Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Requiem (Reger)/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Laser brain via FACBot (talk) 23:02, 6 May 2016 [1].

Requiem (Reger)

Nominator(s): Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:13, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the Requiem by Max Reger, which I want to see in good shape on 11 May 2016, a century after his early death. Looking closer, the article which began to be about the Hebbel Requiem which he composed in 1915 on a German poem by Friedrich Hebbel, with the soldiers fallen in World War I in mind, is also about his earlier setting of the same poem (1912), and his unfinished attempt to compose a Latin Requiem (1914). The article received a GA review by RHM22 a while ago. Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:13, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Brianboulton

Uncited statements: There are numerous sentences that do not carry citations.

There are two sources which I would like to get advice on how to use them as references, one the Max-Reger-Institut website with detailed information on each piece, and the score. One: should I have the refs for Op. 1, 2, 3 and 4 all in THIS article, to cite that 1-3 are all chamber music, and 4 is songs, #1 by Hebbel? One look (or two to find Hebbel) at Max Reger works#Table of compositions (linked) shows that at a glance. - The other: the score tells us about his tempo markings and division of parts, even if no secondary source does. In a different review, we talked about the music section being comparable to a plot section in a book. --GA

I introduced now the "vocal score" as a reference. ---GA

In the "Background" section: "He established himself as a pianist and composer, also teaching piano and organ. The first compositions to which he assigned opus numbers were chamber music. He composed in 1891 as his Op. 4 a collection of songs, the first, "Gebet" (Prayer), on a text by Friedrich Hebbel who wrote the poem on which two of Reger's Requiem settings are based."

First sentence bio, second see above. --GA

"Hebbel's poem": "The Latin title of the poem alludes to Requiem aeternam, rest eternal, the beginning of the Mass for the Dead."

There may be people who simply don't know that much about the meaning of Requiem, both as a word as a liturgy. Do you think a link to Requiem is enough? --GA

"Hebbel Requiem - Music":

"The four parts SATB of the chorus are often divided. The key is D minor, as is Mozart's Requiem. The tempo in common time is marked Molto sostenuto, kept with only slight modifications by stringendo and ritardando until the most dramatic section, marked Più mosso (moving more) and later Allegro, returning to the first tempo for the conclusion."

Most is now cited to the score. Do we need references for the Mozart Requiem being in D minor, the Brahms beginning with a pedal point on F, and Das Rheingold on E-flat, next question? ---GA

"In a pattern strikingly similar to the beginning of A German Requiem, the bass notes are repeated, here on an extremely low D, lower even than the opening of Wagner's Das Rheingold on E flat."
"In section B, the chorus is divided in 4 to 6 parts, set in more independent motion. The soloist sings similar to the first time, but repeats the second line once more while the chorus sings about the hovering as before."

Score, now cited ---GA

"In section C, the chorus literally stiffens on a dissonant 5-part chord fortissimo on the word erstarren. In great contrast, a storm is depicted in dense motion of four parts imitating a theme in triplets."

Score, now cited ---GA

"Reger completes the chorale setting in his way for the chorus, while the solo voice repeats "Seele, vergiß nicht die Toten"."

Score, now cited ---GA

The above stand out because they are at the ends of paragraphs – or in a few cases represent the entire paragraph. There may be other, less obvious uncited sentences. In some cases the problem might be resolved by the resiting of an existing citation, otherwise new citations are required.

A couple of unrelated points:

In the infobox the statement "Soldiers who fell in the War" is a little vague. At least say "First World War", and link.
The statement "Reger died in Leipzig after a full day of teaching on 11 May 2016" reads as though it was the teaching that killed him. You may want to rephrase/expand a little.

