Talk:The Royal Opera

message: Oliver Chettle, could you explain why you just reverted my merge of this article with Royal Opera House? Having two separate articles complicates things for those of us writing articles on operatic topics, particularly biographies of singers. The only case I found it to be necessary is Paris, where the Opéra National de Paris has been associated with more than one venue (Opera Bastille and Paris Opera). In all the other articles, the company and the house are dealt with together on one page since they are for all practical purposes one. Viajero 10:31, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: They are not one. They are legally separate, just as the Royal Ballet and the building are separate. The theatre is much older than the company. The Royal Opera House should not be categorised in opera companies because it is not an opera company. Oliver Chettle 11:46, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I am aware that, technically speaking, they are not one. However, in cases where the opera company has not been associated with two (or more) theaters for which we have entries, it makes sense to deal with them both on the same page. In nearly every singer biography, there is a line which goes something like this: "in 19xx singer X made his/her debut in [London]", where [London] is a variable. Hitherto, we have had to choose between linking to the "Royal Opera House" (the locale) or to "London" (the public); either is correct. Now you complicate things further by adding a third option: the company. Did singer X perform at the hall or with the company? In virtually all cases, the answer is: both. If you look at any other article on a major opera house, such as La Scala or Berlin State Opera you will see that the house(s) and the company  are intertwined. It is not ideal but serves our purposes better than splitting things in separate pages. Please reconsider, especially given the fact that all of the information on this page can safely be brought under ROH, as my original merge demonstrated. -- Viajero 12:27, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

text: "Legally separate" is not a very useful distinction for the Wikipedia reader who might be kept in mind more constantly than she is. Is it really sensible to have two articles on each major opera venue, one for the house and one for the paper corporation that may or may not own the physical plant? Perhaps Oliver Chettle will take pity on the reader and the rest of us. --Wetman 13:41, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually everything I do on Wikipedia is done for the readers not for the comparatively tiny number of editors. I am unconvinced by the arguments put forward. The opera company article is just as legitimate as the ballet company article (I hope I haven't now exposed that to attack). The building has a long history which does not really relate to the present performing company, and much that should be written about the company has little to do with the building. Oliver Chettle 04:49, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Question

message: I have moved the Royal Opera content from the Royal Opera House page. This leaves one article for the building and an article each for the two companies that use it as a home. For history of earlier edits of most of the content, please see the ROH history page. Humansdorpie 09:27, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Royal Opera content moved from ROH page 

message: Shouldn't this page be moved to "Royal Opera (London)" if (as I assume) the intent is to disambiguate with other foreign opera companies with royal patronage? "Royal Opera, London" is not a proper noun, or at least it's not at all commonly employed as such. I believe it's Wiki practice to put the disambiguator in parentheses. Badgerpatrol (talk) 09:42, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: See "Name redux" below.  --  ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ [your turn] 21:42, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Name

message: I am gathering material to overhaul this article substantially. If any editor has so far contributed any uncited contributions to the present article, may I invite him/her to add citations in the next week or so? Many thanks – Tim riley (talk) 13:05, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uncited material 

message: I have added some info and removed uncited material, and put the article up for peer review, where comments will be most gratefully received. Tim riley (talk) 20:47, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: PR

message: Copied, with minor edits, from my talk page: comments from User:GuillaumeTell received after PR closed:
* The BBCTV series "The House" deserves its own article, don't you think?  There's some information at IMDB and probably more elsewhere.  I could knock something up fairly quickly if you like.
**That would be splendid: many thanks. Tim riley (talk) 18:15, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I am mightily grateful for these points. We differ on a few of them, but I think the article will be much improved when I have finished incorporating the rest, which I shall now go and do. Thank you very much. Tim riley (talk) 13:55, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not too bothered by the suggestions that you've rejected (others may disagree, of course!).  I've looked through the additions, etc., and everything seems in order.  I'll see if I can find out when the term "Director of Opera" first appeared, and if I do, it should be easy to add a third column to the table with all the names.  Payne and Padmore really do need WP entries, which I may be able to start if/when I'm in a position to provide names and dates. --GuillaumeTell 11:44, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent! Many thanks! Tim riley (talk) 13:15, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  PR - supplementary comments 

message: ... this article has become a FA!  Great effort, Tim. --GuillaumeTell 18:01, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you, sir! The effort was much aided by the attentions of others, naming no eponymous Rossini heroes. Tim riley (talk) 16:48, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  While the Table rumbles on ... 

message: This article claims that Les Troyens has not been performed at Covent Garden since 1972, although Scottish Opera gave one or two performances there around 1990, I think. Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 18:26, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point. I shall check and amend as needed. This article is only about the resident company's productions, otherwise (gasps as ROH luminaries reach for their sal volatile) we should have to mention - aargh - Gilbert and Sullivan and Welsh National Opera. I'm a bit hazy about productions of The Trojans at the ROH, though I know the Great Dame appeared at short notice as Dido in 1969, borrowed from the Scottish Opera production at short notice when Josephine Veasey was taken ill. Dame Janet sang in English and the rest of the cast sang in French, but, I am told by one who was there, it was stupendous nonetheless. But I digress. I'll research and report back. Tim riley (talk) 20:24, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I think the only Offenbach (apart from Hoffmann) I have ever seen in Covent Garden was the Komische Oper once doing ‘Ritter Blaubart’. Visits by the Kirov and Bolshoi will have confused the situation also. Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 19:13, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Berlioz: Les Troyens last performance 

message: I'd like to suggest updating the final sentence of this section (which has a broken link as reference): "Productions announced for the 2011–12 season include a new opera by Judith Weir, and the first performances of The Trojans at Covent Garden since 1990, conducted by Pappano, and starring Bryan Hymel, Eva-Maria Westbroek and Anna Caterina Antonacci." I work at the Royal Opera House, so thought it best not to do this myself, but refer other editors to the 2012-13 season announcement on the ROH website, which could be drawn on. Thanks, OperaBalletRose (talk) 15:51, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks very much for this. I'll put it on my list unless someone else gets there first. Tim Riley (talk) 17:46, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Great! Many thanks, OperaBalletRose (talk) 18:01, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Aha! We're in safe hands. Guillaume Tell has done the necessary. Many thanks, Monsieur T. – Tim Riley (talk) 21:21, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: 2002 to date

message: Since this is mentioned in the text, why do we need to have reference to this separate company made in the lede? IMHO its not important almost-instinct 14:05, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, It has no such ties, and is uncited clutter. Am deleting. Tim riley (talk) 15:00, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Royal English Opera 

message: An editor wishes to change "magnificently restored" into: 'The Sunday Times described the reopened theatre as "magnificently equipped for its most exigent scenic demands and audience creature comforts.'  In other words, the theatre was magnificently restored (of course, for the purposes of being a theatre, both in front of the curtain and behind it).  Unless anyone has a source that disputes the account of the Times, the description is non-controversial, and the writing is more concise and elegant.  An encyclopedia article is not best constructed with a series of quotes from the sources, only quotes that add something of value.  Rather, good encyclopedia writing involves describing what the best sources are saying, in concise, clear language, with the facts organized in a logical, balanced way.  -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:57, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't *want* to change it to that, I was just trying to find a compromise. I think having the phrase "magnificently restored" in the sentence jars with the neutral point of view policy, but clearly others disagree and I have no desire to get involved in any unpleasant disagreements, so I shall leave you to it. Angmering (talk) 18:46, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: MOS asks for concise writing

message: An editor added this:
:Radio and Television Broadcasts
:The BBC has regularly broadcast performances from the Royal Opera since its establishment in 1946. The earliest complete broadcast was Britten's Peter Grimes in December 1947, and until the mid-1950s, some operas was only broadcast in part. Unlike the Met broadcasts in the USA, the BBC never had a regular broadcast schedule of Royal Opera performances, and sometimes only broadcast three or four in a year and rarely more than ten. Broadcasts were usually on the Third Programme (Radio 3 after 1967) but some were heard on the Home Service (Radio 4 after 1967). The BBC began FM broadcasts in May 1955, and the first Royal Opera FM broadcast was Tosca on June 30, 1955. Stereo broadcasts started in 1966 and the first Royal Opera stereo broadcast was Der Rosenkavalier, performed on April 26 but broadcast on October 29. The first television broadcast was of La Traviata on April 24, 1967 and in black and white. The first colour broadcast was of Aida on February 5, 1968. 
:The broadcast archive of the Royal Opera is far from complete. Audio broadcasts were not systematically kept by the BBC until the 1980s and therefore many performances from the 1940s and 1950s no longer exist in audio form.(ref:) The largest archival holdings of Royal Opera performances are the Royal Opera themselves, the BBC, the National Sound Archive of the British Library and the Music Preserved Archive at the University of York. Some recordings have been released by the Royal Opera's own label, and by historical specialists such as Pristine Audio and Testament. More recent video recordings are widely available on DVD.
The lack of citations makes this unsuitable for a featured article (or any article, indeed) but it is interesting and if citations to reliable sources can be found I think it would be a useful addition. Can anyone find such sources? Tim riley talk  14:48, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Broadcasts 

message: It's a pity that the pic illustrating Today's Featured Article on the Main Page crops off some of the pediment of the Royal Opera House. May I suggest replacing it with one of the following images? My preference would be for the one on the far left. Ham II (talk) 07:59, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I would have chosen an interior, saying more about the character of a theatre, and am surprised the article has not a single one, such as :File:MFroyaloperahouse1.jpg --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:06, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  I second that suggestion, though the opinions of contributors to the article (which I am not) should carry more weight than mine. Ham II (talk) 08:51, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Main page image 

message: Substituted at 05:18, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on The Royal Opera. 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/20140407064033/http://www.roh.org.uk/about/royal-opera-house/history to http://www.roh.org.uk/about/royal-opera-house/history
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:46, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on The Royal Opera. 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/20120105035313/http://www.roh.org.uk/booknow/seatingplans.aspx to http://www.roh.org.uk/booknow/seatingplans.aspx
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111005013825/http://www.roh.org.uk/roh2/operadevelopment.aspx to http://www.roh.org.uk/roh2/operadevelopment.aspx
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130131104450/http://www.roh.org.uk/about/tony-hall to http://www.roh.org.uk/about/tony-hall
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:41, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on The Royal Opera. 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/20091007032111/http://www.roh.org.uk/discover/opera/index.aspx to http://www.roh.org.uk/discover/opera/index.aspx
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:37, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified