User talk:Magicpiano/ArchiveComposer1

Beethoven
Yah, it needs some work. It needs someone to step way back and see what and why and where; it needs a strong style section, and good cited material on influence (actually it would be more interesting to find composers *not* influenced by Beethoven, or who tried to escape his influence, since he is probably the most influential composer of the last 200 years). I suspect most people are just intimidated by the thought of working on such a high-profile article, but that's just a hunch. A lot of people watching those kinds of articles have twitchy fingers on the rollback button.

I think what happened is that back in 2004 we split out the long article into subsections, which now are still largely in the "2004 style" (uncited, unreferenced, just slabs of expository prose), leaving behind a much shorter article which seems to cover the major areas superficially. Back in the early days of Wikipedia we tried to keep articles short; that's not so important any more, and I wonder if we should consider re-incorporating much of the satellite article content into the main (or just re-writing the main?) Looking around at other articles on contemporary figures I see some robust articles that still have numerous satellites, like Jupiter (see Napoleon I of France for an example -- there's a contemporary artist who worked in a medium incorporating sight and sound). Antandrus (talk) 15:50, 14 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm glad I'm not alone in my opinion, it took me a long time to figure out how to usefully characterize the issues I saw. LVB clearly needs multiple articles to fully cover him; the main article really needs to be an umbrella that summarizes (well) what's in the subsidiary articles.  LVB is especially hard, since so much of what he wrote is notable -- summarizing in this case means the main article will lose notable things.


 * But this should be discussed further on the article's talk page (or on the project talk page -- as I said, I think the article is an embarrassment as it currently stands, and that makes the project contributors look bad too). I think I'll put a pointer to the review there, and eventually make some concrete suggestions for how to proceed, but I think it needs to be a collaborative effort.  Magic ♪piano 16:03, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Schubert's last sonatas
I wonder if you would like to join in the discussion here. I think you know the Schubert articles better than I do! Best. -- Klein zach  00:11, 18 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks. -- Klein zach  23:43, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Unassessed Composers articles
I've now gone ahead with a proposal for a bot run for unassessed Composers articles - as mentioned previously - and I'd be grateful for your input, see here. Best. -- Klein zach  23:43, 18 December 2008 (UTC).k

Assessment request
Hi Magicpiano -- I've started repairing/upgrading the articles assigned in the Union University class (see the thread on the Wikiproject Composers talk page) and have finished with Jacques Arcadelt for now. If you feel like it would you mind doing an assessment there? Unfortunately that picture of Arcadelt on Commons is actually Palestrina, so I can't use it -- but another question I had for you was this: since you often ask for images, do you have any ideas of what sort of images might help articles on Renaissance composers? Sometimes I put in a picture of a place they worked, or a painting if we're lucky enough to have one, or a manuscript/print facsimile, but maybe I'm just lacking imagination. Thanks for your work on this stuff! Antandrus (talk) 05:29, 23 December 2008 (UTC)


 * My stock response on images where a picture of the subject is unlikely to be available or hard to get (applies to modern subjects as well as the more obscure older ones), is to use things like these as a lead image:
 * places they worked (period paintings, period maps, modern photos, if appropriate)
 * if their compositions are preserved in notable works (like the Chigi Codex), especially if they're attractively illuminated
 * group paintings of musicians of the time
 * instruments, if the composer specialized enough
 * I wouldn't use portraits of other people as a lead image, for obvious reasons. For a longer article, any subject matter mentioned in the article is ripe for use as an image in the body, including portraits of other people:
 * patrons
 * teachers
 * known colleagues
 * I'm not sure what WP:MOS says (if anything) about image frequency; I find one image every 3-4 paragraphs to be adequate. Most of the Renaissance composer articles are short enough that one image is plenty.


 * I'll try to get to the Arcadelt article today. Real life is intruding (for somewhat obvious seasonal reasons), which will necessitate a bit of a wikibreak. Cheers!  Magic ♪piano 16:07, 23 December 2008 (UTC)


 * No rush -- appreciate your help. I'm hoping to have some time between Christmas and New Years to upgrade some of the Renaissance composer articles -- if I remember to pack enough books when I hit the road tomorrow.  Have happy holidays, Antandrus  (talk) 16:46, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Rimsky-Korsakov
Thanks for the assessment of Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov, which was very fair. As I just mentioned on the talk page for that article, the "Rimsky-Korsakov" references are actually for the composer's autubiography, My Musical Life; all footnotes in the article have been changed to reflect this fact. Thank you for pointing out the Alma Problem. Rimsky of course was not an unbiased chronicler of his own life but at least the biases are clear. Lacking a comprehensive biography of R-K, My Musical Life was at least an acceptible if not ideal alternative. Again, thanks for the assessment. Jonyungk (talk) 21:46, 25 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Have a small quandary with the Rimsky article. The following appears in two places in the article:


