Talk:Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart/Archive 2

message: "Around the time when he was five or six years old, he could play the piano blindfolded and with his hands crossed over one another."
Is from the movie Amadeus. Whether this really happened outside of Hollywood I have no idea.
Ummm, I know that movie like the back of my hand, and I don't remember a quote like the one posted above.  It seems to me to be a recollection of two separate scenes in the film hybridized into a quotation.  Please inform me if this is a scene from the Director's Cut, as I have not seen it.  I recall a scene (in the original release version) from Mozart's childhood where he played the harpsichord blindfolded (but sitting upright) for a rotund clergyman, and then proceeded to play the same tune on the violin, all while his proud father, Leopold beamed.  And I also recall a scene where Mozart, now a young man, is celebrating a successful operatic performance, where he is sitting at the piano, playing for everyone's amusement, during which his friends lift him and rotate him upside-down.  At this point Mozart proceeds to play the tune he had just played upside-down (and backwards, as instructed), with his hands crossed over.  However, he was neither blindfolded nor 5 or 6 years old.
Am I missing something?  Is my memory that bad? Eganio 01:49, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Note:

message: The inclusion of K.522 as an "Excerpt showing Mozart's experiment of multitonality" seems to me to be misleading at best, ludicrous at worst.  Seeing as this is from "The Musical Joke," the excerpt can hardly be a "See how far ahead Mozart predicted Ives" sort of thing.
Ursatz 21:53, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Multitonality

message: I noticed that the material from the Mozart's name article has been merged back into the main article, and I feel this is a bad idea.
It is off-putting for a reader, coming to this article and wanting to read about Mozart, to be immediately bogged down in a mass of detail on the meaning of Mozart's name and the various changes it underwent during his life.  As is true in the other articles on major composers, we have spun off excessive detail into satellite articles (see Ludwig van Beethoven, Beethoven: life and work, Beethoven's musical style and innovations for some other examples).  If we merge this detail back into the main articles they become long and rather unwieldy.
I'm open to other opinions.  Antandrus 23:44, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yea, I undid, the placement of all of Mozart's name in the Mozart article, until a descision has been made whether or not to delete it. Rmrfstar 01:27, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Mozart's name being re-merged into the main article

message: 'Although highly unappreciated during his lifetime...' - Not entirely true; surely someone can expand on this. (comment by User:62.253.64.14.)
Yes, we should expand on it. He was actually fairly popular in Vienna, and he was a musical idol in Prague. (comment by User:Berserk798.)
: Please sign posts on talk pages. See comments above under Short intro?/Amadeus.  --RobertG ♬ talk 5 July 2005 16:21 (UTC)
He was actually appreciated very much by the majority of the public.  He was however somewhat under-appreciated by some who felt strongly about preserving the traditional Italian language for operas, and as we all know the very popular "Die Entführung aus dem Serail" was written in German, and was received quite enthusiastically by the public.  One of the few points that were 'somewhat' accurately portrayed in the movie Amadeus.
it states that mozart was capable of improvising "competently" on difficult passages as a wunderkind. i think this is another example of underappreciation, as mozart was so very famous for his wonderful improvisation, and he wouldnt have been so with mere competence.
Beethoven certainly appreciated Mozart's skill as a composer, but there is indirect evidence he thought less highly of his keyboard skills. In one of the Beethoven "Conversation Books" a visitor asks Beethoven if he ever heard Mozart play. Beethoven's answer is not recorded, but the visitor replies "Ah, well that was in the infancy of piano playing".Saxophobia 01:04, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unappreciated? 

message: I trimmed them.  Easybyte.org is a site where an individual has posted easy keyboard arrangements of various works by many composers including trad and anon, it doesn't add any encyclopedic information about Mozart.  The Mozart-Kraus link contains information about Kraus, but for Mozart it is just a list of links to Mozart sites of varying quality; if any of the sites it links to are worthy of inclusion here then add them!  Some of them are here already.  Amadeus Immortal is a website about the film, with a small amount of information on Mozart; it's already an external link on the Amadeus article.  --RobertG ♬ talk 10:17, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the link before because the software was not even allowing me to save the page without removing it. A user had misspelt "Vienna", and when I tried to save, it told me that site was blacklisted and that I couldn't save until I removed the link. Heimstern Läufer 20:16, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links 

message: An anonymous editor just changed the introduction to say that "most" of M.'s works are part of the standard concert repertoire, rather than the prior "many".  If we define the standard concert repertoire as what's played by major symphony orchestras and classical radio stations, only a small portion of his symphonies and concerti are regularly played, not to mention all of the rarely played cassations, concert arias, etc.  So I changed it back to many.  Jeremy J. Shapiro 21:15, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Many vs. most

message: For a FA, this article is deficient in that it provides absolutely no information on his style. Please see the guidelines at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Composers#Guidelines_for_musical_style. Tony 04:53, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You are right.  There wasn't a word in the article about style, influence, and so forth.  I took a swing at it; it's a bit rough for now.  Feel free to edit mercilessly, rearrange, whatever; it could be a huge amount of material, but I tried to keep it relatively short for the start.  It might need subsections by type of composition, or perhaps should be mainly chronological.  Antandrus  (talk) 21:14, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Relative to his other work, and to what other composers were doing at the time.  Have a look at the 40th symphony, both the development sections of the 1st and 4th movements, that piece for musical clock K 608, the finale of the Jupiter symphony, --there's others.  Antandrus  (talk) 01:02, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

text: Not to mention the introduction to the Dissonant quartet, "In quali eccesi" in  Don Giovanni, and "Der welcher Wandert" in The Magic Flute.  Jeremy J. Shapiro 01:12, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  information on style is seriously wanting 

message: I've moved the following passage to this talk page:
:Mozart himself is universally recognized as a musical genius, having learned to compose at the age five and showing an encyclopedic grasp of every musical form of his time despite having lived only for 35 years.
Everything it says is of course true--but is also covered later in the article.  And there's a lot to be said for a pithy, short introduction.
My own favorite version is Viajero's, from April 2, 2005 (see discussion of it above).  It would be nice to reach a consensus, then try to keep the intro stable.
Opus33 15:55, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm the one who wrote this.  The present intro is much too short and non-personalized.  A lead can and often should include information that are expounded in depth later in the article.  It should make it difficult to mistake the person from another. That's the whole purpose of it.  Mozart's lead is legions shorter than many famous people's biographies.  I can give you many examples: check out Alfred Hitchcock for instance. Mandel 10:16, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I take it that the original consensus for this article to have an especially short introduction was because Mozart is potentially such a huge subject the article itself stands as the introduction, with the reader directed to other articles for more detail.  I think this was a sensible consensus.  Therefore I agree with Opus33 on the whole (although I thought the recent introduction was fine - the five words about him being underappreciated in the version Opus33 refers to is either platitudinous, or implicitly opinionated - what quantity of appreciation should he have had? - we've discussed that matter here, too :-)).  In any case, the addition which Opus33 removed doesn't really precis any of the article's content.  I don't really agree with all of it, either: he was precocious, yes, but "learned to compose at age 5" is both more and less than the truth, and "encyclopedic grasp of every musical form" is a bold claim which I suspect it would be possible to refute.  --RobertG ♬ talk 09:39, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: The intro again

message: An anonymous editor (User:68.233.231.138) is being quite persistent in inserting his/her personal analysis of the movie Amadeus, particularly the characterizations of Mozart and Salieri, in the articles on those composers.  That movie is a fictionalized account of the lives of those two composers, and information about the movie does not belong in the articles on the composers.  If made suitably NPOV and given proper references, that information can be placed in the article on the movie, and should go nowhere else.  I believe I have now used up my third revert.  Thanks for listening, Antandrus  (talk) 19:22, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Amadeus the Movie

message: Is there any truth to this? Seems odd...
-G —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.35.247 (talk • contribs) 
:Mozart was buried in Salzburg, not Vienna. This is impossible. Just another rumor. -Scm83x 21:55, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  That's wrong! Mozart died in Vienna and he is also buried in Vienna and definitely NOT in Salzburg! The funeral was 1791 in St. Stephens cathedral and he got buried in the Saint Marx cemetery - it is today in the 3rd district of Vienna. But there is some true: The gasworks is not far from the St. Marx cemetery and Zentralfriedhof-cemetery :-) --Andreas.poeschek 22:17, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Consecration ceremonies inside St. Stephen's Cathedral were not allowed in 1791. The ceremony took place outside the church.--131.130.135.193 09:02, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Buried under a Gas Station in Vienna

message: The pointer under "Works, musical style, and innovations" refers to the list-o-works as a "main article". Now that there is significant material in this section, I think the reference is misleading: the list-o-works is definitely not a "main article" when it comes to musical style and innovations. Would it be acceptable to change this to use the "See Also" template? David Brooks 00:37, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: erm, yes.  We must have missed that.  Thanks!  Antandrus  (talk) 00:45, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: done (I was reading the article because KING is wall-to-wall WAM for some reason :-). David Brooks 00:48, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  SeeAlso or Main for the list of works 

message: I disagree strongly with the statement recently made by 213.164.193.161 in the edit summary, "Blue tags are links, and nothing else !!!" (sic).  After 213.164.193.161's edit, the caption for the top image now reads "W. A. Mozart, 1790, portrait by Johann Georg Edlinger (Face only)".  I point out that when the article says "Mozart was born in Salzburg", we do not think of "Salzburg" as merely a link to the Salzburg article, but a piece of information which happens to be also conveniently linked to an article.  I will not revert since I have plainly touched a nerve; so what do others think?  --RobertG ♬ talk 13:26, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blue tags are not "links and nothing else" 

message: The question is whether the skull Hamlet is holding possibly belongs to Mozart or not?
http://www.cnn.com/2006/SHOWBIZ/Music/01/03/austria.mozart.ap/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2006/SHOWBIZ/Music/01/08/austria.mozart.ap/index.html
:The links no longer work. -- Rob C (Alarob)
I REALLY don't see how that could make any sense, because Shakespeare would a) not only have to have predicted the existence of Mozart, but b) would have to be writing about events more than 200 years in the future.  It's unfortunate that the links don't work...I would love to see that connection defended... Eganio 00:27, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  To be or not to be that is the question 

message: "Mozart, along with Haydn and Beethoven, was a central representative of the classical style" - Mozart and Haydn, yes, but surely Beethoven is not a good example as (I was always taught) he tends to early Romanticism.  Should this be removed?  Gluck (or Salieri!) might be a better candidate...  BarryNorton  20:45, 10 Jan 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed Beethoven and reworded to focus on the work, rather than the person, as an archetype of the style. --BarryNorton 15:09, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Classical Period 

message: "Quite the contrary, Mozart was a studiously hard worker, and by his own admission his extensive knowledge and abilities developed out of many years' close study of the European musical tradition. 
: ...um, what?  Is this just vandalism that has gone unnoticed for a while?  I'll leave it to someone who knows and cares to fix it.  --Imperpay 21:19, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've removed the offending sentence. It was obviously vandalism. JackofOz 21:27, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Myth or Controversy? 

message: I do not know whether the "Mozart year" is of significance outside of Germany and Austria, but if it is, perhaps this article could have some kind of banner to announce this fact, for the duration of 2006? Here is the city of Vienna's website on the subject.
(I assume this is, indeed, an international affair, seeing that the German press made a seamless connection between 2005 being the Einstein year and 2006 the Mozart year. The joke goes that the Mozart year is being postponed and the Einstein year repeated because no one understood it.) - Samsara 13:48, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is certainly being widely celebrated in Australia (cf. Austria).  As I'm writing this, I'm listening to ABC Classic FM's countdown of the "Your Favourite Mozart Moment" listener poll.  The top 100 "moments" are being broadcast over 3 days, culminating in a live concert tonight in which the top 10 moments will be played and broadcast live.  JackofOz 02:01, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Mozart year

message: This text is very quaint: "Constant travel and cold weather may have contributed to his subsequent illness later in life." Did it really? Would you say the same thing about anyone in the 20th century? No? But one said such things in the 19th or 18th century. So it is okay to place this medically nonesensical statement in the article. Seminumerical 16:22, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for spotting this, Seminumerical.  By 21st century standards, we'd want to locate peer-reviewed clinical studies (studying randomly selected subject populations, including a matched control population of children who didn't travel a lot in cold weather) if we wanted to accept this as valid.  It sounds to me just like what you said--19th century medical ignorance.  So I've taken it out.  Opus33 16:28, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: How Quant

message: This is just a heads up that this article is in the first page of results when one clicks on the Google logo today.  There might be more vandals than usual. --Dglynch 04:58, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's actually the sixth, don't know how many that means... --yoshi 07:20, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Google Logo Click Results

message: Happy 250th birthday, Mr. Mozart! jayjay 10:35, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Happy Birthday! 

