Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Opera/Archive 76

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.

The names of works, and other terms, not in English, should be marked up with the {{

Umm, that code still gives: Von heute auf morgen. Do you have a harder sell for using it? Sparafucil (talk) 10:36, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

It's supposed to do that. It's "invisible". For the reasons why the hidden code it can be helpful, see Template:Lang#Rationale. Voceditenore (talk) 10:59, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

A very high proportion of our articles contain foreign-language material. Adding these tags looks like a horrific amount of work (opera titles, first lines of arias...) for not very much, if any, end-product. CJK is (I presume) limited to artists' names. Articles with Cyrillic characters might be worth doing, I suppose. --GuillaumeTell 11:37, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

I agree. I have to confess, I generally don't bother with it, although the aim is laudable. No doubt some bot will be invented to run around adding it, although Lord knows how it will know what language it should template for... Voceditenore (talk) 12:31, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Back in October, we briefly discussed possible changes to the approach in this section to be further discussed this month and implemented in January.[1] The basic idea would be for this section to shift the focus from creating articles to one more focussed on improving core content.

• One format would be to replace CoM with OoM (Opera of the Month), choosing a single key work or group of works (e.g. Mozart's Da Ponte operas) to improve.
• Another possibility is to retain CoM (and use it to work on the composer's bio) and add OoM, preferably(?) with an opera or group of operas by that composer.

This relationship could be further extended to the SoM for singers (especially red-links or stubs) which appear in the CoM/OoM articles. This approach (in an informal way) worked quite well last month as we tackled various issues relating to Puccini, his operas, and his singers in preparation for the 150th birthday and the December Opera Portal. Since the next portal change will be in February, it could give us some incentive for the new format. Thoughts?... Voceditenore (talk) 12:40, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

I'd prefer the first option (or some variant thereon). I think CotM as it is has run out of steam. We've really covered the major works by the major composers in at least stub form. The more specialised areas are best dealt with by editors with an interest in such areas rather than via collaboration. We've got breadth, now let's aim for depth of coverage. The Puccini approach looks like an interesting model. For example, one month we could take Pelléas et Mélisande since 2009 is the 50th anniversary of the death of its librettist,

Folantin (talk) 13:12, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

I like that idea too, and especially your suggestion of Pelléas et Mélisande. The more possibilities for participation the better. Some members are better at and/or prefer working on bios, others on actual works. Plus, part of a good reading experience in an opera article is being able to follow the links and find decent articles where'er you walk. For example, I just expanded and added references to a stub Il Bellerofonte and found that the articles on the composer and librettist are rather poor. Plus, the lead singers, are not well covered at the moment: Anton Raaff, Caterina Gabrielli (both stubby) and Ferdinando Mazzanti (non-existant). I'm not suggesting it for OoM though.;-) Voceditenore (talk) 13:36, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

I like both ideas that Voceditenore has suggested. However, I would like to see us continue to create some new opera articles and continue to turn red links blue at the opera corpus. My general idea a few months back was to find a way to work on both quality and quantity. Perhaps we could pick one major composer (or at least a composer with a major opera) each month and one minor composer with associated operas and hopefully singers as well. This way we would get to work on the quality of core articles together and continue to expand our coverage (although at a much slower rate). We might also consider changing singers of the month to a broader biographies of the month to cover other associated people such as librettists and conductors if we wanted to. Also, I really like the check list that we did for Puccini and I personally would like to see this sort of evaluation repeated every month. Perhaps we could formalize that into the new process as well.

talk) 08:00, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Just let me know, and 'll update the templates. 08:22, 16 December 2008 (UTC) (This offer was posted by User:Shoemaker's Holiday.)

I'm happy with any or all of the above suggestions (but I'll be passing on Pel and Mel, which I really really don't care for). I've got my own list of opera articles to create or improve (next up is Michael Berkeley's For You) but will join in here if the subject is something that interests me. --GuillaumeTell 12:06, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Based on the above discussion, and remember that whatever we decide on, it's not writ in stone. We can try out the new approach for a couple of months and see how it works out. I'll put a comment section for each bit.Voceditenore (talk) 15:38, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Composer of the Month

• We could keep Composer of the Month, since as Nrswanson points out, there are still plenty of red links in the
  Opera corpus
  and it gives members a wider choice of what to work on. Here are some possible groups based on the Corpus. I've chosen composers who were contemporaries of Debussy (give or take 10 years).

