| Revision as of 14:49, 13 March 2004 editCamembert (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users18,991 edits article on testimony would be fine← Previous edit | Revision as of 14:15, 20 March 2004 edit undoGestumblindi (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users3,218 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
| It certainly wouldn't be a bad idea to have an article specifically on ''Testimony'' (at ] with a note pointing there form ]), though there needs to be some mention of it here as well, of course. --] | It certainly wouldn't be a bad idea to have an article specifically on ''Testimony'' (at ] with a note pointing there form ]), though there needs to be some mention of it here as well, of course. --] | ||
| * Since the debate regarding "the extent to which Shostakovich expressed his opposition to the state in his other music" is a major part of today's Shostakovich perception, there would need to be more than a short mention here. ] | |||
Revision as of 14:15, 20 March 2004
zhongwen doesnt work!
I've done version 1.0 of a rewrite: some NPOVing, cutting the rather ejaculatory account of the cello concerto, and expanding and (hopefully) clarifying the Testimony/revisionism section. I have a few hundred pages of stuff to work through on that, so more to come. I'll keep it concise. :) Markalexander100 05:08, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- If the Testimony debate has become such a large part of the article, why not spin it off to its own article? Crculver 14:33, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)
It certainly wouldn't be a bad idea to have an article specifically on Testimony (at Testimony (book) with a note pointing there form Testimony), though there needs to be some mention of it here as well, of course. --Camembert
- Since the debate regarding "the extent to which Shostakovich expressed his opposition to the state in his other music" is a major part of today's Shostakovich perception, there would need to be more than a short mention here. gestumblindi