Talk:Anna Magdalena Bach

Little Notebook

There is no discussion of the Little notebook here, not even a link to another article. Asmeurer (talk ♬ contribs) 23:57, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Composer project review

I've reviewed this article as part of the Composers project review of its B-class articles. This article is a weak B; its factual gaps really need better justification than is presently given, and there are also MOS issues to address. My full review is on the comments page; questions and comments should be left here or on my talk page. Magic♪piano 01:44, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Portrait

Is there any source to indicate that the modern portrait resembles Anna Magdalena Bach or is it only generic? 78.55.128.202 (talk) 13:48, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Anna Magdalena Bach/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)

Press [show] to view →

;Composers Project Assessment of Anna Magdalena Bach: 2024-05-21 This is an assessment of article Anna Magdalena Bach by a member of the Composers project, according to its assessment criteria. This review was done by Magicpiano. If an article is well-cited, the reviewer is assuming that the article reflects reasonably current scholarship, and deficiencies in the historical record that are documented in a particular area will be appropriately scored. If insufficient inline citations are present, the reviewer will assume that deficiencies in that area may be cured, and that area may be scored down. Adherence to overall Wikipedia standards (WP:MOS, WP:WIAGA, WP:WIAFA) are the reviewer's opinion, and are not a substitute for the Wikipedia's processes for awarding Good Article or Featured Article status. Origins/family background/studies Does the article reflect what is known about the composer's background and childhood? If s/he received musical training as a child, who from, is the experience and nature of the early teachers' influences described? Gaps in early life should be cited. Early career Does the article indicate when s/he started composing, discuss early style, success/failure? Are other pedagogic and personal influences from this time on his/her music discussed? Is it known how she got from Zeitz to Leipzig? Mature career Does the article discuss his/her adult life and composition history? Are other pedagogic and personal influences from this time on his/her music discussed? ok List(s) of works Are lists of the composer's works in WP, linked from this article? If there are special catalogs (e.g. Köchel for Mozart, Hoboken for Haydn), are they used? If the composer has written more than 20-30 works, any exhaustive listing should be placed in a separate article. pass Critical appreciation Does the article discuss his/her style, reception by critics and the public (both during his/her life, and over time)? pass Illustrations and sound clips Does the article contain images of its subject, birthplace, gravesite or other memorials, important residences, manuscript pages, museums, etc? Does it contain samples of the composer's work (as composer and/or performer, if appropriate)? (Note that since many 20th-century works are copyrighted, it may not be possible to acquire more than brief fair use samples of those works, but efforts should be made to do so.) If an article is of high enough quality, do its images and media comply with image use policy and non-free content policy? (Adherence to these is needed for Good Article or Featured Article consideration, and is apparently a common reason for nominations being quick-failed.) ok References, sources and bibliography Does the article contain a suitable number of references? Does it contain sufficient inline citations? (For an article to pass Good Article nomination, every paragraph possibly excepting those in the lead, and every direct quotation, should have at least one footnote.) If appropriate, does it include Further Reading or Bibliography beyond the cited references? Article has citations; no separate reference list Structure and compliance with WP:MOS Does the article comply with Wikipedia style and layout guidelines, especially WP:MOS, WP:LEAD, WP:LAYOUT, and possibly WP:SIZE? (Article length is not generally significant, although Featured Articles Candidates may be questioned for excessive length.) Poorly written; MoS formatting violations. Things that may be necessary to pass a Good Article review Article requires more inline citations (WP:CITE) Article prose needs work (WP:MOS) Article text formatting needs work (e.g. quotation methods, punctuation, inconsistent styles) Summary Not really a composer biography, but what the hey. The bio is a bit sketchy, which is not necessarily surprising. However, it should be made more clear what sorts of resources are available, and how they indicate the gaps that are present. There are a variety of MoS violations that should get attention, and the whole article would benefit from some work to give it a more unified encyclopedic voice. Article is a weak B; the gaps in background really need to be justified. Magic♪piano 01:41, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Last edited at 01:41, 24 March 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 07:53, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Anna Magdalena Bach. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110716074353/http://www.npj.com/thefaceofbach/QCL12.html to http://www.bach-cantatas.com/thefaceofbach/QCL12.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.npj.com/thefaceofbach/QCL12.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:35, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks bot. You did a good job with the "Face of Bach" last year, but I don't know why there were 2 urls for the same essay here, looks like unnecesary duplication to me. I have removed dup.

Also I have "reported you" for the supposed deadlink to the podcast (the article history for 6 July 2017 refers to your "tagging 1 as dead"). Nothing personal, but the url seems OK to me.--Thoughtfortheday (talk) 16:08, 8 July 2017 (UTC)