Wikipedia:Peer review/Carillon/archive1

Carillon

I've listed this article for peer review because I intend to get it promoted to WP:FA this year. This is an old article (since 2002) about an old musical instrument (since 1500s), and as far as I'm aware, only two other musical instrument articles (1 and 2) have been rated FA. Please give me any and all types of review comments.

Thanks, Thrakkx (talk) 22:59, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Comments from Gerda

Thank you for this exquisite topic. (The second of your other examples is a FL, featured list.) Feel free to comment after each bulleted list.

• Lead image: I suggest take one showing the bells.
  • Done, though I put it in place of the Bok Tower image. I believe the image of the keyboard itself is a more representative lead image. Carillons' bell-housing-structures all look wildly different, but their keyboards look the same.
• Caption of tower image: please offer "Florida", - and do we need a link to a library at this point?
  • No longer applicable as the image has been removed. However, I put the link to the Anton Brees Carillon Library under See Also. That article may be in bad shape, but it actually is the library with the largest collection of carillon-related materials in the world.
• Lead:
  • I'd split the sentence about ownership here, playing there, in two.
    • Changed.
  • "The majority are concentrated around its place of origin" - it is not clear what "its" stands for.
    • Reworded to "concentrated in and around the Low Countries." "Place of origin" also felt unclear upon review.
  • "constructed in the last century" - better: "20th century"
    • Changed.
• Range:
  • I don't need six references for one fact, - three at best
    • Comment: I added so many references to illustrate the variety of authorities that make this claim. I combined them all under one reference tag. What do you think, remove some still? I'm thinking the three undated references if yes.
• International recognition:
  • A bit surprising to see destruction under this header
    • Changed. You have a point. There is a natural heading divide right before the UNESCO facts.
  • UNESCO: perhaps take that to the lead also.
    • Added to lead!

That's it for now. To be continued. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:56, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments! I look forward to more. Be strict; the goal is to pass FAC on the first try. Thrakkx (talk) 02:01, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, I like your reactions! (Don't need anything bolded) - I see a busy day (see my talk), and will be back late, or tomorrow. There is a great Carillon tradition at Marktkirche, Wiesbaden. Even our little town has a chime, automatically playing two-part music twice a day but sadly not tuned well (heard last Monday). I listened to a concert that the Wiesbaden player gave in Stanford, Connecticut, small world. In Helsinki, four players performed chime music for half an hour before a choral concert at the Uspenski Cathedral. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:28, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Fish Church, and also: nothing wrong with trying several times. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:31, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

• Music:
  • "Others were composers of other media" - could that be said less repetitive, and more precise? - Which media?
    • Changed wording to "Among those composers were his students, such as Staf Nees, Léon Henry, and Jef Rottiers, and composers for other instruments, such as Jef van Hoof."
  • "Music for the instrument was sporadically published in North America until 1961, when the Guild of Carillonneurs in North America began regularly publishing music." - that sounds like a contradiction, probably my misunderstanding?
    • Changed wording to "The Guild of Carillonneurs in North America opened the first dedicated publishing house for carillon music in 1961."
• Organization:
  • "Employed carillonneurs at several universities and also those not employed at university-owned carillons offer private lessons." - difficult, but may be only me.
    • Changed wording to "Employed carillonneurs will often offer private lessons at their carillons."
• Distribution
  • In the table, I don't need "Counted by" in every column, better explain all headers right above the table, explaining also the abbreviations.
    • I explain in the paragraph above that the World Carillon Federation is not counting non-traditional carillons and TowerBells is. What would you suggest for the heading titles? "Count of traditional carillons" and "Count of non-traditional carillons" with subcolumn headings being "TowerBells.org" and "World Carillon Federation"?
• See also
  • I think the library would deserve some prose
    • I inserted a fact about it at the end of "Music." Hopefully it's not too out of place.
• my questions: is there any recording of carillon music? ... anything that could be said about concerts? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:15, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
  • There are recordings of carillon music, which I included under "Sound." I felt was the best place to put them given the section title and content.
  • I think I can add a bit about concerts. I checked the Rombouts source, and he does write a about what a carillonneur must do in the context of their job. I'll add a new subsection under "Usage and Repertoire." Thrakkx (talk) 21:59, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
    • All fine and understood, and I'm still in my morning routine, so just a brief reply: some people always ignore infoboxes, and I always ignore sound files. I'd make it a section, with most of the information prose, leaving just headers in the sound file which should appear in the section. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:59, 31 May 2021 (UTC)