Talk:Ernest Fanelli/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Aza24 (talk · contribs) 21:25, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to review this. Will leave comments below. – Aza24 (talk) 21:25, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Life

"started studying [...] continuing his studies" – possibly rephrase to avoid "study" twice
Do we know the teacher he didn't like?

There's no info

Might consider linking timpani and music engraver
maybe gloss who Delibes is? "French opera composer..." or something
"tough" seems a little informal, but I'm not sure
I assume 17 March is in 1912, but 1912 is only mentioned in regards to when he began working with Pierné, not when he gave Pierné the score

Works

You might consider making the comp table sortable

The class for sorting is present, but I just realized that when the table floats to the right, the sorting buttons dissappear... I'll have to nag at village pump

Well that was quick!

"between that and meeting Pierné"—I would just give the year, since it will probably be forgotten by the time someone gets to this part or not have been known at all if they skip the life section
Might give the translated title of L'Effroi du soleil in the prose
"Some orchestral compositions use instruments"—does't really mean anything, maybe you're missing a word like "uncommon" or "unusual"?

I feel like that's a little WP:OR-y because no source states that they're uncommon or unusual. I've dropped the word "instruments" instead

The Ezra Pound line is phrased a little strangely—sounds like Fanelli is the "he" in "he wrote that the"
I think Ravel was right about proto-Impressionism predating Fanelli :)

Indeed, though I'm still kinda surprised by how someone with little musical training composes such a work in their twenties during the 1880s! Composers usually take time to develop a mature style. Either he had a gift he couldn't exploit or he pulled all-nighters in the library studying Années de pèlerinage ;)

Might consider linking "formally" to [[Musical form]
You might consider mentioning at least the existence of the other chamber works in the prose

I could, though in that case I would probably also have to unnecessarily include the other orchestral works and the opera, which there is no information about except for their existence. I feel like its redundant but I'm thinking of a solution

Reputation

I would gloss who George Antheil is
The Monthly Musical Record should probably be itaclized?
Would like ornamentation

Clarify please

My apologies, I meant "link"—have just done so now myself. Aza24 (talk) 19:54, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

Might link modernism to modernism (music)
"he liked" seems a little informal
I feel like the lead is missing a sentence something like "His oeuvre is relatively small, and includes orchestral works, 32 miscellaneous songs, a few chamber works and a three act opera buffa" or something

I added a similar sentence but dropped "is relatively small, and" as there was unfortunately no ref that supported that, and would therefore be OR

Article looks great otherwise. Aza24 (talk) 22:07, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Aza24: I've implemented your suggestions and left a few comments. Also, to answer your question, it doesn't matter, because everything below the ref section I completely forget about all the time anyways! >:( I have to stare at a new article like 8 times before realizing that I need to add categories, let alone portals. Wretchskull (talk) 13:19, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ha! Sometimes when I expand music critic's bios I don't see them on my watchlist for months, until some editor comes a long and adds six of the most blatantly obvious missing categories all at once... not my forte either!

The changes look good, and I will pass the article shortly. You might consider rephrasing the "saxhorn" line a little closer to how Rosar does. I think it's important to say first how he admired the wind sound, which explains why he has those kinds of instruments (and avoids OR additions like you said). When the opposite order of information it used here, I feel it separates the observations' connections too much. A minor matter though. Congratulations on your hard work. Aza24 (talk) 19:58, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]