Jump to content

Wikipedia:Peer review/Kaikhosru Shapurji Sorabji/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Kaikhosru Shapurji Sorabji

[edit]
Toolbox
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

I'm listing this article for peer review as I would like to fine-tune it before taking it to FAC. I believe the article is in good shape, but it is a bit long by the standards of classical music composer FAs. (The longest one, Benjamin Britten, currently sits at 10,991 words.) I've done some trimming in the past few days and managed to bring the word count of its prose under 10,000 words (it's at 9,857 words right now), but some people may still find this a bit excessive. I would say its length is reasonable, considering we do not have supplementary articles on Sorabji's music (such as Beethoven's musical style or Beethoven and C minor), the vast quantity of music Sorabji produced (at least 140 hours), and the fact that he lived to be 96. Nevertheless, I'm open to any kind of feedback (especially suggestions on what material could be excised from the article) and I would like to know if the text is accessible even for a layperson, as there are one or two paragraphs that might confuse people not versed in music theory. I have also recently received some feedback from user Tim riley, whom I will notify of this PR and ask him if he would like to continue our conversation here. Thank you. Toccata quarta (talk) 09:30, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE: when you close this peer review, please be sure to remove it from Template:FAC peer review sidebar. And please consider adding the sidebar to your userpage so you can help out at Peer review! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:09, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Gerda

[edit]

Thank you for the invitation. Today I remember many things, atrocities of Nazi Germany, the fall of The Wall, and that Brian died a year ago, - still a model. I admire his Percy Grainger and Alan Bush, among many others. I usually look at the lead last, and will have to read in small doses. Looking forward to get to know a composer about whom I know nothing! I got in the mood by writing about a Requiem about which I knew nothing. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:54, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

TOC

  • Looking at the table of content, I have some questions which may be answered when getting there:
    1. Isn't Personal life part of a biography? (I remember a comment that the whole article is the biography.)
      It is. As a quote (cited in the article) by Sorabji scholar Marc-André Roberge says, "there are years for which hardly anything [about Sorabji] can be reported". The structure of the article is a reflection of the research and scholarship on Sorabji, which is shaped by the scarcity of sources on his life. As things stand, I think its flow is reasonable, and dispensing with the "Personal life" section might result in having little bits of "trivia" scattered across the article. I'm curious how your impression will change as you continue reading the article and once you are done with it. Toccata quarta (talk) 10:42, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    2. "Ban and seclusion" makes curious, but doesn't tell me for which reason I'd click on that header (similarly for others of the type)
      I must admit that I have never considered looking at the article from the perspective of a reader skipping the lead (though I'm sure many of them will do [and have been doing] just that), so I'm thankful for this suggestion. How does something like "Ban on performances" sound? It's probably a bit more captivating, but it does not reflect the content of the rest of the section (the "seclusion" part). The next one ("Admirers and inner withdrawal") is long enough as it is, so merging may not be ideal. Toccata quarta (talk) 10:42, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    3. "Health and religious views" - a strange-sounding combination
      It is a bit peculiar, but I hope it makes sense once you've gotten there. The health section is rather short, so a separate section for it might look a bit odd. Maybe the best solution would be to scatter most of the information in the biography section, though that might be tricky to do well. Toccata quarta (talk) 10:42, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Early years

  • "Kaikhosru Shapurji Sorabji was born Leon Dudley Sorabji" sounds irritating to me. I'd probably say: "Born Leon Dudley Sorabji in ... on ..., he was the son of ..."
    I moved his birth name into a note discussing his name changes. I hope it makes sense that way. Toccata quarta (talk) 10:42, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've seen "nèe" only for women's maiden names, otherwise "born".
    It is a bit unusual to have the original name only for the father, but that's what the sources and state of the scholarship necessitate. The paragraph actually has "né", which is used for male names, though it is uncommon and potentially confusing. Toccata quarta (talk) 10:42, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    While I understand, I'd still use "born". Your choirce, of course, saying that once for all. --GA
    I have decided to keep it and avoid "born", which appears later in the sentence and occurs elsewhere in the paragraph. Incidentally, while looking for something else today, I noticed that the FA John Barbirolli has "né" in the very opening, for what that may or may not be worth. Toccata quarta (talk) 15:48, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm used to seeing only years of birth and death for persons without a link.
    Fixed (also in a later part of the article). Toccata quarta (talk) 10:42, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "They married on 18 February 1892." reads as if that came after his birth.
    I have chosen a "safe" and perhaps "dry" approach to discussing the marriage. As you will see later in the article, Sorabji's father was married thrice, with the third and possibly also the second marriage (to Sorabji's mother) having been bigamous (his first wife died at an unknown date). Injecting too much of a narrative into this section could confuse readers once they get to later portions of the article. Toccata quarta (talk) 10:42, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Without complications, you could simply say "had married", no? --GA
  • "Warlock inspired Sorabji to become a music critic and focus on composition, and his letters convinced him that he should avoid a university setting." - sorry, we have to think too much to whom "his", "him", "he" refer.
    Trimmed and rewritten, though a superior copy editor may be able to improve the passage further. I also removed a sentence from the same paragraph, in line with "show, don't tell". Toccata quarta (talk) 10:42, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • At the time we look at, it was Arnold Schönberg.
    Good point. Schoenberg is also mentioned elsewhere in the article, as is Sorabji's attitude to his later music. For what it's worth, the Britannica's article is titled "Arnold Schoenberg", so this spelling should be fine in a text written in BrE, even if Schoenberg intentionally used the American spelling in his later years. Toccata quarta (talk) 10:42, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I'd say Schönberg when referring to early works, and Schoenberg for later ones, as I call a woman different names before and after marriage if the name changed. --GA
    That's reasonable, but there is also the risk of having readers (especially without a background in music) think that another composer is being discussed. A comment on Schönberg's name change would solve this (as it does in the case of maiden names) but would feel out of place in Sorabji's biography. Toccata quarta (talk) 15:48, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The last paragraph has some jumps in chronology.
    See my first comment. Toccata quarta (talk) 10:42, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ban

