Talk:Angela Gheorghiu/Archive 1

Archive 1

Comments

Very dodgy as it is - not a hint of the criticism this Victoria Beckham of the opera world has received. 82.69.28.55 23:17, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Agreed - most of this looks like it was written by her own PR staff. I strongly suggest a very long-term blogger/insider/musicologist's perspectives: http://operachic.typepad.com To be fair and balanced, I also contributed the note about AG's Grammy nomination, and her problems with the LOC. BTW notice how all the favorable, even gushing comments in this article, are sourced to her friends, whilst the facts are sourced to major media and well-established enterprises? There is less and less doubt in my mind that AG has let her less-than-astute staff make important decisions and manage PR for her -- to her detriment. Sidney Orr (talk) 22:59, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Sidney Orr (talk) 22:56, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I've nothing against her, but this entry sure reads more like a fan's appraisal, not a neutral biographical essay. Can anyone do better?

"Lyric dramatic soprano" isn't a voice type.

maybe it should be changed to "dramatic soprano." what do most people consider her fach to be? Eccoh22 18:27, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

She's considered a true lyric soprano. Doublea 03:49, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Bravo to whoever added the 10th footnote, regarding the two Brit magazine articles, which begin to reveal the musician's true nature, and as such, contributes much as a counterweight to the public relations hype that constitutes most of the article, otherwise. There is more to being an artist with a legacy of interest, then to musicality, otherwise millions more would pay more attention to Herr Wagner's (IMHO - ) very pretentious music. Sidney Orr (talk) 22:54, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Birth year

Rough Guide to Opera gives her birth year as 1963. So we'd need a source for the year 1965, otherwise I'll change it.. --NeofelisNebulosa (моє обговорення) 11:58, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Don't be surprised if it's changed back. AG has her own web people, and is adept on the PC herself. She is quite capable of editing any of these comments, except that her English may betray her. (Sorry, Anya, but you do still need to focus on reading and writing English, and avoid gross misunderstandings, rather than explode at those who would help you from friendship!) Sidney Orr (talk) 22:54, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject

Comments which merely comprise personal opinions of Angela Gheorghiu as opposed to discussion directly related to improving the article will be removed. Likewise, any comments unsupported by reference to reliable sources will be removed in accordance with Wikipedia policy on the Biographies of living persons. Note also that all assertions the article space must be supported by reliable sources. Comments in the article like "Her website incorrectly claims a Grammy win in the "Partners/Rolex" comments" are entirely inappropriate unless a live link can be provided which supports this. Voceditenore (talk) 21:26, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

However, comments which clearly fit in the paragraph "Personal Life" may be quite suitable, provided they are reliably sourced. There are many full-time musicologist/bloggers who are closely involved with the world of opera. They are a reliable source for topics which fit "Personal Life". Consider Norman Lebrecht, for one, and Operachic, for another. One has only to consulth their articles, books, and blogs, to notice that their musical knowledge in general, and their knowledge of opera life in particular, often far exceeds that of the well-meaning wiki volunteers. Sidney Orr (talk) 22:53, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Norman Lebrecht's books and his articles in The Evening Standard would count as reliable sources for Wikipedia's purposes, although some musicologists, conductors, the head of Naxos Records, and the British High Court would take a different view. The Opera Chic blog, like any other blog, does not, as I have taken pains to explain several times on this page with multiple references to Wikipedia's requirements for sourcing biographies of living persons. Please note also her own disclaimer:

"Although I am a classically-trained musician, I am in no way a musicologist. Therefore, my words should not be misconstrued as the authoritative statements of journalists and criticts [sic]. Instead, these essays should be taken simply as chats about the arts. Also fashion. Also the internets. Also you." [1]

