Talk:Vienna State Opera

Comment
I don't think I've ever seen such confused and confusing language in any Wikipedia piece. As of April 1 2022, this article is informative and interesting but disorganized. The most serious problem, though, is that it's almost unreadable & unintelligible in many places, probably due to translation problems. There are too many examples to list. And because it's often impossible to guess what the meaning is supposed to be, repairs will need to be undertaken by someone who is an expert in the subject, or in the original language (with access to the German text as it was when translated), or preferably both. (I do think the history of the building and its reconstruction after WW2, and the key roles played by both Mahler and Krips in its history, should be clarified but not cut or condensed. It would make sense to mention Mahler's 1897-1906 collaborations with Roller (designer) and others; their work, with its efforts to unify the whole experience of music, drama, lighting, color, etc, seems to have carried forward the revolutionary ideas of Wagner at Bayreuth, as well as anticipating the even more revolutionary ideas of Wagner's grandson in the reborn Bayreuth after WW2. Did that decade at the Vienna Opera exert a global influence? If so, it might be interesting to note an example or two. Mentioning a few other influential musicians in its history would not go amiss, if there were others worth mentioning. [end of new comment]67.81.65.206 (talk) 05:19, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

Wow, this article says a lot about Mahler but little about all these other illustrious characters. It's going to take a group effort to fix this, I think. Dunkelweizen 13:26, 12 October 2007 (UTC)


 * There is an intention to translate parts of the German article. -- Kleinzach 14:13, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

That's a good idea; I can help with that. Dunkelweizen 12:11, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Far too much attention on the current and last season. This isn't a press release or 'recent opera history' archive. Instead it should focus on the subject matter. For example the orchestral body. How many players? How many performances every year? How is it organized? Etc. runenaljoss


 * I don't think there is any such account as runenaljoss. Please sign on properly (see top right). As for your point about 'the current and last season', I agree. It's needs editing. If you have the necessary knowledge, why not have a go? -- Klein zach  05:30, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

The "propectus" statements
User:Kleinzach: "world famous", "finest in the world" "prestigious" etc. are usually not objective statements, and are very ofeten found in self-promotion material. I am not saying that the Wiener Philharmoniker (and the staatsoper) is not one of the best orchestras - probably the best? - (and opera companies), but this is not a neutral statement as it is judgement of value of the Orchestra (which probably doesn't even need it, but that's not the point). If you feel so strongly about making such a subjective statements, at least provide a reputable and verifiable source and idicate who and why think it is one of the best opera companies and the Wiener is prestigious. This is an encyclopedia, and encyclopedias should not include judgements and statements so subjective. I am marking them again as lacking sources until good sources are posted. I hope you agree. Cheers. --Karljoos (talk) 18:48, 14 January 2009 (UTC)


 * IMO you are using the wrong editing method here. We use 'fact' tags to indicate when a dubious statement/fact needs corroboration. If you feel the language here is un-encyclopedic, it's better to use some kind of cleanup tag such as the 'advert' tag. There is a list of tags at Template_messages/Cleanup. I'll have a look at the wording here and see if it can be improved. -- Klein zach  23:25, 14 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your comments, User:Kleinzach! --Karljoos (talk) 00:12, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Commemorative coin section
Is this relevant to the article? What do people think? -- Klein zach  00:26, 15 January 2009 (UTC)


 * IMHO, if the Austrian government decided to issue a commemorative coin to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the re-opening of the opera house, it is an important event and does give an idea of its magnitude from a different angle. Hence I do vote for keeping it. Thanks, Miguel.mateo (talk) 02:30, 15 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, but is it relevant here. Perhaps it belongs in a commemorative coin article, no? -- Klein zach  02:35, 15 January 2009 (UTC)


 * It is wiki-linked to an Austrian coins article, but this particular coin is about this particular building, that is why is 'also' here. What do you propose?  You want to remove the text and leave the image only? Thanks, Miguel.mateo (talk) 04:46, 15 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, I'd remove both to the Austrian coins article, but I'd like to hear from other editors. -- Klein zach  05:51, 15 January 2009 (UTC)


 * To that I would disagree, it does show the important of the buildign from a completely different angle, and it does not harm the article at all, it is a small paragraph in the "see aslo" section. Miguel.mateo (talk) 10:20, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Makes one wonder if someone has an investment in these coins that might benefit by a mention in a well-known and quotable source. Most people reading this probably already realize that Austria since 1918 has been a smallish country with a gigantic musical heritage kept alive locally by a great orchestra and a great opera house. The other most significant aspects of Austria's past are not likely to be commemorated any time soon by its government (hopefully). The musical heritage of Vienna is awesome enough without cluttering up the article with digressions about official promotional celebrations of its awesomeness. 67.81.65.206 (talk) 05:40, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

Better image?
Do other editors agree that introduced a better image? It doesn't show the front entrance and with its cluttered foreground it's a lot worse than the previous image. If the previous image should be replaced, I'd prefer the lead image from the German Wikipedia article. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 12:58, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

I agree. MUSIKVEREIN (talk) 13:38, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Audio system
I work for Beckhoff Automation. In compliance with the COI guidelines, I suggest adding a section about the audio system of the Vienna State Opera, which was modernized by Beckhoff/Salzgeber in November 2020.

Thanks for considering this edit. --94.31.87.165 (talk) 10:31, 15 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Do you need any futher information or sources? I'm happy to help, community feedback is highly appreciated. --62.159.14.27 (talk) 09:02, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: This suggestion includes far too much technical detail for the article. The sources you provided do not sufficiently establish the notability of these technical details for them to be included. Actualcpscm (talk) 16:45, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your feedback, Actualcpscm. Unfortunately, there are no better sources for the matter. Do you think that a short statement about the audio and video technology in two/three sentences (without mentioning the companies) would be feasible? --SP at BA (talk) 10:38, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
 * It seems like you‘re proceeding in the wrong direction for an encyclopedia, from content to sourcing („I want to include X, let‘s find sources to accommodate“). The correct way would be sources —> content, since the reliable sources should be the only place where ideas and content are drawn from. I understand that you have a COI and it isn‘t easy to keep that separate, but this is not how Wikipedia or any encyclopedia works. If you want something to be included, it needs to meet the relevant requirements. There‘s no way around that. Actualcpscm (talk) 11:28, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Actualcpscm. I really appreciate your help. I don't want to rush into any changes here. Thanks for the feedback, I'll look again for more sources. For now you can close here. Regards, SP at BA (talk) 12:05, 28 March 2023 (UTC)