It's a translation of Reger's writing, which is pictured and therefore not repeated in German. He knew of no numbers for wars". It's specific, with a link, in the first paragraph of the lead. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:22, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to reword the death. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:59, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Brianboulton (talk) 10:44, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for looking, and raising good points. Looking forward to a solution to the general Op. ~~and score~~ questions. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:17, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Updated --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:07, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry Gerda, but I don't understand many of your responses; perhaps I am dim, but I don't have time for a long discussion. I'll just say two things: first, statements such as "The Latin title of the poem alludes to Requiem aeternam, rest eternal, the beginning of the Mass for the Dead" would be better included as a footnote, where as explanatory comments they need not be cited. Secondly, some of your citations to the score look dubious. For matters of fact, e.g. key, tempo, instrumentation or similar detail, then the score may be cited, but not for interpretative statements such as "In section C, the chorus literally stiffens on a dissonant 5-part chord fortissimo on the word erstarren. In great contrast, a storm is depicted in dense motion of four parts imitating a theme in triplets." For you to use such a statement, a published source needs to have said it, or something like it. Likewise the Rheingold comparison. I hope that helps. Brianboulton (talk) 19:02, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Without a note here, I added cites other than the score to the stiffening (although it's not interpretative, it's just that all voices hold their note without dynamic change for a long time) and the storm. Both "stiffen" (erstarren) and "storm" (Sturm) are in the text, now more visibly because I repeat the translation in the paragraph (which was ony in the table when you read). I found a cite for Mozart and Brahms. Will do without Rheingold if it's a problem, but it should be easy to find a ref. Thank you for the footnote idea, will do that. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:30, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Our article on Das Rheingold is not very specific, and has only an offline source. Of the many online, this one describes it most precisely. Acceptable?--Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:51, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I thought about the footnote once more, but think Reger's Requiem is so different from what readers expect that a footnote is not enough for clarification: a German poem with a Latin title, about rest for the dead, alluding to the Catholic mass, but not even Christian. What can we do? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:43, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

Missing parenthesis in the lead caption?

No, just trying to make readable what Reger wrote: "2.)" - grateful for making that clearer --GA

The caption of the History image is displaying with the filename shown - see VPT discussion

I don't see that. --GA

I'd have no problem with showing the complete card, - would match the poet who is also sitting. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:25, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Reger_Max_Postcard-1910.jpg: when/where was this first published? If the author is unknown, how do we know they died over 70 years ago? Nikkimaria (talk) 15:10, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, but remember that in the GA review by RHM22, the image I had suggested was replaced by this one, so I thought it was "safe". RHM22 also did the cropping. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:20, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The original image was possibly not PD, and as an expressionistic painting, I don't think it was necessarily the most illustrative choice for this particularly article (although it was nice aesthetically). As for the current postcard image, the source website says that it was published in 1910 in Germany, it should be public domain because it was published more than seventy years ago. The current tag on the image seems wrong, unless somebody knows who actually took the photograph. I think the correct template is this: Template:PD-Germany-§134-KUG. I don't know much about German copyright, so I'm not sure. The image isn't actually cropped, but I used the CSS cropping template so only a portion shows due to the unnecessary large size.-RHM22 (talk) 22:33, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Likely I'm missing something by using Google Translate, but I'm not seeing that the source website says either that the image is a postcard (it seems to say only "photograph") or that it was published in 1910 (it says "original date 1910"). In fact, it seems to say that the publication date was 2014. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:39, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have my difficulties with image rights in all languages ;) - this would tell me that the website included it in 2014. Here's German, with a link to "Gemeinfrei" which I would translate as "free to share". - How would this be, alternatively? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:27, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For that you would need to know when/where it was first published, you'd need to verify author was never given, and (depending on first publication) you'd need a US PD tag. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:10, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds as if the original choice may have advantages, after all, with a creator who is known to have died in 1918. RexxS, what do you think? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:13, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not exactly sure what choices you're asking about, because the above exchanges don't seem to be about the same image, but this is what I've managed so far:

For the File:Reger Max Postcard-1910.jpg, the source (the Catalan website) indicates "Memòria Digital de Catalunya" as the repository of the original, and grants "copying for study and research, quoting Centre de Documentació de l'Orfeó Català as source. All other uses require permission." So we don't have the photographer's permission for Wikipedia use. However, if the original postcard(?) were PD, then Bridgeman vs Coral would indicate that we don't need to recognise claims of copyright by the photographer, because it's a 2-D work and the photographer can't generate a new copyright. However, I can't be sure that the original actually is a postcard (which would make it a 1910 publication), even though I would find it unusual for a mere unpublished photograph to have the subject's name imprinted on it. Anyway, we don't seem to be able to conclusively demonstrate that the original image has now passed into the public domain, so I've proposed that it should be deleted from Commons - c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Reger Max Postcard-1910.jpg. Of course, if it survives that nomination, we can then use it on En-wp with confidence.

