Talk:Signa (opera)

This article was nominated for deletion on 11 April 2007. The result of the discussion was keep.

I am sorry to be pedantic, but my research is based on resources that are in the public domain or the British Library, which I have spent 5 years collating. As such, there is nothing original in the content of this article that cannot be clarified from many sources. I am the only significant authority on this composer, although Lewis Foreman and Jeremy Dibble would be able to confirm a majority of my statements.

Christopher J. Parker

Per wikipedia policy, unpublished research is inappropriate on wikipedia - see WP:OR. However, if the article can be supported only with citations from public sources, this is not an issue - but those citations should be present and verifiable per WP:V. As such, an unpublished draft is not an appropriate source for a wikipedia article. Once the paper in question is published, of course, it may be cited freely. bd_ 17:30, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Synopsis

I think this should be restored. A synopsis based on an original libretto can't be regarded as original research. - Kleinzach 01:59, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I put a {{rewrite}} tag on the summary, in hope that it would be reworked to meet our style guidelines. I didn't ask for the synopsis be removed altogether or remove it myself. Leebo ^T/C 02:38, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't aware of style guidelines for synopses. Do you mean sections? Act One, Act Two - that kind of thing? Perhaps a model would be helpful? Agrippina (opera) for example? - Kleinzach 04:02, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OR tag

I've removed the OR tag as Mr. Parker has been doing a great job of cleaning up the article(s), and I look forward to reading more of them - Tiswas^(t/c) 08:49, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]