To be continued, interesting! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:48, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for all your comments so far, Gerda, and I look forward to the remainder. And thank you for the historical note in the opening—every day has a history to it, but these are especially charged and in a number of ways, as indeed the last few have been. Toccata quarta (talk) 10:42, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for thoughts. At the moment, I looked at the Bio section, and all understood where I left no more reply (to keep simple). I'll look at the the TOC later, when I have more overview. Generally, it should enable readers to navigate to whatever portion of the article they might be interested in (something the lead doesn't do), and therefore should describe what to expect as precisely as possible. Turning to Grainger, I see less sensation in the headers ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:54, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Given that Grainger held views that are hard to describe as anything other than "far right", I think a willingness to portray him as a "colorful" (no pun intended) person will be very limited. Sorabji certainly had a fascinating personality and his biography is full of hilarious and you-have-to-see-it-to-believe-it moments (many of which are not covered in the article, otherwise it would be flooded with trivia), so in a way I'm glad that the text conveys that impression. :-) Toccata quarta (talk) 15:48, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mystique and fabrications

Sexuality

  • "mistreated by other boys in the school he attended and his tutor" - I think it needs a comma to not include the tutor in mistreating.
    That sounds reasonable, though the last copyedit (by a Canadian editor) resulted in this version. If further editors or native users of BrE feel the same, I will put it there. Toccata quarta (talk) 15:48, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I read the rest of personal life without urgent wishes to change things ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:47, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mature works

Read Late works without problems. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:46, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, understood. I wonder if there's any better term than "Mature" which is slightly pov, sending other works to "Immature". - I hope I'll get to reading further, but am busy with a Britten composition for his birthday, and a Recent death, on top of the long watchlist, and wanting to merge two infoboxes, and help with the opera navboxes ... --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:20, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed usage of the "mature" label, both in that header and a few other passages. Do not worry about the pace – this is a marathon, not a sprint. ;-) Toccata quarta (talk) 11:22, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Inspiration

  • I see an interesting list of names, but what I'd love to know is a bit more detail on how these inspired him, - rather different temperaments and music, Debussy and Reger, to name just two. I like the precision of Eastern influence.
    I have added some details on this. The influence of Godowsky and Alkan is discussed later in the article, as is Reger's, so I wouldn't overdo this. As for Busoni and Scriabin, their influence was pervasive, while the early influences (excepting Scriabin) are not discussed in much detail in the scholarly literature. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:45, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "especially for his nocturnes, which have been described by Sorabji and others" - a bit strange, coming from German, to first have "his" and then his name again, - may be just me.
    On reflection, it does sound a bit peculiar, but since it survived the last copyedit, I'll leave it there for now and see if others object. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:45, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Harmony

  • Looks as if the wish for more detail is fulfilled ...
    Some expansion of this section took place during the last copyedit. If there is something you deem superfluous or too technical for the average reader, let me know and I will deal with it. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:45, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think we need given names for Mozart and Brahms, - and really try to avoid "Wolfgang Amadeus" a construction the man in question would not have used. (The Salzburg Festival uses W. A., but I don't think we need even that in this contect, no confusion with Leopold.)
    For consistency, full names have always been given when introducing individuals. If we make exceptions for Mozart and Brahms, then Beethoven, Wagner and Chopin (who are mentioned later in the article) could be next in line and we might end up making some kind of "WP:OVERLINK" argument. Not out of the question, but could be rather arbitrary. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:45, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "and his musical thinking is closer to that of the Baroque era than to the Classical" - a bit redundant to what we just heard, and a strange present tense for the thinking of someone who died a while ago
    Fixed by shortening the passage and moving his views on Classical music into the section on his music criticism. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:45, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Creative

  • Why yoga twice?
    Here it has to do with the various claims that have been made regarding its role in Sorabji's compositional process, rather than his religious beliefs and practices, if that is what you are asking about. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:45, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Sure, only. why yoga twice in this short section? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:01, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I have merged the two sentences discussing yoga and hope that addresses the issue. Toccata quarta (talk) 17:31, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In later life, his typewriting also became error-ridden" - how about "In later life, even his typewriting became error-ridden"?
    I think this would push some POV or original research into the text by implying that typos and the like are less likely to occur when typing than in handwritten materials. (Intuitively, I'm inclined to say the reverse is true, but that's just my opinion and has no place in the article.) I have changed the sentence to "In later life, similar issues came to affect his typewriting", which I hope makes sense. Toccata quarta (talk) 15:32, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Past midnight --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:09, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Back, finally.