message: actually it shows some Joseph Anton Steiner, a merchant and official.
Source: Article from F.A.Z. (Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung):
http://www.faz.net/s/RubEBED639C476B407798B1CE808F1F6632/Doc~ED33FA3328AC742C9B0D45F721B0E9951~ATpl~Ecommon~Scontent.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.237.150.43 (talk • contribs) 
This is circunstancial evidence only.  Where's the supposed portrait of the wife of the merchant that was on show together with it in the 1920's?  The picture certainly resembles Bologna Mozart a lot and the man depicted shows that joyous face we generally associate with Mozart.
:Good catch! I've changed the potrait. Hope this one is of him ;-). Shanes 12:15, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Looking into it further, reading article linked to from the commons page and actually reading the discussion further up on this talk-page, it looks like that article is wrong, and that the portrait is indeed that of Mozart. So I've changed the portrait back. Shanes 12:39, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

text: (As the one who put all the music on this page) You have no idea how happy it makes me to hear that :) Raul654 17:24, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Anon. contributor changed the previous and added:+ This is not proven.Why can't people accept that Mozart portraits do exist outside of the "holy 12"  It reminds me of the Mozart manuscript that resurfaced years ago and was declared inauthentic by 7 of the worlds experts, only to be declared "authentic" years later, much to the dismay of these experts.--64.136.175.30 21:09, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Apart from the fact that the comparison with the authenticity of a manuscript would be totally inappropriate anyway, there never was a "Mozart manuscript that resurfaced years ago and was declared inauthentic by 7 of the worlds experts". This story is 100% fabrication.--64.136.175.30 21:09, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What evidence disproves that the 'Edlinger Mozart' is not Mozart? I thought they did a split-face test tht concludes that the man in the portait was in fact Mozart? InternetHero 00:10, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture by Johann Georg Edlinger doesn't show W. A. Mozart 

message: Wikipedia shouldn't be in the business of quoting unauthoritative sources for such an important item.  
"Although this alone isn't an indicator of Tourette's, he also had strong physical tics and twitches, poor impulse control, and several other aspects which do strongly point to the disorder. [1]" 
 
Poor impulse control is not a symptom of Tourette's, just because one "sufferer" in the UK may think it is.  There are alternate explanations for all of the alleged symptoms attributed to Mozart, not the least of which is the prevailing culture at the time.  
There is NO indication from any credible source that Mozart had tics or twitches, again, just because a musician/composer with Tourette's says so.  And there are no tics mentioned in the referenced articles or the original sources from which all the writing was taken, verbatim.  
No credible neurologist, TS expert, or authoritative source endorses the notion that Mozart had Tourette's, and multiple sources have indicated that there is no evidence to support this (see the Tourette syndrome entry).  
The reference given on the Mozart entry claiming he had Tourette's is to a website written by a layperson, not an official source for information about Tourette's disorder, and using writing all taken from basically one other source (a documentary by a Tourette's musician in the UK), without correct attribution.  Nothing in any of those sources credibly attributes tics to Mozart.  Did the [| author of that website] add the entry?  tsk, tsk.
:::Referencing Wikipedia:Verifiability, that website is a source of dubious reliability, as well as a self-published source.  The "accredited PhD" alone makes it a source of dubious reliability.  This is how "Mozart with Tourette's" becomes an internet urban legend.  152.163.100.134 05:48, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Know your sources ! 

message: Some author of a study, Martin Braun, tries to place links to his site and studies about mozart-portraits. He claims to have proven the authenticy of two portraits, the edlinger-portrait and the hagenauer-portrait. Both are questionable, the latter absolutely. In en both portraits and the according weblinks were inserted by User:Salinasa. You can find more discussion on :de:Diskussion:Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (in german). --stefan (?!) 12:50, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: User:Saliente is also active in this case. --stefan (?!) 13:03, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

text: and so is User:213.164.193.161 Contributions (also active in "neurobiologic articles", another field of interest of Mr. Braun, see ). IP is from sweden. Braun lives in sweden. --stefan (?!) 20:32, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: For totally unknown reasons Braun calls his portrait "Hagenauer-Mozart". It should really be called "Wikipedia-Mozart".--141.203.254.65 12:57, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Somebody, I don't say it's Braun himself, is spreading Brauns two Mozarts throughout all wikipedias with a lot of energy. I'd name the Hagenauer "Brauns-Mozart". --stefan (?!) 11:17, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nonauthentic portraits 

message: The article describes Constanze as a "would-be" cousin of Carl Maria von Weber.  What does this mean?  Was she his cousin or not?  (I must admit, I had always thought she was Weber's sister, but have been recently brought up to speed on that).  JackofOz 01:56, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm answering my own question here.  Constanze's father was Fridolin (jr) (1733-79). Carl Maria's father was Franz Anton (1734-1812). Fridolin and Franz Anton were brothers (their father was Fridolin sr).  That makes Carl Maria and Constanze first cousins.  I've made the necessary change.  JackofOz 10:10, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fridolin and Franz Anton were half-brothers because they had different mothers. The entry is now correct.--141.203.254.65 15:05, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Constanze and Weber

message: Concerning the sentence:
"However, test results were inconclusive, showing that none of the DNA samples were related to each other."
If none the DNA samples were related to each other, doesn't that mean the results WERE conclusive?
: Yes indeed, they were. The alleged "Mozart grave" does not contain Mozart's relatives and the samples of "Mozart's hair" did not grow on Mozart's head. The alleged "Mozart skull" is nothing but a clumsy fake.--141.203.254.65 12:59, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inconclusive DNA? 

message: Maybe I'm just being pedantic, but I don't like having this article justified. Although justification looks nice on a page, it actually makes the page harder to read, because of the uneven spaces between words. I think there is a reason that the wikipedia style sheet does not have all pages justified, and I think we should stick to that (see Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Miscellaneous notes). I'm gonna change it back per the MOS, and if people feel strongly they can talk about it here. Makemi 16:30, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Justified

message: Can we agree on what the lead image is to be?  I know this has been under discussion before - but I can't find a consensus.  The image name was "broken" by an anon, then the image was deleted as broken, and then a different image was used to replace it.  I put it back to the drawing by Doris Stock which was there yesterday because I think it is preferable as a contemporary portrait.  Was this right?  Can we agree that this (or another) image is the best for the top of the article, and then stick with it?  --RobertG ♬ talk 16:16, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that it's nice to have the contemporary drawing in the lead. It gives a clearer likeness than the painting down the page, and it's better to have something contemporary than a later extrapolation. Makemi 22:15, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead image 

