Talk:Symphonic poems (Liszt)

message: I was asked to comment on the state of this article; here are my impressions.  Overall, I think much of the content that is present is pretty good, and may not need much more than copyediting and MOS-related things.
; Possible GA issues
These should probably be addressed before going to GA.
* The lead does not satisfy WP:LEAD; it is not a summary of the main points of the article (composition process, written prefaces, other innovations not mentioned).  The list of works should be moved to the body.
* The sections on Liszt's composition style are interesting; however, "New bottles", although cute, is not really an encyclopedic heading, and "Creative experiment" is probably better termed "Composition process" or similar.
* It should be clearer that Liszt was the actual originator of the term "symphonic poem" -- instead of "Liszt first used", something like "Liszt coined the term".  (Unless it's not true, of course, in which case earlier uses should be mentioned.)
* There are some minor MOS issues -- places using dashes that call for endashes is common.  Copyediting wouldn't hurt, but content-related work should precede that.
* I'd put :File:Wilhelm von Kaulbach 001.jpg in the article.
; Other issues
These are factual concerns that might not stop a GA review, but are worth mentioning.
* I expected to get some indication of how the form developed (or appeared to develop) over time; what differentiates Orpheus stylistically from Hamlet and Les Preludes.  This information may or may not be present; it would require close reading to discern it.  (I understand this may be complicated by Liszt's tendency to revise; but this ought to be a tractable problem.)
* The reception section deals mainly with the musicological reaction (i.e. by Liszt's peers and critics).  Some words about audience reaction ought to be included.
* The article may benefit from a brief summary on each poem: "program" description, composition date(s), first performance, reception.  I realize this may add notable length to the article; feel free to push back on this point.
It's a good piece of work; keep it up! Magic♪piano 02:32, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Impressions

message: Should the article mention
#that these aren't much used (at least in the English-speaking world)
#whether Liszt was responsible for them?
Peter jackson (talk) 11:08, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Schonberg fits into it by how the industrial revolution affected the music scene, especially on how a growing and increasingly prosperous middle class helped bring public concerts into play. The footnotes show four other authors cited in that section. To them I've added Salmi and Cay, both cultural historians who have specialized on 19th-century Europe. Cay's information especially seems to dovetail with Schonberg's. Hopefully, this might settle any qualms.Jonyungk (talk) 20:50, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Numbers 

message: Liszt first used the term "symphonic poem" in public at a concert in Weimar on April 19, 1854 to describe Tasso. Five days later, he used the term "poèmes symphoniques" in a letter to Hans von Bülow to describe Les preludes and Orpheus.
: This reads very much as if the actual verbatim expression he used was the English-language "symphonic poem".  But since he was speaking at a concert in Weimar, and presumably addressing mainly Germans, would he not have used the German term "Sinfonische Dichtung"?  If this is the case, we need to make it clear that our term "symphonic poem" is a translation into English of the German term that Liszt actually coined.  --  Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 08:56, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll check this out, Jack, since the article's up for review. Since the source is Walker, my guess is that the info is accurate.Jonyungk (talk) 00:12, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Liszt the anglophone?