Talk:L'Ange de Nisida

To do

 * Comparison of plots of L'ange de Nisida and La favorite
 * Look up other sources than Ashbrook —Preceding unsigned comment added by Laser brain (talk • contribs) 07:58, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Role creators
Normally we have a column for role creators. It's interesting to see who sang at the premiere and Amadeus usually has the information. -- Klein zach  09:39, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
 * There was no premiere—L'ange was never performed. I have a bit of information on who Donizetti had in mind for a couple of the roles, but that's it. I thought it would be more interesting to list who those roles turned into when he reworked L'ange into La favorite. -- Andy Walsh  (talk)  17:17, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just modified one external link on L'ange de Nisida. 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: When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110726002409/http://www.donizetti.org/media/1/20070704-Coedizioni.pdf to http://www.donizetti.org/media/1/20070704-Coedizioni.pdf

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:19, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just modified one external link on L'ange de Nisida. 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: When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110726002147/http://www.donizetti.org/biblioteca/index.php?-action=list&-table=documenti&-cursor=0&-skip=40&-limit=10&-mode=list&-sort=autore+asc,+scheda+asc to http://www.donizetti.org/biblioteca/index.php?-action=list&-table=documenti&-cursor=0&-skip=40&-limit=10&-mode=list&-sort=autore+asc,+scheda+asc

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:20, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Title
Is this capitalized properly? I was under the impression that the French-language convention for titles of works was to capitalize, at the the start of a title, both a leading Le/La/L'  and the "important" word that follows it. I think this should probably be at L'Ange de Nisida. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  22:32, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Agree - the frwiki title is capitalized as you suggest. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:41, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Compare La Damnation de Faust where we also deviate from the French original, - why I don't know? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:09, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Probably another mistake; I encounter French, Spanish, etc., mis-capitalization of titles at en.wiki quite frequently (both in article titles and especially in running text). There are sometimes exceptions, where an English-language work has a non-English title, and where a work not in English (or maybe in any language, e.g. a painting or an instrumental) as a non-English title that is overwhelmingly used in English and has been "assimilated" to English title style in most English-language source material.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  05:54, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Not a mistake but a conscious decision based on use elsewhere. This has been discussed several times at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Opera; see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Opera/archive toc. It's summarized at WP:OPERATITLE. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 13:56, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 8 December 2020

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: Consensus to move  (t &#183; c)  buidhe  23:46, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