 * In both places it is undocumented, but I would hate to remove it because it is bassically true. In such a catalog, would the citation rule still apply? As I hope to eventually nominate the Rimsky article for GA, this is a concern. Jonyungk (talk) 18:29, 30 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Interesting problem. A more readily-sourceable factual assertion might be that those works are not frequently staged in the West.  Sourcing the popularity of the excerpts might be as easy as noting how frequently they've been recorded (or appear in Pops-style programs).  Another place to look might be "popular" treatments of the music or composer, rather than scholarly ones (not sure how well that'll work for Rimsky...).  Magic ♪piano 21:30, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

I owe you a huge apology
over the New Grove references in Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky. Contrary to comments by SlubGlub, these were not copied-and-pasted from the New Grove but I had not sufficiently rewritten the passages in question to pass scrutiny. This problem has since been rectified. Since SlubGlub's comments came immediately after your reassessment of the article, I can imagine the timing could not have been worse. Again, I apologize and thank you sincerely for the time you have put into this article. Jonyungk (talk) 21:54, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I am not a great policeman of plagiarism (or allegations thereof). I did watch that exchange, unsure what to make of it;  I'm glad it seems to have been sorted out.  (And thanks for paying attention to R-K; I've not had time to look at it -- see the busy header on this page -- but I'm sure it'll improve things.)  Magic ♪piano 02:28, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome, and thanks for the encouragement. Wish you a wonderful 2009. Jonyungk (talk) 21:47, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Requesting rerating for Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky
How would I go about doing this? Jonyungk (talk) 19:17, 10 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I'll revisit it early next week.  Magic ♪piano 22:54, 10 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I've had a look at the article; it looks really good, but needs some copyediting (mostly just small stuff). I can do this if you'd like; I will also flag points that I think still need inline citations.  I would also recommend to you one (or more) of the following courses of action:
 * ask someone experienced in the FA process, like User:Brianboulton, to go over the article
 * resubmit for peer review
 * submit it for FA, and see what happens
 * (I'd have it copyedited before doing either of the last two.)
 * I think the article is A-class; if something's wrong with it, at this point it is more likely to be a matter of style than substance.


 * One other recommendation: there are enough articles concerning Tchaikovsky that there probably ought to be a navbar (see the bottoms of many pages concerning Beethoven or Mozart for what I mean).  Magic ♪piano 19:27, 13 January 2009 (UTC)


 * If you would copyedit the article, that would be great. The navbar idea sounds excellent, also. How would I go about creating one? Is it simply a case of typing in the composer's name in brackets, as in


 * , as it appears to be the case on the Beethoven and Mozart pages? Thanks again. Jonyungk (talk) 19:51, 14 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, you do have to create the template, as you would any other new page. Create the page "Template:Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky", populate it with what you want the navbar to look like. (I'd start with the contents of the Beethoven or Mozart templates, and just edit it from there. They're not that tricky.)


 * I'll try to get some copyediting in over the next few days -- it'll take a while, it's a long enough article.  Magic ♪piano 21:15, 14 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks very much for going through the article and for your comments. Both are greatly appreciated. One question: Will the two paragraphs I placed at the beginning of the "Works" section suffice for a summary? Wasn't sure what else I could place there that could be cited. Jonyungk (talk) 19:11, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I think those two paragraphs make a good summary.  Magic ♪piano 19:49, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Rerating Tchaikovsky and the Five
Thanks for your comments on this article, as well as for copyediting it. I have added citations for most of the places you indicated. What's next? Jonyungk (talk) 21:16, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, all the citations would be needed (GA and FA reviews will quick-fail if there are "work" tags in the article). There are also some display/rendering issues between images and some of the quotation blocks, at least in my browser's view of it. I may try a few things to improve the situation.  Magic ♪piano 22:55, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. There was only one citation missing; the situation has since been remedied. Jonyungk (talk) 17:14, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I still see three -- search the page source for {{ fact . Two in Balakirev, one in Before Tchaikovsky.  Magic ♪piano 17:29, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * To quote Agatha Christie, and then there were none. :) Jonyungk (talk) 07:17, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * It looks good to me now. I made some minor changes (including an annoying WP:MOS thing about using endashes in page ranges which you should be aware of if/when you push Tchaikovsky to FA), but I think it's good enough to submit to WP:GAN.  Magic ♪piano 14:27, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Tchaikovsky and the Five
Hello. I've noticed that you left a list of things you were going to do on the talk page of this article back in November. Have they been completed? If so, I would like to begin the GA review. ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 21:58, 31 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I believe that Jonyungk has dealt with all of the things I pointed out in that comment. (I think the article is ready for a GA review.)  Magic ♪piano 01:11, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Ferruccio Busoni
I read your review of this article. I would like to start a page "List of compositions by Ferruccio Busoni". Obviously it will initially be very incomplete and, of course, I would like for other editors to contribute, so I want to post it early on. Since I'm rather new as an editor, I was wondering whether I should put some sort of notice that the page is a work in progress, or is that understood? Robert.Allen (talk) 00:11, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The best things to do are this:
 * Put inuse or expand at the top of the article. (Remove it when you are happy with the page.)
 * Make sure the article is correctly categorized, and linked from the Busoni page (see Help:Category).
 * If you have a reference work you are working from, add a References subsection, where you can add the reference (see Help:Section and Help:Referencing).


