# Talk:Helena Braun

This review is transcluded from Talk:Helena Braun/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: The Most Comfortable Chair (talk · contribs) 04:24, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
Hello. I will review this. — The Most Comfortable Chair 04:24, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

I became preoccupied with something unexpected this past week. I will have the review by next Sunday, at most. Thank you for your patience. — The Most Comfortable Chair 11:18, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
No worries. Coincidentally, I am attending a conference out of town this week so I wouldn't have much time to respond before then anyway! DanCherek (talk) 13:26, 12 June 2022 (UTC)


### Lead
"Düsseldorf, Prussia, Germany" → "Düsseldorf, Prussia, German Empire" — Could also link German Empire if you would like to.
Done. DanCherek (talk) 21:02, 26 June 2022 (UTC)


### Early life
I would recommend adding a timeframe for her studies — it is not clear if she studied locally as a child, adolescent or adult. Same goes for her study with Hermann Gallos and Hans Duhan. Even a rough estimate would be useful in contextualizing her development.
I've spent the past few days digging through sources for any clarification on this but unfortunately wasn't able to find anything that sheds any more light. Her studies with van Helden is from The New York Times, which only mentions: "She is a native of Duesseldorf, where she studied with Henrich van Helden." The other two teachers are from the Times obituary, which mentions: "Braun studied in Vienna under two notable singers, Hermann Gallos and Hans Duhan." It seems like in these and every other source that I've seen, her date of birth and the year of her debut are given, but not really any other chronological information in between. DanCherek (talk) 19:53, 30 June 2022 (UTC)


### Career
Link — "Le nozze di Figaro"; "dramatic soprano"; "Brünnhilde"; "Wagner"; "Der Ring des Nibelungen"; "Vienna State Opera"; "Bavarian State Opera"; "Metropolitan Opera"; "Helen Traubel"; "laryngitis".
Done. For Wagner, I linked Wagnerian later on in the article, which redirects to the composer's article. ("Wagner's Der Ring des Nibelungen puts the wikilinks a little too close in my opinion). DanCherek (talk) 21:12, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
"She was a member of the Vienna State Opera from 1939 to 1949, and from 1940 until her retirement in 1959 she was also a member of the Bavarian State Opera." — Could be trimmed for flow. → "She was a member of the Vienna State Opera from 1939 to 1949, and from 1940 until her retirement in 1959 of the Bavarian State Opera."
Trimmed, with a little rearranging: "She was a member of the Vienna State Opera from 1939 to 1949, and of the Bavarian State Opera from 1940 until her retirement in 1959." DanCherek (talk) 21:12, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
"the opera was met with a hostile public response" — Could we briefly mention the reason for it?
Added more from the existing Levi source and a new source about its reception – basically a combination of perceived anti-fascist themes and musical elements that people didn't like. DanCherek (talk) 19:53, 30 June 2022 (UTC)


### References
Could link "Newspapers.com" for consistency, since "ProQuest" is also linked.
Done. DanCherek (talk) 21:19, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
I would suggest adding English translations of German titles wherever it is relatively descriptive — "Rudolf Wagner-Régeny: Der Opernkomponist"; "'Unausführbar' – 'was Furchtbares' – 'Gelingen des Unmöglichen': Tristan und Isolde im discographischen Vergleich"; "Schwerpunkt: Tristan und Isolde"
Done. DanCherek (talk) 19:32, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Overall, really great work on this! It is concise and well-written. Little to suggest here and it should pass. — The Most Comfortable Chair 17:25, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello DanCherek, I went through the article again and found no other problems. Once the outstanding three points are addressed, I will pass this. There is no rush though — just wanted to let you know. — The Most Comfortable Chair 02:35, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for the review! I'm planning to finish responding within the next day. DanCherek (talk) 02:38, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Hi The Most Comfortable Chair, I've responded to all above and I think I'm ready for you to take another look when you get a chance. Unfortunately, as I mentioned above, I wasn't able to find very much information about her early life in terms of when she studied. Please let me know if you have any more suggestions about this or any other aspects of the article. Thanks again for your time in doing this review! DanCherek (talk) 19:54, 30 June 2022 (UTC)


### Final
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct: 

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation: 

Is it verifiable with no original research?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline: 

B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines: 

C. It contains no original research: 

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism: 

Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic: 

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style): 

Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each: 

Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute: 

Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content: 

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: 

Overall:
Pass or Fail: 
The article is written nicely, illustrated appropriately, and covers all major aspects fairly; it cites reliable sources and the content is verifiable. I am happy to pass — thank you DanCherek for writing one more high-quality article! — The Most Comfortable Chair 20:09, 30 June 2022 (UTC)