Talk:List of prominent operas/Archive 3

message: Three members support removing links to this page from opera articles. This could be accomplished by going through the list of links (located below the search box). Are any members opposed to this? - Kleinzach 21:22, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Three days have passed and no objections, so the dogs of deletion have been let loose. I've done maybe a third, and I'll have another go tomorrow. I've also deleted some entries from the list on the basis that the entries themselves for these operas explicitly stated that they were not part of standard rep. A total shambles. I also came across a couple of spoiler warnings, which I speedily deleted. Cheers, Moreschi 21:46, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Keep up the good work!  My current (well, tomorrow's) activity involves frying one or two other fish and nailing (yet again) a canard or two. I'll help out if necessary when I'm done. --GuillaumeTell 00:05, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: All done (I think). I may have missed one or two, but I think that's the lot. If an opera was indisputably part of standard rep (Giulio Cesare, Idomeneo, most of the Verdis), then I left in the reference to standard rep but removed the wikilink. If it was borderline (and there were a few on this list that I'd never even heard of before) then I removed the sentence linking the entry to this list altogether. Congratulations to Fireplace: his new boxes containing vocal ranges and original casts look very good, and I came across quite a few of these as well. As a next step, I would support a vote for this articles's deletion, but preserving the list of historically significant operas. Moreschi 12:10, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, I've just deleted another 25 (including Don Carlos, Carmen, Porgy and Bess, Cendrillon, Anna Bolena), plus the entire works of César Cui.  An awful lot of them, especially the ones by Cui and Rimsky-Korsakov, said that the opera is NOT part of the standard repertory!  I got these by clicking on the "What links here link" in the Toolbox, bottom left of the article.  There are still over 50 links there, including at least two to (Russian) composers, but some of these are to user pages.  One, by the way, is to an article-for-deletion entitled "Operas by original title and English title".  It's now been deleted but seemed only to have two items in the list.  Interestingly, just about none of the votes cast were signed by users whose names I recognise from around here.  Anyway, these extra links want zapping, but I feel that I've done my bit. --GuillaumeTell 18:03, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh lord, what a mess. I missed that search tool: I went through the entries of all the operas included in this list. I reasoned that surely no one would be so thick as to say that their opera was in standard rep and then not bother adding an entry in this page. Evidently not. The extra links shall shortly be zapped. Best wishes and apologies to all. Moreschi 18:27, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Removing references to this article from opera articles

message: Now we have acted on Fireplace's excellent suggestion of removing the links to this page, what's next? I think the main ideas were: 
1. Outright deletion of this page 
2. Removing the 'Standard operatic repertory' intro (This list comprises the standard operatic repertory . . . . ), merging both the 'Standard operatic repertory' and 'Historically significant operas' into a single list of (innocuous?) famous operas.
3. Making it into a annotated list, with the selection justified solely by the annotation.
In general, I am not in favour of deleting exclusive lists such as this one, the List of major opera composers, or the List of important opera companies. They serve a different purpose to the big inclusive lists like The opera corpus or Opera houses. Kleinzach 09:03, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd favour an annotated list called List of Important Operas.  --GuillaumeTell 09:58, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My vote would be for outright deletion (as I said above) but preserving the list of historically important operas. To my mind, the other 2 suggestions will run into the same problems as the current version has. If we are going to preserve the list, however, I feel that it needs to be drastically purged, as currently it's way too long. Moreschi 13:42, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I support GuillaumeTell's suggestion, though I'm not convinced the name change is necessary - but it wouldn't do any harm. I agree with Moreschi about the need for a purge, though I'm not in favour of hiving off the 'Historically Significant' list. It's so limited. I don't think it can stand on its own. - Kleinzach 14:21, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How, exactly, would an "annotated list" work? I don't quite understand the term. Moreschi 16:52, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There would be two or three sentences explaining very briefly what the opera is and why it is significant. Kleinzach 17:39, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: O.K, I understand now, but what would the criteria be for "important" (Mr Tell) or "significant" (Herr Kleinzach)? Surely both of these are just as vague as "famous" (current)? Best to all, Moreschi 08:17, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The brief annotation would itself be the justification (and therefore the criteria) for listing. This would be an improvement on the current list because anybody adding a work will have to explain why it is there. Of course there will still be disagreements but these should be reduced. (If this idea is accepted I volunteer to do the four Mozart operas!) - Kleinzach 08:53, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

text: My thinking is that about one third should go, but this may be controversial. I suggest you provide a list of proposed items to purge here under a new heading Purge. Is that OK? - Kleinzach 11:30, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

text: We need a neutral adjective to indicate that it is a select list. Are there any other suggestions apart from famous and important? - Kleinzach 11:35, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Er, influential? It's still based on a POV but at least it's a little more clear what the basis is. Mak (talk) 14:13, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not wedded to important, but it does have the advantage of including important-because-pioneering, important-because-influential, important-because-popular, important-because-frequently-performed, important-because-you name-another-reason.  My problem with other suggestions is that I really wouldn't want to confine the list to the historically significant (first TV opera?  Oh, how interesting!) and I wouldn't want to lose operas like Il Trovatore or Les Huguenots or A Life for the Tsar or .... --GuillaumeTell 00:33, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree - after some thought and noting GuillaumeTell's argument - that 'important' is best. So that is two votes. Any other suggestions? - Kleinzach 08:10, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Any more comments? If not, may I change the name to List of important operas? - Kleinzach 12:19, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Go for it. Fireplace 13:55, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The next step?

message: As you can see I have now made the change to important operas as there was near-unanimous agreement on this. I have also removed the 'Standard repertory' introduction, which I think was implicit in the title change. I hope that is OK. If not please say so! (I have tried to fix the zillions of redirects etc. Please change any links that you may still find.) Thanks. - Kleinzach 18:14, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Title change

message: I'd like to nominate another group for deletion: 
Bellini: La sonnambula 
*Delete Moreschi 11:36, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Purged. - Kleinzach 19:07, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

text: *Purged. - Kleinzach 19:07, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

text: *Purged. - Kleinzach 19:07, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

text: *Purged. - Kleinzach 19:07, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

text: *Purged. - Kleinzach 19:07, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

text: *Purged. - Kleinzach 19:07, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

text: *Purged. - Kleinzach 19:07, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

text: *Purged. - Kleinzach 19:07, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

text: *Purged. - Kleinzach 19:07, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

text: *Purged. - Kleinzach 19:07, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Purge Round 2