 * Have fun!  Magic ♪piano 00:47, 6 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I started List of compositions by Ferruccio Busoni, but hope to add more when I get a chance. Robert.Allen (talk) 10:00, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Rimsky-Korsakov, Take Two
Since reading your appraisal on Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov, I've done a considerable amount of additional work and wondered if you could take a second look at the article. Except for a couple of paragraphs for which I am still locating sources, it appears this article might be worth nominating for GA review. Thanks. Jonyungk (talk) 18:54, 7 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Sure, I'll take a look at it soon.  Magic ♪piano 02:16, 8 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I've copyedited through the end of the bio, and marked a few tags. I also not that there are some invalid references -- you should check into those.  Magic ♪piano 03:11, 13 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the copyediting. Took what you said about length to heart and found several places to tighten up the article, fixed references and got everything shipshape for GA review. Again, thanks! Jonyungk (talk) 01:31, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Talk:John Adams (composer) TOC
Unfortunately, all of your many assessment comments are showing up in header form in the Talk page's TOC, making it most unwieldy. I tried replacing your headers with simple bolding, but they still show up. Is there something you can do? Perhaps the template of your comments has to be changed oon your end. Anyway, this is being discussed here:. Thanks in advance for your help. Softlavender (talk) 23:45, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

UPDATE: Already fixed. No problem now. Softlavender (talk) 23:58, 11 February 2009 (UTC)


 * well, I'm glad it was cleared up. I'm wondering if something changed in one of the banners?  I've not seen the problem of the comments being visible inside a banner -- that sounds like a bug in the banner.  Magic ♪piano 04:13, 12 February 2009 (UTC)


 * (Dropping by . . .). I think there are problems with this. I'm seeing an uncollapsible version of the assessments in the Biography banner and I saw another one appear on an actual talk page. There should also be a link to the assessments on the Composers banner. Was there one before? I can't remember. -- Klein zach  10:53, 12 February 2009 (UTC) P.S. I've just found out that the banner was changed to the so-called WPBannerMeta on 9 February by Happy-melon . He also made related changes to the  Classical Music banner, see Project banner name change. -- Klein  zach  11:10, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Assessments/music projects generally
I continue to be impressed by all your hard work on the Composers articles! However I am wondering how we might get other people involved in similar work. You have the composers well covered, but there are other music projects. I'm wondering whether you might consider writing an explanatory page/section, perhaps on a new Music project subpage for Assessments (for descendant projects). What do you think? Best. -- Klein zach  05:07, 19 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the positive feedback. The B articles are a bit a slog by now, but the end is coming into sight.


 * Getting other people involved is something I don't know how to do -- my observation is that most people on WP do what they are interested in doing. If that doesn't included reviewing, it doesn't happen.  (See also the constant backlog at WP:GAN for another example of this.)  One thing that might work is to try to develop an A-class review process.  I know that my assessments of that are imperfect, which is why I temporize in my reviews if I think the article is "factually complete".  A relatively simple thing, like a Review subpage where they can be announced, discussed and archived.  (I'm thinking along the lines of WP:MILHIST's A-class review process, only less bureaucratic.)  The problem is that you may have to specifically ask people to participate, at least at first.


 * I can certainly write something up on how to review (or write) good composer or musician biographies, now that I've seen a few hundred of them. More general guidelines are trickier; I actually think they would need to be divided by category: person (e.g. Mozart), place (Boston Symphony Hall), work (Symphony No. 9 (Beethoven)), event (Death of Beethoven), instrument (Cello), technical term (pizzicato), histories/genres (Renaissance music), all strike me as things for which one could create a separate guideline of what constitutes a comprehensive treatment (basically an A-quality description) of something in that category (and there are enough articles in the category to warrant the creation of such a guideline).


 * --  Magic ♪piano 14:29, 19 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Category based guidelines sound useful. Do you think this idea would work on a new Music project subpage for Assessments (for descendant projects) or do you have another idea? (I'm a bit less interested in an A-class review process because there are so few articles involved, but I'm certainly not against it in any way.) -- Klein zach  23:44, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Composers banner
On another matter Alanbly has just added Comments fields to the Composers banner to enable people to see it directly. Let me know what you think, whether we need to fine tune anything. Thanks. -- Klein zach  06:46, 19 February 2009 (UTC)


 * It seems to be working OK in both nested and non-nested banner instances. (I think the Biography banner still expands the comments page when nested in at least one of the banner-nesting schemes; see e.g. Talk:Hector Berlioz)  Magic ♪piano 16:06, 19 February 2009 (UTC)


 * One other thing I've noticed is that the assessment within the Composers banner unravels with the heading turning back into 'equals' signs, e.g. Talk:Colinet de Lannoy with the banner switched to 'show'. Are you seeing this? -- Klein  zach  23:51, 19 February 2009 (UTC)


