Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Cosima Wagner/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by GrahamColm 07:25, 23 July 2012 [1].

Cosima Wagner

Featured article candidates/Cosima Wagner/archive1

Nominator(s): Brianboulton (talk) 13:29, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cosima Wagner was the daughter of a fairly malign genius (Liszt), and became wife to another of a similar stamp. And she stacked up plenty of negatives on her own account: austere, glacial, unforgiving, obsessive, a rampant anti-Semite... Yet she served Wagner's music well, as both his late muse and as the protector of his legacy. One over-obsequious critic opined, at her death, that she was one of the greatest women who ever lived. Yeah, right; subsequent judgements were considerably less indulgent, though most give her some grudging credit. Trying to present a balanced account of such a controversial life is not easy, but I have done my best. Thanks to peer reviewers in general, and to Ruhrfisch in particular for image assistance. All comments welcome. Brianboulton (talk) 13:29, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments just minor quibbles:

Ref 80 should be pp.
Would be nice if the images have WP:ALT, unless you see reason not to include it – Lemonade51 (talk) 17:54, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't generally include ALT, as I remain unpersuaded that such text is of any real benefit; for instance, should one be asked to provide a description in words of a piece of music, for the benefit of aurally-impaired readers? The issue is one on which opinions are always likely to differ. Brianboulton (talk) 10:53, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

"Schooling and adolescence": could imagine the picture next to the paragraph that mentions the lady

The paragraph that mentions the lady is aligned precisely with the middle of the image. Any other alignment within the section would be disruptive. Brianboulton (talk) 10:53, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Leave it, then, it's just that I look at a picture first, then its caption, then only I read ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:30, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

same: I don't know if ugly duckling is known well enough - or should be linked?

I'd say that's a useful link, so done. Brianboulton (talk) 10:53, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Marriage to Hans von Bülow": "Frau Franziska von Bülow", why "Frau? (it's not a title) Frau von Bülow is fine. Why "Bülow, not "von Bülow"?

I've dropped the "Frau". The question of "von" was raised by Tim riley at the peer review. He points out, correctly, that in English prose the convention is to drop the von except in formal mentions of a person's name, and I have followed this practice. This conforms with all the English-language sources. Brianboulton (talk) 10:53, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I miss something about Cosima as a mother of her daughters.

I don't know what your point is, here. Brianboulton (talk) 10:53, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I mean: I get to know that she gave birth to two girls and how she named them and why. I don't learn anything about her relationship to them, they "disappear", --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:30, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"transfigured", suggest to also give the German word

It is not provided in the source; presumably to seek it out would amount to OR? I am not sure, anyway, what benefit the German original would bring to English WP readers. Brianboulton (talk) 10:53, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Munich and Tribschen": "the sacking both of Ludwig's cabinet secretary and his prime minister"?

Can you clarify your query? Brianboulton (talk) 10:53, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Probably my lack of English, the placement of the "both" seems odd to me, "the sacking of both Ludwig's cabinet secretary and prime minister"? - well, still odd ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:30, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

same: "Cosima wrote to Bülow", "from Wagner and Cosima", "Cosima and Wagner were married" - one first name, one last?

adjusted Brianboulton (talk) 10:53, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Building the Festspielhaus": suggest the picture later

Done Brianboulton (talk) 10:53, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

same: "Green Hill", provide the well known "Grüner Hügel" also

See my previous answer re German originals Brianboulton (talk) 10:53, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

same: suggest "Bayreuth Festival", once also "Bayreuther Festspiele", otherwise "festival"

I am considering this. The sources tend to refer to the "Festival", capitalised, and I have followed them, but perhaps your suggestion is better - give me a little time. Brianboulton (talk) 10:53, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:30, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I thought about it myself, working a bit on Rheingau Musik Festival. I write "the festival" when I don't use the full name, although it has the word "Festival" as part of the name. The Bayreuther Festspiele don't have "Festival" in their name, it's no more than a translation, not even a good one, because the Spiele (games) aspect is lost, - I don't see why that should be capitalised, my POV, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:03, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have followed your preference. Capitalisation has been removed except when the formal title "Bayreuth Festivsl" is used, or where the word is capitalised within a quote. Brianboulton (talk) 11:02, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"The first festival": consider, instead of the German Kaiser Wilhelm I, the German emperor Wilhelm I

Done Brianboulton (talk) 10:53, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

same: why the Figaro critic in brackets, but not the other?

Amended Brianboulton (talk) 10:53, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Parsifal": the par on anti-Semitism comes a bit out of context

I wanted to relate the anti-Semitism to Levi's appointment as conductor of Parsifal. I have rearranged the prose to make this context more apparent. Brianboulton (talk) 10:53, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

same: Kapellmeister, German nouns capital

Done Brianboulton (talk) 10:53, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Venice and widowhood": widowhood would be correct for all her remaining lifetime, no?

Yes, but she was widowed in Venice. Brianboulton (talk) 10:53, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but does it have to appear in the heading? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:30, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Mistress of Bayreuth": I would not know how to understand Mistress here

The context will be pretty clear to the English readership. If you can suggest an alternative, equally clear term, I'd be happy to consider it.

