Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Opera/Archive 10

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive 10

1 American Indian Grand Opera
2 Composers of the Month for January/February
3 Operas with a known first performance date in England (1800-1900)
4 This month's composer of the month
5 Proposal: 'Special Projects' box
6 Article grading
7 Navigational boxes
8 Opera buffa hoax
9 New page for user and project boxes

[edit] American Indian Grand Opera

I see that about 20 per cent of the Grand Opera article now deals with 'American Indian Grand Opera'. Does anyone know why this subject is treated so prominently? Incidentally it seems that the contrubution has been signed by someone called Brent Michael Davids - a member of Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias?

Is there a history here that someone knows about? Best. - Kleinzach 17:10, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

I noticed that too on the Opera page. I thought it was a hoax. It really belongs in an American opera article, or even a page of its own.--Folantin 17:23, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Peculiar. Especially when this phrase, when googled, gets precisely 2 Ghits. Confused. Whatever the authenticity, it certainly throws the page out of whack. Moreschi 18:35, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Apparently we're talking about a genre which includes one known example (The Sun Dance), which (as far as I can work out from googling around) was never professionally produced. How it fits into the specific category "grand opera" is not stated either. --Folantin 20:51, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

All praise to Folantin's googling skills. How you found even that much out of such minimal info is beyond me:)) Shouldn't we ask the editor who has written this info? And yes, I can't see how it links to Grand Opera either! Moreschi 21:18, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

I got most of the info from here [1]. Googling "Gertrude Bonnin" and "grand opera" doesn't turn up anything relevant. --Folantin 21:54, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps the best solution would be to split the material off into a separate article? It appears to be perfectly legitimate - just inappropriate tacked onto the grand opera article. It is likely that the writer doesn't know that 'grand opera' is a genre within the opera tradition. - Kleinzach 22:15, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

WP:BOLD et al, but we should probably inform the creator first. That would seem to be the best solution - a move to Native American Opera? The word "Grand" doesn't seem to be appropriate. Cheers, Moreschi 22:30, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

So what do you want to say? "Hello. Thanks for your contribution to Grand Opera. However, it may be you have assigned the new information to the wrong article. "Grand opera" is a very specific musical genre and is not a synonym for opera in general. Do your sources describe Bonnin's work as "American Indian grand opera" or just "American Indian opera"? It may be the case that your information would be better in an article of its own, for example Native American opera." That's not too good, I know, but I'm not really with it today. Something along those lines nevertheless. Meyerbeer should get the star role in a Grand Opera article. --Folantin 12:19, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

I have placed a note about our discussion on the talk page of Grand Opera. The approach to the author (as drafted above by Folantin) seems perfectly reasonable to me. - Kleinzach 17:58, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Brent Michael Davids (www.brentmichaeldavids.com), one of the top Am. Indian composers in the USA. There are mabny Indian operas, but Gertrude's opera was indeed a Grand opera, fitting that definition. The entry could be split probably, because there are other operas listed which were not grand operas. Both are needed. If English operas, denoting those created by English composers, are listed than Am. Indian grand opera is legitimate for this entry. However, if the article must be weighted to correspond to the field as a whole, the article may be too heavy on Am. Indian grand opera. There are more though they are not easily googled and my sources were from books that I own, and ones trhat I myself have been featured in (and thereby happen to have in my personal library). I would recommend shrtening the Indian grand opera entry to balance the weight of the entire entry, and splitting off another category of American Indian opera, which can then be greatly expanded. There are also sub categories of Indianist operas for the more general Indian opera category. At any rate, it takes time to build up these articles, and there are only a limited number of American Indian composer scholars around to do it. My own CV is here <http://www.filmcomposer.us/Davids_CV.pdf> if you wsh to corroborate who I am. Thanks! --Brent Michael Davids 00:10, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

The article in question contains the following explanation:

"Grand Opera is a style of opera characterized by grandiose scale. Heroic and historical subjects, large casts, vast orchestras, richly detailed sets, sumptuous costumes and spectacular scenic effects . . . Other characteristics include continuous music (recitative instead of spoken dialogue), a four or five-act structure and the prevalence of ballets and large scale processions."

