Talk:Don Carlos: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 20:58, 14 July 2013 editPigsonthewing (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Event coordinators, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, File movers, IP block exemptions, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors266,365 edits →Ahem: c← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 00:44, 1 February 2024 edit undoCewbot (talk \| contribs)Bots7,677,534 editsm Maintain {{WPBS}} and vital articles: 2 WikiProject templates. Create {{WPBS}}. Keep majority rating "B" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 2 same ratings as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject Opera}}, {{WikiProject France}}.Tag: Talk banner shell conversion
(32 intermediate revisions by 15 users not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{WikiProject ~~Opera~~\|class=B}}		{{WikiProject banner shell\|class=B\|
	{{WikiProject ~~France\|class=B \|importance=low~~ }}		{{WikiProject Opera}}
			{{WikiProject France\|importance=low }}
			}}
	{{Archives\|auto=yes\|search=yes}}		{{Archives\|auto=yes\|search=yes}}

			== Deputies ==
	== Restoration of composer navbox ==

			I would like to propose that Flemish deputies is changed to envoys within the article. I know that many sources use 'deputies', but envoys avoids misunderstanding that are from a parliament or that they are deputizing. Envoy would be an acceptable translation from deputé in the original French vocal score (http://javanese.imslp.info/files/imglnks/usimg/4/41/IMSLP24581-PMLP55451-Verdi_-_Don_Carlos__ed.francese_Escudier_1867__bw.pdf). ] (]) 19:19, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
	I propose that ] be removed and replaced with ]. Our traditional navbox is more useful and non-obtrusive, while this new Infobox opera is distracting and adds no information that is not already and better presented in the lead. --] (]) 02:31, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

			:Well, it's interesting looking at the literature. Both Parker (in Sadie) and Budden, Vol. 3 use "Deputies" in the list of characters. Charles Osborne's "The Complete Operas of Verdi" uses both "deputation" and "envoys" in his description of Act 3, Sc. 2: "The King descends the cathedral steps to join the procession, a deputation from Flanders, led by Carlo, appears. The envoys kneel before Philip...." (p. 356). In the libretto accompanying the Giulini/Domingo/Caballe etc. CDs when they sing, the group is named (in the English ext) as "Deputies" but alongside it in the French text column it is "Les Envoyés".
	*'''Support restoration''' as a long-term contributor to this article dating back to 2005. Once again this infobox is problematic with regard to genre. Gerda Arendt should have proposed the infobox here first before taking any action, as she knows perfectly well the use of ''this particular box'' is controversial and prone to inaccuracy. --'']]'' 02:48, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
	::Unfortunately there is a similar ] distraction at ]. --'']]'' 02:53, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
	:::Do you understand that the composer navbox is redundant? There's a more complete navbox for the composer at the bottom of the opera. --] (]) 07:39, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
	::::No, I disagree that the top right composer navbox is redundant. It has long been supported by a strong consensus. --'']]'' 01:34, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
	:::For the infobox: feel free to change it. If the genre is not correct, just drop it or change to ]. - No, I don't know "perfectly well" that "this particular box" is controversial, - it's an option of project opera. --] (]) 07:44, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
	::::An option of project opera? Whose option? Andy Mabbett's? Yours? --'']]'' 01:38, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
	:::::], quote: "Following discussions here last March ..., this is been under development at ]. It is now in a usable state with complete documentation ... As this discussion has been open for over two weeks with some reservations but without any major objections to making this box available as an ''option'' for articles on individual operas, I've now gone ahead and added it to the list of templates on the main project page and to the Article Guide. Hopefully, this will not prove to be the end of civilization as we know it, although you never know ;). ] (]) 06:32, 18 June 2013 (UTC)." end of quote --] (]) 07:12, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
	* My general thoughts on the Infobox (including that in my personal history I argued exactly as shown above) is found on ], short: the infobox is meant to repeat, in structured form, --] (]) 11:49, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
	:::That's not consistent with WP guidelines on infoboxes which stress that they are to ''summarise'' not repeat. --'']]'' 14:46, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
	::::Without looking: How would you "summarize" a date of first performance, a subtitle, the name of a librettist, etc? If the guideline does not allow to repeat those key facts it needs to be changed, --] (]) 14:51, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
	:::::No, Gerda, the box is supposed to summarise ''the article'', i.e the article as a whole. '']]'' 15:07, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
	::::::Your view. - I believe that an infobox supplying only a quick date and location of a topic is already helpful, everything else is optional. - "Genre": I changed the field to "Description" for now, awaiting further discussion. --] (]) 10:24, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
	:::::::"Description" is actually worse, IMO, because it's very vague: it could mean something similar to "genre", or it could be a plot description, or it could be....etc. ] (]) 14:18, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
	::::::::It's not meant to be permanent, but better be too general until consensus, suggestions welcome on the template talk, --] (]) 15:14, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
	:::::::]:{{tq\|''When considering any aspect of infobox design, keep in mind the purpose of an infobox: to summarize key facts in the article in which it appears. The less information it contains, the more effectively it serves that purpose . . . . Of necessity, some infoboxes contain more than just a few fields; however, wherever possible, present information in short form, and exclude any unnecessary content.''}} In other words, long multi-field boxes are discouraged. '']]'' 07:13, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
	::::::::While the material you quote doesn't support your closing assertion (indeed, you appear to be scrabbling around for support for ] and finding nothing substantial), the inbox in question is not a "long multi-field box". Further, the quoted material does not support your earlier "summarise ''the article''" assertion (emphasis in original) either, because it says (my emphasis) "summarize '''key facts''' in the article". <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); ]; ]</span> 10:09, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
	:::::::::Actually it's true that Andy Mabbett is an expert on ]. He rewrote a large chunk of it on 30 May . The words {{tq\|''usually in the top right of an article''}} were inserted in the first sentence. '']]'' 21:45, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
	::::::::::'''How dare I?!?''' Report me to WP:ANI for that, '''''at once'''''! (But first, please feel to address the point I made in my previous post in this section, refuting your false assertions). <small>Intelligent readers will note that my what my ''uncontested'' edit actually did was to change the words "usually at the top" to "usually in the top right ...(in the desktop view)". Do feel free to point out infoboxes at the top left or top centre.</small> <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); ]; ]</span> 21:48, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
	:A navbox in the upper right does not good whatsoever. ] ] 21:09, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

