Talk:Dmitri Shostakovich

message: Of all composer FAs, this article is probably the worst in shape. It was last reviewed in 2007 and it hasn't been taken care of since.
*The most critical issue issue is sourcing. Some pages are missing, and there are multiple CN tags present, though there should be far more. Some paragraphs rely on a single inline citation. The entire "Recorded legacy" section is an example.
*The "Early career" and "Later life, and death" sections both display elements of "list of events" rather than prose. They are also dull and monotone.
*The "Self-quotations" and "Orthodoxy and revisionism" sections seem to partially coincide. There is no mention of the DSCH theme in the first section, but it is mentioned in the latter section. Shouldn't the DSCH image be moved to "Self-quotations"?
*Although not as necessary, it probably wouldn't hurt to have a few more images.
Honestly, anyone quickly skimming through the article can quickly tell that it isn't worthy of being featured. Wretchskull (talk) 12:55, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured article review needed 

message: I can understand - I suppose and sort of and reluctantly - not mentioning Mieczyslaw Weinberg at all anywhere else in the article but perhaps, unless there isn't definite evidence that it was Weinberg who provided this, he might be mentioned here. ELSchissel (talk) 22:00, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll look up the Shostakovich material I have at home to see whether Weinberg provided this book. However, I think he and a lot of other composers could definitely be mentioned in a new section that discusses Shostakovich's influence as a composer and teacher. I'm surprised no such section already exists. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 22:19, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "In 1948, Shostakovich acquired a book of Jewish folk songs" 

message: Following the demotion from FA, this article is now unassessed. Is that right? How should i\t be assessed? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 01:12, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Unassessed

message: I added the Modernist Music footer template, since Shostakovich is included there, but was reverted because "Shostakovich is not a modernist". I'm a layman in this respect but was just looking to create consistency - according to this List of modernist composers, Shostakovich is a modernist composer (as is Prokofiev, Stravinsky and several other Russians). So can we include the template or not? Khuft (talk) 18:05, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: No. Shostakovich himself inveighed against musical modernism repeatedly, both in private and public statements. Below are a few examples:
I should like to discuss the question of avant-garde music […] This militant trend is based on a destructive attitude towards music. Could the ideological essence of avant-garde music be made any clearer than it was by one of its gurus, who proclaimed: “Music against man!” Avant-gardism is an attempt—doomed from the outset—to achieve a new quality in music merely by rejecting norms and rules that have evolved over the ages. It is a crass theoretical delusion […] (Dmitry Shostakovich: About Himself and his Times, p. 287)
We Soviet artists should be happy, for that man, who is building the bright communist future, is beside us. […] How could we forget about our wide audience—the people for whom art is created? […] There are certain phenomena in Western art which are innovatory in name, but are in fact directed against man, or at best ignore him. I am thinking of the work of the most militant representatives of the so-called avant-garde music. (Dmitry Shostakovich: About Himself and his Times, p. 333)
The general picture of 20th-century music shows an unprecedented stratification: at the one extreme there is the refined and usually artificial fabric of modernism; at the other there is the vulgarity of the “culture industry.” […] While at the one extreme the evaluation of music is left to a mistrustful, irritable intellect; at the other, it is reduced to coarse physiology, primitive fashion. (Dmitry Shostakovich: About Himself and his Times, p. 335)
By the way, I got into a slightly tricky situation with [Pierre Boulez] at a banquet: imagine the arch-apostle of modernism coming up to me, seizing my hand and kissing it! I was so taken aback I didn't manage to snatch it away in time. (Story of a Friendship: The Letters of Dmitry Shostakovich to Isaak Glikman, 1941–1975; p. 193)
Shostakovich’s own modernist period was very brief: lasting roughly from 1926–1928. Later in life he was also not above openly criticizing younger composers for their modernistic tendencies. The incident with Edison Denisov’s The Sun of the Incas may be the best known, but Rodion Shchedrin and even Shostakovich’s favorite student Boris Tishchenko were occasional targets. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 19:05, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

text: Many thanks for taking the time for the detailed response. Appreciate it. I get the feeling that the template that got me into this rabbit hole (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Modernism_(music)) may in general be incorrect itself... Supposedly it's based on List of modernist composers, but I saw you (and User:Smerus, who reverted my edit here) have been going through that list. Might give it a few days to see where the List is by then, and re-check the template afterwards. Khuft (talk) 19:27, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

text: Many thanks CurryTime7-24 for responding so swiftly to Khuft 's query. I agree entirely with your assessment of Shostakovich vs. modernism.--Smerus (talk) 20:19, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Modernist?

