User talk:Kleinzach/Archive 8

Wagner singers list
Hi there! That's a jolly thing to have a list of, indeed! Hojoho. Can't see Karl Erb, though... Do you know, I find the date-brackets surrounding these artists very confusing, because (I know they originate in the Michael Scott book scopes but) very few careers fit exactly into these date brackets and one has to look through all the lists to see if one's latest 'pet' is there. I can think of loads of people who need to go in - the English ones, for a start. It needs a statement at the top to say whether this is anyone who has ever sung or recorded an aria or excerpt, (presumably not), or whether it is anyone who has taken part meaningfully in a production or concert version of a Wagner music-drama on record or stage or platform. Then to see if these people are there or not they all need to be listed alphabetically. I like the list of Recorded pianists - do you know that one? I'll try to find the link in a sec. It's easy to look up if your last idea is in there, and easy to keep adding. As this list includes non-recorded singers like Heinrich Vogl and living ones like Siegfried Jerusalem (hope he's still with us) or Rita Hunter then it would be useful to have some little conventions. I suggest (R) after the name to mean (known to have made a recording) or (NR) to mean (known NOT to have made a recording) - and blank for not known. For those in red (not yet written) one could also add a floruit date (like, (c.1923-1951) or something), so that potential authors can hunt them up easily. What do you think to all that? I'll find the piano list link. Dr Steven Plunkett 02:08, 30 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Try Classical pianists (recorded). I find it very user-friendly and it is analogous. What do you think? Dr Steven Plunkett 02:14, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

And there are of course people of the recording era who didn't record at all, and there are Wagnerian singers who did record, but not Wagnerian music - so you could have (RW) to mean 'has recorded Wagner', possibly. The list will be a very useful starting point for more biographical work. Obviously there are singers who are strongly identified with RW and others who have just sung some, or are not exclusively Wagnerian. I think the difficulties of this kind will only become clear when the list is developed and added to, but that should not deter one. Dr Steven Plunkett 02:33, 30 June 2007 (UTC)


 * "and living ones like Siegfried Jerusalem (hope he's still with us) or Rita Hunter". Siegfried J. is still going strong, but alas, Rita Hunter died 6 years ago. By the way, her Wikipedia entry is a bit of a dog's dinner at the moment. It was marked as lacking any sources. I added some in hopes that someone can use them to fill out/improve the article. Best, Voceditenore 17:30, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

This is a worthwhile idea! Wagner's not really my 'thing', so I can't comment on the contents, but I do have a couple of observations on the layout etc... Best, Voceditenore 08:17, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) I think it's awfully tricky to go by 'years active', which it looks like this is based on. I'd go either for an alphabetical list or a 'time period' list based simply on date of birth.
 * 2) If you do go for a time period format, I'd leave out reference to 'Pre recording era', unless one of the criteria for inclusion on the list after that period is a significant recorded legacy.
 * 3) The horizontal layout is awfully hard on the eyes and 'busy' looking. I'd go for vertical.
 * 4) If you do go for a horizontal list, I think I'd leave out the b and d dates (makes it even busier). People will get a general idea from the time period they're placed in, plus they can always click on the link to find out more.
 * 5) Seems a good idea to also classify (as you have started to do) by soprano, tenor, bass, etc.
 * 6) I'm not sure what the criteria are for this list. Probably needs to be explained at the top: Strongly identified with Wagnerian repertoire?  Have sung a significant amount of Wagner (but are not exclusively Wagnerian)? Have not sung a lot of Wagner but who did sing in significant premieres or were prominent in one or two roles e.g. Julián Gayarre?


 * Thanks for all the ideas. I have already acted on some of them by adding an introduction and renaming the page as a List of article-worthy Wagner singers. My original intention was to check coverage and identify major singers without articles. Where this will develop into a viable, publishable list I'm not sure. (Lists tend to be attacked by WP-apparatchiks as pieces of original research (and therefore deletable), though as project subpages they are relatively protected.)


