Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Opera/Archive 96
 | This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:WikiProject Opera. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 90 | ← | Archive 94 | Archive 95 | Archive 96 | Archive 97 | Archive 98 | → | Archive 100 |
September CoM and OoM
Since I will only be briefly back at the end of August, I have provisionally filled these in so as not to leave a blank on September 1st. Please feel free to change them if you come up with better ideas.
Voceditenore (talk) 17:55, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Mario Lanza an opera singer?
I've been having somewhat of a revert war with Monkeyzpop on the Mario Lanza page as to whether or not he should be included in such categories as 'Category:Operatic tenors' and 'Category:American opera singers.' The man's apparent 17 year career in music and the movies saw 2 performances on the professional operatic stage in a middlebrow house as Pinkerton. After that he apparently was no longer interested in singing opera on stage and never did again. Having names like Richard Tucker who spent 30 years on stage in the same category is absolutely ridiculous; does anyone agree with me? There are also several other inaccuracies; for example in the first paragraph it says Toscanini said of him "the greatest voice of the twentieth century" when what he actually said had the words "natural voice" in it. Looks like some of his fans have had way too much fun with this article and it is in bad need of a cleanup. I actually wrote quite a bit of the article around 2006 but now it's filled with ridiculous inaccuracies making him looks like the successor to Caruso himself. I'd like some support here. Thanks,
NewYork1956 (talk) 01:48, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
- While I certainly agree that the Mario Lanza article needs attention (particularly further citations to reliable sources to verify its content), I do not see why Lanza should be excluded from either "Category:Operatic tenors" or "Category:American opera singers". He did after all train as an opera singer and perform in operas on stage (albeit briefly). Further, he recorded opera arias both on record and on film; one of which won the National Record Critics Association's 'Operatic Recording of the Year' award. Arguably his most well known work is the film The Great Caruso, for which he performed and recorded several opera arias and duets. Although he may have done other things with his gift than what is traditional for an opera singer, he certainly earned the right to be called an operatic tenor.4meter4 (talk) 02:50, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
- The only operatic training he had was with Enrico Rosati but Lanza was not even able, or perhaps unwilling, to learn an operatic role which is why he was eventually dumped as a student. Recording arias on a Hollywood sound stage with the best recording engineers money can buy in no way makes you an operatic tenor just the same as performing in an opera twice (and consecutive nights I might add) in two decades doesn't. Perhaps Lanza had to voice to be an opera singer but he never actually was one (not even in his own mind) and therefore does not belong in the same category with tenors like Caruso, Gigli, Tucker, Corelli, Di Stefano, Schipa, Peerce, or even Melton who all performed on stage for several years, some for 30+ years. Lanza made his choice and that choice was not to be an opera singer. The Great Caruso was just as controversial (as was once noted in the article but no longer is; ahem) as it was popular and serious opera fans in the 1950s did not consider Lanza to be an opera singer; there's no reason we should now. 174.1.159.105 (talk) 05:42, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
- For clarification anon ip 174.1.159.105, are you user:NewYork1956? If so, please remember to sign in for now on. As for my response to what you just said, I stand by what I said in the paragraph above. Facts are facts. Lanza is a tenor who performed in and recorded operatic music. He is therefore an operatic tenor. This is not an opinion but an easily verifiable statement of fact.4meter4 (talk) 05:54, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
- Ah and I suppose Bocelli, Bolton, Potts, and Brightman are opera singers too. I can't believe anyone would give these singers that satisfaction. Last time I checked an "opera singer" is a person trained to sing opera on stage and do so as a career. Anyone can record it; hell I can record myself singing it but it doesn't mean I deserve to be called an opera singer. 174.1.159.105 (talk) 07:03, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
- Lanza is a tenor who performed in operas and recorded operatic music. He is therefore an operatic tenor. Facts are facts. Lets not get side tracked by discussing other singers whose careers are superfluous to this conversation.4meter4 (talk) 07:38, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
- Operas? You're clearly not analyzing enough of this. The whole point of this is that all he ever did was make a debut and after that for the rest of his life never performed in an opera again. Generally an operatic/opera singer sings in more than one opera professionally in his or her lifetime, no? The fact that the only other thing Lanza ever had to do with opera is recording a couple arias has always been the exact argument as to why he IS NOT an opera singer so don't try twisting your facts here. Lanza doesn't deserve to be called an opera singer, and here's a fact for you; he's NEVER been considered one. 174.1.159.105 (talk) 08:01, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