For File:Max Reger 1913.jpg, the source is Gewandhausmagazin Nr. 89, 2015/16, S. 13, so there's a clear publication in 2015, but no obvious evidence of when or if the original image was published, so it suffers from the same defect. Does anybody have easy access to the magazine? The preview at https://issuu.com/gewandhausorchester/docs/gwhm_nr.89_webseite doesn't show me page 13, so I can't see if there's any more information about the original.

For File:Nölken, Reger.jpg, the original is attributed to Franz Nölken, who died in 1918. In 1913 (the date of the painting), Nölken seems to have been based in Hamburg and Reger in Leipzig, which makes it very almost certain that the country of origin was Germany. Annoyingly, the source page given http://www.aski.org/portal2/89.95.0.0.1.0.html doesn't show anything about the image, and the Wayback Machine hasn't got a snapshot from 2009. Nevertheless, I've updated the {PD-Art} tag on Commons to reflect that, as it's incontrovertibly PD in the US and Germany. --RexxS (talk) 16:26, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

May I confess that I understand only half of all this but would think the Nölken portrait is the best choice? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:33, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's almost certainly the safest choice. I much prefer the postcard personally, but IMHO we would need to see it survive the deletion debate on Commons before we could be happy using it in a Featured Article. --RexxS (talk) 22:45, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Jim

This isn't my subject area, and I don't read German, so I can't check most of the sources. An interesting and generally well written piece, but there are places where the text is perhaps a bit clunky or wordy. Some nit-picks

he conceived in 1914 already the project to compose a choral work—by 1914 he had decided to compose a a choral work?

I have no source for "decided", and - looking at the ups and downs of the project - it seems too clear a term. I am open to a better wording of "idea", "project", "intention". --GA

Well, it's still clunky, and both "already" and "project" seem superfluous -Jim

How is "... he thought in 1914 already to compose a choral work to commemorate the soldiers who died and would die." ---GA

he moved to Jena in 1915, still teaching in Leipzig. He composed there— where is "there? If it's Jena, better In Jena he composed...

How do others feel? I tried to avoid that close repetition. --GA

but as it stands it's ambiguous -Jim

taken, changed, lets not people think for a moment, he composed while teaching ;) ---GA

after the outbreak of World War I, Reger intended to compose a work commemorating the soldiers who fell in the war —I don't like the repeat of "war", perhaps intended to compose a work commemorating its fallen soldiers or something similar

Please look for "something similar", if English can do that. He wrote also for those who were not (yet) fallen, but would die in it. --GA

"for those who would die"? -Jim

taken---GA

"Dies irae" should have both words capped

No, Latin rules. - Then I looked at the article. We need to discuss this, but until we find that this is an exception (compare Victimae paschali laudes, I would like to keep it as in other articles on Requiem compositions, and many occurrences in Requiem itself. --GA

Dies Irae is how it is in its own article, and that conforms to English capitalisation rules (all cap or all lc), I don't understand this hybrid version -Jim

There was a long discussion, about Latin incipits, but I can't find it. We have La traviata Italian, Petite messe solennelle French. To make the Latin follow English rules seems hybrid. - I started the discussion on the Dies irea talk. ---GA

The work remained unfinished and was later assigned the name and work number Lateinisches Requiem, Op. 145a, by the publisher.— the unfinished work was later assigned the name and work number Lateinisches Requiem, Op. 145a, by the publisher.