I am not so familiar with the topic. I heard "Hüterin von Bayreuth", but would not know how to transate that, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:30, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:22, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Herrin des Hügels is another term, title of a 2007 biography you may want to mention, the title of the review, "Hüterin des Wagnerschen Erbes", might be translated to "Guardian of Wagner's heritage", see also [2], --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:05, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am most familiar with the verb "hüten" (from which Hüterin is derived) in the context of shepherds and goalkeepers. I do not think there is a standard one-to-one translation of Hüter or Hüterin (masculine and feminine forms) in English, but guardian is a good translation, especially in this context. That said, I have to agree with Brian that Mistress of Bayreuth is very clear in context to this native English speaker. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 12:31, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In general: an excellent approach, looking at many facets of the topic. I would enjoy some more quotes in original German. I don't know if more were available on HER view of historical facts. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:03, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your thoughtful comments, much appreciated. Brianboulton (talk) 10:53, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for acting on them, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:30, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:59, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good to have your support, Gerda. Brianboulton (talk) 10:44, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - spotchecks not done. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:40, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Carr 2007 or 2008? Why include date in short citations when there is only one source by this author?

2008 is correct pub. year for this edition. At an earlier stage I was using another Carr book, pub. 1997, but this was dropped during the article's development. Brianboulton (talk) 16:26, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

FN88, 151, 158: page(s)?
Compare formatting on FNs 117 and 158
Eckart or Du Moulin Eckart?
Where is Harmondsworth? Nikkimaria (talk) 23:40, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All above fixes made. Thanks. Brianboulton (talk) 16:26, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Image review - as noted above, I reviewed the images and find that they all are free and properly licensed and sourced including the new image of Ludwig II). I peer reviewed this, but need to re-read it carefully; I imagine I will support after the PR, where all my concerns were addressed. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 03:53, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support - I was involved in the peer review and all of my minor concerns were addressed there. THis more than meets the FAC criteria, well done! Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 12:11, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

PS I do note that "Festival" is capitalized everywhere except in the header "First festival" and twice in the first paragraph of the Parsifal section. For consistency these should also be capitalized. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 12:14, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your support. The question of the capitalisation of "Festival" was raised by Gerda, above - see my response. I am still pondering this, but whatever I do I will ensure that there is consistency in the treatment. Brianboulton (talk) 16:26, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pleas see my note in Gerda's comments. I have decapitalised "Festival" in all instances except where the formal title is used. Brianboulton (talk) 11:02, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support: Although not an expert by any means on music or on Wagner, I thoroughly enjoyed reading this article. If the subject is a little disagreeable, I think this gives a very rounded view of her. Just a few minor comments, which do not affect my support and may be cheerfully dismissed out of hand. Sarastro1 (talk) 23:07, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"In December 1859 she was saddened by the death of her brother Daniel, at the age of 20…", and later, "In December 1859 she was saddened by the death of her brother Daniel, at the age of 20…" I'm a little uncomfortable ascribing feelings like this without any obvious way of seeing what she was actually thinking or feeling. But maybe I'm missing something, or maybe the sources are clear.

I'm not too clear about the "and later" part of your comment, since you merely repeat the phrase just quoted. On the matter of Daniel's death, the source describes Cosima as "numb with grief", so my wording is pretty restrained. Brianboulton (talk) 10:40, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lizst sort of vanishes early on. Did he have any views of her marriage to Wagner? And her conversion? Do we know what his relationship with her was like in later years? Or her opinion of him?

Lizst definitely took a back seat in Cosima's life after her marriage to Wagner, who was her father's age and his equal or more in musical terms. You get an idea of Liszt's diminished status in Cosima's eyes through her behaviour when he inconveniently died during a Bayreuth festival. She went through the motions, but would not allow the festival to be disrupted. Brianboulton (talk) 10:42, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Wagner announced the first Bayreuth Festival for 1873": This sounds quite definite, but then we later read that it was deferred. What about "scheduled the first Bayreuth Festival"?

He made an announcement – probably a "pronouncement" if I understand Wagner's style. Then circumstances forced a delay. "Scheduling" is I think a more recent idiom and I would prefer the present wording to remain. Brianboulton (talk) 10:40, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are some contemporary opinions of her in the early part of the article, but nothing later. Is there anything significant that people at the time said about her? What did they think at the time? What did her family think of her? I appreciate that this may all be unknown. Sarastro1 (talk) 23:07, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we have her as "a magnificent-looking woman, a perfect queen" at the time of the first Festival. Thereafter the sources don't really provide snapshots, but we understand the type of woman she was by her actions - her business acumen, her hold over her family in all matters relating to the staging of Wagner's works, etc. Of course, in her last 25 years or so, few apart from her immediate family got anywhere near her. Brianboulton (talk) 10:40, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your interest in this article (a far cry from the cricket fields of England) and for your support. Brianboulton (talk) 10:40, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support I had my say, and little it was, at the peer review. Sorry to be so slow to notice it was languishing here, but frankly, I rarely look at the nominations list these days. But a very worthy article, well worth the star.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:59, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I must say that your peer review was more substantial than you imply, and gave food for thought. Brianboulton (talk) 10:44, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.