Jump to content

Talk:American premieres of Dmitri Shostakovich's Symphony No. 7/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
Passed. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 00:55, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA toolbox
Reviewing

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: MyCatIsAChonk (talk · contribs) 00:41, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]


A fascinating article, and I appreciate its origin story- will review soon! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 00:41, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CurryTime7-24, some concerns below- I'll read through it entirely when you're done- fantastic work so far! Also, ref 5 is broken. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 01:08, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My hands are full at the moment, so please give me until September 10 (PDT) to answer your concerns in detail and to start the article clean-up. Thank you as always! —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 01:30, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well-written:
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
  • A live CBS radio broadcast of a performance of his Symphony No. 1 on December 7, 1941, was interrupted by breaking news of the Empire of Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor. - IMO, not lead worthy; certainly good for the rest of the prose, but it's not particularly to summarizing DSCH's perception in the US
    Done! —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 00:07, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Quotes in leads need citations
    Do they still need them even though they are cited in the body? —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 00:07, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Elie Siegmeister and Amnon Balber in an article published in Musical America and the Brooklyn Daily Eagle said - IMO, unnecessary detail about the source of the quote- just using the newspaper is fine
    Done! —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 00:07, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • the New York Times,[11][12] Baltimore Sun - for both these papers, "The" is part of their names and should also be part of the wls
    Done! —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 00:07, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • He completed the symphony on December 27 and spent the next few hours - "the next few hours" makes it sound like present tense; perhaps "spent the following hours"
    Done! —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 00:07, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • dynamics, phrasing, and expressive markings - add wls for the non-musician reader
    Done, I think, but could only find one passage where musical terminology was explicitly used. May I please have a list of other passages that need amending? —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 00:07, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • and played the symphony for them. - likely worth clarifying that this was the piano reduction
    Done! —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 00:07, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Soon after, he performed the symphony at his home again - when is soon after?
    Unfortunately, the source does not specify when this occurred. Can you suggest an alternate phrasing that wouldn't pose MOS:RELTIME issues? —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 00:07, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Among his guests were harpist Vera Dulova and conductor Alexander Melik-Pashayev, who hoped to premiere the symphony. - "the latter of whom hoped to..."
    Done! —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 00:07, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Victor Seroff, a contemporary biographer - I hate to contradict you on any DSCH-related topic, but 1943 is contemporary?
    I meant contemporaneous for the period discussed in the article. Let me fix that! —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 00:07, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • In efn a, is Shostakovich's personally selected biographer supported by the ref? Same for According to Sofia Khentova, Shostakovich's official biographer, the composer accepted...
    To make it easier for everyone, I removed this detail. (It's also not really relevant to the article.) —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 00:07, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Shostakovich's Seventh and most important symphony—ninety minutes [sic] of music..." - sic should be italicized and linked; same goes for anytime sic is said in the article
    Done! —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 00:07, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • James Hilton quoted in his column Shostakovich's remarks imploring his fellow Soviet citizens to maintain their resolve in the defense of their country;[43] another columnist in Pasadena, California, quoting the same asked rhetorically, "Can a nation endowed with such a spirit be defeated?"[44] An article from Dayton, Ohio, illustrated Russian people's devotion to music by reporting on how during the symphony's Moscow premiere the musicians and audience ignored an air raid warning in order to let the performance continue.[45] The Honolulu Star-Bulletin declared that Shostakovich was "among the greatest of contemporary composers."[46] - throughout all these reviews, the use of author, paper, or city is inconsistent. One uses the author, some others use the city of the newspaper, and one just uses the name of the paper. I suggest using on format for consistency- all work just fine
    Let me work on that tomorrow... —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 00:07, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I trimmed this passage and standardized how the media is referred to. Let me know what you think! —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 21:42, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • including from the New York Times and Time, - again, the is part of The New York Times
    Done and done! —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 00:07, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Downes wrote in the New York Times that - same here
    Ditto! —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 00:07, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • How is the "Intermezzo interrotto" section relevant to America?
    Bartók's reaction and resulting movement for his Concerto for Orchestra were direct results of the American mania for Shostakovich 7 and Toscanini's broadcast. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 00:07, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Prose is clear and free of typos

1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. No lists, fiction, or words to watch; layout is appropriate, lead is well-written
2. Verifiable with no original research:
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. Refs are placed in a proper 'References' section
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). Sources consist of reliable books and newspaper articles; all good here
2c. it contains no original research. Don't see a need for a spotcheck (would be hard anyway since many are offline); article is well-cited and verifiable, no OR visible
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. I worry about the number of blockquotes. While a number of them are certainly necessary in my opinion, some are reviews that could easily be paraphrased/summarized and backed by other reviewers; particularly the quotes under "Recordings" and Kay's quote under "Criticism". One of the quotes under "Press coverage" should be cut, since they both reflect the same idea: "Shosty's masterpiece, we will all love it, etc etc" (please excuse my extreme reductiveness, this is just for the review's sake)

Earwig shows no violations, quote use is appropriate

3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. Addresses DSCH's perception pre-Seventh, the press coverage of the Seventh, the premiere and battle over it, and the overall reception; all good
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). Stays focused throughout
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. No bias visible
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. No edit warring
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.

Images are properly tagged

6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
  • IMO, the portrait of Beethoven is unnecessary; the Beethoven comparisons are mentioned in one sentence near the photo, then again in another sentence further away
  • The image sizing across the article is odd to me. Some images (e.g. NBC staff examining microfilm) are rather small, while others (e.g. Shosty in firefighting gear are rather large. I think there could be better consistency here
  • Don't think Sandburg is needed either, since he's mentioned in one sentence in that section

Images are relevant and properly captioned

7. Overall assessment.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:American_premieres_of_Dmitri_Shostakovich%27s_Symphony_No._7/GA1&oldid=1176330300"