Voceditenore (talk) 18:32, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

That is debatable, given a long-posted paragraph, "Personal Life".What should and shouldn't be included under such a heading? There is an enormous amount of PUBLIC material for that, in the case of AG. If one was to ask the question, for instance, "Isn't it true that... [material removed per WP:BLP by Voceditenore (talk) 08:21, 12 June 2008 (UTC)] ...wouldn't that be suitable material for "Personal Life".? Get real, Mr Fan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sidney orr (talk • contribs) 00:22, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

First of all please respect talk page guidleines and place comments below the material you are replying to. (I have moved it). And please sign your comments. Material about the private life of a living person (or persons in this case) may not be placed in their biographies unless it has been published in a reliable source, e.g. a newspaper of record or an official press release. Material from internet forums and blogs may not be used as a source, unless it is a blog owned and written by the article's subject. Nor can such material be placed on the article talk page, or on user pages. Once again, please read Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons before further editing. Unsupported negative and potententially libellous material has been removed from your comments on this page. If it is added again, the matter will be taken to the Biographies of living persons noticeboard. Voceditenore (talk) 08:21, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

My addition has a direct bearing on biographical facts and the accomplishments -- or lack of --of AG. My addition was based on verifiable facts in the links provided. I do not appreciate you deleting my addition, which was based on factual material. I also verified the situation with "The Recording Academy". Did you consider doing so before deleting my writing? Did you actually READ the rationale below? Sidney Orr (talk) 00:01, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Apropos Angela Gheorghiu and someone's changes to my additions: I have aimed to improve the piece by toning down the original article which apparently was dictated by her PR department. All of my writings have been from documented and reliable sources. There still remain several completely gratuitous remarks, which have little use in an objective article. The last footnote that was removed and replaced with a less reliable one, was directly from the Grammy.org association itself, but was replaced with a secondary source. AG WAS NOMINATED IN 2001 not 2002 according to "The Recording Academy" BTW -- so it made no sense to replace my footnote with a less reliable source. I took the trouble to TALK to someone there regarding that fact BTW, and can supply his email address if you doubt that. As matters stand, the article is still an obvious fluff/gush piece by a FAN rather than an objective article. I appreciate your interest, but I will escalate the problems with your overly complimentary comments, if you continue in such a biased manner. I also had nearly THREE years of correspondence with AG, from which I can draw information and material that can be documented. And, if you doubt any of my assertions, check with operachic.typepad.com, or Norman Lebrecht, who have been observers of AG for many years, and know much more about her in most ways than I.

BTW There is one other little tidbit at this time about AG: "The Recording Academy" (Grammys) verified that AG was never nominated other than in 2001. and, that she never won. They have already published the WINNERS, hence do not need to explicitly publish the non-winners. However, for several years, she/Rolex have clearly claimed a Grammy win on her homepage -- www.angelagheorghiu.com/en -- and The Recording Academy is proceeding accordingly -- probably a "cease and desist" order. I'll let you be the judge of what to say about that, if anything, in the wiki article. (Perhaps that assertion should best be sourced/noted then by two links: her website, and www.grammy.org) Sidney Orr (talk) 00:11, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes I did read your rationale. Although please note that material I edited and provided references for was added by an anonymous IP 71.116.78.146. I presume that was you editing anonymously? The link you provided to the Recording Academy did not specify a page where it could be verified that the recording had been nominated. That site does not list past nominees. The source I provided specified both the nominees and the winner, Les Troyens. Secondly, as explained in the footnote and in the article on the 44th Grammy Awards, the date of any such award is normally derived from the date of the ceremony. The phrasing and footnote makes that clear now. Thirdly, at the time you placed the material, there was no functioning link to Gheorghiu's web site to establish that "she had claimed a Grammy". I have now fixed the link. The area you are referring to is a pasted-in section from the Rolex site under the "partner's section". The quote is no longer on the Rolex site. Nor has Gheorghiu ever claimed in any of her official biographies that she has won a Grammy. However, if you think that adding to the article that a quote from another web site on Gheorghiu's web site incorrectly states that she had won Grammy Awards is a key contribution to this article, by all means please re-add it. I have adjusted the link to her official web site so that it can now be verified.

