Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Agrippina (opera)

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Karanacs 22:02, 24 March 2009 [1].

Agrippina (opera) edit

Nominator(s): Brianboulton (talk), Shoemaker's Holiday (talk)

I am co-nominating this with User:Shoemaker's Holiday. 14 April sees the 250th anniversary of Handel's death. There are no featured Handel articles; it would be good if this were featured before then, as Agrippina was his first big operatic success.It was written by the youthful composer towards the end of a short sojourn in Italy, but is reckoned to be fully up to the standard of his mature style.

The user Moreschi, who was the main editor on earlier versions of the article, was contacted and advised that it was being prepared for a possible FAC. He has not edited it since January 2008. The article had an extensive recent peer review. Brianboulton (talk) 19:52, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I added in some sources, worked on structure, and minor copyediting, but I must admit that Brian's done most of the heavy lifting, with major copyediting work, and actually locating a libretto - which I could not. =) Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 21:14, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tech. Review

  • Dabs and external links are found up to speed (based on the checker tools in the toolbox at the right)
  • Ref formatting is not found up to speed (based on WP:REFTOOLS)
  • The following refs (coding pasted below) are duplicated and appear as such in the ref section, a ref name should be used instead.
  • Brown, pp. 357-58
  • Sawyer, p. 534
  • Boyden et al, p. 56
Fixed the only one of these where this was, as far as I could tell, the case? Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 00:46, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • The following ref names are used by different refs, when only one specific ref should be using it.
  • Brown3578
  • Sawyer534
  • Grove--₮RUCӨ 00:04, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
These are the same refs, just with the text copied in case things get moved around. We could remove the text from one, but, frankly, it's probably less breakable if we leave it like it is. I have double checked they're all the same, and fixed one that wasn't. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 00:46, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I see you are right, why aren't they in a <ref name="(text)"/> format?--₮RUCӨ 01:01, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
They could be, but if you're editing things, it's often convenient to have a bit of redundancy so that if you end up deleting a sentence or something, you don't have to go and find the ref it once connected to. I suppose it wouldn't be hard to change them to that format now, I'm just wondering if it's desirable to remove the redundancy. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 01:44, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In this case it doesn't matter since it doesn't affect the formatting and output of the refs, so you're in good check.--Best, ₮RUCӨ 01:54, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 02:22, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Media review - All images and clips have adequate descriptions and verifiable licenses. (I only wish there were more audio clips!) Awadewit (talk) 02:47, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I did what I could, I fear. Even what little I did get was difficult. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 03:35, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - I peer reviewed this and have enjoyed the article and following the development of the article, and hope it can be featured to be on the Main Page for Handel's 250th. I have two minor quibbles. Since both cities are in Germany, could The first was in Schwetzingen (Germany), the other at the Göttingen International Handel Festival.[9] be clearer as something like Both were in Germany: the first in Schwetzingen, the other at the Göttingen International Handel Festival.[9]? Second, aren't some sort of references needed for the CDs in the Selected recordings section? Ruhrfisch ><>°° 04:57, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Would gfhandel.org be an acceptable cite for the recordings? The site is run by the Handel institute, which includes several scholars of note. They list two additional recordings, but we could always add them, and then everything would be cited. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 05:29, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have fixed the "Both were in Germany" line. Brianboulton (talk) 09:39, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the gfhandel.org site is co-produced by David Vickers, a leading opera scholar especially of Handel; he is co-editor of the (2009) Cambridge Handel Encyclopedia. I have added the refs to the discography section. Since it is a selected discography, I see no reason for adding further discs to it. Brianboulton (talk) 11:39, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
All my quibbles have been resolved - well done. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 13:52, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks again for your help. Brianboulton (talk) 17:03, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Impeccably referenced, comprehensive and easy to follow. Four tiny comments:
    • I wondered about the very opening line. Libretti are set to music, but is music set to a libretto as here stated?
    • Background: first para: "Allesandro" (Scarlatti) should be "Alessandro"
    • Composition: second para "…and other arias frm the opera.." needs an o
    • Synopsis: second para: "Aggripina" should be "Agrippina" Tim riley (talk) 12:49, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Leaning towards support This article is a clear introduction to the opera. It covers the composition and production of the opera as well as its music. It is also well-written and uses high-quality sources. The only thing standing in the way of my fully supporting this article is the sourcing issue I outline below.

