Wikipedia:Peer review/Gustav Mahler/archive1

Gustav Mahler
Did this in a day's work using a couple of references. This is my first major overhaul of a WP article, so I'd like to get some feedback and see how I did; I tried to follow the guidelines for a good article as much as I could. Comments and thoughts would be appreciated. Thanks! TheProject 05:25, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Looks good, overall. If anything he made is online (it should be public domain since he died in 1911), adding it as samples to external links would be good. Try incorporating material from see also (Category:Compositions by Gustav Mahler) into main article. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 20:40, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, I can't find any sheet music at the sheet music archive. I'm not familiar with where to find OGG files of music, either -- can someone give me some pointers? I notice there are generally only OGGs of well-known works. Are the OGG files found on composer/works pages made by WP users, or released by independent artists, or what? Assistance is gratefully appreciated. (It is my understanding that MP3s are a copyvio, is this correct?) TheProject 22:30, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * It is possible to make .ogg files from digital recordings, as long as they are less than 30 seconds in length they can be used in Wikipedia under the provision of fair use. They're not absolutley necessary but they do enhance an article. Otherwise the article looks very good.--nixie 02:27, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Generally speaking, it is very good. If at all possible, a further exploration of his legacy would be helpful. Your section on "Works" is particularly good. 06:04, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * There are certain elements of POV that I can see creeping into the article, especially in ways that romanticize the composer's persona. Some of the worst examples:
 * Choosing clarity over a mass orgy of sound, he never left the principle of tonality
 * This led to tensions between Mahler and his orchestras, even as those tentions produced finer performances
 * Keenly aware of the colourations of the orchestra, the composer filled his symphonies with flowing melodies and expressive harmonies, achieving bright tonal qualities using the clarity of his melodic lines.
 * There are also some passages that use unnecessarily flowery or colorful language Here are some examples:
 * he had taught the public to revere the works of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, Ludwig van Beethoven, and Christoph Willibald Gluck
 * focuses on increasing severity of expression, including the "Tragic" symphony, whose hammer blows shocked Viennese audiences and inspired other composers.
 * his works won over an audience hungry for the next wave of musical exploration.
 * Overall, the article could use a bit more subsectioning. The "biography" section is by no means too long, but it should be broken down into two or three sections.  Same goes for the "Music" section, which could use a little organization in general.  There should be more discussion of his legacy, as mentioned above.  In particular, his effect on other composers needs some further explanation.  How did he affect Schönberg, Berg, and Webern?  Alos, when was the first complete set of symphony recordings done?



I'm by no means a Mahler expert - I certainly don't know enough to contribute many facts here - and this article seems to me a grand start; I learnt a lot. However, he's a major figure without doubt and I think the article needs to be longer, with more details. A few comments follow, all meant to be positive; there are some grammar/style preferences which I won't mention as they're easily fixed - the content is the hard bit! And also I recognise that TheProject inherited some content from the previous versions of the article! Introductory paragraph: I don't think the length of one of his symphonies and opinion about what represents the "peak" of his vocal writing (whatever that means) are significant enough; I think the intro should be a potted version of the whole article (perhaps a para about his life, one about his music and legacy). I think his whole biography could be expanded somewhat (some different subheadings, maybe, of a few paragraphs each). There seem to be several chunks of his life missing. I'd like to see more details of his early life: was there music in his family? did Mahler actually study with Bruckner at Vienna Uni? did he study with anyone else of note? did he major in composition or conducting? Was he single-handedly responsible for the change of public taste in opera in Vienna (how did he educate the public?)? The first symphony mentioned in the biography is no. 4 - where do the first three fit? This is discussed a bit in the "Music" section ("divided into three periods"). Was expediency really the main reason for his conversion? - it's such an important factor (isn't it what led him to set Veni Creator Spiritus in Symphony No. 8?) that I think this deserves some expansion. I'd like to be given some examples of the "stubborn obstinacy" mentioned. What made the anti-semitic attacks of 1907 more unbearable than other attacks (if that can be done without repeating the attacks on Wikipedia)? A little more detail about his time in the USA would be nice. Did Alma Mahler survive him (I know she had two more notable husbands - Gropius and Werfel - subsequently to her marriage to Mahler)? Some of his songs are with piano accompaniment, aren't they? More details about innovations (and combining voice/chorus and orchestra in a symphony was not in itself an innovation!). Legacy: I'd like to see more evidence for the claimed influence on Hollywood (wasn't that influence exerted through Korngold's enforced emigration there?) and on the 2nd Viennese school (and for that, more detail about Bruckner's influence on Mahler). I don't think Benjamin Zander and Marcus Stenz are that well known, and Horenstein died in 1973. I hope you don't think any of these comments are negative - I have tried to make them all ideas or suggestions for improvements to this stimulating article which has much potential. --RobertG &#9836; talk 30 June 2005 17:26 (UTC)


 * Nope, I hardly think anything is negative here -- that's what I love about WP, except that I've been ridiculously busy lately *and* I'm out of town right now, so I'll try to take into consideration all these suggestions when I get back. But thanks to everybody for the input. TheProject 16:14, 12 July 2005 (UTC)


 * I disagree that the article should be longer. I think it's about the right length, though there should be some reprioritizing of information, and some of the more important sections should be expanded into separate articles.   Those can be much more detailed, and with those in place you might feel more comfortable excising some of the details in this article.  I don't know that Ludwig van Beethoven is the best model to work off as an article in general, but certainly you should look at how effectively Beethoven's musical style and innovations and Life and work of Ludwig van Beethoven have been pulled into separate articles, freeing up the main article from having to cover them in great detail.  Mahler could use a similar kind of organization.