 * I've suggested a bar of three major roles to exclude major singers who didn't really specialize in Wagner. Maybe two would be better? Once we have a balanced list we can perhaps reduce the number of periods or perhaps eliminate them altogether? Also if we do eventually 'publish' it we can redesign the page. (I'm not a fan of scrolling and prefer dense pages - after all you can enlarge text with your browser - but note other people feel differently about this). Likewise adding codes: R/NR which would be very useful if this develops beyong being a checklist. -- Kleinzach 07:22, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

I find your bar on 'two roles' a bit strange. If someone has ONLY sung say one performance of the forest bird in Siegfried, then that would hardly qualify them. But if (like Santley) they have sung Vanderdecken successfully at Covent Garden and elsewhere for years, with some of the other greats, then he is a Wagnerian, even though it was his only wagner role. If you enforce this rule you will lose a lot of people who really should be on the list IMO, and what matters about that is, it will make the list less useful, not more so. It would be much easier to take people out later if they seem too insignificant, than to deliberately exclude them at the beginning.

BTW, the date brackets are operating rather strangely, because some of the people seem to be in the wrong 'time zone'. Best, Dr Steven Plunkett 00:06, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Later: Both Schwarzkopf and Elis Schumann were both Eva in Meistersinger, and flower-maidens in Parsifal. If they shouldn't be in, can you explain more clearly what you want the list to be for? If people have made a success in a serious Wagnerian role (even if it's Rienzi) then how can you leave them out of a list of Wagnerian singers? Dr Steven Plunkett 00:55, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * My idea was to compile a practical and limited list of Wagner specialists. Something that was do-able and would identify missing singer articles - purely a means to an end - hence the bar of two or three major roles, excluding the Italians who sang Lohengrin, lyric sopranos who just did Eva and all the legions of rhine maiden, flower girls and Valkyries etc etc.


 * However it could be developed in more detail. Would you like to take it over (ideally after joining the Wagner project)? The danger is that you will run into the WP:OR police at some point but perhaps you would like to do this? BTW I will be away for most of the week. Not sure if I will be able to be online at all. -- Kleinzach 07:00, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I am sorry Kleinzach, I seem to have bungled in rather with good but dunderheaded intentions and you perhaps feel I have spoilt your list by adding stuff that changes what you were trying to do with it. I really do apologise if that is the case. I don't really want to take it over but I do think it is very valuable as a way of identifying articles that need to be written and would happily keep adding names to it if that is what you would like me to do... Actually there is a very useful wealth of ideas here for new articles already, and I wouldn't mind picking out a couple and getting on with the singer biographies, which is what I prefer doing. If you would like to delete anything I have put in, please do and I won't even notice and certainly not mind. This was quite late-night stuff for me and frankly some early nights would be a good thing, though I am at your service in any way you think I can be useful. I know how difficult it is to be constructive on wikipedia and I would like to back off and let you guide this list in whatever way you wish it to go. Best wishes and thanks, Steven a.k.a Dr Steven Plunkett 14:27, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Absolutely no need to need apologize - after all I opened this up for discussion and on WP nobody owns anything. I will take out some (famous) names for whom Wagner was not their main thing (and in any case don't need to be promoted) like Callas and Tebaldi. Some of the names I added also probably need to come out - more from obscurity than anything else. Please continue to add people and it would be terrific if you have time to do articles on a couple of the main missing people. Best. -- Kleinzach 22:49, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

No, but you started this and you know what you were trying to do!! I will tread more softly. (However, you'd better keep Giuseppe Borgatti in, because he really was proper Wagnerian and sang the stuff like no-one else...) I have just written something on the pianist Leonard Borwick. I will now proceed to immortalise Johanna Jachmann-Wagner (Wagner's niece, and the original Elisabeth in Tannhauser) on the basis of her daughter's memoir, if she hasn't already been done under some other name. She was quite a gal. Dr Steven Plunkett 01:25, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