  • There are no redlinks in the article, but it struck me that some of the pieces mentioned probably deserve an article of their own. Could redlinks be added where appropriate?
    • I've linked every opera and cantata mentioned in the text, creating a new article on Ero e Leandro. I didn't link the pasticcio "Perseo", though, but I don't think, at least, that it was particularly notable. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 22:32, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • at that time there was little difference, apart from increasing length, between cantata, oratorio, and opera, all being based on the alternation of secco recitative[6] and aria da capo - There are too many phrases and words set off by commas here - the sentence becomes difficult to follow.
  • It is already difficult enough to read Wikipedia's footnote-peppered articles, but I find it extremely distracting to read sentences with footnotes interrupting the sentence. Could we move the notes to the end of the sentence where possible?
    • I'll see what I can do in this respect, but my own preference is for citations as close as possible to the relevant material. I also have a "thing" against long reference strings at the ends of sentences. Brianboulton (talk) 22:42, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • I agree - I prefer combined footnotes - one footnote to list them all. :) Awadewit (talk) 20:24, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        • I've shifted all but a couple of refs to their sentence's end, combined some, & generally made things tidier. One or two refs which refer to specific quoted expressions or phrases I have left where they were. Brianboulton (talk) 15:43, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • When writing about literary works, it is customary to list their first date of publication in parenthesis after the title. Is there such a custom in musicology?
    • Not certain of your point here. Is the suggestion that the article should be titled Agrippina (opera) (1709) - or am I misunderstanding you?
      • She means, for instance:


