Talk:Rigoletto: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 82: Line 82:
::::Not the question. I would like to know what you think is wrong with this particular infobox, agreeing that we spent too much time on AN/I. Rigoletto is is not a composer. --[[User:Gerda Arendt|Gerda Arendt]] ([[User talk:Gerda Arendt|talk]]) 14:46, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
::::Not the question. I would like to know what you think is wrong with this particular infobox, agreeing that we spent too much time on AN/I. Rigoletto is is not a composer. --[[User:Gerda Arendt|Gerda Arendt]] ([[User talk:Gerda Arendt|talk]]) 14:46, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::What's wrong with it? 1. It isn't as useful as the navbox. 2. It doesn't summarise the article (as any worthwhile infobox should). 3. It doesn't help the opera newcomer understand what ''Rigoletto'' is. Want any more? I can probably add another three or four. Or are we just playing games to put off the inevitable reversion? Meanwhile, of course, none of us are contributing to the encyclopaedia. --''[[User:Kleinzach|<span style="color:#FF4500;letter-spacing:2px;">Klein</span>]][[User talk:Kleinzach|<span style="padding:0px 0px 1px 2px;color:white; background-color:#ACE1AF;letter-spacing:2px;">zach</span>]]'' 14:57, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::What's wrong with it? 1. It isn't as useful as the navbox. 2. It doesn't summarise the article (as any worthwhile infobox should). 3. It doesn't help the opera newcomer understand what ''Rigoletto'' is. Want any more? I can probably add another three or four. Or are we just playing games to put off the inevitable reversion? Meanwhile, of course, none of us are contributing to the encyclopaedia. --''[[User:Kleinzach|<span style="color:#FF4500;letter-spacing:2px;">Klein</span>]][[User talk:Kleinzach|<span style="padding:0px 0px 1px 2px;color:white; background-color:#ACE1AF;letter-spacing:2px;">zach</span>]]'' 14:57, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
:::::Many articles in many other wikiprojects have an infobox and a navbox; they serve different purposes. The infobox provides summary information for the article in question, the navbox helps find related articles within the project. Both fruit, but definitely apples and oranges. And Kleinzach, comments like the above, using the "royal we" to describe your own views in oppisition to those of Gerda, are rather close to a personal attack, given that there are clearly two sides on this issue and more than one party on each. [[User:Montanabw|<font color="006600">Montanabw</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:Montanabw|(talk)]]</sup> 16:55, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 16:55, 8 July 2013

WikiProject iconOpera B‑class
WikiProject iconThis article falls within the scope of WikiProject Opera, a group writing and editing Wikipedia articles on operas, opera terminology, opera composers and librettists, singers, designers, directors and managers, companies and houses, publications and recordings. The project discussion page is a place to talk about issues and exchange ideas. New members are welcome!
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Question

Did Liszt actually transcribe the opera Rigoletto? Or just the famous paraphrase of "Bella figlia dell'amore" in Act IV?

Notability of Armando Gabba, baritone singer

A user has been edit-warring for deleting this entry:

from the disambiguation page Gabba, arguing that he's not notable enough to ever have a Wikipedia article, and thus to be listed as a redlink on a dab page. You can provide opinion and information (positive or negative) about it at the discussion page Talk:Gabba so as to help sort it out.

Thanks,

-- 62.147.112.36 14:51, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Roles box: "dash" looks like "smiley face"?

These blanks are gradually being filled in by members of the Wiki opera group.

Certainly more spacing is fine if you object to the "smiley face" look, but there seems to be little point in changing over all of the "Roles" boxes for every opera to "not known".
I support User talk:Whjayg's revert. Viva-Verdi (talk) 17:47, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Orgy" is inaccurate

At some point in the editing of the synopsis, the opening scene of the opera (a ball in the Duke's palace) became an "orgy". A few modern productions, e.g. at London's Royal Opera House in 2001, have depicted it this way.[1], [2]. However, this is not what is described in the actual libretto:

"Sala magnifica nel palazzo ducale, con porte nel fondo che mettono ad altre sale, pure splendidamente illuminate. Folla di Cavalieri e Dame che passeggiano nelle sale del fondo - Paggi che vanno e vengono - Nelle sale in fondo si vedrà ballare. Da una delle sale vengono parlando fra loro il Duca e Borsa."
English translation:"A magnificent room in the ducal palace, with doors at the back which give onto other rooms, also splendidly illuminated. A crowd of lords and ladies stroll about in the rear rooms - pages come and go - in the rooms at the back people can be seen dancing. The Duke and Borsa come out of one of the rooms conversing with each other."

