Talk:Opera house

Name change and split into two articles

Increaingly, I've come to the conclusion that the only way to have all the opera houses in some sort of list (since people remove individual houses and put them in the country list) is to change this to List of opera houses.

There is a List of important opera companies (60 regarded as significnt, so don't believe that we need another one), but I think you're right in suggesting that Opera house could be it's own article.

Vivaverdi 23:52, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree that List of opera houses would probably be more consistent with other articles. - Kleinzach 14:12, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

By agreement, this is now simply "Opera house" and a separate List of opera houses has been created. Vivaverdi 21:12, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

This page now looks rather odd. It looked even odder before I removed the Note that I wrote and have now put on the List page. Do the References really belong here as well as there, where I see they've been copied? NB there are lots of pages that link to this one. Is anyone planning to improve this page before it gets listed for deletion? --GuillaumeTell 21:25, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I think it will be OK if we treat it as an opera terminology article. Many of these are short anyway. I don't see any danger of it getting deleted. It could be developed with information about architecture and design. (The German page is a kind of combination of both types of article). BTW, I have updated the list infobox. - Kleinzach 21:33, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

OK, fine. However, I've just noticed that the move has created a double redirect. Opera House, which is used in a number of articles, dumps you at "Opera houses", from where you don't get forwarded to Opera house. I'm not clear what ought to be done about this, though I've fixed one or two individual occurrences - is it just redirecting from Opera House straight to Opera house? --GuillaumeTell 21:55, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I think I've fixed this. - Kleinzach 22:03, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it looks like it. Thanks. --GuillaumeTell 23:56, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the wiki-ing (if that's a word...) of all this. I'm afraid that I'm (mostly) clueless on this stuff...

Vivaverdi 02:40, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

But there;'s no reason not to keep the refeences, since all refer to specific opera houses. Certainly, the article now needs some expansion to deal with the evolution of the "house" per se. That is something I'd be willing to tackle, unless anyone else wants to leap in... (It's a busy summer at the Santa Fe Opera).

Vivaverdi 02:43, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Sources

There is a good article on 'Theatre architecture' by Edward Langhans in Grove. This is a subject that really would benefit from diagrams and photos. Great if you can take it on. Fascinating subject. - Kleinzach 09:45, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Palais Garnier -Outside.JPG

Image:Palais Garnier -Outside.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 16:20, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Teatro San Carlo: lack of sources

Can anybody provide any source/evidence for the San Carlo theatre in Naples to be:

• the oldest operating theatre in the world (cannot check all existing theatres and their inauguration dates);
• the oldest to have been built with a "horseshoe" hall.

Filippo83 (talk) 10:37, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

The San Carlo has been reconstructed in 1810'. Even the Metz Opera house, presented here, is older. 217.167.255.177 (talk) 10:06, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

The San Carlo was inaugurated on 4 November 1737 https://www.teatrosancarlo.it/en/pages/historical-highlights.html Nivent2007 (talk) 15:00, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Yes that page says "1737: The most ancient Opera House in the world comes to light". I think if one phrased it as "claims to be.." and confines it to opera, it would be ok. The Theatre Royal, Drury Lane is (WP says) "The building is the most recent in a line of four theatres which were built at the same location, the earliest of which dated back to 1663, making it the oldest theatre site in London still in use." Johnbod (talk) 15:11, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

The Theatre Royal, (WP says) "for most of that time, it was one of a handful of patent theatres, granted monopoly rights to the production of "legitimate" drama in London (meaning spoken plays, rather than opera, dance, concerts, or plays with music).

Teatro di San Carlo was inaugurated on 4 November 1737. Lonely Planet says: "Although the original 1737 theatre burnt down in 1816, Antonio Niccolini's 19th-century reconstruction is pure Old World opulence". Nivent2007 (talk) 11:52, 11 August 2023 (UTC)