Pianism and keyboard music

  • I wonder if we really need a separation of performing and composing (and even organ) for someone who played his own music. Some of what Performer says would make more sense if we we reminded already of his compositions' features.
    I'm a bit confused here; are you suggesting putting the "As a composer" section ahead of the "As a performer" one? I'd say the latter is pretty much devoid of jargon, which is reflected in the lack of Wikilinks in it. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:05, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • if organ symphonies are so important, how about a link, and mentioning in the lead? ... same for piano symphony?
    That would make sense (though the discussion of importance is "relative to his other works with organ parts"). I tried expanding the lead to include "three symphonies for organ", but the list is long enough as it is and something would probably have to go. ... which include seven symphonies for piano solo and three symphonies for organ flows much better (though the list still feels a bit long), but the "and" disrupts the flow of the list. There's another option on the table, namely He ... is best known for nocturnes such as Villa Tasca and Gulistān, and for his large-scale compositions, which include seven symphonies for piano solo, three symphonies for organ, four toccatas, Sequentia cyclica, 100 Transcendental Studies and his last two piano sonatas. Just a shame that Villa Tasca is a redlink (and I'm sure my syntax and comma usage in the proposed text are rife with errors). Toccata quarta (talk) 12:05, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • composer: first "he has been called ...", then "It particularly exhibits ...", and we have to remember that "It" may mean "his writing for the instrument" from a while ago
    Rewritten and shortened. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:05, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "said" "said" in fast succession
    Fixed. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:05, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • organ: "Organ Symphony No. 1" but "Third Organ Symphony"? ... "numbered the Third Organ Symphony among his finest achievements" - not sure that "numbered" is the best word of self-appreciation here
    Oxford Languages gives one of the word's meanings as "include or classify as a member of a group", so it should be fine. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:05, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • transcription: "approach to his compositions", - "his" is a bit ambiguous after we heard of Bach and "the composer's"
    Fixed by shortening the passage. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:05, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Writings

  • books: I doubt that we need Mozart's complete (and wrong) name, and Brahms will also be known I guess
    Done. Regarding the removal of links for Bach and Stockhausen, is there a guideline or policy that supports such practice? A link to Ravel (preceding a mention of Gaspard) remains in the article and his name would be have to be linked later while appearing in shortened form, which might be somewhat disorienting. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:05, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I have now made the same change for Ravel, though I'm still curious if there is any page encouraging this approach (which, on reflection, I find logical). Toccata quarta (talk) 12:25, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reception

  • can we drop the "various individuals" clause?
    I have opted to remove the entire "foreword", which added little to the text. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:05, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • as before, readers getting this far probably know Beethoven, Chopin and Messiaen by last name
    Done. I have done the same for Ligeti later on, though having only his surname next to Finnissy's and Ferneyhough's full names might look a bit odd (same issue as with Ravel). Toccata quarta (talk) 12:05, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Twentieth-Century Works of Genius" - why all these capitals?
    That's how it appears in the source, which is a German translation of an English-language text. Both English and German have their issues with overcapitalization, so it's not clear how this came about. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:05, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • innovation: the sentence beginning "Roberge likens" runs on too much for my understanding
    I have simplified the sentence and hope it makes sense now. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:05, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

to be continued --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:56, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think a bit more about recordings and their reception would broaden our view at the composer, example Gramophone review and musicweb review. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:42, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Another bit about a performance of an organ symphony and another voice about a piano performance. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:59, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is some good material in these links, but a lot of it is better suited to articles on the particular works. As Sorabji's music is still very much in the process of being (re)discovered, many such statements are prone to becoming dated quite quickly. Roberge writes on p. 409 of Opus sorabjianum, "Despite the recent flurry of editions and recordings, there remains much to be done before we have a full knowledge and understanding of Sorabji's vast creative output", and I have tried to adhere to that in spirit. Still, I have added a quote from a 2015 review that offers a more "aesthetic" and temperate assessment of Sorabji's music, provides some counterpoint to the very favorable and very negative comments that come earlier in the section, and is one of the few to discuss how the reception of Sorabji's music has evolved since the 1980s. I hope it does the job. Toccata quarta (talk) 09:31, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

