Talk:Music of Mesopotamia/GA1

GA Review

Passed. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 01:59, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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

Reviewer: Iazyges (talk · contribs) 17:14, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria

GA Criteria

GA Criteria:

1
1.a

1.b
2
2.a

2.b

2.c

2.d
3
3.a

3.b
4
4.a
5
5.a
6
6.a

6.b

No DAB links Y
No dead links Y
No missing citations N I've marked a few spots without citations, which will need to be cited or removed, repeated here for your convenience:
texts about music and musicians are present throughout all stages of the development of writing; they focused on listing instruments, genres, and songs, and articulating their music theory. Piecing together thousands of surviving tablets, researchers have been able to offer a detailed picture of Mesopotamian music culture.

In 2009 Syrian composer Malek Jandali released an album, Echoes from Ugarit, which contains an interpretation of Hurrian Hymn No. 6 on piano accompanied by a full orchestra.

The most famous are the four Lyres of Ur: (and the following list)

Lutes were modified and adapted as they influenced neighboring regions.

Discussion

@GuineaPigC77: Article looks to be in good shape other than the uncited material, will begin working my way through the article in detail. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 17:16, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That said, citation #145 "Kilmer 1976, p. 7." is an error, it appears the date is wrong for the works cited, or perhaps the work it was meant to be attached to was never added in the sources. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 17:18, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Iazyges Great news! I'll be responsive to making changes etc., and I'll also ping @Aza24 and @Furius who may want to discuss as well. Thanks for your interest and time! GuineaPig_C77 (𒅗𒌤) ☕ 21:09, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Missing citations:
- Writing and tablets. Altered the first sentence to remove claim that writing was present at “all stages”. Hopefully what remains is considered obvious? Cited second sentence.
- Echoes from Ugarit. Cited.
- Lyres of Ur. I removed some un-cited material and cited the rest. However, I think more scrutiny is needed here: the claim that there are "four" lyres of Ur is not correct, at least according to Kilmer 1998, who says "Were it not for the eleven stringed instruments recovered at Ur (two harps and nine lyres), we would not have a single actual stringed instrument from ancient Sumer-Babylonia." The “four lyres” idea seems to be coming from the Lyres of Ur article. Revisiting this literature now, but in the meantime let me know if my edit is sufficient to fix the problem.
- Lutes. Adjusted claim and cited.
GuineaPig_C77 (𒅗𒌤) ☕ 15:03, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think where I said "obvious" above, it was poor choice of words. I don't think I mean WP:OBVIOUS but rather that the sentence is well and clearly supported throughout the remainder of the article. My inexperience is showing, but can one do that in the body of an article in the same way one would in the lead, provided that no new information or claim is added? GuineaPig_C77 (𒅗𒌤) ☕ 15:39, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@GuineaPigC77:I would ere on the side of caution there purely because the summary without a backing citation can come off as OR; if an easy citation cannot be found, I think the sentence could be removed without taking away much from the article (that archeology has led to the discovery of past culture should not come as a great shock to any reader, I think). Ref issue with #145 above remains unfixed, as well. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 17:19, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Fair point. I went ahead and cited each part of that first sentence individually to be safe.

As for the the error, I removed that citation altogether - both parts of the sentence are supported by the Güterbock 1970 source. GuineaPig_C77 (𒅗𒌤) ☕ 20:50, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Prose Suggestions

Please note that almost all of these are suggestions, and can be implemented or ignored at your discretion. Any changes I deem necessary for the article to pass GA standards I will bold.

Context

it first developed settlements around 10,000 BCE. suggest humans first began to develop settlements there around 10,000 BCE
Instruments were regarded as intermediaries, minor gods that held sway over major deities think this comma should be a colon.

Surviving works

not just practical considerations suggest changing not to rather than

Surviving instruments

very few instruments have survived suggest very few of the instruments themselves have survived
but it has been lost suggest but it was subsequently lost

Religious

the Balag and Shem, respectively everywhere else in the article the term "balag" as used for the instrument is lowercase; perhaps it should be changed here as well.

Music education

Professional musicians would be trained as apprentices, being eligible for employment in numerous settings. suggest Professional musicians would first be trained as apprentices, and then would be eligible for employment in numerous settings.

Societal role

and their job may have been considered less glamorous and temporary this bit is slightly confusing and doesn't seem to line up exactly with source. Source says it is suggest that the job was normally less glamorous, rather than may have been less glamorous, and the temporariness of the job is where the maybe applies; additionally, the current wording suggests the role was "less temporary", due to ordering. Lastly, the writing here seems to ride the edge of close paraphrasing, which is hard to avoid and keep the meaning, so I suggest just quoting it directly. Suggest it has been suggested by the musicologist Piotr Michalowski that their job was "normally less glamorous and perhaps temporary".
Making a note that I removed italicization for gala and naru from this section as they seem to be translits and are elsewhere not italicized.
When the Assyrian military conquered a city, they spared the musicians and sent them to Nineveh with the spoils. Somewhat awkward phrasing, suggest When the Assyrian military conquered a city, they would spare the musicians and sent them to Nineveh with the spoils.

Specific personalities

claiming that it came easy to him this does not appear to be in the cited source, unless I am misreading it; the previous page (374) does say "which he claims to have studied with great zeal, so that no aspect of it was too difficult for him"; these things are similar but not exactly the same. It should be rephrased to be closer to source, perhaps as claiming that the zeal with which he studied it prevented it from being too difficult, and cited to the proper page.
Also noting that I adjusted the page ranges of some subsequent sections to match the source (for instruments and genres)

Divination of instruments

I think this section should be titled "Divinity of instruments", as I'm not seeing anything about wikt:divination, only possible wikt:divinity
as minor gods - intermediaries that could help the priest communicate with a major god. suggest changing hyphen to colon.
@GuineaPigC77, Aza24, and Furius: That is all of my suggestions; aside from the two bolded one it's mostly just slightly wording changes; the two bolded ones aren't very major but do constitute deviations from the source. I've also gone through and done some menial changes to the article (sorry for the spam) for refs and inserted various MOS templates. Article is in very good shape, and I would be happy to support at FAC, once issues are fixed. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 00:27, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
All of your re-phrases work great, and I implemented them over several edits. The only difference I made was in the phrase "When the Assyrian military conquered a city, they would spare the musicians and sent them to Nineveh with the spoils" I changed "sent" to "send" to match with "would". Does that work? GuineaPig_C77 (𒅗𒌤) ☕ 01:30, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.