Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Frédéric Chopin/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Ian Rose 05:17, 17 August 2014 (UTC).

Frédéric Chopin

 * Nominator(s): Smerus (talk) 17:54, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

This article is about the composer and pianist Frédéric Chopin. The subject is listed as a level 3 vital article; although the article has been subject to some alarums and excursions in the past it has now been stable for quite some while. The peer review has been supportive and constructive, and I am grateful to those who participated. Now that the suggestions of reviewers have been generally adopted, (and reasons offered in the few cases where they where not), I believe it to be at, or very close, to FA status. I look forward to comments. Thanks, - Smerus (talk) 17:54, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I've contributed a fair bit to this so I'm unwilling to assume the stance of a reviewer.♦ Dr. Blofeld  08:49, 9 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Support A very well researched and engaging article. All my comments were well addressed at the PR. --Stfg (talk) 18:22, 17 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Support: I, too, was active at the peer review stage, during which the article was pretty thoroughly worked over. A couple of final quibbles:


 * There are a few uncited statements at the ends of paragraphs. See, for example "Death and funeral", 2nd paragraph: "Later that morning, Solange's husband Clésinger made Chopin's death mask and a cast of his left hand." In the Music section the first "Overview" para is uncited, as is the last part of the final Overview paragraph. There are a few other instances; in some cases it may be more a case of adjusting the position of the citation rather than adding a new one.


 * A suggestion: short quotations, e.g. Liszt's remark in the "Franz Liszt" section, are best kept within the main prose, rather than as blockquotes. Short blockquotes give the  prose an unnecessarily fragmented appearance, especially when there are two close together, as in the "Technique and performance style" section.

These are small matters. I have no hesitation in supporting the article's promotion to FAC, subject to the usual source and image clearances. An excellent composer biography. Brianboulton (talk) 19:24, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks Brian. I think I have now dealt with the points you mention.--Smerus (talk) 08:04, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Support Comments. A fine article; I also commented at the peer review. Reading through again I see a couple of minor points:

All very minor points in a very impressive article. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:43, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
 * "Even in early childhood, Chopin was of slight build and prone to illnesses": perhaps "Chopin was of slight build, and even in early childhood was prone to illnesses"? I don't think his build should be in the scope of "even" here.
 * "It quickly became apparent that he was a child prodigy, and by the age of seven Fryderyk had begun giving public concerts, and in 1817 he composed two polonaises, in G minor and B-flat major": two consecutive "and" conjunctions in one sentence. I think a full stop after "prodigy" and then "By the age..." might be better.
 * On re-reading I realize that you don't mention whether he was raised speaking French; it's apparent later in the article that he could speak it, but preferred Polish. If he was raised to be bilingual perhaps that could be mentioned in either the "Childhood" or "Education" sections. Now dealt with 27.7.14.
 * "where, for the last time in his life, he met his parents": you have "met" three times in quick succession here, and in any case "met" has the wrong connotations for a visit to his parents. How about "where he spent time with his parents; it was the last time he would see them"?
 * I think Arthur Hedley should be identified when his opinion is given: "Musicologist Arthur Hedley". (I don't think this sort of attributive description is necessary everywhere -- for example, in the Polish heritage section, you introduce a paragraph with "Some modern commentators", which serves to characterize each of the writers you then quote; and in the Form and harmony section I think there is sufficient implication that the opinions are from musicologists or historians of music.) Now dealt with 27.7.14.
 * "But they also require a formidable playing technique": The "But" seems unnecessary to me.
 * Attributing an opinion to "Grove Music Online" in the text of the article seems odd -- wouldn't it be better to give the names of the authors of that article? E.g "musicologists Michałowski and Samson"?


