Talk:Nausicaa (opera)

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

A mini review[edit]

I was asked to have a look at the article by my good wikifriend @L'OrfeoGreco:, prior to a GAN. So here are my remarks. (I will be posting a few each days, it might take a while). Cinadon36 11:40, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sources[edit]

  • Nice to see quality sources. I have seen you have spitted the sources to subsection, that is ok. Just that publications also include articles (and websites, in a broader extend). So, maybe change the headings of the subsections?Cinadon36 11:40, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Nice point, turned Publications to Books, check! L'OrfeoSon io 11:58, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

Recordings[edit]

It is a little bit weird using a smaller text size for the second sentence. It does not comply with Wikipedia:Manual of Style and might cause confusion, because notes, as references, are used with a different format, usually. Cinadon36 11:40, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Cinadon36 would you suggest adding a note section (a bit awkward for just one note) or putting the Note in parentheses? L'OrfeoSon io 12:00, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Both are fine but I slightly prefer parenthesis. Cinadon36 12:05, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done! L'OrfeoSon io 12:10, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Synopsis[edit]

The first sentence shouldnt be in italics, nor should be written as a note.

The word ‘’libretto’’ needs a definition. I have noticed the internal link, but readers should be able to get the meaning of an articles without clicking to blue links, if it is possible.

The issue that requires attention is the way you are presenting the story. Apparently, you have not watched the Opera, and I'm uncertain whether you've read the libretto (it matters). In any case, the problem arises from closely following the source, including its structure. I'm not sure what the solutions might be or if any action needs to be taken. Fortunately, there are users who specialize in addressing copyright issues like this one, and they have assisted me in the past. I'll reach out to one of them for guidance. Cinadon36 11:40, 30 September 2023 (UTC) PS-I have asked @Diannaa: to shred her light! [1]. Cinadon36 11:52, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

First sentence moved in first paragraph as folows: "The libretto is an adaptation of the myth of Nausicaa and Odysseus, based on Robert Graves' novel "Homer's Daughter", set in the 7th century BCE by approximation."
Word libretto explained on section "The libretto" as follows: "the two of them collaborated to write the opera's libretto, the text that would then be set in music by the composer."
Unfortunately I haven't watched the opera, although I'd wish to see it revived! As for the Synopsis, well, I can reassure you that the language used is mostly mine, I haven't copied any part, but it also holds true that I relied solely on the source cited for the synopsis' text. L'OrfeoSon io 12:11, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Diannaa: says it is fine with her, so it is fine with me as well! [2].Cinadon36 21:45, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Great to hear! I also used copyvio, no violation found. Besides, I did took the facts from the text, but I formed new wordings. In many opera articles, the synopsis is exactly that, a description of the synopsis in other words. L'OrfeoSon io 21:48, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Athens Festival premiere[edit]

This section is well-written. However, the photo may not be as helpful as it could be. Considering that the Odeon hasn't undergone significant changes since 1960, it might be more appropriate and useful to replace it with a different photo of the Odeon. Cinadon36 15:55, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Witty remark! How do you find the new photo? L'OrfeoSon io 21:29, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You can either visit the main article (Odeon of Herodes Atticus) or, even better, visit Wikimedia Commons [3] and search with the appropriate keywords. Voila! Cinadon36 21:41, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Cinadon36 What is it that we are searching for exactly. I mean, isn't the new picture ok? For it shows the entire Theatre. Is it the decade that we are aiming for? I haven't got it yet! L'OrfeoSon io 21:44, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think we are looking for a photo of the theater and the seats, so that the reader can understand that it is a truly large and beautiful ancient theater. I want the reader, who has no idea about Greece and ancient theaters, to visually grasp where the play was performed. Cinadon36 21:49, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@L'OrfeoGreco, I am not very happy with the photo you have added. There are some people on stage. Some readers might be misled that they were part of the Nausicaa. Minor details, I know. Cinadon36 22:08, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What's your take on these?:
1) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Odéon_d%27Hérode_Atticus.jpg
2) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_orchestra_of_the_Odeon_of_Herodes_Atticus_on_May_30,_2021.jpg
3) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:%2B_5000_Zuschauer_fasst_das_Odeon_des_Herodes_Atticus._06.jpg
L'OrfeoSon io 22:14, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That's better, no buildings, but half the view:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/26/Acropolis_theatre_-_panoramio.jpg
L'OrfeoSon io 22:17, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And these?
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/95/Greektheater.JPG
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Odeon_of_Herodes_Atticus_high_angle.jpg (high angle)
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ed/Odéon_Hérode_Atticus_-_Athènes_%28GRA1%29_-_2022-03-26_-_16.jpg L'OrfeoSon io 22:22, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would exclude the one with the wooden floor. Maybe I would avoid the ones with that small paragka, it 's not nice and it might have been build rather recently.. I dont know. You choose! Cinadon36 22:40, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Cinadon36 the new image depicts an intact part of the Odeon with natural landscape. Do we keep it? L'OrfeoSon io 23:06, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep it! Fantastic! Cinadon36 23:09, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Music[edit]

