Talk:Fantastic Mr. Fox (opera)

Edits
The page has been edited so that no material is taken directly from an outside source. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jsiskind2 (talk • contribs) 14:51, 22 June 2010
 * Actually that's not true. The page had been considerably reduced but still contained virtually verbatim text from copyright websites. See below. Before re-expanding this article please read the links in the notice below as well as WP:Close paraphrasing. Voceditenore (talk) 10:38, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed
One or more portions of this article duplicated other source(s). Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Voceditenore (talk) 10:38, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

"Critical response" section
I have removed this recently added section. Cherry-picked, out of context positve quotes sourced solely to the composer's website are not appropriate on Wikipedia and are particularly inappropriate for a "critical response" section. The references must be to the original work, with full bibliographic information and where possible a link. Most importantly, the section needs to represent a balanced coverage of the critical response. The opera is not remotely the unqualified critical success misleadingly presented in that section. Note, for example, these reviews which range from luke warm to scathing:  (The Telegraph);  (The Guardian);  (The Stage);  (New York Times); 3 (San Francisco Chronicle;  (Variety). – Voceditenore (talk) 08:35, 15 May 2012 (UTC)