Jump to content

Talk:Schubert's last sonatas

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good articleSchubert's last sonatas was one of the Music good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Did You Know Article milestones
DateProcessResult
August 16, 2008Peer reviewReviewed
December 18, 2008Good article nomineeListed
June 15, 2011Featured article candidateNot promoted
September 8, 2023Good article reassessmentDelisted
Did You Know A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on November 20, 2007.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ...that the last three piano sonatas by Franz Schubert (pictured), published eleven years after the Austrian composer's death, are often regarded as a trilogy?
Current status: Delisted good article

GA Reassessment

[edit]

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.


Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · WatchWatch article reassessment pageMost recent review
Result: Delisted. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:35, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The "structure" and "the sonatas" sections of this 2008 GA are near-completely unverifiable, with inline referencing seemingly haphazard in the extreme, failing GA criterion 2.

If someone does have relevant literature to hand, however, this will probably be a rather quick fix. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:36, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Curiously, the GA reviewer thought it was WP:OR back in 2008, but declared it passed anyway. Since they were probably completely correct in their opinion about how the article was written – by a knowledgeable editor, i.e. relying only indirectly on sources for those sections, a fix would likely mean rewriting the offending parts. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:39, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OR is definitely an issue. More specifically, there's quite a bit of essay like synthesis. And even if such information can be more reliably sourced/presented (which is doubtful), it must be too specific for an encyclopedic overview article. Aza24 (talk) 20:49, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
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.