Wikipedia:Peer review/The Bartered Bride/archive1

===The Bartered Bride===


 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for July 2009.
 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for July 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed. The article has been expanded from Start-class into something much more comprehensive. General review comments welcome. It's a great opera, and I hope the article will make people want to hear or watch it. Many thanks, Brianboulton (talk) 21:33, 7 July 2009 (UTC) :Note: Because of its length, this peer review is not transcluded. It is still open and located at Peer review/The Bartered Bride/archive1.

Comment
 * I've fixed typo errors of all Czech names.
 * Thanks for doing that. Brianboulton (talk) 16:57, 8 July 2009 (UTC)


 * The last sentence of the first paragraph in the "Libretto" section mentions an "operatta". I think that it is an "operetta".
 * Typo, well spotted. Now corrected. Brianboulton (talk) 16:57, 8 July 2009 (UTC)


 * The last sentence of "Music" section says "It has also been suggested (...)" - I'd say that this is a weasel word.
 * I agree. Sentence altered to record who actually suggested it. Brianboulton (talk) 16:57, 8 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I fixed the titles in the List of musical numbers. I found this source - website of Supraphon. It is a 2009 release of the opera. The list of the numbers on that page is pretty different to this one - why is that? (By the way there is a link on that page to a pdf file with an English translation of the whole opera - maybe it's useful).
 * The main difference between the Supraphon list of number titles and the one in the article is Supraphon that lists the recitatives, which I do not. Otherwise the lists are pretty much the same; in some cases the Supraphon title is longer, in Act III they show a slight difference in number order and, most usefully, they give the words which the chorus sings to the Act I polka. I will make a few adjustments. The Supraphon site, with its link to an English libretto, is a good External link, and I have added it. Brianboulton (talk) 16:57, 8 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I can see no other problems for now. I really like that there's a lot about reception. Both synopsis and music have good coverage as well as the lead section.--  LYKANTROP    ✉  12:54, 8 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks indeed for your comments. Brianboulton (talk) 16:57, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Allright. These were just single points. I'll check it again later for more general issues (if there are some at all) because I am extremely busy right now. Have a great day!--  LYKANTROP    ✉  17:59, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Greetings! Here are some futher comments.
 * Lead section
 * "(...)is considered by Czechs to be quintessentially Czech in spirit.": Is the inclusion of "by Czechs" necessary? What about "(...)is considered to be quintessentially Czech in spirit."?
 * I'm not sure whether the "Czechness" of the music is universally recognised, hence the qualification "by the Czechs" which I think is probably necessary. Brianboulton (talk) 21:06, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I can follow you.--  LYKANTROP    ✉  23:20, 12 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I linked the "libretto". It maight not be clear to everyone.
 * OK Brianboulton (talk) 21:06, 12 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Context
 * I am not sure whether the name of the section "Context" is the right choice. I think it could be more specific. The word "context" does not really describe the content of the section, because a context is in fact pretty much the same thing as "Background" (currently a subsection of "context"). The sections Libretto, Composition and Restructure are not about the "context" of "The Bartered Bride" - they are about the opera itself. I am not quite sure how exactly this should be solved, but I think that a possibility would be to make a separate section for the current "Background" (which could also be called "Context") and then put those 3 (Libretto, Composition and Restructure) under a new section called "Writing process" or something like that.
 * I have followed your suggestion. "Background" has become "Context", and Libretto, Composition and Restructure have been grouped under "Writing history". You are right, this is more logical - thank you for your help. Brianboulton (talk) 21:27, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
 * "Writing history" is also a good possibility! But you've added "Writing process" - probably by mistake :)--  LYKANTROP    ✉  23:20, 12 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Composition
 * "(...) as instalments of Sabina's revised libretto were received." - This is an odd formulation. The text above explains that Smetana recieved a version of the libretto from Sabina, and then revised it. But the sentence: "as instalments of Sabina's revised libretto were received" makes a bit chaotic who recieved them and who revised them. If Sabina's instalments of libretto were revised by Smetana, they already must have been recieved by Smetana before they were revised by him. What the sentence says is that revised instalments were recieved, which then makes no sence because they were first recieved and then revised -if I understand it right. Therefore the sentence actually sounds like Sabina revised the libretto by himself. I hope this makes sense.
 * Yes, you are right. I have replaced the opening sentence of the second paragraph with: "The opera continued to be composed in a piecemeal fashion, as Sabina's libretto gradually took shape." I think this is consistent with the information about how the libretto was concocted, but please say if you think there is any remaining confusion. Brianboulton (talk) 21:02, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
 * The meaning formulation is now accurate. Once the text explains how the libretto took shape in the "Libretto" section, here it explains that the rest gradually took shape the same way.
 * I think that's it. Good luck! Feel free to contact me if you need me to check some Czech spelling :) --  LYKANTROP    ✉  23:20, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

