Template:Did you know nominations/Charivari (Gruber)


 * The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as |this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:13, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Charivari (Gruber)

 * ... that the title of the composition Charivari by HK Gruber, based on a Strauss polka, can refer to both rough music and an Alpine ornament?


 * Reviewed: Die Geschichte der Abderiten

Created by Wildbill hitchcock (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 13:47, 29 April 2015 (UTC).


 * ??Can't see either of those mentioned. Johnbod (talk) 14:38, 29 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Now you see one ;) - sorry, I felt I had to nominate last minute and grabbed the first thing striking me, because I really didn't know for the longest time of my life what a Charivari is. Better description welcome. Now let's have a hook which is sourced, even if more boring:
 * ALT1: ... that in the 1981 composition Charivari by HK Gruber, based on a Strauss polka in perpetual motion, the mask of Gemütlichkeit "is gradually allowed to slip"? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:35, 29 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:38, 26 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Symbol possible vote.svg Article was just new enough at time of nomination, and is long enough. The ALT1 hook will work, although it would be fun to try to make some sort of intriguing, misleading pun on perpetual motion and perpetuum mobile.
 * The big problem is that something very strange is going on with the sources; much of the information can't be found on the pages linked. For simplicity's sake, I've annotated those problem spots on the page itself using Template:Failed verification and Template:Citation needed. I hope these problems can be resolved.--Lemuellio (talk) 14:02, 30 May 2015 (UTC)


 * I had a look - hoped the author would ;) - The Boosey source has other dates for the publication, I changed them. - The term "Perpetuum mobile/Charivari" is used on the Chandos recording, and quoted in review and Boosey's shop. - Charivari has several meanings, see de:Charivari, - I knew the first one, de:Charivari (Schmuckkette), while the composer - according to the Gruber's German notes for Boosey - thought more of the noise here: Charivari. Gruber mentions Katzen in his notes, forced to make sounds. - Those notes also say that the trumpet plays a motif from Wiener Blut (waltz), - perhaps that waltz part could be reworded? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:25, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Let me apologize for that. I don't have much time these days. The page I linked to when I was referring to the score is the only one available in the website of its publisher. The composition is not in the public domain, but I have access to a copy of the score. Gruber uses the word "Waltz" in a section of Charivari, which is why I decided to include it. I can take it down if it is considered to be original research. I wrote the dates of publication and revision according to that version of the score; I later found out that those dates differed from the ones on the website. If the ones on the website are more reliable, I apologize. Ron Oliver (talk) 22:49, 2 June 2015 (UTC)


 * I think you can justify "waltz" even from the online source, because Wiener Blut is clearly the waltz here, not the operetta. I suggest you make a reference "cite book" of the score and cite to that was is only in that. I would trust you. I have done the same for Missa Dona nobis pacem. - As Lemuellio pointed out, the German blurb with the publication has ore than the English, - perhaps even make a separate ref for that? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:21, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Done. I'm aware it's sort of a messy article, because there's so little information (or, rather, so much disinformation) about the work. Ron Oliver (talk) 13:58, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Symbol voting keep.svg Many thanks to both of you for the clarifications and improvements. I sympathize with the difficulty finding information and wading through disinformation. The article looks OK now; the preponderance of primary sources still seems like an issue, but I can't find any DYK reviewing guideline dealing specifically with that question, so let's let it pass.
 * As for the wording of the hook, how about this?
 * ALT2: ... that HK Gruber's Charivari plays with perpetual motion and a slipping "mask" of Gemütlichkeit?
 * Lemuellio (talk) 21:35, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Good ideas but I would miss the base by Strauss --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:54, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
 * ALT3: ... that HK Gruber's Charivari plays with a Strauss polka in perpetual motion and a slipping "mask" of Gemütlichkeit?
 * Lemuellio (talk) 13:23, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
 * How about this? Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 10:16, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * ALT4: ... that HK Gruber's Charivari begins with a Strauss polka in perpetual motion, and ends with the slipping "mask" of Gemütlichkeit?


 * Nice ideas, but should by HK Gruber, not H. K. Gruber, - I would actually prefer our article as the German one de:HK Gruber, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:24, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg While there may be no specific rule about primary sources for DYK, this article is entirely sourced to sources apparently written by the subject's creator. Without at least one reliable third-party source, how is notability demonstrated? - Dravecky (talk) 10:47, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Do you mean the notability of a published and recorded piece of music? - I would understand if the work was an unpublished piece nobody had ever heard about, but this is not quoted from the composer's diaries but a notable publisher. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:23, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I mean that the article does not appear to meet the most basic requirements of WP:NMUSIC. Notability is not inherited so simple publication by a notable publisher does not confer notability on the published work. Surely in the 30+ years since publication some independent source has written about this work, if it's indeed notable for Wikipedia's purposes. - Dravecky (talk) 20:26, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Symbol voting keep.svg I sympathise with the desire to have some secondary sources, but I don't think it is a bad idea to show this on DYK in the (unlikely) hope that somebody will produce better sources or (sadly) propose deleting it; you've also made the reliance on primary sources look worse by crediting Gruber as the author for sources where there is no author listed (I've corrected that), and you might attend to that "[not in source cited]" tag before this gets on the main page. ALT1 or ALT4 are OK; I prefer ALT1. Length, age, neutrality, and QPQ are all fine, AGF on one of the sources, the rest show the article to be copyvio free. Belle (talk) 08:41, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
 * (with still not much time:) I found this 2007 review, with only a line on the piece but better than nothing, and a comparison to Ravel's La Valse would also make a good hook, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:19, 25 June 2015 (UTC)