  • "English composer, music critic, pianist and writer" - I guess he was a pianist before composer, and would try to keep critic and writer together.
    Do you mean chronologically? Sorabji's earliest compositions predate his first public performance (1920) by several years, and he did not have much of a career as a pianist. In terms of what he is notable for, the current order seems about right. His piano-playing is what comes under the heaviest fire in the article, so I definitely wouldn't put it first. Toccata quarta (talk) 10:34, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "He is one of the most prolific 20th-century composers, and is best known for ..." - Having read to the end, I think we should tell the reader soon that yes, he was prolific but rather not known. I'd mention piano first, not nocturnes (which some will have to look up).
    The lead as a whole tells the reader that Sorabji went into self-imposed obscurity and has become better known in recent years. For composers who were very famous or influential, the lead usually says such a thing outright, and the general approach for the others tends to be "If you can't say something impressive, don't say anything at all." A statement bordering on "The subject of this article is not notable but this article exists anyway" might not work out very well (the lead, especially its very opening, should explain why its subject is notable). Toccata quarta (talk) 10:34, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am not sure that the list of his fancy piece titles before some biographical understanding is helpful, - at least not in that length.
    I have shortened the list of pieces; see also my response to one of your later points. Toccata quarta (talk) 10:34, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • 2nd para: how about first parents, then feeling alien, then seclusion?
    That would make the link between his private income and career less clear, which might not be ideal. Toccata quarta (talk) 10:34, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • how about first let him play, then say "reluctant performer", the forbidding?
    In that case, the text might convey the impression that his change of attitude resulted from his reluctance to play in public, which is not very accurate. Toccata quarta (talk) 10:34, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "... through his writings and music criticism, at the centre of which are his books Around Music ..." - I'd get criticism before writing, and wonder if "at the centre of which" can be avoided.
    I have checked the sources and simplified the relevant passages accordingly, as "centre of" was not supported by them. Toccata quarta (talk) 10:34, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the sentence about his move from London to Dorset, what is the function of "also" and "eventually"?
    "Also" establishes a link to what was said previously, so that the passage says "during the period of limited public performances, he (also) left the center of English musical life". "Eventually" is there because he did not move to Corfe Castle immediately after leaving London. Toccata quarta (talk) 10:34, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • 3rd para: I wonder if his self-taught unusual composition style might come before the above, explaining it partly.
    As it stands, the third paragraph is chronological at first, becomes general later and moves into the present towards its conclusion. I tried the following, but don't think it quite works: Sorabji's musical style is highly individual and characterised by frequent polyrhythms, interplay of tonal and atonal elements and lavish ornamentation. As a composer, he was a largely self taught. Although he was attracted to modernist aesthetics at first, he later dismissed much of the established and contemporary repertoire, and he drew on diverse influences like Ferruccio Busoni, Claude Debussy and Karol Szymanowski. The long opening sentence might scare laypeople, and it feels strange to jump back to how he evolved as a composer after laying out features of his mature style. Toccata quarta (talk) 10:34, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Busoni, Debussy and Szymanowski probably all fall under "well-known" by surname.
    Not sure about Szymanowski, nor about Alkan a bit later. I would be happy to give only surnames in the lead, but I don't know if this kind of inconsistency is allowed by the MOS. Toccata quarta (talk) 10:34, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "His output of over 100 compositions spanned eight decades and ranges from sets of miniatures to works lasting several hours." - I'd consider putting that in the very first para of the lead, - great summary! Better than prolific and nocturnes.
    I have moved this passage into the first paragraph and hope the resulting synthesis is acceptable. Toccata quarta (talk) 10:34, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "His larger works also tend to combine contrasting forms (primarily baroque and athematic)." - not happy with the sentence, but not able to nail it why. ... "also", brackets, somewhat too brief to be easily understood, - or is it just me?
    Looking at this sentence after many years (and after having rewritten it countless times), I have concluded the lead will be better off without it. It is too technical for most readers and those capable of understanding it will not hesitate to dive deeper into the article. Toccata quarta (talk) 10:34, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the last sentence, I'd include "performances".
    Fixed by shortening the passage. Toccata quarta (talk) 10:34, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Last for here - will see you at the FAC! - I am a picture-driven person, and at a glance see a pensive man, and would prefer to also see when and where he was born and died, and a link to the list of his works, as Percy Grainger offers, and Beethoven. Best wishes! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:37, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you mean an infobox, I gave it a go again (I tried one, only in preview mode, a couple months ago), but I'm bothered by "Notable works" paving the way for a link to a list of compositions, while the lead is highlighting only some parts of his musical production. There are also issues with the place of birth (England, UK or GB) that I'd rather avoid, especially for a composer who did not identify with English society. I do not wish to open another infobox argument, but I think even the short one I tried out here has several issues (and I'm not opposed to most infoboxes). Thank you very much for your time and all your input, and I look forward to seeing you at FAC. Toccata quarta (talk) 10:34, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the replies, all understood. I mean an infobox, but some think that's a no-no-word. Grainger and Beethoven haven't attracted "notable works" in many years. I never fill the country thingy, but always find helpful souls versed in how a place was named at which time. This is what I'd write, and just a suggestion. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:24, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the suggestion. I have made some tweaks to the IB and added it to the article; I guess I have now officially joined the "dark side". Toccata quarta (talk) 15:08, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Removing it here, to avoid double counting when looking for number of transclusions. It's in the history for those interested. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:19, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

From Smerus, part 1 - Lead

[edit]

apologies, my contributions here will be piecemeal.

No need to apologize, and thank you for contributing! Toccata quarta (talk) 12:13, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • This sentence in the lead " As a homosexual of mixed ancestry and feeling alienated from English society, he was educated privately and had a lifelong tendency to seclusion" won't do. His homosexuality was not a condition of his education. Maybe "Sorabji evidenced alienation from English society throughout his life: contributing to this were his mixed ancestry, his private education, his homosexualty and his tendency to seclusion" - but then make sure that all of these traits are mentioned and cited in the main article.
  • I have reorganized this and the preceding sentence, while keeping them consistent with the text and the sources. There may be room for further improvements, but at least (and much to my surprise) the change resulted in a considerable shortening of the lead. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:13, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Although Sorabji was a reluctant performer and not a virtuoso, he played his works in public between 1920 and 1936." He did, but very rarely - this sentence implies he did this regularly. The article says "Sorabji first played his music publicly in 1920 and he performed his works in Europe over the next decade" and cites Roberge p. 60. The citation does not support this text ( and nor does Roberge p. 61 which mentions his ?sole recital in Vienna). I suggest, e.g., "Sorabji was a reluctant performer and not a virtuoso, but he did play a few of his works in public between 1920 and 1936."
  • There should be brief mention in the lead of recordings and of ongoing editions of Sorabji's work.

