Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 15:31, 19 January 2013

Richard Wagner

Richard Wagner (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Featured article candidates/Richard Wagner/archive1
• Featured article candidates/Richard Wagner/archive2

Nominator(s): Smerus (talk) 08:34, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured article because...together with a number of other editors I have been working over recent weeks to raise the article to FA status; with a particular hope that the article can feature as FA on 22 May 2013, the bicentenary of Wagner's birth. The page is well-watched and many comments have been received during this process, as can be seen from the talk page; we have therefore not sent the article for a formal peer review for FA (although it had one for GA not too long ago).Smerus (talk) 08:34, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Source review - spotchecks not done

• Ellipses generally don't need to be bracketed
• "Wagner wanted the first complete cycle to be performed in a new, specially designed opera house" - source?
• Magee 2000 or 2001? Ashman 1988 or 1982? Gutman or Guttman? Check correspondence between footnotes and references - this will be quite time-consuming
• FN175: missing italics
• FN195: page in Ross? Page for FN199? 212? 213? You've got a few footnotes without pages where they seem to be needed
• FN188: link returns error
• Donington: missing comma
• Foreign-language sources should be notated as such
• Publisher for John?
• Laibach link is dead and link checker reports other problems

Need a thorough checking here. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:06, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure if I understand your 9th point, as I see a publisher in the article. Regarding your 5th point—all those references are Internet ones. Toccata quarta (talk) 07:43, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for these copyediting points, I will deal with them in the next day or two if no one else does. Please note both foreign-language sources are now correctly notated as such.--Smerus (talk) 14:05, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

I believe that Nikkimaria's points have now been addressed by other editors and myself. I point out the following:

• "Wagner wanted the first complete cycle to be performed in a new, specially designed opera house" - source? - This is in fact addressed and sourced earlier in the article when discussing A Communication to My Friends, but I have now rephrased the passage, re-cited the original source, and given an additional source.
• FN188: link returns error (Laibach) - relocated page and given access date. The new page seems permanent.
• Ashman - this source seemed to me suspect (details about Tannhauser in a book about The Dutchman), so I have replaced it with another citation.
• Magee (2000) - another editor has used the US edition which is from 2001. I have the 2000 UK edition, and have substituted this and checked all the page references.
• Ross: I have removed this quote, and its supposed source, which are only visible by subscription and anyway do not make any significant contribution to the article. As regards other internet citations, see the comment of Toccata quarta above.
• Publisher for John? - corrected.

Best, --Smerus (talk) 13:46, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

• Comments by Johnbod:
• "In 1833, Wagner's older brother Carl Albert..." - not previously introduced. Were there other siblings? I'd work any into the childhood years section.
• " as choir master in Würzburg" - for what? A school, a church, the opera house?

...ore later. Johnbod (talk) 17:13, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

sorted both these, thanks. --Smerus (talk) 09:54, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

• I've added the 2nd link in "the unsuccessful May Uprising broke out, in which Wagner played a minor supporting role" - if that article is accurate, "minor supporting role" is defence counsel talk. An "active part" perhaps?
• Don't we have a more idiomatic translation of: "I shall never write an Opera more." and "At a specially-appointed Festival, I propose, some future time,"?
• I think something should be added about his growing reputation in the late 1860s & early 1870s, presumably on the back of Tannhauser, Meistersingers & Lohengrin (Dutchman?), which were I think widely performed by the end of the 1860s.

