Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Symphony No. 8 (Mahler)/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by SandyGeorgia 20:05, 4 June 2010 [1].

Symphony No. 8 (Mahler)[edit]

Featured article candidates/Symphony No. 8 (Mahler)/archive1

Nominator(s): Brianboulton (talk) 23:53, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Another salute to Mahler in his 150th anniversary year (the centenary of the premiere is on 12 September 2010). This symphony was the greatest success of Mahler's lifetime and has stayed popular with the public, although there is often less enthusiasm from the critics. It is the ultimate combination of symphony and song, and its unofficial subtitle "Symphony of a Thousand" is apt. For once, it was a pleasure to write the article; I hope some readers will likewise enjoy it. Brianboulton (talk) 23:53, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support. I had the pleasure of peer reviewing this article. It was top flight then, and is better still now. In my opinion it meets all the FA criteria and is a worthy candidate for the front page. - Tim riley (talk) 00:25, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support I too peer reviewed it and found all of my (minor) concerns were addressed in the PR. I also want to note as an Image Review that all of the images are either PD-old, or modern with a free license. Well done, and I think this would be a fitting tribute for the centennial anniversary of the premier. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 01:37, 29 May 2010 (UTC) PS I am planning on listening to this symphony just because of reading this article[reply]

Thanks to Tim riley and Ruhrfisch for their patient peer review work, and now for the above supports (though I doubt if Tim will be listening). Brianboulton (talk) 21:40, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments - quite a nice article, with a few points to take care of to make it really great.

(dab check - no dab links)
External links - http://www.andante.com/Profiles/Mahler/Symph8.cfm returns invalid hostname; "Symphony of a Thousand in Quebec" is a redirect (and has a title that does not match the source)
- The first of these is an irritation. I took a print copy of this article on 20 April, and the link was still working on 18 May when I sent the article to peer review. Andante.com is hosting a series of Mahler tributes, and the article by Henry-Louis de La Grange on the Eighth is part of this. Now this and the other tribute articles all appear to have vanished. If I can't locate the new site within a day or so, I will find other sources for the information cited here. As to the Quebec source, I have switched this to a different and more stable site.
  - You could also check archive.org or a similar site to see if they have a copy
    - Checks have proved fruitless, but I have found a BBC source that replicates much of the material. I am using this, with appropriate small changes to the text. The dead link has been removed.Brianboulton (talk) 16:06, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Correct spelling of Gut(t)man(n)?
Did Mahler actively disapprove of the nickname, or did he simply not acknowledge it?
- Biographer Carr refers to Mahler's "dismay" at the name, which I guess amounts to disapproval (which doesn't of course have to be active; silent disapproval can be equally potent). I believe my choice of wording reflects fairly what the sources say, but I can change "despite Mahler's disapproval" to "without Mahler's approval" if you really think the point important.
  - My point was that "despite Mahler's disapproval" seemed to contradict with "Mahler did not acknowledge the name" in the lead; if you're satisfied with both wordings I won't insist on changing it
Musikfesthalle or Musik-festhalle?
"it has also been compared to the Beethoven's Ninth Symphony" - revise to reflect intended meaning
- I have deleted the superfluous "the", if that is what you were meaning. Otherwise, please clarify.
  - Yes, that makes sense
Is the second section based on the closing scene or scenes of Faust?
"four trumpets, 4 trombones" - why the different number format?
The "subsequent performances" image is a program, not an advertisement, correct?
Faust is arguably a play, not a poem, and Part II was written entirely in the 19th century
- I have rarely seen it referred to as a "play". I have seen many references to it as a "poem" or "dramatic poem", and these are the terms I have employed.
  - Understandable. Feel free to point that out to the editors of our own article on the subject ;)
Prose is technically correct, but lacks flow in areas - could use another set of eyes
- Other eyes have viewed it. If you can indicate where you think that flow is lacking, perhaps attention can be directed to those areas.
  - More a general point than a specific complaint; I'll see if I can fix this myself.
Be consistent in using "Oxford" vs "Oxford, UK" as the location for Oxford U Press. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:42, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for these comments and for the sharpness of eye. Where I have not replied, I have simply corrected the text. Brianboulton (talk) 19:12, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support I also peer reviewed the article and there were relatively few concerns and they were addressed. Fulfils all FA criteria.--Wehwalt (talk) 04:24, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Brianboulton (talk) 21:40, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment—~~In addition to the one noted above by Nikkimaria, there is also a dead link to http://www.gustav-mahler.org/english/ .~~ Ucucha 06:06, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually, that one works fine for me...perhaps it's just a site your computer doesn't like? Nikkimaria (talk) 14:12, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Works again now; the site was probably down for a while. Ucucha 15:47, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Images - The PD-US template is over used, and while acceptable, is less free than desirable. If possible use pd-old, pd-germany or plain pd depending on what is appropriate per FAC3 Fasach Nua (talk) 10:32, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Pretty much there, but could do with a final polish. Some points:
Underlinked: I'm not one to want Austria, but symphony, sonata form & others should be linked, especially musical terms, but also Strophe.
- Of musical terms, I have now linked sonata form and some related terms (exposition, development etc). I am pretty sure that all musical terms (including symphony) are linked at first mention, but if you spot others I'll be happy to deal with them. About "strophe" I am not so sure. First, the word only occurs within a quotation and we don't usually link within a quote; secondly, the "Strophe" article is a mess, with heavy cleanup banners in place. I'm not sure that a direct to this article will be helpful. Instead I have added a parenthetical "verses" to the quote, which is surely all readers need to know.
Since Maiernigg is in the municipality of Maria Wörth (pop. 1357), that should be added (really it should redirect there with a little added)
- With all due respect, and thanks for the info, I'm not sure this tells anyone much. From the maps, Maiernigg is several miles east of Maria Worth and the connection between the two places seems entirely administrative. My own view is that mentioning the province, the lake and the place-name is probably enough. But tell me if you feel strongly.

