Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Carl Nielsen works/archive1


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

The list was archived by SchroCat 12:19, 28 September 2015.

Carl Nielsen works

 * Nominator(s): Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:52, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I think it's a comprehensive and practical list of an important composer's. If you don't agree please tell me gently because it's my first nom for FL. The list is was created based on template Classical works row which Alakzi helped to imake work, and was filled mostly by Ipigott who knows the composer's work. Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:52, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

I realize - looking at the other nominations - that it might be a good idea to move the article to a clumsy List of compositions by Carl Nielsen. Please discuss but don't move today while the article is still on the Main page as I write this. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:18, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm a complete layman when it comes to classical music so feel free to correct me. Cowlibob (talk) 20:21, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Comments by Cowlibob
 * The lead is very short and is just a description of how the table is set out which is better just before the table where a similar paragraph already exists. I wonder if it would be better to simply bring up the history section and make it the lead.
 * This new "history" lead could be expanded to highlight important compositions and perhaps show a chronological transition of how his compositions changed over time. Did he start of doing certain genres and move into others? That sort of thing would make the lead engaging.
 * I find the table hard to follow in what order is it set out?
 * Some of the table entries don't seem to be referenced.
 * Simpson 1952, Lawson don't seem to be used to cite anything in the list.
 * Translation column is not complete.


 * A few replies:
 * If a knowledgable person could write about his development, great, but isn't that covered in the composer's article?
 * It's set out by listing his most famous compositions first, then by genre, but you can arrange it by all other keys, - how is it hard?
 * The whole tabe - without saying it every time to avoid clutter - is referenced to the CNW site, for most rows the specific link to a work is in the last column.
 * Simpson ref covers the FS numbers, - should that be explained?
 * Translation is given only when the common name or part of it are Danish, again to avoid clutter, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:34, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the clarifications. Since we have to my knowledge no FLs of works by composers, this would be the first of its kind. I thought bibliographies would be a good list type to compare to such as Arthur Conan Doyle bibliography, List of works by Georgette Heyer which do feature biographical elements which tell a story (introducing the person and then taking us through the important works).
 * If it is all cited to CNW, it would be good if the last column is full then the reader could read across from each composition and see a citation to it in the same row.
 * So the order is by most famous compositions first. I have not seen a table ordered that way, usually it is chronological, alphabetical or split by genre. I would like others input on it. Cowlibob (talk) 11:54, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Last first: it is by genre, just that - on request by Ipigott - two genres in which he excelled come first, then the normal order (which has stage works first which he did but not so successfully. If you sort by genre, you get the normal order, I probably said that already). The links of the genres take a reader to the section in question. The table was made because so far we had three - one by genre, one by date, one by opus number, - and each time you changed an item you had possibly to change it three times. No more time right now. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:07, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Ah okay so it is by genre, just with a bit of tweaking. Thanks again for clarification. Cowlibob (talk) 12:17, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Comments Firstly, welcome to FLC, it's nice to see you here. I think that this article still has quite a lot of work to do to get up to FL standard. Here are some of my thoughts: I think this article still needs a lot of work doing to it, and I wish all participating editors the best of luck in improving it. It might be work running it through WP:Peer review first. Thanks, A Thousand Doors (talk &#124; contribs) 21:04, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
 * We no longer normally begin FLs with "This is a list of..." or "This table is a...". Instead, the opening needs to tell the reader about who Carl Nielsen was, and what kind of works he produced. While this information may be available at Carl Nielsen, Summary style says that each article on Wikipedia must be able to stand alone as a self-contained unit – for that reason, I would expect this article to go into a bit more detail about the composer himself.
 * To honest, I'd recommend getting rid of the first paragraph entirely, and having what's in the History section as the lead instead. I don't remember ever seeing a FL where the sortability of the table was noted, and it would be confusing if one was reading this article on a screen reader, for example, or if it had been copied into a Wikipedia-Book, where the table would obviously not be sortable at all.
 * The History section needs to flow better than it currently does. At the moment it's just four short disjointed paragraphs, two of which are only one sentence long each. This is an article that's covering nearly six decades' of a man's work – I would expect there to be more than just 200 words on the subject. At the very least, it need to be two or three times longer. What sort of things do other reliable source say about Nielsen's compositions? What sort of things do Lawson and Simpson say about Nielsen's works in their books?
 * I don't know much about Neilsen, and I was still left with questions after reading this article, which makes me suspect that comprehensiveness is not as high as it needs to be. Who or what influenced him? Which of his works were best received? Were there any works where he tried something different? Although we don't have any FLs specifically about classical music compositions, you may want to seek inspiration from FLs on similar subjects, such as (for example) List of works by Dorothy L. Sayers, List of works by Sharpe and Paley, List of literary works published in Asia Raja or List of works by E. W. Hornung. On that subject...
 * "Carl Nielsen works" suggests to me that this is going to be a prose-heavy article specifically about Carl Nielsen's work. As it stands, however, it's actually a list of Carl Nielsen's work. For that reason, I'd recommend moving this article to something like, say, List of works by Carl Nielsen.
 * "Table of Compositions" -> "Compositions"
 * Again, it's not necessary to discuss how the table is sortable.
 * As Cowlibob says, the initial sorting of table is not very intuitive. Having them first sort chronologically seems most logical.
 * It might be worth using the Abbr template for some of the abbreviations in this article, e.g.  and
 * "Time" -> "Year(s)"
 * Ved en ung Kunstners Baare is listed twice.
 * Several works don't have CNW numbers. Any reason why not?
 * Viser og Vers af J. P. Jacobsen doesn't have a year.
 * Four citations is far, far fewer than I would expect to see in a FL.


 * – SchroCat (talk) 12:34, 28 September 2015 (UTC)


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