I am pretty happy with everything else.--  LYKANTROP    ✉  19:29, 11 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the time taken with the review and for the helpful comments. Brianboulton (talk) 16:36, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Jonyungk comments

In general, Brian, you've done an exceedingly good job&mdash;I wish my prose were so clear and polished! There is generally a greater vareity of sentence lengths here than there was in the bio on Smetana, which enhances readability; and it is fairly obvious from the overall tone that you were having more fun writing this article, which makes it more fun to read. Just some minor things:

Lead
 * What is a Gilbertian twist? I know you have a link there, but for those who are not up on their Gilbert and Sullivan, such as myself, a couple of words ("A Gilbertian twist of ...") might help.
 * I have a bit of a problem here. The sentence is long enough without an extra clause explaining "Gilbertian twist", which would probably be too much detail anyway, for a summary lead. The nature of the twist is explained in the synopsis - what if I mention Gilbert there, so the reference is clear? Otherwise I could replace the phrase "with the help of a late Gilbertian twist" with something like "after a surprise revelation". What do you think? Brianboulton (talk) 11:53, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
 * "After a surprise revelation" would work for me. Jonyungk (talk) 06:39, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, I've left the lead as it was, and explained Gilbert in the synopsis. I hope this works. Brianboulton (talk) 21:37, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Context
 * Background
 * Although I like your use of the word "descriptive" instead of "programmatic", Liszt's style was usually evocative in a general sense rather than literally descriptive. Just a nit to pick.
 * Are you suggesting a different word? "Descriptive" occurs frequently in the sources; "evocative doesn't,and might be considered POV. Brianboulton (talk) 17:27, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
 * You have a point. Jonyungk (talk) 06:39, 12 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Was Cornelius a pupil of Liszt's, or merely a follower? I'm not sure personally, but I know he was part of Liszt's circle in Weimar.
 * Large lists Cornelius among "pupils and followers". "Follower" is probably a better description, so I've changed it. Brianboulton (talk) 11:53, 9 July 2009 (UTC)


 * "In September 1857 Smetana visited Liszt in Weimar, where he met Peter Cornelius, a pupil of Liszt's who was working on a comic opera Der Barbier von Bagdad." This sentence sounds a little long and "rangy", and it would be nice to have a little variety in sentence patterns in this section. What about, "In September 1857 Smetana visited Liszt in Weimar; there he met Peter Cornelius, a pupil of Liszt's who was working on a comic opera, Der Barbier von Bagdad"?
 * Happy to do this. Brianboulton (talk) 18:13, 9 July 2009 (UTC)


 * "However, one of the factors which influenced his decision to return permanently ..." How about "However, one factor ..."?
 * Yes, done. Brianboulton (talk) 11:57, 9 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Libretto
 * "There is evidence to suggest that Sabina himself did not fully appreciate Smetana's intention to write a full-length opera, later commenting: 'If I had suspected what Smetana would make of my operetta, I should have taken more pains and written him a better and more solid libretto.'" Do we need "There is evididence to suggest that"? Sabina's comment seems more than just a suggestion.
 * Agreed, altered. Brianboulton (talk) 11:57, 9 July 2009 (UTC)