message: "Another area of debate involves Mozart's prodigy as a composer from childhood until his death. While some have criticised many of his earlier works as simplistic or forgettable, others revere even Mozart's juvenilia."
People actually debate this? What kind of music were they writing as children?
XAlpha 11:47, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem is not that people see the works as bad for a child, they just don't think they should be held up as pinnacles of awesomeness. Because they're by a child, and thus not quite so awesome. Makemi 18:23, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: But they were pretty awesome for a child. I mean, I can understand qualifying it, I can see saying "Well, it's not the greatest music ever written, but it's pretty damn amazing considering Mozart was 5 years old." Saying "Mozart's music just sucks!" just sounds like jealousy to me. XAlpha 14:41, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I doesn't say that. It says that some think that his music from childhood was forgettable (qua music, not qua child), but others basically worship it. I think you're seeing a problem that doesn't really exist. Makemi 16:35, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Retarded criticism 

message: How about switching over to the Source referencing format for individual statements? That would make the article more verifiable. Shawnc 13:41, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference format 

message: please someone put some facts from here  to the article. thank you! --Monk 08:02, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  about poverty and money 

message: Some sentences seem like they belong to different sections. Eg. "it has been popularly assumed that Mozart was penniless" seems to fit under "Myths and controversies".  The section "Mozart in popular culture" is very short and doesn't contain fictional works such as "Amadeus" which is actually mentioned elsewhere. There should be better organization of the article's structure. Shawnc 06:32, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Material overlap 

message: I removed the unsourced statement ... "By the age of four he could play the violin extraordinarily well. He would approach ladies in the street and amaze them with his music, some of which he had written himself." and replaced it with sourced info for ages 4 and 5.  I'd be happy to see this stuff reintroduced if someone has a source. — Stumps 12:21, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ages four and five 

message: The claim is made under "triva" that Mozart spoke 15 languages, and the source is the Dallas Symphony Orchestra's website for kids, which I don't consider authoritative. I'd like to see a source for this from a scholarly biography. Obviously he spoke fluent German and Italian, presumably had some significant ability in Latin and (I assume) Greek, probably good French, some Spanish, some English. So there's a very generous seven. How do we get to fifteen?  --Ggbroad 14:34, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: 15 Languages

message: I tried to find a source.  The best I could find was this.  There are some good sources at the bottom of the article on this site.  Could we use this? 71.31.156.121 23:53, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the article says its a piano.  I know he played the harpsichord, but is this a good source? 71.31.146.85 20:18, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Playing Piano Blindfolded 

message: "There is another legend, it is about Mozart final days, it tells that Constanze lyed down at Mozart side in his deathbed in order to dead with him."
well ok it is ridiculous. But also I read a book (written by an expert, I don't remember the title) about Mozart telling this story and  referring to that as a legend.   It is ridiculous because is a LEGEND. Also if you see the article history you will see that I put it in Myths and Controversies. User:Atenea26 00:05, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Constanze and Mozart lying together in Mozart Deathbed

message: Who is up for a major cleanup of this article? It's too long, uncited, and unbalanced (there's more "myths and controversies" and "triva" than there is stuff about music, more about whether or not he had Tourette's than about his operas, too much about the criticism and defense of the movie and the play) I can write, have some historical knowledge, but know something less than nothing about the mechanics of musical composition. But I'm up for a major rewrite if other people are. --Ggbroad 18:06, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: May I suggest that the passage concerning the Amadeus film under myths and controversies be moved to a separate section concerning the film and that it be made more concise? I could be rewritten in about two short paragraphs. Would anyone object if I tried it? --Ggbroad 18:44, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Major Cleanup in Order

message: Linked at the top of the page, and here.  Sandy 20:25, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Former featured article

message: There are many interesting anecdotes in the influences section, and intriguing (but rhetorical) statements about paralleles between Mozart and his successors - none of which seem to be supported with any authority whatsoever! Good read, maybe, but certainly not convincing.. Seems a shame for such an important topic. 128.250.6.246 07:23, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Influence section reads like a gossip column 

message: I agree with the person who suggested that the Amadeus section (on the film) should not be here, in this article. This article is about the man, not the films about the man. A link to the film would be more appropriate. 128.250.6.246 07:51, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree for a lot of reasons. One, before the film section existed, there was an even larger discussion of the film under "myths and controversies." Two, the article on the film is not very good. Three, most of what the general public knows about Mozart comes from the film - ie) far more people have seen the film than will ever read a serious biography of Mozart. I see no reason why a brief, one paragraph section on the film detracts from the rest of the article.Ggbroad 12:06, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Having a section on Amadeus is like having a section for "Downfall" and a hundred other Hitler films on Hitler (instead we have a film link section: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitler#Films) or having a section on Kundun in the Dalai Lama: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalai_lama - instead there is a link. Come on people - the page is about the man, not the films about the man. 203.214.116.112 13:37, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it's not at all the same, because Downfall didn't have anything remotely like the impact on the public's perception of Hitler than Amadeus has had for Mozart. As Neville Marriner once observed, the film Amadeus did more to popularize Mozart and his music with the general public than everything that had happened in the two hundred years prior to it. Over on the Salieri page, for instance, about half the page is devoted to refuting the stuff about Salieri in the Amadeus film. So, in brief, the movie Amadeus is  part of the story of Mozart the man. It's just a short passage, it's not hurting the article, it helps to clear up common misconceptions. I say leave it. --Ggbroad 13:51, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have a feeling that you'll keep arguing this point, so I'm make a final observations. One, the section on the film is 250 words out of total of 4700 words in the article. It's 5% of the total length of the article and can be read in about one minute. Removing it would add nothing to the article, detract some important information about the relationship between Mozart and one of his contemporaries, and remove answers to common questions that the general public has about Mozart. That, it seems to me, is the whole point of Wikipedia.--Ggbroad 13:59, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't object to having a reference to Amadeus in the Mozart article.  It has indeed helped to popularise Mozart to many people who would otherwise have known nothing much (or nothing at all) about him.  However, please read my comment under "Mozart Requiem" below - the film should NEVER be used as a source for biographical material about him - particularly his relationship with Salieri.   Shaffer never claimed it was biographically accurate, and often acknowledged it was not.  It was never intended with that purpose in mind.  It contains "some important information" about Mozart - such as the beauty of his music and the ease and rapidity with which he wrote it.  But much of the "information" about Mozart vs. Salieri is historically inaccurate.  We can't use ANYTHING in the movie as a source for the information in our article, just as we couldn't use "JFK" as a source for our article on the Kennedy assassination, or "Gandhi" as a source for our article about Gandhi.   We can report that a film called Amadeus exists, and that it has had a major cultural infuence on the world's appreciation of Mozart, and we can give other information about the film, but using the film as a source for a life of Mozart is not appropriate.  JackofOz 01:49, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Amadeus film section should be moved out 

message: I have heard rumors that Mozart was a let's just say how the person I know said it "pervert".I don't know if this is true and don't know if anyone else knows if it is true but I need it to be cleared in my mind.I'm truly sorry if this offends anyone in any way I don't mean for it to be that way I just need some input so I can clear it as I said above and to correct the person I know if it is false.Thankyou
I believe Mozart's "perverted" status was spread by the movie Amadeus, but I seem to recall that Mozart did do "dirty" puns before. You might want to ask the reference desk. bibliomaniac15 03:09, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help me please. 

message: Around the time when he was five or six years old, he could play the piano blindfolded and with his hands crossed over one another. [citation needed]
This is mentioned twice in the article, once in the "Family and early years" section and later under "Myths and Controversies". As has already been disucussed on this talk page, we have no citation, and I rather wonder if this is really just one of unsubstantiated statements in the Mozart legend. If we can't get a source, I suggest we remove this statement from the opening and keep it in the "Myths and Controveries" section (where it surely has a place). Heimstern Läufer 03:15, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Playing the piano blindfolded with arms crossed 

message: Since school started, back in September, this article has been the subject of frequent (and really quite childish) vandalism. Should we / can we semi-protect it for a while? --Ggbroad 12:50, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just wanted to restate my point above. This article is being vandalized 3 to 4 times per day.--Ggbroad 18:33, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm noticing it too, and considering the semiprotect.  There was a recent post on the administrators' noticeboard about the similar situation at Albert Einstein; if the vandalism continues tomorrow, and I don't do it first, just bug me and I'll do it.  Antandrus  (talk) 01:40, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay. This article is being vandalized literally DOZENS of times a week now. I think it's time to semiprotect, at least temporarily. My Watchlist fills up with vandalism from this page. --Ggbroad 19:34, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I'm afraid my watchlist is pretty much jammed with vandalism from my page. I don't have the authority to protect it, but I do have the means of removing it from my watchlist and leaving it to its own devices. Damn, I'd just read Gutman's cultural bio, too, and was going to add some stuff and some citations in the hopes of making this a FA again. But what's the point? --Ggbroad 01:11, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semiprotect 

message: I've started an approach that may apply to Wikipedia's Core Biography articles: creating a branching list page based on in popular culture information.  I started that last year while I raised Joan of Arc to featured article when I created Cultural depictions of Joan of Arc, which has become a featured list.  Recently I also created Cultural depictions of Alexander the Great out of material that had been deleted from the biography article.  Since cultural references sometimes get deleted without discussion, I'd like to suggest this as a model for the editors here.  Regards, Durova 15:47, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's a good idea.  We may already have a few "Composer X in popular culture" articles.  I for one am irritated by the weed-patches that those "trivia" or "so-and-so in popular culture" sections become, as they gradually accrete micro-factoids.  Is there a more general discussion of this somewhere? -- i.e. since this doesn't just apply to the Mozart article.  Antandrus  (talk) 15:55, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've left notes at Wikipedia talk:Core biographies and started a worksheet at User:Durova/Cultural depictions of core biography figures.  For now I'm inviting people to discuss this in my user space (since the idea is in such an initial stage).  Thank you for your interest! Durova 18:31, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

text: It's fine with me!  Antandrus  (talk) 23:15, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've done a simple cut and paste of the trivia section.  The new page should probably also contain at least some of the material from the previous section, about plays and films, but since that's already written in paragraph form I'll leave it untouched for now. Durova 02:50, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Cultural depictions of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart]] 

message: Wasn't it the rival composer, Antonio Salieri who was believed to compose most of Mozart's Requiem?  I cannot source this but have strong reason to believe it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 149.125.195.143 (talk • contribs) .
:Actually a lot was completed by Franz Xaver Süssmayr.  Our article on the Requiem (Mozart) covers a lot of it.  The movie Amadeus of course showed Salieri taking dictation from Mozart as he lay in bed, specifically the "Lacrimosa". Antandrus  (talk) 02:57, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wasn't Amadeus rather fictionalised, though? (I myself have never seen it.) —  $PЯINGεrαgђ  01:31, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, yes, it certainly was:  let me clarify:  the movie showed Salieri taking dictation and hearing those angelic trombones and all, but that probably didn't happen quite the way it was portrayed, if at all.  Antandrus  (talk) 01:37, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: (edit conflict) Ah, similar to the somewhat fictionalised Impromptu (1991 fim) vs. the somewhat truer-to-the-fact Chopin: Desire for Love. —  $PЯINGεrαgђ  01:44, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Amadeus is, IMO, a great film.  But please, please, NEVER use anything you see in it as a source for anything that actually happened.  Peter Shaffer has made it clear it was intended as a play inspired by Mozart's life, NOT as an as-it-happened accurate biography.  JackofOz 01:16, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Umm, as I remember it, it wasn't as though Salieri was hearing the angelic trombones...in my eyes, those were provided as a guide for the audience as to what Mozart himself was hearing, all the while directing Antonio as to the musical notation (i.e. the orchestration).  Meanwhile, Salieri is a competent enough composer and musician to understand the musical concepts Mozart is dictating to him, which is why he becomes excited (unusual for the reserved, snarky Salieri) while scribing the Confutatis Maledictus (not the Lacrimosa Dies Illa, BTW - that is played during Mozart's funeral scene) of the Requiem for Mozart just prior to his death, and starts to sing along to the ostinato they are working on, exclaiming, "Wonderful!". Eganio 22:44, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mozart's Requiem 