When writing synopses, media descriptions of specific productions and/or second-hand synopses should always be checked against the original libretto. In the interests of accuracy, I am changing "orgy" to "ball". Voceditenore (talk) 07:14, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds as if whoever put "orgy" in there didn't understand what "ball" meant here! --Thnidu (talk) 20:20, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Painting of the composer

This appears twice and I wonder why. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.125.230.181 (talk) 17:08, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because whoever created Template:Verdi operas didn't check to see if the picture chosen duplicated the one already in the article. Eek! That was me! However, I've now substituted a photo for the article's painting. Maybe I should go through all the articles on Verdi's operas to see if this happened anywhere else. --GuillaumeTell 17:28, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

E il sol dell'anima

Where is this song in the synopsis? Dylan Hsu (talk) 20:06, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Act 1, scene 2, when the Duke reassures Gilda that he loves her. I've added it to the synopsis, together with the "Addio, addio" ending to the duet. --GuillaumeTell 01:01, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Banda

(Also posted on Wikipedia:Help desk)

Instrumentation includes "banda", with a redlink to Banda (opera). I've just been looking for what is meant. "Banda" is Italian for

Band (in all senses); banner; company, crew. — civica, municipal band.
(Cassell's Italian Dictionary, 1967)

I have started a draft article, User:Thnidu/Banda (opera), which so far is barely even a stub but does have one offhand reference. I would appreciate any elaboration, especially by someone who knows the territory.

I have been looking for a more exact forum to post this in but without any success. List of musical ensemble formats looked promising but is minimal.

Thnidu (talk) 20:30, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Banda is Italian for band, but it has a special and well documented role in opera, not only Verdi, althugh he used them a lot, but also Rossini and other composers of the era. I've expanded your draft at User:Thnidu/Banda (opera) and added further sources. There is definitely enough now to move it into main space where it can be further expanded. Let me know if you'd like me to do that. Voceditenore (talk) 15:08, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Restoration of composer navbox

Per Robert.Allen on Don Carlos, I propose that Template:Infobox opera be removed and replaced with Template:Verdi operas. The long-serving navbox is more useful and non-obtrusive, while this new Infobox opera is distracting and adds no information that is not already and better presented in the lead. --Kleinzach 02:56, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. Viva-Verdi (talk) 03:40, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
To not repeat the same arguments (opera navbox is redundant, infobox is meant to repeat key facts), please let's argue at Don Carlos, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:53, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No, if you are going to go from article to article doing this kind of thing, each instance needs to be noted. By the way what other articles now have these boxes? --Kleinzach 01:30, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Please see Don Carlos for update, As you probably know, links to a template can easily be found using the function "What links here". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:25, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree – The navbox should be restored and the Infobox removed. --Robert.Allen (talk) 08:46, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please tell me what is wrong with this infobox, while a general discussion is going on on the project level, quote (not by me) "My personal opinion is that where a footer navbox is available, replacing the header one with the infobox is perfectly acceptable. It is also perfectly acceptable not to do so." --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:54, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
We've spent the best part of the last three months explaining what we think is the problem with your infoboxes. If you want some references try the last AN/I started by Andy Mabbett here. Kleinzach 14:39, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not the question. I would like to know what you think is wrong with this particular infobox, agreeing that we spent too much time on AN/I. Rigoletto is is not a composer. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:46, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
What's wrong with it? 1. It isn't as useful as the navbox. 2. It doesn't summarise the article (as any worthwhile infobox should). 3. It doesn't help the opera newcomer understand what Rigoletto is. Want any more? I can probably add another three or four. Or are we just playing games to put off the inevitable reversion? Meanwhile, of course, none of us are contributing to the encyclopaedia. --Kleinzach 14:57, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Many articles in many other wikiprojects have an infobox and a navbox; they serve different purposes. The infobox provides summary information for the article in question, the navbox helps find related articles within the project. Both fruit, but definitely apples and oranges. And Kleinzach, comments like the above, using the "royal we" to describe your own views in oppisition to those of Gerda, are rather close to a personal attack, given that there are clearly two sides on this issue and more than one party on each. Montanabw(talk) 16:55, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]