Talk:Roger Parker

Link suggestion to Lecture Extracts
Gresham College has recently released a set of three short YouTube videos extracted from a recent lecture of Professor Parker's: http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=4D9BDE6748B9C7A2 I think that this would be a nice link, as it shows Professor Parker's style of speaking and it is his particular topic of interest (Opera). I only don't add the link myself due to the possible accusation of a conflict of interest through my association with the college. Jamesfranklingresham (talk) 15:23, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Multiple issues/ ref-improve banner added by User:Onel5969
With the addition of this banner today, I set about expanding the article in various ways. It seems to me that Roger Parker stands as the UK equivalent of American musicologist Philip Gossett, albeit that he is about 10 or so years younger. So, the issue of notability is probably of the largest concern, but Parker is not just a UK professor of music (as indeed was Gossett) but is involved far deeper into publishing critical editions as is Gossett.

Any comments regarding notability would be appreciated, as well any other useful reference links/sources come to mind. Thanks, Viva-Verdi (talk) 17:18, 17 February 2015 (UTC)


 * User:Onel5969 had added the following to his talk page.
 * Hi - The main difference between Gossett and Parker is that the award Gossett won is much more prestigious (or at least appears to be).  Let me just say that I don't know much about opera, so I'm just basing it on the articles themselves.  Gossett has all the same types of references as Parker, but then he has two very strong citations (the first 2).  Those are the two factors which make me not question Gossett, but question Parker (although I'd still like to see a couple more strong citations for Gossett).  If you could come up with 2 or 3 strong articles (not interviews) about Parker, that would help.  They should be from well-known national publications.  To be honest, I missed two things in the Parker article, for which I'm going to remove the notability tag: the Guggenheim fellowship and his fellowship at the British Academy.  Those two things alone make him meet wiki notability criteria.  As you flesh it out, just make sure to cite claims.  The problem with both of these folks is that most of the world doesn't care about the thing they do best, so there is very little press.  Not saying that's right, but that's the way it is. Good luck with the edit. Onel5969 (talk) 03:33, 18 February 2015 (UTC)


 * I'm pleased to see that the notability tag on the Roger Parker article has been removed, because - in my opinion- there are clearly notable elements to his work, not the least of which is his co-directorship of the Donizetti Operas Project and his own work on preparing critical editions.
 * Since User:Onel5969 confesses to little knowledge of opera, I'd note that Parker's preparation of critical editions alone (which involve a huge amount of research and work to create a version as close to the composer's original intentions as possible)   certainly justifies notability. He is one of only three men in the world who have been overseeing the preparation of the critical editions of the works of Verdi, Rossini and Donizetti.  As rightly noted, these men may not get much in the way of press and, therefore, usable references beyond those already provided. However, I have added quite a few, re-organised the article into sections to emphasise the breadth of Parker's work, and shall continue to see what I can find.  Prizes are not the only criterion  for importance.  Viva-Verdi (talk) 20:23, 19 February 2015 (UTC)