Talk:Albion and Albanius

message: (edit conflict) Recently User:Dmz5 tagged this article for "cleanup". A note was left at  User talk:Dmz5: "Recently you tagged the article Albion and Albanius without leaving a suggestion on its talkpage suggesting how the article might be remade to satisfy you. Perhaps the tag was an error. Would you give editors a few words of guidance when your schedule permits?" --Wetman 06:02, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: More specifically, it needs to be Wikified. From the guidelines: "Check if the article is a copyright violation; Check if another article already exists on this subject; Make links to other articles, format the lead (first sentence), and arrange section headers as described at Wikipedia:Guide to layout (A very useful tool in guiding the format of articles); Remove the wikify tag." V-Man737 06:09, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Keep in mind that there are still things in the abovementioned guidelines that need to be met in order to justify removing the tags; break up the article into headers, and add references, and I'll be satisfied as to its wikified status. V-Man737 04:21, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Looking at the article more closely, I'm beginning to agree with you, but I'd like to know how you figure it doesn't need the headers. As for the references, they are sufficient for now and I'll see about notating them Wiki-style. ^_^ V-Man737 05:54, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well as the article stands, it seems too short to be broken up into sections. What would the section titles be? Paul August ☎ 17:45, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Oh, yeah... I forgot, the references are for books. Since I don't have the books, might I recommend some light reading for you (or for whoever has the books)? WP:CITE#HOW talks all about how to make references Wikipedia standard. V-Man737 05:58, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *I'm realy pleased DMz5 and V-Man737 and co are going to take this up - I think it would be a good idea if they added the headers and then expanded the sections. No problems there from me, and I'm sure Bishonen and Wetman would love to see it expanded too. There is quite a bit that could be written about what Dryden was trying to say in Albion and the points he was making.  Also you could talk about the influences that 17th century French opera had on later 18th century music and why Albion was important from that point of view.  The development of the court masque into opera etc.  I think these are all areas which if there are sections could be explained but while it remains as it is just a basic description of a little known work - a coupe of lines in sections would be pointless. I look forward to reading the finished product on FAC Giano 07:18, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Well, it was on my watchlist from May 2006, but some bot or other added a template to User talk:Bishonen, which is effectively a project. -- ALoan (Talk) 15:23, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  *stalks Dmz* V-Man737 16:58, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: "Cleanup tag"

message: The article claims that ″Albion and Albanius is the first full-length English opera that still survives.″ What about John Blow's Venus and Adonis, which dates from 1683? As is stated in its article, the Grove dictionary names this one the earliest surviving English opera. CharlesVilliers (talk) 20:01, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, the emphasis seems to lay on full-length, as Venus and Adonis is not longer than an hour. CharlesVilliers (talk) 09:37, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  First English opera