 * "... being one of the few in the Czech language written in trochees which matched the natural first-syllabus emphasis in the Czech language." Since I don't remember my studies of poetic feet from school, and many others won't, what is a trochee?
 * Fortunately a "trochee" is easily explained, so I've added a few words of text. Brianboulton (talk) 17:32, 9 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Composition


 * "Smetana's diary for December 1864 records that he was still working on the music for The Bartered Bride, but the piano score was not completed until October 1865." You use "but" to connect the two clauses of this sentence but I don't understand how the piano score's not being completed is a contradiction of the fact he was still working on the music. What about a semi-colon after "Bride" and dropping "but"?
 * Yes, better. Brianboulton (talk) 12:18, 9 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Restructure
 * This section looks good.

Synopsis

Why do you use Roman numerals for the Act numbers elsewhere in the article and not here?
 * You may well ask. This was done by someone from the Wikipedia Opera Project, "in accordance with Opera project guidelines". The same thing happened with Agrippina – Roman numerals in the text, Arabic in the synopsis. It is a guideline, not a rule, and I could change it back, but I don't want to offend the Opera Project unneccesarily, so as with Agrippina I propose to leave it unless it becomes an issue at FAC. Brianboulton (talk) 12:18, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
 * No, no, was just curious. Jonyungk (talk) 06:39, 12 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Act 1
 * "However, her desires are for Jeník although, as she explains ..." It sounds strange having "althouth" come so soon after "however". Do we really need "however"?
 * No, I've reworded. Brianboulton (talk) 12:36, 9 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Act 2
 * In the second paragraph, will everyone know what you mean by "verbal fencing"?
 * I would have thought so. Alternative suggestions welcome. Brianboulton (talk) 12:36, 9 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Same paragraph: I don't undererstand how Jeník would ponder "the deal he has supposedly made" since it isn't clear that Jeník isn't bartering in true faith. To me, it sounds like a legitimate deal, so the word "supposedly" confuses me. A sentence or part of a sentence clarifying this would help.
 * The purpose of Jeník's aria is to alert the audience to the fact that the deal he has just made with Kecal is not all that it seems. He doesn't give any direct information, but from now on the audience is at least partly aware that "something is going on". I have changed the wording a little, to make this clearer. Brianboulton (talk) 12:36, 9 July 2009 (UTC)


 * "Krušina and the crowd marvel at Jeník's apparent self-denial, but the mood changes when they learn that he has been paid off, and the Act ends with Jenik being denounced by Krušina and the rest of the assembly as a rascal". This sentence feels a little long. What about a period after "off" and a new sentence beginning with "The Act"?
 * Agreed and done. Brianboulton (talk) 13:09, 9 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Act 3
 * "They are horrified: ("He does not want her - what has happened?")." Having a colon just before a parenthetical comment looks strange. Remove the colon.
 * OK Brianboulton (talk) 13:09, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Reception and Performance History
 * Premiere
 * How does Smetana's comment at the end of the section fit with what preceded it? Seems like it belongs earlier in the article.
 * You are right; Smetana made his comment 16 years after the premiere, so it shouldn't be in this section. The question is, where to put it? I will give this some thought. Brianboulton (talk) 18:26, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I've transferred it to the end of the Restructure section. It reads pretty OK there. Brianboulton (talk) 21:49, 12 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Later performances
 * "In the years after its first performance, The Bartered Bride reappeared in the Provisional Theatre's repertory at regular intervals". Why, if the opera was initially such a failure?
 * Partly because there were very few Czech operas around at the time, and the theatre had to settle for what it could get. And partly because Smetana himself became the theatre's principal conductor in September 1866. Brianboulton (talk) 13:19, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Maybe this information could be included? Jonyungk (talk) 06:39, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I.ve added a short explanaation - don't want to overdo it. Brianboulton (talk) 21:49, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Music
 * I like how you show how Smetana imparted folk character in his music.
 * In the second paragraph, I generally understand what you're saying, but will non-musicians know what fugatos, tuttis and syncopations are? Do you need to explain briefly what these are, or what they might sound like to general listeners? This type of question dogged me through the FA review of Symphonic poems (Liszt), so someone else might ask the same questions.
 * It would be very tiresome, and disruptive to the article, to have to explain all the musical terms. I think this is a situation where a link to the appropriate article (or to Wiktionary) is appropriate. Brianboulton (talk) 13:19, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I am the principal culprit for Jonyungk's concern. In this case, I think it is okay to forgo elaborating fugatos, tuttis, and syncopations, as the context of the sentence has placed them as "striking features".  These features are not crucial for the reader to understand; the subsequent text or the rest of the article do not use them as a basis for information.  Of course, there are some concepts that I feel could be elaborated, per my review below.  Jappalang (talk) 02:20, 13 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Good explanaton of musical reminiscence in the third paragraph.
 * Fourth paragraph: "Otherwise" in the beginning of the second sentence is unnecessary. You've already explained there is little characterization and listed the exceptions to this in the preceding sentencce.
 * Otherwise deleted. Brianboulton (talk) 13:22, 9 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Good explanation later in the fourth paragraph on the use of major and minor keys&mdash;very clear and understandable.