- Lanza is a tenor who performed in operas and recorded operatic music. He is therefore an operatic tenor. Facts are facts. Lets not get side tracked by discussing other singers whose careers are superfluous to this conversation.4meter4 (talk) 07:38, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
- Ah and I suppose Bocelli, Bolton, Potts, and Brightman are opera singers too. I can't believe anyone would give these singers that satisfaction. Last time I checked an "opera singer" is a person trained to sing opera on stage and do so as a career. Anyone can record it; hell I can record myself singing it but it doesn't mean I deserve to be called an opera singer. 174.1.159.105 (talk) 07:03, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
- For clarification anon ip 174.1.159.105, are you user:NewYork1956? If so, please remember to sign in for now on. As for my response to what you just said, I stand by what I said in the paragraph above. Facts are facts. Lanza is a tenor who performed in and recorded operatic music. He is therefore an operatic tenor. This is not an opinion but an easily verifiable statement of fact.4meter4 (talk) 05:54, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
- The only operatic training he had was with Enrico Rosati but Lanza was not even able, or perhaps unwilling, to learn an operatic role which is why he was eventually dumped as a student. Recording arias on a Hollywood sound stage with the best recording engineers money can buy in no way makes you an operatic tenor just the same as performing in an opera twice (and consecutive nights I might add) in two decades doesn't. Perhaps Lanza had to voice to be an opera singer but he never actually was one (not even in his own mind) and therefore does not belong in the same category with tenors like Caruso, Gigli, Tucker, Corelli, Di Stefano, Schipa, Peerce, or even Melton who all performed on stage for several years, some for 30+ years. Lanza made his choice and that choice was not to be an opera singer. The Great Caruso was just as controversial (as was once noted in the article but no longer is; ahem) as it was popular and serious opera fans in the 1950s did not consider Lanza to be an opera singer; there's no reason we should now. 174.1.159.105 (talk) 05:42, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
Um, I consider him an opera singer. You want a better page on Mario Lanza? Be Bold and do it almost-instinct 11:56, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
- I tried that once but unfortunately some delusional fans of his have came and wrote an article that tries to convince us of a career that didn't exist. Apparently some of those fans are in this group, but what could I expect in a place where the likes of Andrea Bocelli and Paul Potts are allowed and actually accepted in some of these categories? Lanza certainly deserves to be in it more than they do but even still he was not an opera singer therefore he cannot be in these categories. Now I see exactly why people say not to believe half of what is written on Wikipedia; this is a prime example. And what the hell kind of opera (or should I say "popera?") group is this? I'm appauled. NewYork1956 (talk) 14:34, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
- Um, I'm actually not a fan of any of the singers you mentioned above and have never edited any of their articles. I despise popera in fact. But as much as I may like or dislike certain artists or performance practices, wikipedia is not the place to express my own particular point of view; particularly within articles. It's obvious to me that you don't really understand wikipedia's policy in regaurds to neutral point of view. Nor do you really understand the purposes of categories. The fact that you are trying to categorize someone not based on their own achievements but on a comparative importance scale with others in a similar profession is entirely against wikipedia's policy on categories. Further, the fact that every other editor (both here and at the Mario Lanza page) has disagreed with you should be an indicator that your perception of reality may need to be altered for your own benefit.4meter4 (talk) 15:25, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
- Um, I think Wikipedia not being a place to express opinions has been the point made here all along about this totally un-nuetral article. The article in question has numerous inaccurate claims that paints Lanza as being an operatic tenor who happened to be in movies which isn't the case at all. And all the more negative points have been removed? Lanza was a Hollywood movie star and recording artist and nothing more. I can't believe some of the stuff I'm reading here. Mario Lanza an opera singer? That's certainly news to me! Lanza was an extremely controversial man in his time and from what I clearly remember was never accepted as an opera singer. However, that's not the impression I get reading Lanza's article and someone ignorant on the subject would certainly get the wrong impression. Is this the purpose of Wikipedia? Since Lanza's achievements don't ever include him being an opera singer I must question why he's in those categories. Furthermore, most of what's in the article isn't even fact! 24.114.236.27 (talk) 17:44, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
- This is not relevant to the question of whether or not he belongs in Category:Operatic tenors. What is relevant is, was he a tenor? (yes) and did he sing opera? (yes) and once those are established, we see that he ends up in that category. Yes, he's at the margins of that category. No, he's not (and never tried to be) the successor to Caruso. But he meets the definition: A tenor who sung opera.
- Ultimately, everything on Wikipedia needs to meet Wikipedia:Verifiability. Can you find a reliable source that says Lanza was not an operatic tenor? If you can, please share. Ozob (talk) 04:36, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
- Um, I think Wikipedia not being a place to express opinions has been the point made here all along about this totally un-nuetral article. The article in question has numerous inaccurate claims that paints Lanza as being an operatic tenor who happened to be in movies which isn't the case at all. And all the more negative points have been removed? Lanza was a Hollywood movie star and recording artist and nothing more. I can't believe some of the stuff I'm reading here. Mario Lanza an opera singer? That's certainly news to me! Lanza was an extremely controversial man in his time and from what I clearly remember was never accepted as an opera singer. However, that's not the impression I get reading Lanza's article and someone ignorant on the subject would certainly get the wrong impression. Is this the purpose of Wikipedia? Since Lanza's achievements don't ever include him being an opera singer I must question why he's in those categories. Furthermore, most of what's in the article isn't even fact! 24.114.236.27 (talk) 17:44, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
- Um, I'm actually not a fan of any of the singers you mentioned above and have never edited any of their articles. I despise popera in fact. But as much as I may like or dislike certain artists or performance practices, wikipedia is not the place to express my own particular point of view; particularly within articles. It's obvious to me that you don't really understand wikipedia's policy in regaurds to neutral point of view. Nor do you really understand the purposes of categories. The fact that you are trying to categorize someone not based on their own achievements but on a comparative importance scale with others in a similar profession is entirely against wikipedia's policy on categories. Further, the fact that every other editor (both here and at the Mario Lanza page) has disagreed with you should be an indicator that your perception of reality may need to be altered for your own benefit.4meter4 (talk) 15:25, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
I have expanded this article, changed the layout to conform with other opera articles (uniformity of presentation being important for an encyclopedia in my view), and am now working on the synopsis. Would this be sufficient to upgrade the status to start class? Francesco Malipiero (talk) 10:59, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
- I should say so, depending on how thorough you are. http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Opera/Assessment&diff=next&oldid=272112969 contains the marking scale we use and translates marks into grades. I'm not sure why the scale was removed.--Peter cohen (talk) 15:05, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
Franz Schreker operas
I have done some work on Der ferne Klang, and suggest it be removed from the Key article improvement list. I have created Die Gezeichneten and assigned it stub status. Hope that is allright. I have also created a template for Schreker operas, which for now still contains red links, but I plan to create articles on those operas in the near future. Francesco Malipiero (talk) 20:25, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
- I think it's not helpful to include unlinked or red-linked items in a navigation template. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 06:16, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
- You are right, of course; after all, what's the use of including items you can not navigate to in a navigation template. I have edited the template to hide red-linked and unlinked items, but I kept them there for future reference. Francesco Malipiero (talk) 13:43, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Notes (Footnotes) and References
In looking at many opera articles (as well as non-opera ones too), it appears that we are using a couple (or more) of systems to reflect inline citations and broader references to sources.
Some people use "References" for both footnotes and references with "reflist/" appearing at the top while the "references" are generally rather longer, are in alphabetical order of author, and include publisher info and ISBN numbers; a few others use separate "Footnotes" and "References" headings; many others use "Notes" (for inline citations using < ref > and < /ref > tags and "References" in that order.
For the most part, Wikipedia:Manual of Style (footnotes) seems to favour the latter, as I do.
