Talk:Piano Concerto No. 2 (Liszt)

Expand Dec 2006
There should be a detailed description of the "movements". It should include Liszt's status at the time he wrote it, I think. There is a lot of stuff to be said about this concerto. -- A. Wang (talk/contrb.) 15:08, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

POV
I don't like the "for musical poets only." To me, it's oddly disparaging of its sister work, and while they may contrast, it shouldn't be worded as if this is superior. POV nears original research in this situation. ALTON  .ıl  20:32, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I do somewhat agree and it does have a sense of original research and opinion. I decided to remove the portion. If you feel this was wrong, feel free to revert at any time and we'll discuss. — Andy W. (talk/contrb.) 21:05, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I think you threw out the baby with the bathwater on this call as there was worthwhile material that could have been rephrased to make the passage NPOV. One complaint gets an editor to pull an entire section? I agree with the principle of you actions but think it could have been handled in less of a knee-jerk reaction. Jonyungk (talk) 05:09, 9 July 2008 (UTC)