Wikipedia:Peer review/Mozart in Italy/archive1

Mozart in Italy

• A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for January 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I would appreciate comments on all aspects of this article, especially prose and images. Is there anything important missing? Is there anything unimportant which is overcooked? This is a companion-piece to Mozart family Grand Tour, which was promoted last year, and should be an interesting addition to Wikipedia's Mozartiana.

Thanks, Brianboulton (talk) 14:48, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

I've made some edits in the article itself but also have the following comments:

• Para 2 of Lead: "the fons et origio of modern music and its terminology." - the "and its terminology" seems an awkward phrase.

• I've altered it to "...and of much of its terminology". Does that sound better?

• Photo of his birthplace - might be useful to put a bracketed note in the caption to explain "Mozarts Geburtshaus" means Mozart's birthplace.

• Agreed, and done.

• Background - importunate and "pushy". Isn't this basically a tautology?

• Well, they mean slightly different things. "Importunate" - pestering, harrassing; "pushy" - self-assertive. Leopold was both. "Pushy" is the word Sadie uses (hence the quotes"). I'd prefer to keep both, unless there is a serious objection.

• "Italy was considered the Mecca for all musicians ..." would this term have been used in the 1760s? Perhaps use "focal point" instead.

• I doubt if Mecca was used in this way in the 18th century, but does that disqualify its use in a 21st century account of the journey? Again, the source (Sadie) uses the term, so I'm in good company. I'll consider your suggested rewording, however.

I'll copyedit the rest and more comments may follow. --DavidCane (talk) 20:25, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for these suggestions and for the useful copyedits. Brianboulton (talk) 00:06, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Some more comments:

• Milan revisted, October 1771 – February 1772 - My tallying of the dates makes this October 1770 to February 1771 and I have changed the section heading.

My mistake, thanks for the correction

• Name of the Archbishop who died in 1771 - The article on the Archbishopric of Salzburg gives his name as Sigismund von Schrattenbach rather than Siegmund Christoph von Schrattenburg. The difference in the first name could be due to latinisation or alternate spellings (the Archbishop that followed was known as both Jerome and Hieronymus), but that would not explain the difference in the ending of the family name.

Again, my careless mistake - Schrattenbach is of course correct.

• Salzburgians - I think the correct collective name is Salzburgers.

You are right - altered

• References, Sadie - There are two Sadie sources. It looks like all the references with his name are from his 2006 book. At first glance the Grove references don't appear to have a source as they are listed with Sadie's name first as well. The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 2nd edition (2001) is available online as part of Oxfordmusiconline.com and the Mozart Article there is credited to Cliff Eisen, et al (the et al including Stanley Sadie and four others). It might be worth adding Eisen to the reference to differentiate them.

All the "Sadie" references are to his 2006 book, and I have now added (2006)in each case, to make this clear. The two "Grove" references are both from the 1980 "New Grove", not from the revised 2001 edition. The 1980 New Grove was edited by Sadie, and the Mozart article written by him - it was published separately as such. Cliff Eisen may have refashioned the article for the 2001 edition. The Grove references could be rewritten as "Sadie (1980)", but would that clarify?

• References, Order of the Golden Spur - The article on the order states that it is a single class order (i.e. everyone appointed to it is of the same rank - Knight). In this case seniority would be based on order of appointment in the order. The Grove Online articles for Gluck and Dittersdorf state that Gluck was appointed to the order in 1856 and Dittersdorf in early 1770, which would seem to put Mozart between the two in seniority.

I believes there must have been degrees of knighthood within the Order, since Gutman makes the same point about Wolfgang's ranking higher than Gluck's. I have added the Gutman reference, and slightly altered the wording of the footnote.

An interesting read. --DavidCane (talk) 01:41, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your helpful comments, on which I have acted as I believe necessary. Brianboulton (talk) 11:47, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Review by Jappalang

All issues resolved

Lede

• Suggestion (trying to get rid of two "Italy"s): "Mozart in Italy describes three journeys to Italy the Italian Peninsula made by ..."
  • I believe we can just get rid of "to Italy" – the destination is explicit by the article title. Therefore, "Mozart in Italy describes three journeys made by the..." etc. Will that work? Brianboulton (talk) 19:41, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
• "... the youthful young Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart ..."

I do not think "youthful" is correct here. He was just young, not full of young energy, or glowing with the vigor of a child (he was one then).

Agreed, "young" it is. Brianboulton (talk) 19:41, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• "... command performances ..."

I have heard of this phrase before but never explored its meaning. What is it? "Command performance" redirects to "Royal Variety Performance", which is not of direct help. I assume "command performance" is a performance for royalties, am I right?

A "command performance" is a performance requested by a (usually) royal personage. In the case of Mozart's tour, I think on balance that "private" is a better word, since he had both royal and non-royal patrons, so it has become "public concerts and private performances". Brianboulton (talk) 19:41, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• "The second and third journeys were shorter visits to Milan, for the fulfilment of opera commissions which Wolfgang had acquired during the first visit."

I think I understand why you used "for the fulfilment" instead of "to fulfill" (to avoid repetition of "to"), but it seems wordy (most likely I am wrong). Regardless, I think "his first visit" might be more personal for the subject.

I've altered this to: "...Milan, fulfilling opera commissions..." etc. I've also made it "his" first visit, as you suggest. Brianboulton (talk) 19:41, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• "... to the furtherance of the ..."

Is "to furthering the" gramatically correct? Would it be better?

It is grammatically correct, and better. I've changed it. Brianboulton (talk) 19:41, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

* "The children were exhibited as prodigies, and made a considerable mark. By 1769, Nannerl had reached adulthood, but Leopold was anxious to continue 13-year-old Wolfgang's education in Italy, the fons et origio of modern music and of much of its terminology."

The first sentence (and the first clause of the second) made it seem the children were products, marketed by Leopold. Inevitably there are criticisms on that, but should the article present his treatment of his children as such? On another note (a personal choice), the phrase "fons et origio" infuses an old-feel artistic theme, but replacing it with "source" or "origin" could be more accessible to the general reader. Is "of" in "and of much" redundant?

Leopold certainly did exploit his children's talents, but you are right; the debatable question of Leopold's treatment of his children is beyond the scope of this article. So I have softened it: "During these journeys the children's performances made a considerable mark". On the question of "fons et origio", since the term is used by the source, and has a certain elegance, I'd like to keep it if possible, nless you feel strongly it should go. The redundant "of" has been removed. Brianboulton (talk) 19:41, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• Suggestion on change: "During these journeys the children's performances had made a considerable mark on European society."

The "had" is likely redundant. Furthermore, perhaps a clarification of who the "mark" (impression) was on? Jappalang (talk) 02:07, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Agreed, though I've made it "across European society". Brianboulton (talk) 17:33, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• Grammar: "Wolfgang's performances had beenwere well-received ..."

Agreed and altered Brianboulton (talk) 19:41, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• "... his talents recognised by honours, including a papal knighthood, and by commissions."

Suggestion: "... his talents recognised by commissions and honours, including a papal knighthood, bestowed on him."

I've altered this, to avoid confusion between "honours" (knighthood, memberships of philharmonic societies) and "commissions" (contracts to write musical works). The commissions come up in the next sentence.Brianboulton (talk) 19:41, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• Embellishment: "... great musical theorist ..."

Would "leading" be OK? He was certainly that. Brianboulton (talk) 19:41, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

We can go with that. Jappalang (talk) 02:07, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• Grammar: "Leopold had harboured ..."

Agreed and done Brianboulton (talk) 19:41, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• "This aspect increased in importance as Leopold's ..."

Clarify: "This aspect of the journey increased in importance to Leopold as his ..."

I don't really want to repeat "of the journey", and I'm not convinced that "aspect" is the right word. I've altered this to "objective", and think it reads all right now. Brianboulton (talk) 19:41, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Background

• Embellishment: "... the extraordinary, God-given musical talents of his children ..."

These should have been quotes, but from the grand tour article, it is Nannerl who spoke this of Wolfgang; hence, unless someone said the same of both Nannerl and her brother, these powerful adjectives should not be used to describe their talents.

Similar words were used by others, but I think it best to remove the embellishment. Brianboulton (talk) 21:54, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• "... and the Mozarts also discovered that they were no longer young enough ..."

Did Nannerl and Wolfgang feel this as well? I would have thought it would be the adults (Leopold and Anna Maria) who might have taken pride in having child prodigies and were disappointed.

The source says "they" rather than "the Mozarts" . I've reworded: "...it became apparent that they were no longer young enough to cause a sensation". That's pretty close to the source. I've also deleted "as child prodogies". Brianboulton (talk) 21:54, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• Redundancy: "... Leopold managed to offended the distinguished and influential court composer Christoph Willibald Gluck."

Agreed and done. Brianboulton (talk) 21:54, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• "An unwise petition to Emperor Joseph II may have the effect of harming the Mozart name ..."

Unwise to who? What was the petition about? I understand it was a petition to ask the Emperor to reconsider the previous rejections of Wolfgang's request for an appointment, and that it was unwise to ask after two or three rejections. This concept is however, summed in two words. Reading later, Leopold had no knowledge of earlier rejections, and so the "unwise" aspect might be debatable.

This peteition was not about appointments, but about the refusal of the court theatre to mount Wolfgang's opera. I've done some rewording to clarify this, and also removed the description "unwise", which smacks of POV. Brianboulton (talk) 21:54, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• Grammar: "... and Leopold had developed a reputation for ..."

Agreed and done. Brianboulton (talk) 21:54, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• "He had wanted to include an Italian leg in the grand tour, in the autumn of 1766, but had reluctantly abandoned the idea rather than extending his absence from Salzburg."

Aside from the probably unnecessary second "had", how about ...

Suggestion: "He had wanted to spend the autumn of 1766 in Italy as part of the grand tour, but reluctantly abandoned the idea to minimise his absence from Salzburg."

I wasn't very happy with this paragraph, so I've refashioned it, using some of your wording, and merged it into the next. Brianboulton (talk) 21:54, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• "Nannerl, by 1769 nearly 18 years old, could no longer be exhibited as a child wonder, ..."

Here is one thing that caught my attention during a speed read-through. Earlier, it was said that the children were no longer young enough to be regarded as child prodigies. Now it seems, Nannerl is the only one, or are "child prodigies" different from "child wonders"?

This part has largely disappeared in the rewriting referred to above. Brianboulton (talk) 21:54, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• Suggestion: "... Wolfgang needed to hear and absorb the music of Venice, Naples and Rome firsthand, ..."

Agreed and done. Brianboulton (talk) 21:54, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• Suggestion (to help to clearly link the last clause to the houses): "... opera houses, which are described by biographer Stanley Sadie ..."

Agreed, with slightly different wording. Brianboulton (talk) 21:54, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• Grammar: "... for Leopold, or Wolfgang, or both."

Agreed and done. Brianboulton (talk) 21:54, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• Suggestion: "... which helped fostering a positive attitude ..."

Agreed and done. Brianboulton (talk) 21:54, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• "... together with a gift of ..., with a promise of ..."

Similar structure in the same sentence. Any way to reword it? A breakup might do...

Looking at the source again, I see that "promise" is too strong a word. There was an indication that a salary might be paid. I have reworded to reflect this. Brianboulton (talk) 21:54, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

The change is good, just one more question that concerns this statement. Is "Konzertmeister" "Master of Concerts"? Should the literal translation be inserted in parantheses here just like some of the previous foreign terms? Jappalang (talk) 02:07, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

"Konzertmester", literally "concert-master", meant a court musician. I've added a paranthetical note. Brianboulton (talk) 17:45, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Journey to Milan

• "His support would prove vital to the success of the entire Italian undertaking."

The words "would prove vital" seem to be a foretelling here. Would "would be vital" (implying a conditional) not do?

Yes, agreed. Brianboulton (talk) 22:31, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• "... partly because of ..., partly because the midwinter weather made travelling difficult and unpleasant."

A bit repetitive and seems to be missing a conjunction.

Suggestion: ""... partly because of ..., and partly due to the midwinter weather, which made travelling difficult and unpleasant."

I've reworded, generally along the lines suggested. Brianboulton (talk) 22:31, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• "Early concert takings were evidently modest, while, according to Leopold, costs were running at around 50 florins a week."

What is with the "evidently" (embellishment), "while" (curious choice of a conjunction, is it as a explanatory clause)?

Suggestion: "Early concert takings were modest; according to Leopold, costs were running at around 50 florins a week."

Agreed and done. Brianboulton (talk) 22:31, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• "Leopold's attitude to money was always circumspect, tending to emphasis his expenses and minimise his takings, and typically writing: ..."

This sentence as it is, seems more relevant to Leopold's article (his personality).

Suggestion: "Leopold was prudent with regard to the tours' finances, tending to emphasize expenses and minimise takings, and typically writing: ..."

I've rewritten along the suggested lines, but used the word "cautious" (which appears in the source) rather than "prudent". Brianboulton (talk) 22:31, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• "... by the local press. They attended a performance of Guglielmi's Ruggiero, which, from Wolfgang's description in a letter to Nannerl, did not impress him."

Pronoun issues. "They" could be confused with the press, although it could be the Mozart father and son. Amidst the identities thrown about, who would "him" be (father or son)?

Suggestion: "... by the local press. Leopold and his son attended a performance of Pietro Alessandro Guglielmi's Ruggiero, which did not impress Wolfgang, according to the boy's letter to Nannerl."

Agreed, more or less, and rewritten accordingly. Brianboulton (talk) 22:31, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• "... describes him as leaving ..."

Would it not be more accurate to say it was young Mozart's performance that left them dumbstruck, and not perhaps his physical appearance?

Suggestion: "... describes the young boy's achievements as leaving ..."

Yes, except I've used "exhibition" rather than "achievements". Brianboulton (talk) 22:31, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• "... they saw watched Nicola Piccini's opera Cesare in Egitto."

I think "watched" would be better, "saw" might connotate a passing glance. "Watching a movie" (with attention paid) seems more proper than "seeing a movie".

You don't really talk about "watching" an opera (or any theatrical performance, for that matter - you wouldn't say "We went to watch Death of s Salesman). I think "saw" is probably OK, but I've made it "attended" - going to the opera was partly a social occasion, after all. Brianboulton (talk) 22:31, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• Explicitness: "... including the Habsburg Archduke Ferdinand, a possible future patron for the young composer."

Agreed and added. Brianboulton (talk) 22:31, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• Suggestion (restrictive vs. non-restrictive clause, and pronoun clarity): "... an honour for which that Leopold had been hoping for since their the Mozarts' arrival in the city."

Agreed and done. Brianboulton (talk) 22:31, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• Restate subjects for clarity: "They The Mozarts left Milan on 15 March, ..."

Ageed and done. Brianboulton (talk) 22:31, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• Redundancy: "... Wolfgang appears to have done little by way of composition."

Agreed and done. Brianboulton (talk) 22:31, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Milan to Naples

• Reassertion: "After a few days in Parma, they the Mozarts moved on to Bologna, ..."

Agreed and done. Brianboulton (talk) 23:08, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• Suggestion (pronouns and restrictive/non-restrictive clause): "They He and his son left on 29 March carrying letters from Pallavicini which it was that he hoped would enable Wolfgang to meet Pope Clement XIV when they reached Rome."

Agreed and done

• "The boys were destined not to meet again;"

I am not certain talking about fates and destiny is encyclopaedic.

Suggestion: "The boys never met again;"

Yes, much better. Brianboulton (talk) 23:08, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• "to the Count's kinsman, Cardinal Pallavicini, Prince San Angelo of Naples, and to Charles Edward Stuart, otherwise "Bonnie Prince Charlie", Pretender to the throne of England."

Are Cardinal Pallavicini and Prince San Angelo of Naples the same person, and are they the Count's kinsman?

I hope I've sorted this out by better punctuation and the odd extra preposition. Brianboulton (talk)

• Reassertion: "They The Mozarts visited the Sistine Chapel ..."

Agreed and done. Brianboulton (talk) 23:08, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• Suggestion: "... a feat that came to reached the ears of the Pope."

Agreed and done. Brianboulton (talk) 23:08, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• "Amid all this activity, Wolfgang was composing busily—the contradanse K.123/73g, an aria Se ardire, e speranza, the G major symphony begun earlier, and possibly other symphonies, the provenance and authorship of which remain uncertain."

The "all" is likely redundant, but I feel this sentence is incorrectly constructed. "Wolfgang was busy composing. This, this, this started earlier, others are unknown." It does not feel right to me.

Suggestion: "Amid these activities, Wolfgang was busily composing his works; he continued working on the contradanse K.123/73g, an aria Se ardire, e speranza, and the G major symphony, which he had begun earlier, and likely other symphonies, whose author could have been he."

I agree the part needs improving. With regard to your suggestion, I think "his works" is probably redundant: as I understand it, he composed the contradanse and the aria, and finished the G major symphony started earlier. It is thought he may have composed or worked on other symphonies, but this can't be confirmed. I've refashioned the text to say broadly what I've just said here; I hope it is clear enough now. Brianboulton (talk) 23:08, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• "They gave a concert on 28 May, ..."

Did Leopold perform as well?

Source doesn't say; he was an accomplished violinist, so he probably did. Brianboulton (talk) 23:08, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• "When it became clear that a hoped-for summons to play at the royal court ..."

I think "hoped-for" is redundant.

Agreed and removed. Brianboulton (talk) 23:08, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Return from Naples

• "The party made a rapid return to Rome, completing the journey in 27 hours, although the benefit of this speed was reduced when Leopold sustained a leg injury that troubled him for several months."

What was the benefit of returning in speed?

Suggestion: "The party made a rapid return to Rome, completing the journey in 27 hours; however, Leopold sustained a leg injury that troubled him for several months."

The benefit would, I suppose, have been more time in Rome (to make contacts, give concerts, etc), but that's conjecture. Your simple factual version is better, and I've adopted it> Brianboulton (talk) 23:21, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• "Wolfgang passed the time by composing a short Minuet, ..."

Would a "by" there be correct?

Each I think is correct. Brianboulton (talk) 23:21, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

• "On 9 October he was examined for membership of Bologna's Accademia Filharmonica, offering as his test piece ..."

The structure does not seem correct (Passive main clause, active dependent clause). For example: "He was under attack, offering no defense."

Suggestion: "On 9 October he underwent examination for membership of Bologna's Accademia Filharmonica, offering as his test piece ..."

Agreed and done. Brianboulton (talk) 23:21, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Milan revisted, October 1770 – February 1771

• Reassertion: "They Leopold and his son arrived on 18 October, ..."

Agreed and done. Brianboulton (talk) 11:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• Suggestion (tenses): "Wolfgang was complaining complained about his aching fingers, but could not begin work on the arias until the singers were present,; it being was the prevalent practice that operas were composed in collaboration with the principal performers."

Yes, and I've also added why his fingers were aching. Brianboulton (talk) 11:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• "As the singers assembled, opportunities for mischief arose."

Does it not sound sort of dramatic?

Suggestion: "However, the Mozarts faced other problems as the singers assembled."

Yes, I've toned it, down per your suggestion. Brianboulton (talk) 11:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• Suggestion: "Quirino Gasparini, composer of an earlier setting of Mitridate, tried to persuade the prima donna, Antonia Bernasconi, to use his settings of for her arias, was rebuffed but met with failure;"

Aside from the missing conjunction, the last clause rendered an improper verb usage with Microsoft word (I guess the passive voice clashed with the active tone of the first clause). I think it is "settings for her arias" rather than "settings of her arias", correct?

Yes, correct. I've also reworded slightly, to remove a repetition of "setting". Brianboulton (talk) 11:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• "and sang one of Gaspari's settings in Act 3"

Is that supposed to be "Gasparini's settings"?

Yes, typo, well spotted. Brianboulton (talk) 11:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• Redundancy: "Leopold was able to write wrote home:"

Agreed and done. Brianboulton (talk) 11:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• Suggestion: "... at the Teatro Regio Ducal (La Scala's predecessor as Milan's great opera house before the La Scala was built),"

Agreed and done. Brianboulton (talk) 11:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• Suggestion: "... at the conclusion there were cries from the audience of cried, "Evviva il maestro!" (Long live the master!), and demands demanded for encores."

Agreed, (but no "for" after "demanded") Brianboulton (talk) 11:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• Suggestion: "The opera had a run of ran for 22 performances during the season."

Agreed and done. Brianboulton (talk) 11:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• Suggestion: "The Mozarts were now free to relax. Having fulfilled his major obligations for this trip, Wolfgang gave a concert at Firmian's palace on 4 January 1771; a few days later they the Mozarts heard that ..."

The original first sentence does not seem encyclopaedic, and if deleted, they (Mozarts) would have to be restated at the earliest opportunity.

Your suggested version is better, so has been incorporated. Brianboulton (talk) 11:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Journey home

• Reassertion: "Leaving Venice on 12 March, they the Mozarts journeyed to Padua, ..."

Agreed and dne. Brianboulton (talk) 11:31, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• "This would emerge as La Betulia Liberata ("The Liberation of Bethulia"), a work for which the subsequent performance history is obscure"

Not entirely sure what this is to mean, "emerge" means to come into existence over a long period of time or come out of something. Is the sentence trying to say that this work was discovered or analyzed much later to be La Betulia Liberata?

No, merely that the subsequent history of this work is obscure. Nobody knows for certain when it was written, or first performed. I've got rid of "emerged", and hope the sense is clearer now. Brianboulton (talk) 11:31, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

"... for which the whose subsequent performance history is obscure ..."

I think "whose" would be better, "of which the" can also be used. Jappalang (talk) 13:20, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

One word better than three, so "whose" it is. Brianboulton (talk) 17:49, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• Incomplete sentence: "In Verona a few days later, more commissions awaited; for Wolfgang was to compose a serenata (or minor opera), to which would be performed in Milan in the autumn for the wedding of the Archduke Ferdinand and his bride Princess Beatrice of Modena."

Agreed your suggestions, reworded. Brianboulton (talk) 11:31, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• Clarification: "At the same time, came the young composer received a separate commission for another Milan carnival opera, ..."

Agreed and done. Brianboulton (talk) 11:31, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• "This latter created a clash of ..."

"This latter"?

Deleted Brianboulton (talk) 11:31, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• Reassertion: "Thereafter they father and son sped northward towards home"

Agreed and done. Brianboulton (talk) 11:31, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• Repetitive: "The pair had also ... and had moved ... Wolfgang had been honoured ... and had won ... He had been admitted ... had studied with ... and had written"

I've slightly reworded this paragraph, to deal with the "had" repetition problem. Brianboulton (talk) 11:31, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

"Wolfgang had been honoured by the Pope, gained admittance to the academies of Bologna and Verona, and had studied with Padre Martini."

Microsoft Word registers a verb conflict in this sentence.

Suggestion: "Aside from being honoured by the Pope, Wolfgang was admitted to the academies of Bologna and Verona, and studied with Padre Martini." Jappalang (talk) 13:20, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Agreed, except I think it has to be "had been admitted"; it doesn't read right otherwise. Brianboulton (talk) 17:59, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Second journey, August–December 1771

• "They shared their lodgings with violinists, a singing-master and an oboist: "...delightful for composing, it gives you plenty of ideas," Wolfgang wrote to Nannerl)"

This is missing an opening bracket, and a punctuation. Furthermore, the relationship seems to be oblique between the lodgers and Wolfgang's idea.

Suggestion 1: "They shared their lodgings with violinists, a singing-master and an oboist, whose companionship Wolfgang described as "delightful for composing, it [gave] plenty of ideas"."

Suggestion 2: "They shared their lodgings with violinists, a singing-master and an oboist. The mixing of these musicians in a living space produced an atmosphere that Wolfgang found to be "delightful for composing," inspiring "plenty of ideas"."

It is obvious from the sources that Wolfgang's remarks to Nannerl were intended ironically, and I have altered the text to make this clearer. Brianboulton (talk) 12:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• "... the grander piece was to be Hasse's opera Ruggiero, which was to be performed on 16 October, the day after the wedding, with Ascanio to follow on the next day."

Repetition of "was to be".

Suggestion: " ... originally, the grander piece was expected to be Hasse's opera Ruggiero, which would be performed on 16 October, the day after the wedding, and Ascanio would follow on the next day.

Reworded generally in accordance with above. Brianboulton (talk) 12:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• "Leopold's glee was obvious:"

Possibly dramatic.

Suggestion: "Leopold expressed glee at this turn of events:"

Yes, I think "glee" itself is a bit of a problem (POV?) so I've replaced it with "delight". Brianboulton (talk) 12:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• "Hasse himself was gracious about his eclipse,"

Not certain, but I think "himself" is redundant here.

You're right - removed. Brianboulton (talk) 12:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• "Perhaps Leopold's pushiness in Vienna over La finta semplice still rankled there, perhaps word of his crowing over Hasse's failure had reached the Empress."

I hazard to say this is too eloquent. It is a form of speech that proposes, not stating information.

I've removed the "perhapses", but the suppositions are from the sources, they are not my interpetations. This being so, I think "Whatever the reason..." follows naturally, although I've rephrased it to "For whatever reason...", which means the same as "regardless", but is my slight preference. Brianboulton (talk) 12:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• "Whatever the reason, Maria Theresa's ..."

Same with the above, "Regardless" could replace the "Whatever the reason", depending on what is done with the previous issue.

See above.

Upheaval in Slazburg

• Suggestion: "... which had been promised by Schrattenbach on Wolfgang's return from the first Italian journey, but not had not yet been granted."

As mentioned earlier, this wasn't a "promise" as such. I have reworded accordingly. Brianboulton (talk) 12:27, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• "Salzburg Kappellmeister post"

What is a Kappellmeister in English?

The literal translation ("chapel-master") is pretty meaningless, which is why I rely in this article, as in the grand tour article, on a link at first mention. I suppose "music director" is a rough equivalent, but not entirely right.Brianboulton (talk) 12:27, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

It does not matter then. Jappalang (talk) 13:20, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• "However, the appointment would now be made by the new archbishop, an unknown quantity."

I believe "an unknown quantity" is used in the literal sense in encyclopaedias.

Suggestion: "However, the appointment would now be made by the new archbishop, whose policies and affiliations were unclear."

Agreed, but I've used "attitudes" rather than "affiliations". Brianboulton (talk) 12:27, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• "... elected to the archbishopric, as a compromise candidate acceptable ..."

Should the comma be there?

Deleted. Brianboulton (talk) 12:27, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• Suggestion (the original is okay, this is just a variant if desired): "... to be to in the Mozarts' advantage favour;"

I've left it for the moment. Brianboulton (talk) 12:27, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• "But on the matter of the new Kappellmeister, Colloredo began to look for someone outside the Salzburg court, eventually settling on the Italian composer Domenico Fischietti. Fischietti was several years younger than Leopold, who now realised that his own chances of promotion had probably gone for ever. It became evident that Leopold's hopes for a comfortable old age now rested with Wolfgang, and the quest for a suitable position for the boy became the main focus of the third Italian journey, which began at the end of October 1772."

I saw the "... Fischietti. Fischietti ..." and found that my attempt to resolve the repetition resulted in changes to the entire chunk of sentences.

Suggestion: "However, Colloredo looked for someone outside the Salzburg court to be his new Kappellmeister. Eventually, he chose the Italian composer Domenico Fischietti, who was several years younger than Leopold. Realising that his chances of promotion were probably gone forever, Leopold turned his hopes for a comfortable old age towards Wolfgang. The quest for a suitable position for the boy became the main focus of the third Italian journey, which began at the end of October 1772."

I too worried about "Fischietti...Fischietti", but couldn't find a way round it. Your suggestion is admirable, and has been adopted wholesale. Many thanks! Brianboulton (talk) 12:27, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Third journey, October 1772 – March 1773

• Redundancy: "Wolfgang soon found himself ..."

Agreed and done. Brianboulton (talk)

• Suggestion (not too sure, but might be informal): "... that Wolfgang was composing his arias at breakneck speed with great speed,"

The source has Leopold reporting Wolfgang "working at breakneck speed", so I assume L. used the German colloquial equivalent. Brianboulton (talk) 16:27, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

It does not really matter that much, anyway. Jappalang (talk) 22:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• "... the running time was extended by the insertion of ballets so ..."

Why were ballets inserted?

It was a custom of the time, and I've added a note to that effect. Brianboulton (talk) 16:27, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• Suggestion (redundancy and phrasing): "... second opera, Paisiello's Sismano nel Mogul, was being postponed to allow Wolfgang's piece a longer run. which It received 26 performances in all."

I have rephrased, not quite as you suggest. Leopold was reporting that Paisiello's opera had been postponed, so I think that tense has to stay. Otherwise I've tidied up as you suggest. Brianboulton (talk) 16:27, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• "Such success for the new work may have been fleeting; during the next few years the libretto was re-set by several different composers,"

I am not entirely clear over this sentence. Would re-setting the libretto to the score mean the work was not successful? Furthermore, if different composers re-set the libretto, then it is the fault of the text, and not Mozart's score, right?

Er, no: Re-setting a libretto means setting new music for it. This was quite common for the time; many of Mozart's operas are settings of previously-used libretti. It isn't necessarily a criticism of him that new settings for Lucio Silla were quickly sought, but it rather indicates that his music wasn't thought to be of lasting value. Perhaps "may have been fleeting" is too tentative? "was fleeting", or "was ephemeral" may be better, perhaps?

Hmm... Sadie states that no press criticism or praise came for this work; that could back up the fleetingness (no reporter cared to speak of it). An affirmative tone ("was fleeting") should be better, but how about "The new work did not endure in perpetuity despite such success; during the next few years ..."? Jappalang (talk) 22:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Re last suggestion: It wouldn't be right to talk about the work not enduring in perpetuity. Its popularity was fleeting in 18th century Italy, but the later superstar status accorded Mozart as a composer ensures that everything he wrote endures in perpetuity. So I think the alteration to "was fleeting" gives the necessary affirmative tone, and is accurate. Brianboulton (talk) 22:17, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• Grammar: "... had pursued his quest for ..."

Agreed and done. Brianboulton (talk) 16:27, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• Suggestion (for clarity): "During the long wait which followed While waiting for the reply, Wolfgang composed a series of string quartets ..."

Agreed and done. Brianboulton (talk) 16:27, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• Suggestion: "Leopold had to resorted to deception to explain his remaining extended stay in Milan when he had no further duties there,"

Let us not say he was forced to do it; he could be willing to do so for all we know.

Yes, your version is neater and better. Brianboulton (talk) 16:27, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• "His cyphered letters to his wife Anna Maria ..."

Out of curiosity, was Leopold paranoid, or was this the norm for personal correspondences in those days?

Leopold's letters were part-public documents, for circulation around Salzburg. If he wanted to convey a private message he used a private code which only Anna Maria could interpret. I am adding a footnote to explain this. Brianboulton (talk) 16:27, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• Reassertion: "They The Mozarts had no choice now ..."

Agreed and done. Brianboulton (talk) 16:27, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• Affirmation: "Neither father nor son were to visited Italy again."

Agreed and done. Brianboulton (talk) 16:27, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Evaluation

• "Maynard Solomon summarises the Italian journeys as representing Leopold's greatest triumphs, but also as incorporating a great failure."

I think those verbs were unnecessary.

Agreed and removed. Brianboulton (talk) 17:02, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• Suggestion: "... the Italians had in the main mostly responded to them with enthusiasm."

Agreed and done. Brianboulton (talk) 17:02, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• "Wolfgang had been received by and honoured by the Pope;"

Is the first "by" necessary?

No, deleted. Brianboulton (talk) 17:02, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• "... completing three commissions resulting that resulted in acclaimed performances."

Could be a fused participle issue, I think...

Agreed and done. Brianboulton (talk) 17:02, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• "... all emanated from the Italian experience."

The "including ... minor works" is just a descriptive, take it away and "Other compositions all emanated from the Italian experience."; thus, "all" is unnecessary.

Rephrased> Brianboulton (talk) 17:02, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• Suggestion (personal preference): "The failure was Leopold's inability, despite much his efforts and persistence,"

I agree your preference. Brianboulton (talk) 17:02, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• Suggestion: "In ignorance Ignorant of the truth, Leopold could nevertheless perceive an invisible a barrier to his Italian hopes, and eventually he recognised that he could not overcome the forces lined up against him."

Yes, this is neater. Brianboulton (talk) 17:02, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

• Punctuation: "proved short-lived, for; despite the critical"

Agreed and done. Brianboulton (talk) 17:02, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Please rebut if my opinions are wrong or misguided. Working off written notes and to be continued. Jappalang (talk) 12:18, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much for this meticulous review. I look forward to receiving more. Brianboulton (talk) 23:21, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

No problems. Here are some more, with a few further queries on previous changes. Jappalang (talk) 02:07, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Done. Entire article reviewed to the best of my ability. Do not fret over the images. I have gone through them and those that are deficient, I have corrected. There should be little if any opposition to them in an FAC. I would suggest including some public domain clips, if any exist, of the operas Mozart has composed during these trip. Jappalang (talk) 07:09, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Again, may I thank you for the depth of this review, which has covered just about every aspect of the article and has, I think, helped greatly to improve it. One more thing: another editor, in good faith, has altered the first line of the article. What do you think of it? Should I revert to the former version? On the question of sound clips, my efforts to get them for the grand tour article got me lots of false promises and no action. I'll consider trying again, if I can find another helper. Brianboulton (talk) 22:26, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Neutrality's edits seem to be in line with WP:LEAD#First sentence, in which if the article's subject is of a descriptive nature, then it might be not be necessary for the article's title to be stated word for word. The change from "fifteen" to 15 conforms to the general rule in WP:MOSNUM#Numbers as figures or words. However, I think he might be overlinking to concerts and Italy (the last can remain in bold though), although nobility should be fine (since there may be readers who might not know of the distinct differences in Western caste at that time). His intention is acceptable, and I think the language is fine, but it does seem that the first sentence has lost a feel of "this article describes the three journeys Mozart made to Italy." Jappalang (talk) 00:00, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

I think I agree; this version, though acceptable, loses some force. I have changed back to the original opening, but kept the link on nobility. Brianboulton (talk) 10:32, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

• Comments I've only read the beginning, but what I've seen is promising; a fascinating read! Looking forward to seeing this at FAC sometime soon.
  • Should archbishop (by itself) be capitalized or lowercase? It's presented in both forms in the article.

Either form is acceptable providing a consistent rule is applied. The rule I use is to capitalize when the full title, e.g. Archbishop of Salzburg, is used, but to user lower-case for general references to "the archbishop". I have corrected one inconsistency. Brianboulton (talk) 12:07, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

• • "abandoned the idea to minimise his absence from Salzburg." I think a short clause might be helpful to explain why he wanted to minimise his absence. Was he under pressure from Salzburg to do so at this time?

Yes, I've altered "minimise his absence from" to "hasten his return to", and mentioned Leopold's concern about his reception after such a long absence. Brianboulton (talk) 12:07, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

• • "from the archbishop towards the forthcoming trip" It's probably best to introduce his name here, rather than later.

OK I've done this.Brianboulton (talk) 12:07, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

• • Solomon (p. 69) quotes from a letter Leopold wrote in October 1767 that "the trip to Naples is now definitely set for early next year". Do we know what this might be referring to and what happened to these plans?

Solomon doesn't say who this letter was written to. I think the letter merely confirms what we know - that Leopold was determined on an Italian trip as soon as possible. Brianboulton (talk) 12:07, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

• • "Leopold was cautious about revealing too much of the tour's finances..." What do you think about adding (perhaps in the notes) a bit about why he was not forthright in his letters home about his finances (his misstep in reveling in his success in the early years of the Grand Tour)? BuddingJournalist 09:21, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

On the last point I have added a footnote per your suggestion, based on the information in Solomon, p. 58. Thank you for your interest in the article and I hope it will be at FAC soon. Brianboulton (talk) 12:07, 21 January 2009 (UTC)