 * When I looked at the Lannoy banner just now, it looked fine (no equals).  Magic ♪piano 02:41, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Symphony No. 1 (Rachmaninoff)
If you have time, is there a chance you could look over this article for me. I've been copyediting the article myself and correcting any copyvios that have arisen, but it really needs a good going over and it was rushed into FAC. If you're too pressed to do so, no problem. Either way, please let me know what you think. Thanks! Jonyungk (talk) 22:08, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Based on the complaint of copyvio, I'm not sure how you should proceed. I can copyedit, but it sounds as if the FAC reviewers are really nervous about the copyvio stuff.  On the other hand, it does appear to still be early in the process.  I'll see what I can do -- I don't have much time until Sunday or Monday though.  Magic ♪piano 02:39, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


 * It's actually not my article with which to proceed; nevertheless, I think I've (hopefully) done enough rewriting throughout the article to aleviate at least the worse of the copyvio questions, if not all of them. Like you said, it's still early in the process. Thanks again for going through the article. Jonyungk (talk) 08:08, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Chevalier de Saint-Georges
Hi magicpiano. I left a comment on your assessment at Talk:Chevalier de Saint-Georges which you may be interested in reading. Also, I have made the suggested changes to the Thomas Arne article based on your assessment, and I wouldn't mind having your excellent critical eyes looking at it again. Thanks for all your hard work at the composer project! Cheers.Nrswanson (talk) 03:56, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Restructuring of Symphony No. 1 (Rachmaninoff)
Thanks for the suggestion on restructuring this article. I've shifted copy accordingly. Any chance you still might be able to copyedit? Thanks. Jonyungk (talk) 23:55, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Sure, I'll have a look.  Magic ♪piano 13:06, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Tchaikovsky and the Five
Thanks for the encouragement in having me nominate this article for GA review. It just passed. :) Jonyungk (talk) 22:10, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Suggested solution to Talkpage/Comments TOC problem
Anomie (at the the Village Pump Technical) has suggested this solution:


 * Remove the headings (== or &lt;h#> style) from the /Comments subpage; you can emulate them with appropriate inline styles on a  if you really want. 

Is this feasible, do you think? Hope you had a good break! -- Klein zach  01:17, 2 March 2009 (UTC)


 * A brief break from my break. I go to California in a drought to go camping, and it rains...  Anyway, I can change the model review to use div or other methods to put in headers, but this won't fix the 250 or so extant reviews.  (They might be bot- or AWB-fixable, though.)  Magic ♪piano 01:15, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Classical Music assessment page
I wonder if you can have a look at this: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Classical_music? Thanks. -- Klein zach  23:40, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Webern
Hi, Thanks for the thoughtful comments on Anton Webern. I'm interested in addressing those problems when the time opens up for me. Only one thing jumps out at me: You end it with "factually defective," which doesn't seem to be supported by your other comments. You point out much that is missing, but nothing that is "wrong" or "defective." Am I missing something? Or perhaps I am misunderstanding the phrase? (John User:Jwy talk) 17:11, 19 March 2009 (UTC)


 * The "factually defective" was referring to the missing stuff. I'm not up on Webern, so I can't comment on the accuracy of the article...  Magic ♪piano 17:13, 19 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Okay. thanks. He's an interesting composer. Hopefully you'll learn more about him next time you get back there! (John User:Jwy talk) 17:26, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Hello
Hi. I wrote on your other page. Sorry for the inconvinience. I hope that we can be buddies.--God&#39;sGirl94 (talk) 18:45, 17 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Who's your favorite composer?  Magic ♪piano 21:20, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh man, I like most of them, but I REALLY like Verdi. I also like Mozart and Vivaldi, but Verdi's my favorite. What about you?--God&#39;sGirl94 (talk) 16:22, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Anton Rubinstein
Thanks for your comments on the Rubinstein article. My challenge as I look through it is that while Rubinstein is known have composed a fair amount of music, his lasting fame is actually as a pianist. Should the article be rerated as a performer bio rather than as a composer bio? Jonyungk (talk) 22:14, 22 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I concur that the focus of the article should stay on him as a performer. However, in its present state, it gives very little background on his composition at all.  Perhaps one way to approach it would be to
 * expand the Composition section (probably not more than double its current size)
 * add a paragraph or equivalent to each subsection in the Biography about interesting composing events (notable works written, operas premiered, and so on)
 * if he performed his own works, that is of course also something to note


 * Hope this helps. Congratulations on the promotion of Tchaikovsky, by the way.  Magic ♪piano 23:32, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry 'bout Bax
My bad.:( Jonyungk (talk) 00:39, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Marc-Antoine Charpentier
I wonder if you would like to have a quick look at this article to see if it is B class now. --Hans Adler (talk) 23:30, 28 March 2009 (UTC)


 * It's certainly B class; I've updated the banners. If you want to improve it further, you should include more musicology: discuss his style in more detail, and include later composers that he may have influenced, and more critical and popular appreciation (especially over time, if possible).  If you're thinking of a formal review in the future (GA or FA), you'll need to add inline citations.  Magic ♪piano 01:12, 29 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Actually I am not involved in the article (yet?), I merely have it on my watchlist. So I noticed that "one of the 2 biographers of Charpentier" (in her own words) has started work on the article. Thanks. --Hans Adler (talk) 02:46, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, and a favor?
Thanks for the congratulations on Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky making it through GA review. It is currently in FA review and I have a favor to ask of you. If you have the time, could you look at the article once more. I've added some material in the sections from "Mature composer" through "Turmoil in life and music" that I initially thought enhanced the article but am now wondering whether now I am bordering on having too much material and should remove it. I'd really appreciate your opinion on this, and it really helped when you did the same with Rimsky-Korsakov during its GA review. Thanks. Jonyungk (talk) 16:58, 29 March 2009 (UTC)