 * Thanks for this. I have responded to many, but not yet all, of your comments in the article text. I'm now away for a few days, so intend to catch up on these and any other comments on my return.--Smerus (talk) 10:15, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I've struck the points you've dealt with and switched to support above; the two remaining points are very minor and it would not affect my support if you don't agree. It's great to see such an important article make it to this level of quality. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 10:57, 19 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Support. I had one minor query about the comprehensiveness of the literature consulted, but on second thoughts that's just nitpicking that wouldn't have stopped me from supporting anyway. Excellent article. And thank you, because it is an important one. --Mkativerata (talk) 04:00, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Comments by Gerda
Impressive, written with knowledge and enthiusiasm! Some minor points for consideration (I will not mention my major one again, it's on the article talk), and more may come up once I have more time:

Lead
 * "He gained and has maintained renown worldwide as one of the leading musicians of his era" seems needlessly complicated. I doubt that we can say "He maintained" of a dead person. No, this is perfectly OK English usage
 * "Chopin was born in what was then the Duchy of Warsaw, and grew up in Warsaw, which after 1815 became part of Congress Poland." Consider to just say "Chopin grew up in Warsaw." and leave the rest of politics to the article. We want to get to music! I believe this is necessary as there has been much discussion on precise description of his origins.
 * "During the last 18 years of his life, ..." - A reader who forgot his year of death may not realize that there is no break in the chronology. Now dealt with 27.7.14.
 * How about songs to Polish lyrics? I would not click "song" otherwise, thinking that I know what a song is. Now dealt with 27.7.14.
 * insurrection? - I didn't know the word, but you don't have to adjust your style to people limited in language who would profit from a you-know-what . This is perfectly OK English usage

Childhood


 * "Chopin was of slight build, and even in early childhood was prone to illnesses." - "even in early childhood"? how about something like "already in early childhood"? This is perfectly OK English usage

Education


 * "and on this instrument in May 1825 he performed his own improvisation" - long time until a verb appears, almost German This is perfectly OK English usage
 * "the Leipzig Allgemeine Musikalische Zeitung praised his "wealth of musical ideas"" - the paper certainly wrote not in English Gerda, this seems a quite superfluous comment - the quote is cited - we don't give every quotation in the orginal language - this is English WP, so it would be pointless to give the original German '
 * I was wondering if Gerda was referring to the fact that, as those are not the exact words but a translation, the quotes are unnecessary (i.e. the translation serves as paraphrasing). Just a thought. --Stfg (talk) 09:28, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
 * , if so do we have to somehow rework Chopin writing "It should be like dreaming in beautiful springtime – by moonlight",  and "O God! ... You are there, and yet you do not take vengeance!", or Fétis writing  "Here is a young man who ... taking no model, has found, if not a complete renewal of piano music, ... an abundance of original ideas of a kind to be found nowhere else ...", etc. etc. etc.? If you remove the quotation marks from "wealth of musical ideas", you make the phrase look like a rewording - actually it is a translation representing the exact words used (as are the Chopin and Fetis quotes I have cited in this comment and which are used in the article). The original text is "ein Reichtum musikalischer Ideen", exactly equivalent to the translation and not a paraphrase; and for this reason I believe it is best left as is.--Smerus (talk) 10:02, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
 * good point. Fair enough. --Stfg (talk) 10:36, 28 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Why "Piano Concerto no. 1? vs. No. 1 Now dealt with 27.7.14.

So far for now, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:45, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Travel ...


 * I am oldfashioned regarding imagelocation and dislike images left under a header. We don't yet know who the Radziwills are, and it's too small to show. Radziwill is linked immediately to the right of the picture, i.e. in the3 same paragraph  where the pic is located, but I have added a link in the picture caption for those who can't be bothered to read the text. Your own predilections for picture positioning (with which by the way I disagree) are not I think a criterion for FA.
 * He premieres the piano concerto, - do we know anything about the composition process? This article is about Chopin, not the detailed processes of composition of his works. I know of nothing particularly interesting to add here - in any case the concerto is one of his least original works, as the article mentions.

Paris
 * The image of Maria appears well before her mentioning in the text. I disagree; she is in the second para on the right of the picture, which starts within the picture area. To move the pic to the top of the para referring to her would involve disrupting the next section which would be contrary to FA criteria. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:24, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for taking care of my comments. I am sorry that I missed the PR, questions are just questions, they don't question the FA quality. I guess that the reactions of a non-native speaker might be of interest. - For the following, a simple "English" will tell me "This is perfectly OK English usage." - Image placement is not "my own" but as it was recommended until quite recently, and still makes sense to me. I will not repeat that for the images in "Music". All questions above are resolved but one:


 * Back to the newspaper: "the Leipzig Allgemeine Musikalische Zeitung praised his "wealth of musical ideas"" - the paper certainly wrote not in English, I would prefer it without a quote, "the Leipzig Allgemeine Musikalische Zeitung praised his wealth of musical ideas". , I disagree strongly with your preference here - see my comments re Sftg's note on this for my more detailed reasoning and justification.
 * accepted, I forgot that you might have trouble with copyvio ;)