A Village Romeo and Juliet - thanks
Thanks for the kind comment. Sorry it took me a while to take the hint about the video; it's added. Best, DJRafe 20:59, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Reply to message
Dear Kleinzach, thanks for your message. I replied at the page. Please consult also my userpage: I am leaving the wp room. You have been a most considerate and helpful editor to work with. Thankyou. Stick with this list as it will one day be a very useful resource. I will try to whip up some further interest in it. Very best wishes, Dr Steven Plunkett 15:08, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Sylvia Fisher
I have picked off this lady for a biography, hope that's okay. Please check her out at Sylvia Fisher. I have made some necessary readjustments. I'd be grateful, if you had time, if you could also glance at an article I have written on Prometheus (Goethe). If, as I think, your German is up to it, I'm confused about the real meaning of three lines beginning 'Und glühtest jung und gut..' and it would be a great help if someone could explain them to me! Many thanks, Kretzsch 23:55, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Ja, ich bin es. Thankyou for welcoming me! The Wolf and Schubert are mentioned here, by another hand. I am by no means un-detectable but want to edit without registering my CV every time: the mists will soon clear. Nice to be back! Kretzsch 00:51, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Stiffelio
Hi, I have done something to this Verdi Stiffelio opera page which you may or my not like. I just happen to have the info (having attended the 1973 premiere) so thought I'd share it.... Please vet for suitability of content according to project guidelines, etc. thanks, Kretzsch 23:10, 11 July 2007 (UTC) P.S. The allusion is to the teacher of Adrian Leverkühn Kretzsch 23:21, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Jacques Offenbach/Ssilvers
I integrated the "Trivia" section into the other sections and moved the critical reception and Zola stuff below the list of works. I also listified the various posthumous works. See what you think. -- Ssilvers 04:50, 12 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Hmm. I don't think I have time for another cleanup job on Offenbach!


 * What posthumous works? Where did this come from? One isn't even by Offenbach. What sources have you been using? Amateur websites or proper reference books?


 * BTW were you able to remove the corrupt text from Les brigands or should we just delete it all? -- Kleinzach 08:25, 12 July 2007 (UTC


 * You wrote:"What posthumous works? Where did this come from? One isn't even by Offenbach. What sources have you been using? Amateur websites or proper reference books?"


 * I didn't add it - It was already there. I just listified it from the tangled Trivia paragraph in which it appeared.  I am not surprised to hear that it contains errors.


 * OK, now I understand I was looking at the history and it was difficult to see why and what you had done. But why did you transfer dubious (by definition) material from the Trivia to main sections without checking it? You weren't using any reference books, were you? -- Kleinzach 04:40, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Then you wrote: "BTW were you able to remove the corrupt text from Les brigands or should we just delete it all?"


 * Sorry, to what corrupt text are you referring? As for the Offenbach article, I have untangled some of the incomprehensible stuff that was there, but I'm afraid that you and/or GT are the first editors I could think of who might be able to clean it up more.  I haven't got any reference materials for Offenbach.  Just give it 15 minutes - It's just the "posthumous works" and the Zola paragraph, really, that need your attention.  If you don't want to do it, that's up to you, but I have done all I can.  -- Ssilvers 13:32, 12 July 2007 (UTC)


 * The Musical Numbers section from Les brigands. Your edit (cut and paste?) of 6 April. Every word is capitalized and all the French accents have been removed. (See Talk Page/Musical Numbers). If you can't correct it then it should be deleted.


 * It has been corrected now. -- Ssilvers 04:54, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * No - only some of it. For example, we have: 'Arrete-toi Donc, Je T'en Prie' . I also see you have been deleting my comments again. Nevertheless the whole exchange will remain on my Talk page. -- Kleinzach 06:38, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


 * As for Jacques Offenbach it would have been better to leave the article as it was. Why not contribute to articles where you have the necessary language skills, knowledge and relevant books? There are lots of English light operas that need articles, why not work on those? I regret having to express my irritation again, but if you remember my last cleanup job after your Offenbach editing took around ten hours. Basta! -- Kleinzach 04:40, 13 July 2007 (UTC) (Copied to my Talk page for the record)

No need to thank me, old fellow. Making you clean up articles that you have been neglecting is reward enough! LOL! -- Ssilvers 07:12, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


 * There are approximately 3,499 other neglected opera articles. It's not for you to decide which ones have priority. BTW I see you have now deleted this whole exchange from your Talk Page. Too embarrassing? Arrête-toi donc, Je t'en prie! -- Kleinzach 07:28, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Not at all. Only your behaviour has been embarrassing, as usual. I deleted it because it is merely a series of inane rants by you (filled with historical inaccuracies) in response to my polite request for assistance. Ciao for now; I'll let you know when I have further use for you. :) -- Ssilvers 13:53, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


 * You write "I'll let you know when I have further use for you." That's uncivil.


