Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of operas by Mozart
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The list was promoted by User:The Rambling Man 18:51, 23 July 2008 [1].
This list has been researched and developed to provide a comprehensive and accurate overview of Mozart's opera canon, in a clear and regular format. It has received a thorough peer review, which has led to significant improvements, and I believe that it now meets the FL criteria. Brianboulton (talk) 18:44, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments
- Don't have bold links in the lead.
- Link removed Brianboulton (talk) 20:49, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- " February 7, 1778 Mozart" comma between year and Mozart? - Yes, now included
- Any reason why it's written in US-English?
- Is it? What, particularly, makes you say so? Brianboulton (talk) 20:49, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "characterizations " The Rambling Man (talk) 07:05, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The "z" spellink is used in Brit-Eng, too. Brianboulton (talk) 09:17, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Well that's certainly a modern interpretation. Characterisation is preferred as far as English Wikipedia is concerned.
- The "z" spellink is used in Brit-Eng, too. Brianboulton (talk) 09:17, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "characterizations " The Rambling Man (talk) 07:05, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Is it? What, particularly, makes you say so? Brianboulton (talk) 20:49, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Don't have bold links in the lead.
The Rambling Man (talk) 12:31, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- OK, changed. Brianboulton (talk) 19:01, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- 1780 image on the left wrecks the layout (for me in Safari, at least). I suspect right aligned image would work better.
- Well, it would have to be a different image, because this one would be looking away from the text if located on the right. I'll look for alternatives. Brianboulton (talk) 20:49, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I've put a portrait on the right side, looking into the text. I don't think it's as good as the other, but it may preserve your layout. Brianboulton (talk) 22:57, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, it would have to be a different image, because this one would be looking away from the text if located on the right. I'll look for alternatives. Brianboulton (talk) 20:49, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I think it's worth explaining the Kochel numbering in the lead.
- Any reason why the footnote on the Kochel column-heading is not adequate, indeed better, for the purposes of this list? Also, it's linked at first mention in the text. Brianboulton (talk) 22:57, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- K.50 details has a full stop, the others don't. Be consistent. - Stop removed
- Voice parts - MOS says numbers below 10 should be in text. - I'll come back to this Brianboulton (talk) 20:49, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- (Later) I've tried the text format. In my view, the table loses a lot of clarity by the form "Three soprano, two tenor", etc. There must be some circumstances in which the MoS rule is not inviolable (football results come to mind). If required I will make the change, but I really do think the quality of the table will suffer. Brianboulton (talk) 20:59, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Can you link librettist to, say, libretto? - Yes, done
- By Eng: I guess you mean English translation. Worth noting that in a statement above the table. - Done
- K.345 uses a hyphen in the details column - use en-dash.- Done
- K.208 links Opera but Opera has been used well beforehand - link the first time.
- Actually, apart from in the bold titles, opera on its own is not mentioned, until K. 208. Earlier references in the table are all to opera buffa and opera seria, not "opera"
- K.344 is missing a full stop in the details. - Done
- K.366 looks like the details has a break or something... - Fixed
- K.527 also seems to have the date after a break.-Fixed
- 1780 image on the left wrecks the layout (for me in Safari, at least). I suspect right aligned image would work better.
Support - I commented on this list in the peer review process, and think it's shaped up to be an outstanding addition. Well done, Brian! MeegsC | Talk 11:43, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- One comment: The sentence Ideas and characterisations introduced in the early works were developed and refined is a bit unclear. Does that mean they were already developed and refined, or that ideas and characterisations from those works were developed and refined in later works? If the latter, the sentence should be reworded. MeegsC | Talk 11:47, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Good point. I've amended the sentence. Brianboulton (talk) 13:13, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support, though it might be useful to mention, in the lead, in what language the operas were originally written/sung. --maclean 20:58, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you for this suggestion. I think that the language information should be in the table itself, and have added a column, which looks well - on my screen, anyway. Brianboulton (talk) 23:37, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I dislike the article title. We seem to have gravitated towards a more informal title format; I would prefer something like "List of operas by Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart". Or even "List of operas by Mozart". Not opposing, just stating an opinion. --Golbez (talk) 12:38, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- When I created the list it was called "List of operatic works by W. A. Mozart". Someone from Project Opera changed this to "Mozart's operas" on the grounds that this title would be more easily found. After some discussion, by way of compromise, it became List of Mozart's operas. Further discussion might swing towards your title of choice, which I would prefer. Brianboulton (talk) 17:05, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- FWIW I'd go for "List of operas by Mozart" in pref to the current choice. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:21, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "List of operas by Mozart" redirects to this list. How do I make a redirect into the main title? Brianboulton (talk) 00:07, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I believe administrators only can make this move.--Crzycheetah 06:07, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah, most likely it'd need the redirect to be deleted to make way for the move. If you're sure this is the title you want then let me know and I'll do it. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:43, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, please do it. Will the present title then be a redirect to the new one? Brianboulton (talk) 09:15, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- That's right. I'll go ahead and do it. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:33, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, please do it. Will the present title then be a redirect to the new one? Brianboulton (talk) 09:15, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah, most likely it'd need the redirect to be deleted to make way for the move. If you're sure this is the title you want then let me know and I'll do it. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:43, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I believe administrators only can make this move.--Crzycheetah 06:07, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- "List of operas by Mozart" redirects to this list. How do I make a redirect into the main title? Brianboulton (talk) 00:07, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- FWIW I'd go for "List of operas by Mozart" in pref to the current choice. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:21, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- When I created the list it was called "List of operatic works by W. A. Mozart". Someone from Project Opera changed this to "Mozart's operas" on the grounds that this title would be more easily found. After some discussion, by way of compromise, it became List of Mozart's operas. Further discussion might swing towards your title of choice, which I would prefer. Brianboulton (talk) 17:05, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support- I made a few comments about this list at the opera wikiproject and made a few minor edits to the list. This list is not only an excellent edition to the encyclopedia but exemplifies some of the best work done at the opera project.Nrswanson (talk) 14:53, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Why are the K numbers linked? They lead to the same places as the music titles so this is redundant and "surprising" linking. Also why is there an entry saying "Music for a Latin drama" which is unlinked to anything that would explain this classification while the article on Apollo et Hyacinthus calls it Mozart's first true opera? Rmhermen (talk) 16:12, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I linked the Ks that were linked in the Kochel catalogue list, but I agree that they don't provide any useful independent link, and can be removed. As to Apollo, while it can be properly described as Mozart's first true opera, to call it simply an "opera" gives little indication as to its unique character. The title page on the on-line NME score seems to be missing, so I couldn't pick up their description of the work. Osborne calls it a "musical intermezzo to a Latin comedy", but Kenyon's description is the one I have used: "Music for a Latin drama", and this is cited. Brianboulton (talk) 20:36, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I am not concerned about it being sourced but that I don't know what it means - and there is no link to follow to learn more about it - what is a "Latin drama"? why does it need music? - drama doesn't generally, etc. Rmhermen (talk) 20:49, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I have chosen one of the formal descriptions of the work. I think the meaning of the title is self-evident - a drama, written in Latin, set to music. If I described it in the table as "a musical setting of a Latin text", would that clarify? There is no relevant link; space in the table is obviously limited, so I can't provide a longer explanation. Brianboulton (talk) 00:10, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Well that would clarify that he wasn't writing music for a telenovela. That it meant a drama written in the Latin language, in fact, did not occur to me on reading this. I was trying to figure out what kind of Spanish form Mozart would ever have been working on. Rmhermen (talk) 14:37, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Modified. I'm glad to have resolved your difficulty. Brianboulton (talk) 21:33, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Well that would clarify that he wasn't writing music for a telenovela. That it meant a drama written in the Latin language, in fact, did not occur to me on reading this. I was trying to figure out what kind of Spanish form Mozart would ever have been working on. Rmhermen (talk) 14:37, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I have chosen one of the formal descriptions of the work. I think the meaning of the title is self-evident - a drama, written in Latin, set to music. If I described it in the table as "a musical setting of a Latin text", would that clarify? There is no relevant link; space in the table is obviously limited, so I can't provide a longer explanation. Brianboulton (talk) 00:10, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I am not concerned about it being sourced but that I don't know what it means - and there is no link to follow to learn more about it - what is a "Latin drama"? why does it need music? - drama doesn't generally, etc. Rmhermen (talk) 20:49, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I linked the Ks that were linked in the Kochel catalogue list, but I agree that they don't provide any useful independent link, and can be removed. As to Apollo, while it can be properly described as Mozart's first true opera, to call it simply an "opera" gives little indication as to its unique character. The title page on the on-line NME score seems to be missing, so I couldn't pick up their description of the work. Osborne calls it a "musical intermezzo to a Latin comedy", but Kenyon's description is the one I have used: "Music for a Latin drama", and this is cited. Brianboulton (talk) 20:36, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support, not only meets FL criteria but is genuinely useful and an adornment for WP! One minor quibble - why give the English of Così as Thus, All Women!, which apart from being rather meaningless is not even a literal translation of the title (I suppose, back-jobbing, the Italian for this translation would be Così tutte!). The article on Così does not suggest this wording but offers instead "Thus do all [women]" or "Women are like that", either of which I think would be preferable. But this is trivial in the overall context. Smerus (talk) 18:03, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support, and agree with Smerus regarding the translation of Così. --Kleinzach 23:04, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I m happy to change the translation to the Smerus version. Brianboulton (talk) 00:10, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. Very well presented, and will serve as a useful model for listings of operas by other prolific composers. I've made a couple of small improvements to the lead. One comment: the English translations in the list aren't always the same as the translations given on the operas' own pages (example: La finta giardiniera, where the list translation is better) and it would be good if these were synchronised. --GuillaumeTell 17:24, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I've amended the Schuldigkeit translation in the list to match the opera page. As to La finta giardiniera, the opera pages's translation "The Phony Gardener" is an Americanization that jars on sensitive Brit-Eng ears. I would rather leave the version I have, which is Osborne's; I don't think minor differences between translations are that important, and I don't see any instances where confusion is likely to arise. Brianboulton (talk) 18:44, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.