Talk:List of operas by Claudio Monteverdi

First impressions

A great beginning!

• We need lighter colours, for better accessibility (contrast letters to background is not enough), consider those from Bach cantatas.

  I tried that for Arianna.

  It looks better like that! Is the color I chose for "complete libretto and lost music" too dark? I don't think it looks that great but I'm not sure what to change it to. Aza24 (talk) 22:25, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

• The explanations of the colours needs to go above the table, and we need to also show the same content somehow relse, like numbering them and showing the number in a note, for the blind.

  Moved the colors, the numbering is a great idea. Do you think we can move the colors on the List of operas by Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart? They're at the bottom there and seem super inconvenient that way. Aza24 (talk) 22:25, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

• We should find short headers for the table, and describe what they mean in detail above the table.

  I tried.

  Looks great! Aza24 (talk) 22:25, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

• We need to link every occurrence because when sorted differently, a different line may be the first line. I don't believe we need the given names of librettists in the table.

  Instead I got the librettists' names above, no link, only surname, to not sort by given names.

  Also looks great! :) Aza24 (talk) 22:25, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

• In first performance, I suggest to have just the date, and all detail in prose, to not clutter the table.

  Perhaps we should distinguish dates and places (2 columns), or perhaps describe the place above, as the librettists.

  Alright that makes sense, I'll have to do some more looking to figure out some of the premieres.Aza24 (talk) 22:25, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

• I hope that we'll find a way to make the 3 biggies stand out first glance.

  That may happen automatically with lighter colours.

  Yes, I was wondering about this, I guess we would eventually mention how there are the 3 big ones that survive in the prose, but it would be nice to highlight them more somehow. Aza24 (talk) 22:25, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

• Combattimento is not an opera, - if we keep it I'll have to write the article, which is probably a good idea anyway ;)

  I linked it, and will expand, probably never to featured, but somewhat.

  Yes you're completely right! I missed the fact that it is argued about how to classify it but it seems like in general it is definitely not classified as an opera. Aza24 (talk) 22:25, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:49, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Second round, indented --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:53, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

7 May

Thank you, it looks much improved. I made minor changes with edit summaries I think I don't need to repeat here. Hope to get to some prose later today. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:54, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

I'm really think filling in the uncataloged SV numbers and unperformed pieces with a "–" or something makes sense. Otherwise it looks like that information was simply forgotten by the editors or missing. Aza24 (talk) 07:08, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

I see, but to me, it looks cleaner empty. Who will expect a performance place, or a catalogue number, for an opera for which we don't even have a libretto? I'm more concerned about finding some group names or numbers for the blind who can't see the colour key. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:16, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

I wonder about less colour in the table. Perhaps background colour only for the group name (to be) and/or the title? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:26, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Well, the thing is, there is a SV for one of the lost Operas and performances recorded for 3 of the lost operas, so an empty box would probably be confusing, in my opinion. Maybe to address the color blind issue I can restate the music and libretti's existence in the notes section? I was planning to write in that section about what the opera was written for so I could add that there without it getting too lengthy. Aza24 (talk) 08:31, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

To your other point, there does seem to be a bit too much color, but perhaps it will look less full when the notes section expands the rows height? I just haven't seen any tables on Wikipedia without the whole row filled in for a color, so thats my reservation. Aza24 (talk) 08:33, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

I'd keep the note entries short and rather have more prose for what might be longish there, also for the practical reason that I hope this will be a DYK article which needs 1500 chars of prose. A table is for at a glance, not for studying details of an operas occasion. We do need some grouping in the table (!) for those who can't see the colours. I can take of it, but probably not today. - About SV no. and performance for a lost one: great to have that from other sources, but nobody should be surprised by no entry. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:23, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Great edits! I'll get some sources for what we have so far in the next couple of hours and maybe start drafting some kind of lead. Just a note about the premieres, from what I've read it seems like the pieces whose premieres are empty is not because the information is unknown. Rather, they're empty because those pieces were never finished which of course making a performance impossible. We should probably try to make this clearer in the prose. Also, I noticed your use of UK/British English with "Colour," if you prefer to stick to this kind of English, feel free to change any words I spell differently accordingly. :) Aza24 (talk) 23:20, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, - will stick to UK English because that's what we do for European topics. I write differently for American topics ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:42, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

8 May

Alright I've added some info for all of the Operas in the table, we can definitely compress it at some point. Aza24 (talk) 07:20, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Great! Today would be a good day to move it to Main space, - I'll see what I can do expanding. I see the problem coming that often Brian's wording would be best, but thou shalt not copy. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:24, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

All I managed to do is basically extracting the details from the table to short entries about the operas. I wonder if we need all the refs in the table. More hopefully tomorrow. I hope nobody dies. Today, mostly written in memory of Norbert Balatsch. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:40, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