			:To the extent that the Flemish group act as envoys from Flanders to present a case to the King, the use of that term makes sense. ] (]) 21:09, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
	===Ahem===
	Pardon me for intruding and reverting to the orginal topic here. As at ], I '''agree''' with ] and ] that the old template should be retained, and I believe Robert.Allen has been correct in restoring it. ] seems to me clunky. No clamour of complaint was ever present about the old template - if it ain't broken, why fix it? - --] (]) 16:22, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
	:Different from Rigoletto, do you agree with me that all links in the sidebox would be repeated in the bottom navbox if that navbox (which should be present in every article that it links to) had not been removed. We are not talking about "fixing" but adding: a date in template form that appeared only in the infobox, a picture closer to the time that Verdi composed the work, and structured information useful for Wikidata. Site consistency - infobox on top, navbox on the bottom is normal - is another consideration. Did you read the related ]? I am on Misplaced Pages to improve, not to retain something only because it is not "broken". --] (]) 16:47, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
	::I think the infobox is intrusive and pointless; and I am not aware of any evidence base to indicate that it has any use or advantage over the template. --] (]) 20:38, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
	:::Then you haven't been paying attention. {{tl\|Infobox opera}} - like many of our infoboxes - emits metadata about the subject, making it machine-readable and available to services that reuse our data for a wide variety of purposes, as well as to browser tools operated by individual readers, all in furtherance of our mission to provide a world-wide, freely available educational resource. that;s in addition to providing a handy and convenient, easily accessible quick summary of key facts about the subject to our readers. <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); ]; ]</span> 20:58, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

			::Thank you - I did check first to see that someone uses the word (I found Osborne) before putting my first comment, although it is not the most commonly used. ] (]) 21:30, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
	== Development ==

			Your Doncorlos page is wrong here Iam Doncorlos patner of our country Sidddra 19:22, 2 June 2017 (UTC) <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
	{{Infobox opera

	\| name = ''Don Carlos'' \| italic title = no
			== Cimbasso? ==
	\| image = File:GiuseppeVerdi.jpg

	\| alt =
			I can only vouch for the French version, but that score calls for an ], not a cimbasso... -- ] (]) 14:45, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
	\| caption = Giuseppe Verdi, composer of ''Don Carlos'', 1876

	\| genre = ] in 5 acts
			== External links modified ==
	\| composer = ]

	\| librettist = {{plainlist\|
			Hello fellow Wikipedians,
	* ]

	* ]
			I have just modified {{plural:3\|one external link\|3 external links}} on ]. Please take a moment to review . If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit ] for additional information. I made the following changes:
	}}
			*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120502200913/http://www.houstongrandopera.org:80/tickets/calendar/view.aspx?id=1681 to http://www.houstongrandopera.org/tickets/calendar/view.aspx?id=1681
	\| based_on = ]'s play '']
			*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131222013333/http://www.giuseppeverdi.it/visInglese/page.asp?IDCategoria=3648&IDSezione=25313 to http://www.giuseppeverdi.it/visInglese/page.asp?IDCategoria=3648&IDSezione=25313
	\| language =
			*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060605104344/http://www.giuseppeverdi.it/stampabile.asp?IDCategoria=162&IDSezione=581&ID=19849 to http://www.giuseppeverdi.it/stampabile.asp?IDCategoria=162&IDSezione=581&ID=19849
	\| premiere_date = {{Start date\|1867\|03\|11\|df=y}}

	\| premiere_location = ], Paris, by ]
			When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the ''checked'' parameter below to '''true''' or '''failed''' to let others know (documentation at {{tlx\|Sourcecheck}}).
	}}

	According to of this infobox, it's "still under development". Interesting, I thought that was true for every line on Misplaced Pages, and development normally happens in article space where more people can see it. But let's make an exception and develop right her, as an exercise. What do you think is missing or wrong? If it's on this opera, discuss here, if it's the template, on the template talk. Should we have for example a second infobox for its Italian version? (as we have two, for German and English publication, of works of Kafka) --] (]) 21:21, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
			{{sourcecheck\|checked=false}}
	:I really like this one. ] ] 21:25, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

	:I reverted its removal as that reason was spurious. It was then removed as "there's no consensus for this change", which is also not a valid reason to revert (]). I've now reverted its removal from ''this talk page''; which was blatantly unacceptable, whatever the edit summary. <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); ]; ]</span> 21:43, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
			Cheers.—] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">(])</span> 06:45, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
	:(ec, reply to Kleinzach removing the box from this talk)

	::like this (restored): This infobox shouldn't be placed here in talk space. ] previously agreed not to use this tactic following the controversy at ]. If the box is going to be redeveloped, this is not the place. --'']]'' 21:35, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
			== External links modified ==
	:Kleinzach, you are right, it should not be placed here, it should be in the article and be developed there. - Following Wagner, I said I would not again place an infobox on a talk page when it's not wanted in an article, to remain on the talk page. - This is different, it is (or rather "was") on the talk page to be developed, to be taken back ton the article. Also: this is an opera, not a composer, the infobox is not controversial, even if you think so. I take it to the ] now, I have my ] and no interest in edit war. --] (]) 21:54, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

	:::I added infomation about the Italian version ], ready to discuss development, --] (]) 10:29, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
			Hello fellow Wikipedians,
	::]: It's not possible to have any kind of discussion here while my comments, to which you have responded, are being removed. . --'']]'' 22:20, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

	:::I restored the "message" above, for the intelligent readers, --] (]) 22:31, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
			I have just modified one external link on ]. Please take a moment to review ]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit ] for additional information. I made the following changes:
	:::AS I noted below, what I actually did, as intelligent readers can see from the diff, was to revert you removing part of another editor's contribution, at the same time inviting you, in the edit summary, to restore your comment if you wished to. It's beyond time you stopped trying to censor others' contributions to talk pages. <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); ]; ]</span> 09:05, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
			*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131004212841/http://62.204.133.52/opera/activity.php?Cod_not=67 to http://62.204.133.52/opera/activity.php?Cod_not=67

			When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

			{{sourcecheck\|checked=false\|needhelp=}}

			Cheers.—] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">(])</span> 12:06, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

			== Title of the Article ==

			In the opera world, everybody calls this "Don Carlo." Don Carlos is the English translation. Would the article about "La Boheme" properly be entitled "The Bohemian"? ] (]) 17:59, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
	=== Deletion of my message By Andy Mabbett ===
			:It has perhaps escaped your attention that the original French version was called "Don Carlos", and this is typically used by ]. ] (]) 01:24, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
			: I added the Italian name to the lead. Please check out the archive of this talk, where the question came up in 2006. I wonder how to clarify in the infobox that there are two versions, in different languages. I'd go for a second infobox for the Italian, as about all values would be different. Compare ]. --] (]) 09:33, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
			::Looks to me like a classic case where its best to have no infobox at all! ] (]) 11:46, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