Italian composers

1. Mese Mariano
2. Ruggiero Leoncavallo (1857-1919): Chatterton, Edipo re, Goffredo Mameli, La jeunesse de Figaro, Maià, Der Roland von Berlin, Zingari
3. Pietro Mascagni (1863-1945): Zanetto
4. Antonio Smareglia (1854–1929): Nozze Istriane
5. Vincenzo Valente (1855–1921): I granatieri

Spanish composers

1. Isaac Albéniz (1860–1909): Henry Clifford Pepita Jiménez
2. Enrique Granados (1867-1916): Maria del Carmen
3. Amadeo Vives (1871–1932): Doña Francisquita

French composers

1. Alfred Bruneau (1857–1934): Angelo L'enfant roi, Messidor, L'ouragan, La rêve
2. Gustave Charpentier (1860–1956): Julien
3. Camille Erlanger (1863–1919): Le Juif polonais
4. Albert Roussel (1869-1937): La naissance de la lyre, Le testament de la tante Caroline
5. Erik Satie (1866 –1925): Geneviève de Brabant

- Voceditenore (talk) 15:38, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Comments

To be honest I'd be hard pressed to find information about most of those works. --

I could manage La cena delle beffe and Maria del Carmen with the aid of my old Wexford programmes. I might possibly have one for Aunt Caroline's Will, but that was a student performance about 40 years ago so may not have much, if any, background. --GuillaumeTell 18:57, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

I wasn't suggesting all of them ;-) - the above was just a list from which to choose, assuming we still want to continue this feature. Personally, I would go with the Spanish chaps since I can get stuff for them, and GT also has stuff for one of them. We also have kind of big gap in our Spanish opera/zarzuela coverage. As for Giordano, see my comments under Opera of the Month. Voceditenore (talk) 07:05, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Singer of the Month

Do away with Singer of the Month and incorporate it into a more 'global' Opera of the Month - Voceditenore (talk) 15:38, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Comments

Opera of the Month

This is how it might look...

The Opera of the Month is Pelléas et Mélisande by Claude Debussy. We would like to expand this to at least B Class. Other work on articles related to this opera and its composer includes:

Singers connected with Pelléas et Mélisande

• For improvement:
  • Jean Périer, (the first Pelleas) needs clean up
  • Georgette Leblanc (Maeterlinck's wife and originally scheduled to sing Mélisande) needs expansion and better referencing
  • Hector Dufranne (the first Golaud) needs expansion
• Articles needed:
  • Félix Vieuille (the first Arkël)

Other operas by Debussy

• Articles needed:
  • Rodrigue et Chimène opera (based on Le Cid)
  • Le diable dans le beffroi (based on Poe's "The Devil in the Belfry", unfinished)
  • La chute de la maison Usher (opera) (based on Poe's "The Fall of the House of Usher", unfinished)

Other operas based on plays by Maeterlinck

• For improvement:
  • Ariane et Barbe-bleue by Paul Dukas is not well sourced and lacks synopsis and premiere singers
• Articles needed:
  • Monna Vanna by Henry Février

- Voceditenore (talk) 15:38, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Comments

Very good. As well as being the 50th anniversary of the death of Maeterlinck, 2009 is also the 200th anniversary of the death of Edgar Allan Poe, so this is a highly appropriate selection. --

I rather like the idea of this kind of format too. After looking at the sad state of

Andrea Chenier today, I was thinking this might be a good candidate for February. It has red linked and long overdue articles on the principal singers, Umberto Giordano is entirely unreferenced, and his remaining red-linked opera articles could go in there too. Voceditenore (talk) 07:12, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Are people happy with the proposed changes, i.e., adding OoM; keeping CoM for now (with selection still to be decided); and incorporating SoM into OoM? I'd like to give User:Shoemaker's Holiday enough time to make the new OoM template for us and January draws nigh. Voceditenore (talk) 07:25, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Fine by me. --GuillaumeTell 18:23, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Colleagues may like to look at this which was sent to me anonymously. (I wish I could claim the credit for it). It could probably do with some hefty editing, which I am not up to. The quartet at the end of Act I seems highly appealing.--Smerus (talk) 22:06, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

PS: Happy Chanukah

Unfortunately, Wikipedia doesn't seem to have room for these things; fortunately, there's Uncyclopedia which specialises in this genre. I took the liberty to publish it there, after a superficial scrub according the Opera Project's guidelines. AFAIK there's only one other opera article there (The Marriage ofFigaro) (which, if I remember correctly, briefly found its way to Wikipedia once. Michael Bednarek (talk) 03:15, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Kleinzach has also reverted him at La Scala. That big ballet navbox is basically "project spam" in my view. It adds nothing to the article, but worse, its size and vertical layout wreck the image format of the pages it's added to. I would have no objection if the ballet folk developed a horizontal navbox to be placed at the bottom of the articles which are also relevant to ballet. But until then, the vertical one should go. I have no objection to the addition of the small ballet portal logo to relevant articles, though. It's usually down in he external links section and unobtrusive.