9 May

note to self [1] --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:44, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Aza24, I got some info from the Lost operas article over, including a pic which suggest that the operas were played no at the Ducal palace, Mantua but Palazzo Te which was also a ducal palace. Do you know? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:16, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Gerda, I'm not really sure what you mean. The picture you added is one of Ducal palace, Mantua not Palazzo del Te. Orfeo and L'Arianna were definitely premiered there, and not Palazzo del Te, according to Grove/Carter. (Grove article was written by Carter) Orfeo's wikipedia article confirms this while L'Arianna's article doesn't mention this interestingly enough (should we add that in there maybe?), but proposes no alternative. (Ducal palace, Mantua's article also suggests they were performed here) It looks like Monteverdi was a court musician at Palazzo del Te though. I'll do some cleaning and add a little more to the text on each of the operas in a little bit! Aza24 (talk) 22:25, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, I found the same thing but failed to say so. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:28, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Coffeeandcrumbs (talk) 08:41, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that among three surviving operas by Claudio Monteverdi is L'Orfeo, first performed in 1607 and still in the repertoire? Source: several

• Reviewed: SS Dongola, 2nd article
• Comment: best on the composer's birthday 15 May, and sorry for being late

Moved to mainspace by Aza24 (talk) and Gerda Arendt (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 22:08, 9 May 2020 (UTC).

• The hook wording is rather confusing: would it be better to say instead that L'Orfeo is (from what I can tell from the article) the oldest opera that is still regularly performed today? I'm sure that hook fact, if worded properly, would interest even non-opera fans. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 13:24, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

ALT1 ... that L'Orfeo, which premiered in 1607 and is one of the three surviving operas by Claudio Monteverdi, is the oldest opera still regularly being performed today?

Would you be fine with this wording? I'm not sure how to avoid the repeated use of the word "opera" so this could probably be revised further. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 02:39, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the offer, however, I feel that it would be a good hook about L'Orfeo, but not the operas. What do others think? It could also be shortened by dropping the date, because I feel a clause with two points retards the key fact for too long? And I think the key fact should be at the end. And I think "surviving" might raise curiosity, and perhaps more than "oldest" whatever. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:54, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

• Suggesting a variant of both of the prior hooks—ALT0 is oddly structured, and ALT1 puts L'Orfeo before the operas:

• ALT2: ... that of the three surviving operas by Claudio Monteverdi, L'Orfeo from 1607 is the oldest opera still regularly being performed today?

Another approach might be to note that L'Orfeo was written when Monteverdi was 39, while the other two are from his 70s, but that information would need to be added to the article. —BlueMoonset (talk) 05:02, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for helping my awkward English. I think that he wrote operas when younger and older is not as specific as him writing at the very beginning of opera, and the first of them to last. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:35, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

• Full review needed now that hook is set. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:27, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Article was moved to mainspace on the day it was nominated, it is long enough and new enough at the time of the nomination. A QPQ has been done and no close paraphrasing was found. Assuming good faith for the source as it is offline. As I suggested the "oldest opera still regularly being performed" hook fact, a new editor is needed to sign off ALT2, although I have some concerns that the "is the oldest opera" wording could be reasonably misinterpreted to only be referring to the three operas rather than opera as a whole. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 12:46, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

... and if so, would it matter? ... it's of course also true. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:33, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

The hook fact is supposed to be about L'Orfeo being the oldest opera in general still being performed regularly, not just that it's Monteverdi's oldest surviving opera. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 13:43, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

And - pardon - which other composer would that be writing which opera still performed today before 1607? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:47, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

• ALT2a: ... that the earliest of the three surviving operas by Claudio Monteverdi, L'Orfeo from 1607, is the oldest extant opera still regularly being performed today? —BlueMoonset (talk) 04:09, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

That sounds good and more accurate. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 11:00, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

• Narutolovehinata5, was there something else needed that prevented you from completing your review with an approval? BlueMoonset (talk) 13:29, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

@BlueMoonset: I introduced the "oldest opera still being performed" hook fact so I can't approve a hook that mentions it. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 13:36, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

• I'd forgotten that, Narutolovehinata5. My apologies. I'll call for a new reviewer for ALT2a, and I've struck ALT2. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:03, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

• New reviewer needed to check ALT2a hook. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:03, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

• The ALT2 hook fact is not correct according to the source, which groups L'Orfeo together with two operas by Henry Purcell as the most often performed 17th-century operas. The source says nothing about it being the "oldest" opera performed either. It seems to me that ALT2 is more accurate, as the second clause appears to be talking about Monteverdi operas, not operas in general. Yoninah (talk) 19:38, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

• I can't follow. The source talks about Purcell's Dido and Aeneas (one opera), and however many, Purcell was born more than 50 years after L'Orfeo was performed, which makes L'Oreo really singular, - wordsmithing welcome. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:57, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

• Then we need a source that says L'Orfeo is the oldest extant opera still performed today. I can't read a source that groups it with Purcell and know that L'Orfeo is older. Yoninah (talk) 20:03, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

We have several sources (not in this article) saying when Purcell was born (1659) but what would they have to do with the Monteverdi list? Readers might rub their eyes about such a thing required by DYK formalism, instead of common sense. Can't things such as when Purcell and Shakespeare were born taken as common knowledge? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:10, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Well, I found a source] without Purcell for what simply IS rather common knowledge. Will add to the article. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:17, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