Re your remaining comments, note that your personal opinions of and speculations about the article's subject have no place whatsoever in the article, on its talk page, or on the talk pages of any of its editors. Nor does your alleged correspondence with either her or anyone else belong there. Claims which cannot be verified by reliable sources as defined by Wikipedia will be removed from both the article and the talk page in accordance with Wikipedia's policies on the biographies of living persons. May I also ask you to refrain from personal comments about other editors such as "Get real, Mr. Fan." I'm not a fan of the article's subject. I am a member of the Wikipedia Opera Project and have written or substantially contributed to many articles on opera singers for Wikipedia. We also keep many singers' pages on our watchlists, especially when they are biographies of living persons, including this one. The policies that I have tried to explain to you apply to all biographies of living persons on Wikipedia. They are not my personal policies, they are Wikipedia policies. They are not being applied exclusively to this article, they are applied to all such articles. This article was begun in 2003 and is the product of many editors and many revisions. I note that you are a new editor to Wikipedia, and so far, apart from one article which mentions a character with your name, your only edits are to this one. You also seem very unfamiliar with Wikipedia policies and practice in general. In addition to the pages on the biographies of living persons and reliable sources that I have linked above, I think you would find Wikipedia's Talk Page Guidelines and the Policy on Original research helpful. Voceditenore (talk) 08:21, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Voceditenore: Please don't get me wrong -- I admire your work, although the AG article has and continues to read like PR fluff in the main. Responding to a few of your points:

1. I didn't think it a good idea to change the link to her site, since there many links to the non-"en" version, which will now fail.

2. On the main homepage in question, there is still a clear reference to her winning a Grammy, in the place you saw, Parners/Rolex, although "The Recording Academy" (Grammy.org) denies that. I talked to "Greg" there - the designated "fact-checker, who used their database, both to verify the year of, details of the nomination, as well as check, and check again, whether AG won. He verified that she never has. Don't you think there's an issue for the wiki article as a result? If not, why not simply say so -- that its better to wait until there's legal proceedings or until her website is changed, rather than lecture a contributor about common sense?

3. I won't make more of an issue out of this, but will simply wait for the legal process to play out. You are welcome to contact my Grammy source, [name and email address removed per privacy of personal information Voceditenore (talk) 08:08, 13 June 2008 (UTC)]. You have a lot more time on your hands for the wiki than do, so I urge you to clarify any doubts in your mind by communications with him and/or their "communications" department. Clearly something is awry, and since you are paying such attention to this bio, I simply hope you come to understand why I think its unfair (at least) for someone to claim a Grammy award inappropriately.

4. I'm glad that you have all the musical knowledge you do, and that you have contributed so much to the wiki community. I only performed and studied composition under SLonimsky a few years whilst an undergraduate - a long time ago. So its debatable whetrher I am a sub-area-expert. But I do claim some unique knowledge of the subject material at hand, about which I can never reveal any _private_ matters, of course, at present. However, I do claim a right to reveal or eucidate on what has been made known publicly, is in the public domain, or which comes directly from subject-area masters, such as Mr William Mason. If any of those assumptions violate wiki policy, which I admittedly am not very familiar with (I go for common sense instead) -- then perhaps we should continue some of this discussion with the wiki group you mentioned.

5. I admit/stipulate that I should become more familiar with the wiki procedures.

6. As to "libel", my thinking is unchanged: if its true, it not libel. I must accept the information from the Grammy database as factual and true. (and superior to any secondary sources such as CNN) Do you, or do you not, think that's reasonable? Sidney Orr (talk) 22:33, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Re 1. This is an English encyclopedia. If the link works, the link should stay, particularly if you intend to re-add the assertion about the claim to winning a Grammy. (See Re 3. below.) My concern with the original assertion in the article was that it was unverifiable without a working link to where the claim could be found.