			== ] to appear as POTD soon ==
	Andy Mabbett is now deleting what I write here . --'']]'' 21:49, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
			Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that ] will be appearing as ] on March 26, 2018. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at ]. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the ]. — ] (]) 10:16, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
	:Nice try at a smear, again, but what I actually did, as intelligent readers can see from the diff, was to revert you removing part of another editor's contribution, at the same time inviting you, in the edit summary, to restore your comment if you wished to. It's beyond time you stopped trying to censor others' contributions to talk pages. <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); ]; ]</span> 21:56, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
			{{POTD/2018-03-26}}
	::He's got you on that one Kleinz. You really need to stop this sort of thing. Here's . ] ] 22:08, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
	Not only am I deleted — but again this has been refactored. . --'']]'' 22:15, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
	:Glad to see you don't deny removing someone else's comments. ] ] 01:06, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
	:The only "refactoring" was to make the heading level 3, so that it sits under the level 2 heading of the matter under discussion. No change was made to your comment. <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); ]; ]</span> 09:05, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 00:44, 1 February 2024

This article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Opera

This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Opera, a group writing and editing Misplaced Pages articles on operas, opera terminology, opera composers and librettists, singers, designers, directors and managers, companies and houses, publications and recordings. The project discussion page is a place to talk about issues and exchange ideas. New members are welcome!OperaWikipedia:WikiProject OperaTemplate:WikiProject OperaOpera

France Low‑importance

	France portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Deputies

I would like to propose that Flemish deputies is changed to envoys within the article. I know that many sources use 'deputies', but envoys avoids misunderstanding that are from a parliament or that they are deputizing. Envoy would be an acceptable translation from deputé in the original French vocal score (http://javanese.imslp.info/files/imglnks/usimg/4/41/IMSLP24581-PMLP55451-Verdi_-_Don_Carlos__ed.francese_Escudier_1867__bw.pdf). Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 19:19, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Well, it's interesting looking at the literature. Both Parker (in Sadie) and Budden, Vol. 3 use "Deputies" in the list of characters. Charles Osborne's "The Complete Operas of Verdi" uses both "deputation" and "envoys" in his description of Act 3, Sc. 2: "The King descends the cathedral steps to join the procession, a deputation from Flanders, led by Carlo, appears. The envoys kneel before Philip...." (p. 356). In the libretto accompanying the Giulini/Domingo/Caballe etc. CDs when they sing, the group is named (in the English ext) as "Deputies" but alongside it in the French text column it is "Les Envoyés".

To the extent that the Flemish group act as envoys from Flanders to present a case to the King, the use of that term makes sense. Viva-Verdi (talk) 21:09, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you - I did check first to see that someone uses the word (I found Osborne) before putting my first comment, although it is not the most commonly used. Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 21:30, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Your Doncorlos page is wrong here Iam Doncorlos patner of our country Sidddra 19:22, 2 June 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sidra Memon memon (talk • contribs)

Cimbasso?

I can only vouch for the French version, but that score calls for an Ophicleide, not a cimbasso... -- megA (talk) 14:45, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Don Carlos. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:45, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Don Carlos. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131004212841/http://62.204.133.52/opera/activity.php?Cod_not=67 to http://62.204.133.52/opera/activity.php?Cod_not=67

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:06, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Title of the Article

In the opera world, everybody calls this "Don Carlo." Don Carlos is the English translation. Would the article about "La Boheme" properly be entitled "The Bohemian"? PaulAlanLevy (talk) 17:59, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

It has perhaps escaped your attention that the original French version was called "Don Carlos", and this is typically used by WP:RS. Johnbod (talk) 01:24, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

I added the Italian name to the lead. Please check out the archive of this talk, where the question came up in 2006. I wonder how to clarify in the infobox that there are two versions, in different languages. I'd go for a second infobox for the Italian, as about all values would be different. Compare Ein feste Burg. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:33, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Looks to me like a classic case where its best to have no infobox at all! Johnbod (talk) 11:46, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

File:Giuseppe Barberis - Carlo Cornaglia - Giuseppe Verdi's Don Carlo at La Scala.jpg to appear as POTD soon

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Giuseppe Barberis - Carlo Cornaglia - Giuseppe Verdi's Don Carlo at La Scala.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on March 26, 2018. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2018-03-26. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 10:16, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Picture of the day

An 1884 illustration by Carlo Cornaglia of the Milan premiere of Don Carlos. This grand opera, composed by Giuseppe Verdi to a French-language libretto by Joseph Méry and Camille du Locle, is adapted from Friedrich Schiller's dramatic play Don Carlos and tells the conflicts of Carlos, Prince of Asturias (1545–1568). First performed in 1867, the opera exists in numerous versions, the longest of which lasts four hours.Illustration: Carlo Cornaglia; Engraving: Giuseppe Barberis; restoration: Adam Cuerden Archive – More featured pictures... Categories: