Revision as of 09:07, 11 April 2012 editGuillaume2303 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers86,215 edits →Infobox: cmt← Previous edit | Revision as of 10:10, 11 April 2012 edit undoPigsonthewing (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Event coordinators, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, File movers, IP block exemptions, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors266,305 edits →Infobox: RsNext edit → | ||
Line 45: | Line 45: | ||
:::::I agree with Kleinzach and 4meter4. The Infobox says nothing important about him as a composer (!) that isn't in the article. More relevant than place of birth etc. would be compositions, such as ], ], but I see no room for them in the layout, --] (]) 08:58, 11 April 2012 (UTC) | :::::I agree with Kleinzach and 4meter4. The Infobox says nothing important about him as a composer (!) that isn't in the article. More relevant than place of birth etc. would be compositions, such as ], ], but I see no room for them in the layout, --] (]) 08:58, 11 April 2012 (UTC) | ||
::::::I don't know all that many infoboxes, but the scientist infobox has a line "known for". And if the current infobox is not satisfactory, it shouldn't be too difficult to make another one that is. Gerda is, of course, absolutely right that an infobox doesn't contain any info that isn't already present in the article, but it isn't meant to: its purpose is to summarize the info in an "at a glance" way. --] (]) 09:07, 11 April 2012 (UTC) | ::::::I don't know all that many infoboxes, but the scientist infobox has a line "known for". And if the current infobox is not satisfactory, it shouldn't be too difficult to make another one that is. Gerda is, of course, absolutely right that an infobox doesn't contain any info that isn't already present in the article, but it isn't meant to: its purpose is to summarize the info in an "at a glance" way. --] (]) 09:07, 11 April 2012 (UTC) | ||
:::::::{{Tl|Infobox person}} also has that parameter, and could be used here. Unless, of course, someone wishes to argue that Barber was not a person... <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); ]; ]</span> 10:10, 11 April 2012 (UTC) | |||
:::::In what way do you suppose that {{Tl|Infobox musical artist}} ''as used on this article'' is not appropriate? <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); ]; ]</span> 10:10, 11 April 2012 (UTC) |
Revision as of 10:10, 11 April 2012
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
Archives |
/Archive 1- 2006-2009 discussions |
Formating the article
There's an irritaing amount of empty space at the top of this articel under the brief introduction - can someone sort this out - I can't see how to. 86.149.54.241 (talk) 14:00, 31 March 2008 (UTC) The 'Biography' title would need to be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.33.44.9 (talk) 15:47, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Downgrading to start
I am down-grading this article to start class. This article is poorly organized and lacks in-line citations. It has a lead which does not accurately summarize the article and needs to be expanded, and it is sparse in its biographical details for a composer of his stature. It also needs a much improved analysis/criticism section of his work.4meter4 (talk) 21:40, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
New York Premiere of the Adagio for Strings
On May 1 1939, the Adagio for Strings was given its New York premiere by the Orchestrette Classique under the direction of Frédérique Petrides, at the Carnegie Chamber Music Hall, now Weill Recital Hall. You may see fit to add this fact to your article. Mx96 16:58, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
Popular culture
In the popular culture section of this article it is stated that Barber's Adagio For Strings has been remixed by DJ Tiesto. While it may have been remixed by Tiesto at some point (I am not aware of this remix myself), the dance version of Adagio For Strings was first released by William Orbit. However, it was the Ferry Corsten (another Dutch DJ) remixed version of the William Orbit song which made it popular. It may be the fact that both Tiesto and Corsten are Dutch dance music producers that has led to the confusion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.253.148.190 (talk) 13:44, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
- Everything in this section as it now stands pertains to a single work, the Adagio. Thus, anything worthy in this section (be there anything) can be moved to the existing separate Adagio Misplaced Pages article or, perhaps, to a new Adagio section of this Barber article. In any case, in Misplaced Pages "Popular culture" is a euphemism for trivia, and I will delete the "Popular culture" section in due course. TheScotch (talk) 21:53, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
- Perhaps what is needed is a completely new article, titled "Barber Adagio for Strings Trivia", or better, "List of trivia involving Barber's Adagio for Strings". No doubt the real popular culture zealots will not be satisfied, and will instead want "List of trivia about the first bar of Barber's Adagio for Strings", "List of trivia about the second bar of Barber's Adagio for Strings", and so on, or even "List of trivia about the viola's first note in the first bar of Barber's Adagio for Strings, by nationality", etc., but I think we must draw the line somewhere. On the other hand, we could always invoke Misplaced Pages:Fancruft in cases like the one cited above (Dutch dance-music producers making Barber's Adagio famous at last? Give me a break!).—Jerome Kohl (talk) 22:19, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
Additional citations
Why, what, where, and how does this article need additional citations for verification? Hyacinth (talk) 04:57, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
- There are four perfectly plain "citation needed" tags in the text, and one more in the footnotes.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 05:07, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
Tag removed. Hyacinth (talk) 06:00, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
- Unsupported claims also removed.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 06:32, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
Infobox
Arguably the info box here is redundant. It's also the wrong type (musical artist). Can we remove it? Thanks. --Kleinzach 08:31, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
- No. It is not redundant, and it is not the "wrong type". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:14, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
- I agree with Kleinzach. The infobox serves no beneficial purpose. Delete per WP:DISINFO.4meter4 (talk) 12:31, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
- I agree with Andy, infoboxes are a useful complement to biographical articles, providing a rapid "in brief" overview. Kleinzach, why do you think this is the wrong type of infobox and which type would be better? --Guillaume2303 (talk) 13:46, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
- The musical artist info box is for popular musicians. Look at the way it is set up — it's not appropriate for composers. As for "which type would be better" almost any one! But this isn't relevant if there is no consensus for having it. (Please note that I am not against info boxes per se. I think they can be very useful for certain kinds of articles. I've made some myself for theatres etc.) --Kleinzach 08:35, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
- I agree with Kleinzach and 4meter4. The Infobox says nothing important about him as a composer (!) that isn't in the article. More relevant than place of birth etc. would be compositions, such as Adagio for Strings, Agnus Dei, but I see no room for them in the layout, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:58, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
- I don't know all that many infoboxes, but the scientist infobox has a line "known for". And if the current infobox is not satisfactory, it shouldn't be too difficult to make another one that is. Gerda is, of course, absolutely right that an infobox doesn't contain any info that isn't already present in the article, but it isn't meant to: its purpose is to summarize the info in an "at a glance" way. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 09:07, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
- {{Infobox person}} also has that parameter, and could be used here. Unless, of course, someone wishes to argue that Barber was not a person... Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:10, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
- I don't know all that many infoboxes, but the scientist infobox has a line "known for". And if the current infobox is not satisfactory, it shouldn't be too difficult to make another one that is. Gerda is, of course, absolutely right that an infobox doesn't contain any info that isn't already present in the article, but it isn't meant to: its purpose is to summarize the info in an "at a glance" way. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 09:07, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
- In what way do you suppose that {{Infobox musical artist}} as used on this article is not appropriate? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:10, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
- I agree with Kleinzach and 4meter4. The Infobox says nothing important about him as a composer (!) that isn't in the article. More relevant than place of birth etc. would be compositions, such as Adagio for Strings, Agnus Dei, but I see no room for them in the layout, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:58, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
- The musical artist info box is for popular musicians. Look at the way it is set up — it's not appropriate for composers. As for "which type would be better" almost any one! But this isn't relevant if there is no consensus for having it. (Please note that I am not against info boxes per se. I think they can be very useful for certain kinds of articles. I've made some myself for theatres etc.) --Kleinzach 08:35, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
- I agree with Andy, infoboxes are a useful complement to biographical articles, providing a rapid "in brief" overview. Kleinzach, why do you think this is the wrong type of infobox and which type would be better? --Guillaume2303 (talk) 13:46, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
- I agree with Kleinzach. The infobox serves no beneficial purpose. Delete per WP:DISINFO.4meter4 (talk) 12:31, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
- All unassessed articles
- Start-Class biography articles
- Start-Class biography (arts and entertainment) articles
- Unknown-importance biography (arts and entertainment) articles
- Arts and entertainment work group articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- Start-Class Composers articles
- WikiProject Composers articles
- WikiProject Classical music articles
- Start-Class LGBTQ+ studies articles
- WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies articles