Talk:Sylvia (ballet)

message: There is an entire evolution of this ballet's history left out - its 1901 production in St. Petersburg for the Imperial Ballet. It is this version that served as the inspiration for Ashton's production, and it is not even brought up once on this web page. - The Royal Ballet's production of 1952 is NOT the production responsible for this the title changing from "Sylvia ou La Nymphe de Diane" to "Sylvia" - it was the Imperial Ballet's production of 1901 that started this tradition.
It seems that everyone on Wikipedia that says "yay or nay" as to whether or not an article should be featured is OBSESSED with citations, and it seems that the worth of an article is based on this. Likewise if an article exploits all of the really unessecary Wikipedia features such as wiki quotes, etc. then of course that will make an article even more worthy of being featured - Im sure had there not been any citations included in article it never would have become featured. Reagarding citations, many of the the ones included in this article take one to a link that then takes one to a review of a performance, many of which talk very little about this ballet's history. So, if citiations are what is supposed to "authenticate" the information provided in the article - or simply give referance to a source - then why are all of the citations links to reviews of performances? How does one know that the information provided by the reviewer is accurate?
In the 'Style' section of this article the entire paragraph pretty much violates the whole neutrality policy.
There is not one shread of information included in this article that one cant find by simply putting "Sylvia Delibes Ballet" into a google search.
Mrlopez2681 15:30, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As the main contributor to this article, and proponent of its accuracy and comprehensiveness, I shall try to address your criticisms. 
#First of all "the entire evolution of this ballet's history" has not been left out. Much of it had to be omitted; not every single production of Sylvia can get its own paragraph. Concerning the 1901 production: I did not know that Ashton was inspired by the 1901 production, nor that the name was shortened that early (I seem to have made the very bad assumption that it was changed in 1952). If you have sources for these claims, we can add that, and even give the 1901 production a paragraph if you like.
#Your criticism of the FAC process should be placed on the FAC talk page. This is not the place for that.
#Now to deal with the citations. I tried to cite all of the facts as best I could, though sometimes I had to use online reviews. I also used the ABT PLAYBILL, The Cambridge Companion to the Saxophone, The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, The Ballet Annual, and the San Francisco Ballet Magazine. If you think some more facts are spurious, say which. If any source is deemed unreliable, it shall be removed.
#I also disagree with your assessment of the "Style" section. I don't think it violates NPOV policy, though you should feel free to quote any particular statment which pushes a non-neutral point of view. -- Rmrfstar 03:50, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article sure wasnt made a Featured Article for its history 

message: I apologize Rmrfstar if I came acorss as evil......very sorry. After reading my above statements I realized how negative it reads, the majority of which was NOT directed at you at all. Maybe you didnt take it that way but I felt my statement did in fact sound as though directed at the main contributor to the article, which is you.
Fortunately "Sylvia" is a ballet that has not had a zillion different revisions like "Le Corsaire". Of course there have been quite a few stagings, but not revissions - to the best of my knowledge, only 3 major versions - the original production, the Petersburg Production of 1901 (who mounted this staging and all the other details escapes me right now, but I have sent emails to collegues in search of Answer), and finally Sir Frederick Ashton's production for the Royal Ballet. Mrlopez2681 04:35, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Apologies 

message: The purpose and function of the Talk page is to discuss the article and how the article is to be edited. One user has deleted the contents of this Talk page (which I just now restored at the very top of the page) and is apparently using this Talk page to edit a portion of the article. Two things are against Wikipedia policy about this: (1) The contents of Talk pages are not to be deleted, although they may be archived (WP:ARCHIVE). If you wish to retract statements or parts of statements you made, please put a score through them using < s> and </ s> (2) The Talk page is not a catchall for editing sections of the article. If you wish to proceed with that on a page other than the article itself, please create a User subpage on your own userpage by using a slash. Take a look at Wikipedia:Subpages.  You can add the subpages to your user page or user Talk page merely by starting any article within a namespace with a slash, like this: /Sandbox.  Clicking on that link would create a new article named "Sandbox" from this page. [Subpage creation (like the wiki page explains) applies to article talk pages too (useful for temporary or archival subpages) but not articles themselves.] Please, if you would, remove your article-editing contents from this page that are not discussions about the article. Thank you very much! Softlavender (talk) 10:13, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I requested of Mrlopez that he use this talk page as a staging ground for his additions. I am pretty sure that's standard practice. Also, talk pages are better places to post short excerpts because of their high visibility. Especially because this is a featured article, it makes sense to get as many eyeballs looking at potential additions as is possible. In any case, his placement of such a small amount of material does not disrupt the workings of this page (though his deletions did). -- rmrfstar (talk) 09:39, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not standard practice to leave an eidt on a Talk page for over two months. Mrlopez needs to move his practice editing to his own user pages; they've been cluttering up this Talk page for over two months. If they aren't practice edits but real edits, they can be made to the article itself. Softlavender (talk) 12:38, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