 * In Music: Maurice Schlesinger and similar, - I would consider to link them again, for readers who jump there without reading the biography. Different readers have different interests. ''I have some sympathy with this, but then some other editor will complain about overlinking - I have had this problem before when articles are up for promotion. Safer to leave as is, perhaps? If there are any other editors with opinions on this, I would be glad to hear from them. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:48, 28 July 2014 (UTC)


 * I can see readers being interested just in music, and I have seen new linking in a major paragraph of longer FA articles, such as BWV 172 where the instruments are linked in the lead, the infobox and the scoring section. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:53, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
 * OK I will look through and link some of the more recherché characters.--Smerus (talk) 11:56, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
 * now done!--Smerus (talk) 12:37, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! Now Music:

Overview
 * I expect an overview, not first thing an image with a caption of one specific type of composition. Can that image go to where Polonaise is mentioned? We are now dealing with music, and here is a piece of music, so I think this is OK. If you have enormously strong feelings, I am happy to delete the pic. 
 * Don't delete! I would prefer it on the right, as an illustration rather than the first statement. GA


 * Do all readers assume that songs are part of chamber music, or could they be mentioned separately? Agree- done
 * If chamber music has a link, how about Bach and Italian opera also? Agree- done
 * "Much of what became his typical style of ornamentation ... is taken from singing. His melodic lines were increasingly reminiscent of the modes and features of the music of his native country, such as drones"- I am not happy with "is" vs. "were" but can't even describe why. Perhaps because you are not a native English speaker

Form and harmony
 * "The preludes, many of which are very brief, (some consisting of simple statements and developments of a single theme or figure), ..." can we drop the brackets? We could, but that would make the sentence as a whole less clear.

Form and harmony Polish heritage

Reception and influence
 * Bach is linked here, but not before in Music. Corrected
 * "A less fraught friendship was with Alkan, with whom he discussed elements of folk music, and who was deeply affected by Chopin's death." - first he, then Chopin, - rewording? I don't see any issue here-  this is a straightforward English sentence; 'with whom' and 'who' both clearly refer to Alkan. 
 * I would not exactly call it "straightforward" but it's clear, - just strange for me that "Chopin" first appears as a pronoun, later as the name. GA

I guess that several people and institutions will eventually get articles and then be linked. Thank you for what we have already! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:25, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

My points addressed, thank you! Support, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:03, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Image review

 * Captions that aren't complete sentences shouldn't end in periods
 * I found it once and removed it. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:32, 19 July 2014 (UTC)


 * File:Frederic_Chopin_photo.jpeg: what is the copyright status of the original unrestored image? Now dealt with 27.7.14.
 * File:CHopin_SIgnature.svg: bluntly, nothing on the image description page is right Now dealt with 27.7.14.
 * File:Mikołaj_Chopin.jpg: artist's date of death? Now dealt with 27.7.14.
 * File:Franz_Liszt_by_Herman_Biow-_1843.png: source link is dead, needs US PD tag Now dealt with 27.7.14.
 * File:Chopinamqsop53.jpg: possible to include a more specific source? 'Private collection' means just that, i.e. collection/collector not revealed to public.  This is a standard form of reference in academic works etc. where the owner does not wish to be made public.
 * Sound files should include licensing tag for original composition (all PD by now) as well as the performance Now dealt with 27.7.14.
 * File:Op_62-1ms.jpg needs US PD tag Now dealt with 27.7.14.
 * File:Pere-Lachaise_Chopin_grave.jpg: as France does not have freedom of panorama, we need to include a licensing tag for the monument itself as well as the photo. Now dealt with 27.7.14. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:58, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks and, I will deal with these on my return (see above).--Smerus (talk) 13:20, 19 July 2014 (UTC)


 * , and, I think I have now dealt with all outstanding comments (see notes in red following comments)--Smerus (talk) 21:17, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Sources review