I make them within sight of each other, and just over 3 miles apart by boat, which I'm sure is the best way to travel it. But I wouldn't withhold support for that. Wörthersee is not much use, and has no map. Johnbod (talk) 21:52, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I've worked the town name in - see what you think, whether it overloads the text? Brianboulton (talk) 16:20, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've set up Maiernigg as a redirect, with some text added, so is fine as it is now. Johnbod (talk) 16:58, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Symphony of a Thousand redirects & should be bolded.
the unlinked "ninth-century Christian Pentecostal hymn" Veni creator spiritus is rather misleadingly described as Pentecostal; it should be "for Pentecost".
a translation of the singer's "role" titles would be more useful than the now forgotten soloists at the premiere, if there is not room for both.
- I think that the premiere soloists' names, if known, should be given, whether they are forgotten or not. This is significant information. As to translations of the role titles, many of them are proper names. Of the others, "Magna peccatrix" might be "Woman of great sins", "Mulier Samaritana" would be "Samarian woman" and "Maria Aegyptica" is "Maria of Egypt". I'll add these.

Johnbod (talk) 19:24, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your comments. Where I have not replied to points, I have accepted your suggestions. Brianboulton (talk) 21:35, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support. As usual, excellent work from this Brian. A few niggles:

Why "The" before the title, first word?
"considerable critical"—a mouthful ... could the first word be dropped?
Remove "more mature", since that is indicated by "middle"?
Characteristic and characterised in the lead; no big deal, though.
"a defining document"—I'd rather think of it in its aural realisation rather than pieces of paper if we're to talk about defining a century.
I do find the use of commas idiosyncratic. I can cope, I guess. Sometimes they appear where you wouldn't think they're necessary ("Throughout this time his practice was to leave Vienna at the close of the Hofoper season for a summer retreat, where he could devote himself to composition.") Most writers would insert a comma after "death" to avoid "death performances". As now, it's "In the period following the composer's death performances were comparatively rare, but from the mid-20th century onwards the symphony has been heard regularly in concert halls all over the world, and has been recorded many times." I'd be inclined to do this: "In the period following the composer's death, performances were comparatively rare; but from the mid-20th century onwards, the symphony has been heard regularly in concert halls all over the world and has been recorded many times."
Deryck Cooke did something wonderful with the 10th, but I find "of utterance" highly pretentious or plain ambiguous in this quotation, to the point of wanting an ellipsis: "more stern and forthright ..., more tautly symphonic, with a". Better rhythm, anyway. I don't find the repetition of the "of" grammar in "of orchestration" convincing, either. Who is uttering? Not the prettiest word in Engish, either. And was he referrring to the lyrics? It's hard to say, which is unsatisfactory from the reader's point of view.
"The first note shows:"—can it be "note is", to avoid the repetition with the previous "show"? Tony (talk) 07:42, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Tony. I've done most of the tweaks you suggest. I queried "The" before the title when I began the article's expansion, but another editor was pretty insistent it should be there (see talkpage discussion), and I didn't feel strongly enough to the contrary to make an issue of this. Cooke use the term "document" in relation To Beethoven's Ninth, but I've altered it to "statement". I will run a comma check to see if I can iron out some idiosyncracies. Pleased to have your support. Brianboulton (talk) 10:07, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support I have nothing to add to this discussion apart from my full support. In a way, such well-prepared candidates can be a little frustrating because there is little positive criticism left to offer. Having said this, I didn't like "redraftings" but I can live with it :-) Graham Colm (talk) 14:47, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, Graham, and I've made it "rewriting". Thanks for the support. Brianboulton (talk) 15:18, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Sources look fine to me. One thing (hard to call it an "issue") I noticed is that British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) is used as the publisher for most sources except one, which uses simply BBC. Juliancolton (talk) 16:05, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I think I've fixed the errant BBC. Brianboulton (talk) 23:43, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.