Wikipedia:Peer review/Vespro della Beata Vergine/archive1

Vespro della Beata Vergine
I've listed this article for peer review because I want to find out if it can become a featured article some day. Vespro della Beata Vergine is a unique piece in the history of sacred music, the first in a line of later Bach's Christmas Oratorio and Verdi's Messa da Requiem. Monteverdi demonstrated the range of his abilities, writing with a position in Rome in mind, but in the end got the post at San Marco in Venice. We don't know if it was ever performed completely during his lifetime, nor if he actually expected it to be performed that way. Certainly musicologists and musicians from the 20th century on have been fascinated. Much more text than the 5 psalms + Magnificat usually set in a vespers music, six soloists, 10-part choir in one psalm, rich orchestra, dramatic and virtuoso elements from the just beginning opera combined with the ever-present Gregorian chant, great diversity in musical styles and expression, - all it takes to make a piece successful 400 years after it was written. Here is a short introduction, - in the background you hear an extreme performance, a recording which renders only the music Monteverdi wrote (and no aditions to make it a proper liturgical vespers service), with 10 singers and soloist for all instruments. I heard them in concert last Sunday.

The article just received a GA review by The Rambling Man. Thanks to him, and for your interest, Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:34, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Main contributors include Verbcatcher and Thoughtfortheday. Sources were provided by Brianboulton. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:58, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Comments by SoWhy
I'm not much of a musical composition guy, so these are (hopefully useful) comments by someone completely unfamiliar with the whole topic area. Regards So  Why  16:20, 19 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Lead
 * The lead section appears too long. MOS:LEADLENGTH advises 2 paragraphs for articles with less than <15,000 characters which is the case here if my tools counted correctly. Currently, the lead section makes up ~20% of the article's text. As someone unfamiliar with the topic, reading that lead kind of scares me from reading the rest of the article. Also, many details mentioned in the lead, such as the dedication to Pope Paul V or speculation where it might have been performed seem unneeded when trying to "summarize the body of the article with appropriate weight."
 * Also, shouldn't the alternative name "Vespers of 1610" be mentioned in the lead sentence (MOS:LEADALT)? E.g. Vespro della Beata Vergine (Vespers for the Blessed Virgin), SV 206, sometimes also called Vespers of 1610, is an extended musical composition [...] That way the rest of the fourth paragraph could be removed, since the full publication name does also not strike me as something that really needs to be mentioned in the lead.
 * I got the 1610 name (which was the article name earlier) closer to the beginning, but not right away because first the reader should know what this Italian title means, and the year needs explanation. --GA


 * History and context
 * If the article mentions Monteverdi's desire to move up within the court of Mantova, shouldn't the article also provide at least some basic information on why he was there, what he planned to achieve and why composing this piece would have achieved that?
 * There's now more bio. Pleae check again. --GA
 * Also, should "at age 43" really be the preferred style of dating? After all, it forces readers to look up his birth date in his article to then calculate that it must have been 1610. Even if the source only says "at age 43", WP:CALC allows saying it was in 1610 because when he was baptized on 15 May 1567, he was only 43 between approx. May 1610 and April 1611. But if the piece was published in 1610, he must have written it in 1610 as well for having done so at age 43.
 * Shouldn't it be Mantua, not Mantova, like in his article?
 * same --GA


 * Thank you for helpful comments, indeed. The article is on its way, so please look at the lead last. Rather than counting: the lead should contain the information a reader should absolutely know. I'll look into expanding the bio part. If you understand he wanted to be promoted within Montova, I must change something. It was too small for him, so he aspired to Rome and got Venice. Age: we don't know exactly when he composed, only when published, some say he wrote for 3 years, - I will look into that too. Once 1610 us established in bold, I don't think anybody would have to look up a birth date, and if, hovering over his name seems easy enough. I try to get to what a thing is, rather than including alternative names in the first sentence. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:30, 19 August 2019 (UTC)


 * More detailed responses now, and some changes made, more to come, - please check again. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:02, 2 September 2019 (UTC)