Talk:André Raison

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 02:16, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Composer project review

I've reviewed this article as part of the Composers project review of its B-class articles. This is a B-class article; its formatting and layout need some attention, and it needs more inline citations. My full review is on the comments page; questions and comments should be left here or on my talk page. Magic♪piano 02:02, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:André Raison/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)

Press [show] to view →

I recommend a critical review of the score sample from "Trio en chaconne". If you compare it with the edition in WIMA you'll notice the initial motive in WIMA's edition has the notes 4g | 2d+ 8a 16g 16a | 2b in the right hand upper part while the sample in the Wikipedia article has 4g | 2c+ 8a 16g 16a | 2b Unfortunately I've not access to the original printing of "Livre d'Orgue". But from a music analysis point of view it seems obvious that the leading motive spans the chord on the first degree of the key in use (in practice g-minor). The 2c+ found in the Wikipedia sample seems most unlikely to me. Reccmo (talk) 11:02, 11 June 2008 (UTC) Composers Project Assessment of André Raison: 2024-11-14 This is an assessment of article André Raison by a member of the Composers project, according to its assessment criteria. This review was done by Magicpiano. If an article is well-cited, the reviewer is assuming that the article reflects reasonably current scholarship, and deficiencies in the historical record that are documented in a particular area will be appropriately scored. If insufficient inline citations are present, the reviewer will assume that deficiencies in that area may be cured, and that area may be scored down. Adherence to overall Wikipedia standards (WP:MOS, WP:WIAGA, WP:WIAFA) are the reviewer's opinion, and are not a substitute for the Wikipedia's processes for awarding Good Article or Featured Article status. Origins/family background/studies Does the article reflect what is known about the composer's background and childhood? If s/he received musical training as a child, who from, is the experience and nature of the early teachers' influences described? ok Early career Does the article indicate when s/he started composing, discuss early style, success/failure? Are other pedagogic and personal influences from this time on his/her music discussed? ok Mature career Does the article discuss his/her adult life and composition history? Are other pedagogic and personal influences from this time on his/her music discussed? ok List(s) of works Are lists of the composer's works in WP, linked from this article? If there are special catalogs (e.g. Köchel for Mozart, Hoboken for Haydn), are they used? If the composer has written more than 20-30 works, any exhaustive listing should be placed in a separate article. ok Critical appreciation Does the article discuss his/her style, reception by critics and the public (both during his/her life, and over time)? ok Illustrations and sound clips Does the article contain images of its subject, birthplace, gravesite or other memorials, important residences, manuscript pages, museums, etc? Does it contain samples of the composer's work (as composer and/or performer, if appropriate)? (Note that since many 20th-century works are copyrighted, it may not be possible to acquire more than brief fair use samples of those works, but efforts should be made to do so.) If an article is of high enough quality, do its images and media comply with image use policy and non-free content policy? (Adherence to these is needed for Good Article or Featured Article consideration, and is apparently a common reason for nominations being quick-failed.) Image, and music notation; no sound clips. References, sources and bibliography Does the article contain a suitable number of references? Does it contain sufficient inline citations? (For an article to pass Good Article nomination, every paragraph possibly excepting those in the lead, and every direct quotation, should have at least one footnote.) If appropriate, does it include Further Reading or Bibliography beyond the cited references? Article has references; a few inline cites. Structure and compliance with WP:MOS Does the article comply with Wikipedia style and layout guidelines, especially WP:MOS, WP:LEAD, WP:LAYOUT, and possibly WP:SIZE? (Article length is not generally significant, although Featured Articles Candidates may be questioned for excessive length.) ok Things that may be necessary to pass a Good Article review Article requires more inline citations (WP:CITE) Summary This is a somewhat interesting article, even if the biographic component is on the brief side. The music is reasonably well-covered; I find the large musical extract distracting; the juxtaposition of the church image; livre listing, and notation gives the page a jumbled quality. Article is B-class; it needs some attention to format and layout (which may require additional words to fill parts out). Magic♪piano 02:00, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Last edited at 02:00, 24 March 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 07:46, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on André Raison. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060227004122/http://www.aristote.asso.fr:80/gui/Sons/raisonroydesparisiens.wav to http://www.aristote.asso.fr/gui/Sons/raisonroydesparisiens.wav
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060227003924/http://www.aristote.asso.fr:80/gui/Sons/raicornet.wav to http://www.aristote.asso.fr/gui/Sons/raicornet.wav
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060227004544/http://www.aristote.asso.fr:80/gui/Sons/raibtromp.wav to http://www.aristote.asso.fr/gui/Sons/raibtromp.wav

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:41, 13 October 2016 (UTC)