# Talk:Prelude and Fugue on a Theme of Vittoria

This review is transcluded from Talk:Prelude and Fugue on a theme of Vittoria/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Tomcat7 (talk · contribs) 11:56, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 

It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 

Link motet in the lead
Link vicar, cantata
"The Prelude and Fugue was one of two pieces that Britten wrote that year based on music by other composers". Suggest: The Prelude and Fugue was one of Britten's two pieces he wrote that year based on music by other composers. The sentence is a bit confusing, perhaps write "which were based..."
"of a saint who was a bishop" - suggest "of a saint and bishop"
"a combination of requirements that it is difficult for organs to meet.[4]" - a combination of requirements difficult for organs to meet
Shouldn't the title be Prelude and Fugue on a Theme of Vittoria, per MOS:CT?
Where was it performed apart from the noted locations?
Have there been any other versions?
You may note that registration or subscription is required for 10 and 1--Tomcat (7) 12:23, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Linked motet, vicar and cantata for the sake of argument
I don't know why you don't seem to like the use of the word "that" in clauses, but there's nothing wrong with it.  Your proposed new sentence makes less grammatical sense, so I won't change it as you suggest, but I have tweaked it slightly and I hope you think it's clearer now.
Done
Not done, "that" is fine
Ah, the joys of capitals.  Will move it in a second.
I mentioned in the 1963 concert because the reviewer said something about the piece, rather than just comment on the performance. Apart from that, it's been performed in many organ recitals and church services, I'm sure. It wouldn't be encyclopaedic (or possible) to list them.
Not that I know of.  I haven't found a source to say that nobody's arranged it for any other combination of instruments.
You obviously did not notice the (subscription required) at the end of those two references...
Thanks for the review. BencherliteTalk 10:47, 28 January 2013 (UTC)