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:37, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: I’ve noticed that a lot of biography articles have an Infobox detailing all the various minutiae surrounding a composer’s life or achievements. While the various awards conferred upon Shostakovich are mentioned in the summary, would placing them along with information about his family into a separate Infobox be of any help for readers of the article in the future? Trumpetguy19 (talk) 13:59, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The awards list is quite long for that purpose, and family less key. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:54, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox? 

message: In the legacy section, the text of the second paragraph begins "Shostakovich's influence on later composers outside the former Soviet Union has been relatively slight." There is no citation for this. 174.87.204.74 (talk) 22:47, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Legacy: Influence without citation 

message: What information should be included or excluded from the infobox? —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 23:35, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Gerda; the infoboxes at Van Gogh and Kafka should also be removed. Ceoil (talk) 09:39, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: What are you talking about? Gerda isn’t suggesting removing those? Dronebogus (talk) 15:22, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  RfC: Infobox 

message: This page is almost impossible to access. It appears with a very large banner flag, a big blank graphic below it, which obscures most of the copy. 88.107.200.18 (talk) 04:18, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page access 

message: Should a listing of Shostakovich's marriages with wedding and death/divorce years be included in the infobox? Please provide your choice of either Option 1 or Option 2 along with a brief statement explaining your choice in the "Survey" section below. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 18:50, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: @ You had two editors participating in that discussion. RFCs are for topics with entrenched divisions among many edtitors, not for settling minor disputes among a small group of editors. Per WP:RFCBEFORE, you should have proceeded to getting relevant WikiProjects involved before taking it to an RFC, or gone through the Wikipedia:Third opinion process. It looks like you skipped both of those steps. Next time something like this comes up, I suggest placing neutral notifications about a talk page discussion at relevant wikiproject pages. You did that for this RFC, so I know you could have done that for the earlier simple talk page discussion on the infobox at this article. An RFC should not be the first place you go to get more people involved in a talk page discussion. Best.4meter4 (talk) 20:02, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I respect your work and we've messaged pleasantly, I think, in the past. I'm disappointed by your bad faith assumptions about me. On top of the personal issues that have occurred to me this year, it's these sort of interactions that discourage me from resuming more active participation in Wikipedia. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 22:12, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Sigh. @ I don’t think I am being rude or acting in bad faith. I am pointing out that you didn’t follow WP:RFCBEFORE. For that reason alone, this RFC probably should be closed for procedural reasons. We have community guidelines for how to run an RFC for a reason. It’s not my fault that you didn’t follow the guidelines at the RFC policy page. Anybody coming here is going to immediately see 1. That you didn’t follow RFC guidelines and procedures as outlined at WP:RFCBEFORE. 2. That when it was pointed out to you, you shot the messenger rather than accepting a valid problem. Accusing me of acting in bad faith when I called you out for not following RFC procedure doesn’t make you look good.4meter4 (talk) 22:47, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

text: The people interested in this article care. It is not unusual to have RfCs on many issues, some minor. Figureofnine (talk • contribs)  13:15, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

text: There are a lot fewer parameters in the composer box, by the way. It just happens that those used in the person box above are allowed in the composer box, too! Hence they are identical. — Iadmc♫talk   09:37, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

text: *Use Template:Infobox classical composer please. My very best wishes (talk) 21:24, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  RfC: Inclusion of Shostakovich's marriages in the infobox 

message: *Option 2 improves focus. For non-stats-heavy subjects like this one, if something doesn't warrant inclusion in the lead it will rarely warrant inclusion here. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:01, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: @ You had two editors participating in that discussion. RFCs are for topics with entrenched divisions among many edtitors, not for settling minor disputes among a small group of editors. Per WP:RFCBEFORE, you should have proceeded to getting relevant WikiProjects involved before taking it to an RFC, or gone through the Wikipedia:Third opinion process. It looks like you skipped both of those steps. Next time something like this comes up, I suggest placing neutral notifications about a talk page discussion at relevant wikiproject pages. You did that for this RFC, so I know you could have done that for the earlier simple talk page discussion on the infobox at this article. An RFC should not be the first place you go to get more people involved in a talk page discussion. Best.4meter4 (talk) 20:02, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I respect your work and we've messaged pleasantly, I think, in the past. I'm disappointed by your bad faith assumptions about me. On top of the personal issues that have occurred to me this year, it's these sort of interactions that discourage me from resuming more active participation in Wikipedia. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 22:12, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Sigh. @ I don’t think I am being rude or acting in bad faith. I am pointing out that you didn’t follow WP:RFCBEFORE. For that reason alone, this RFC probably should be closed for procedural reasons. We have community guidelines for how to run an RFC for a reason. It’s not my fault that you didn’t follow the guidelines at the RFC policy page. Anybody coming here is going to immediately see 1. That you didn’t follow RFC guidelines and procedures as outlined at WP:RFCBEFORE. 2. That when it was pointed out to you, you shot the messenger rather than accepting a valid problem. Accusing me of acting in bad faith when I called you out for not following RFC procedure doesn’t make you look good.4meter4 (talk) 22:47, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

text: The people interested in this article care. It is not unusual to have RfCs on many issues, some minor. Figureofnine (talk • contribs)  13:15, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

text: There are a lot fewer parameters in the composer box, by the way. It just happens that those used in the person box above are allowed in the composer box, too! Hence they are identical. — Iadmc♫talk   09:37, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

text: *Use Template:Infobox classical composer please. My very best wishes (talk) 21:24, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey