Talk:Amadigi di Gaula

message: Recently user:Taksen added a picture to the article that I replaced with a picture that holds more relevance to the article. Taksen then reverted my improvement with an edit comment of The Handelian police is busy again. Some issues to consider in this issue:
* None of Taksen's edits are accompanied with reasoning as to why the picture he has selected should be in the article.
* We have a duty not to mislead our readers. Taksen's generic Baroque theatre picture shows almost nothing of a Baroque theatre, and instead demonstrates a curtain painting (which may, or may not be original). The theatre in question in the original image is not even in a country that Handel visited (much less produced work for).
* My initial edit explains why the picture I selected is a better choice. It demonstrates a scene at a theatre at which Handel was active at the time of the painting. Handel also produced works very similar to the action displayed in the image (masques).
* Taksen: please have a read of WP:Civility and try to appreciate why personalising the issue ("Handelian police") is abhorrent at WP. If you cannot act civilly, and cannot provide reasons for your edits (a constructive edit summary for all of your edits would help other editors), then you should probably not be editing at WP.
Instead of simply reverting, could you now explain to the community why the picture you selected does a better job of illustrating the article than the one I selected? I have reinstated the image that has far more relevance to the article, and failing appropriate opposing reasoning, I propose that it replaces the original image in the article. Thank you.
GFHandel ♬  21:58, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Dear Handellover and community (?), your picture is interesting, but it might show the hall and not the stage. It has as much relevance to the story of Amadigi as mine that at least shows a stage. If you believe the Baroque theatre picture shows almost nothing of a Baroque theatre it is impossible to argue with you. It seems to me a lot of the discussions on Wikipedia is about ego and not about relevance. I propose I add my picture tooo. There are very few baroque theatres left in the world. I don't see why this picture should be removed as being not appropriate.Taksen (talk) 05:30, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I personally agree with user GFHandel. There are many images available which have direct relevence to Handel. It therefore doesn't make sense to include an image here of a theatre which has no direct connection to either the composer or the work.4meter4 (talk) 09:21, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  A more relevant picture 

message: Perhaps magical opera or "magic" opera should link magic opera/Zauberoper or another opera genre. Or fantasy.  
Magical redirects to the Anthropology and Religion magic (and may later target the [[Magic] disambiguation. --P64 (talk) 17:52, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Magic(al) opera 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Amadigi di Gaula. 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/20140714210600/http://www.philharmonia.org/winton-dean-on-teseo/ to http://www.philharmonia.org/winton-dean-on-teseo/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111006085329/http://www.donaldcorrell.com/amadis/preface.html to http://www.donaldcorrell.com/amadis/preface.html
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) 10:11, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: It might be worth mentioning that what was apparently the first professional performance since the eighteenth century was given and broadcast (by the EBU)in March 1985 under Roger Norrington.Delahays (talk) 14:10, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Roger Norrington