Template:Did you know nominations/La casa disabitata


 * 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  Jolly  Ω   Janner  08:01, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

La casa disabitata

 * ... that the 1835 opera La casa disabitata, composed by Princess Amalie of Saxony (pictured), received its first modern performance in 2012 after its previously lost score was discovered in a library in Moscow?



Created by Voceditenore (talk). Nominated by 4meter4 (talk) at 21:08, 11 February 2016 (UTC).


 * Note to reviewer. I reviewed Template:Did you know nominations/Du wahrer Gott und Davids Sohn, BWV 23. Best.4meter4 (talk) 17:43, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

A wonderfully written and interesting article! I have only a few comments/suggestions: -- Black Falcon (talk) 00:05, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
 * However, the manuscript score of the opera itself had been amongst those confiscated by the Russian army at the end of World War II and taken back to Russia. – This sentence should be cited.
 * The performance was in concert version (Russian authorities would only grant permission to use the manuscript for a single unstaged performance). – This sentence is cited to the Musical America source. Although the portion contained in parentheses is substantiated by that source, the portion outside of it appears to come from the Gramophone source: "… the whole thing was given (in concert form) …".
 * It took place in the salon of the 17th-century summer palace in Dresden's Großer Garten with Helmut Branny conducting the Dresdner Kapellsolisten. – This sentence should be cited; it could probably be supported by the Musical America and Gramophone sources, or possibly even the Seen and Heard external link.
 * Hi, Black Falcon . Alhough it strikes me as overkill to cite every single sentence, I've added the Gramophone ref for the "confiscated" bit and for the sentence about where it was given and who the conductor/orchestra were, although that is already referenced in the role table. I don't think it's necessary to double ref the "concert version". That's what "unstaged" means. Peppering every single sentence with a footnote can be distracting to the reader, although I understand that at DYK, everyone wants to be super careful. I'll add it if you think it's really necessary. Voceditenore (talk) 07:51, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Voceditenore. Your reasoning for not double-citing "concert version"—i.e. that this is inferred by stating it was an "unstaged performance"—is convincing, and I thank you for expanding my knowledge.  -- Black Falcon (talk) 18:41, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Black Falcon. Your comment reminded me that those of us who write regularly about opera (or any subject), often assume that readers know all of the technical terms we're using. I'm going to create a short article: Concert version. This is far from the first time this has come up, and I've often wished I had something to link to when I use the term in an article. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 06:28, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * That's excellent, Voceditenore! Any thoughts on an alternative hook that includes both articles, e.g.:
 * ALT 1: ... that the 1835 opera La casa disabitata, composed by Princess Amalie of Saxony (pictured), received its first modern performance in 2012 (in concert version) after its lost score was rediscovered in a library in Moscow?
 * -- Black Falcon (talk) 20:21, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi Black Falcon. I'm not keen on the addition of (in concert version). It makes the hook distracting and overly long and detracts, I think, from the main point. Also, bolding concert version implies it's also a DYK, which it's not. I only started the stub of that article. Since then there's a crew still working on it. If they do want to go for a DYK, there are plenty of more apt hooks (or will be), and it should be a separate DYK. However, I do like the other rephrasing, i.e. its previously lost score was discovered  → its lost score was rediscovered. That's a real improvement. Voceditenore (talk) 06:35, 22 February 2016 (UTC)