Talk:Jacob Obrecht

The 1980 Grove article

I think much of the article should be rewritten using newer sources, as Sparks' text is no longer valid. Wegman's entry on Obrecht in Grove Online specifically addresses the issue, explaining in great detail why Sparks is in error about various aspects of Obrecht's personality, work and historical significance. Unfortunately I am no expert on Obrecht or Renaissance polyphony, but I hope someone more knowledgeable will come along, see this notice and maybe correct the article. Jashiin (talk) 16:01, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Composer project review

I've reviewed this article as part of the Composers project review of its B-class articles. I take issue with the writing in this article; it needs copyediting. Its other main failing is that there is no works list; my full review is on the comments page. Questions and comments should be left here or on my talk page. Magic♪piano 23:06, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Yah, thanks for reminding me. This is one of the articles that was savaged by a class assignment in December 2007 (same class as the thread on the Wikiproject composers talk page, but the previous year) and I haven't gotten around to fixing it yet. Some of it doesn't make sense at all; it's a collection of short choppy sentences riddled with cites, many out of context and misunderstood. Obrecht is an important composer and making this a good article will be a substantial job. Antandrus (talk) 00:00, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, that certainly explains it. You have to wonder if students today are taught how to write paragraphs (never mind anything longer)... Magic♪piano 01:13, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Dates don't add up

It says that he was born in 1451 but also that "His portrait, painted in 1496, gives his age as 38, establishing his birthdate" which would mean that he was born in 1458. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.162.181.34 (talk) 15:35, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

I own a few recordings of music by Jacob Obrecht, and they all have the birthyear 1457/1458 (see e.g. this on-line catalogue entry. However, probably a more reliable printed source is needed to justify changing it in the article. --Francesco Malipiero (talk) 15:57, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Wegman's article in the 2001 New Grove is more recent than his 1994 book. I updated the article to give the more recent date, citing Grove. Note that this article was one of the ones shredded by a class project at Union University three years ago; the whole thing needs a rewrite and a careful comparison to sources to pull out contradictions like this. (I've been intending to do this for a while but haven't.) Antandrus (talk) 16:25, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Jacob Obrecht/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.

Comment(s)

Press [show] to view →

==Composers Project Assessment of Jacob Obrecht: 2009-01-12== This is an assessment of article Jacob Obrecht by a member of the Composers project, according to its assessment criteria. This review was done by Magicpiano. If an article is well-cited, the reviewer is assuming that the article reflects reasonably current scholarship, and deficiencies in the historical record that are documented in a particular area will be appropriately scored. If insufficient inline citations are present, the reviewer will assume that deficiencies in that area may be cured, and that area may be scored down. Adherence to overall Wikipedia standards (WP:MOS, WP:WIAGA, WP:WIAFA) are the reviewer's opinion, and are not a substitute for the Wikipedia's processes for awarding Good Article or Featured Article status. ===Origins/family background/studies=== Does the article reflect what is known about the composer's background and childhood? If s/he received musical training as a child, who from, is the experience and nature of the early teachers' influences described? ok ===Early career=== Does the article indicate when s/he started composing, discuss early style, success/failure? Are other pedagogic and personal influences from this time on his/her music discussed? ok ===Mature career=== Does the article discuss his/her adult life and composition history? Are other pedagogic and personal influences from this time on his/her music discussed? ok ===List(s) of works=== Are lists of the composer's works in WP, linked from this article? If there are special catalogs (e.g. Köchel for Mozart, Hoboken for Haydn), are they used? If the composer has written more than 20-30 works, any exhaustive listing should be placed in a separate article. No works list. ===Critical appreciation=== Does the article discuss his/her style, reception by critics and the public (both during his/her life, and over time)? ok ===Illustrations and sound clips=== Does the article contain images of its subject, birthplace, gravesite or other memorials, important residences, manuscript pages, museums, etc? Does it contain samples of the composer's work (as composer and/or performer, if appropriate)? (Note that since many 20th-century works are copyrighted, it may not be possible to acquire more than brief fair use samples of those works, but efforts should be made to do so.) If an article is of high enough quality, do its images and media comply with image use policy and non-free content policy? (Adherence to these is needed for Good Article or Featured Article consideration, and is apparently a common reason for nominations being quick-failed.) Article has one image; more would be better. One sound clip. ===References, sources and bibliography=== Does the article contain a suitable number of references? Does it contain sufficient inline citations? (For an article to pass Good Article nomination, every paragraph possibly excepting those in the lead, and every direct quotation, should have at least one footnote.) If appropriate, does it include Further Reading or Bibliography beyond the cited references? Article is well-referenced and (almost overly) cited. ===Structure and compliance with WP:MOS=== Does the article comply with Wikipedia style and layout guidelines, especially WP:MOS, WP:LEAD, WP:LAYOUT, and possibly WP:SIZE? (Article length is not generally significant, although Featured Articles Candidates may be questioned for excessive length.) Layout (now) OK; lead may be a bit short, and prose needs work (see summary). ===Things that may be necessary to pass a Good Article review=== Article lead needs work (WP:LEAD) Article needs (more) images and/or other media (MOS:IMAGE) Article prose needs work (WP:MOS) ===Summary=== This is a reasonable article. Unfortunately the writing in it is somewhat choppy; while I realize that documentation on the man is scarce, randomly throwing other references out (like Tinctoris and Erasmus) without context is grating. The article would seriously benefit from a copyediting by a team: a good writer, and a subject expert. The article's other major flaw is that his works are not listed (either here or in a separate article, whichever is appropriate for the length of the list). This is somewhat routine for important composers of other eras; it should be important here too. Article is B-class; I think, considering the importance of the subject, that the effort to get it to A (or past a GA review) would be time well spent. Magic♪piano 23:04, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Last edited at 23:04, 12 January 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 19:19, 29 April 2016 (UTC)