Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Nixon in China (opera)/archive1

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 SandyGeorgia 01:20, 16 April 2011 [1].

---

Nixon in China (opera)

Nixon in China (opera) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Featured article candidates/Nixon in China (opera)/archive1

Nominator(s):Wehwalt (talk), Brianboulton (talk) 16:12, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

President Richard M. Nixon was probably the most unlikely of operatic heroes (or villains), at least until Jerry Springer 20 years later. John Adams's score is a curiosity: part 1980s minimalism à la Philip Glass, part Stravinskian neoclassicism, part 19th century Romantic, part big band and pop. The work's early performances rather baffled critics and public, resulting in praise and damnation in equal measures. Slowly, however, it established itself at least in the English-language operatic repertoire, and is now considered one of the most significant works in American opera. Peer reviewed here, now ready (we think) for FAC appraisal. Your comments welcomed. Wehwalt (talk) and Brianboulton (talk) 16:12, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Support I copyedited this article and commented at the PR, and I believe it to be thoroughly well written and informative.-RHM22 (talk) 17:39, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Support Like RHM22 I took part in the peer review. My few queries were thoroughly dealt with and I warmly support the article's promotion to FA. I make no judgment on the images (lacking expertise in that specialism) but in all other regards the article seems to me to meet the FA criteria. Tim riley (talk) 17:50, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you, for the support and particularly for your PR contributions which greatly helped the article'spreparation. Brianboulton (talk) 20:32, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Image and deadlink review
Article makes good use of seven images, all of which are properly licensed and list working source links work where applicable. No deadlinks in the article.--NortyNort (Holla) 12:33, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. Brianboulton (talk) 20:32, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

No problem--NortyNort (Holla) 01:09, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

• Comments
  • With these ingredients Adams mixes Stravinskian 20th century neoclassicism, jazz references, and big band sounds reminiscent of Nixon's youth in the 1930s. — I don't know why you didn't put a comma after ingredients.
  • Any reason why you write sometimes in American standard (like period in a quote) and sometimes British (Commonwealth) standard, like "recognise" instead of "recognize", "theatre" instead of "theater" or period after a quote?

Period within/after a quote is an MOS issue, and I believe we do it correctly. Even though I went over the parts of the article Brian wrote to ensure it was American English, obviously I missed one. I do not see the word "theatre" used in the article.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:36, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

There are three "theatres", which one of them should be changed (in the "Inception" section, first sentence).

Ah hah. Done.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:33, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

• • any reason, why "anti-Communism" is capitalized?
  • "Los Angeles Times" should be "Los Angeles Times"
  • “There are only three things wrong with Nixon in China. One, the libretto; two, the music; three, the direction. Outside of that, it’s perfect.”[7] — why you wrote such quotation marks and not the standard """?
  • In this final, "surreal" act [42] the concluding thoughts of Chou En-lai, are described by Tommasini as "deeply affecting". — Please explain what you meant with this. Remove unnecessary ref.

I don't see an unneeded ref. The "surreal" quote is not from the same reference as the "deeply affecting" quote, you can't remove it.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:51, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

The sentence was unclear because of punctuation, I've cleared that up I think.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:51, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, but it seems like the comma isn't on the right position:

Do you mean: "In this final "surreal" act,[42] the concluding thoughts of Chou En-lai are described by Tommasini as "deeply affecting".[24]"

or: "In this final, the "surreal" act,[42] the concluding thoughts of Chou En-lai, are described by Tommasini as "deeply affecting".[24]" --♫Greatorangepumpkin♫T 13:28, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Act 3 is the only surreal act, if that answers your question.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:31, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

I actually meant the clause position, as I don't think this sentence does make any sense. Besides this, a support from me is doubtless applicable.

• • In this recording Edo de Waart conducted St. Luke's Chorus and Orchestra. — comma after recording (it is not a stand-alone main clause).
  • This recording received a Grammy Award in 1988, for Best Contemporary Composition in the "Classical" category;[50] — remove unnecessary comma after 1988 (now it is a main clause)
  • Ref 50: publisher is "The Recording Academy"; the work is "grammy.com"
  • Ref 27: "KHOU TV Inc" -> "KHOU-TV, Inc."
  • Ref 21: "first=Alex" not "Alec"
  • Some accessdates missing.

I red the article fast, so I might overlooked something.--♫Greatorangepumpkin♫T 11:53, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your work. I think I've taken care of everything, with the quibbles above, excepting one reference, #22, from Tempo to which I do not have a subscription and so cannot add the accessdate field. My colleague will do that once he looks in.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:12, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

I have added an access date for Ref 22. Brianboulton (talk) 16:34, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

(od)Support - OK, then I will Support this excellent article. I did a second run, but I haven't found any mistakes.--♫Greatorangepumpkin♫T 17:35, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the support and for the work. I think I've cleaned up that sentence, feel free to tinker on your own.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:54, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Source review

• Source for Roles table?
• Metropolitan Opera or The Metropolitan Opera?
• "(Nixon in China edition)" or "(Nixon in China version)" or "(Nixon in China)"?
• What does "p. Zest" refer to?
• Be consistent in whether you provide publishers, ex for Opera News
• Maybe pipe the link for ref 29? Nikkimaria (talk) 20:18, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, I will look these over. On the Zest, that was the Chronicle's very Eighties name for what we might call a Living section. If you think I can do it in a less awkward way, help is always gratefully accepted.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:23, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

I think Brian and I have done all of these now.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:11, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

• Support, I also participated in the peer review and any issues I had were already addressed there. I believe this article to be excellently written and well sourced. It will make an excellent addition to wikipedia's growing number of opera FAs.4meter4 (talk) 02:12, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the support, and for your help with this. Brianboulton (talk) 19:01, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.