Jump to content

Talk:Josef Tal

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Joseph Tal)

Biography assessment rating comment

[edit]

The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- KenWalker | Talk 07:52, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject class rating

[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 21:08, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

COI

[edit]

The artice has been heavily edited & expanded by Tal's son, Etan Tal, which is obviously a major WP:COI violation. The full list of compositions seem rather excessive and over power the article..perhaps they should be a standalone article - created by someone rather less close to the subject.78.86.25.78 (talk) 11:54, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article's format is similar to other articles on similar topics (see Arnold Schoenberg for example, or John Cage - which is split). If you think that "the list of compositions is rather excessive", you may discuss this issue with those in charge of WikiProject Biography, or with Composers WikiProject or with WikiProject Israel whose editors did not share your opinion (so far). Regretfully (or not), I have no right to delete any of the composer’s works only to comply with your opinion.
To the best of my knowledge the article is thorough and accurate and it was scrutinized by many Wikipedians. It has been rated as B-Class on the (three) projects' quality scale, and translated to different languages by Wikipedians with whom I have no personal acquaintance - none of those felt that there had been any bias in the text.
I always sign my contributions (either texts, editing or photographs) with my full real name. I do not disguise under a pseudonym or an IP number. The mere fact that I "heavily edited" the article, or that I am Tal’s son, does not necessarily entail any bias but rather a thorough acquaintance with the material .
If you have a specific claim, or if you can offer any confirmation for your allegation, please specify it and allow other competent and objective contributors to address it. Otherwise I would ask you to remove the template since it fallaciously insinuates biased editing (and intentional violation of Wikipedia's rules) on my part.
Etan Tal - Josef Tal's son. Etan Tal (talk) 19:04, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Please see WP:COI I believe that you are editing this article to promote your father. regards 78.86.25.78 (talk) 03:27, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I did some more reading on the guidelines and it seems that that the relevant place to discuss conflict of interest issues is not the Biography, Israel or Composers wikiprojects but a specific noticeboard WP:COIN. I know very little about the inner workings of wikipedia, it just struck me as wrong that somebodys son gets to write him up on wikipedia. If you open a topic there about this I'll happily defer to whatever the experts say. The compositions matter is really that it looks cluttered and contains too much detail in that table format, the Schoenberg or Cage articles contain nothing similar. Perhaps there are style guidelines about thse matters as per WP:MOS? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.86.25.78 (talk) 04:07, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Dear 78.86.25.78,
Thanks for making your claim a bit clearer. I will try to answer your specific points:
1. "I believe that you are editing this article to promote your father" – In editing this article I strive to promote KNOWLEDGE. Evidently "promoting" any person mentioned in the article is an unavoidable by-product.
2. " it just struck me as wrong that somebodys son gets to write him up on Wikipedia" – Unless you prove specific bias on my part, there is no reason not to let me edit ANYTHING which contributes to knowledge. There is no justification whatsoever for such discrimination. Indeed, being a relative of an article's subject necessitates particular self discipline and cautious editing to avoid subjective bias. I trust that I have indeed accomplished this goal.
3. " The compositions matter is really that it looks cluttered and contains too much detail in that table format, the Schoenberg or Cage articles contain nothing similar" – this claim refers to two topics:
a. The contents: I cited the Schoenberg and Cage articles to show examples of lists of two "modern" composers. The length of ANY list should not be a factor for assessing its content quality (provided it does not interfere with readability of article)
b. The format: As far as I know there are no guidelines which prevent any list to be edited as a table. I agree that it is a matter of subjective taste, but I found that it is a fine solution to deliver the information in an orderly readable way. Moreover, the updated information is not readily available and accessible anywhere else. I advise you to have a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_compositions_by_Franz_Schubert#How_Schubert.27s_compositions_are_listed (see Works for the stage table). The table there, though title-rolling and even more detailed than mine, is a good example.
My father passed away about a year ago. I am the only relative still capable of writing a Wikipedia article about him – not because I have special talents, but because I happen to be the only one who has most of the relevant information. To prove this statement I would ask you to compare the present article, with the 10:45, 25 May 2008 version (the last version before my first editing) - I trust you’ll agree there is a significant difference…
It is a natural and understandable reaction to suspect COI in articles submitted to the Wikipedia, and I trust your attitude originates from true caring. I appreciate your alertness and welcome such wherever applicable. It is though our duty as editors to balance this sort of criticism carefully and apply COI templates only when COI claim has a factual basis. Otherwise we might discourage creative contributors instead of encouraging them. As I have said before, I welcome any constructive correction, addition or deletion in the article as long as it is based on true facts. Your COI template does not reflect a true fact. Etan Tal (talk) 11:31, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I was brought to this from the notice left at the conflict of interest noticeboard. While the conflict of interest is clear in this case, Etan has acknowledged the COI at his user page as the guidelines suggest. While there was a tag left on the page saying that cleanup may be needed because an editor has a conflict of interest, no specific complaints regarding neutral point of view violations have been raised, or any other significant cleanup. The only complaint I see is a minor one regarding formatting, which wouldn't be influenced by the COI in any way. I've personally looked over the article and it doesn't seem to be promotional, so I've removed the COI tag. -- Atama頭 17:56, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
While there is no obvious indication (to me) of conflict of interest, the first sentence of "Biography" is very clearly a peacock phrase, and should be cited to neutral reliable sources that clearly document the scope of acceptance of the claim. (This makes me wonder what other editors thought when they read it.) I'll also note that some of the endnotes are not in fact citations, and some that are refer to materials with clearly limited availability. This makes the article appear to be better-cited than it actually is. (This article was flagged for review at the Composers project -- I will be reviewing it in more detail.) Magic♪piano 13:54, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