I've gone ahead and done that. It's useful enough. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 23:10, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Again, during the run Poppaea's aria "Ingannata" was replaced with an another of extreme virtuosity - Is there a better way to describe the difference between the two? What made the second one more technically difficult, for example? Later in the paragraph, it is suggested that what made this demanding was the range. Perhaps rearranging the information here a bit would improve this section.
    • Dean doesn't specify beyond extreme virtuosity, a term which most opera-lovers would understand as combining range and coloratura. I think the rest of the sentence makes it clear that the new version was intended to showcase Scarbelli's vocal skills. The final point is really just saying that such embellishments were unusual at this time. Brianboulton (talk) 22:42, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • Are you telling me this section is written for opera lovers (GASP)! I wish something on coloratura could be added because I didn't know that, but, if not, that's ok. Awadewit (talk) 20:24, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        • Well, Dean was writing for opera lovers, and omitted to mention coloratura in his "extreme virtuosity" description, so I can't oblige by adding it. Honestly, though, I think the meaning of the sentence is clear. Brianboulton (talk) 22:01, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
          • That said, if Dean's book contains more information or clarity on this subject, please do add it in. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 00:08, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • However, when interest in Handel's operas awakened in the 20th century - Could you explain why interest in Handel's operas suddenly emerged in the 20th century?
  • There have been numerous productions since - since when? (This sentence begins a section, so it needs to be particularly explicit.)
  • Recent revivals have used counter-tenors in the roles written for castrati. This is so in the 1995 Gardiner recording, in the 2002/2007 New York State Theatre productions, and in the 2007 ENO version - This sentence seems lonely. Is there a way to integrate it into the "Contemporary revivals" section?
  • The fact that the article quotes two pieces of gradute student work quoting Dean and Knapp's Handel's Operas leads me to believe that work has not been consulted. As it is the only book in the reference list devoted exclusively to Handel's operas this concerns me. There is a revised edition of Dean and Knapp's book from 1995 that I have access to. Would it help if I consulted this book?
    • If you would, please do - we tried to find it, but were unable to. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 20:34, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'm so lazy that I ordered it sent from our music library to our main library. It'll be there tomorrow. Awadewit (talk) 20:24, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        • Apparently delivery is slower during spring break. Still waiting for the book. Awadewit (talk) 20:37, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
          • That being the case, while we are waiting could you please either strike or add comments to the other items in the review so that we can close them? Brianboulton (talk) 23:01, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
          • I've struck them. Awadewit (talk) 23:36, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
            • I've acquired the book - it does have quite a bit of information not covered in this article. I've offered to scan the relevant pages at Talk:Agrippina (opera). Awadewit (talk) 23:31, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
              • Thanks to Shoemaker's Holiday and Brianboulton for adding material and carefully checking the article against the new source. I'm fully satisfied with the article's sources now. Awadewit (talk) 18:20, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
                • And thanks to you for locating the source and enabling us to enhance the article. Brianboulton (talk) 00:52, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Agrippina by George Frideric Handel". written at Richmond, Va.. Virginia Opera. 2006. Retrieved on 5 March 2009. - Can we link "Virginia Opera" somehow so that readers know why this source is reliable?
  • Bianconi, Lorenzo; Giorgio Pastelli (1997). Opera Production and its Resources (tr. Lydia G. Cochrane). Chicago: Chicago University Press. ISBN 0-2260-4590-0. - Note in this entry in the "References" list, the translator's name is italicized. Is there a translator field in the template? (Yet another example of why templates are more trouble than they are worth.)
    • No, there isn't one. Damn templates. I've changed it to put Cochrane in as a parenthetical author. Why does FAC insist on these damn things being used? Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 23:45, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • FAC doesn't insist. I find them generally helpful, though on occasion they can be a pain in the backside. Brianboulton (talk) 23:47, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        • I find them both useful and frustrating - they make sure you get all the important information, but lack options for anything unusual. =/ Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 00:08, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dean, Winton (1980). "George Frideric Handel". New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians (British special edition). 8. London: Macmillan. pp. 85–138. ISBN 0-3333-23111 Parameter error in {{ISBN}}: checksum. - Does this mean "Vol. 8"?
  • "Handel, George Frideric". Encyclopædia Britannica 15th edition. 5. 2002. pp. 678–80. ISBN 0-85229-787-4. - Is there an unspoken agreement not to list the publisher and location of the EB?
    • No idea why this info was omitted - fixed.
  • LaRue, C. Steven (1997). Handel and the Aria, in The Cambridge Companion to Handel, ed. Donald Burrows. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-45613-4. - This should use the "book chapter" template - note that the chapter, book title, and editor are currently all in italics.
  • The "Further reading" entries do not match the citation style of the "References".

As you can see, most of this is small potatoes. Awadewit (talk) 19:47, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for your careful reading, copyedits & comments above. It would be interesting to know if the Dean & Knapp book contains information or insights not covered here; I'd be a little surprised, because a lot of this article is based on Dean's writings on the opera, as well as on other scholarship. The book is pretty well unobtainable in the UK – even the Royal Opera House couldn't help me – but if you are able to consult it, your comments would be appreciated. Other points above, e.g organisation of template formats, etc, are being worked on. Brianboulton (talk) 22:42, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • I am now fully supporting this article. Wonderful work. Awadewit (talk) 18:20, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. (Since Awa caught the small formatting glitches) Ealdgyth - Talk 20:59, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Augh, screw it, these templates are broken pieces of shite adding bad grammar, like "...in Amanda Holden. New Penguin Opera Guide." . I'm going to replace everything with PROPER, NORMAL citation. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 23:50, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • "Kill the template, kill the template..." :) Awadewit (talk) 00:10, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        • Done. And don't forget to sing that in an Elmer Fudd voice to Ride of the Valkyries, Awadewit. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 00:24, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. This is a comprehensive, well articulated, and well referenced article.Nrswanson (talk) 19:52, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support & comment. Speaking of "kill the template", it would be helpful for outsiders to weigh in on the look of the role table vs [original], and also on the discography table, which dosnt have room for annotations & review links. Sparafucil (talk) 00:49, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - I first saw this back when it was a GA. Wow, what a change! I would request the editors to work on Serse next. --RelHistBuff (talk) 15:26, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Agrippina_(opera)&oldid=1136459095"