Talk:Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart/Archive 3

message: I'm not sure about all of the recordings at the bottom of the page, but the recordings of the clarinet concerto are simply horrible (technique, tone, improvisation/cadenzas)-- could we get better quality recordings, please?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.143.161.216 (talk) 16:05, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recordings 

message: :Another debate involves Mozart's alleged status as a kind of superhuman prodigy, from childhood right up until his death. While some have criticized his earlier works as simplistic or forgettable, others revere even Mozart's juvenilia. In any case, several of his early compositions remain very popular. The motet Exultate, jubilate (K. 165), for example, composed when Mozart was seventeen years old, is among the most frequently recorded of his vocal compositions.
Hello, I've moved this "debate" to the talk page because it seems completely subjective and unresolvable.  Also, there's no reference source (and it's not clear to me there even could be one).  Note that Exultate, jubilate is now mentioned in the bio section as a popular early composition, so deleting it here is less of an issue.  Opus33 01:20, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Item I moved from main article

message: Hello, I've moved this from the main article:
:Mozart died at approximately 1 a.m. on December 5, 1791 in Vienna. With the onset of his illness, he had largely ceased work on his final composition, the Requiem. Popular belief has it that Mozart was thinking of his own impending death while writing this piece, and even that a messenger from the afterworld commissioned it. Documentary evidence has established that the anonymous commission came from one Franz Count of Walsegg on Schloss Stuppach, and that most if not all of the music had been written while Mozart was still in good health. A younger composer, and Mozart's friend and, some say, pupil, at the time, Franz Xaver Süssmayr, was engaged by Constanze to finish the Requiem, which he had been already helping the ill composer with, since Mozart could not write on account of his swollen limbs. He was not the first composer asked to finish the Requiem, as the widow had first approached another Mozart student, Joseph Eybler, who began work directly on the empty staves of Mozart's manuscript but then abandoned it.
Reason:  we've already got extensive discussion of the Requiem in two other articles, namely Death of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart and Requiem (Mozart).  The main Mozart article is very long, and I would judge that it really just have a quick summary of the Requiem (which I just put in).  Opus33 18:15, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Item II moved from main article

message: Hello, I've moved this from the main article:
:Because he was buried in an unmarked grave, it has been popularly assumed that Mozart was penniless and forgotten when he died. He earned about 50,000 florins per year, equivalent to at least 142,000 US dollars in 2006, which places him within the top 1% of late 18th century wage earners, but he could not manage his wealth. His mother wrote, "When Wolfgang makes new acquaintances, he immediately wants to give his life and property to them." His impulsive largesse and spending often had him asking for loans. Many of his begging letters survive, but they are evidence not so much of poverty as of his habit of spending more than he earned. He was not buried in a "mass grave" for paupers but in a regular communal grave according to the 1784 laws in Austria.
I'm not happy with income figure of 50,000 florins.  Maynard Solomon (in his 1995 bio) conducted a really painstaking survey of Mozart's sources of income, and he put all his data and reasoning in the appendix to his book.  It looks like Mozart probably never made much more than 5,000 florins in any one year.  I suspect that the source for the 50,000 figure, a newspaper reporter, got wrapped up in enthusiasm for his point and added an extra zero.
I also don't think this paragraph is entirely about Mozart's death, which is the section it occupied.  I've tried to fix this by discussing all the various points in what I think are more logical places:  the spendthrift habits for 1785-6 (when Mozart became temporarily rich and started to manifest these habits in a serious way), the begging letters for 1788-1790 (when they were written).  Opus33 18:32, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: At least we should keep the information from the last sentence, because often people think that it was heartless to burry one of Austrians biggest composers in such a simple grave. But due to the radical reforms that Emperor Josef II. had made (see Josephinism) this was really "normal" at that time! So please dont delete too much information from the main article, and try to condense the most important facts to keep them in the most accessed article about Mozart. -- Rfortner 20:59, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: <This seems to have been worked out ok; the article now does mention the mass grave as well as Josephinism.> Opus33 17:46, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Item III moved from main article

message: Under "Mozart in Fiction" the page contains this sentence.
"Modern audiences have been gripped by the account of Mozart's life given in Peter Shaffer's play Amadeus, as well as the luxuriantly produced Hollywood film based on the play."
Personally, I think "luxuriantly produced" is a bit of a subjective phrase, which is open to too many interpretation, but the real problem with the sentence is the claim that the film is a "Hollywood" film.  It's not.  It was shot in primarily in Prague and funded by a San Franciscan company.  Where does Hollywood fit in? <comment by User:Therealunno>
:Hello, I took out both items.  I had originally meant "Hollywood" in the sense of "popularized, intended for a mass audience" but this is getting too close to a WP:NPOV violation.  Cheers, Opus33 21:22, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Film Description 

message: It doesn't mean "Lick me in the arse."  It means "Kiss my arse," as the wikipedia page devoted to this canon clearly explains.Schlier22 04:30, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I am not alone in being rather annoyed by the recent edit wars on this article.  I notice that Leck mich im Arsch is currently protected and labelled on the talk page as subject to one of the lamest edit wars in history (I think it's "arse" versus "ass" over there).  Surely we don't want that to happen on this article too?  Can we agree on the most appropriate translation, please, rather than continuing the current bad-tempered oscillation?  My latest edit was my suggestion for compromise.  Please bear in mind that those of us who don't speak Chinese
 well enough to know one way or the other are forced to rely on the integrity and good sense of other contributors who can determine the most appropriate translation.  The current back-and-forth is an unedifying spectacle.  --RobertG ♬ talk 16:09, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I second RobertG's contention and think his inclusion of the literal and idiomatic translations represents a suitable compromise.  This edit war is growing tiresome.  Kindest regards, AlphaEta T / C 17:10, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

text:  RobertG, I think you have found an appropiate phrase to present both translations and let the adult reader decide him/herself about the English meaning of this term. So if nobody else (e.g. Schlier22) contestes your compromise, I will support it. By the way: For someone like me, whose native language is Austrian German, it is quite funny to see an entire section in a Wikipedia-discussion devoted to "Leck mich im Arsch", because as a single phrase it is a common (vulgar) form for "Fuck off!" So you can imagine how funny it appears to me, that a COMPROMISE has this section-title ;-) -- Rfortner 17:19, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

text: RobertG, I accept this very reasonable compromise.  Thank you for your help in arbitrating this dispute.--Schlier22 01:09, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

text: I also am pleased with the compromise; thank you all.  Cheers, Antandrus  (talk) 01:42, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Ditto.  Opus33 02:26, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Leck mich im Arsch