Can we come to some agreement here that opera articles will do the same? Viva-Verdi (talk) 17:28, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
- I for one agree with you and will change the articles I have created and/or expanded on the Korngold and Schreker operas accordingly. So a section "Notes" containing the reflist for in-line citations, followed by a section "References" containing further sources. I see now that this is also the lay-out used for the Tosca article, which could serve as a reference for all opera articles.Francesco Malipiero (talk) 18:58, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
- Briefly, as I'm in Italy on a dreadful dial-up connection... As long as the article is well-referenced, the style is consistent within the article, and one of the forms mentioned in the MoS, I am not in favour of imposing mass-uniformity across articles. It is potententially contentious, and unnecessary. There is far more important work to do in terms of improving articles. The Bartered Bride was recently changed for no reason, except for this nebulous 'uniformity'. It is a Featured Article and the referencing system was approved during the FA process. Note also that "References/Sources" should not be used for "further sources". For articles which use the shortened footnote format (author's last name, date of publication and page number), that Section gives the full bibliographic information for the works in the footnotes. Voceditenore (talk) 07:33, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
- Well, is it not reasonable that a reader should expect to see a fairly consistent "look" to all articles - and especially, in this case, opera articles with which we are all involved? In this Project, we've developed a series of guidelines as to what we expect of opera articles, and the contents of each one should be pretty uniform and logical. (e.g. I moved the "Roles" box from way down at the bottom of the Boris Godunov article to appear in a more-or-less standard position.) We've created "Composition history", "Performance history", a "Roles" box, a standard "Synopsis" - no longer "Plot" - format, etc. etc. I see nothing wrong with an overall consistent "look" to all articles on which this group works. Viva-Verdi (talk) 23:25, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
- There's nothing wrong with a fairly consistent look, but different articles may be optimally organized and written using slightly different section headings and section order, especially at FA level, which is far more important than a consistent "look". Secondly, I don't think changes like that should ever be made to Featured Articles and or long-established articles without first proposing them on the talk page. The OP guidelines, are simply that, not requirements that need to be (or can be) enforced in any way. Frankly, I often deviate from them if I think it improves readbility and organization of the subject matter. Voceditenore (talk) 09:34, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
- Well, is it not reasonable that a reader should expect to see a fairly consistent "look" to all articles - and especially, in this case, opera articles with which we are all involved? In this Project, we've developed a series of guidelines as to what we expect of opera articles, and the contents of each one should be pretty uniform and logical. (e.g. I moved the "Roles" box from way down at the bottom of the Boris Godunov article to appear in a more-or-less standard position.) We've created "Composition history", "Performance history", a "Roles" box, a standard "Synopsis" - no longer "Plot" - format, etc. etc. I see nothing wrong with an overall consistent "look" to all articles on which this group works. Viva-Verdi (talk) 23:25, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
I have created this article on the Schreker opera, but I have a problem with two sources contradicting each other concerning the conductor of the first performance. According to AmadeusOnline it was the composer, according to Universal Edition it was Ludwig Rottenberg, on whom I translated an article from German Wikipedia to get rid of the red link in Der ferne Klang. Would anyone here have access to a reliable source that can solve this contradiction? Francesco Malipiero (talk) 20:01, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
The outcome of the above will have implications on whether we split discogs out or not.--Peter cohen (talk) 23:18, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
- Now that this deletion-discussion has been closed, I propose that all future (and, if possible, existing) individual entries in discography tables should have an in-line citation (preferably next to the catalog number) referring to either the appropriate page on the record company's website, or an on-line review of the recording (eg Gramophone, MusicWebInternatiol, ClassicalCDReview etc). Pls see Das Rheingold discography for an example. This would avoid these discography articles being tagged as poorly-referenced. Opinions pls? Francesco Malipiero (talk) 14:07, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
- I think that might be excessive. I've got a draft discography of Karl Ridderbusch at User:Peter_cohen/sandbox where I have used commercial CD vending sites among my sources. I don't think this is problematic. Perhaps I might indicate which source is used where though when I eventually return to this.--Peter cohen (talk) 17:21, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
- Oh dear, wouldn't this be a total pain to go and reference every single recording on the existing disographies? In the case of Rhinegold take a look at http://www.operadis-opera-discography.org.uk/CLWARHEI.HTM#80 where we fiind references to sources of this recording from the operadis-opera-discography.org.uk site. Many existing discogs. refer to this source, and it's been agreed (I believe) that, when this soource appears, it does so as a footnote from the "Label" section. In that way, anyone can see the sources and publications which relate to recordings of this opera. Viva-Verdi (talk) 17:27, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
- I hereby officially withdraw my proposal as per FM:BIPWTTTC (sorry that's a joke: it stands for Francesco Malipiero's Bad Ideas Proposed Without Thinking Through The Consequences). Seriously, it was not a good idea in the first place. Francesco Malipiero (talk) 19:44, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
- Call yourself a Wikipedia editor? You're not meant to withdraw your proposal. What you should be doing is proposing for deletion all the discographies that don't match your ideal referencing format. ;-)--Peter cohen (talk) 20:00, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
- I hereby officially withdraw my proposal as per FM:BIPWTTTC (sorry that's a joke: it stands for Francesco Malipiero's Bad Ideas Proposed Without Thinking Through The Consequences). Seriously, it was not a good idea in the first place. Francesco Malipiero (talk) 19:44, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Flavio Labò
I've come across the singer Flavio Labò a few times in doing research, and I'm beginning to wonder if it might be another name used by tenor Flaviano Labò. Anyone know?4meter4 (talk) 19:09, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
- It is the same person. His name is Flaviano, but once an error gets started, it's repeated all over the internet, making it look like there are more "sources" for it than there actually are. Voceditenore (talk) 21:57, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
- That makes sense. I redirected Flavio Labò to Flaviano Labò and corrected any spelling errors of the name in wikipedia.4meter4 (talk) 22:39, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
I have created this article on the Franz Schreker 1902 opera. When checking What links here I noticed that the Opera corpus mentions an opera with the same name by Erwin Schulhoff, which is now wikilinked to the wrong article. I was unaware of the existence of this Schulhoff opera, and so now there is a problem with the linking. How can this be solved? Francesco Malipiero (talk) 21:46, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
- This is simple to fix. Disambiguate the Schulhoff opera to Flammen (Schulhoff). Standard practice is to use the last name as in Ariadne auf Naxos (Benda) for the Benda opera versus the Strauss opera.4meter4 (talk) 21:49, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
- Will do. Francesco Malipiero (talk) 21:55, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
- Would this opera quality for inclusion in the article List of operas set in the Crusades, per the criteria that justify inclusion of Donizetti's Gabriella di Vergy in this list? Francesco Malipiero (talk) 22:05, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
- In my opinion it does meet the criteria per the same reasoning as Gabriella di Vergy.4meter4 (talk) 22:16, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
When googling the web for info on Karl Erb (regarding conflicting sources as to whether or not he sang in the premiere of Die Gezeichneten) I found this. It is a word for word copy of the entire WP article on this singer! They even forgot to edit out an inline citation (see the section Later Career, the reference to Hans Hotter's Memoirs. Is this allowed? Francesco Malipiero (talk) 14:55, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
- Also don't bother searching on this website. It's content is simply copied from English and German Wikipedia. Francesco Malipiero (talk) 15:31, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
- Yes it is allowed if they mention that it comes from wikipedia and is licencesed under the GNU Free Documentation License. The website you linked does this at the bottom of the webpage, so it is perfectly legit in this instance. Unfortunately, I have found other instances where this was not done. I once went to a concert where the artist bio in the program was a verbatim copy of something I wrote on wikipedia, so it's not just a problem on the web.4meter4 (talk) 16:03, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
User:SingingZombie back from the dead
At Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/SingingZombie/Archive it was determined that User:207.237.243.185 is SZ. He's now editing from the IP again. I hadn't seen too much problem with the first couple of edits I looked at, though I need to check exactly why the Dutchman is cursed. However, there is a bit of a dispute over the spelling of the name of the villain in Otello where he's tried to enfirce what seems to be a dated spelling. Anyone what to take action at this stage? Or do you want to see how things progress?--Peter cohen (talk) 14:25, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- This IP was blocked for a month fom 18 May, but resumed editing on 19 June. Quite a few of the operatic edits that I've looked at have been constructive (mostly reasonable amendments to synopses), but the Jago/Iago thing is very annoying. Maybe contact the blocking admin (User: Elockid), although (s)he may be on holiday for another two weeks. --GuillaumeTell 16:16, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- I've now posted to Elockid's page suggesting that we unblock SZ. Anyone object to this?--Peter cohen (talk) 19:22, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
- We-e-ll, there continues to be some evidence of the "I am right and you are wrong" syndrome. As well as the goings-on about the spelling of Iago, User:207.237.243.185 has twice changed the voice-type for Masetto in Don Giovanni from bass to baritone, despite being told that a) the role was designated as bass and b) (the clincher) the creator of the role also played the Commendatore, indubitably a bass role. OK, some baritones have sung Masetto, but some basses have sung Don Giovanni. --GuillaumeTell 21:03, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
- Ah. I have informed the IP of this thread and of my post to Elockid's page. We can see what (s)he has to say. I had decided to go for this option after noticing that the IP had posted to Talk:Gerhard Stolze about the unlikeliness of the claim that he had ever sang the role of Wozzeck as claimed in the then version of the article. After checking the two articles on Oxford Music Online, I was bold and removed the claim. I had taken this is as evidence that the user was not always imposing their world view but was raising likely issues. Also, the user has not actually attempted to reimpose Jago in the last week after saying they would stop.