More anon, --Smerus (talk) 10:52, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

From Smerus, part 2 - Early Years
[edit]
  • You need to split this, I would say - at present it goes up to 1936, when KS was 44! In the process you can incorporate stuff from 'Personal life' which really ought to go in 'Biography' and perhaps relegate a deal of this to the notes, which could help in effect in shortening the article text. I would suggest making a split at around 1914, so that the second header could be (e.g.)'First compositions'. I've personally always found it useful to put a date range, or approximate date range, next to the subtitle in 'Biography' e.g. 'Early years (1892-1914)', 'First compositions (1914-1936)'
  • All true and the idea had occurred to me, but the scarcity of sources means this required some ingenuity in restructuring the article (which I have just done). I hope the chronology and headings make sense. I skipped year ranges for "Early years" and "Last years", as those are very hard to pin down (e.g. the first year mentioned in "Last years" is 1986, while the previous section ends with 1979) and should be clear from the context. One question, though: is the following inconsistency in years that (do not) overlap an issue?
  • "Entering the music world (1913–1936)"; "The ban and financial struggles (1936–1949)"; "Admirers and inner withdrawal (1950–1968)" Toccata quarta (talk) 15:48, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Amongst the things that should certainly imo be brought up from 'Personal life':
  • "Sometime in 1913 or 1914, Sorabji joined the Parsi community and changed his name." Why, by the way, and how did he identify previously?
  • The correspondence with Warlock represents the first major insight into Sorabji's life and very little is known of his earlier years. There are some things that the correspondence gives away, such as that Sorabji did not originally deny his mother's Englishness (which is discussed later in the article) or that he still had not "awakened sexually" by then, but that's about it. I added a bit about how the correspondence reflects the birth of his sense of otherness and the development of his non-English identity. Toccata quarta (talk) 15:48, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Family and finances - the father's death should go in the main biography, as should KS's limited inheritance. The detail about the father's various other marriages, etc., fascinating as it is, is incidental to the article and can go in a note.
  • The para about yoga could go into the second part of this split
  • There are various other things which could be lifted from 'Personal life' up to 'Biography' and/or relegated to notes, I leave that to you to consider.
  • I have made a number of changes to the "Personal life" section, which has been trimmed by 1.5 [sic] sections and whose content and length now looks much more reasonable to me. I have also moved some material into notes, so the article's prose now stands at 9,205 words. There is definitely room for further improvement, but this word count is much more reasonable than the 9,857 that were there when this PR page was created (or the +10,000 words the article had once upon a time). Let me know what else, if anything, stands out to you as an issue. Toccata quarta (talk) 15:48, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • His absence from conscription or the war effort in 1914-18 should be mentioned in the second of my suggested sections. In 1939 by the way, aged 47 , he would be top end of the range for call-up so an unlikely candidate for it. As his opinion and status about soldiering remain unclear, there seems to me to be no point in speculating about it later in the article.
  • Roberge (2020) writes on p. 55, "Sorabji was forty-seven years old at the beginning of World War II and would surely have been able to carry out various non-combatant duties, such as fire-watching for incendiary bombs during air raids." I thus chose to put this information in the article. Toccata quarta (talk) 15:48, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm going to be boring here and suggest that the sentence "Sorabji avoided military duties during World War II and it remains unclear how" be rewritten something on the lines of "During World War II Sorabji chose to avoid any military or civic duties." (Consistent with the Roberge reference). The 'how' is in fact very clear - civic duties were voluntary, and he was off the scale as regards conscription. Roberge assumes the latter, and implies (I am sure correctly) that Sorbaji just couldn't be bothered about the former. But there is no mystery about it.--Smerus (talk) 16:56, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I suppose I should have quoted a more extensive chunk of Roberge's text, since the very next sentence says, "The extant documents are mute about his status during this period, including whether he was a conscientious objector like Benjamin Britten, or like Michael Tippett and his later friend Ronald Stevenson (who both served prison time), or whether he was exempted from duties because of health problems." To me, this suggests that he could have gotten into hot water for refusing military duties, but maybe I'm being dense. Toccata quarta (talk) 18:41, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

More anon, --Smerus (talk) 15:09, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Part 3 (as it now is!) Entering the music world
[edit]
  • "—in the work of Arnold Schoenberg, Alexander Scriabin, Gustav Mahler and Claude Debussy, among others—" Why list these names here? - they belong in discussion of his music (?influences?). Similalrly with the listing of " Paul Hindemith, Alfredo Casella and Béla Bartók" below - they have no direct interaction with KS and lenthen the article without adding to its substance,
  • But you should mention somewhere Cecil Gray and Bernard van Dieren who I think (from memory) knew him and exchanged ideas with him.
Last concert and imposing the ban
[edit]
  • As you point out that there was no formal ban, you may want to reword this heading.
  • I agree, but there is no ideal solution (other than a very long section title). Even scholars like Roberge and Rapoport, who have discussed the issue at length, still use the word "ban", because nothing else fits. We could put quotation marks there (as does the rest of the article), but I know some editors dislike seeing those anywhere, much less in a section heading. If there is a short (and suitable) alternative to words like "restriction", "uninterest" or "exposure", I'll be all for it. Toccata quarta (talk) 18:41, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • After giving this some thought, here are a couple ideas:
  • Musical and financial hurdles/troubles/difficulties/struggles
  • Musical and financial vicissitudes; or Musical and other vicissitudes; or Vicissitudes, musical and other
  • Limited performances and inheritance
  • I quite like "vicissitudes" here (and would probably settle for option 2 or 3 in the second bullet point), but I'm not sure if it's suitable for the encyclopedic tone of Wikipedia. I have created a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Words to watch#"Vicissitude(s)" to get some feedback on its usage. Toccata quarta (talk) 04:36, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Vicissitudes I think could be fine - but how about something more straightforward, e.g. Problems - financial and aesthetic -since the problems weren't intriniscally musical, but more about reception and interpretation.
  • In the end, I decided to go for "Ups and downs, musical and other" which is similar to "Vicissitudes" but less formal. Most sources give varying opinions on the cause of Sorabji's self-imposed obscurity: some blame only Tobin, Abrahams's discussion lists various factors, and Sorabji's feelings of alienation (resulting from his homosexuality and mixed ancestry) are generally considered to have contributed to his change of attitude. However, many sources describe the "ban" and his ensuing pronouncements as an overreaction (Tobin's performance was the only bad one), so I have added a quote from Roberge to that effect into a suitable part of the "Reception" section. Toccata quarta (talk) 09:48, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

