Talk:Marius Petipa

Copyvio?
Some of the new addition appear to by copyvio of the http://www.doingmyhomework.com/show_essay/12194.html and similar materials. Please rewrite the material so to avoid copyright violation abakharev 11:36, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Another option is that the essay was written by the author of the present article. --Ghirla | talk 11:42, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Hello. I find the biography section of the article Marius Petipa, which was added by User:Mrlopez2681 on January 15, 2006, almost the same to the page http://www.balletmet.org/Notes/Petipa.html. Reading his user page and considering the date of the article on Balletmet written, I have a strong doubt that it may be violating copyright. If not so, could somebody please indicate that the article of Balletmet is copyleft? The reason I am asking this is because, someone in the Japanese Wikipedia started translating this article, and if the "original" English version is illegal, the Japanese version will have to be deleted as well... Aotake 03:45, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

New Article
I have just completed rewriting the article on Marius Petipa. I encourage my fellow wikipedians to proof-read!

--Mrlopez2681 12:28, 14 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Congrats! May I do a copy-edit, and then nominate it for GA status? It's an amazingly comprehensive article, should be Featured after some tweaking!— E  ditor at L arge  ( speak )  12:53, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Spanish Dance
I would be interested in knowing something about Spanish dance at the time Petipa lived there. Does anyone know if this type choreography has been remembered or recreated? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cellorando (talk • contribs) 19:54, 8 February 2007 (UTC).

Fair use rationale for Image:Bayadere -Kirov -Lotus Blossums.jpg
Image:Bayadere -Kirov -Lotus Blossums.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:56, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Birth date
The article says Petipa was born in 1818, but the biography at So which date is the correct one? — Loadmaster (talk) 02:40, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
 * balletmet.org says 1822;
 * encyclopedia.com says 1822;
 * abt.org says 1819;
 * britannica.com says 1818;


 * Hmm. I wondered the same thing.  For what it's worth, Google has 34,200 hits for "Marius Petipa 1818", 28,800 for "Marius Petipa 1819", and only 740 for "Marius Petipa 1822".  I'd be inclined to disregard 1822 on that basis, but that still leaves 1818 vs. 1819.  But until we see a birth certificate or similar doco, we can't be sure - 1822 may even prove to be the right date for all I know.  --  JackofOz (talk) 07:41, 29 April 2008 (UTC)


 * He was born in 1818. The best history on Petipa produced in modern times is Garafola's "The Diaries of Marius Petipa", which is pretty hard to get a hold of (it is sighted at the bottom of the article). Ballet history is infested with misconceptions and incorrect information that spreads from source to source. The confusion concernign his birth year comes from many biographies of his written by Russian ballet historians and from his own memoirs. ABT's web page has TONS of incorrect information, and their online list of repertory has lauaghable credits with regard to composers and choreographers (I have contacted them on this matter, but they really dont seem to care). I imagine many encyclopedia utilize the written accounts of the Imperial Ballet from the early Soviet era for sources, as these remain the most easily accessible concerning the ballet of the late 19th century in Russia. Balletmet's pages are not very good, and they havnt been updated for years. But anyway, yes, he was born in 1818.

--Mrlopez2681 (talk) 08:13, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Raymonda -Kirov -Victoria Tereshkina & Ilya Kuznetsov -sized.JPG
Image:Raymonda -Kirov -Victoria Tereshkina & Ilya Kuznetsov -sized.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:06, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Sleeping Beauty -1890 Reconstruction -Svetlana Zakharova, Veronica Part, Anton Korsakov -1999.JPG
Image:Sleeping Beauty -1890 Reconstruction -Svetlana Zakharova, Veronica Part, Anton Korsakov -1999.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:45, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Errors
I can not be sure, but I believe that the dates of Petipa's birth, as well as the dates of his brother's successes are not correct. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.169.143.170 (talk) 09:36, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
 * My source is "the Diaries of Marius Peitpa" by Lynn Garafola, among others. The dates are as correct as possible. --Mrlopez2681 (talk) 06:30, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

The illustration of Petipa "at age nine" does not at all look like a nine year old boy; if I had to guess the age of the fellow depicted, I'd say it was more likely in the 15-to-18 range. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.227.181.250 (talk) 21:18, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for bringing this to my attention - the caption is left over from an older image that has since been replaced. He is indeed at about 15 yrs, in the portrait. --Mrlopez2681 (talk) 06:30, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

removal of paragraph by user 81.22.31.154 @ 14:05, 20 March 2013‎
I have removed the following paragraph, which has no business being included in an opening summary. The paragraph referenced Susan Au's book "Ballet and Modern Dance", which is hardly the best source for information on Petipa's ballets -

'''Petipa's ballets embraced structure and form, bringing harmony and order to the stage. This structure included an adagio pas de deux, followed by a male solo variation, a female solo variation, and a coda to reunite the couple. The divertissements were short variations, often with a folk or national-style dance, to provide variety and flavor. Drama often came second in Petipa's ballets, but academic ballet technique was required. The female ballerina was often the most celebrated figure in Petipa's works, with the male dancers mostly providing showcasing and support (except for the pyrotechnics of the male variation and the coda). Female dancers were almost always en pointe, and in tutus of various styles.'''

Petipa did not invent the classical Pas de deux, and the very notion that "Drama often came second in Petipa's ballets" is completely untrue. It is true that Petipa's ballet put the ballerina center stage. --Mrlopez2681 (talk) 01:53, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Marius Petipa. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070224011836/http://www.articlemyriad.com/24.htm to http://www.articlemyriad.com/24.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:44, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

More references needed to maintain neutral point of view
At this time all eleven instances of "considered" are unsourced, including two in the lead. Adding additional references and context can help us maintain a neutral point of view per WP:SUBJECTIVE. For comparison, "considered" is used only twice in the English version of Shakespeare and both include references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GeekyEnki (talk • contribs) 02:10, 21 October 2017 (UTC)