk) 18:33, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Sir Adrian did indeed conduct the Enigma ballet, in runs of performances at the ROH in 1975 and 1977. He also conducted Elgar's The Sanguine Fan at the Coliseum at the very end of his career. At the ROH he also conducted Vaughan Williams's Job (which was dedicated to him) and something called The Ropes of Time by Jan Boerman in a double bill in which he also conducted Das Lied von der Erde, if you can image a more idiotic choice of music for a ballet. Incidentally I infer that you don't know about this excellent resource buried deep in the Royal Opera House website. Bookmark the url, as you'll never find it otherwise: http://www.rohcollections.org.uk/Performances.aspx. Tim riley (talk) 18:12, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited André Balbon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Angélique (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:31, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Cg2p0B0u8m, Just wanted to say, that's a very nice addition to the "20th century and beyond" section. Thanks! --Robert.Allen (talk) 03:17, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I'm sure it can be improved... it is quite difficult to find a full history of the last 50 years; maybe the imminent tri-centenary of the Opéra-Comique will produce a full story. Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 20:22, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dido and Aeneas discography, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page William Christie (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:55, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jérôme Deschamps, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Don Kent (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:05, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I'm writing to members who participated in the March 2013 discussions about the possibility of developing an opera infobox. We now have a reasonably stable and usable box with examples of how it would look in articles at Template:Infobox opera and a new discussion re its potential addition to the project's Article Guide as an option for opera articles. The discussion is at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Opera#Opera Infobox update. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 08:13, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

	The Original Barnstar
	Having several times stumbled across articles where you had contributed valuable content, I thought your efforts should be acknowledged. Edwardx (talk) 21:39, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you ; I will keep trying. Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 22:43, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

This page 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.