 * It looks like it made it (before I had a chance to look)! Well done!  Magic ♪piano 01:27, 30 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, what do you know! Nice to see that star there, but I still have the same concern. Could you stil take a look? Jonyungk (talk) 05:30, 30 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I had a look, it looks pretty good. One nit: I'm not sure if cite #50 (Osoovskii) is correctly spelled, considering his name is referenced elsewhere as Osoovski.  Magic ♪piano 13:21, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll check out that cite. Thanks very much! Jonyungk (talk) 16:40, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Composers Project B-class reviews
Congratulations on finishing a substantial body of work! Assuming you don't want to enjoy a richly-deserved retirement, I am wondering whether you might be able to help me checking through Category:Unassessed Composers articles — or perhaps alternatively switching onto WP:CM assessment? What do you think? Best. -- Klein zach  01:44, 31 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I'd actually like to take a break from doing regular reviews (I still take requests), and devote some time to figuring out what to do with the Beethoven family of articles. I thought you were going to do a bot run to auto-categorize the unassessed composers to Start?


 * We tried to, but the instructions for Shepbot got increasingly complex, and he became less and less interested. In the end I found checking by hand was a good idea anyway as there are so many anomalies (unstubbed stubs, articles that didn't belong, non notables etc etc). -- Klein zach  05:05, 31 March 2009 (UTC)


 * As far as eventual CM assessments are concerned: one bit of "janitorial" work that would be useful is to categorize the articles covered by that project by subject matter (musical work, performer, musical form, performance space, etc). Any sort of assessment work is going to require that sort of breakdown, to figure out how to assess them in a non-generic way.  Magic ♪piano 03:38, 31 March 2009 (UTC)


 * A good set of categories does exist, see WikiProject Classical music/Categories. We also have the Compositions task force which has a special banner script. Are these adequate or do you think a further classification is needed? Although there are some 40 nominally B-class CM articles, I agree that any assessments should be done group by group (e.g. all conductors followed by all pianists). -- Klein zach  05:05, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Dussek
Hello Magicpiano. I was in Čáslav, it's beautiful ancient town, but the museum is open since April. Sometimes it's almost hopeless with the Czech culture institutions... Btw, I have expanded and clarified Janáček's article with the great help of User:Haploidavey, but now we need an "impersonal" view - would you mind to look at it? I don't want to waste your time, however, your opinion and good experience with article assessments would be welcomed. Particularly I'm bit afraid of number of Czech references - I've compared a lot of important sources (all of them, I hope), but I haven't access to the important English books.. Have a good day --Vejvančický (talk) 12:49, 31 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, you'll just have to go again in a few weeks. :) I'll try to look at Janacek in the next day or two.  Magic ♪piano 13:22, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Symphonic Poems (Liszt)
Hi! I was thinking of putting up this article for GA review and wondered if you would have the time to look it over before I did so. Any input would be welcome. Thanks! Jonyungk (talk) 22:52, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

John Serry Sr.
Hey Magic that is really good advice there you left on the page for John Serry Sr.. I can't remember how I got into it basically all I did was a copy edit. It seems to be written by one author who maybe dislikes criticism, though I think yours is nothing but excellent constructive critisism. We had tchaikowsky in there at one point, well that is just someone showing off, I changed it to Tchaikovsky, I don't care how it is spelt in Russian in English it is spelt with a V. So I went through cleaning up references etc, then we had the merge, needs another cleanup but I am waiting a little cos it seems to be changed quite regularly at the moment and your humble gnome works best cleaning up when it's not changing too quickly.

So, thank you again for you excellent constructive advice. I hope it's appreciated by the editors more musical than me. 23:02, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Drigo article
Hello!

First, I would like to thank you for your wonderful review of the article I created on Riccardo Drigo. I appreciate the constructive criticism and I agree with it completely.

With regard to the technical aspect of his music, I admit that I am not the best person for the job - I am no musician. In terms of ballet music, Drigo was, in my humble opinion, a marvelous composer, and right up there with Delibes. There are occasions where he even exceeds him. Outside of the theatre, his music is almost like high-order salon music. His greatest talent was no doubt an abilty to create beautiful, singing melodies.

I have not been able to find out specifics on his personal life (i.e. marriages, children). With regard to close freinds, he and Alexander Glazunov were very close freinds, as well as tchaikovsky and Anton Rubenstein.

I was wondering if you would be interetsed in helping me improve the article? I am also not very good at citations, but I would love to add them to the article.

--Mrlopez2681 (talk) 02:49, 6 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I see you've been busy since my review. I'll take a more detailed look at it later, but my first impression leaves me with the idea that there are still personal details (like romantic relationships, marriage, children) and posthumous reception missing (things I pointed out in my review).  You might also read an essay I wrote recently on the subject of composer articles.


 * I can certainly copyedit the article, but citation needs to be done by the editors that have the sources. I suggest you read about footnotes, and experiment in a sandbox.  (You might also look at this article's source for examples on doing footnotes.)  Magic ♪piano 15:51, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Re: John Serry, Sr. article
Dear Magicpiano: Please accept my apologies for deleting you comments from the talk page on this article. It was not my intention to waste your time. I do sincerely appreciate all of your efforts to assist in the development of the article. I have explained on the article's talk page why I am unable to comply with your request for additional information. I hope that you can appreciate my reasoning. If possible, kindly withdraw my request to include this article within the composer's section and restore its rating back to C-level. Thank you for your kind assistance in this regard.--Pjs012915 (talk) 21:41, 6 May 2009 (UTC)user:pjso12915

Choral symphony
This article is going through peer review and I've subsequently been doing a lot of work on it. Nevertheless, it still seems like is needs a lot of work in restructuring or reprganizion. If you have the chance, could you look it over and give some suggestions? Thanks. Jonyungk (talk) 07:01, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Paganini article
Hello there: I have been (on-and-off) looking after the article on Paganini. I read your comments back in November 2008, and I think they are of much value, and I will do my best to improve its quality.

You also mentioned that the Paganini compositions should be its own article, and I wholeheartedly agree. I would like to know, if authorization would be needed to do something like that by myself?

--Bart weisser (talk) 09:13, 31 May 2009 (UTC)


 * As far as I know, anyone can create new pages, which is all that would be required to split the composition list; just make sure to follow naming conventions when creating it.  Magic ♪piano 11:39, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Contact request
Hi there! We're trying to get a free image for the article Medieval lituus, a musical instrument that was recently created by a group of UK and Swiss researchers to perform a Bach chorale. I have tried unsuccessfully to contact the UK team. Would you be willing to contact the Swiss team and ask for a free image, since you speak German? It is the Schola Cantorum Basiliensis, and their contact page is here.

I don't know if you've ever asked for images, but there is some info at WP:COPYREQ. Basically, they have to be very explicit in their release of the image into a compatible license, and you have to forward their e-mail to the OTRS system.

Thanks in advance! --Laser brain (talk) fcvfv 18:02, 9 June 2009 (UTC)


 * While my German is mostly pretty good, it is notably lacking in a number of technical subject areas. (This is what happens when you learn it as a child, and don't persist in studies.)  I'm not confident that I could properly carry the needed dialogue in this subject (copyrights, permissions, and so on).  Good luck with your search.  Magic ♪piano 12:13, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks anyway! --Laser brain (talk)  19:53, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Date of move for Beethoven's and Schubert's final resting place.
Dear MagicPiano, In the 1863 edition of the British publication "The Musical Standard", the following paragraph is found on page 108 of the November issue. It appears that this sets the move date of the bodies earlier than the 1888 year given in the article. Or perhaps there were two moves?? It doesn't seem likely.

(I have copied the paragraph digitized by The Google Book project and OCR'd the image, and then checked it for errors.)

MUSICAL SACRILEGE.—The following paragraph has been going the round of the daily papers, appearing in the Globe under the head of Court Intelligence: (!)—"The Musical Society of Vienna having resolved that the mortal remains of Beethoven and of Schu-bert should be placed in more suitable vaults, the two bodies were exhumed on the 13th in the presence of a crowd of medical and artistic notabilities (!). The skeleton of Beethoven was almost perfect, the bone of the temples alone being wanting. The remains of Schubert had suffered much: the head and hair were intact. The bodies of the celebrated composers were photographed (!) upon being reburied." [There is something essentially repulsive in the idea of disturbing the remains of Beethoven "in the presence of a crowd of artistic —nobodies;—a proceeding not at all divested of culpably impertinent curiosity by the plea of reverence to the memory of the departed great.—ED.]

169.139.222.5 (talk) 19:18, 19 June 2009 (UTC)Robert Winslow

Dear Magic Piano, My apologies for posting too hastily. It appears that the 1863 exhumation was done in order to replace the bodies at the old Währinger Friedhof in new solid copper caskets. They were indeed moved on 9/22/1888. http://members.virtualtourist.com/m/a6ba9/4e34c/4/ once again, my apologies- 169.139.222.5 (talk) 19:30, 19 June 2009 (UTC)Robert

Barges review
Thanks for your useful comments on the Barges article. I hope they will be addressed by someone eventually (perhaps even me if I have time).

I would just like to correct a slight misunderstanding:

"Origins/family background/studies. . . . ok, but I somehow doubt he was born on more than one barge."

I understand the confusion but in this case Barges doesn't refer to the plural of barge but to a place (see the entry in New Grove Dictionary of Music & Musicians/Grove Music Online [subscription access]). I can't find anything out about the place; perhaps it no longer exists or perhaps I just haven't looked enough, but I have no reason to doubt the Grove article.