More anon - --Smerus (talk) 11:48, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mystique and fabrications
[edit]
  • " It has proven to be a challenging task" - the words 'to be' are superfluous, I would delete
  • Mother. This para could be made a lot shorter. You've already referred to his ma not beaing a singer, and thr paragparapj duplicates the 'Spanish-Sicilian' angle.
  • "Sorabji's deception regarding his age may be why he was not conscripted during World War I, though his precarious health has also been suggested as an explanation." I'd just delete this sentence; there is nothing in the article about him giving a misleading age in the period 1914-1918, and you've already refrered to him avidung conscription.
  • "It remains unclear why Sorabji insisted on a Spanish-Sicilian ancestry and other fabrications. Owen says he may have shielded himself from being viewed as a mixed-race Englishman and chose to portray himself as a foreigner instead. His interviews with people from Corfe Castle and neighbouring areas show that Sorabji's personality exhibits many contradictions, which he terms "posturing of otherness"." I'd delete this. It more or less rehashes the above, and adds little or nothing. The following sentence ("Owen concludes...") onwards effectively summarizes the section as a whole.
  • And incidentally the following section "Sexuality and otherness" also repeats, sometimes for the second or third time, stuff which has been said above (Spanish-Sicilian, dislike of England, etc.). It could be heavily pruned imo. I would also separate 'sexuality' from 'otherness' as their being used together could be misconstrued by devotees of wokeness.
  • Splitting the two would be rather tricky, so I have replaced "otherness" with the more plain "ethnicity". I have removed some content as suggested and redistributed various passages into other sections and the notes. (Also, the article prose is now under 9,000 words – yikes!) Toccata quarta (talk) 19:56, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

--Smerus (talk) 16:06, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Religious views
[edit]

Once again I ask you to consider removing the para about yoga to the 'ups and downs' section in thr biography. For 2 reasons: 1) Yoga is not a religion, it is, according to WP , "a group of physical, mental, and spiritual practices or disciplines" that crosses inter alia Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism. 2) The information here, which includes info about music and an essay he wrote in this period, belongs in the 'Life' as it places these developments in the sequence of his story. --Smerus (talk) 11:42, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done, with a new quote from Sorabji included. Toccata quarta (talk) 14:25, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Music and writings
[edit]

I will skip these sections !--Smerus (talk) 11:44, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Legacy
[edit]
  • I think it is worth saying that KS's manuscripts are still being edited and published (often for the first time) by the Sorabji Archive. E.g see here, here, and here (Organ symphonies corrected and/or edited by Kevin Bowyer), and here (Piano Symphony ed. Jonathan Powell and Alex Abercrombie), amongst others.
  • Recordings. Geoffrey Madge's recording of Opus Clavicembalisticum, despite its occasional faults, was I think very important in establishing KS's legacy. (You could also mention John Ogdon's landmark performances of this work). Amongst recent KS recordings, Powell's 7 CD recording of the Sequentia Cyclica – Super Dies Irae ex Missa Pro Defunctis was given the German Record Critics Award in 2020.--Smerus (talk) 11:57, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Aza24

[edit]