So my first question would be whether the opera by Gertrude Bonnin fits this description. Most operas don't, of course, and if it doesn't that in itself is not an issue, except that the section doesn't belong in the article. Best - Kleinzach 15:50, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, most definitely, Bonnin's opera was a grand opera, fitting the above description. the entry is needed for a complete encyclopedic entry. If one is attempting to suggest that Indian operas are less prevent because less important, that argument is without merit. Am. Indians composing operas are the result of racist practices in America, and the genocide against Indians, even at the time Bonnin was composing. The records are not common on Google, and are more obscured because Indians ourselves are obscured, both in the history and in the United States generally, whose efforts are to forget the atrocities rather than cherish them. In this, the "them" is Indians, and as a consequence, Indian grand opera. One cannot dismiss Bonnin because she was rare, in fact, she must be included because she was rare, that is the whole point of an encyclopedia. But I must point out there are more Indian operas and they will be included, and as this is not a living bio issue, the entry must stand so it can be expanded. Charlotte Heth of the Smithsonian, and Vicky Levine of University of CO-Boulder have more references, and these are published sources. Time will permit their inclusion. My orig. suggestion is best, add another Indian opera split but leave this 'grand' entry here. If someone wishes to abbreviate the entry so as to give the article its proper weight, on an equity basis to other grand operas, please do, but split this article first so the information here is not lost. Thanks. --Brent Michael Davids 18:40, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

First of all I would suggest you write an article on the Sun Dance. That will establish what exactly we are talking about here. It's much easier for everybody involved if we have the specific information first before we move into questions about what is appropriate/proportionate for general introductory articles.

It may be worth mentioning that the present article only covers the main 'schools' of grand opera (French, German, Italian). Grand Opera is meant an introduction to the subject not an exhaustive study mentioning every work that has ever been performed, let alone every work which has ever been written. Regards. - Kleinzach 20:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Composers of the Month for January/February

We started the Composer of the Month list to encorage new members to contribute as well as to concentrate on areas where our coverage is poor.

I note that virtually no-one has written anything about the operas listed for this month (November), not even those who made up the list. Is this because no-one is interested or because the information is not available? Many of the works are new to me. Are they listed in Grove?

I wonder whether the list of women composers for December will generate any more interest? The Musgrave operas have short entries in Grove, and L’amour de loin has enjoyed critical success but the others? Is anyone going to write about them?

I recommend that for January we return to a policy of featuring the most famous composers. My suggestion would be to do Rameau, Rossini or Offenbach. Any preferences or other ideas? Best - Kleinzach 16:52, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Further to my note above, I see that the Amy Beach work has been omitted from the December list, (also the statement that the operas are not listed on The opera corpus is no longer correct - they are). I would make the necessary changes myself but I can't locate the text to modify it. How does the template work now? Can anyone explain how the thing has been set up? Thanks. Kleinzach 21:26, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I agree about January's choice. we should have an achievable objective. I'd say we should either take a famous composer who wrote a lot of works (Rameau, Rossini or Offenbach are ideal examples) and try to create stubs (at the very least) for every single one of their operas, or we take a major composer who wrote only a handful of operas (e.g. Weber) and try to provide good, solid articles for each of his works. If we choose the former method, I vote for Rameau. --Folantin 22:11, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

PS: By the way, List of major opera composers is now a featured list. It only took three months of agony to get there!--Folantin 22:21, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

I am happy to second Rameau for January. There are about 20 red titles and it would be good to start all or most of them as stubs - on the basis that the stubs are substantial enough to be worth reading at creation. A good model would be the Handel stubs we did before (e.g. Berenice or Faramondo). (The stubs can then be fleshed out later by people who have seen the operas and have specialist literature etc.) - Kleinzach 20:11, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

P.S. Congrats to all on the List of major opera composers. Obviously a painstaking (if not tortuous) piece of work. - Kleinzach 20:11, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Rameau sounds good. BTW, Kleinzach, it was completely tortuous. Check out the talkpage archives and where it ended up. Cheers, Moreschi 20:16, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

You all deserve medals. What kind do you want? I'll send a bulk order to the factory! - Kleinzach 20:23, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Ooh, let's see. OBE's? Orders of the Garter? Knighthoods? Seriously, though, I hope I never have to tangle with such an invidious situation again. Good can come out of conflict though, - hey, we got a featured list! - but Boisseau got what he wanted by outright bullying, and that was unacceptable. Cheers, Moreschi 20:32, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I have filled in Rameau for January (above) as it seems there are no objections. (Incidentally, Minkowski is giving a Rameau concert in Grenoble with the Musiciens du Louvre on December 15 but unfortunately I haven't been able to get tickets . . .) - Kleinzach 20:58, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

How about we try the other extreme with Weber for February? Vanished user ^talk 22:42, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I second that, and will volunteer for Euryanthe and Die drei Pintos. Maybe if I start now they'll be ready for February. --GuillaumeTell 22:51, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Weber for February. The three existing articles all need work as well as the unwritten ones. - Kleinzach 23:06, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Great. I was planning to have decent articles on all Rameau's works (plus a revised biography) by the end of 2007 anyway, so this will be a big help. Weber is a good choice too. Maybe Adam and the rest of the G&S crew will be particularly interested in overhauling the Oberon article, given it was set to an English libretto by James Robinson Planche and they seem to have a lot of info about 19th century British theatre. --Folantin 09:50, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Sure. Planche was one of the major influences on the early Gilbert, and recognised Gilbert as the heir to a certain fairy play genre he developed (it's more noticable in Gilbert's earlier works, mind), so it should be interesting to research. Vanished user ^talk 10:49, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I have listed Weber in the composer of the month (February) box above as we seem to be unanimous on this. - Kleinzach 12:18, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Operas with a known first performance date in England (1800-1900)

That reminds me: If there's any opera written in English or with a known date of first performance in England within the period 1800-1900, please tell me: It is likely I can pick up some nice out-of-copyright images for it in the course of some other research. Vanished user ^talk 10:56, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I have just left you a note about Oberon but I see that Folantin has beaten me to it! To answer your broader question Grove has most of the London premiere dates for 19th century operas. It's relatively easy to get the dates for the Bellinis, Donizettis, Verdis, Wagners, Gounods etc etc. however IMO having pictures of the original (Itaian, French, German) productions is really much more interesting than a national premiere elsewhere.

Incidentally, one good source of illustrations is the German Wikipedia. Tell me if I am wrong but I think there's no problem simply copying the pictures straight onto our pages. - Kleinzach 11:23, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Agreed, the original productions are better. But it doesn't hurt to have others if we can get them. A well-illustrated article never hurt anyone, after all. - But, aye. Let's grab from other Wikipedias when we can. Vanished user ^talk 11:30, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] This month's composer of the month

I feel reasonably confident of my ability to get Smyth up to shape, but not the other composers. Anyone else working on them? Vanished user ^talk 22:36, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do for Judith Weir's works, starting with stubs for those listed. --GuillaumeTell 11:11, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proposal: 'Special Projects' box

I propose we start a 'Special Projects' box to go above or below the 'Composer of the Month'.

This could list our larger, ongoing projects - for example the current revision of the List of important operas or developing good/featured articles - projects which last more than a month and are outside the scope of the monthly series.

These 'special' projects might be set up by any group of four or five members working together, and to the extent that they were adopted 'officially' by the Opera Project might serve to protect participants from outside harassment.

I welcome comments. Please don't hesitate to shoot the whole thing down if you don't think it will work - or you think a different approach is needed! - Kleinzach 13:16, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea. I think we should work on overhauling our "core" pages, such as List of important operas. Quite a bit of work has already been done on the main Opera entry. Now I think the various "national opera" articles need fixing. I've produced a total revision of German opera virtually singlehanded, and Moreschi has expressed an interest in helping me fix French Opera (I have a user sandbox for the proposed revision if anyone else is interested). Others have said they would like to do something about English opera. Italian opera needs dealing with, American opera doesn't even exist, and so on and so on. --Folantin 13:29, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Agreed with Kleinzack and Folantin. This sounds like a good idea to help people find new articles to edit and to create quality articles. I agree with Folantin about the national operas and the List of important opera composers, and I - and, I think, Kyoko as well - would like to have a good crack at Gluck's Orfeo. Go ahead, by all means! Moreschi 13:34, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Agreement here too. --GuillaumeTell 18:01, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. We need a title. Opera Project project is a bit clunky. How about (Opera Project) 'Work in Progress'? - Kleinzach 21:45, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Ooh, that's quite harsh, "they would like to do something about English opera. Italian opera needs dealing with, American opera doesn't even exist"! Just kidding, I understand. Yes, I would like to work on Gluck's Orfeo. As for the project, maybe you could call it "Opera Collaboration"? --Kyok o 16:14, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Hajimemashite! The existing opera project template refers to collaborations so I'd prefer to see something more specific and vaguely official sounding to build in an element of protection from harassment. Any other ideas? - Kleinzach 20:27, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

"Hajimemashite"??? What on earth? My spellchecker suggests "whitewashing", but that doesn't sound right. Joking apart... "Opera Project Working Groups"? Moreschi 20:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Having work groups (project teams or whatever) is one way to go of course, but here we were talking about projects. What I was thinking was that we could have an overall heading of 'Opera Project Work(s) in Progress' divided into 'Lists', and prospective 'Good articles', and 'Featured articles' etc. etc. but maybe someone has a better concept? (I was assuming that Kyoko is Japanese . . .). - Kleinzach 20:49, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Hajimemashite, Kyoko desu. Yoroshiku. I don't know much Japanese, because I was raised in a predominantly English-speaking household in the Montreal area (English being the strongest shared language between my parents). Anyway, how about "focus project" or "focus article"? Kleinzach spoke of harassment. Does that really happen with opera articles? --Kyok o 04:37, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Re-harassment, what I was referring to was the phenomenon of wikipedians with special non-opera related agenda (and often no interest in opera at all) becoming interested in our work. - Kleinzach 12:24, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Could always go for cute, "WikiSubprojects Opera" "WikipProject Opera WikiWorkgroups" or, more sanely, "WikiProject Opera Subgroups." Vanished user ^talk 14:10, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Adam, that makes sense to me. Shall we go with 'subprojects' and 'subgroups' as our basic terms? - Kleinzach 12:24, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I have just realized there are descendant WikiProjects (e.g. WikiProject Gilbert and Sullivan) which might get confused with 'WikiSubprojects', so perhaps we should avoid this term? IMO 'Work in Progress' is still the most suitable general heading. Has it been vetoed? - Kleinzach 20:07, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

...Well, drat it. Ah, well. Give me your preferred term and I'll move templates around. Vanished user ^talk 01:05, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I was going to suggest putting it here first before launching it . . . . but let's call it 'Work in Progress' and then throw it open for discussion. I have already added some example text. - Kleinzach 09:21, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I have fixed the provisonal wording myself. - Kleinzach 12:44, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article grading

One thing that needs doing (IMO) is grading existing opera articles in some way so that we can see which ones need attention - missing character-listing, synopsis too brief or non-existent, no info about recordings, etc., etc. The Biography Project has a grading system that might do, maybe with modification: Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Assessment - I keep coming across their banner on composers' talk pages. --GuillaumeTell 18:01, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I have taken the liberty of splitting your comment - so that your ideas get due exposure!

I am in agreement that a grading system would be helpful, but we don't have the typing hands available to do something as elaborate as the Biography Project. If we had a scaled down system how might it work? - Kleinzach 21:22, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

The Gilbert and Sullivan WikiProject have got a grading system, though there are obviously far fewer articles to write and grade. See the talk pages of W.S. Gilbert and Arthur Sullivan. I've got an idea. How about we get the List of important operas thrashed out, and, once that's done, grade all the opera articles that are on that list, once we've fixed it so it becomes NPOV? That will limit the amount we have to do and provide us with a focus for doing the most important ones. Cheers, Moreschi 20:11, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Not as many fewer as you'd think: Gilbert wrote over a hundred plays, and we also do all major actors and actresses. Vanished user ^talk 20:18, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

That many? Prolific fellow. My word. Still, better than a couple thousand operas. Moreschi 20:20, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Weel, actually, not that many - I just checked and it seems to be 76 or so (See List of W. S. Gilbert dramatic works) - though if you add the parodic reviews of other plays, which he did as one to two-page scripts, then, well, double that at least. Stedman edited a book that was collection of the parodies, and that wass by no means complete. Also some ridiculous number of short stories, a collection of poetry, a lot of cartoons, numerous articles... not all is notable enough for an article of course, but... it's quite enough to get on with. Vanished user ^talk 20:31, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree that it would be better to put off discussion of the grading until after the List of important operas is done. Meanwhile I'd be grateful for your input on the name for the official OP projects (see above) . . . - Kleinzach 20:32, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I have put a model grading scheme at User:Kleinzach/Article_ranking. I wonder if this be suitable for adapting as a project grading guide? - Kleinzach 11:49, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Some preliminary thoughts. Yes, I think it's suitable, though it certainly needs adapting to make it relevant to opera articles (especially bearing in mind that articles on operas, singers, composers, genres, opera companies ... [add extra categories here] will all have different requirements). The "Needed" grade presumably appears only in a table somewhere, rather than on a Talk page for a red link? And the difference between Stub and Start might need looking at - a lot of what are now categorised as Stubs look more like Starts to me. I'm also a bit surprised that there's an A grade between GA and FA. Maybe several examples of current articles that seem to fit each grade would be useful? --GuillaumeTell 17:29, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes indeed. This table is a standard one used (and adapted) by different projects. I think it would be easier to use it than to start from scratch. - Kleinzach 17:45, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Navigational boxes

Another thing is the navigational boxes: I've created Template:Mozart Operas and Template:Mozart Operas wide (which needs more work) and stuck them, respectively, into Il re pastore and Mitridate Rè di Ponto (something wrong with that title) as a start. Comments welcome on my talk page, but if we're going to do more of these we need some consensus, e.g. on where they go, and some division of labour. --GuillaumeTell 18:01, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I have changed 'Mitridate Rè di Ponto' to 'Mitridate, rè di Ponto' but I am pretty sure there is no accent on re. Can anyone confirm?

On the boxes themselves, I'd recommend cutting down on the white space and ranging the text. In the past i have used width:90% for the wide boxes and it works quite well. Also centring may be a problem if you have a picture. I'd try ranging left. I can give you some code if you like. Kleinzach 21:32, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

The Italian word "re" has no accent (as in Il re pastore and Giordano's Il re) and none of my reference sources has it for the opera. Nor has The opera corpus. The French put an accent there, as they do for "Radamès", but that's no excuse. Could you sort this out? And yes, please, for the code - I've been making it up as I go along! --GuillaumeTell 22:18, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I have fixed Mitridate, re di Ponto with an inelegant cut-and-paste job (I don't know a better way of doing this.) And I have given you some code for the info box as well - if it's still difficult to manage, give me yours and I will try to smarten that up as well. - Kleinzach 20:24, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

An update: Kleinzach and I have reached a final form for Template:Mozart Operas, and I've added it to all of them (except King Thamos, whose Stub or Start I'm about to start composing). Both of us noticed while engaged in this operation that most Mozart operas could do with more work!

I'll add a para about the template, which we think would be a useful model, on the main Project Page. Comments welcome.--GuillaumeTell 17:37, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Having been away, I hadn't noticed this or the Strauss navigational box. They look great! Much more useful than a generic opera infobox. Fireplace 22:29, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I've also done Verdi and Janacek so far, with Puccini, Tchaikovsky and Wagner on my list to be done when time permits - all these have all-blue entries in The opera corpus. (So have Donizetti and Handel, where we might need two columns!) The boxes look rather unwieldy when applied to the shorter stubs, and often a bit inelegant when there's a table of roles near the top of the article: a longer preamble to the articles might help. But I do think that top right is the best place for them, and I've slapped them on regardless. All assistance gratefully received. --GuillaumeTell 22:47, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Opera buffa hoax

I have just been looking at the first paragragh of the Opera buffa and read:

. . . Leading composers include Mozart, Rossini, and Bizet but many others made a significant contribution to the genre and provided great influence for these composers; Mozart in particular. These include, Claudio Goffenberg, Heinz Goering and Lucio Allapenzio. The librettist Alfonso Madrigali was a close friend of Mozart and helped him to establish the opera buffa style to its full dramatic potential. He favoured librettos with somewhat lewd and erotic texts, and was highly accomplished at integrating his favourite themes into the operas with the utmost subtlety. For example, in Act two of Le nozze di Figaro, Mozart and Madrigali collaborated to ensure that the homosexual tendencies of the protagonist did not become obvious throughout. . . .

Is this a hoax? I couldn't find Alfonso Madrigali at all when I searched on Google. As we all know the librettist of Figaro was da Ponte. - Kleinzach 23:06, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

I've now deleted the passage. After checking further, I found it was written by someone using the IP 143.117.143.182 who had a history of making spurious changes to articles. In future I suppose we'll have to watch out for clever vandals as well as stupid ones. - Kleinzach 23:31, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Ooh, intellectual vandalism! I'll have to add that to the collection...Moreschi 13:00, 10 December 2006 (UTC)