User:C.kerby UWM/sandbox

Article Evaluation
Evaluating Dido's Lament Wikipedia Article

Notes:

1.) There is a mention of the piece being used annually in London which really distracted me from what the piece was originally about. It felt like this section was a little bit out of place and I'm sure that with more research the song may be used in other places as well and could possibly have its own section devoted to this. Moreover, I think that more information as to why this aria is used in that parade could be something notable to search upon an contribute to the article itself. It also mentions about a composer that transcribed the piece which is something else that could be added to this section of the aria's uses.

2.) The article does remain neutral in its wording and gives off the feeling that it wishes to just get information distributed out to the public.

3.) There is a brief viewpoint that is shared about Dido's relationship with Aeneas that depicts their relationship as one that was destroyed by fate. They link an article to a blog post about the piece to which the writer attempts to make a connection to a story in the bible about Rachel and Leah. I am a little skeptical that the source is as credible as is could be and that a dedicated section to the reasoning of her death could possibly be included as it is relevant to the context to which the word painting is based upon. In addition, The article source that is sourced in this article is very closely paraphrased from another Wikipedia article (Dido). It is odd that this is the only source outside of a one page textbook reference to the piece and it looks as if some work could be done on this piece in the future.

4.) As mentioned before there are two sources noted in the reference section and there are sources needed to confirm some statements in the article. Also as previously mentioned, one of the sources that the Wikiauthor uses has close paraphrasing and the article has been archived since it was first released. I believe that more reliable sources could be used to really bring this piece to light and including more detailed sections about the meter, chromatization and word painting. The secondary source is also unnecessary for the section that it is included in and could be placed somewhere else possibly in an analysis section.

5.) The second source that is used is not as reliable as it could be. To begin with it is not a peer-reviewed source and is from a blog. The opinion that is provided by the author is nothing more than one person's opinion and has no evidence to support his claims throughout the source. the source is also from a site called "Returned, Music the Gospel" which clearly represents that it is christian-biased. The section on the source that tries to tie Dido's tragedy to the story of Rachel and Leah in the bible is a far reach that the source is trying to narrate. Moreover the Wikiauthor refers to the tragedy as an "apocalyptic romance" the Wikiauthor merely quoted the title of source that was cited and has not gone into depth of what that means. Ironically, the actual source itself never does define what it means by "apocalyptic romance" hence, the source itself is highly unreliable.

6.) The secondary source that was provided is out of date and has been archived. The blog post dates back to December of 2014. The textbook is something that is difficult to challenge especially when the publisher is Wiley. I would really have to see the page of text that the Wiki-author is referring to and determine if this is something that is laid out in the text of the book, or if it is something that was interpreted by the wiki author. Otherwise, the textbook that is used in our course offers some more insight into the aria and the context of the piece and goes into more detail regarding texture, melody, and the continuo.

7.) There are no conversations that are occurring around the piece except for a bot that archived the blog source. I believe that a dialogue could be started if significant changes were made regarding the aria on the wiki article.

8.) The piece is part of the Wikiproject Opera which is an opera group that writes extensively on the topic. The piece is also rated as "START" which according to Content assessment, means that it is "quite incomplete" and the sources that are listed are questionable. This leads to the opportunity to possibly build on the topic and contribute to the article.

9.) It is much different than how our text discusses the piece. To begin with, It has no mention of the first movement actually introducing the continuo intially. it also doesnt mention the relevance of the ground bass in the context of the boroque era. Our text also hints that "female grief" is what is portrayed in the work which was "written by a man" which hints that the scene although rightfully dramatic, could be biased in its interpretation of grief. It has no mention of the instruments used in the piece and no format of the piece. I believe that a lot could be added to this article to really flesh it out into something that can educate people about the piece itself, while also avoiding the advanced jargon and wiki links that are used throughout the current article. Instead, the article could be made much more user friendly and be more educational to reach a broader audience, rather than those versed in music.