If we're talking about growing reputation in that epriod, I think it would be more about the first performances of Tristan, Mastersingers and the first two Ring operas. Tannhauser, Dutchman and Lohengrin had been around for a while and I believe that Rienzi was just about the most popular of the lot.--Peter cohen (talk) 23:05, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

'reputation' is not so easy to establish - but I have added a note indicating the spread of performances during this period.--Smerus (talk) 09:40, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

• "he nevertheless reworked both the Dutchman and Tannhäuser on several occasions". You might add that different versions are still performed and recorded.
• I certainly don't think the images should all be on the right, as suggested below, but most of them are fixed too small, at 130/150px, especially later in the article. There is space, & the MOS discourages fixing at small sizes.
• I'm not sure Rossini can be said to have "resisted his influence" as he must have been in his seventies when he made his famous joke, & had hardly composed for decades.
• Is there a case for a few audio clips dotted around?
  • • That's it. Generally a very good read & certainly FA quality. Johnbod (talk) 13:26, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
      • Many thanks, Johnbod. I will try to fix most of these points on the lines you suggest. The translation is Ashton Eliis's which although highly Victorian is the standard one used - I know of no others. I will think about the images. Audio clips are difficult because of the scale of the works. Best, --Smerus (talk) 09:13, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
• Support though further polishing points below may still improve it. Johnbod (talk) 21:47, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

• Smerus, rather overlinked. Please see my edit on that count.
• "and the elaborate use of leitmotifs: musical themes associated with individual characters, places, ideas or plot elements"—you can use a dash, but not a colon or semicolon.
• "Unlike most other opera composers,"—you could lose the "other".
• "Wagner's life was characterized, until his last decades, by political exile, turbulent love affairs, poverty and repeated flight from his creditors."—a bit bumpy. Perhaps re-order? "Until his last decades, W...". And there's a "decades" again, two sentences later.
• Personal opinion: wouldn't it be better visually to have the pics all right-sided?
• The music-language section ... could include much more technical stuff, but it is a summary article, I suppose. Tony (talk) 08:39, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

many thanks for this. I have gone through the changes 2-4 you propose, but as for the pics it is better I think to have people 'facing in'. As this article is for Wagner himself, I think it would be wrong to overload it with 'technical stuff', which can be found in other articles in the Wagner category. Best, --Smerus (talk) 09:50, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

It's a fine nomination—certainly in terms of cr. 1a, and probably other criteria, this is worthy of FA status.

• "In Biebrich Wagner began work on Die Meistersinger von Nürnberg, the idea for which had originally occurred to him in 1845, but which he had resolved to develop during a visit he had made to Venice with the Wesendoncks in 1860, where he was inspired by Titian's painting The Assumption of the Virgin."—Can this huge winding sentence be tamed? And "for which the idea" might be better word order.
• Followed by a stub: "This opera is Wagner's only mature comedy.
• Then: "Between 1861 and 1864 he also tried to have Tristan und Isolde produced in Vienna. Despite numerous rehearsals, the opera remained unperformed, and gained a reputation as being "impossible", which further added to Wagner's financial woes."—This is not the best para ... Is "also" necessary? "Impossible" in what sense—to perform? to listen to? Maybe "further" is not redundant here; I haven't looked at the previous context.
• "The indiscreet affair scandalized Munich and Wagner also fell into disfavour amongst members of the court, who were suspicious of his influence on the king." I'd be more comfortable with a comma before "and" ... but it's partly personal style. Is "also" needed? "Among" is usually preferred nowadays to "amongst". Was it all members of the court who disapproved? (The current comma indicates this meaning.) Tony (talk) 09:50, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Thanks for these comments. I have copyedited, using many of your suggestions,and added a new reference , to clarify.--Smerus (talk) 12:11, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
    • Regarding "with leading members of the court"—just some, or all? If the former, then something like "many", "some" or "several" might be useful. Toccata quarta (talk) 19:33, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

now clarified.--Smerus (talk) 11:08, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Support Leaning to support A most impressive expansion of a very important—perhaps the most important—opera-related article. Many thanks to the major players in this project.

