Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Opera/Archive 25

message: I've been working on Italian opera and I've just moved my revisions so far from my sandbox to main space. It's by no means perfect and I haven't finished but I thought I'd give others an opportunity to join in. I've made a start on revising the 17th and 18th century sections, using the version on the Italian WP as a basis. I stole Moreschi's section about Gluck and Mozart from the main article. All this probably needs expanding (especially the 18th century - i.e. Handel and Co.). I'm not going to touch the 19th or 20th centuries because I'm no expert on them and I've noticed people round here get upset if an opera gets mischaracterised as "bel canto" or "verismo". Likewise, we probably need a section on how Mussolini's artistic policy affected Malipiero and Dallapiccola (or whatever) and something about the avant-garde (Nono,Berio). But I'll leave that to others.
I've also translated Polish opera. Again, I haven't put the final touches to this but it's a good, solid article which is currently an FA candidate on Polish WP. I've checked some of the facts against English sources and they pass for accuracy. There are some controversial bits (is Halka really a finer opera than The Haunted Manor?) but they can be sorted out. I'm still ironing out a few ambiguities and maybe there needs to be more historical background to make things clearer to the non-Polish reader. --Folantin 12:28, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well done. I confess to only recognising King Roger of what was mentioned in the article. SO I can't say which work is finer. --Peter cohen 15:33, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The WP Halka article says "It is considered one of his greatest operas", whereas The Haunted Manor article says "It is considered Moniuszko’s best opera".  Jim Samson in Grove is non-commital in the Moniuszko article, but says in The Haunted Manor article that it "has strong claims to be considered Moniuszko's masterpiece".  Take your pick!  I don't know Halka, but it is apparently something of a totemic work in Poland. --GuillaumeTell 17:48, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey, well, I'm sure it will be resolved one way or another even if it means a big scrap between Halkaists and Manorists on the talk page (!). My main aim here was to act as a recruiter for people to fix the Italian opera article. --Folantin 07:54, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: National opera articles again

message: Now that we are about to ask SatyrTN to run the bot, can we look at the Opera banner and see if it needs editing? The existing text is:
This article is a part of the Opera WikiProject, a collaboration to develop Wikipedia articles on operas and opera terminology, opera composers, librettists and singers, directors and managers, companies and houses, and recordings. The project talk page is a place to discuss issues, identify areas of neglect and exchange ideas. New members are very welcome!
We will also (presumably) need a second version (called operastub?), for noting stubs. Perhaps the wording for this would be something like:
This article is a part of the Opera WikiProject, a collaboration to develop Wikipedia articles on operas and opera terminology, opera composers, librettists and singers, directors and managers, companies and houses, and recordings. The project talk page is a place to discuss issues, identify areas of neglect and exchange ideas. New members are very welcome!
This article has been automatically assessed as Stub-Class by WikiProject Opera because it uses a stub template.
Comments? Suggested new versions? Should we adopt something shorter?  -- Kleinzach 03:38, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would like to chance "This article is a part of..." to "This article falls within the scope of...". This suggestion follows on comments above about the possibility of people who have created articles feeling that their work is being hijacked. --Peter cohen 07:57, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with Peter. We don't want to give the impression we are just sticking our flag onto other people's hard work. --Folantin 08:09, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I think that wording is standard now. Anything else? -- Kleinzach 08:33, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good, somebody has already changed it. -- Kleinzach 09:40, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

text: I'm keen to keep this simple and not confuse anyone. We've just fixed the text for the basic banner and I'm awaiting a reply from SatyrTN about the next stage. It's important that we don't go beyond the established consensus for this operation - at least without starting new topics and explaining what is involved. I'm about to start a new topic myself about another (design) aspect of this. One thing at a time! -- Kleinzach 10:53, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Opera Project banner