Talk:Ach wie flüchtig, ach wie nichtig, BWV 26/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Dr. Blofeld (talk · contribs) 11:54, 31 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Lede
 * "Its aspect of the transience of human life " -can you reword a bit, it's not clear what you mean. Theme rather than aspect?
 * "theme" tried --GA


 * History
 * As we know its 1724 you can remove "of 1724" in second instance.
 * yes --GA


 * "The cantata is based on the hymn in 13 stanzas by Michael Franck (1652)[4] on a melody by Johann Crüger (1661),[" -"to" rather than "on" a melody. Comma after Franck needed too.
 * yes --GA


 * "kept" -retained?
 * yes, more later --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:22, 31 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Scoring
 * "The text and tune of the hymn are kept" -kept isn't the right word here.
 * tried differently --GA


 * As you've linked the instruments here you should probably do so in the lede too, or don't link them, either one.
 * This has grown in history. To link to violin is nonsense in a way, as the kind of violin Bach knew sounded different from what our article is focused on. Most people will know what a tenor is. I retained that from the earlier versions, but find it distracting in the lead, where you have a link to Baroque instruments, same as in the infobox for "instrumental". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:39, 31 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Music
 * "The Bach scholar Klaus Hofmann notes: "A " -I would tweak to "The Bach scholar Klaus Hoffman describes it as a "far-reaching coloratura [which] culminates in an uneasy dissonance" to improve flow.
 * taken --GA


 * ""unusual oboe trio"" -unusual according to whom?
 * ref doubled --GA


 * " Mincham sees a connection of the runs to those of movement 1, but" -strange to end the line with "but" and then the block quote. I would find a way to shorten it and paraphrase inline.
 * I added, but find the description too good to paraphrase ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:39, 31 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Delighted that you look into this, and hoping that some of our past disagreements will prove fleeting and futile: I will get to this, but have family first, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:52, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:

Excellent job!♦ Dr. Blofeld  16:46, 31 December 2015 (UTC)