Re 2. Once again, private emails are not considered reliable sources by Wikipedia. More importantly, I have removed the full name and email address of your contact at the Recording Academy from your comments above as per Wikipedia's privacy of personal information policy. Please do not add the names and email addresses of other people to talk pages or articles again.

Re 3. As I said before, if you think the incorrect Rolex advert is worth noting in the article, and contributes significantly to the biography, add it. It can now be sourced via the link to Gheorghiu's web site, and if you think it necessary, add an additional reference link to the official Grammy site. (The CNN link needs to stay as it references the Grammy nomination for Manon.) If the Rolex advert is ever removed from her site and there is no other published reliable source which confirms that it had been there, then the assertion will have to be removed as well. Note however, that the Rolex advert makes no claim about her having won a Grammy specifically for Manon. It says in typical ad-speak hype "She commands attention. And she's earned it on stage and off, winning virtually every award from the Grammys to Female Artist of the Year in Britain."

Re 4. Once again, you do not "have the right" to make claims (either positive or negative) about a living person (or persons) on Wikipedia which cannot be referenced to published reliable sources. Your alleged personal knowledge and private emails whether from the article's subject, the Director of Lyric Opera of Chicago, or anyone else cannot be used as sources. Nor can material whose only sources are blogs, self-published web sites, or internet forums.

Re 6. By "libellous", I was referring to the assertions you made about the subject's private life, which I removed from your comments on this talk page yesterday. Wikipedia does not allow unsourced libellous or potentially libellous assertions about living persons in articles or on talk pages. Even assertions (either positive or negative) which are "contentious" must be referenced impeccably and even then the policy is presumption in favor of privacy. Wikipedia does not operate like a internet forum or a blog. It has much stricter rules, Nor is it in the business of investigative journalism. If you find these restrictions uncongenial, then you should think seriously about continuing to edit this or any other biography of a living person on Wikipedia. If you still require clarification about these issues, I encourage you to enquire at Biographies of living persons noticeboard. Voceditenore (talk) 08:08, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Angela Gheorghiu, The Love Of My Opera Life

An article about my love for Angela Gheorghiu as both a great soprano and performer; as well as a woman of incredible sexual beauty.

My admiration for Angela Gheorghiu started a few years ago when I woke up one morning and turned on my TV to Mezzo; the French classical music channel. It being then that I saw one of the most beautiful women I had ever seen in or out of opera, performing the aria “Habanera” in a segment from the opera “Carmen” by Bizet. As for myself, it was not an issue of my never having seen or heard anybody else perform this very aria but there was something in the way this sensuous woman with dark black hair interpreted this aria that made it so alluring to watch; as she with not only her voice but body and coquette gestures performed it. It was Angela who added so much with not only her graceful sexuality but the way her eyes and smiles added to her interpretation; all of which making her as if an actress in a scene of seduction.

I at that point must admit was captured by Angela even to the point of being enamored with her, not only as a great soprano but by her femininity which came across in the way no other’s ever had in the world of opera. Of course there had been other ladies of beauty in opera such as Te Kanawa or Fleming yet Angela Gheorghiu was one who in a way was to opera what Marilyn Monroe had been to cinema, her being a woman who put so much of her female self in to her parts that never failed to exclude feminine passion. Looks wise hers was a face that combined beauty with personality that perhaps did not always include symmetrical features yet soft ones that to my eye made her a delight to watch; as she expressed herself in arias which seemed almost composed for her womanhood. I even getting the impression hers was pure celestial joy whilst she delighted with her persona and above all talent.