The rest of the article looks good. Well done! Jonyungk (talk) 21:30, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your helpfula nd encouraging comments. Brianboulton (talk) 18:27, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Comments from Ricardiana

I only have a few comments so far; the article as a whole is really beautifully written. Many of the sentences have a lovely, slightly twisting syntax, without losing clarity, and, as Jonyungk said, the article communicates a great enthusiasm for the subject.


 * Set in a country village, with recognisable characters from everyday life - could this be shortened to something like "with realistic, everyday characters"?
 * Good suggestion. I have slightly reconstructed the sentence, as it was gathering too many commas.
 * a "real Indian" sword swallower - is this India-Indian or American Indian? A wikilink could clarify which.
 * Well, my English libretto says "A real Indian from the Fiji"! Should I extend the quote to cover this? (Another Eng. translation calls him "a veritable Indian from the Otahiti isles").
 * Hmm! Puzzling. Yes, I think extending the quotation would be helpful. Ricardiana (talk) 02:32, 15 July 2009 (UTC)


 * His antics convinces his parents - s/v agreement
 * Fixed, thanks
 * compared the work unfavourably to the Offenbach genre - a link here would be useful, I think
 * Now linked.
 * was criticised for lacking theatrical values - I'm not sure what this means. Good acting - good backdrops, etc. - or something else?
 * The most general criticism related to the inappropriate stage sets, and I think I've clarified this.
 * Looks good to me. Ricardiana (talk) 02:32, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

More later. I am enjoying reading the article, and will probably look to download at least some of the Bartered Bride soon - I've never heard any Smetana, and now I would like to. Best, Ricardiana (talk) 00:44, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thans for your comments, will look forard to any others. Brianboulton (talk) 08:52, 12 July 2009 (UTC)


 * In Prague, new productions are given virtually every year - perhaps this is misreading, but I felt like this was a quick leap forward in time from the previous sentence. Was The Bartered Bride not performed much between the 40s and more recent decades - or was it performed regularly at least in Prague throughout the 20th century?
 * This production in English, directed by Francesca Zambello - normally I'm a big fan of commas, but this sentence seems a little comma-heavy to me, perhaps because the clauses are relatively short. Is there any way to re-phrase so that the sentence doesn't pause as often?
 * Mařenka's temperament is shown - this and the next two sentences are very similarly structured, and the effect is a bit staccato. Can you combine some or otherwise vary the structure a little?
 * The list relates to the "definitive" (1870) version of the opera. - could you remind readers whose judgement this is, perhaps with a footnote, so it doesn't sound POV?
 * In the notes, when you list Grove Music Online, the editor's name is in italics as well as Grove. Is there a way to fix this?
 * Also in the notes, when you reference Brian Large's book, shouldn't "The Bartered Bride" part of the title not be italicized?