L'ange de Nisida → L'Ange de Nisida – Per MOS:FOREIGNTITLE, MOS:FRENCHCAPS, and WP:COMMONNAME. The dominant treatment of titles like this, and this title in particular, in English-language sources (and in French ones for that matter) is L'Ange de Nisida, following standard, modern French titling practices (capitalize the first letter, the first letter of the first significant word if the title starts with L'/Le/La, and any proper names). WikiProject Opera has put up a WP:PROJPAGE essay at WP:OPERATITLE that effectively defies both the MOS:FOREIGNTITLE guideline and WP:COMMONNAME policy, in favor of mimicking what some off-site style guide does. This is contrary to WP:CONLEVEL policy, and previous attempts to do things like this have never ended well. WP has its own style guide and title policy. While the lower-casing of ange in this title is hardly unheard of (given that there is an organization that prefers to do opera titles this way), it is clearly the minority practice in scholarly literature (first link above), and is not the majority practice in books indexed at Google Books, either. A n-gram search shows that the lower-casing style was virtually non-existent until around 1960, and has since then been in sharp-spiking competition with Ange. Some examination of the journal usage suggests that ange is more common in non-English and non-French sources, and also more common in sources that post-date Wikipedia having an article on this opera, which suggests a WP:CIRCULAR result. Since the usage is nowhere near consistent across all sources, and clearly leans toward Ange anyway, there is no rationale for a departure from FOREIGNTITLE and COMMONNAME. Cf. standard ArbCom statement of principle: "Local consensus among a limited group of editors, such as through a Wikiproject or talk page discussion, does not override wider community consensus. Advice pages that have not been accepted as a policy or guideline should be treated as essays." — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  01:23, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Support per detailed and well-argued nomination. The French Wikipedia main title header is indeed L'Ange de Nisida and other headers delineating proper names, such as L'Ange-Gardien, Capitale-Nationale, Quebec, L'Ange-Gardien, Outaouais, Quebec or L'Ange Blanc use uppercase "A" in French Wikipedia. The use of lowercase "a" in "Ange" has even extended beyond opera to the 1994 French film which improperly has, as its header, L'ange noir, even though French Wikipedia's entry uses the header L'Ange noir.. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 03:24, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Support, nothing to add to substantial reasoning. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:45, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose this is a classical music work, no reason why we have to capitalise French names in pseudo-English style just because that is what pop articles do to Spanish pop songs. It won't harm anyone to see the French name of a French opera written in French as WP:FRMOS. I think SMcCandlish that this is more than local consensus, this is in fact the correct title and it if MOS:FOREIGNTITLE is against it then the local consensus is there. In ictu oculi (talk) 14:10, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I've just checked, MOS:FOREIGNTITLE says nothing as far as I can see about actual foreign titles but only translated ones like Dangerous Liasons. What am I missing? Just noting also that fr.wp is all over the place. In ictu oculi (talk) 14:15, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Um,, it's not "pseudo-English style", it's French titling style (Académie Française and Imprimerie nationale, also favored by Le Petit Robert, Le Quid, and l'Dictionnaire de citations françaises, etc.). It also happens to be the dominant style in English-language sources for  work. I think you've missed both of the points here, somehow. Please read again. Also, fr.wikipedia is not a reliable source. You'll find the L'Ange de Nisida style, however, also recommended in English-language sources, e.g. MLA style (summarized on this point here by Dickinson College), and Oxford University Press style .  The "pseudo-English style" is actually the sentence-case recommendation by Chicago Manual of Style (which also recommends the same for article titles and much else, in English; mirroring what they want done is English is  Chicago came up with doing this to French and all other non-English titles in the first place).  I was wondering where this L'ange de Nisida style was coming from on Wikipedia, and found it buried in MOS:FRANCE, at MOS:FRENCHCAPS. The advice there appears to be over a decade old (I've opened a talk-page proposal to modernize and simplify it). Regardless, even it certainly did not require or recommend L'ange de Nisida style, it simply  it for operas and paintings, based on a 1993 version of Chicago (the 2017 version no longer makes the same recommendation, but simply observes that both styles exist and that one should use one or the other consistently; WP veering into the sentence-case style for two classes of works (which it doesn't even do consistently in those categories), is neither compliant with the Chicago rationale nor with our own WP:CONSISTENT policy. PS: "this is a classical music work" verges on immaterial, except that MOS:FOREIGNTITLE say to use the dominant spelling in English-language sources for pre-modern works with non-English names, and that spelling is L'Ange de Nisida.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  08:10, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose – This has been discussed at length in the Opera Project. The reason for the strict sentence case boils down to two reasons, probably related: 1) there is no absolute consistency in the francophone world, despite the Académie's pronouncements; 2) at least one of the major encyclopedic works on classical music, Grove, uses this style consistently (search result for 'L'Ange de Nisida' only returns 'L'ange'). So it's only natural to follow their standard, which also has the advantage of being easy to understand and implement – that's why it's almost universally used here. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 10:17, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
 * "discussed at length in the Opera Project" is rather meaningless handwaving, given WP:CONLEVEL policy and the fact that your wikiproject's style essay is in direct conflict with site-wide WP:CONSISTENT policy and several guidelines, and the project has been admonished more than once to stop trying to control the content of articles across a category you claim within project scope (infoboxes, etc.). I've already demonstrated that the majority usage in English-language sources is L'Ange not L'ange, so the fact that you can find some exceptions is meaningless.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  10:33, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Grove is hardly 'some exception'. Point is: there is no universally agreed standard. For this particular work by an Italian composer, the strict sentence case is also used by donizetti.org: L’ange de Nisida and Bachtrack: "Donizetti's L'ange de Nisida proves to be a masterpiece". -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 11:17, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
 * It is some exception. And yes, the point is that there is no universally agreed standard. Ergo, WP should not make a strange exception here but do what it does with all other titles.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  23:06, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
 * It isn't a strange exception, it is correct. Correct per French grammar, correct per Grove. I see no benefit in this RM at all, as for consistent - go fix the blonde tennis lady, then tell us about consistent. In ictu oculi (talk) 15:39, 17 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Support. I think the French Academy style should be authoritative in this case. I don't approve of carving out project-level exceptions for this level of style guidance. —David Eppstein (talk) 08:46, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
 * And which style exactly is that? fr:Wikipédia:Conventions typographiques presents 4 regulations, 2 with subsections, none of which explain fr:Le Rouge et le Noir or fr:Les Petits Riens, or fr:Flic ou Voyou which understandably is internally inconsistent. Then there are fr:Usage des majuscules en français which contradict everything before. Explaining Très Riches Heures du Duc de Berry or fr:Le Fabuleux Destin d'Amélie Poulain requires advanced command of French. Further, it has been pointed out at Talk:La Vie Parisienne (magazine) that French orthography is irrelevant in favour of English usage. In this case here, "L'ange", and in every other similar one, English sources can be found in both variants. Given the problem with native French rules and conflicting usage, and inconsistent English usage, having a simple, widely followed, guideline based on scholarly sources is a reasonable position which helps readers and editors. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 11:45, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Support per the detailed and well-reasoned nom. Wikiproject conventions certainly don't trump real usage. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 23:37, 11 January 2021 (UTC)