 * Citations
 * Ref 4: The linked document is undefined, no source information. The citation should be properly formatted. Deleted this as I couldn't find satisfactory source information. 
 * Ref 20 and many others: you need to employ a consistent page range format. Compare 12, 20, 38, 48 and lots more. done: have reviewed all Zamoyski citations in this light. 
 * Ref 25: This would be better as a full citation, as with ref. 93 The information you mention was alreay in the text, but I have rewritten this to clarify.
 * Ref 34: This does not look like a reliable source, nor o I think citation to it is necessary Deleted this - following cite also covers this issue. 
 * Ref 92: In the bibliography this is "Zaluski, Iwo and Pamela" Done.
 * Ref 104: This is not a citation, its a direction to another WP article. The information on Chopin's illness needs to be cited, here, to a reliable source. I have deleted the WP article redirect, since it is already linked at the start of the paragraph. The citation at the end of the paragraph carries the relevant information.
 * Ref 112: What makes this source reliable? (Now mote 109). I think this is OK - it's the website of a well-known published series of handbooks, of which the webpages are extracts. I.e. I think an acceptable secondary source, as any serious guide book would be, for factual information of this sort (as opposed to speculation about characters, motives, etc.).
 * Ref 118: format (lacks "p.") Done.
 * Ref 120: Ditto Done.
 * Ref 131: The link is no longer working New cite, and revised text
 * Ref 161: Comment as for 25 Done.
 * Ref 170: Should be Atwood (unless all the other refs to this source are wrong) Done. and corrected article text as well.
 * Ref 186: Source does not support all the information cited to it, e.g. no mention of the Milan 1901 performance. Also, the writer of the source says "I tried to find more on the internet but could only come up with the information on Wikipedia, quoted in the first paragraph above". So I don't think this source qualifies as reliable. Sorted - I think this opera surely deserves an article of its own, if I can acquire enough info..


 * Bibliography
 * There is inconsistency in providing publisher locations Done (I think).
 * I could not find citations to the following sources listed:
 * Chopin: 19 most popular pieces
 * Chopin 1973
 * Chopin 1993
 * Eisler
 * Siepmann Removed all these.

Otherwise sources seem to be of appropriate quality. Brianboulton (talk) 22:35, 2 August 2014 (UTC)


 * , I believe I have now covered these issues. Best, --Smerus (talk) 15:24, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Good enough by me. Brianboulton (talk) 15:50, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Comments by Piotrus

 * Object.

