Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Igor Stravinsky/archive1
Igor Stravinsky[edit]
Self nomination. Rewrote a short and poorly written article. Marlowe 19:57, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Support. However, a nit: the portrait by Picasso is in BMP format; this should be changed to a more standard format. 81.168.80.170 20:20, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Support. EXCELLENT. small nit: city should be called St. P., not Saint P. (here's some trivia: locals never use the Saint except in officialese) A. Shetsen 04:45, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Changed to 'St.'Marlowe 21:49, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Thank you. No objection even before, full support. A. Shetsen 21:15, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Changed to 'St.'Marlowe 21:49, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Support: really well written and structured article on a major figure. Bmills 10:11, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Object reluctantly: lots of great content. However I think that someone with a golden quill needs to go over it for stylistic reasons; several sentences come across as containing too many commas, being too long or just being a bit clumsy. I've had a little go at fixing this but haven't finished (or done a particularly wonderful job). Lupin 11:10, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)- Just spent some more time picking over text and constructions. Ommited some commas where extraneous, and left others where helped with clarity. Also noticed that you and a few others have made some great edits. Hopefullly this clears up your objection.Marlowe 21:49, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Change vote to neutral. I've just gone over it again, and have made more changes. I think it reads better now, but someone else should read it again I feel. Also, the more I read it, the more the article reads like a eulogy. I think there must have been (and remain) critics of Stravinsky's work who should be given greater voice for the sake of NPOV. Lupin 12:50, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- I don't think that there is a respectable view that he was a bad composer. (Some people don't like his music, but that's not the same thing as it being bad.) We don't need to mention in every composer's article that some people might not care for his stuff. Markalexander100 02:50, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- That some "people" may not "like" Stravinsky's music is not at all what Lupin was saying. Actually, among the pupils of Schoenberg and Stravinsky there was quite the animosity. Hyacinth 03:03, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- There certainly were people who hated Stravinsky's work, and the riot at the premiere of The Rite of Spring is a good example. But, perhaps this is covered in the articles on specific works (i.e. The Rite article)? This biographic article gives a good overview of the man and his music and is pretty scholarly, I think. To me, it reads objectively, does not fawn over the music, but does state he was influential-- which is undeniable (i.e. the quintessential NPOV arguement: even if some hated the music, all would agree that he was a gigantic figure of the 20th century. This is the view the article takes). I suppose this is a long-winded way of saying I don't see any NPOV problems here. Incidentally, could you cite this animosity between pupils of Schoenberg and Stravinsky? If true, that might be an interesting inclusion in this article. Marlowe 21:30, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- That some "people" may not "like" Stravinsky's music is not at all what Lupin was saying. Actually, among the pupils of Schoenberg and Stravinsky there was quite the animosity. Hyacinth 03:03, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- I don't think that there is a respectable view that he was a bad composer. (Some people don't like his music, but that's not the same thing as it being bad.) We don't need to mention in every composer's article that some people might not care for his stuff. Markalexander100 02:50, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Change vote to neutral. I've just gone over it again, and have made more changes. I think it reads better now, but someone else should read it again I feel. Also, the more I read it, the more the article reads like a eulogy. I think there must have been (and remain) critics of Stravinsky's work who should be given greater voice for the sake of NPOV. Lupin 12:50, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Just spent some more time picking over text and constructions. Ommited some commas where extraneous, and left others where helped with clarity. Also noticed that you and a few others have made some great edits. Hopefullly this clears up your objection.Marlowe 21:49, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Support. (I've been doing the same as Marlowe). Markalexander100 11:31, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Object- A good article but it still lacks a lead section which is a basic requirement of being featured. That section needs to be a concise summary of the whole article -where he was born and where he died needs to go in the biography section only.For an article this size there should be one to two paragraphs (a paragraph needs at least 3 sentences). --mav 20:07, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)- Changing to Neutral and will change to Support once a slightly longer lead section is developed. --mav 20:15, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Done (two paragraphs of two sentences each, but we can stick them together if you're counting;)). Markalexander100 02:59, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Expanded lead further. Marlowe 21:30, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Done (two paragraphs of two sentences each, but we can stick them together if you're counting;)). Markalexander100 02:59, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Changing to Neutral and will change to Support once a slightly longer lead section is developed. --mav 20:15, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Support'.
- Support. Good article. I might tweak the serialism section some more--needs Canticum Sacrum, Threni and Requiem Canticles. Antandrus 03:12, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Object.
1) Lead section needs expanding. 2) The music section mentions the "rediscovery of his Orthodox faith in the 1960s"; the "Biography" section doesn't mention this. Orthodox Judaism or Eastern Orthodox Christianity?— Matt 03:25, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)- exised the "rediscovered orthodox faith" line althogether. he "rediscovered" religion in 1926, not 1960s.Marlowe 15:21, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Support. Hyacinth 19:16, 21 July 2005 (UTC)