text: Oh whoops - sorry - did I delete the entire talk page?! Anyway, why not just delete the above passage that is now in the article? Mrlopez2681 (talk) 01:24, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Purpose and function of Talk page

message: In fact, the first seven productions of Sylvia were not successful.
: What does this mean?  Not artistically successful?  Not economically successful?  Not attended by as many people as expected?  --  JackofOz (talk) 20:45, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It means "popular", as I think is made clear by the sentence which follows. -- Rmrfstar (talk) 12:27, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: First 7 productions

message: This article could use some referencing improvements. There are places that would be helped by having additions of cites, to satisfy verifiability for the reader. If not objected to by significant contributors to the article, I would be willing to identify some of these deficient locations in the article with  tags. However, it might be best to address in the form of WP:FAR, and give the article a more thorough overall review. -- Cirt (talk) 21:11, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: May I suggest that Cirt first apply the  tags and that when as many of those as possible have been resolved that the article then be submitted for WP:FAR review (though I have seen Sylvia this article lies outside my bailiwick.) — Robert Greer (talk) 15:24, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I want to reboot this notice before I file a FAR on this article. Overall it is in good condition. The largest problem is the lack of citations to some paragraphs. If those can be fixed then I believe that this article could skip the FAR process. Brad (talk) 06:43, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Please do add the  tags. I'll then do what I can to find citations — after Thanksgiving. — Robert Greer (talk) 17:11, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

text: I just updated some dead links, but even so, I agree that the article is no longer close to FA quality.  FAR was, I think, the right call.  -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:34, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  FA concerns 

message: I surmise that the libretto given is Ashton's, though I have no reason to think so, and the article doesn't help. -Wetman (talk) 17:12, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Libretto 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Sylvia (ballet). 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20080516174423/http://www.balletarchive.org/ballets/sylvia-pas-de-deux-1950- to http://www.balletarchive.org/ballets/sylvia-pas-de-deux-1950-
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080516174423/http://www.balletarchive.org/ballets/sylvia-pas-de-deux-1950- to http://www.balletarchive.org/ballets/sylvia-pas-de-deux-1950-
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:52, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Is it worth mentioning that the Procession of Bacchus segment was used as the basis for the theme tune of the 80's TV series 'Knight Rider'?122.107.170.39 (talk) 15:56, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  in popular culture 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Sylvia (ballet). 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/20050523082809/http://www.english.iup.edu/mhayward/aminta.htm to http://www.english.iup.edu/mhayward/aminta.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050404154522/http://www.ballet.co.uk/magazines/yr_04/dec04/gw_rev_sylvia_past_1104.htm to http://www.ballet.co.uk/magazines/yr_04/dec04/gw_rev_sylvia_past_1104.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070314173654/http://en.chinaradio.cn/1857/2004-9-29/60%40155878.htm to http://en.chinaradio.cn/1857/2004-9-29/60%40155878.htm
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) 19:55, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Sylvia (ballet). 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://archive.is/20130209091903/http://www.voiceofdance.com/v1/features.cfm/1098/Dance-Review-San-Francisco-Ballet-Mark-Morris-I-Sylvia-I-098.html to http://www.voiceofdance.com/v1/features.cfm/1098/Dance-Review-San-Francisco-Ballet-Mark-Morris-I-Sylvia-I-098.html
*Added  tag to http://www.roh.org.uk/whatson/production.aspx?pid=13790
*Added  tag to http://www.balletmet.org/Notes/Delibes.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051204113652/http://www.ballet.co.uk/magazines/yr_05/jul05/sc_rev_paris_opera_0405.htm to http://www.ballet.co.uk/magazines/yr_05/jul05/sc_rev_paris_opera_0405.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050206014335/http://www.hamburgballett.de/e/rep/sylvia.htm to http://www.hamburgballett.de/e/rep/sylvia.htm
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) 03:21, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified