Jump to content

Talk:Claude Vivier

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleClaude Vivier has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 29, 2023Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on March 24, 2023.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Claude Vivier was inspired to compose Shiraz after hearing two blind singers in a market?

Needs work to correct misconceptions

[edit]

This article perpetuates from myths/misconceptions that have been debunked in Bob Gilmore's recent biography (Claude Vivier: A Composer’s Life). Vivier did not spend "some years" travelling in Japan, Bali, and Iran. Rather, he took only a single trip there, which he ended after only 5 months when he got homesick. Also, his murder was not a male prostitute but a truquer, a criminal who goes to gay bars and pretends to accept the advance of homosexuals in order to rob them. 194.136.68.66 (talk) 13:30, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Claude Vivier. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:15, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Claude Vivier/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: AirshipJungleman29 (talk · contribs) 19:16, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, this is a superb article. I'm passing it immediately. No clue why it has languished for so long. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:16, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
  2. Is it verifiable with no original research?
    A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
    B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
    C. It contains no original research:
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
    Earwig shows 29.6%.
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
  6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    Congratulations! As above, a fantastic article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:18, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cielquiparle (talk15:30, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Improved to Good Article status by Charlieridgley (talk). Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk) at 22:22, 4 February 2023 (UTC). Note: As of October 2022, all changes made to promoted hooks will be logged by a bot. The log for this nomination can be found at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Claude Vivier, so please watch a successfully closed nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Looks good! Can't read French but the source seems fine. Elli (talk | contribs) 14:01, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Onegreatjoke and Elli: I'm not sure which part of the online copy of the source corresponds to pages 28–29, but the only relevant text I could find was l’un des premiers compositeurs ouvertement et fièrement homosexuels du Québec – "one of the first openly gay composers in Québec". Sojourner in the earth (talk) 12:34, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging GA editor @Charlieridgley: to make sure they are aware about the issue with the hook and claim that "one of the first in history" may be too broad. Cielquiparle (talk) 11:58, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is an excellent article, and I hate seeing it held up over this issue. Charlieridgley, who got the article up to GA, has been inactive for a couple of months. In their absence, I've been a bit bold and removed the "one of the first openly gay composers" line from the article. I think there are many alt hooks that could do this article justice. How about:
  • ALT1: ... that Claude Vivier was inspired to compose Shiraz after hearing two blind singers in a market?
Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 04:14, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging Elli any thoughts on this edit and alt? Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 03:17, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
ALT1 is cited in the article and the sources check out (Gilmore 2014 says Shiraz was inspired by real-life blind singers in a market, and Hickling 2008 confirms that there were two of them). I haven't done a full re-review of the article, just approving the hook. Sojourner in the earth (talk) 07:16, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks SITE! I really messed up the pings above, so another try for @Onegreatjoke, Elli, and Cielquiparle: I think things are good to go here, but speak up if the new hook and article changes don't work for you. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:06, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]


To add to article

[edit]

To add to this article: explanation of what a truquer is. There doesn't seem to be a definition for the noun sense of this term at Wiktionary. 173.88.246.138 (talk) 03:12, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]