message: Hi Wikipedians, 
I'm new to Wikipedia so I'm not sure how much to change the text in the article.  As you can see below, it is not quite accurate.  
The article currently reads "Maynard Solomon conjectures that he may have suffered from hand injuries [citation needed]"
Maynard Solomon's book is called Mozart:  a Life
It is copyright dated 1995, and published by HarperCollins Publishers, NYC, NY
Here is the quote in its entirety from pp. 301, 302
:A chance comment by Beethoven's nephew in early 1824 offers other food for speculation regarding Mozart's shift away from a piano viruoso's career, which had been the foundation of his popularity as well as of his most lucrative endeavors, both in public halls and aristocratic salons:  "Mozart's fingers were so bent by the constant playing," wrote Karl van Beethoven in the deaf composer's conversation book, "that he couldn't even cut his meat." (footnote number 48)  The most startling aspect of the story--Mozart's awkwardness in using his hands--is apparently confirmed by Nissen, who wrote:  "One knows that apart from clavier playing he was very clumsy in the use of his hands, that he couldn't cut meat and so forth and that his wife had to cut his meat as though he were a child." (footnote number 49)  Schlichtegroll had already told the story somewhat differently, emphasizing Mozart's fear of cutting his fingers. (footnote number 50)
:One possible inference to be drawn from these reports is that Mozart was suffering from a painful condition in his hands that might have adversely affected or threatened to affect his pianistic abilities and compelled him to think about alternative ways of making a living.  Such a condition is consistent with Mozart's repeated bouts of rheumatic fever--in 1762, 1766, 1784 and perhaps 1787--a disease that can be cumulative in its effects and that probably was the main cause of his death.  Arthritis is the most common clinical manifestation of rheumatic fever; typically the affected joints become painful and tender, and may also become inflamed and swollen.  We know from Leopold Mozart that when Mozart was a child, his joints were so severely affected after the early bouts that "he could not stand on his feet or move his toes or knees." (footnote 51)  The joints affected are usually the ankles, knees, elbows, or wrists, but in the days before anti-inflammatory therapy, migration of the arthritic condition to the shoulders, hips, and the small joints of the extremities, including the fingers and toes, frequently resulted.  If this speculation has any merit--for there is no contemporary report that his virtuoso powers were affected--Mozart's condition naturally was not to be advertised, because he would not have wanted to abandon piano-playing after 1786.  And he did continue to perform occasionally, although such performances as he gave were either in foreign cities--his playing was highly praised in both Prague and Dresden--or in the privacy of his own home rather than in the major arenas where his capacities were well known.  Additional arguments against this speculation are the consistently fine calligraphy of his scores and his reported skill at billiards.  In the end, this story of a grown man unable to cut his food may turn out to be just another aspect of the myth of the eternal child.'
Ljprice 03:01, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source for Mozart's "Hand Problems" 

message: I've just come back from Prague and was astonished at the amount of Mozart advertisement and paraphernalia there. I understand that Moazart allegedly (or definetly) said that quote, but I was interested in other reasons why the Pragers attributed him to their city to such an extent. In my guide book (I know, not the best source) I read about his relationship to the city and it said he had been there 4 times, and although the first visits featured his success with the inhabitants of the city (contrarirarily the Viennese were, as they still are today, very critical) his last visit was in summer of 1791; a new piece of music he had composed for the people there was received very negatively and he left the city 'bitter and ill'; and as we know, he died in the december of that year... Is there any significance or 'truth' to this?
:My dear Viennese and Austrians, jelaousy will not help you here. Successfull opening night of Don Giovanni in Prague is a fact beyond question, also famous quote "Meine Prager verstehen mich" (My Praguers understand me) is well documented in historical writtings. Further, most scenes from the famous movie Amadeus were shot in Prague as the location was deemed authentic. Also glamour of Prague as the home of the richest german/jew audience of the time attracted Mozart much. Don't forget Prague was the seat of Holy Roman Emperors during the golden era of the Empire, in Mozart's time the city was still very rich. Even in present day Prague dwarfs Vienna in every way. For example the seat of Holy Roman Emperor's the Prague Castle is the biggest castle in the world, the oldest university in central Europe, oldest and greatest jewish settlement etc. Prague was de-facto capital of central europe that attracted many and not Mozart only..
::...aha, accusing the Viennese of jealousy and then producing that ramble! It was in Prague where I found out that the authenticity of that quote is doubted! Ok, I'll go through your arguments in chronological order.. Of course Don Giovanni was successful in Prague, I never denied that, just said that he suffered some not-so-great treatment by the Praguers LATER (admittedly reflected in Vienna throughout Mozart's career). True, Prague was definetely a rich city (both economically and culturally) but he apparently was only there 3 or 4 times, and there's no doubt there was a similar, if not greater 'german/jew' audience in Vienna. Even if Prague was the seat of the Holy Roman Empire at one point or other, the Emperor was Austrian(!). And to your statement 'Prague dwarfs Vienna', are you being sarcastic? Prague was the de-facto capital of central Europe?!? How come so many famous artists (also those from Prague) were in Vienna at the turn of the century? Plus, the fact that Vienna was the capital of the empire which ruled Over Prague and also a key city in cultural terms.
I'm not in any way jealous of Prague! It's a beautiful city. I'm just questioning an opinion, probably spread by the likes of you (dont mean that negatively). I thought that everything on this article deserves historical authenticity. I'm astounded by your response which borders on nationalism (ok, I might be being a little hyperbolic). 
Forgot about the movie.. I don't think it's a great loss for Vienna that it was not filmed here. Some modern buildings would have anyway made it impossible. And even if Prague was more 'authentic' it was still meant to represent Vienna, so I don't understand your point. The movie is not that wonderful either, it lacks the Viennese landmarks which to some extent determined Mozarts life (Stephansdom: marriage and funeral, he also lived very close to it).
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.121.1.78 (talk) 20:34, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Mozart and Prague' 

message: I know there is a lot if speculation about his death but why isn't there anything mentioned about Antonio Salieri? Isn't it a popular rumour that Salieri killed him?
:It is indeed a popular rumour, but one largely discredited by historians. That's probably why the information about it is in the Myths and controversies section rather than in the section about his death. Heimstern Läufer 00:45, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  his death 

message: On commons there has been a long running edit war over . I protected the gallery page with the images removed in the hopes that it would cause people to talk rather than revert, but mostly their talking has consisted of people calling each other vandals. Please contribute to the discussion on  commons:Talk:Wolfgang_Amadeus_Mozart. I'll unprotect the page on commons as soon as there is any evidence of consensus.--Gmaxwell 15:30, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, solved. I turned out that one of the parties had a pretty aggressive (by commons standards) sock campaign going on. It doesn't appear to have spilled over to enwiki, so all is good. --Gmaxwell 07:39, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Save me from the Mozart POV pushers 

message: MozartForum " This free educational site is dedicated to the discussion of the music, persona and world of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart.  Whether Mozart is found on CDs or the stage, in books or articles, at international festivals or websites, we want to bring it all together here!  As well, we shall explore overall the world of Classical-Era Music (1770-1827), encompassing the music, personalities and accomplishments of Mozart’s contemporaries.   
It is the intent of the Founders of the MozartForum to improve the intelligent discussion and discourse of Mozart and his world as found on the Internet.  The Founders, coming from all backgrounds and with different perspectives on the ever-fascinating subject of Mozart, have decided to pool their resources and talents to create and maintain such a website.
We hope that it will become a place where Mozart admirers the world over can come and ask questions, learn, share information, resources and experiences, and generally relish indulging their common interest in this amazing individual and his spectacular legacy." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.226.78.183 (talk • contribs) 
:Please see WP:EL for information on what external links are acceptable on Wikipedia. Forums are for the most part not acceptable, and I would suggest that this forum not be included. Mak (talk) 22:31, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Links to add ?