I apologize for taking so long to finish up; I hope my comments are helpful. (While doing them, I've also been listening with pleasure to Bartered Bride excerpts on YouTube, and I plan on listening to more.) Best, Ricardiana (talk) 02:30, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for these final comments. I believe I have dealt with these points; it is surprising how many small things get overlooked! The article is stronger for your input. Brianboulton (talk) 22:32, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

bg1=#ccccff|contentcss=border:1px LightBluesolid; |headercss= |header=No longer issues. Jappalang (talk) 01:40, 14 July 2009 (UTC)|content=Background
 * Review by Jappalang
 * "... descriptive style championed by Wagner and Franz Liszt Franz List and Richard Wagner ." to break the "... Liszt. Liszt ..." repetition?
 * Done


 * "Liszt was a Smetana's long-time mentor," for clarity?
 * Done, with some consequential adjustments


 * "... Wagner's development of sung-through music drama.": what is "sung-through"?
 * I've dropped the term. The link describes the ideas behind Wagner's new form of music drama, for those who wish to follow it, but it is beyond the scope of this article.


 * "A comment was made by another present,": another... follower? Visitor?  Any chance of identifying this person?
 * Johann von Herbeck, now included


 * "Smetana did not act immediately on this aspiration. However, a factor which influenced his decision to return permanently to his homeland ...": this does not gel well in my opinion. Smetana need not return to Prague to compose a natively Czech work, right?
 * Rephrased


 * "whom Smetana had met briefly during the 1848 Prague uprising.": the mention of the uprising is a bit too surprising event here, possibly disruptive to reading experience. Might I suggest simply "whom he had met briefly in 1848."
 * OK


 * "By this time he had heard the completed music of Cornelius's Der Barbier,": to allay questioning if Cornelius had not conveyed to Smetana some rudimentary rhythms and musical ideas at Liszt's.
 * I have to follow the source, which only says that Smetana "had become acquainted" with the music of Cornelius's opera. Nothing to say he had heard the whole thing.

Restructure
 * "For this, Smetana used a dance piece of music from The Brandenburgers of Bohemia.": I had a sudden thought that "dance" would encompass the choreography as well, and that making it clearer again would help to reinforce it was simply the score that was adapted... is that the case?
 * Now clarified


 * "A new scene, with a drinking song for the chorus, had been was added to Act I, and Mařenka's Act II aria "Oh what grief!" had been was extended."
 * "Various numbers, including the drinking song and the new polka, had been were repositioned,"
 * Done

Synopsis
 * Unpleasant as it seems, citations at the end of each paragraph perhaps should be added? Since this is a synopsis, the primary source can be used and the Libretto by the Metropolitan Opera House is a suitable choice?  However, there seems to be some interpretation ("implying, however, that all is not as it seems.", "In an surprise identity revelation reminiscent of the plots of W.S. Gilbert,"), which can be construed as original research?
 * WP:PLOTS specifies that inline citations are not necessary in plot synopses. The 1909 English libretto is listed among the sources; I could, I suppose, add a note in the Synopsis section referring to this libretto, though I've not seen this done on other similar articles.
 * As to the other points, "implying, however, that all is not as it seems" is not interpretation, but an indication of what Jenik is singing: "Who could believe that I'd sell my darling Mařenka". I will reword, slightly. You are right, however, about the reference to Gilbert. I have seen this comparison made somewhere, but it's not in my main sources, so I have withdrawn it.

Premiere
 * "The premiere of The Bartered Bride took place at the Provisional Theatre on 30 May 1866, with Smetana himself conducting conducted by Smetana."
 * "The stage designs were by Josef Macourek and the producer was Josef Jiři Kolár." -> "Josef Macourek designed the stage and Josef Jiři Kolár produced the opera." for active phrasing?
 * OK, but I sometimes think that too much reliance on the active voice can stultify the prose. A bit of variety in expression is welcome.


