User talk:Busterbarker2008

Ferdinand Frantz

Please refrain from inserting opinions into Wikipedia articles. Your personal judgments on the relative worth of opera singers are not encyclopedically relevant. If you wish to discuss this, please use the article talk page. Chubbles (talk) 23:41, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For sources, check out Der Ring des Nibelungen, Opera Quarterly, 1983; 1: 275 - 279, for a start. Googling the terms Frantz, Furtwängler, and favorite, will also prove illuminating, but there's plenty of academic literature to support all the points.Busterbarker2008 (talk) 23:59, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The operative policy here is WP:NPOV, not WP:SOURCES. My concern is not supporting the points with sources (though you did not do so). Your insertion was editorial criticism on Frantz's talents, which is not proper material for an encyclopedia. There is no place here for asserting that a particular singer is better than another, or that his recordings are good or bad. Chubbles (talk) 04:23, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Then how would you deal with the entry on Furtwängler which clearly broaches your somewhat rigid application of desirable principles? Busterbarker2008 (talk) 19:53, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have reread NPOV, and looked at the entry on Hans Hotter, the only rival for Frantz during the late '40s and 1950s. Statements such as that '[he] owned [Wotan] until the mid-1960s' are not only opinionated but inaccurate. Wilhelm Furtwängler, for one, who could not abide him, did not think he owned this role. The article goes on to say that by the mid-1960s, 'by which time his voice had begun to display an incipient wobble due to hard use' - - - which is nonsense - - the wobble had been on display for all to hear since his recorded Wotan of c. 1938, when he was only 26. And there are numerous other subjective remarks.

In my view, it is necessary -- solely for the sake of objectivity -- to take some action to restore Frantz's reputation vis-a-vis that of Hotter. I appreciate that you are protective of content that you have originated, but . . . . I think it is wrong to impede necessary progress.86.156.205.191 (talk) 21:12, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Have a look, too, Chubbles, at http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Ebe_Stignani 86.156.205.191 (talk) 21:43, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Finally, for what is 'encyclopedically relevant' -- have a look at something actually good, like Edward Morgan's article on Scottish Literature in mid-20th-century Britannicas, for example. What would you do with this conclusion to a superb essay which is on an intellectual level very seldom scaled by Wikipedia, presumably for lack of aspiration rather than competence: "The problem of English or Scots is one that has still to be worked out, and its difficulties are a part of the whole cultural situation. The Scottish sense of separateness is too real to be swamped, but English is dominant in prose writing and in educated speech, and the Scottish poet of the 20th century has been therefore like a shaman who must try out many disguises until he finds the one in which he can best prophesy and persuade." 86.156.205.191 (talk) 23:14, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bill Troop.
To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page. Please remember to link to the submission!
You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Kilopi (talk) 12:57, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Bill Troop, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Kilopi (talk) 09:21, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]