 * It's important that you understand that you don't OWN anything here and you shouldn't try to manipulate other editors and give them instructions. I suggest you read and study WP:CIVILITY which explains how to behave in a mature, positive, polite and considered way on Wikipedia. Please don't post anything more here until you have read that and agreed to follow it. -- Kleinzach 02:38, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

... NewYork1956
Fine, you've caught me. I was planning on quiting Wikipedia, but it's been quite hard (obviously addicted). It seems the many hours I've spent on on wikipedia were a waste because most of the time all I did was add infoboxes to opera singer's pages and upload photos, but the infoboxes are all gone now and my photos have all been deleted due to fair use problems, even though most of them were probably allowed under fair use - I just didn't know it had to be explained why. Anyways, I was obviously quite upset that all my work was for nothing and I'm sorry for all I've put you through. Some of the edits that I'm blamed for were actually not done by me, but I'm not saying I didn't do anything because that's not the case. It is in my opinion that there's no reason for the removal of opera singer's and composer's infoboxes because if there's anything contradictory it could easily be removed. Also the way of changing things like this on wikipedia is just terrible because you could argue that the majority view is to do something one way, but that's simply not true. Most users are not going looking around for arguments of why things should or should not be and if they don't have a problem with something that a few users do, they're not going to assume that it's an issue and will continue being happy with it even thought they may not know a consensus is forming. It's the absolute most stupid way I've ever seen for dealing with something like this. Imagine if there was an election for your country's president and you didn't know about it - That's basically the same thing that's happening on Wikipedia with these consensuses. I'll come out of hiding and not bother with the infoboxes just because there's not much else I can do, but don't think for a moment that I agree with some of the things happening on this site concerning classical music. NewYork1956 06:05, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah well it's about time a box specifically for opera singers and composers is created. I think the articles look better with them, so it's not just for the benefit of having the info in them. Some of the similar boxes suggested for such pages I thought had too much information. If someone just wants to see perhaps the year they were born or the type of music they sang/conducted for an essay or something it's better to just have the box so the person can see it right away rather than having to skim through the article, which also could make it easier to get other unnecessary information mixed into their essay, report, etc. The new infoboxes defiantly should have been created before any consensus was created to remove the old ones because now it's just put a cover over the problem and there's no real reason for anyone to bother creating the new infoboxes. NewYork1956 06:52, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Arnold Matters
Another one off your list: Arnold Matters. bw, Kretzsch 00:21, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Opera seria
Nice job on the references! It's a good article and deserved verification. --Stormbay 17:53, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi
Thank you for the encouragement :D

Juif/juif
Small 'j' in Grove - as you would expect, I think, 'juif' not being a proper name. Best regards --Smerus 05:48, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I have New Grove print edition, ed . Stanley Sadie, 1995 reprint. Which also gives 'La juive'. 'Juif' is an adjective or noun, not a proper name. Doesn't have a capital in French when not at the start of a sentence.--Smerus 08:21, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I have no problems about chanaging to 'J' if you prefer, I have just been following Grove. The Oxford Hachette dictionary gives lower case juif/juive for the noun Jew, (as has Grove in my edition as I mentioned). However, 'Teach Yourself French Grammar', (1962), which I have had lying around since my schooldays, says that 'the capital letter is used....for the titles of books, plays, pictures, etc...'. Thus according to the latter certainly 'La Juive', 'Le Juif errant', - or maybe 'Le Juif Errant'.....And certainly 'L'Artisan', 'L'Eclair', etc. which I think is contrary to WP protocols. You decide, I will follow - or perhaps we should put this up for discussion in ProjectOpera - I am easy either way.--Smerus 14:49, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Here are the Oxford Hachette rules for capital letters in the titles of artistic works:
 * As a general rule: capitalize the initial letter of the first word only, provided it is not a definite article: À la recherche du temps perdu, Une vie.
 * Capitalize the initial letters of the first two words if they are a definite article followed by a noun: Le Journal d'un fille de chambre.
 * Capitalize the initial letters of the first three words if they are a definite articel followed by an adjective followed by a noun: Le Double Inconstance.
 * Of course, if the title includes a proper name, a capital is required: L'Enfance de Bacchus.