If you can give me a couple days I'll leave some comments... Aza24 (talk) 07:03, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely! Looking forward to hearing from you. Toccata quarta (talk) 07:16, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Getting to this now, the first batch:
  • You have some dup links
    There might be some if the lead is considered, but the MOS allows those, if I'm not mistaken. There are a few cases in the text, like seven symphonies for solo piano and works he designated as symphonic, which provide clarification or avoid repetition (in this case, the word "piano"). If you spot others or there are more elegant solutions to cases such as the one I have mentioned, let me know. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:45, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Since there's no movement/period (e.g. "Romantic" "Renaissance") we can link Sorabji to, you may want to consider linking "20-century composers" to 20th-century classical music; would link virtuoso later as well
    Done. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:45, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • " he imposed restrictions on performance of his music (also known as a "ban"), which he lifted in 1976." is especially awkward with the parentheses, which is it, "restrictions" or a "ban"? Afaik, a ban is complete while restrictions are not
  • ornamentation would surely benefit from a link to Ornament (music)
    Good catch; added. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:45, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • You use "Born" in the lead but "né" in the text – should pick one or the other. Btw, if you go with "né" I would definitely link as it's a somewhat specialist term
    Solved by removing the birth name of Sorabji's father, which is pretty much trivia in the context of Sorabji's life. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:45, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not a fan of the current image/layout choices for of the parents. Both are huge pictures; on my screen the mother shows up in the middle of the "Entering the music world (1913–1936)" – seemingly unrelated to the topic here. I would suggest you to a multi-image, I've used this in Portrait of a Musician#Identity of the sitter and I fine that it works well.
    Fixed. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:45, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Any siblings? If so, a number might be worth a mention (and if not I would clarify he was the only child)
    Fixed. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:45, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would think that the " (also known as Philip Heseltine)" is pointless, anyone who actually knows him as Phillip Heseltine surely knows him as Peter Warlock as well :)
    Good point; fixed. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:45, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • claims about universities – vague. "Critiques" "criticism of"? Also, were these Warlock's claims on Universities or music programs at universities?
    I quote Roberge (2020), p. 50: "Philip Heseltine's 'ghastly' accounts of public school and university life convinced the twenty-two-year-old musician that he had been fortunate to escape both". Toccata quarta (talk) 12:45, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would think most know it as "drafted" so if you're going to use "conscripted", it may be worth linking to conscription
    "Conscripted" is consistent with BrE, so I have added a link to Conscription in the United Kingdom. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:45, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Was the first piano sonata his first publisher work? Perhaps specify this if so
    If the list in Roberge's book is in chronological order (and this appears to be the case, though the documentation is somewhat confusing to me), it was not his first published score. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:45, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • the issue was settled after the journal Musical Opinion reproduced correspondence between Sorabji and Newman doesn't really mean anything to me; the issue was resolved because the journal printed their conversations? Clarify perhaps
    I'll readily admit that Roberge's text isn't clear to me, which may be down to the fact that English is not my first language. Feel free to have a look at pp. 86–87 of his book (available free of charge here) and see if you can make head or tails of the narrative. I chose a "neutral" wording but as you rightly point out, it does not tell the reader much. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:45, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I notice that you have "English composer" for Delius but just "composer" for Busoni?
    In general I refrained from giving the nationalities of individuals, but I mentioned them for Delius, Cortot and Berg to illustrate that the interest in Sorabji's music was international and not confined to England. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:45, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • This was not without precedent confused what this means. Had he done something like this before or are you referring to other composers doing this?
    It means that Sorabji had even before then desired to have some control over performances of his music and early editions of his works included comments such as "All rights including that of performance, reserved by the Composer" (see [2]). Toccata quarta (talk) 12:45, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • In 1950, Sorabji left London the text prior to this doesn't really make it clear that he was in London to begin with
    Fixed. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:45, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • May want to give a year in parenthesis when Around Music was published in discovered Sorabji after reading his book Around Music so we know better when this is
    Done. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:45, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Microfilming (which encompassed all of Sorabji's unpublished musical manuscripts) began in January 1953 may work better if built into the sentence, "Microfilming of all of Sorabji's unpublished musical manuscripts began...."
    I think the current version helps emphasize the fact that the microfilming ended up encompassing much more than just Sorabji's major piano works (which had been Gentieu's original offer). Toccata quarta (talk) 12:45, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • mentioned in his letters – "mentioned" is a weird choice of words for a note that is fairly important. Would think "wrote" or "said" to be better
    Fixed by simplifying the passage. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:45, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • would link Wareham, there a quite a few places with the name after all
    Done. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:45, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • complete guess but I wonder if some of the "3,000 books" were scores? would do "3,000 books and scores" if so
    The source does not really suggest such a thing and the section containing the figure is titled "The Well-Read Composer on Social Issues", so it should be OK as it is. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:45, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The small paragraph beginning with The Sorabji Archive (originally called The Sorabji Music Archive) was founded... is noticeably out of place; I would think it fits far better in the Legacy section.
    Moved. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:45, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Got to the Personal life section, a super enjoyable read thus far. Aza24 (talk) 10:23, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Many thanks; I hope the remainder of the article does not change your reaction for the worse. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:45, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think using the "[Ideas]: [explanation]" method is super professional, but twice in a row with Scholars have focused on various areas to dispel them: followed by It has proven a challenging task: is a little much – would rephrase on or the other
    Rewritten. Toccata quarta (talk) 10:33, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sorabji often gave lexicographers incorrect biographical information on himself, I love this guy...
  • Also, about the earlier "[nationality] composer [name]" thing – the reason I brought this up is because I noticed that you give the nationality those that aren't English, which is probably fair, but I would think Busoni should get an "Italian composer Ferruccio Busoni" then
    Delius's nationality is also mentioned, and I think that passage is the only one where I made such an exception. Let me know if you spot any others. Toccata quarta (talk) 10:33, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sorabji's letters afterwards became less sentimental and more infrequent unsure if this is referring to just the letters to Chisholm or his letters in general
    Fixed. Toccata quarta (talk) 10:33, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Calling Michelangelo homosexual is extremely problematic. Mainly because the scholarly consensus is not clear, and he has erotic poems/letters directed towards both men and women so he could have been bisexual as well. It's also possible none of his relationships were even physical. I suspect the term homoerotic may be more appropriate for both Michelangelo and Verlaine since being a homosexual poet doesn't imply all of your poetry is about your sexuality anyways :) "artists" is also weird – I'm guessing you did this as to not avoid calling the famous painter/sculptor that is Michelangelo just a poet, but in this case I don't think it's a big deal, and it makes more sense.
    Fixed by deleting the passage. Toccata quarta (talk) 10:33, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • you may want to link erudition (which somehow has an article) – not a very common word afaik. Would link claustrophilia to our wikitionary article and misanthrope to it's article as well
    I have added some links but left claustrophilia as it is, since links should not appear in quotations. Toccata quarta (talk) 10:33, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • He acted as joint trustee sounds like you're talking about Sorabji, since the he in the sentence before referred to Sorabji, but I'm assuming here its Bromage? You could rephrase to "Between 1933 and 1941, Bromage acted as joint trustee of the Shapurji Sorabji Trust..." to avoid a double "he" and a double "Bromage" beginning the sentences
    Rephrased. Toccata quarta (talk) 10:33, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I like the note 3 earlier about Zoroastrianism but perhaps it would fit better in the Religious views section or be expanded there? The English-Parsi cross is surely important to his life and the religion section only touches on half of this at the moment.
    I have moved the material back into that section. Toccata quarta (talk) 10:33, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Got to the music, btw if my PR is holding you up, feel free to take this to FAC and I'll continue there. Aza24 (talk) 22:33, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for the invitation! Your feedback has been very helpful and "holding me up" is the last thing I would associate with it. However, moving onto a FAC nomination is a good idea and we can continue our conversation there. I will close this PR shortly and notify involved parties once the FAC is in place. Toccata quarta (talk) 10:33, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from SandyGeorgia