message: I did not see here any mention of the tremendous volume of his work. Should there be a special mention of that. To me it seems one of his most outstanding accomplishments.
In the second line of the intro on the main page, it reads, "His output of over 600 compositions includes works widely acknowledged as pinnacles of..."  Did you have something more detailed in mind? Eganio 21:08, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The volume of his work 

message: * Insufficient lead - should be two or three paragraphs
* Insufficient references - An article this long should have roughly 50-60
* The heading 'Life" should be renamed to biography
* Wayyyy toooo many external links.
Main reason i'm failing this is because of lack of citations and numerous [Citation needed] tags. M3tal H3ad 08:56, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A rigorous peer review is needed--ppm 01:58, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA Fail

message: the articla says, Mozart was pronounced [ˈvɔlfgaŋk amaˈdɔʏs ˈmotsaɐt]. I am German and I pronounce him [ˈvɔlfgaŋ amaˈdeːʊs ˈmotsaɐt]. Is the first the "English" way to pronounce him, or just wrong? --androl 09:48, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, this got me a little confused at first, I know a bit of German and have heard the name Amadeus in it before, pronounced as you have said. Even the Latin and Italian pronunciation of Amadeus should be as you have said, the de and us are separate syllables and do not form a diphthong here. It is not normally sounded amaˈdɔʏs in English, I think this is a faux-German pronunciation.--Darthanakin 15:20, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation 

message: On Mozart's name, his first name is quoted as "Joannes Chrysostomus", not "Johannes Chrysostomus". The page is protected so I can't change it. --Ibendiber 18:04, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name? 

message: In 2004 the BBC broadcasted an excellent 3-piece dramatized documentary on Mozart's life and work, "The Genius of Mozart". I would like to weave that into the article somehow, but I can't find the right spot. Any suggestions? AxelBoldt 01:30, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you can use it for in-line references that would be great and especially where the citation needed tags are. I was able to use Marcia Davenport's book to give a citation for his joining of the Freemasons, but I can cannot find the other  claims in the book. Remember that the major thing keeping this article from GA is in-line references.--Jorfer 21:56, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  BBC documentary "The Genius of Mozart" 

message: --Funper 22:32, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Template

message: "One famous demonstration..." well, I've never heard of that. I think that either some references should be added, or the claim removed. --Leonard Vertighel 20:17, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You and me must have seen it at exactly the same time.  I removed it as uncited/OR/weasel.  Antandrus  (talk) 20:21, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks :) --Leonard Vertighel 20:40, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Avoid weasel words|Weasel words]] 

message: The entry notes:
"A highlight of the Italian journey, now an almost legendary tale, occurred when he heard Gregorio Allegri's Miserere once in performance in the Sistine Chapel then wrote it out in its entirety from memory, only returning to correct minor errors; thus producing the first illegal copy of this closely-guarded property of the Vatican."
Is the use of the word 'illegal' correct here? For this copy to be illegal, a law would have to be broken; did Mozart break any laws in making this copy? If not, I would suggest the word 'illegal' be substituted for 'unofficial' or 'unauthorised'. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lindsay40k (talk • contribs) 16:44, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Miserere - illegal copy? 

message: I suggest we start work on a few sentences mentioning Mozart's 1789 journey to Berlin. During this trip he visited Leipzig where he encountered some of J. S. Bach's music. I think this paragraph should go into the "Mozart in Vienna" section. Matthias Röder 06:57, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Paragraph on Mozart's Berlin Journey needed

message: This article needs a box on the top right hand side, like on Ludwig van Beethoven. I'd add it myself, but I'm not too sure how it works yet. Thanks! Aillema 21:00, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Aillema! From the WikiProject Composers page: "Current consensus among project participants holds that the use of currently-available biographical infoboxes is often counterproductive on composer biographies. They should not be used without first obtaining consensus on the article's talk page." The reason why these infoboxes are no longer used is that they often contain inaccurate information. For example, it would be difficult to put the riht flag for Mozart's nationality (Austrian is wrong, as is German, will people recognize the flag of the archdiocese of Salzburg? etc) Matthias Röder 23:04, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Box at the top 

message: I know a womans touch to such a great man would be ideal, but to be fair, I think a dramatization or fictional representation of Mozart is far from what the man stood for. His membership in the Freemason induced the sense of justice and his deep hatred for any lack of it. I think the just thing to do here is to put his actual portrate. Leopold Mozart, W. A. Mozart’s father, wrote about this portrait:
„It has little value as a piece of art, but as to the issue of resemblance, I can assure you that it is perfect.”
(Original text: „Malerisch hat es wenig wert, aber was die Ähnlichkeit anbetrifft, so versichere ich Ihnen, daß es ihm ganz und gar ähnlich sieht.“)
I'm just curious to why the opinion of a person who had no physical contact with the man should be prefered as a reference over his own FATHER. They say she used the Lange, de la Croce, and the Stock portraits, but I still think the relaying of all these perceptions have to be taken into account. I think people mistake Constanze's approval of the Lange painting as it captured the character of his constant relevations and deep modes of thought, rather than his actual appearance. Their maid often said when he ate his supper (while his wife cut up his steak for the fear of damaging hishands) he always seemed to be distant in eyes always masked by his high sprits. The Bologna Moazrt may not capture the 'essense' of Mozart character, but I do believe it captures the 'essense' of his physicality. Maybe the Lange portrait is better then both for the intro? As for the de la Croce and Stock portraits, I think there not very well done. Even Leopold's appearance resembles nothing of his other portraits. Please leave a discussion before reverting. User:InternetHero 23:09, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bologna Mozart vs. Barbara Mozart 

message: I don´t understand include a media section with a lot of files and a link to Commons. I would directly prefer the link to Commons. --Mac 21:19, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Media 

message: I notice that the External Links - General References section contains a link to a non-peer-reviewed on-line article by Robert Newman about the so-called Luchesi authorship controversy. This is a crackpot conspiracy theory that has gained no acceptance whatsoever among professional scholars. It doesn't belong in an encyclopedia article. I would suggest that it be removed.
209.30.169.201 21:55, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: External links