Seeing as my recommendations back then regards adding red links and missing content from pl wiki were disregarded, I stopped my review of those two topics at the beginning of the "George Sand" section. I'd hope that they are given more serious attention this time. If they are sufficiently addressed, I'll resume my review. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 04:07, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
 * 1) As discussed at Talk:Frédéric_Chopin/Archive_12, I still believe that that the phrases French citizenship and French passport should be linked. The argument that those articles cover only 20th century development is irrelevant; they should and will eventually be expanded to discuss 19th century ones, and are valid links. Disagree: such links would be misleading. If the articles are rewritten as you predict  links can be made at that time/ 
 * 2) I also stand by my pre-GA comment that this article fails to adhere to WP:RED. To enumerate the problems:
 * polonaise in A-flat major is still not linked. Smerus argued that not all works of Chopin are notable. I disagree. Quoting from Notability policy for books: "The book's author is so historically significant that any of his or her written works may be considered notable." I think the same principle should apply for musical pieces, and for a composer of Chopin's stature, anything he composed should be blue or red linked. Another link missing would be in the sentence "he played the piano for the Duke and composed a march for him"; pl wiki identifies this as pl:Marsz wojskowy (Chopin). These and all other comments made in this section refer to a variety of non-crucial items for which there are no articles on English Wikipedia. Contrary to User:Piotrus's belief, it is not a condition of FA status that every person, noun, or work of art be given a link. If the articles Pitorus discusses are later created on Eng;ish WP, links can be given at the time. By the way, the blue link he gives at the start of this comment is to a disambiguation page: blue links are given in the article as appropriate to the actual polonaises referred to.
 * eolomelodicon may be notable
 * Emilia Chopin has an article on pl:Emilia Chopin and is probably notable, here's a long English bio: See above
 * 1) Back in the pre-GA review I've identified a number of factoids from pl wiki that should be added here. I was not impressed back then when Smerus dismissed them saying that most of them are trivial. I'll repeat some of them here: Factoids I agree is the right word
 * one of his teachers in his youth was Wilhelm Würfel See above: also my note at the foot of these comments.
 * according to pl wiki, 1818 saw the first significant review of him, published in pl:Pamiętnik Warszawski (1815-1823). This is referenced on pl wiki to "Kazimierz Wierzyński: Życie Chopina. Białystok: Krajowa Agencja Wydawnicza, 1990, p. 33. ISBN 83-03-03117-1." See above
 * "Nasze Przebiegi... Pl wiki notes that a work of Julian Ursyn Niemcewicz (unnamed there) was actually a critique of a society, instead of a praise for Chopin. It was also inspired by an event/concert that drew many notable individuals, and did contribute to Ch.'s popularity. I think we should discuss this further, with the stress not on JUN's work but on the original event itself. See above
 * " their spoofing of the Warsaw newspapers" - pl wiki identifies the newspaper as Kurier Warszawski See above
 * "In September 1828 Chopin, while still a student, visited Berlin ". According to pl wiki, he already went to Berlin in 1826, which our article does not mention. Is that prior trip trivial while this one is less so? See above
 * Pl wiki notes that he spent his last three days in Poland in Kalisz. Earlier, on 2 November, the date of his leaving Warsaw, he was celebrated by his friends, including his teacher Elsner, who composed a cantata for his pupil. This is hardly a trivia. See above
 * The November Uprising inspired the Étude Op. 10, No. 12 (Chopin). This is often asserted, but as mentioned in he article there is no evidence for this assertion.
 * Those sources are not that difficult to find: seems quite sufficient, but there are more: {{cite book|author=Carl Turco|title=Life Is Gray: A Story of Love, Pain, War and the Enduring Human Spirit|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=bQ4Ws0tpS4sC&pg=PA203|date=1 October 2010|publisher=Carl Turco|isbn=978-0-7414-6200-8|pages=203–}quote=It seems well established that No. 12 of Opus 10, “ The Revolutionary Etude,” was written under the stress of emotion caused by the news of the taking of Warsaw by the Russians, which took place in September 1831}} Here's a Polish source: . Here's another one ("Tymczasem Etiuda rewolucyjna powstała dopiero jesienią 1831 r. pod wpływem wiadomości o upadku Powstania Listopadowego."  may be a good page to read, but Google only gives me snippets. --[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]&#124; reply here  08:27, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
 * according to pl wiki, while in Paris he lived at Rue de la Chaussée-d'Antin See above
 * according to pl wiki, while in Paris he had notable pupils (royalty or at least high nobility as well as notable musicians; "princesses de Noailles, de Chimay, de Beauvau, baroness  Rothschild, countesses Peruzzi, Potocka. Future musicioans Karolina Hartmann, Karol Filtsch, and his friend Adolf Gutmann. See main comment above
 * What User:Piotrus is saying is that he would have written the article differently. But he does not demonstrate that any of his points disqualify the article for FA status, which is a different matter. Furthermore he refers to a number of articles on Polish WP: I don't have fluent Polish, nor I suspect do most readers of Engish WP. More importantly for FA status, I have no way of assessing the reliability or otherwise of these articles or of their Polish sources, a key issue. Piotrus notes correctly that he has already raised many of these issues at GA review and elsewhere, when they did not meet with support from other editors. Some are without evidence (e.g. that the so-called 'Revolutionary etude' was inspired by the Warsaw rising). I thought about including Würfel, but whilst it is true that he knew the family, he did not, as the English WP article says, teach Chopin from 1823-6, because he returned to Prague in 1824; the source given here (Slonimsky) is wrong, and I find no reliable source suggesting that he had significant influence on Chopin. I do not see that any of the issues Piotrus has raised either controverts the tenor of the present article or adds to it anything of any significant value. I am afraid therefore that I continue to disagree with him.--Smerus (talk) 07:48, 5 August 2014 (UTC)


