Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Opera: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Moreschi (talk | contribs)
Archiving, productive discussion finished, a decent wording is one the project page: this does not have to degenerate into a a trollfest
Censorship
Line 97: Line 97:


::::I think these lists could be very useful. Shall we go ahead with both? Anyone have any reservations etc.? -- [[User:Kleinzach|Kleinzach]] 22:43, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
::::I think these lists could be very useful. Shall we go ahead with both? Anyone have any reservations etc.? -- [[User:Kleinzach|Kleinzach]] 22:43, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

== Censorship ==

Archiving on-going and recent (i.e. within minutes) discussion '''''is''''' censorship. [[User:Pigsonthewing|Andy Mabbett]] 13:28, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 13:28, 21 June 2007

Opera Composer of the Month Proposals

A simple script will automatically replace the text on the front page with the appropriate month when the time comes. Here are the next three months. - Adam Cuerden talk


[edit]

Composer of the Month for August 2024


Click Here to set up August's Composer of the Month!

[edit]

Opera of the Month for August 2024


Click Here to set up August's Opera of the Month!

Click here to show the September and October Opera and Composer of the Month preparation areas
[edit]

Composer of the Month for September 2024


Click Here to set up September's Composer of the Month!

[edit]

Opera of the Month for September 2024


Click Here to set up September's Opera of the Month!

[edit]

Composer of the Month for October 2024


Click Here to set up October's Composer of the Month!

[edit]

Opera of the Month for October 2024


Click Here to set up October's Opera of the Month!

Archive 1 • Archive 2 • Archive 3 • Archive 4 • Archive 5 • Archive 6 • Archive 7 • Archive 8 • Archive 9 • Archive 10 • Archive 11 • Archive 12 • Archive 13 • Archive 14 • Archive 15 • Archive 16 • Archive 17 • Archive 18 • Archive 19 • Archive 20 • Archive 21 • Archive 22 • Archive 23 • Archive 24 • Archive 25 • Archive 26 • Archive 27 • Archive 28 • Archive 29 • Archive 30 • Archive 31 • Archive 32

The above has turned up on the new article bot's list. It was contributed by User:Rplowright and has already acquired an automated query (on the talk page) about the image. The content is pretty much verbatim from the Biography page of her website. If she wrote this herself, it violates WP:AUTO. What to do?

  • Ask on the talk page, or the contributor's talk page, or via the contact page on her website whether (s)he is RP and holds the copyright? If she says yes to both, then what?
  • Put it down for Speedy deletion and put up a copyvio notice on the page?
  • Do nothing except rename, rewrite and wikify the article (it needs all of those!), which I could do quite easily (she's in Grove and elsewhere).

All suggestions gratefully received. --GuillaumeTell 15:45, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Given that she is notable - and the user has adopted her name! - I might communicate on her talk page. If she is who she might well be, then it would be a good idea to explain how WP works and offer to rewrite it based on Grove etc. The photo could be a pain, but that's why I think we need someone to specialize in clearing image copyrights. -- Kleinzach 23:58, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
On my first look at the article I don't think there's anything that screams delete to me. The description of "one of Britain's leading opera stars" is the closest to a judgement as opposed to a fact in it but I wouldn't argue with that assessment anyway. It's certainly a lot less of a hagiography than Gwyneth Jones (opera singer) was. What are needed to improve the article are some references and rather fewer lists.
If she is RP or a relative with the same initials, she at least ought to know or be able to find out the picture copyright status and might be able to assign use of it to us. --Peter cohen 18:57, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
She is a soprano --Al Pereira(talk) 19:03, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
She has been a soprano, but she now sings mezzi roles such as Fricka and Amneris. --Peter cohen 19:28, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok but her main carreer was as soprano, right? BTW, I remember indeed her difficulties with high notes. --Al Pereira(talk) 20:03, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't suggesting delete as such, but if the person who created the article isn't Plowright herself, it's a flagrant copyright violation - check the link to the Plowright website that I posted up at the top and compare. Even if it is Plowright, it needs a fair bit of work to turn it into a decent WP article. --GuillaumeTell 21:34, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've now posted a query on the user talk page about copyright etc. --Peter cohen 23:14, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If she doesn't respond - it doesn't seem she has been online for the past few days - I suggest we go ahead and rewrite the article. -- Kleinzach 01:56, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, Peter cohen has done quite a good job on that already. --GuillaumeTell 00:09, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, but I only passed Kleinzach's edit total about twelve hours ago. In any case, I think there could still be allegations of plagiarism or copyright breach if someone compared the article with the original source. --Peter cohen 00:25, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, maybe I'll do a bit of pruning and reorganising (tomorrow). And I can add her birthdate ("I can tell a woman's age in half a minute - and I do"). -- King Gama, aka GuillaumeTell 00:54, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well that is the key piece of evidence to show that we have an encyclopedic article rather than an article nased on a promotional biography from her website. --Peter cohen 11:26, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bot maintenance

SatyrTN has kindly offered to follow up the bot run by generating 'to do' lists similar to Wikipedia:WikiProject Classical music/To-do list and Wikipedia:WikiProject Classical music/Small to-do list, also to review the categories for new articles that have been added to the cats, but don't yet have banners. It seems a good idea to keep track of which articles have been tagged for lacking sources etc. Should we go ahead with this? -- Kleinzach 02:18, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like an excellent idea. Some points:
  • The long list contains a number of operas, e.g. Falstaff (opera), and also opera singers (Poli, Köth) and potentially other articles more of interest to us than to the Classical Music folks (Will Crutchfield, perhaps?). Would it be possible to exclude such articles from the CM lists (while making sure that they appear on our list)?
  • What is meant by "Articles needing verification"? Is this articles without (m)any sources or what?
  • I thought that "Articles requiring cleanup" would be just articles with the Cleanup tag, but I see Summertime (song), which, arguably, comes within our remit, doesn't have this, so, again, it would be nice to know what the criteria are.
  • The short list looks like a short version of the long list (duh!), but what are the criteria for selection for the short list?
--GuillaumeTell 10:43, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, all!
The example above is, of course, run on WP:CM's articles (meaning articles with the WP:CM banner. It's not really feasible (nor productive) to exclude an article from one project's list because it's on another one. And that might lead to WP:OWN :)
The way the list is compiled is: The bot reviews all articles with your banner. It looks at each one to see if there is a cleanup banner on the article, and if there is, it adds the article to that group of cleanups. So even if an article desperately needs references, it won't show up in that section until someone adds a {{unreferenced}} tag to it.
To tell you the truth, I'm not exactly sure why "Summertime" is in the cleanup section, since it doesn't seem to have a cleanup tag. I'll look in on that.
The short list is just a random sample of the long list. It's meant to go on a project talk page so that someone just surfing for something to do may get interested, while the long list can be overwhelming :) Except for the deletion articles - that's exactly the same on the short and long lists.
Let me know if you have any other questions. -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 16:30, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for this. I can't see a WP:CM banner on Falstaff (opera), though. But maybe they removed it recently on the basis that it was WP:OWNed by us :) --GuillaumeTell 21:52, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think these lists could be very useful. Shall we go ahead with both? Anyone have any reservations etc.? -- Kleinzach 22:43, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Censorship

Archiving on-going and recent (i.e. within minutes) discussion is censorship. Andy Mabbett 13:28, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]