Talk:Pietro Taglia

Composers project review

I've reviewed this article as part of the Composers project B-class article review. My review can be found on the cpmments page. I think this article is arguably A class. Nice work, Antandrus. Magic♪piano 21:51, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

A-Class?

I'm sorry, but there is no way that this article is A-Class. Look at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Composers/Assessment#Quality_scale, and compare this article with the articles just below it (Karlheinz Stockhausen and Arthur Sullivan). This has to be some joke. --Toccata quarta (talk) 07:56, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

If you think it's a joke, by all means "upgrade" it to "A" class using your obviously superior knowledge of the subject matter. Antandrus (talk) 05:07, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Just as in the case of Talk:Jacques Arcadelt, that is not the case; I was speaking of the article's quality assessment, not its content. --Toccata quarta (talk) 05:39, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Pietro Taglia/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)

Press [show] to view →

==Composers Project Assessment of Pietro Taglia: 2008-11-15== This is an assessment of article Pietro Taglia by a member of the Composers project, according to its assessment criteria. This review was done by Magicpiano. If an article is well-cited, the reviewer is assuming that the article reflects reasonably current scholarship, and deficiencies in the historical record that are documented in a particular area will be appropriately scored. If insufficient inline citations are present, the reviewer will assume that deficiencies in that area may be cured, and that area may be scored down. Adherence to overall Wikipedia standards (WP:MOS, WP:WIAGA, WP:WIAFA) are the reviewer's opinion, and are not a substitute for the Wikipedia's processes for awarding Good Article or Featured Article status. ===Origins/family background/studies=== Does the article reflect what is known about the composer's background and childhood? If s/he received musical training as a child, who from, is the experience and nature of the early teachers' influences described? OK ===Early career=== Does the article indicate when s/he started composing, discuss early style, success/failure? Are other pedagogic and personal influences from this time on his/her music discussed? OK ===Mature career=== Does the article discuss his/her adult life and composition history? Are other pedagogic and personal influences from this time on his/her music discussed? OK ===List(s) of works=== Are lists of the composer's works in WP, linked from this article? If there are special catalogs (e.g. Köchel for Mozart, Hoboken for Haydn), are they used? If the composer has written more than 20-30 works, any exhaustive listing should be placed in a separate article. OK ===Critical appreciation=== Does the article discuss his/her style, reception by critics and the public (both during his/her life, and over time)? OK ===Illustrations and sound clips=== Does the article contain images of its subject, birthplace, gravesite or other memorials, important residences, manuscript pages, museums, etc? Does it contain samples of the composer's work (as composer and/or performer, if appropriate)? (Note that since many 20th-century works are copyrighted, it may not be possible to acquire more than brief fair use samples of those works, but efforts should be made to do so.) If an article is of high enough quality, do its images and media comply with image use policy and non-free content policy? (Adherence to these is needed for Good Article or Featured Article consideration, and is apparently a common reason for nominations being quick-failed.) OK, Given the sparse biographical info. As usual, sound clips would be nice, if possible. ===References, sources and bibliography=== Does the article contain a suitable number of references? Does it contain sufficient inline citations? (For an article to pass Good Article nomination, every paragraph possibly excepting those in the lead, and every direct quotation, should have at least one footnote.) If appropriate, does it include Further Reading or Bibliography beyond the cited references? OK ===Structure and compliance with WP:MOS=== Does the article comply with Wikipedia style and layout guidelines, especially WP:MOS, WP:LEAD, WP:LAYOUT, and possibly WP:SIZE? (Article length is not generally significant, although Featured Articles Candidates may be questioned for excessive length.) OK ===Things that may be necessary to pass a Good Article review=== ===Summary=== Nice job, Antandrus. I think this is arguably A class; it might even pass GA review. The only thing that might improve it is discography. Amazon turned up =sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1226785061&sr=1-1 one recording. Another thing which, if it could be turned up, would "personalize" the article to the subject (in the absence of a portrait), woudl be an image of an older edition of one of his works. ==I agree== ..at least as regards A class, by the existing criteria. Grove 1980 btw mentions some manuscript works as well as the published ones; but as there doesn't seem to be much more available about the guy, this article looks to be about as comprehensive as one can get. --Smerus (talk) 16:40, 17 November 2008 (UTC) Thanks all. Good suggestions. I see now there are several madrigals in manuscript at the library of the Seminario Vescovile, Casale Monferrato. (It would be nice to have a facsimile.) I can add a single-line discography. Antandrus (talk) 15:04, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Last edited at 13:22, 11 December 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 03:01, 30 April 2016 (UTC)