 * "... the threat of imminent war ...": seems a bit sudden with sole definite article "the"... perhaps "... the threat of an imminent war ..."?
 * OK, done


 * "... that had judged Harrach's opera competition,": who or what is "Harrach"?
 * Sorry, should have mentioned him in the Background section. Now done.

Later performances
 * "... replaced by recitatitive.": what is "recitative"?
 * Explained by link at earlier mention.
 * Brian, there is no "recitatitive" except this instance; perhaps you meant "recitative"? (Looks like I also messed it up by spelling "recitative" when I meant to ask what you meant by "recitatitive".) Jappalang (talk) 14:44, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, "recitatitive" was a typo which I have now corrected. I hope all is clear now. Brianboulton (talk) 16:00, 13 July 2009 (UTC)


 * "... to the Offenbach operetta genre.": Why is Offenbach the standard to be compared against?
 * Because Offenbach was the main composer of operetta at that time. A comparison with Offenbach meant that The Bartered Bride was being considered as an "operetta", which would definitely hack Smetana off.
 * I think a brief explanation of this should be included for those of us not in the know about this. I, for one, thought that the comparison was just saying that it did not match up to the "great" Offenbach standard.  Instead it turns out to be a calculated insult.  Jappalang (talk) 14:44, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, I've hopefully clarified this. The source says that Smetana wa hurt by the comment.


 * Perhaps integrate Smetana's death somewhere here to give a sense of post-mortis performances of his work?
 * "Since the Czech language was little known not widely spoken ,"?
 * Both the above attended to.

Recent revivals
 * "... once the home of a large Czech settlement. Antonín Dvořák spent the summer of 1893 in Spillville, during his American sojourn.": the Dvořák mention as a separate sentence seems disjointed and trivial. He does not seem to have anything to do with the opera and this is the only spot he is mentioned...  Perhaps, "... once the home of a large Czech settlement, where Antonín Dvořák spent the summer of 1893 during his American sojourn."  Still has a bit trivial of trivial tone though... (more pertinent for Dvořák's article).
 * I've emoved the Dvorak mention.

Music
 * "... to Czech dance metres of ...": what are "dance metres"?
 * Would "rhythms" be clearer?
 * Yes, I think that would be clearer. Jappalang (talk) 14:44, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, changed.


 * "Historian Harold Schonberg argues that "the exoticisms of the Boheman musical language were not in the Western musical consciousness until Smetana appeared."" -> "Historian Harold Schonberg argues that the Western music circle were unware of "the exoticisms of the Boheman musical language" until they listened to Smetana's opera." or something like that.
 * Schonberg doesn't specify "Smetana's opera". Would it not be better to stick to the quote?
 * It is okay, but it seems a bit awkward to me. Jappalang (talk) 14:44, 13 July 2009 (UTC)


 * " Smetana's language The language in The Battered Bride is, on the whole, one of happiness, expressing joy, dancing and festivals.": I had visions of Smetana's constantly spouting of joy and happiness, dancing and festivals...
 * This might give the impression that it is Sabina's words that invoke happiness, joy, festivals, etc. I've done a slight rewording.


 * "It does not, however, contain many of the opera's later themes, instead concentrating on general scene-setting and establishing a mood, in the manner of Mozart's overtures to The Marriage of Figaro and The Magic Flute, with which works biographer Brian Large makes comparison.": sounds a bit awkward to me.
 * "... and other instances fall short of being full-blown Wagnerian Leitmotive.": I think it would be better to attach a brief descriptive clause to Leimotive.
 * Done


 * "... except in the cases of Kecal and, to a letter extent, the loving pair and the unfortunate Vašek.": "To a letter extent"? I also think it would be better to identify Jeník and Mařenka than to name them "the loving pair" here.
 * I have corrected "letter" to "lesser". I think "loving pair" is probably OK. There is only one such pairing in the opera, after all.