On these grounds therefore, La Juive, Le Juif errant, as you say (so we can agree to differ as to whether Juif/Juive are proper nouns or ordinary). But also Le Nabab, Le Roi malgré lui, Les Francs-Juges, etc. etc. in numerous French operas in WP which I have not edited. How do we resolve contradictions between this and WP protocols? - Smerus 15:04, 26 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I use Grove's dictionary of music and musicians, which definitely gives the lower case, as already stated. I personally don't care which option you go for (see above). But whichever, you have to determine it against WP protocols. Once again I point out that 'juif' and juive' are not proper names, any more than 'anglais/e', 'arabe', 'chrétien/ne', etc., hence not capitalised in normal written French.   Best regards--Smerus 19:27, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Dear Kleinzach - thanks for your last posting on my talk page. I don't mind, as I say, how the operas are capitalised. But I am curious. Please let me know, if you have a moment, on what grounds you assert that 'juive' is a proper noun. 'Eleazar' and 'Rachel' are proper nouns. 'Jew' is not. 'A Jew' has a capital J in English out of custom; but not because it is a proper noun. In the same way as we write 'a Frenchman'. 'Juive' is not by any definition a proper noun, unless specifically used as a name. More specifically, Rachel (who is of course unique) is 'une juive'. She is 'la juive' in question, if you like, but the title implies her quality as one of many. She is nowhere called by anyone, or referred to as, 'La Juive'- it is not her appellation, as one might say 'La Gioconda'. Hence not a proper noun. Best regards--Smerus 14:12, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Genji monogatari
I got curious about Category:Japanese-language operas. This Tale of Genji, if I understand the newspaper correctly, was sung in English when touring in Tokyo. Move to English-language?Sparafucil 21:51, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

John Adams navigation box
Done, but no photo - Jay 12:02, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The title is too long, the only way is to cut it short. But I leave it up to you. - Jay 12:29, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Salieri and Sarti nav box
Done - Jay 10:47, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Quick question
Is there a particular policy on putting the "Roles" section of an opera in a table? Example, Falstaff (Salieri) vs. La scuola de' gelosi? If the second isn't considered messy I won't convert ones that I come across, but if it's beneficial (IMO tables look a lot neater) I can start to convert some of them. Le the  14:32, 6 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you! Le  the  06:06, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Just an English fanatic.
Thanks for the welcome. I am not about to become a producer of content for the opera project, it's really not my forte. I was steered towards the article by the "Did you know" column and it's mention of opera singer and Gershwin in the same paragraph. I found a couple of grammar errors. I am not an expert on the subject, but I do tend to find the ones that involve tense, voice, and spelling. You may see me again sometime in the future, especially when there are glaring errors in featured articles. rpm User:Rpmayhugh

Macbeth (disambiguation)
For edits to disambiguation pages, such as this one, please refer to Manual of Style (disambiguation pages). Thanks! Ewlyahoocom 04:17, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Categories
Hello and thank you for your categorization of my article. I will try to be more complete with my efforts. But I am driven to work on these items. I will look at your additions and utilize them as models for my future use. I am enjoying this and I hope that I am being helpful.

BestCanticle 04:16, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Wagner Project assessment page
Thanks. I meant to do it myself, but things are rather hectic at the moment: I've just got back from (would you believe) Tristan at Glyndebourne (mostly very good), then tomorrow an American visitor arrives for a couple of days, so I'll be supervising the York sightseeing. Early Monday, back to Glyndebourne for some Britten ... Anyway, I will look over the page later this evening, but it'll be next Thursday (16th) before I can get into assessing mode. --GuillaumeTell 21:24, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Eva Gauthier
Thanks, I've taken a look. I don't have the print sources on me, though, so I'm not sure I'll be able to add much material that's requested. Wily D 13:16, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Cat Operas
I used AWB to list the few operas in Operas by Composer not in the top category - see User:Occuli/sandbox1. Some are stubs. AWB has also produced a list of Cat:operas which are not in the Operas by Composer - see User:Occuli/sandbox2. I have no wish to tread on any toes by doing anything more. It would be quick and easy to make similar pairs of lists with AWB for the several other means of subcattery. Occuli 18:08, 22 June 2007 (UTC)