• Caveat: I contributed some of the prose used in the Bayreuth section, though I do not consider myself in any way a major contributor. The article has 8000 words of which maybe 150 are mine.
• At an early stage in the article's development I left talkpage notes for the benefit of the major editors. Most of these seem to have been acted on; one that hasn't, and which I think should be reconsidered, is the retention of the Mahler image. I felt then, and do now, that Mahler's association with Wagner's music (the pair newer met; W died when M was still, metaphorically, in short pants) is not considerable enough to warrant an image in an already profusely illustrated article. Though Mahler did indeed conduct Wagner's operas, he never did at Bayreuth; he conducted works by many composers, yet his image doesn't decorate their articles. Not a sticking point for me, but worth a reconsideration.
• At least two uncited paragraphs: the second of the "Film portrayals" section and the intro. to the "Controversies" section.
• I'd find an alternative word to "putative". Hardly anyone knows precisely what it means.

I've only a few minutes online time now - will revist tomorrow with any further comments. Brianboulton (talk) 00:31, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Brian, thanks for these comments. My responses so far -

• • I have added citations as you suggest, except for the final sentences of the first paragraph on "Controversies" which are really a mini-lead for the following paragraphs - it would I think be otiose to add further citations when each point is dealt with specifically in the following paras.
  • I can't find 'putative', but would point out that this is not (yet) Simple English Misplaced Pages. :-} !!Later - have now found it. In fact I have recast the section, as a consequence of which the superfluous passage containing the putatively egregious offending word has been expurgated.
  • On Mahler - he is there to illustrate W.'s influence on music and the para cites support for him as an example, specifically Taruskin's comments on the music Mahler composed. This seems to me to justify the pic, but I welcome any further opinions.

Best, --Smerus (talk) 09:34, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Fine. Mahler never was a sticking point. I have upgraded to full support. Brianboulton (talk) 00:30, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

• Support and Comments
• "In January 1828 he first heard Beethoven's 7th Symphony and then, in March, Beethoven's 9th Symphony (both in the Gewandhaus)." could be reworded to prevent Beethoven being mentioned twice.
• "together with the collapse of the theatre company employing him" feels a bit clumsy. Can it be reworded?

 Kitchen Roll  (Exchange words) 21:34, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Both points now dealt with - thanks, --Smerus (talk) 17:35, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Review by SandyGeorgia

Not yet ... multiple:

1. Image caption: "The Bayreuth Festspielhaus today", pls review WP:MOSDATE#Precise language. There are four uses of "today" in the article.
2. Is this correct MOS:LQ? "Each stone is red with my blood and yours". Unsure ... pls review throughout.
3. I don't understand the "now" here ... "The Festspielhaus finally opened on 13 August 1876 with Das Rheingold, now taking its place as the first evening of the premiere of the complete Ring cycle."
4. See here and here for discussions of the overuse of however; please review throughout. There are 14 instances of "however", and most of them don't seem necessary.
5. Multiple citations are missing page numbers ... since the short notes don't link directly to the long footnote, I've not checked to see if all need page ranges, but suspect many do.
6. Prose ... While Bayreuth presented a useful front for Nazi culture, and Wagner's music was used at many Nazi events, many in the Nazi hierarchy did not share Hitler's enthusiasm for Wagner's operas and resented attending his lengthy epics at Hitler's insistence. ... Many ... many ... repetitive and vague.
7. It is possible that Wagner's music was used at the Dachau concentration camp ... it is possible according to whom or what? Weasly.
8. Jean-Jacques Nattiez has also applied psychoanalytical techniques to Wagner's life and works. ... and ?? This sentence doesn't tell me anything.

I suggest further prose review and tightening ... these are samples only. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:06, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for these comments. I have rectified points 1,3 and 6. (The caption on the picture, which has been in the article for quite sometime, in fact turned out to be incorrect). As regards point 7, I suggest this is not weaselly at all - the source cited deals with the suggestion and the probability of its correctness in very great detail, which would be out of place in the article. Point 8; the sentence tells you that Mr N. has interpreted W's life according to psychoanalytic theories, and indicates, in the context of the paragraph, that this is just one way of approaching Wagner and his works. Again a detailed exposition of Nattiez would be WP:UNDUE but the cited source will give readers more information. I am pretty sure I can reduce the number of "however"s - I will review presently the other points you have made. Best, --Smerus (talk) 20:37, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

PS Point 2: This is correct per MOS:LQ, and so are all the quotations I have cited in my contributions to the article. I do not believe that 100% adherence to MOS:LQ as to positions of full stops and commas is a precondition of FA, but correctme if I am wrong on this.--Smerus (talk) 10:28, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

PPS point 4. reduced howevers to 3, one of which is in a citation.--Smerus (talk) 10:47, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Re point 5. I don't qute understand this. Where page citations are given, I have checked them of course, and they are correct. (For what it is worth, I have experience of this sort of thing from my academic publications). Where there is a single number this means that, despite SandyGeorgia's 'suspicions', there is no 'page range' involved. Where there is no page number these are references to web locations. If SandyGeorgia (or any reviewer) has particular citations in mind, please indicate which these are. Thanks, --Smerus (talk) 10:47, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Re point 8: For clarity, I have added Nattiez's book to the sources and cited it in a note to the text.--Smerus (talk) 10:58, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Comments by Gerda Arendt

I appreciate the effort!

• Lead

  "his operas (or "music dramas", as they are sometimes called)" - Wagner himself didn't call his later works opera, but several other terms, that should be made clear here.

  "of classical music" - perhaps add "in general" because it is kind of surprising what kinds of music he influenced, although he was mainly a composer of what is often called opera (and he sometimes called Bühnenweihfestspiel for a reason)

  "His Tristan und Isolde is sometimes described as marking the start of modern music." - this strikes me at not really doing justice to his innovations, - perhaps at least connect to the previous sentence?

  It would make more sense to me to mention that he wrote his own libretti for his later works before mentioning Gesamtkunstwerk.

  I think the term "Bayreuther Festspiele (Bayreuth festive games)" deserves to be mentioned. It's sad that the "games" aspect - similar to Olympic Games - is lost in the common English name Festival.

  I would mention the antisemitic writings first, the general influence at the end of the lead.

• General

  The article would be more accessable if German language terms were marked as such, {{lang|de|Gesamtkunstwerk}} and if the article had an infobox. I suggest to use Infobox person and volunteer to do it.

  Look for the term "opera" and see if it fits.

When I have time, I will look more closely, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:42, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Dear Gerda, some general comments on your comments.

• "his operas (or "music dramas", as they are sometimes called)" - this is just the lead; not everyone reading the article will be a music expert and it will lead to more confusion than clarity if the text at this point starts dithering as to 'wahat is an opera'. The terminology is clarified later in the article; at this point I believe it would be WP:UNDUE.
• "of classical music" - to stick 'in general' after this does not I believe add anything - I am sure, forexample, that ] would object to it as otioise (see his comments above) :-}
• "His Tristan und Isolde is sometimes described as marking the start of modern music." -the fact that this sentence follows the previous one indicates that it is in every way consequent. Again, to elaborate further in the lead would be I feel WP:UNDUE.
• "mention that he wrote his own libretti for his later works before mentioning Gesamtkunstwerk." - I agree and will seek to cpyedit - but I don't want to losethe balance of the paragraphs.
• "Bayreuther Festspiele (Bayreuth festive games)" - this is a point difficult to elicit in English without getting into WP:UNDUE detail. It seems to me the point belongs not in this article but in the one on the Bayreuth Festival.
• The issue of W's antisemitism generated a lot of heat and useless squabble about a year ago. By putting it at the end I actually feel it has more impact on the reader than burying it at the start of a paragraph.
• Where there are German words that leaddirectly to an article - e.g. Gesamtkunstwerk - I cannot see the needfor marking them as German.
• I am entirely against having a infobox for this article. Wagner's life and music is a very complex topic and I am certain that an infobox would damage the article by giving inappropriate or highly debatable prominence to some aspects, and/or by under-reporting other aspects. Morevoer Gerda as you know the whole issue of infoboxes is extremely ontroversial and the overwhelming opinion of editors on the Opera, Wagner, and Classical Music Projects is against having them.--Smerus (talk) 15:31, 19 January 2013 (UTC)