composer project review

[edit]

I've reviewed this article on behalf of the Composers project. While the article is B class, I find it has issues, especially in the musical commentary, with balance and sourcing (and the above-mentioned peacock term). My detailed review is on the comments page. Magic♪piano 14:48, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Josef Tal/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)Press [show] to view →
;Composers Project Assessment of Josef Tal: 2009-11-25

This is an assessment of article Josef Tal by a member of the Composers project, according to its assessment criteria. This review was done by Magicpiano.

If an article is well-cited, the reviewer is assuming that the article reflects reasonably current scholarship, and deficiencies in the historical record that are documented in a particular area will be appropriately scored. If insufficient inline citations are present, the reviewer will assume that deficiencies in that area may be cured, and that area may be scored down.

Adherence to overall Wikipedia standards (WP:MOS, WP:WIAGA, WP:WIAFA) are the reviewer's opinion, and are not a substitute for the Wikipedia's processes for awarding Good Article or Featured Article status.

Origins/family background/studies

Does the article reflect what is known about the composer's background and childhood? If s/he received musical training as a child, who from, is the experience and nature of the early teachers' influences described?

  • OK, but there is little indication of what musical influences were in the household and schools of his childhood, which would have influenced his decision to pursue music studies.
Early career

Does the article indicate when s/he started composing, discuss early style, success/failure? Are other pedagogic and personal influences from this time on his/her music discussed?

  • OK.
Mature career

Does the article discuss his/her adult life and composition history? Are other pedagogic and personal influences from this time on his/her music discussed?

  • OK.
List(s) of works

Are lists of the composer's works in WP, linked from this article? If there are special catalogs (e.g. Köchel for Mozart, Hoboken for Haydn), are they used? If the composer has written more than 20-30 works, any exhaustive listing should be placed in a separate article.

  • Presumed to be complete, but the list is long enough to be separated into a "List of compositions by ..." article.
Critical appreciation

Does the article discuss his/her style, reception by critics and the public (both during his/her life, and over time)?

  • Style and reception are discussed but not cited, lack significant 3rd-party commentary, and are presented in WP editorial voice. See summary below.
Illustrations and sound clips

Does the article contain images of its subject, birthplace, gravesite or other memorials, important residences, manuscript pages, museums, etc? Does it contain samples of the composer's work (as composer and/or performer, if appropriate)? (Note that since many 20th-century works are copyrighted, it may not be possible to acquire more than brief fair use samples of those works, but efforts should be made to do so.) If an article is of high enough quality, do its images and media comply with image use policy and non-free content policy? (Adherence to these is needed for Good Article or Featured Article consideration, and is apparently a common reason for nominations being quick-failed.)

  • Article has images (thanks to Tal's son); no sound clips.
References, sources and bibliography

Does the article contain a suitable number of references? Does it contain sufficient inline citations? (For an article to pass Good Article nomination, every paragraph possibly excepting those in the lead, and every direct quotation, should have at least one footnote.) If appropriate, does it include Further Reading or Bibliography beyond the cited references?