 * AWB is very useful but not worth the sacrifice of a Mac. It does allow the easy creation and comparison of 2 lists, and also the easy addition of say Cat Operas to any list (adding Defaultsort at the same time). I have noted that operatic toes have been trampled recently both by infoboxism and categoricism. (I trust you will be able to avoid all the egregious 'categorisation by nationality' schemes.) Occuli 11:05, 23 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I've done a similar 2 for Operas by Genre - User:Occuli/sandbox3, User:Occuli/sandbox4. Occuli 23:31, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi
Logged in long enough today (while working late and waiting for some slow computer processes to complete) in order to make some updates to my user and talk pages, and to make it clear that I've been taking a wikibreak. It's been nice to correspond with you by email. I hope to be back later this month, or in September, after all the family activities settle down. Cheers, Lini 04:07, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Balbina Steffenone
It's in the article "Mexico City", buried in the section that deals with the 19th and 20th centuries, and she also gets a passing mention in "Travelling troupes". So, not a hoax, but then maybe not notable either? Cheers, Moreschi Talk 13:25, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Veselohra na mostě
Thanks for your comment. The problem here seemed to me that the opera was originally Vnm. Then changed when translated (14 years later)to CotB. Grove Opera gives Vnm (with 'The Comedy on the Bridge' (sic) in square brackets). Thus thought it better to give original name, with English name redirecting to it. Whether most users of WP know it by Czech or English title would seem to be a moot point. I personally don't mind which way round - but you have to accept that the WPOpera guidelines can be equivocal in cases like this. Don't bite too hard - I'm just trying to add my ha'pennyworth! I originally just meant to put up Martinů's 'Ariane' - but found the Martinů opera situation such a mess that I added template and did a bit of tidying up. Best regards - --Smerus 07:00, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Wagner assessment
You're right. However, I distinctly remember typing a message to you. Maybe I forgot to save it after previewing it, so sorry about that. Anyway, the approximate content was: --GuillaumeTell 16:31, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm back in action and will start reviewing when time permits (this evening, I hope).
 * I'll use my points system and update the banners with the grade as I do them.
 * After that, I'll go through them using the Moreschi system. What should I do if that produces a different grade?  Note this for discussion?  On the opera's talk page or on the Wagner project page or what?
 * Your points system for singers looks good to me, with one exception: Critical Appreciation (sourced, of course!) seems to me to merit 10 or 15 points rather than just 5.  I'd knock 5 or 10 off Major Career to provide the extra.  One other thing:  how realistic is a list of roles?  Completeness might just about be possible for contemporary singers (though they often like to hide their less successful outings), but the further one goes back the more difficult it becomes, unless there's a biography. Even incomplete lists may not be easy, though Grove and the Oxford Dictionary will provide some info, and there are articles in Opera magazine and bios in programmes (but we don't want to do Original Research, do we?).
 * While you're there, have you looked at Music drama? Should it be part of the Wagner project?  Should it be in the operatic genres category (and/or be a category itself?!)  Grove has an interesting article by Barry Millington on the subject...
 * I decided to do the operas in chronological order, which immediately brought up a problem - Die Hochzeit isn't really an opera. I'm ignoring it pro tem.  I'd rate Die Feen as a Stub, but here's another problem:  inserting "|class=stub" into the banner a) positions the Stub box directly under the Wagner picture, where it looks very odd and b) there's no provision in the Wagner template for a statement alongside saying something like "This article has been rated as x-Class on the assessment scale [with link to assessment page]. See comments [with link to comments] for details.", or similar, which I really think is necessary (and it will move the Stub box away from the picture, too.  I had a look at the coding for some other banner templates (those in Talk:York), but my head started to swim.  Do you think you could sort this out?  There's also the "This article has not yet received a rating" text, which perhaps should be added into the Opera Project banner - presumably by Bot - when we eventually start doing assessment there.  Anyway, I'll carry on rating the other Wagner operas but won't update the Talk pages yet till we've sorted this out.  --GuillaumeTell 16:37, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but SatyrTN seemed to think we were talking about articles without banners, rather than improving the current banner so that it says by default "not yet been assessed" and when assessed says "has been rated... comments here". I looked at Template:WPCities, which does all that, and took fright!  Anyway, I've spelled it out on his talk page.


 * As for the system itself, I've test-driven it on four articles and had similar results from the points and "Moreschi" scales. However, I've altered the latter's emphasis on stubs normally being very short.  Die Feen is undoubtedly a stub, and so is Rienzi, which has only a four-line synopsis.  The points system seems to me to be a good checklist to use when making comments (which I think are essential). --GuillaumeTell 17:30, 24 August 2007 (UTC)


 * SatyrTN has produced a result - see his talk page. I'm just off to Edinburgh for Capriccio, but when I return (tomorrow evening) I'll put up a table showing the points that I allocated to the first four Wagner operas and we can discuss it. --GuillaumeTell 13:18, 28 August 2007 (UTC)