- We-e-ll, there continues to be some evidence of the "I am right and you are wrong" syndrome. As well as the goings-on about the spelling of Iago, User:207.237.243.185 has twice changed the voice-type for Masetto in Don Giovanni from bass to baritone, despite being told that a) the role was designated as bass and b) (the clincher) the creator of the role also played the Commendatore, indubitably a bass role. OK, some baritones have sung Masetto, but some basses have sung Don Giovanni. --GuillaumeTell 21:03, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
- I've now posted to Elockid's page suggesting that we unblock SZ. Anyone object to this?--Peter cohen (talk) 19:22, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
- The IP has been active again for a couple of months and hasn't been blocked in that time and it doesn't look as if they've been reported to any of the drama boards. There were some warning messages for supposed vandalism on the IP talk page, but the ones which actually linked the supposedly problematic edits seemed to be from over-enthusiastic Huggle users. And I have now checked the other one. Issuing a final warning for suggesting that the Iran hostage crisis made Jimmy Carter looked weak, does seem more than a wee bit excessive. You might be able to compile a case as to why this user is as bad as ever, but it needs work as there is nothing raised via the formal channels. If he's still as bad as he was, why did no one bring him up before I spotted who he was? We can see what Elockid says, but perhaps a trip to AN/I would be in roder to decide this. There are options such as mentorship that could be considered.--Peter cohen (talk) 22:25, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
- The reasons I call Masetto a baritone are: 1. He almost never sings the bass line in his ensembles, he's almost always one of the middle voices, above Leporello. 2. He's not a strong, bass-y character; he's weak and wimpy, a light, whining baritone-type. 3. He's almost always sung by baritones--alfred poell, walter berry, etc. 4. He never uses the bottom of his voice, never drops below C. 5. Yes the creator of the role doubled as Commendatore, but basses often double as baritones--eg Hans Hotter who sang baritone roles the Count, Pizarro, Amfortas, but also bass roles Gurnemanz, Titurel, and Pogner; also Theo Adam who sang both baritones Wotan and Alberich and bass Fasolt.
- Since I'm here, let me say that I've been surprised by some of the accusations of bad-faith I have received. The Jimmy Carter thing especially--it's just an historical fact that the Iranian hostage crisis made him look weak and helpless and damaged his re-election bid very badly. That's not an opinion. Remember Reagan's slogan: "Let's make America great again!"? That was largely a reference to Carter's appearance of weakness.
- Regarding the Iago vs Jago thing, I only attempted to change the article ONCE, and on the talk page I specifically said I would defer to wiki editors on this question, although I also mentioned reasons for preferring Jago.
- Generally, I do not vandalize wiki. I have no interest in doing that. If I DID want to vandalize wiki, I would do so from an internet cafe (I live in NYC, we have internet cafes on every corner) not from my home IP. But I am not interested in vandalizing. It's much more fun to make constructive contributions. 207.237.243.185 (talk) 16:18, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
- The above IP has altered all occurrences of "Banquo" to "Banco" in the article on Macbeth without any discussion on the Talk page, and I have reverted these. I'm surprised that "Witches, messengers, nobles, attendants, refugees, chorus" have not yet been translated into Italian. --GuillaumeTell 00:16, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
- I intended not to get involved in discussions any more, but for what it is worth, I quote from the WikiProject Opera page : "The norm when listing or referring to roles is to give proper names in their original form (in whatever language), while translating the others into English. For example the roles in Richard Strauss's Salome are given as: Herodes, Herodias, Salome, Jochanaan, Narraboth, the page of Herodias, first Jew, second Jew (etc.), first Nazarene, second Nazarene (etc.), first soldier, second soldier, a Cappadocian, a slave." The proper name given in the libretto of Macbeth (link at the bottom of the article) is Banco, so using that name (and not Banquo) would be consistent with WikiProject Opera's own guidelines. --Francesco Malipiero (talk) 19:36, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- By the way, the name has also been changed (by the same user I guess) in the corresponding discography.--Francesco Malipiero (talk) 21:59, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
"Foreign" characters in titles of opera articles
User:Roscelese has been adding a template at the top of (mostly?) French opera articles where the title contains one or more characters with accents and/or (possibly) characters other than standard a-z ones. An example is La Périchole, where the template ({{foreignchar|La Perichole|é}}) appears. This produces the following italicised statement, which appears between the title and the lead/lede:
The title of this article contains the character é. Where it is unavailable or not desired, the name may be represented as La Perichole.
The template can be found at Template:Foreign_character, and it generated a lot of heat, including a WP:TfD in 2007 (see its Talk page), since when it's all gone quiet.
I've had a note about this, headed "Clutter or necessary?" from User:Ssilvers. Personally, I regard it as clutter. Comments? --GuillaumeTell 16:17, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
- Clearly it's clutter. But isn't it also WP:OR? According to what rule 'Where it is unavailable or not desired, the name may be represented as La Perichole' or whatever? - Sez who? - [citation needed], please. And it what way can it be ever be 'desirable' to represent something incorrectly? Seems utter nonsense to me.--Smerus (talk) 19:19, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
I agree that this is nonsense and ought to be deleted. -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:33, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
I've been seeing these more and more in the past few weeks, so I assumed it was a new policy. Sorry. Roscelese (talk) 23:48, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Italo Montemezzi's date of birth
I raised this query on his talk page about 2 1/2 years ago, but it's had no response.
There seem to be 2 camps about his date of birth: 31 May 1875, and 4 August 1875. Google produces roughly equal numbers of hits for each.
I've found no source that even acknowledges the issue of the conflicting dates, let alone attempts to resolve it. Can we put this to rest with an authoritative source that not just asserts the correct date, but explains where the other one came from and why it's incorrect. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 11:23, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
- Grove Opera, The Oxford Dictionary of Opera, The Viking/Penguin Guide and Everyman's Dictionary of Music, all Reliable Printed Sources, say 4 August. None of them mention 31 May. One of the problems of the Internet is the way errors or untruths can be perpetuated by sites that just repeat what appears on other sites. Did Johnson's Dictionary say that opera is an exotic and irrational entertainment? No, it didn't.
- Incidentally, Answers.com says that Montemezzi was born on both dates - 4 Augusthere and 31 May here!
- --GuillaumeTell 17:11, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
Some input would be helpful here. Thanks.4meter4 (talk) 06:29, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
- I have a programme for that Dutchman (which I hope I can find!) and should be able to flesh out her bio later today. --GuillaumeTell 11:06, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the much needed improvement.4meter4 (talk) 20:42, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
This conversation may be of interest to project members.4meter4 (talk) 05:07, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
- Please take a look and leave your opinion. Viva-Verdi (talk) 23:27, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Not sure whether this person is notable or not.4meter4 (talk) 10:35, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
- She's mentioned in the Grove Opera article on her brother as being active as a singer in Spain, but there are no further details and she doesn't have an article there. The WP article says that she sang in a zarzuela at the age of 19 but she could have just been in the chorus. There's no info about her career in Spain or the music school in Santurce (which doesn't appear in the article on the latter). Not notable is my opinion. She might (or might not) deserve a brief mention in the article on her brother. --GuillaumeTell 21:13, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
- In my view she's notable enough and far more so than many other opera singers with articles. Most of the sources are in Spanish and it may take a while to fill out the article, but it certainly shouldn't be re-directed/merged or proposed for deletion at this point. She appears to have played a prominent role in the musical life of Puerto Rico and has entries in several reference books on the history of music in Hispano-America. See for example, here and the results here and here. Voceditenore (talk) 06:42, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Happy anniversary Hugo Wolf. --Francesco Malipiero (talk) 22:01, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the much needed improvements!4meter4 (talk) 22:40, 27 August 2010 (UTC)