It was then that I became a fan of Angela’s as I at one point had become one of Kiri Te Kanawa yet with Angela it was equally an infatuation with her as a woman as it was as a soprano. My desire for her being like what I would have probably felt had I lived in the time of Marilyn Monroe. Naturally I took to following her career and above all operas, most of which she performed with her soon to be ex-husband; Roberto Alagna. I must acknowledge that she even lend something extraordinary to roles that previously had not been among my favorites, as she brought a certain capricious nature to them that was not pretentious in anyway yet much like an adorable child. This being precisely how I saw her as Flora Tosca in Puccini’s “Tosca”, specially when playing the jealous lover next to Roberto Alagna in act I in which she acts with suspicion over the gorgeousness displayed in Cavaradossi’s painting of the Magdalena; claiming “e tropo bella” (she is too beautiful).

Angela Gheorghiu in the second act would deliver a stupendous rendition of “Vissi D’ Arte” (face of art) which I had heard several times before yet when taken to her ways became as if an aria I was hearing for the first time; as there seemed to be a passion which had never been there. Angela Gheorghiu in the second act of Tosca would also demonstrate all her strength of character when slaying police chief “Scarpia”, declaring she is Floria Tosca after having claimed “mouri, mouri” (die, die).

Act three did not fail to live up to my expectations in this film version of Tosca and neither did Angela Gheorghiu, as she displayed so much emotion when she believes her lover to be pretending to be dead; only to discover that his was not a game of deceit. It being at that point that she is discovered and rather than be taken alive she decides to end her own life by jumping off the building before she can be captured; all as if to prove that only Tosca can decide such matters.

I would go on to see Angela Gheorghiu and Roberto Alagna perform in several other roles such as Mimi and Rodolfo in “La Boheme” and even in a gala event concert in Dresden which like many of her performances I recorded on DVD from Mezzo. I for my part must even confess to have written two articles about her entitled “Why Do We Love?” and “What Makes Us Love?”. This holding as truth though I did not mention it in anyway that be direct or even indirect that they were about Angela yet it is now that she will be once again free of the bond of matrimony that I declare that they were about Angela Gheorghiu. It being her for whom I felt when I wrote the above mentioned phrases to love.

As for myself, it maybe that I never get to meet Angela Gheorghiu yet I can do no other than dream that I might someday be the object of her adoration, as she is of mine or that my poems might capture her spirit as it might soar; as her voice does on to mine. This for it is my fantasies that include her in ways I dare not even mention in this article or in any other save to her if ever our paths should cross.

http://www.angelagheorghiu.com

http://www.amazon.com/Angela-Gheorghiu-Arias-Giuseppe-Verdi/dp/B00000429G

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Gianni Truvianni (talk • contribs) 15:53, 24 April 2010

The Three Sopranos

An article about an idea of mine for what I see as a great concert for the 2010 World Cup games in South Africa. This being a performance which should be given by the three grandest divas of our time, who in my never modest opinion undoubtedly are Anna Netrebko, Cecilia Bartoli and Angela Gheorghiu; in an event to match those of their male counterparts who called themselves “The Three Tenors”.

It all started during the World Cup Italia 90 when Jose Carreras, Luciano Pavarotti and Placido Domingo performed a concert to be remembered. As these three great tenors of their time sang not only opera arias but popular songs in a show to call the attention of both opera fans and other genres of music. All of which leading to a second performance at the World Cup USA 94 yet on that occasion they would return as “The 3 Tenors”. Carreras, Domingo and Pavarotti no longer using their individual names but that of their group in the same fashion rock bands did.

“The Three Tenors” as most are aware of would go on to achieve enormous success as they not only toured the United States doing shows in stadiums but returned for both the 1998 World Cup in France and the 2002 World Cup in Japan and South Korea. Naturally, as is the case with all singers of tremendous popularity; they also released CDs and DVDs of their performances which in the case of “The Three Tenors” included a Christmas concert.

It is unfortunate however now that “The Three Tenors” are no longer with us. This due to the sad fact that Pavarotti passed away in 2007 while Domingo and Carreras are at an age in which their voices are no longer what they used to be yet does this mean the music must end? I, for my part claim that grand concerts of opera as the ones given by “The Three Tenors” need not end if our desire is that they do not; for to continue their tradition another opera group might be formed for the 2010 World Cup in South Africa.

