Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Handel's lost Hamburg operas/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 13:22, 30 January 2016 [1].

Handel's lost Hamburg operas[edit]

Nominator(s): Brianboulton (talk) 00:07, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In his youth, George Frideric Handel served a kind of composer's apprenticeship at the Oper am Gänsemarkt in Hamburg, where he wrote several operas of inordinate length. The first of these, Almira, has survived, and is occasionally performed; the music for the other three has disappeared except for a few scraps. This article examines what remains of these lost operas, and thus has something for everybody. Handel buffs can ponder the possibility that more of the missing music might one day come to light, while those who regard Handelian opera less reverentially will hope that these works stay lost forever and that perhaps others of the opus might one day join them. The article has been charmingly and thoroughly peer-reviewed. Brianboulton (talk) 00:07, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Image review - I did an image review at PR. I've just double checked, and all images are okay — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:50, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Lingzhi[edit]

  • "Handel, George Frideric: Halle". Oxford Music Online. Retrieved 25 November 2015. Harv error: There is no link pointing to this citation Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 06:44, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redundant source deleted
  • "How much of it is yet in being is unknown". To my American ear, this sounds grammatically problematic. Could we use a paraphrase? Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 06:48, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "After his Hamburg baptism " Literal or figurative? I always read from the bottom up, so it may turn out to be the former, but if the latter please find a synonym. Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 06:50, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Handel's Hamburg years provided" the words "apprenticeship..in which" seem to mean "during", which is chronologically a bit vague given that it is something which spanned his entire career. Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 06:54, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "violinist in the orchestra at the Oper am Gänsemarkt, the city's famous opera house" can we drop the word "orchestra" and use "violinist in the city's famous opera house, the Oper am Gänsemarkt"? Were violinists always in the orchestra?
  • "Daphne metamorphosised" and 'Daphne metamorphosed' both used. Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 07:30, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not altogether clear what you're asking for. The English title forms are from the translation of Hinsch's preface, contained in Burrows et al. It's all we have; none of the other sources in their analyses translate the titles beyond "Florindo" and "Daphne". Brianboulton (talk) 23:02, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for these comments. I have acted on all of them except your translation point. Brianboulton (talk) 23:02, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support thank you for the article. Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 02:19, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support I did a peer review and have glanced over the article again. Excellent work, as always.--Wehwalt (talk) 08:09, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Another peer reviewer looking in. My few and minor quibbles were dealt with then, and on rereading the article now I find it top notch, fully meeting the FA criteria. Very happy to add my support. Tim riley talk 18:18, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Yet another peer reviewer re-visiting. My points were dealt with then, and a further read through shows it to be an excellent and interesting piece. - SchroCat (talk) 20:14, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Non-peer reviewer making a first time visit having returned from a break. I read this in Italy and consider it to be a wonderful example of Wikipedia's finest. CassiantoTalk 12:29, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to all the above for their comments (PR), helpand support. Brianboulton (talk) 23:04, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Crisco comments

  • Might be worth mentioning Germany somewhere in the lead. I'd expect most readers to understand that Hamburg is in Germany, but to be safe...
  • Worth linking Handel's name again after the lead?
  • University of Halle - worth linking (redlinking?)
  • Early 18th century engraving - I believe there are supposed to be hyphens in here (early 18th-century engraving, if I'm not mistaken)
  • with supposedly a capacity of 2,000, - Perhaps this is correct in BrE, but I'd find it easier to read "with a reported capacity of 2,000"
  • et al. - Several style guides, such as APA and Chicago prefer a non-italicised form; do British style guides proscribe italics? You don't use italics further down, and in some cases (viz. Burrows et al 2011) you don't use a full-stop either.
  • I adopted italics in the text at the suggestion of Tim in the peer review, and have now made the format consistent.
  • "Nero's play, "The Judgement of Paris", and a spectacular representation of the burning of Rome do not advance the plot, but occupy much of Act III." - Do not advance the plot strikes me as something which should have a reference. "Many digressions" and "spectacular" as well (We're not simply reporting what happens, but offering judgment on the contents; see WP:PRIMARY: "Any interpretation needs a secondary source").
  • I agree with you concerning "spectacular", "do not advance the plot" and "many", and have adjusted accordingly. I think "digressions" unadorned is OK. Brianboulton (talk) 21:37, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Worth linking the Roman deities (Cupid, etc.)?
  • British Library - Link?
  • John Mainwaring - worth noting in-text when he was writing? Speaks as to how early these works could have been lost by

An absolutely delightful read. Nothing but nitpicks from me. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 10:01, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Review and comments much appreciated. I have dealt with them all, only commenting as required. Thanks, too, for the above source image review. Brianboulton (talk) 21:37, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by BlueMoonset[edit]

It is indeed an excellent article overall, but the Almira section has some accuracy issues that need to be addressed:

  • The assumption from reading the first sentence is that Keiser had completed Almira when he left Hamburg with it for Weissenfels. According to the second chapter of George Frideric Handel: A Life with Friends by Ellen T. Harris, he "left without completing his setting".
  • This is what Hicks says: "...the libretto had been prepared for Keiser himself, who had already set it to music; only his enforced move prevented its performance in Hamburg. (He produced a revised version at Weissenfels on 30 July 1704; his original setting was never performed.)" This clearly suggests completion of Almira before Keiser's flight. Perhaps it wasn't finalised ready for production; Dean and Knapp report considerable confusion over Keiser's versions of Almira. This isn't really germane to Handel's lost operas, so I'm inclined to let the point go. Brianboulton (talk) 22:22, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • The second paragraph gives a false impression of the plot: someone reading this would assume that Almira's father is actively choosing his daughter's husband. In fact Almira, who is crowned Queen of Castile in the opera's opening scene, having just reached her majority, is faced with a directive left by her several-years-dead father to marry a son of the house of Consalvo, Prince of Segovia, who had been her guardian while she was underage.
  • The World of Opera citation (28) at the end of the penultimate sentence is incorrectly dated in the reference section: the Boston performance being broadcast is from June 2013, so 2011 is not possible. I don't know whether the broadcast was later in 2013 or in a subsequent year, but I'm sure the information must be available somewhere.
  • Well spotted. The web page is not specifically dated – I must have picked up 2011 from the range shown at the bottom. I've removed 2011 from the citation. Brianboulton (talk) 22:22, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of additional things:

  • in the Keiser and Mattheson section, Keiser's birthdate of 1774 has to be wrong.
  • in the Afterwards section, Deidamia's date is given as 1740, but the premiere (according to Deidamia) was in January 1741. Wouldn't the latter year be more appropriate?
  • Not really, as I'm referring to composition dates rather than performance dates. Brianboulton (talk) 22:22, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

—BlueMoonset (talk) 17:44, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your interest, and for these helpful comments, generally taken up and dealt with. Brianboulton (talk) 22:22, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Source review All sources seem of encyclopedic quality and are consistently and appropriately cited.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:59, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Handel%27s_lost_Hamburg_operas/archive1&oldid=1138462293"