 * The article as written fails to be comprehensive; while I am open to discussion of individual points I raise, a blatant dismissal of all of them is not helpful. And the fact that Smerus disregarded my comments before doesn't make me feel better about it now, neither. With regards to MoS, fails to follow WP:RED, which the last time I checked is an accepted editing guideline and endorsed by MoS. Seeing as Smerus is dismissing my comments along the lines of "I don't want to expand the article further" and "I chose not to follow WP:RED", I sadly have to stand by my oppose. Speaking as a representative of WikiProject Poland, and in my view as an author of thousands of Polish related articles, this one is not ready to join a dozen or so other Polish topics that are featured. I applaud Smerus on getting this to a high quality standard (the article is without doubt much better than it was a year or so before he started working on it), but I don't believe your refusal to compromise on the issues I raise makes this work eligible for Featured status. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 08:08, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
 * "Articles should not have red links to topics that are not likely to have an article." (WP:RED). The onus therefore falls on Piotrus, if his objections are to be valid, to demonstrate the likelihood of articles on his factoids (his word). I happen to think it is is Piotrus who is unamenable to compromise, but I will be glad to see the opinions of others. --Smerus (talk) 08:43, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

OK, I'll bite. In general, I don't think it's helpful to say "according to pl wiki ...". There is no reason why an article in one wiki need follow an article in another wiki, and most of us won't be able to read Polish. Also, what is interesting to readers in one country is not necessarily of interest to those in another. The case for inclusion or exclusion of something should be made on its own merit, not on precedent. Turning to specific points: Regards, --Stfg (talk) 10:04, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
 * The concepts French citizenship and French passport are clear enough. Wikilinks to them wouldn't aid understanding of the present article, so imo they shouldn't be linked.
 * Potential redlinks need to be considered on a case-by-case basis, not generically. I don't see the article failing to conform to WP:RED generically.
 * "1818 saw the first significant review of him ...": I have no strong view.
 * "Nasze Przebiegi...": I suggest taking this to the article talk page. This is a case where things suitable for pl.wiki may be unsuitable for en.wiki, since most of us can't read that source and thus cannot assess its significance.
 * "identifies the newspaper as Kurier Warszawski": ^F text search doesn't find where it says that, but it's in the second paragraph of the Pierwsze sukcesy section. Like the rest of that section, it's uncited, so we should not follow this.
 * 1826 visit to Berlin: our article says what happened of interest during the 1828 visit. pl.wiki's merely states that an 1826 visit occurred, not what happened, and imo this isn't enough to merit inclusion.
 * "spent his last three days in Poland in Kalisz. Earlier, on 2 November, the date of his leaving Warsaw, he was celebrated by his friends, including his teacher Elsner, who composed a cantata for his pupil": imo this is trivia; ymmv of course.
 * November uprising inspiring op10#12: we need to be careful here, because sources less than the best are prone to propagating urban myths. Ashton Jonson is published by DOGMA, about which I can discover nothing. The front material of the book mentions www.dogma.de, which is now something completely different (a space probe or something). The Turco is self-published through Infinity Publishing.com and is a work of fiction, therefore not RS. I don't have the language skills to evaluate the Polish sources.
 * lived at Rue de la Chaussée-d'Antin: trivia
 * list of pupils: several of his pupils are already mentioned in the article because of something relevant that they did. I don't see the point of a vanilla list of pupils, even notable ones, unless they contributed something to music history themselves later on. Princesses and countesses aren't interesting just because they are high society. Gutmann is already mentioned as a pupil. We don't have articles about Karolina Hartmann and Karol Filtsch, and I don't know whether they are notable or not. Further additions could be proposed on a case-by-case basis. This could be done at any time on the talk page, and imo it should not hold up the FAC.
 * Thanks Stfg I note all your points, especially the final one!--Smerus (talk) 11:09, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
 * PS as regards the so-called 'Revolutionary' etude - it was never given this name by Chopin and he never referred to it as such. I know of no musicological work or modern seriously researched respected biography which gives any reason for stating it was connected with the Uprising. I do not think WP should spread such stories without cast-iron evidence. And that evidence should be in English, so that English WP readers can check it (per WP:V).--Smerus (talk) 11:27, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
 * PPS As regards "Nasze Przebiegi"... whatever this event signified, or signifies, to Poles is not relevant to this article, only that it was the occasion of a (cited) comment on Chopin by Niemciewicz.--Smerus (talk) 12:23, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
 * My two cents: if something is now a red link but seems good for improving Chopin's article, make it blue. That could be a stub first, which eases the connection to the Polish article for those who can read it. I don't know what FA criteria think of ill, example Emilia Chopin, which turns automatically to a simple blue link once there's an article in English. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:34, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks Gerda . In principle I do not disagree with this approach. It's more that none of Piotrus's suggestions seem to me worthy of an article now or in the future, nor are any of them significant in the context of Chopin's life and career. A WP article is not a full-length biography or study. In fact at the GA stage, I actually wrote a number of articles on English WP at Piotrus's suggestion  - perhaps he fails to recall this - including among others Tytus Woyciechowski, Jan Białobłocki, Jan Matuszyński and Société historique et littéraire polonaise - so that they could have blue links. They seemed to me to be interesting, and relevant enough to justify the work. The other topics listed by Piotrus in this review do not seem to me to have any great interest or relevance as regards Chopin. E.g. Emilia Chopin played no part in his life after childhood, and would scarcely merit an article even in Polish WP were it not for the fact that she was Fryderyk's sister - relationship, as you know, is not a justification for WP:NOTABLE. So I think it appropriate  - regardless of FA considerations  - to leave matters as they stand rather than to litter the article with red links which neither I, nor apparently anyone else, has a yen to turn blue. If it is a bar to FA status that everything potentially blue-linkable is not blue- (or red-) linked, then I think very few if any articles would ever get FA status. Most relevantly, nothing in Featured article criteria requires this, and it is therefore not a valid reason in itself for objecting to FA status. If Piotrus feels so strongly about his topics then of course as long as he can justify WP:NOTABLE he is free to write the articles himself and insert blue-links.--Smerus (talk) 11:09, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, agree. I should have said more clearly that I was addressing Piotrus when I said "make it blue". I think that a sister, fiancée, dedicatée deserves an article if it sheds light on aspects of a person but is too much to be included in the person's article, but agree there is not much about Emilia even in Polish, different from Ottla Kafka, Felice Bauer and Giulietta Guicciardi, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:59, 5 August 2014 (UTC)