 * "Large suggests that the character may have been modelled on that of the Baron in Cimarosa's opera Il Matrimonio Segreto.": perhaps a short descriptive of the Baron's role (main villain, supportive sidekick, or fool) in Cimarosa's opera can be added here?
 * Done

Film in adaptation
 * No mention of Czech films (although the first two of them, Max Urban's 1913, are silent and likely filmed at the opera, and the third is 1 year later than the German version)?
 * Some commentary on the 1981 Czech television series (directed by Otto Schenk)
 * Another review on the DVD of the television series (though the reliability of this site may be suspect)
 * London's 2002 production of the play
 * "Opera-lovers should not expect too much, but the work nevertheless gave an attractive portrait of Bohemian village life in the mid-19th century.": the tone is non-encyclopaedic; it seems to be casual, a recommendation between "friends", sort of what you would expect to read in a movie review.
 * The Complete Idiot's Guide to Movies, Flicks and Film and Acting does point out the first film rendition of the opera is 1913 (the first only states it in one short sentence, the second expounds it as a creation by Max Urban who cast his wife in the leading role), but they might not be particularly good-quality sources.
 * I have added a line about the 1913 silent film (I wasn't aware of two silent Czech films). The Czech TV production of 1981 and the subsequent DVD release didn't strike me as particularly notable, nor did the New Youth Opera's London production in 2001. In any case, these are not "film adaptations". As to the "Opera lovers should not expect..." sentence, this is what the NYT reviewer says - it's not my comment. I have made this clearer.
 * Yep, there were two (according to IMdB and other Czech film sites). Jappalang (talk) 14:44, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

}} Additional sources
 * Did you know that ...
 * ... "Prodaná nevěsta was sung at the National Theater in a performance dedicated to the memory of the fallen" four days after "the last significant fighting of World War II in Europe" on (9 May 1945)? (p. 235 of The Coasts of Bohemia, Princeton University Press.)
 * ... "one of the opera's liveliest coruses extols the virtues of good Czech beer"? (p. 122, ibid)
 * ... the 20th century world is more familiar with the German version of the The Battered Bride than the original Czech? (ibid)
 * ... "it was Prodaná nevěsta that was staged at the Stavovské divadlo on the night it was occupied in 1920, a message obvious to all"? (ibid)
 * ... The Battered Bride was one of the regular features, starting from 1943, of cultural life in the Nazi camps for Czechs? (p. 228, ibid)
 * ... ''The Metropolitan Opera Guide to Recorded Opera provides 3 pages (pp. 501–503) of reviews of the recordings: 1952 Supraphon (M), 1961 Supraphon (S), and 1980–81 Supraphon (D) CD?
 * ... Alan Rich, music critic for the New York Magazine, enjoys The Battered Bride and was so diappointed with the Met's 1978 staging that he called his review "The Sin of False 'Bride'"? (New York Magazine, November 20, 1978, p. 121)
 * Take note that the phrases in quotes " ... " are exact from the sources, so some rephrasings are needed. Not everything need to be added as well.  The above are just suggestions.  Jappalang (talk) 14:44, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I have taken the first of the above Sayer observations, because I think that is both interesting and notable. I have not at this point included the others, for fear of overloading the article with a miscellany of facts. I would like to see the recording reviews which you mention, which I am unable to access. Brianboulton (talk) 16:32, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I will send you the text of The Metropolitan Opera Guide to Recorded Opera in a few hours. Jappalang (talk) 01:40, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

If you cannot access the Google previews, page me if you want them. Jappalang (talk) 02:11, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Warmest thanks for the typical thoroughness of your review. You will see that I have adopted the majority of your suggestions; where I have not done so I have explained why. After your monumental review of the Smetana article, this level of attention was beyond the call of duty, and is much appreciated. Brianboulton (talk) 16:32, 13 July 2009 (UTC)