[edit]

Toccata quarta, you're in very good shape here ... I have a few minor nitpicks and dumb queries.

  • I am left wanting more information about why he wanted to change his name ... anything available?
    I have added a quote from Sorabji on this topic. Toccata quarta (talk) 14:06, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • You might want to consider juggling the images to avoid having people looking off the screen, which is very distracting; it is aesthetically better if images are facing the text. That would mean switching the images of his parents so that they are looking at each other instead of her looking off the page, and doing something different in the section with Havelock Ellis.
    I tried switching the images in the first case, but the caption is a bit of a problem. Madeline Matilda Worthy and Shapurji Sorabji, Sorabji's parents [emphasis added] might be a bit cumbersome, while Sorabji's parents, Madeline Matilda Worthy and Shapurji Sorabji is ambiguous (it could imply a reference to four or more individuals). Would Sorabji's parents: Madeline Matilda Worthy and Shapurji Sorabji be an acceptable solution, or is a more elegant one available? Toccata quarta (talk) 14:06, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I will leave that to you ... just raising issues that could come up at FAC. Havelock looking off the page, and the mother looking down and away are like fingernails on a chalkboard for me, but not so for everyone ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:37, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I have fixed the positioning of the images and solved the caption issue with notes in brackets. Toccata quarta (talk) 16:57, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • the editor of the journal responded, "If Mr. Sorabji will in future send his letters in typescript instead of barely decipherable handwriting, we will promise a freedom from misprints". Review MOS:LQ throughout.
    Unless my understanding of MOS:LQ is incorrect (which is not out of the question), all such passages in the article are fine. In the case of this particular quotation, the sentence ends, "... we will promise a freedom from misprints—at all events from 'glaring examples'." Toccata quarta (talk) 14:06, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    You have the sources, I do not ... this was just a reminder to check :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:37, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • ... Frank Holliday (1912–1997) ... Norman Pierre Gentieu (1914–2009) ... I am unsure why some types of articles give birth and death dates in parens after names, which is very distracting, but perhaps it is a style guide attached to a Project? Also, see WP:RED; some of these seem notable, and if so, redlinks help build Wikipedia.
    I don't believe WP:CLASSICAL or WP:COMPOSERS have guidelines prescribing such an approach, but I find it convenient to have the information there, in the absence of articles on the individuals. There are various historical figures who are notable only because of their connection to major composers like Beethoven, Chopin, et al., and this might be the case for Holliday and Gentieu, who probably rise above WP:1E level, if only because of the attention they receive in the literature on Sorabji. As Sorabji's position in music history is still in the process of becoming clearer, I'd much rather wait before creating entries on them, but it's possible they already meet GNG. Toccata quarta (talk) 14:06, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    OK with me, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:37, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • However, Holliday preserved his collection of Sorabji's letters ... check throughout for the overuse of however.
    Fixed by adding some additional information into the passage. There are two other occurrences of "however" in the article, which, judging by the information in the link you provided, should be OK. Toccata quarta (talk) 14:06, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Good ... always looking to lower the however scourge! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:37, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are duplicate Wikilinks; you can install this Dup link checker
    I have removed several duplicate links with the tool's help. I made exceptions for Consonance and dissonance, as the two concepts are discussed in one article, for [[Subject (music)|subject]] and [[Subject (music)|themes]], and for the [[Part (music)|lines]], [[Part (music)|voices]] and [[Part (music)|part]] "trio". As the lead of Part (music) mentions, this last term can have (at least) four different meanings. Toccata quarta (talk) 14:06, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Good! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:37, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • WP:RECEPTION is an excellent essay about how to organize Reception sections thematically ... the Reception here seems to bounce around, and the essay may provide ideas.
    I have moved some material into the section on his music criticism, since the existing critiques are not substantive enough to justify inclusion in the section (as the newly added material mentions). The remainder has been reorganized (with some new details thrown in) and I hope the "Reception" section (particularly its third paragraph, which was a bit messy) now offers a much more coherent narrative. Toccata quarta (talk) 14:06, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Good luck ! Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:37, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That's it ... good luck! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:58, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks! Toccata quarta (talk) 14:06, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Late comment from Smerus

[edit]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Kaikhosru_Shapurji_Sorabji/archive1&oldid=990417268"