 * I think it's a good idea to create blue links when possible, but that should not stop us from creating red links. I've stubbed Emilia Chopin, whose notability is indeed borderline, and you are welcome to take it to AfD with no prejudice from me. Nonetheless, I do think that this article is under-red linked - I am not convinced that any piece of Chopin's music is non-notable, for example, and I'd still like to see some of the facts I listed above added to the article. I'll leave this to others to consider, and if the consensus is that my recommendations are not necessary, so be it. Once again, I do applaud Smerus on great work getting this so far - please remember that reviewers prime job is to nitpick :) Cheers, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 05:10, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
 * , many thanks for stubbing Emilia, I certainly won't take it to AfD! I understand where you are coming from, but, reinforced by the comments from Stfg and Gerda above, I believe I can defend the charge that the article as at present 'fails to be comprehensive'. The issues which you raise may be appropriate for a detailed academic study of Chopin (and in particular, for some of them, maybe a Polish one) but they do not feature in e.g. Grove or Britannica amongst leading English references, or in any of the other sources I have to hand. For myself I am happy that the article is comprehensive to the level of GA, and I am glad that other editors contributing to this discussion agree. That of course doesn't mean it can never be developed or improved, as you have demonstrated with Emilia, and I have just done by creating Chopin (opera) for a bluelink.--Smerus (talk) 06:45, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I won't be taking it to AfD either, and would !vote Keep if anyone did. It's well enough sourced to meet GNG. Although notability isn't inherited, I think the two literary efforts mentioned in the article are enough to make her independently notable. Thanks Piotrus. --Stfg (talk) 08:25, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Stubbing and red-link discussion

 * In related topic, I looked at pl wiki Chopin's category. I thought about stubbing pl:Tekla Justyna Chopin but I have doubts about her notability, so I won't even suggest red linking her for now. I think I'll try to DYK pl:Listy Fryderyka Chopina do Delfiny Potockiej, it's a nice story through perhaps not even something we have to link from the main Chopin's article. pl:Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina should be mentioned in the article if it isn't already (it's a major institution) and should be easily stubbable with English sources. pl:Rok Chopinowski probably is worth mentioning through English sources may be fewer; it is however interesting enough it should be there (probably with the rest of tributes and such). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 14:04, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
 * The Institute is mentioned in the article, and I will have a go at stubbing it.--Smerus (talk) 14:11, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Started.--Smerus (talk) 16:36, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Since a bone of contention seems to be redlinks, has anyone considered using ill like in the current nomination Departures? It leaves a redlink, with a blue link to a foreign-language article on the topic (assuming there is one), then erases said foreign-language link once an article has been created here. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:50, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
 * See Gerda's comment above (the one beginning "My two cents"). --Stfg (talk) 09:33, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Alright. Curly Turkey just showed it to me a couple months ago and I've fallen in love with it. I wouldn't consider redlinks part of the FA criteria, though. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:40, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Comments from Dank

 * As always, feel free to revert my copyediting.