  • Sourcing needs work. One third of endnotes are not actually citations. There is no separate list of sources (not necessarily a problem). If the "Further reading" listings were used as sources, they should be listed in a "Sources" section.
Structure and compliance with WP:MOS

Does the article comply with Wikipedia style and layout guidelines, especially WP:MOS, WP:LEAD, WP:LAYOUT, and possibly WP:SIZE? (Article length is not generally significant, although Featured Articles Candidates may be questioned for excessive length.)

  • The lead is not a summary of the article (per WP:LEAD). The number of quotes by the subject are perhaps a bit excessive -- I'd really like to know more about what others (critics, musicologists, etc) thought.
Things that may be necessary to pass a Good Article review
  • Article requires more inline citations (WP:CITE)
  • Article lead needs work (WP:LEAD)
  • Article footer material needs organization (WP:LAYOUT)
Summary

While I am aware of the discussions about conflict of interest, I have tried to keep my review above those accusations. I believe that better sourcing and citation of things that are clearly opinions is needed in this article for Mr. Tal's son to stay clear of those accusations. The first sentence ("Josef Tal is considered among the founding fathers of Israeli music.") is a good example of such a sentence. Who considers him such? Later in the article is a harsh critical comment -- does that reviewer think this? The whole section on his musical style is significantly lacking in sources to clearly unbiased third parties. While the quotations by Tal are generally interesting, they ought to be balanced by more commentary from third parties. (For example, a quick search of Google Books turns up =hHdSNJ1a45sC&lpg=PA7&dq=Hirshberg%20Josef%20Tal&lr=&pg=PA67#v=onepage&q=Hirshberg%20Josef%20Tal&f=false this source among others, which might be useful.)

The basic bones of the biography are adequate. A little more could be told about his childhood musical environment, but we know where he lived, and when, and what his professional positions were. The lead (per WP:LEAD) is deficient -- it should summarize the article, and it should also note his professional roles beyond composer (pianist, conductor, teacher), even if they were not what he saw as his avocation.

I found the footer material to be somewhat confusingly organized. There are standard names for footer sections (see WP:LAYOUT) that make it clear what materials were used as sources in writing the article, and inline notes and citations ought to be separated (especially if there are a significant number of notes as opposed to citations, as is the case here). Lastly, the list of compositions is long, taking nearly half the article length. It should be moved to List of compositions by Josef Tal and summarized here.

I give the article a B rating, but the article needs work to improve WP:MOS adherence as well as sourcing and balance in the musical commentary. Magic♪piano 14:41, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

== Discussing Comments by Magic♪piano ==

Regarding your peacock phrase claim I wish to add the following references to support my editing. The first three literally describe Tal as "one of the founding fathers".
  1. Ronit Seter: Music in Jewish History and Culture, in Music Library Association. Notes. Philadelphia: Sep 2007. Vol. 64, Iss. 1; pg. 87, [ISSN: 00274380] (reviewing Music in Jewish History and Culture. By Emanuel Rubin and John H. Baron, Detroit Monographs in Musicology/Studies in Music. Sterling Heights, MI: Harmonie Park Press, 2006. [ISBN 0-89990-133-6]
  2. Rebecca L. Torstrick: Culture and customs of Israel, Greenwood Press, 2004, p.154 [ISBN: 0313320918]
  3. http://www.iamic.net/news/israel/josef-tal-%E2%80%93-memoriam

Other references to support my editing (although in a different phrasing) are:

  1. Robert J. Gluck: Fifty Years of electronic music in Israel. In: Organised Sound 10(2): 163–180 , 2005 Cambridge University Press. [doi:10.1017/S1355771805000798]
  2. Alexander L. Ringer: Musical Composition in Modern Israel. In The Musical Quarterly, Vol. 51, No. 1, (Jan., 1965), pp. 282-297 Oxford University Press
  3. Hans Keller: The Jerusalem Diary. Music, Society and Politics, 1977 and 1979. Plumbago Books [ISBN 0-9540123-0-5], p.21

I looked at Arnold Schoenberg article where the 2nd paragraph states: "Schoenberg was also a painter, an important music theorist, and an influential teacher of composition" (my underscoring). It does not seem to me that one will ask for references to support these adjectives. It will belittle Schoenberg if one does, because it is a common knowledge by the professional community, and does NOT require any support. It might also be considered as redundant "overciting" by Wikipedia standards.

