Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Georges Bizet/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 Ucucha 15:34, 28 October 2011.

Georges Bizet

 * Nominator(s): Brianboulton (talk) 21:11, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

The French composer Georges Bizet died at 36, a few weeks after the premiere of his last major work, Carmen. He had no idea it would become one of the best-known and most successful works in operatic history. He thought that it had flopped, one more failure in a career marked by frustration and disappointment. He had been a prize-winning student for whom a brilliant career was confidently predicted – but he couldn't pierce the conservatism of the French music establishment, who thought he was like Wagner. Or they found other reasons for not performing his music. Had he lived only a little longer he would have known success at last, but alas!....Peer-reviewed here, with exemplary diligence. Brianboulton (talk) 21:11, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Support - I followed the peer review and it is exemplary. I am continually humbled by the quality of Brian's writing. No issues were revealed by Copyscape searches. Graham Colm (talk) 21:44, 23 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the support and the most generous comment. Brianboulton (talk) 11:49, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Source review - spotchecks not done. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:10, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Use a consistent format for ranges - for example, "260–6 and 270–71"
 * Why not include both authors for Grout, as you do for Warrack and West?
 * Check formatting of Dean 1980 title
 * Check for minor inconsistencies like doubled periods
 * Be consistent in how editions are notated
 * "J.M. Dent and Sons" or "J.M. Dent & Sons"? Nikkimaria (talk) 22:10, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't understand your comment re Grout, above. Otherwise I have made the necessary fixes; thanks for your review. Brianboulton (talk) 11:30, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * "Grout, Donald Jay; Pelisca, Claude V" is represented in shortened citations (ex. FN 125) as simply "Grout", whereas "Warrack, John; West, Ewan" is represented as "Warrack and West" (FN 129). Nikkimaria (talk) 13:29, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Warrack and West are indivisible as the authors/compliers of the Oxford Companion. Palisca (my typo, sorry) did not help write Grout's text; so far as I can judge from the preface, he provided the music examples. But as this is too complicated to explain, I've added him to the short citation. Brianboulton (talk) 16:22, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Support Had my say at the peer review just a few days ago. Eminently worthy.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:00, 23 October 2011 (UTC).


 * Thanks for PR comments and support. Brianboulton (talk) 11:49, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Support: I likewise had my say at peer review and see no obstacle to promotion. Finetooth (talk) 00:25, 24 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Many thanks. Brianboulton (talk) 11:49, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Image review: Images are verified to be in the public domain or appropriately licensed. Jappalang (talk) 00:54, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Support: I consider the issues I raised at its peer review to be resolved. This is an well-written and comprehensive article on Carmen's author (confessing my ignorance, I heard about the opera, but not its author before reading this article). Jappalang (talk) 00:54, 24 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your help with images and text. Brianboulton (talk) 11:49, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Support: I too engaged in the peer review and my few minor queries were dealt with there to my complete satisfaction. French music of the 19th century is one of my own specialist areas, and I am filled with admiration (not to say envy) at the seemingly effortless way this comprehensive and balanced article is put together. It is first-rate, and is a credit to its nominator and to Wikipedia. Clearly meets all FA criteria, in my judgment. Tim riley (talk) 14:26, 24 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much. Regrettably, it is not "effortless", and would be even more difficult without the help of diligent peer reviewers who have done much to raise the quality of the article. Brianboulton (talk) 11:49, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Support Paragraph 2 even inspired my womenfolk to compose a limerick beginning There was a young lady from Perth...  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  16:18, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much. Can we have the other four lines? My talkpage, if unsuitable for sensitive ears (Sandy etc). Brianboulton (talk) 17:13, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Whaaaaaa ????? I accept limericks in place of chocolate these days.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 02:06, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Support—My concerns were addressed. Thank you. Regards, RJH (talk) 20:46, 25 October 2011 (UTC) Comment —A very nice work. I did link a few musical jargon terms and added a couple of commas, but overall it is in an excellent state and is an enjoyable read. However, there are a few minor points that I would like to see checked: Regards, RJH (talk) 16:21, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Why the hyphen in "16th–century"?
 * The hyphen is required when the term is used as an adjective: "16th-cetury palace"
 * Okay, that must be a British English convention.
 * Non-UK readers may not understand the reference to: "presuppose Blackpool pier". A note of clarification may be beneficial.
 * Maybe even some UK readers will struggle with it . I have shortened the quote, and removed references to Blackpool pier
 * In the references, there are "Dean (1965), ...", "Dean (1980), ..." and "Dean, pp. 754–55". Can the latter be disamgibuated?
 * Fixed
 * Consider using sfn, or one of the variants, to link all of the book citations.
 * Sfn isn't my preference for inline citations. It's a question of personal choice.
 * Okay.
 * There is no space between the periods and the OCLCs: ".OCLC"
 * Fixed
 * There are some linked references with no access date, while others have such.
 * Access dates are not necessary when the online links are to print sources, e.g. The Guardian, The Gramophone, The Music Quarterly, etc, though I know some people like to add them
 * Thank you for your review and useful comments. Brianboulton (talk) 17:13, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Support based on the comments below. Carcharoth (talk) 00:43, 26 October 2011 (UTC) I may make more comments later, when I read through it again, but I had to point out the amount of improvement achieved here in a relatively short period of time. I wish the editing history of all articles at FAC was this easy to survey. Carcharoth (talk) 00:43, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Support by Ruhrfisch. Having read the limerick on Brian's talk page, I then readthe article and agree it is eminently worthy of FA status. I have a few quibbles which do not detract from my support.
 * solfège is linked twice in the article
 * I did not quite understand this sentence The boy was brought up to believe that he was Adolphe Bizet's child; only at Reiter's death in 1913 did she reveal her son's true paternity.[42] Did she reveal his paternity in a will? On her deathbed? Perhaps something like ''The boy was brought up to believe that he was Adolphe Bizet's child; Reiter only revealed her son's paternity in 1913, on her deathbed.[42]
 * In the US at least, the opera is sometimes known as The Pearl Fishers - would it make sense to give this translation of the title as well?
 * Very nicely done, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 23:09, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I've done the minor fixes per your suggestions. There are quite a few French titles in the article; if I translated Les pecheurs to English, would readers expect all the French titles to be translated? That would, in my view, break the prose flow with constant paranthetical interruptions. So basically I am using the links. Though I guess that anyone even half familiar with "The Pearl Fishers" would readily recognise Les pecheurs de perles. Thank you for your support and comments. Brianboulton (talk) 08:54, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Even my atrocious French was sufficient to figure out The Pearl Fishers, so I am OK with not translating it. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 23:44, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
 * The writing is excellent and engaging.
 * The sources used appear to be exactly what is needed.
 * Brianboulton's first edit to this article was on 27 September 2011, with the most recent edit being on 26 October 2011 (i.e. one month). In that period, he made 223 edits (the next highest number of edits in the entire article history was 58, and the next highest 17). When Brian started editing the article, it looked like this and it now looks like this. That is extremely impressive (though I should mention that several other editors have been helping as well).
 * These are kind words indeed. I'd better clarify that although my first edit to this article was 27 September, I had been working in my sandboxes before then, and of course the research and reading goes back a lot futher, so it can't be considered as one months' work. And you are right to point to the very helpful contributions of other editors. Brianboulton (talk) 08:54, 26 October 2011 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.