 * "Two Polish friends in Paris were also to play important roles in Chopin's life there. His fellow student ...": The first sentence acts like a topic sentence for the next three sentences. I usually insert a paragraph break before such a sentence; any objections? There are other ways to handle it, if you object to short paragraphs (this would make the previous paragraph two sentences long). - Dank (push to talk)
 * "Alkan's teacher Zimmermann": There's a probably a style guideline somewhere that advises against giving the last name only at first occurrence (unless they were known that way, and he wasn't, judging from the lead of the given link).
 * "soon found success with publishers, and in 1833 he contracted with Maurice Schlesinger, who arranged for it to be published also in Germany and England": I'm thinking maybe you meant "with local publishers", which would make that "also" more natural. N'est-ce pas? - Dank (push to talk) 19:32, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * "In the winter of 1844/5 ... continued to deteriorate, particularly from 1845 onwards": Not taking a position, but copyeditors are going to have various problems here. WP:SEASON suggests not saying "winter" if you don't have to, though it's not a big deal if establishing the time frame isn't important. (You may want to check for "winter" and "summer" throughout with this in mind.) If you do go with "winter", I'd personally go with 1845 rather than 1844/5. And "particularly from 1845 onwards" is a little jarring because it implies we're at some point in the narrative earlier than 1845, which doesn't seem right. Maybe "from this time onwards".
 * "With this decline": Not taking a position here either. These are the first words of the section, and some don't like pronouns in one section that refer to nouns in the previous ones; others think that "With his decline in health" would be a little redundant with the previous section.
 * "In late October 1848, while staying at 10 Warriston Crescent in Edinburgh with the Polish physician Adam Łyszczyński": (I took a couple of commas out and rearranged ... 4 commas before the main clause is usually too many.) If Łyszczyński didn't live at 10 Warriston Crescent, then move him into the main clause. - Dank (push to talk) 20:21, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * "What in the hands of others was elegant embellishment, in his hands became a colourful wreath of flowers.": 100 years ago, the word "elegant" meant something closer to "fussy, inelegant", so possibly this quote will give the reader the wrong idea. I don't know when the quote dates from.
 * "(See "Bibliography" below for some of these.)": An alternative, if you like, is to link to the section you want people to see.


 * Support on prose per standard disclaimer. These are my edits. Highly engaging, with just the right tone. - Dank (push to talk) 21:08, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Many thanks for these helpful comments. I believe I have now resolved them all, except for Hiller's use of 'elegant'. Schlesinger required a bit more explanation to deal with your point, which I have supplied. Łyszczyński did live at that address, so I have left that sentence as it stands. I also rewrote part of para 2 of 'Travel and domestic success' as your coyedit of the comma placement there revealed, per User:Stfg, an inadequacy in the citation. As regards Hiller, the citation is from the musicologist Jonathan Bellman - Hiller would have been writing some time in the third quarter of the 19th century. Your point about the implications of 'elegant' is a nice one - in the nineteenth century use of 'nice' :-) - but as we don't have access to the original German (in which itself 'elegant' may or may not have had dismissive overtones) I think we had better leave the quote as it is rather than second-guess. Best, --Smerus (talk) 10:27, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
 * All the changes in response to my comments look great. We've all done a fine job here, notably Brian and Mike above, Stfg at the PR, and you and Blofeld ... kudos. - Dank (push to talk) 14:38, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Support – I am nonplussed that I have failed until this very hour to spot the progress of the article to the threshold of FA. I reviewed it at GAN and commented at the time that it had FA written all over it. The page is still finer now than it was then, and for what it's worth at this late stage I add my unreserved support. This is just the sort of front page article to enhance Wikipedia's standing. Marvellous stuff.  Tim riley  talk    17:05, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Closing comment -- Although there's an outstanding objection, I think enough discussion has taken place and there's been plenty of time for other reviewers to consider the merits of those comments. Taking that into account, and after discussing with fellow coord Graham, I'm going to promote this. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:14, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Ian Rose (talk) 05:17, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.