message: The sound sample of Der Holle Rache is terrible.  I would suggest its deletion. Dave Foster 21:32, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: By all means delete it, then. -- Rob C (Alarob) 21:44, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Awful sound example 

message: Hello, someone put up an IPA pronunciation for Mozart's name, [ˈvɔlfgaŋ amaˈdɔʏs ˈmotsaɐt], that rendered the "eu" of "Amadeus" as [ɔʏ], if it were the normal German value heard for instance in "Freude".  This IPA transcription attracted a talk page complaint (see above), and also attracted my notice just now.
The "eu" seen here is indeed not a normal German "eu".  "Amadeus" is a Latinized form of Mozart's middle name, and in German they pronounce Latin words more or less in Latin fashion.  So I've changed the transcription to end in "[eus]", which (leaving aside issues of vowel length, about which I'm not sure) is at least closer to the truth than what we had before.  I have verified the pronunciation by posting a query on the German Wikipedia, which you can view at:
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diskussion:Wolfgang_Amadeus_Mozart#Bitte_hilfen_.28Englisch.29
Opus33 00:37, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your research,you're totally right. --Catgut 02:06, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The IPA pronunciation

message: Hi there. This page is rather long and could do with being archived! Is this something anyone can do?
JH(emendator) 15:31, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Time for another archive! 

message: I like to suggest to include a link titled 783 Digitised Works of and about Mozart in The European Library "mozart")
Please let me know what you think. Thank you. Fleurstigter 10:34, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this link is very helpful Matthias Röder 11:48, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ok. I have added it. Thanks. Have a nice day, Fleurstigter 12:08, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[The European Library]]

message: A link to a "Mozart tower" site with all of Mozart's compositions in MP3 has been added. Of course, it's very sweet, but we need to make sure that it's not a pirate site, because WP isn't supposed to link to pirate sites. So - is it? 
From the Polish wikipedia:
===Mój mailing z redakcją strony www.mozart-turm.de===
Display all headersSubject: Re: A question about music on your web site.
From: "SEBASTIAN TROPP" <mozart-turm(at)T-Online.de>
To: "Jakub Kuryluk" <xxxxxx@xxxxx.xx>
Date: 22 Jun 2006 09:00 GMT
WE ARE THE OFFICIAL MOZART-ARCHIV AND THE SAME IS VALID ALSO FOR RECORDINGS. IN POLAND IS THIS OTHER IN THE RULES. IN GERMANY IS ADDITIONALLY THE PLAYING OF CLASSIC MUSIC ABSOLUTELY FREE, BECAUSE THE COPYRIGHT COVER ONLY THE WORK AND NOT THE PLAYING. YOU CAN LISTEN IN MALLS OR HOTELS FREE CLASSIC MUSIC. ADDITIONALLY OUR INSTITUTION IS A PART OF CULTURAL ENVIRONMENT OF GERMANY.
:"Jakub Kuryluk" <mailto:xxxxxx@xxxxx.xx> schrieb:
:Dear Mr. Tropp,
:I know, that Mr. Mozart died in 1851. This year we have the 250th anniversary of his birth. The licenses are free for scripts only. Records on your website are younger than 50 years (I am sure of that). So what about performers' rights to these recordings?
::Dnia 22-06-2006 o 08:59:00 SEBASTIAN TROPP <mailto:mozart-turm(at)T-Online.de> napisał:
::Dear Mr. Kuryluk,
::MOZART is dead since 1791, and since 1851, the licenses are free. Additionally, we are a non profit company for worldwide cultural intentions, without financial interests.
:::"Jakub Kuryluk" <mailto:xxxxxx@xxxxx.xx> schrieb:
:::Dear Redactors,
:::i have w question about mp3 files included on http://www.mozart-turm.de/ ("Mozart-Archiv" -> "Mozart->Muzik"). What kind of licence are they? I am a Wikipedian and I woould like to add a links to your mp3s on polish Wikipedia (pl.wikipedia.org). But these links where remooved (from Wikipedia web page), because this source seems to be illegal to some members of Wikipedia Community. I would like to know, do you have a right to these mp3. I need to heave a sureness about it.
All in all think I that Mr Tropp's case not convincing is, and that the link removed be should :). --91.148.159.4 19:03, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mozart tower 

message: Display all headersSubject: Re: A question about music on your web site.
From: "SEBASTIAN TROPP" <mozart-turm(at)T-Online.de>
To: "Jakub Kuryluk" <xxxxxx@xxxxx.xx>
Date: 22 Jun 2006 09:00 GMT
WE ARE THE OFFICIAL MOZART-ARCHIV AND THE SAME IS VALID ALSO FOR RECORDINGS. IN POLAND IS THIS OTHER IN THE RULES. IN GERMANY IS ADDITIONALLY THE PLAYING OF CLASSIC MUSIC ABSOLUTELY FREE, BECAUSE THE COPYRIGHT COVER ONLY THE WORK AND NOT THE PLAYING. YOU CAN LISTEN IN MALLS OR HOTELS FREE CLASSIC MUSIC. ADDITIONALLY OUR INSTITUTION IS A PART OF CULTURAL ENVIRONMENT OF GERMANY.
:"Jakub Kuryluk" <mailto:xxxxxx@xxxxx.xx> schrieb:
:Dear Mr. Tropp,
:I know, that Mr. Mozart died in 1851. This year we have the 250th anniversary of his birth. The licenses are free for scripts only. Records on your website are younger than 50 years (I am sure of that). So what about performers' rights to these recordings?
::Dnia 22-06-2006 o 08:59:00 SEBASTIAN TROPP <mailto:mozart-turm(at)T-Online.de> napisał:
::Dear Mr. Kuryluk,
::MOZART is dead since 1791, and since 1851, the licenses are free. Additionally, we are a non profit company for worldwide cultural intentions, without financial interests.
:::"Jakub Kuryluk" <mailto:xxxxxx@xxxxx.xx> schrieb:
:::Dear Redactors,
:::i have w question about mp3 files included on http://www.mozart-turm.de/ ("Mozart-Archiv" -> "Mozart->Muzik"). What kind of licence are they? I am a Wikipedian and I woould like to add a links to your mp3s on polish Wikipedia (pl.wikipedia.org). But these links where remooved (from Wikipedia web page), because this source seems to be illegal to some members of Wikipedia Community. I would like to know, do you have a right to these mp3. I need to heave a sureness about it.
</blockquote>
All in all think I that Mr Tropp's case not convincing is, and that the link removed be should :). --91.148.159.4 19:03, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Mój ''mailing'' z redakcją strony [http://www.mozart-turm.de/ www.mozart-turm.de]