Talk:Sergio Calligaris

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

Contents 1 Advertisement 2 Advertisement - Reply 3 Advertisement - Re - reply 4 Calligaris: the work begins!

[edit] Advertisement

This article reads like an advertisement for the subject. It is too full of adjectives - few of them referenced. There are few independent references. Are the claims exaggerated? Maustrauser 12:08, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Advertisement - Reply

Hi! It was not my intention to make the article like an advertisement - actually the claims are taken by a number of reviews listed in the web pages under the various headings. Should I make a reference for each adjective used? Sorry to bother you with such futile question but I am not an expert user. Aquilante74

G'day. I'm delighted that you wish to improve the article. A few tips to start with. Remove all the adjectives unless they can be cited. For example, in the first para we discover he is "world-famous". Who says? I reckon he may be famous amongst pianists, but he's not known in Rwanda or the Tasmanian town of Strachan. WP is a world encyclopaedia so it has to be written from a world perspective and with a neutral point of view. Further we find that he studied with "Renowned masters." If they are renowned it is surprising so few of them have entries in WP. Later we here his style is characterized by "sheer brilliance" and "detailed attention". Who says? Why should we believe them? All these statements, if they are to remain need to be footnoted. It is not acceptable to require the reader to simply go and read other reviews in the external links.

A bigger concern is that nearly all the information seems to be taken from Calligaris' own website: http://calligaris.carisch.it/scalen/bioen.htm This is going close to a copyright violation but also raises questions about the material's veracity. The best sources are from independent third parties and not from the subject of the article. With regard to the adjectives noted above, as the material mostly comes from his website it seems that it is Calligaris who is calling himself "world famous" and "renowned." This doesn't look good. Your best bet is to find external reviews and comments and use those, rather than Calligaris own website. Do check how notable he really is before putting lots of effort into this bio. He only receives fewer than 1300 google hits and thus may not even meet WP:Notability standards. Maustrauser 23:45, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Advertisement - Re - reply

Hi Maustrauser! Thank you for your helpful and detailed reply. I know understand much better where your concerns lie and how to address them. They all make sense. I will be undertaking this over the next couple of weeks (I am very close to complete my PhD and have my mind on other things also!); so if you could remain a little patient and do not classify the article for speed-deletion I would be very grateful. In the meantime, thank you again, best wishes Alessandra 12:28, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Calligaris: the work begins!

Dear Maustrauser, I have finally been able to start on the article. By the way, thank you very much for your "good luck" in relation to my PhD: YES! I handed it in and now it only a question of time before the viva. Yuppie! Anyway, let's talk about "serious" matters now. I have started cleaning the article from the many adjectives. I hope it now sounds more acceptable. However, I know that there is still a lot of work to do: one of this is about referencing. Here I got a slight problem and would be very grateful to have your input. Problem 1): there is one information that I gained from the composer directly:

"In his youth he had been a pupil of Luis Angel Machado who, in turn, had been personal assistant to Paul Hindemith." Since Machado is a minor figure, so to speak, in composition, there may even be a question of whether quoting him or not. Should I put a footnote like "personal communication" or something similar?

Problem 2: in a passage like the following, where I list the characteristics of his music:

"the vivid opposition between "elegiac" and "flamboyant and wild" themes; a dramatic use of rhythm; a disciplined and, at the same time, extremely complex master of counterpoint; the adoption of "classical" composing forms (see, just as an example, the use of form in the Prelude, choral, double fugue and finale op. 19)",

should I put a footnote for each review (or more than one) where these features are being discussed?

Problem 3: you pointed out that not many of his teachers have an entry in WP. Apart from Jorge Fanelli, however, all other are listed in the Baker's Biographical Dictionary of Musicians (Jorge Fanelli is mentioned in Calligaris' entry in the same work). Shall I put a reference to the Baker's (or to other dictionaries) for each of them?

I am sure these will not be the only questions from me to you, but they would make a good start for me! I also hope I am not over-stretching your patience! A rileggerci presto, Alessandra 16:09, 21 February 2007 (UTC)