Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Richard Wagner/Archive 4

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. 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.

Contents 1 Project scope 1.1 Peformers 1.2 Family members 1.3 Critics, advocates, influences etc. 1.4 Please sign and indent! 1.5 Time to agree scope 2 Project logo by Javitomad/1 3 Männerlist grösser als Frauenlist 4 Bayreuth canon 5 Project logo by Javitomad/2 6 Animal rights/Anti-Semitism

Project scope

Currently the project page does not match the categorisation. I think we need a proper discussion on who we cover as part of the project. I'm going to seed sub-headings in the hope of keeping things organised.

Peformers

We are encouraging people to write articles on these. But who do we want to have under the project?

Do we want specific categories i.e Category:Wagnerian singers, conductors, directors etc.

I think we need to link criteria for encouraging articles from here with criteria for being under a category.

PS and also one for Wagnerian singers, I 100% agree.--Smerus 14:20, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

(I've refactored this, I hope you don't mind, Smerus)--Peter cohen 14:48, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm opposed to having a category for Wagnerian singers - or Mozart singers, Puccini singers or whatever - because it would be too difficult to define and maintain, and wouldn't be of any practical value IMO. (What I have done is work on a List of article-worthy Wagner singers.) -- Kleinzach 16:09, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

They are singers who you would expect to have a WP:Wagner tag on their talk page, then?--Peter cohen 16:52, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

No, as explained above. Also consider the enormity of the task of categorizing Wagner singers. We should not be proposing and discussing something that nobody has any intention of doing. Please note that for similar reasons the Opera Project does not categorize conductors. -- Kleinzach 02:47, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Family members

See the heading Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Richard Wagner#Category:Wagner family where discussion has already started.

Critics, advocates, influences etc.

User:Kleinzach has removed Ludwig II of Bavaria from our headings but we mention him on our front page. So do we want him or not? ditto for Schopenhauer as an influence, but then why not Beethoven or Carl Maria von Weber? Ernest Newman is currently included]], but not Deryck Cooke. Nietzsche is a prominent advocate and critic.

1000 years ago I started Category:Wagnerites (and also Category:Anti-Wagnerites - Nietzsche was in both categories) which got deleted a while back for what I feel were specious reasons - but there is a case for some sort of category/categories which deals with - 1) people closely associated with Wagner's life, thought and career who were contemporaries (Ludwig, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche....) and - 2) significant commentators on Wagner (e.g. Newman, Cooke). Smerus 14:19, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

AFAIR, a lot of the deleters said they would be happy if the pros and antis were in categories clearly identified as part of the 19th century debate.

As you said, Perhaps we need categories under this heading for:

• Wagner associates and influences. (Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, Bakunin, Ludwig, the Wesendoncks...)
• Wagner writers (Shaw, Cooke, Newman, Nietzsche(again)...) This requires people to have written at least a book on RW or the equivalent number of essays, chapters or whatever. Twain is entertaining, but unless his work is book length, I don't think he counts.Hanslich might well have written enough.

Separately there might be a list of those influenced by Wagner, e.g. Bruckner, Thomas Mann etc.--Peter cohen 14:48, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

I think we should be cautious - not build castles in the air. Categories for associates, followers and influences etc. are distracting from more important work like improving the basic articles on the Wagner operas. These categories seem to inevitably end up on Cfd provoking interminable, often inconclusive discussions. -- Kleinzach 16:32, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

I started work on [[Die Feen] on 29th August, when I think GT had estimated it at Stub, or at best borderline Start and by 5th September it had reached B grade. Especially now that we've provided guidelines, it should be relatively simple to get all the opera articles to B grade in the next few months. As for moving above, I am still keen on colaborations as the easiest way to get to GA and better, given that we have nine members. So, for those who prefer working on their own, having a broader list of Wagner-related topics is a good way of providing suggestions.--Peter cohen 09:02, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Please sign and indent!

Re-reading the comments above I find it impossible to work out who wrote what. Can we please sign comments and properly indent them so that it's all clear? Thank you. -- Kleinzach 01:52, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Time to agree scope

Now Kleinzach has "signed off" the assessment trial, it is definitely time for those of us who are here for the long term to decide what the scope of the project is.

