Talk:Opera/Archive 3

message: Can we get rid of this useless heading and the waffle that follows it?  I'm also dubious about its subsections (despite what I said on the Project Talk page about the first section).
The Opera article as a whole is still somewhat unwieldy - more ought to be hived off into separate articles - but getting rid of this will start to remedy that.
--GuillaumeTell 00:17, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, the first paragraph seems not to be saying much.  But what about the concept that the opera repertory was not developed until later.  If it's true, it's an interesting fact.  I wonder if it is completely true, though.  Didn't Mozart re-discover a bunch of old Bach music and re-introduce it?  And did no one ever want to revive Don Giovanni until the late 19th Century?  Pity.  Ssilvers 02:04, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sociology of opera 

message: I stumbled on the Science-fiction operas page (which is full of valid operatic works by the likes of Menotti and Glass), and was wondering whether lists like it would be validly linkable from the opera page.  I am against linking to things solely for the link's sake, but if someone wanted a list of operas based on Greek mythology (or sci-fi for that matter), surely s/he would come to this page in hopes of finding it, no?
Any thoughts?
Amber388 17:31, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How about adding it as a "See also"?  -- Ssilvers 17:39, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where to link operas by lists? 

message: A user has been edit-warring for deleting this entry:
* Armando Gabba, a baritone opera singer who performed in 1984 with Renato Bruson, Edita Gruberová, Brigitte Fassbaender, and Neil Shicoff in Rigoletto, and is still active
from the disambiguation page Gabba, arguing that he's not notable enough to ever have a Wikipedia article, and thus to be listed as a redlink on a dab page. You can provide opinion and information (positive or negative) about it at the discussion page Talk:Gabba so as to help sort it out.  
Thanks,  -- 62.147.112.36 14:48, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: He appears to sing mostly small roles.  Amazon.com lists 7 recordings on which he appears, at: http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=hy_ss_0/102-2907338-7482544?url=index%3Dblended&field-keywords=Armando+Gabba&x=9&y=13.  I don't see any substantial reviews for him on the web.  He's borderline at best, I think.  I think the Wikipedia policy is not to redlink someone unless you plan to write an article for them pretty soon.  -- Ssilvers 15:20, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, but as far I'm aware disambig pages are for articles that already exist. Once the article has been written, then it can go on the disambig page. Re non-notability: seven amazon hits isn't very impressive, but maybe he mostly performs live. However, I haven't heard of him, so I really can't comment. Maybe someone else knows a bit more about him? Borderline for me. Moreschi 21:33, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  notability of Armando Gabba, baritone singer? 

message: Someone removed this heading, but we were discussing what to write there.  In the meantime, I added a paragraph to the trends section and a couple of "external links" about the greying of the audience.  But if someone can figure out what else ought to be said about the development of an audience, we can move it or change it.  --  Ssilvers 20:53, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I know I said I'd have a go at it, and I had a couple of whacks at it on paper, but keeping the paragraph short proved to be well nigh impossible. I think this is really a subject for full discussion in a separate article. Cheers, Moreschi 13:09, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Development of an audience 

message: Looking at the images used to illustrate the article one would get the impression that opera is not a dramatic art form but a large building. :Image:Bayreuth-Rheingold-1876.jpg is more like what I would expect. Rl 11:32, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Illustration

message: "This page is 41 kilobytes long. This may be longer than is preferable; see article size.".  How should go about splitting this article up?  I propose that Origins be moved to Origins of Opera. Kc4 22:36, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Size of Article

message: This discussion page seems to be growing fast.  Perhaps some of the closed threads could be moved to a secound discussion page. Kc4 23:04, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Archive 2 

message: Dear Opera fans:  There are many famous patter songs in opera, but many of them are not yet listed at the article patter song.  If any of you have the names and relevant information about famous opera patter songs, would you please add them?  Thanks!  -- Ssilvers 04:14, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Patter Songs

message: I am suspicious about some of the media linked from here, specifically the two pieces from Traviata and Nessun Dorma. I havn't identified the date of the recordings from Traviata, but the Nessun Dorma is almost certainly from the famous Three Tenors performance in Rome, and is released under Decca. What justification do we have to use this recording? --Alexs letterbox 23:40, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyright state of linked excerpts

