Talk:Die Feen

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Richard Wagner, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Richard WagnerWikipedia:WikiProject Richard WagnerTemplate:WikiProject Richard WagnerRichard Wagner articles

Opera

This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Opera, a group writing and editing Wikipedia articles on operas, opera terminology, opera composers and librettists, singers, designers, directors and managers, companies and houses, publications and recordings. The project discussion page is a place to talk about issues and exchange ideas. New members are welcome!OperaWikipedia:WikiProject OperaTemplate:WikiProject OperaOpera articles

Germany Low‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sourcing and referencing[edit]

I've added a synopsis and various other information. I've tried to indicate what source provided what information. Are other people able to supply sources for information added earlier? --Peter cohen 20:56, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Working towards Good Article candidacy.[edit]

I think that this article is not far off being suitable for nomination.

These are the things that I think need to be done first:

Move up and format the recordings accoridng to WP:WPO standards.
Source a couple of facts: the history of the manuscript passing through Ludwig's and Hitler's hands and being destroyed being the most obvious. Also need full citation details (author, pages) for the Sawallisch box info.
Illustrations: I'm thinking particularly of musical ones. Is anyone here experienced in handling sound files and doing so in accordance with Wikipedia's policies. However, if anyone has a text which has the illustration at [1] and can indicate its date, we might be able to include that in the synopsis.
Should state that it's not part of the Bayreuth canon and find a source.
Rework Sources section into references and links ones.
Confirm what Grove etc have to say.

Anyone able to help with any of these?--Peter cohen 15:03, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Controversial infobox[edit]

I see there was an attempt to put a controversial infobox on this article without any prior proposal. I think that was unfortunate. Personally, I am opposed to using that box. --Klein zach 01:06, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. I see "trying" an infobox, following discussions on project opera culminating in "My personal opinion is that where a footer navbox is available, replacing the header one with the infobox is perfectly acceptable. It is also perfectly acceptable not to do so." (not by me) - There are hundreds of opera articles, several of them with a footer navbox available: I will not "propose" every single time that I replace redundant information by information about the specific article. A centralized discussion about the alternative is open. - Please be careful using "controversial", I prefer: perfectly acceptable to do so or not to do so. Back to the article: what's wrong with this specific infobox? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:36, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain what you mean by "redundant information"? --Klein zach 12:01, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Redundant" - if I really have to explain it once more - means that IF a footer navbox is available (as for Wagner), navigation in a sidebar is redundant, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:48, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain what you mean by "controversial infobox", without reference to your own personal dislike for it? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:16, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I support the inclusion of the infobox. Furthermore, the editor who removed it used an edit summary of "restore Template:Wagner operas until there is consensus for this change", but appears to have made no attempt here to determine consensus, or explain his objection. WP:DNRNC applies. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:18, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I oppose this infobox. No consensus was sought when installing it. I shall be referring to this intervention by Gerda and Mr. Mabbett presnetly in the ongoing arb disucssion on infoboxes.--Smerus (talk) 05:07, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is no need for you to bring this to the arb case, I did it. The opposition of some users to opera infoboxes, part of the manual of style of project opera, is the central part of my statement. It is a bit surprising that people who urge respect for a restriction of a project (no infoboxes for composers) don't respect this option of a project. Repeating: no "consensus" is needed to follow a project guideline. I oppose the term "controversial" in the section header. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:02, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As a reader I expect an infobox about *this* opera not a picture of Wagner with a hidden list of other operas. Agathoclea (talk) 06:06, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A video of Die Feen[edit]

Unlike which is written on the page, a video of the opera by R. Sage conducting the Lyric opera of Los Angeles on 11-06-2010 is available on YouTube: Wagner's Die Feen - A Visual Pasticcio. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 12:14, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox[edit]

I suggest to restore the 2013 Infobox, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:45, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:11, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies Gerda, only just seen this. I don't think it very appropriate. Have removed it pending further discussion. I suggest that idf you are going to add these boxes as you have at other Wagner operas, you raise the issue first at WP:Opera and WP:Wagner.--Smerus (talk) 10:09, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Die Feen/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 →

Lower end of the B range. Suggestions for improvement:

More on background and composition
More on the music, critical opinion, etc.
More illustrations actually relevant to the opera (Weber picture is unnecessary), including musical illustrations
More inline references needed; Sources section can be scrapped once it's established which parts of the article come from which of these;
Recordings section should appear above Notes; tabular format preferred

--GuillaumeTell 21:38, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mid-level B (70 on the points scale). Suggestions for improvement:

More on the music, critical opinion, etc. This is probably the area to concentrate on.

-- Kleinzach 00:09, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Background 9/15 Performance 9/15 List of roles 5/5 Synopsis 10/10 Notable arias 5/5 Music/critical appreciation 6/15 Recordings 8/10 Illustrations 3/10 Referencing etc. 9/15 Total 64/100

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Peter cohen (talk • contribs) 11:59, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

==Discussion==

This has now been moved to Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Richard_Wagner#Article_assessment_5:_Die_Feen_discussion -- Kleinzach 01:16, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 01:16, 8 September 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 13:24, 29 April 2016 (UTC)