As for the infobox on Bolshoi Theatre, it's quite common to have these in articles on theatres, especially those which come under multiple projects. I don't mind them as long as they are accurate, but this is a clear case of infoboxes being misleading because of their restrictive fields which don't accommodate the more complicated reality and/or drive-by editors who don't know the subject or really read the article. Take a look at the current construction data.[2] It was never demolished only damaged on those dates, but you'd never know that if you read only the infobox. Likewise the current building was begun in 1824 according to the article, and the previous start date (1781) refers to a completely different theatre which once stood there, the Petrovka Theatre. Aaargh! Voceditenore (talk) 15:37, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Update: I edited the infobox to at least make it accurate.[3] I was going to add the name of the architect, until it showed up under... er... "design team". Geeesh!Voceditenore (talk) 15:46, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I see that

Nrswanson has turned the vertical monster into a well behaved horizontal creature.[4] I have no problem with this being added to the bottom of articles that relate both to opera and ballet. Voceditenore (talk) 07:56, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

I have tamed the beast! lol Unfortunately this template is placed in so many articles that I don't have the time or inclination to move it to the bottom of every page it is on. However, I have had a nice chat with

talk) 15:31, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

This page was recently renamed

talk) 06:20, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, the former is certainly a mess and needs lots of work. Is it worth it? Viva-Verdi (talk) 00:15, 20 December 2008 (UTC). Based on a googling of her name, there appears to be nothing out there to justify keeping this article. I see that the "List" has already gone....Viva-Verdi (talk) 00:42, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

I also looked - nothing. The article is so badly written and formatted that it's hard to tell if she was simply a

neutral point of view. As you can see from his talk page, he doesn't really understand WP policies and takes rather aggressive measures and against those who thwart him, i.e. he vandalizes the talk pages of admins who delete "his" articles. I also cursorily tried searching for her with the Bulgarian spelling of her name. [8], possibly more digging might find something. But I'm not inclined to spend the time on it, if the original author isn't. Voceditenore (talk) 07:11, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm... perhaps we should take this to

talk) 15:27, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Not worth it at this point. The user talk page vandalism was last July/August. I'm sure his father is notable, although the article is a mess. The mother, in her own right, quite possibly not. I've left a message on the Malina Dimitrova talk page outlining what he needs to do. If no references can be found, then perhaps in the New Year take it to AfD. The ironic thing is that he or rather Genova & Dimitrov are probably notable enough for an article. [9]. He just doesn't seem to 'get' the WP copyright policy and why it needs to be strict. Voceditenore (talk) 16:51, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Hello from Liuben. It was very interesting and sad to red your comments about the pages I have tryed to create in Wikipedia. You are discussing about the "Conflict of Interests" just because was honest enough to write you that Stefan Dimitrov was not only the opera basso but also my father, or that Malina Dimitrova was my mother beside being the highly acclaimed Pianist or that the Genova & Dimitrov pano duo who was chosen to open the Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City - it's me and my partner. What conflict of interests would be there if you wouldn't know all this??? I am not trying to reach anything through "aggressive means", or to "manage to convince" somebody of anything, I am just soooooooo tired to communicate to humans that hide themseles behind short and dry internet phrases and that don't even try to understand first what is going on INDEED and who is stying behind the PC on the other side of the wire - is this a real "web terrorist" or it is just an honest person who needs may be some more time between the hundreds of concerts and master class lectures all around the world in order to get the articles in the shape that you would like... So, how would you feel if you'd come into a court hall and the judge will welcome you with: "You are guilty" without even to listen to you? That my position. Please don't loose your human behavour and have a little understanding for the people - not everybody who doesn' understand your comple rules is a criminal! Liuben —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.131.66.232 (talk) 01:06, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Liuben, we don't mind you creating pages. We mind

reliable source. That's about the twentieth time you've seen those links, and I think a lot of us would be elated if you'd pause for a moment and read them. Thank you, Antandrus (talk) 01:13, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

This article is up for deletion. The discussion can be found at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Malina Dimitrova for those who wish to comment. Voceditenore (talk) 09:46, 7 January 2009 (UTC)