message: "All types of singing in opera are accompanied by musical instruments, though until the late 17th century generally, and persisting until even later in some regions, recitative was accompanied by only the continuo group (harpsichord and 'cello or bassoon). During the period 1680 to roughly 1750, when composers often used both methods of recitative accompaniment in the same opera, the continuo-only practice was referred to as "secco" (dry) recitative, while orchestral-accompanied recitative was called "accompagnato" or "stromentato.""
I'm relatively new to opera, but I must say that I am a little puzzled by this paragraph. It implies that secco was dominant until 1680, then both secco and accompagnato were used until 1750, and then - what? The passage would seem to suggest that people started using only accompagnato, but this is clearly wrong -Don Giovanni (1787, a century after our supposed terminus ante quem) has only or almost only secco, and I think the same holds true even for The Barber of Seville (1816). --194.145.161.227 15:31, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, the paragraph is misleading and should be changed.  The beginning of the paragraph is incorrect as well because it suggests that a capella singing never takes place in opera. To the contrary, there are unaccompanied and sporadically-accompanied pieces and sections to be heard in prominent works from every century.--Pheidias 23:47, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I agree. It needs expansion (I didn't write it). I'll try to get round to it as soon as I can (i.e once ArbCom have decided). Moreschi 12:42, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recitative 

message: After a new anonymous editor made yet another change to the lame sentence in the intro that has attempted to distingush opera from musicals (making the sentence even more meaningless), I realized that the article is better without it.  Let's say what opera is, rather than (inaccurately) what it is not in the intro.  -- Ssilvers 01:34, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe we should just be bold. The introduction is mostly waffle in my opinion. If you look at the foreign language equivalents, they get to the point a lot sooner. BTW I think opera is basically (Western) Classical musical theatre. That's what differentiates it from Broadway musicals, rock opera and so on.--Folantin 08:57, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How about something like this?: "Opera is a form of theatre in which the drama is conveyed wholly or partly through music and singing. Opera emerged in Italy around the year 1600 and is generally associated with the Western Classical music tradition. Comparable musical theatre traditions developed independently in other cultures and are often called "opera" by analogy (see Chinese opera or kabuki for example). These are beyond the scope of this article. European opera has also spread to other continents. For example, the first opera to be performed in the Americas was Tomás Torrejón y Velasco's La púrpura de la rosa, premiered at Lima, Peru in 1701." Then mention there are other forms of non-operatic musical theatre (Broadway musicals, rock opera). I've cut all the stuff about costumes and scenery - it's really pointless. Perhaps we need an introductory section on "Some basic terms used in opera" though (libretto, aria, recitative etc.).  --Folantin 09:15, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Weasel sentence

message: ::Right, let's sum up what IMO still needs to be done after round 1 of the Folantin/Ssilvers attack. The article sure looks a lot better than it did before, but leaving out bits that are still missing here is what I think the problems are.
::*The lead is too short. Per, WP:LEAD, an article this size needs a minimum of three paras.
::*I remain to be convinced that a discussion of what opera is NOT should be in the lead. It's kind of a negative impression. The lead needs to say first what opera is, and then why opera is important, the cultural impact the genre has had, etc. A discussion of what opera isn't surely can go somewhere else. Currently, the article doesn't assert notability - i.e a Martian wouldn't know why opera is so important. This is a very stupid concern, obviously - which is why everybody's missed it.
::*Famous singers - yeah, definitely.
::*This is going to be rather hard to do much about, but we need more variety of sound clips. I'm not Verdi's/Puccini's biggest fan anyway, but they are definitely over-represented. Ideal, in my opinion, would be one sound clip for every section of the national opera genres.
::*"The basic terms in opera section" I'm not entirely happy with. It's good, but I'd relabel it "Operatic terminology" and move it down a bit.
::Of course, then there's all the new stuff that needs to be written. Opera stages, a "Criticism" section(give me a few more days for this one), an "Opera worldwide" section (crap wording, but you know what I mean)...I could go on.
::Right, after all that, fullest congrats to Folantin. The article is vastly improved - and yes, I won't be shedding bitter tears of the opera repertory rubbish. Kudos to whoever cut that POV waffle about Callas, + the superflous bel canto material. One thing that I really like now is the focus on national genres, rather than some mixture of that and chronology. Bravo! Moreschi 19:22, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Replies: I've cut half of the Verdi/Puccini clips (which didn't seem to work anyway and one of them had questionable copyright, see above), and added one each for English, French, and German opera, all copied-and-pasted from other wiki articles (now that's easy). I'll work on the intro when I get some more time. You could well be right about the modernism stuff: I think we wait for a bit, but child articles are easy to create. I now think that the opera terminology section is fine where it is (i.e before all the history), but something further needs to go before that IMO. I'll give it a think. Moreschi 20:05, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So, you're going to write a new paragraph for the intro and move the current second paragraph down into the next section?  -- Ssilvers 16:09, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent rewrite of the article (continued)