Talk:List of prominent operas/Archive 2

message: Wonder if anyone else is feeling like we could stand to do another round of removals?  Here are my suggestions, for your consideration:
* Pearlfishers - true it's getting performed more lately, but not that substantially and do we really think this is going to stick around as a standard item?
* Midsummer Night's Dream, Albert Herring - These don't strike me as standard, but I may be out of the loop on that.
* Oedipus
* Glinka - I thought we were excluding regional favorites, and I don't see these as standard outside russia
* Makropulos Affair - It's at the Met this year, but it's definitely not on the scale of Jenufa or Kobanova for popularity.
* Menotti - I dunno this stuff that well, but do all these really belong?
* Bastien und Bastienne - This really ought to go, while Clemenza should perhaps be added?
* Attila - I have my doubts
* Mignon - The article says it's rarely performed...
* Mahagonny - The music is popular, but is it performed much?
Okay, that turned a little too much into "Which operas have I seen/heard of", but that's why I need feedback.  To me things like pearlfishers are likely enough to be transient that we can skip them.  Otherwise maybe we should include betrothal in a monastery too.  Similarly, if we include Makropulos affair I feel like we should include Bluebeard's Castle (not just because they're both creepy).  Anyway, for your consideration.  --Chinasaur 23:06, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: hmm, Chinasaur does have some dodos there... The closer this list reflects current realities of production (and of recording, too), the more interesting and useful it is. --Wetman 03:00, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)

text: These are tough calls.  I think Oedipus is out; I've never seen or heard it.  It might be popular in Romania.  I think Pearl Fishers is in, but then I've been hearing it all my life; maybe it's falling out of favor. Menotti--Amahl should stay, but I dunno about the others.  B&B, out, Clemenza in.  Attila I never hear.  Mignon in, I think.  Mahagonny I have never seen except on TV, but it does get radio air-time, at least in the US.  It is hard to make judgements on peripheral items in the canon, and it is always possible that something is regionally or nationally popular somewhere but not somewhere else.  Interesting ... Antandrus 03:55, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: If we're going recording too, then I'll say pearlfishers in.  Amahl I agree and likewise I dunno about the others.  I thought part of the description of the list was that we were leaving out some national favorites that aren't internationally popular.  --Chinasaur 05:31, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Purges (2004) 

message: I love the idea of a standard rep list.  I would vote to remove the historically important operas from this list that are not in rep.  I would also like to see added the following: Bluebeard's Castle, Ernani, The Golden Cockerel, Lakme, Louise, Martha, Mignon, and Merry Wives of Windsor. These are certainly performed more often, world-wide at least, than most of Britten. Comments? --DrG 04:22, 2005 May 20 (UTC)
:I second all of your suggestions:  I think they're all famous enough to go on the list. Antandrus  (talk)  04:26, 20 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Only if it's an opera.  Isn't it an oratorio? --GuillaumeTell 18:01, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nominations for new inclusions 

message: This idea just crossed my mind.  What if we eliminated this page altogether.  Instead we create a new sub-category of operas, something like Standard international repertory.  Then we just include the standard operas in that category.  We could also create Historically significant repertory  and others, like Standard American repertory.  Does that make things easier or harder?  What do you experienced wikis think?? --DrG 07:33, 2005 May 26 (UTC)
:The two main problems with switching from lists to categories, IMO, are 1) that you lose the ability to annotate (i.e. the nice explanatory line or two after the historically significant opera, telling a visitor just what the heck it is), and 2) you lose the ability to put in a redlink for an as-yet-unwritten article.  Redlinks are how we grow.  I think that items like operas need to be both on lists and in categories.  (I have no objection to starting the categories you mention, by the way, I think they're a good idea--I just don't want to lose the lists.)  Best, Antandrus  (talk)  14:52, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally, I find lists more useful than categories and would be reluctant to see this one disappear. -- Viajero | Talk 15:29, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: New idea about standard operas

message: "please do not add an opera to this list unless it has had a significant performance history"  It makes the article sound more like a talk page and I have removed it.  --Negative3 21:55, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Is this statement necessary?

message: I have added Purcell's Dido and Aeneas to the "standard operatice repertoire" list, since for the last thirty years or so it has been performed more and more, and on Operabase it lists 15 separate professional productions in numerous countries, including Italy, Germany, France, and the US. This compares with 22 for Fidelio and only one for Les Troyens. I also replaced it on the list of historic operas with John Blow's Venus and Adonis, since according to Grove dictionary of Opera this is a true opera and was first performed a good bit earlier. Makemi 17:00, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: English operas

message: We could do with some more early Mozart operas ; Il re pastore and La finta giardiniera. His list seems rather short. Both are currently either being performed or are about to be performed at London's royal opera house. Keep the Britten(Albert Herring+ midsummer night's dream, both very popular in Britain) and where s Handel's Orlando? Moreschi
:Neither of these early works by Mozart is currently famous, even though they are being performed in the 250th year after Mozart's birth, so neither should be in a List of Famous Operas. Also, please sign your posts by clicking the third button from the right (the one containing a squiggle) above this edit box, and that will save you having to type "Moreschi", and will tell us when you added your comment.  Plus, if you put a few words about yourself on your Moreschi user page, your username will start appearing in blue rather than red.  Use the "Show preview" button below this edit box to check what you've done, and you can, if necessary, check links and do further editing before pressing the "Save page" button. --GuillaumeTell 17:29, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Mozart

message: Earlier today I removed this opera from the standard repertoire list, and got a note about it on my talk page. The guideline for the page seems to be that the opera is either in the "standard operatic repertoire" or is an historically important opera. According to Operabase there is currently only one production of this opera going on, I have never heard of it, despite considering myself familiar with the standard operatic repertoire, and simply being the first opera by Wagner, without it in itself having shown a great revolution in the genre or being any other sort of "first", in my opinion does not make it notable enough for the "historically important operas" list. I suspect the only people who care much about it are Wagner buffs, and I think this page has enough of his operas as it is, and rightfully so. I propose that the opera Rienzi be removed from this page. Mak (talk) 03:12, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Rienzi, Wagner's attempt at a grand opera, is rarely performed. Nevertheless my view remains that the idea behind this article is flawed and the whole thing needs to be rethought. - Kleinzach 10:22, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

text: The most famous part of Rienzi (by far) is the overture.  I did hear a recorded performance of the opera recently on our local "classical" radio station, but staged performances are quite rare.  On a side note, I have come to agree with Kleinzach that the idea of this page is flawed, but I'm not sure how to fix it.  Antandrus  (talk) 14:43, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Adding my belated agreement with all of the above.  --GuillaumeTell 16:36, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Rienzi

message: I am proposing to delete this opera by Gomes, which is about as famous as Pacini's Saffo or Mercadante's Il Giuramento, i.e. not very famous to the vast majority of people.  I have my doubts about some of the others on the list (and would include some others not there at present), but I've said my piece up above somewhere. --GuillaumeTell 16:36, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: By delete do you mean remove the article from the list, or delete the article? I'm all for removing from the list, but opposed to outright deletion (if they can have articles on the mountain in their fanfiction we can have articles on less famous operas). Mak (talk) 16:50, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, sorry, I meant remove from the list.  If Il Guarany is part of the Standard Repertoire, I'm a Brazilian, but it was popular in its day and has (I think) been recorded fairly recently, so it is well worth a Wikipedia entry.  --GuillaumeTell 17:40, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Another vote for removal from the list. - Kleinzach 18:26, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Il Guarany]]