I do not get why section "music" is not a subsection of "Conception and libretto". It seems music is part of conception. Cinadon36 16:57, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Allow me to explain myself here.
In the operatic world, the libretto means nothing more than what it is: a text. It is the music that makes it an opera. Thus, conception (of the idea, of the story) and libretto (the text representing this story in written form) go together, while the music is a different thing, it is the main element of opera. See for example:
Music here means "analysis of the forms, the style, the themes", while conception, libretto and composition mean "the initial idea, the writing and the composing", usually from a chronological aspect.
L'OrfeoSon io 21:42, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh! I see. Seems legit then. Thanks! Cinadon36 21:52, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In fact I now see that the section "Music" includes a description of the music in terms of rhythms, melodies etc, AND a compositional "history". However I couldn't rename it to "Composition and music" because it is an awkward phrase, while "Compositional history and music" is erroneous since I am not including a detailed chronology of how the music was composed. So maybe I'll leave it like that, and we'll see. L'OrfeoSon io 21:57, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Second point, is that the "Audio excerpts from Nausicaa" is an external link. Properly it should be in the "external links" section. I don't mind, since it seems to be fitting with the flow, but have it in mind. Cinadon36 16:57, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Intro[edit]

Intro needs some significant work.

  • Firstly, it contains information not mentioned at the main body of the article ("the other being The Transposed Heads"), also the specific point has a place in the main body, not at the intro.
  • Second, Intro should summarize the main body. Synopsis is missing.
  • Third: "whose main idea is that Homer's epic poem The Odyssey was in fact written by a woman", this line is just one sentence at the main body. It looks it is not that significant to be included at the intro. Cinadon36 22:44, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
1) Transposed Heads added in the main body, it is important
2) Synopsis, more info added
3) Sentence removed
L'OrfeoSon io 23:49, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Smashing! Much better now! Cinadon36 08:25, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ref 11[edit]

Last comment. Ref 11 has a note. I believe you can either insert that note into the main body (some editors, one is me, say that notes shouldn't be extensively used so reader wont have to scroll over refs to discover more information). Or you can explain at the note "author X says this and that", within brackets, if it is author's exact words.Cinadon36 08:24, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Cinadon36 Oh, I forgot about it. It is not a note, but rather a "place", a parameter used to specify the paragraph in which the info required is given. L'OrfeoSon io 09:16, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I added a § symbol to make it clear I am hinting at a certain paragraph of the long article. L'OrfeoSon io 11:14, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Cool!Cinadon36 16:46, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Closing comment[edit]

Well done @L'OrfeoGreco:, you have done a fantastic job! I believe you should now nominate it for GAN. It usually takes 1-3 months before a reviewer responds. Good luck! Cinadon36 08:24, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Cinadon36 Your help has been invaluable Cinadon! Thank you for all your effort!. L'OrfeoSon io 10:01, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your kind words, but you're too kind. You did all the work, and I was happy to help. Cinadon36 16:49, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

Passed. Jon (talk) 05:43, 21 October 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
This review is transcluded from Talk:Nausicaa (opera)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jonathanischoice (talk · contribs) 22:11, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Hi, I'm planning to review this over the next few days; it looks like it will be straightforward though, given Cinadon36 has already done most of the work! Jon (talk) 22:11, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will assess some of the GA criteria and add comments below over the next while, and then leave some time for discussion/editing (I'm fascinated now to track down the Athens recording; duet here)
@Jon, I am glad to see that you, a fellow music-related Wikipedian, are genuinely interested in this article! Recently, I found an Internet Archive link where the whole recording is availabe. I asked User: Diannaa about the copyrights, and whether I could include the link at the External links section, but she knew not. I also found a probably safer to use link, with samples from the official recording. What do you think? Are we to include any of these in the article as "External links"? L'OrfeoSon io 14:37, 20 October 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. Minor concerns addressed below
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. Lead ok; layout ok; w2w ok; fiction n/a; lists, okay as a table (Roles).
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. Satisfactory.
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). Citations are good; § Synopsis is cited once as needed.
2c. it contains no original research. I'm satisfied there's nothing novel or controversial here that isn't covered in the sources.
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. The copyvio report returns nothing alarming; the 58% match is due to a quotation, which is cited; Synopsis avoids violation.
3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. There's nothing controversial in the talk page; no sign of edit-warring etc.
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. Image tags are sufficient and valid.
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. Satisfactory use of images.
7. Overall assessment.