As far as I am concerned there is an issue in that on our project page we mention Arthur Schopenhauer, Friedrich Nietzsche, Ludwig II of Bavaria, and Franz Liszt but do not include them in any of our categories and have not assessed them. SImilarly there are a large number of singers listed, but we have no category or list or assessment of Wagnerian singers. And there aralso conductors, such as Knappertsbusch, whose names scream Wagner just as much as certain of the listed singers in the subpage. So, as a project what do we consider a reasonable scope given our numbers?--Peter cohen 10:29, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Project logo by Javitomad/1

At my suggestion Javito has design a logo which now appears on the main page. I've adapted it for a userbox, coded {{ParticipantWagner}}:

and Javito has put it on the banner, here:

	This article falls within the scope of the Richard Wagner WikiProject, a collaboration to develop articles on the composer and his operas. The project talk page is a place to discuss issues and exchange ideas. New members are welcome!
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale.

Any comments? Colour balance? My own preference might be for a different background colour (i.e. not beige) for the banner. Any ideas? Thanks. -- Kleinzach 00:57, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Jeez, he looks like he's been dredged up from the depths of the Rhine! Does it have to be that bilious green background? How about lavender - one of his favourite colours, apparently. Don't think he'd like the green and neither do I.--Dogbertd 07:47, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree that this green is a bit strong.--Peter cohen 13:18, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

He looks like the Hulk. I agree, let's change the background colour. --Folantin 13:37, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

OK, I will report back to Javito and see what he comes up with. -- Kleinzach 14:09, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

I could make a new version with other colour balance... fancy?
:D
Javitomad (...tell me...) 14:49, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Perhaps we can also consider changing the background colour of the banner (above)? Dogbertd's suggestion of lavender for the logo might be good. -- Kleinzach 14:58, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Here it is: do you like? I hope so.
:D
Javitomad (...tell me...) 21:05, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I wonder if we could make it lighter? On my monitor it is more purple/raspberry than lavender. -- Kleinzach 00:06, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree. I think this could be very good if it were a lighter (or less saturated) shade of lavender. Looking at the chart on [1] I could suggest something aboutFFC CFF or FF9 9FF. Thanks for your efforts! --Dogbertd 10:05, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

I could try... but I'm having a break for a week, so 'till then I won't work any more... you don't mind, do you?
:D
Javitomad (...tell me...) 22:35, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Please take your time and have an enjoyable break! -- Kleinzach 00:11, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Männerlist grösser als Frauenlist

I have put this article up; now, does it go in the Wagner opera template or not?........Smerus 17:39, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Bayreuth canon

Within minutes of my creating this article, it has been proposed for deletion. I believe that it can usefully be kept here with rather more information than would be in a bare dictionary definition. Opinions welcome at the talk page. --Peter cohen (talk) 15:03, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Threat now lifted. Also, apologies for typo on capitalisation.--Peter cohen (talk) 15:28, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Project logo by Javitomad/2

I've been in touch with Javitomad and he's reluctant to make either version of the logo lighter as some of us suggested. That's fine of course, I'm sure we respect his opinion.

This is what we have now:

I'm wondering whether anybody else would like to have a go at editing/lightening the pictures. It's a superb image and I'm sure we can arrive at a colour scheme which looks OK on all our monitors. Best. -- Kleinzach (talk) 07:42, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

As there has been no response to my message I've done a new version of the logo:

Is this a reasonable solution? -- Kleinzach (talk) 08:37, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes. I like it better than the all-green or all mauve versions. Perhaps a version with white face and lilac background would be the best of all possible options? At any rate, this is better than anything that has gone before. Well done!--Dogbertd (talk) 22:13, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. But I'm not very experienced at this! Which colour is lilac? Do you have a number? -- Kleinzach (talk) 00:41, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I like the white/green version best. And so does my wife (altho' she is not a member of the Project so perhaps her vote doesn't count).Smerus (talk) 20:26, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Good, I've provisionally changed the banner and userbox over to the white/green design. If we have a lilac example later we can consider that as an alternative. -- Kleinzach (talk) 01:10, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Lilac. Looking at the chart on [2] I could suggest something aboutFFC CFF or FF9 9FF. But I like the white face version regardless of the background.--Dogbertd (talk) 11:39, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Animal rights/Anti-Semitism

An edit, by User:Polentario, in Richard Wagner claimed that Wagner's vegetarianism was linked to an anti-semitic objection to shechita. I am aware of no evidence for this and rewrote the edit, incidentally turning it into English. I asked on Talk:Richard Wagner if anyone was aware of such evidence and there was an interesting, if inconclusive, answer to my query from Paul B. In the meantime I got the following comment from Polentario on my talk-page. He made a second edit to the Wagner page, even more convoluted than his first, which I have now also edited. I would be grateful for the opinions of others in the discussion on the Talk page.--Smerus (talk) 14:41, 31 March 2008 (UTC)