The singers I have in mind for this new formation of opera voices however would not be comprised of three gentlemen but the same number of ladies whose voices would lead them to be called “The Three Sopranos”. Regarding the three ladies I have in mind; they are the ones’ whose talents elevate them above the rest in the opera world, as it was with Pavarotti, Carreras and Domingo in their time and it is with no doubt that I declare that they should be Cecilia Bartoli, Anna Netrobko and Angela Gheorghiu.

It being these three gorgeous ladies who are in their prime with not only angelic voices but all the charisma and personality that opera divas are required by the laws of nature to posses. Needless to say, they too like “The Three Tenors” did through out the 90s and the first few years of the new century would sing those arias from the opera world which fans have come to adore; along with some traditional folks songs. This being the case where each lady could bring to the repertoire a folk song from her native country that would include pieces from Rumania (Angela Gheorghiu), Russia (Anna Netrobko) and Italy (Cecilia Bartoli).

Of course this being a concert by sopranos would not include the same arias which were covered by the three tenors, for their material would include “Habanera” from Bizet’s Carmen or “Sempre Libera” from Verdi’s La Traviata” or “Me Chiamano Mimi” from Puccini’s La Boheme” and many others which they could perform individually. It also being possible for them in a joint effort to lend their voices to Wagner’s “Ride Of The Valkyre” along with other arias that involve more than one voice with perhaps the three of them ending the show with “O Mio Babbino Caro” from Puccini’s “Gianni Schicchi”; much in the same way “The Three Tenors” ended their shows with “Nessun Dorma” from Puccini’s “Turandot”.

In conclusion I would say that in my opinion Angela Gheorghiu, Cecilia Bartoli and Anna Netrobko performing as “The Three Sopranos” in the 2010 World Cup in South Africa would not only do wonders for the popularity of opera through out the world but their own as well. As it would be their superb voices along with their feminine charm and beauty which would be more than capable of filling stadiums as well as selling CDs and DVDs by the millions. This holding as true given they are genuine divas, unlike those in pop music who have taken to using the name in a move that has only brought vulgarity to the title; as would happen if a person who fries burgers in a fast food restaurant were to pretentiously refer to him or herself as a “great chef”. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gianni Truvianni (talk • contribs) 16:01, 24 April 2010

New comment

It appears that this article has now been rewritten in various places, surprisingly, by someone who is a non-native English speaker, given the questionable syntax. The syntax reminds me of the style used in my previous correspondence with the subject. This does not enhance the credibility of this article, or the Wiki in general, for that matter. The closed environments of paid, professional commentators, such as Lebrecht, Parterre Box and Operachic, who are "on the ground" in the world of Opera, are, as common sense might suggest, more informative in several ways, and more "primary" then the Wiki.

In the world of classical music and opera, the Wiki's amateur editors might improve the articles by paying more attention to high-quality blogs, that invariably contain direct quotations from the subjects, and subject-area masters, as well as photographs by professional photographers at the time of the events. Obtaining permissions for the use of those pictures or excerpts, for use here, is usually trivial, and left as an exercise for the well-meaning amateur editors herein. Sidney Orr (talk) 17:28, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Sidney Orr: Please indent. Can you also explain what you mean about the rewriting? When did it happen? Can you give references. Also note there are professional editors working on WP. --Kleinzach 03:58, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject

Talk pages are solely for discussing improvements to the article, not for expressing personal views on the article's subject, either positive or negative. I have archived two such lengthy essays. They can be found at Talk:Angela Gheorghiu/Archive 1. To the editor who added them, please read Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines. Thank you. Voceditenore (talk) 05:36, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Angela Gheorghiu/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.

this article appears a bit biased. needs some cleanup.

Last edited at 03:19, 7 January 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 14:13, 1 May 2016 (UTC)