Review comments[edit]

Lead
@Jon, I added {{Use dmy dates}} and {{EngvarB}; do you think that the latter contradicts the {{British English} tag placed at the article's talk page? L'OrfeoSon io 13:41, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
 Done
 Done
The libretto
  • Graves accepted the composer's proposal; from 1956 to 1958 the two of them collaborated to write the opera's libretto could be improved, perhaps "Graves accepted the composer's proposal, and they worked together from 1956 to 1958 on the opera's libretto"
 Done
  • Having established the period 1956-1958 in the previous sentence, "For this purpose" would be clearer as "During this time"
 Done
Music
  • The paragraph discussing the composer's connection of melody to prosody could perhaps link to prosody (music) which covers similar concepts.
@User:Jonathanischoice. In the passage cited, Glanville-Hicks focuses on the linguistic prosody (as expressed in "she had made it possible for every word to be "heard pretty well""), so, in a literal sense, the article to be linked is prosody (linguistics); however, for every word to be "heard pretty well", a certain compositional technique is required, which means that the matter also pertains to musical prosody. So, what wikilink do we go with? L'OrfeoSon io 14:09, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps on second thoughts we can leave it as is.
  • thus hinting at the much more massive Greek-speaking audience... is a bit awkward; perhaps "which (appealed to? resonated with?) the primarily Greek-speaking audience of the première"
Oh my, I badly misused the phrase!  Done L'OrfeoSon io 14:16, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "published on Time" should be "in" not "on" (I'm sure it was published in a timely fashion!)
 Done
Athens Festival premiere
  • Link to first instance in prose of Nausicaa (the character) per MOS:L
 Done
  • I think the article undersells the audience reception of the opera by describing it as "well received" (para 4). We could make more of its success, given the description in the recording liner notes: It received three performances at the Festival and was a major success in the international press. Variety wrote: “A ten minute ovation greeted the world premiere of Peggy Glanville-Hicks new opera Nausicaa in the ancient Theatre of Herod Atticus at the Acropolis in the heart of Athens. The cast of 150 won eight curtain calls from the capacity crowd of 4,800 which overflowed into the aisles.” (NWCR695, p. 1)
It's not needed for GA, but it might be fun to track down the 1961 Variety review, perhaps in the IA archive.
  • I think this sounds a bit too final: However, in spite of all its success, the opera was never again produced; perhaps something like "Despite its success, the opera has not yet been produced since its premiere" sounds a little more hopeful; it may be worth noting that Mario Dobernig's 2014 PhD thesis (Trove) involved creating a performance edition of the score.
@Jon, I tried my best; what do you think? L'OrfeoSon io 22:26, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Good I think - I added a little about the audience reception too.
Synopsis
 Done
 Done
  • Link Greek city state to Polis
 Done
 Done
 Done
 Done
 Done
 Done
  • I suspect "Hercules" should link to Heracles the Greek hero, since Hercules is about the Roman one
 Done

— Jon (talk) 22:40, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jon, I couldn't have hoped for a more detailed and insightful review! That is exactly what I wanted, all my errors and omissions traced and listed so that I can spot and fix them, plus some exciting new info to further enrich the article. Thank you! Responding soon. L'OrfeoSon io 13:26, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
All up excellent work! Thanks also for highlighting a sadly neglected opera, and a composer whose works certainly deserve more performances, and no doubt helping with Wikipedia:WikiProject Women too. — Jon (talk) 05:38, 21 October 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.

External link to recording on Internet Archive[edit]

Hi, somehow in the GA review I missed the bit about the recording on IA; I'd say that, since there's nothing forbidding IA as a source in WP:EL and if we use the link to the item that presents 30s previews of tracks which is a commonly deployed strategy to accommodate copyright, we can assume good faith and include it in the external links. We are not using it as a citation, so something like WP:RSPYT does not apply. The worst case scenario is that later we discover we've missed something, and remove it. — Jon (talk) 00:46, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Superb! Thank you for your response. L'OrfeoSon io 08:27, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Nausicaa_(opera)&oldid=1201668713"