"then we need a source": "With Orfeo, Monteverdi created the first opera that both survived the centuries and stuck in the repertory" NPR; "an opera, the first masterpiece in the genre" J.E. Gardiner, in The Guardian"; "This is considered by many musicologists and music lovers to be the birth of Western Opera." France Musique RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 20:20, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

• Thanks, RandomCanadian. The article can only benefit if you'd like to add these sources to it. Yoninah (talk) 20:28, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

  I added the one I found, "the first opera to maintain a place in the modern repertory". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:36, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

  The "birth" thing is a less precise description, because it wasn't the first, just the - by far - first to still be regularly performed. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:39, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

• Thank you both. ALT2a good to go. Yoninah (talk) 20:56, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

10 May

Gerda! I moved some things around because there were a lot of small sections that we were probably going to have to summarize in the lead, so I simply moved them into the lead instead. I also put in a small section about the origin of Opera and Monteverdi's part in it. (Added a bunch of sources too) Let me know what you think of these changes.

After looking at a lot of other lists on Wikipedia, especially music ones like List of works for the stage by Richard Wagner and List of operas by Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart and I've come to the following conclusions.

1. I really think we should delete the blurbs on each of the Operas under the table, as this is after all, not an article on Monteverdi's Operas but a list. I probably shouldn't haven't added those initial notes in the first place.

2. I think the explanations directly above the tables might be unnecessary, I didn't really see any other lists do so and the reason seems to be that everything in the table is pretty self explanatory. If we add in the Lead about which Operas were not performed or something that would help with the explanation as well. The only thing I see that isn't self explanatory is the SV numbers and the two lists I mentioned earlier both have good solutions to this. The Wagner one simply has a section after the librettist section on the WWV and the Mozart one has a note in the top column of the Köchel number about it. I think the Wagner version is a better idea though.

Thoughts? Aza24 (talk) 03:14, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Waking up, and little time right now, not even to read it thoroughly: I think you confuse List and Table. I want to make this a DYK article for his birthday, which needs a certain amount of prose, - and had to be nominated for enough time before, even if not yet polished, so I did although dead tired. (After DYK, prose doesn't matter, but I still believe that longish things should not clutter a clean table, and I do believe that the occasions for which he wrote add life to the whole thing.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:06, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Gotcha, but I think after the DYK that the occasions are probably present enough in the list it self, so deleting the prose below the list would make sense. Aza24 (talk) 08:40, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

I had little time today for this topic, just looked now. I think the "emerging" details are good for a background section, not for a summary of Monteverdi's works. The different genre names also seem no lead material to me. Usually, I write the lead last ;) - travel tomorrow --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:55, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

I also quickly looked at Wagner and Mozart, and think there's way too much detail in the tables. Can you imagine how they look on a mobile device? - For Reger, we have a sortable list of the works with a catalogue number, and below, the details for individual works, such as titles of the movements of a song cycle, or 52 chorale preludes. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:00, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

We have more time because the 15 May preps are already assembled, and I hate begging for exceptions. Hope to do more tomorrow. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:56, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Sounds good. I'll be really busy for the next 2 days–ish but after that will be completely free and I'll tidy up any loose ends in the list and lead and such. Aza24 (talk) 22:09, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

So I added a revision table below the main one since he revised Arianna, not sure about its inclusion as a table though? Aza24 (talk) 20:36, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Will see but too tired right now after updating Gabriel Bacquier --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:53, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Scores

Asked per edit summary, I looked at the list again. I am sure we don't need the links to the scores in this overview article at all, because the reader can be sure to find them in the opera articles. I am not sure about the SV numbers as the first column, - I'd prefer the titles first but won't fight ;) - I don't know about scope vs. the other. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:47, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Well yes I was mainly asking about the Priemere column/row formatting but you bring up some good points. My thoughts are that having SV (or OP. BWV K. etc.) first is pretty standard from all the lists of composition articles I've seen, and the score inclusion was after seeing it at List of operas by Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. I see it as like lists of paintings have a picture of the painting, we can't include the score, so a link to one is the next best thing. Aza24 (talk) 08:00, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

If you think we need it, put it perhaps in a very last additional column. A link to a score - or rather to a website which has links to pdfs of scores if you are able to find them, and then you also have to be able to read one - is not like an image. About table formatting, I don't know much, but RexxS does. - About the numbers first: I understand that for Bach cantatas, where they are redirects, and some probably better known than the complicated German titles. But for operas (yes, also Mozart's), they seem more a thing for musicologists. I don't remember a catalogue number being added on a poster for Poppea or L'Orfeo, and these names are easily recognized. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:44, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

I see where you're coming from with the score and SV stuff. My main hesitation is having the title of the work in the first column, it looks rather odd to me and would be at odds with about every featured list (List of winners of the Boston Marathon has year then the winner for example). My suggestion to solve your and my issues is that the SV and score column (would be a waste of space to separate them into two different ones I think) could be the last column and the "period" one could be the first, thoughts? Aza24 (talk) 09:11, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

That makes sense to me! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:20, 26 August 2020 (UTC)