Talk:Médée (Cherubini)
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
Recordings: continual assertions that recordings exist. Where is the evidence?
editUser talk:151.56.13.214 persists in insisting that recordings of this opera exist. The user of this IP continues to revert changes made by User talk:Brian Joseph Morgan. Neither he nor I have found any evidence that recordings with the named singers actually exist.
151.56.13.214: you need to provide evidence in the form of a link to a verifiyinable site that such recordings exist. Otherwise, what you are doing is tantamount to VANDALISM. If you choose to continue with this behaviour, an appeal will be made to an Admin. to block you from editing. Viva-Verdi (talk) 03:52, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
Euripedes
editThe libretto is not based on Euripides.
Opera-comique
editSounds more like a grand opera, but- formal matter?... Schissel | Sound the Note! 16:10, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
Isn't the lead supposed to summarize the article, not introduce new material?
edit"The long-lost final aria, which Cherubini appears to have elided from his original manuscript, was discovered by researchers from the University of Manchester and Stanford University by employing x-ray techniques to reveal the blackened out areas of Cherubini's manuscript.[4]" Seems odd to have this in the lead, but not in the body of the article. This one sentence arouses much more interest in me than the entire rest of the article. Is there really nothing else to say about it? --Khajidha (talk) 13:09, 3 January 2019 (UTC)