Azzaiolo (talk) 01:44, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Beethoven
Hi Magicpiano -- just dropping by briefly to say thank you for your work on this article. It's looking really good: nice work! Not always so easy to work on high-profile articles, is it? By the way, do you think Tovey should be on the list of influential writers (currently commented out)? All the best, Antandrus (talk) 16:18, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I try not to worry about the traffic counts of articles I touch -- that way, I don't spend as much time fussing over typos. :) I think the basic biographical chronology is now looking better than it was (parts are definitely more accurate), which makes the music section look bad, and the legacy section -- umm, what legacy section?  It looks like Eusebeus is doing good work on Beethoven's musical style, which is from where I cribbed to commented-out lead paragraph content.  I think when he's made more progress on that, it can be summarized for the music section.


 * I think my next step is to look for appropriate resources to actually have a decent Legacy/Reception section (which would justify the commented-out paragrah in the lead), as well as a Cultural Depictions section, which can then subsume the recently-added film references. If you have specific suggestions for sources to use for this sort of material (I assume you were referring to Donald Francis Tovey?), feel free to make suggestions.

Re Editing on John Serry Sr. by User:Damiens.rf
Dear User_talk:Magicpiano - Just a quick note to thank you for your suggestions concerning the restructuring of the article John Serry, Sr.. As I've indicated on the article's talk page I have attempted to implement some of your suggestions by removing content from the Overview section and incorporating it into a Musical style section. 'Kindly note that User:Damiens.rf has made several attempts to undo my implementation of your suggestion regarding the size of the text utilized in the paragraphs describing the advanced compositions: American Rhapsody and Concerto For Free Bass Accordion'' which were merged into the article as a result of a deletion review decision. I have alerted User:Damiens.rf that you specifically endorsed utilizing the smaller text size for this section of the article in order to save space as indicated in your notes on the discussion page (See Item #8) and I have attempted to restore the small size to the text on several occasions. He continues to undo my revisions claiming that it is incorrect to utilize small text in this manner.''' I shall attempt to restore the small size text to this portion of the article one last time and would appreciate any communication you could convey to User:damiens.rf to clarify this matter so as to mitigate the need for repeated editing in the future. As always, thank you for your assistance. --Pjs012915 (talk) 21:58, 29 July 2009 (UTC)User:pjs012915

Pedro Vilarroig
Hi, it's Pedro Vilarroig. Please have a look to the article when you have a little time. I added some references and the dates of several press notes and radio broadcast (Appraisal, press notes and radio section). The ISBN of my books are now listed there too (the last book is too new to be in the ISBN index, I hope it will be rady in a little time). I added a paragraph, as you suggested, explaining the style as neutral as possible, avoiding personal opinions about myself. And look what a coincidence: you told me that I cannot talk about my childhood until a journalist had asked me about it. In August, the 9th in COPE radio station I was interviewed by a jourlalist and asked me about my childhood, so I considered I can put some lines about it in the biography (with a reference lik that is still active). I added one more appraisal about my first performance of my 2nd symphony that was performed last Saturday in San José (Costa Rica). I must say that the critic (Andrés Saenz) is a very harsh person that has no scruples about throwing stones to everything he doesn't like. For example, in this article there are a couple of severe comments about Haydn and a soprano that performed Mozart. If you don't understand this article in Spanish language I will try to translate it into English. Best. Pedro Vilarroig (talk) 0:41, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Composers and Classical Music ratings
Hi. I see you are busy with history. I don't know whether you have any time for music at the moment. We have four or five composers awaiting assessment (here), but more importantly I wanted to ask you about the Classical music project articles. Do we want to assess these in the future? Recently I've found that by altering a banner parameter I can make the project completely non-assessing (i.e. removing all existing ratings from view). I thought I might discuss this option with the project, but wanted to ask you about it first. Best. -- Klein zach  09:15, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll try to get to the accumulated composer reviews soon. The question of assessing CM articles is an interesting one.  Some people have appreciated the reviews I did of the composer articles; on the other hand, I observe that discussions on project talk pages tend to involve a relatively modest set of people, whose thoughts on ratings and assessment seem fairly well-known.  I can spend some time drafting some sort of assessment criteria for at least some categories of CM-related articles (e.g. compositions and lists of compositions), but I think actually applying the criteria requires some sort of scope -- a drive to actually improve the quality of a reasonably well-defined grouping of articles, for example -- and more people willing to do it.  Magic ♪piano 16:15, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, those are more or less my thoughts, i.e. that we should either do it properly or not at all. Perhaps, if you liked to produce some kind of proposal we could base the discussion around it? -- Klein zach  23:30, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I've now done a draft, but I'd like to have your comments before I launch it, see here. Thanks. -- Klein zach  07:14, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I would add words describing the broad categories of articles the project encompasses (compositions, performers/groups, performance spaces, etc), pointing out that each may need a different standard. I'll try to draft some sort of guideline for performers tomorrow.)  Magic ♪piano 20:19, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
 * What I was really recommending was that new projects be created for assessing particular categories (such as violinists or whatever). Are you in agreement with this or do you see it working in a different way? Some time ago I created a formal categories page which was the basis of the present banner set. -- Klein zach  23:55, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I think that's fine, but I think the proposal would benefit from clarity of language that the divergent nature of the things covered is one of the things that might motivate either subprojects or task forces.  Magic ♪piano 01:16, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
 * OK. I've revised it. Please let me know what you think. -- Klein zach  01:47, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
 * That looks better. I've started drafting guidelines for individual performers (which should be suitable for musicians, conductors, and so on) here.  Based on the Composer ratings, it's still a work in progress, but feel free to comment.  Magic ♪piano 02:13, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Your guidelines will be very useful in due course. They look good. Right now I'm hoping we can get a basic decision about how to proceed. I'll be grateful if you can take part. I'm anticipating some silly responses, so if we can have some intelligent ones that will be excellent! -- Klein zach  02:59, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

The new discussion is here. -- Klein zach  09:28, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Contemporary music project assessment
I've been working on a simplified assessment system for the Contemporary music project. I was intending to do this without bothering you, however one editor has questioned whether 'B' assessments are worth doing, and I wondered if you might like to give your view? The discussion is here. -- Klein zach  03:09, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Josef Tal
Dear Magicpiano,

I read your comments with great interest.

I appreciate your thorough analysis and constructive suggestions to correct and improve the article. I will try to follow your guidelines respectively (and respectfully).

Thanks for your serious & helpful work. It is the first time I encounter a review which is exact, objective, clear and sharp yet unbiased and unoffending. Chapeau!

May I discuss with you the proposed changes before inserting them into page? Etan J. Tal 20:21, 25 November 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Etan J. Tal (talk • contribs)


 * Feel free to discuss things (or ask questions) on the article talk page -- I will continue to watch it.  Magic ♪piano 20:54, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Beethoven's relatives

 * Articles for deletion/Johanna van Beethoven
 * Articles for deletion/Kaspar Anton Karl van Beethoven

Just to let you know that both articles have now been re-listed, with the request to clarify each editor's present position. --Jubilee♫ clipman 23:55, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Composers Project discussion
Hi. You may remember this discussion (that you actually started) about the scope of the Composers Project, see here. Anyway, It has resumed here. I don't know whether you would like to comment? -- Klein zach  01:42, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Mily Balakirev
I am consiering revamping this article with the aim of eventually submitting it for GAR. Much work has been done on it already since you reviewed it for Composers Project review, so if you have time, could you possibly re-review the article and give some suggestions on what further improvements could be made? Thanks very much. Jonyungk (talk) 17:13, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for looking over Balakirev once more. As far as I know, Balakirev never married or had any close personal relationships; without a good biography of him in English, it's impossible to say why this was so, except perhaps that he was basically hermitic. Hopefully, this would not be too great a stumbling block should the article get to GA review. Jonyungk (talk) 18:00, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I was wondering if English-language sources might be short on that sort of information. I suspect the lack of that info may not be much of an issue, but you might see if you can find a Russian-reading editor to see if something can be turned up in a Russian source.  Magic ♪piano 18:04, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Schubert
Thanks for the appreciation. ~Yes, I don't actually have Newbould's book at hand at this moment - read it a few months ago and now someone else's clawed it at the local public library. I'll return to it and check those refs but since it was already being used a good deal as a source in the article and the passages I referred to wouldn't be hard to find quickly from the index and the contents I resolved to put in a few points I remembered about his last illness etc. His discussion of that is quite in-depth. It's one of the best Schubert books I've ever seen, clear, open-minded and engaging and with a profound knowledge of the man and the entire age. Strausszek (talk) 13:00, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Tchaikovsky and the Belyayev circle
Thanks for rating this article a B&mdash;it's a nice acknowledgement of the work that has gone into it so far. What suggestions do you have for improvement? Jonyungk (talk) 18:23, 7 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I was just going through unassessed articles and scanned it; if you think it's in a state for a more thorough review, I can put it on the list.  Magic ♪piano 18:37, 7 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Go ahead and put it on the list. I've done everything I can for the article at the moment and could use additional feedback. Thanks! Jonyungk (talk) 18:51, 7 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks very much for looking over the article once more and giving your suggestions. I have incorporated the large quote in the Glazunov section into the text to remove the confusion you mentioned. Would you say the article is of high enough quality at this stage to submit to GAC? I'm not in a hurry to submit it as I already have Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov at FAC, but would eventually like to send it there. Thanks again for your help. Jonyungk (talk) 19:17, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

composer's project review - Louis Spohr
LOUIS SPOHR article - Life section There is only one footnote among many paragraphs. Looking thru the history, it seems that many Anons have added here and there but Editors MDCollins, Kanx1976, HIS33407district61, FeanorStar7, and Beannaithe are at least (hopefully) still around to add footnotes to this section where they contributed? I don't have access to the biographical books - I've been to the library today and have the latest edition of the New Grove entry on Spohr, and the article in the International Encyclopedia of Music and Musicians 11th edition - but can't correlate every line from these, nor would I want to edit what is most probably verifiable information from the references noted if they could simply be properly attributed. Any hope on you guys coming back and "finishing the job"? I'll note this on the user pages of the above. HammerFilmFan (talk) 23:10, 1 July 2011 (UTC) HammerFilmFan