Now comes the comparison issue: One might say both figures (Tal and Schoenberg) are not to be compared. This is not for me to answer but for the professional musicologists. Since several of them (cited above) already answered the question, it seems to be logical (for me, anyway) to assume this is definitely NOT a peacock phrase.

On the other hand, it is now clear to me that some of these references should be included in the article's Further Reading list. This will hopefully balance our POV regarding this issue.

I ask you to reconsider this section of your review. Some of your other recommendations are already performed (without hesitations!), others will be discussed here later. Etan J. Tal 22:44, 27 November 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Etan J. Tal (talk • contribs)

In the absence of inline citations, it is not possible to judge that the phrase is not peacock. If you have sources that support the claim, use them to cite the statement -- burying the sources in "Further reading" doesn't tell me (or the next reader to come along) who made the claim. Ideally, you should explicitly state who is saying it, so that the claim is not made in the Wikipedia editorial voice. For example:
Ronit Siter, a [insert his qualifications], wrote that Tal is a "founding father of Israeli music".[insert ref here]
I will disagree with you about the Schoenberg article, for several reasons.
First: any uncited statement can be challenged or argued. Not everyone who reads that article knows who Schoenberg is, or what his role was in 20th-century music; this is equally true of this article.
Second: the sentence you highlight is in the lead, where many editors do not normally put citations, as the lead is supposed to reflect the article content. (I generally cite only controversial assertions or quotations in the article lead.) The test of that sentence is whether or not is supported in the article text in a meaningful way. The fact that most of that article is uncited is in fact somewhat problematic, but a straightforward unskeptical reading of the article does, in my opinion, support it. A persistent citation-demanding editor (which exist, but I am not one) would attack the sentences in the article that support that statement.
Article was revised according to your remarks. Pls have a look and note uncorrected flaws, additional information still required, or any other change you may recommend to improve the article. Thanks - Etan J. Tal 18:59, 10 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Etan J. Tal (talk • contribs)

Last edited at 19:00, 10 February 2010 (UTC). Substituted at 20:30, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Josef Tal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

|needhelp=<your help request 1. *Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131023000346/http://www.imi.org.il/UploadedFiles/06990f45-2eb8-49d7-a881-d78696f689f6.pdf to http://www.imi.org.il/UploadedFiles/06990f45-2eb8-49d7-a881-d78696f689f6.pdf - original link is OK

2. *Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090731141823/http://www.imi.org.il/site/ to http://www.imi.org.il/site/ - please update link to http://imi.org.il/cat1.php

3.*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110721134532/http://www.jewish-music.huji.ac.il/thesaurus761f.html?cat=9&in=9&id=687&act=view to http://www.jewish-music.huji.ac.il/thesaurus761f.html?cat=9&in=9&id=687&act=view - original link is OK

4. Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131022034528/http://www.jerusalem.muni.il/jer_main/TopSiteJeru.asp?newstr=3&src=%2Fjer_sys%2Fpublish%2FHtmlFiles%2F1030%2Fresults_pub_id%3D12594.html&cont=895 to http://www.jerusalem.muni.il/jer_main/TopSiteJeru.asp?newstr=3&src=%2Fjer_sys%2Fpublish%2FHtmlFiles%2F1030%2Fresults_pub_id%3D12594.html&cont=895 - original link is OK

5. Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131023000457/http://www.imi.org.il/UploadedFiles/84b87cba-186a-4d96-b246-702ff11c6c47.pdf to http://www.imi.org.il/UploadedFiles/84b87cba-186a-4d96-b246-702ff11c6c47.pdf - original link is OK

6. Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110716135533/http://www.imi.org.il/Instrumentations.aspx?ComposerID=600f2e7f-ba9e-44da-82f7-d14635bb41e6 to http://www.imi.org.il/Instrumentations.aspx?ComposerID=600f2e7f-ba9e-44da-82f7-d14635bb41e6 - please update link to http://imi.org.il/composer_page_table.php?case=search&cid=97

>


Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:56, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Josef Tal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:47, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Josef_Tal&oldid=1210617828"