Perhaps make two sentences? There are many years in between. The failure was hard for Reger, - perhaps even an extra sentence about that? --GA

Yes, needs tightening -Jim

Was done already, please look again, ---GA

"memoria" looks like a typo for "memorial"

yes, good catch! --GA

The chorus, divided in eight parts&mdash' the eight-part chorus?

I would do that, but later in the work it's five and four. Should we add here before "divided ..."? --GA

Yes, that's clearer -Jim

fine ---Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:13, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:56, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Jim, for diligent reading and good comments, hope you are with me for answers, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:56, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy with the responses so far, but I'm not supporting yet since there seem to be some unresolved issues with other reviewers, and since I have little expertise in this area, I'd like to see how they pan out Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:03, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Wehwalt

I would cut "with the autograph"

I don't see that anywhere. If you mean "in the autograph", I added that because the dedication in the printed edition was slighty different. Open to a better way of doing this, ---GA

" as the final part of his 83" unclear what this means on casual reading

Added a bit, ---GA

"He began a setting of the Latin Requiem" I would make clearer in text that this is the service for the dead.

Added, ---GA

"on words of Joseph von Eichendorff" with words by ...

I changed it, always insecure about prepositions in English ;) ---GA

What church was Reger excommunicated from?

I added now Catholic to the above service for the dead, - hope that does it. To my knowledge, the Catholic Church is the only one to excommunicate, and stopped doing it for simply marrying someone from a different or no church. - Something about Reger's tension between Catholic upbringing, then marrying a Protestant wife, should be in his - so far poor - biography. The lead of a composition article is not the place for such details, imo. ---GA

"as a motet for men's chorus a cappella," if it is just for men's chorus isn't it by definition a cappella?

Tricky good question (because of the ambiguity of a cappella). (First longish answer: To my knowledge, it could also be for men's chorus and (unmentioned) orchestra or piano or other accompaniment. Bach's motet's were with (unmentioned) instruments.) I guess I switch to "unaccompanied", although that's a monster of a word. ---GA

"In response to World War I, he conceived in 1914 already the project to compose a choral work to commemorate the fallen of the war." I would delete "already" and change the next word, "the", to "a"

That sentence was changed already, following Jim, ---GA

" In 1915 he moved to Jena in 1915" duplication

good catch! ---GA

"Reger died there on 11 May 2016." ahem

even better catch ;) ---GA

"Hebbel writes indeed about the rest of the dead," I'm not sure the "indeed" works. Also, "rest" in this context is ambiguous and I took it to mean remainder.

Dropping "indeed", I try quotation marks for "rest eternal" (mentioned the line before) to avoid that trap. I added "not religious" which is a summary of what follows. ---GA

In the first two paragraphs of Hebbel's Requiem (the section), you twice set forth the first line (once in italics and once not) and the translation twice. Cannot this be consolidated? I'm not sure that your use of italics when non-English words and phrases are used is consistent.

I removed the second one, hoping for the readers' memory from one paragraph to the next. Generally I try to follow: when in quotation marks in the text, not also italics, but italics when a name for a movement or section (in the table), - I make mistakes ;)

"The addressing of the soul reminds of some psalms" possibly change "reminds of" to "is reminiscent of"or "echoes"

very good idea! ---GA

"and imagines them, nurtured by love, to enjoy one last time their final glow of life." I might say "sustained" for nurtured. Is this fully accurate? "Final glow", if I must search for a meaning, would mean "final moments" to me, and the final moments of life are, I expect, not always the most pleasant.

It tries to summarize "Und in den heiligen Gluten, die den Armen die Liebe schürt, atmen sie auf und erwarmen und genießen zum letzten Mal ihr verglimmendes Leben." A lot of talk about "Gluten" (glow), stoked by love, they (the poor dead) breathe (revived), get warmer and enjoy for a last time their dimming life. - The translation of the latest recording has "And in the holy ardour Which love rouses in the poor, They breathe once more and take on warmth And enjoy for one last time Their fading life." - (missing the stoking part, and missing "verglimmen" - what a flame does when it ceases being a flame) - Improvement welcome. ---GA

"full of battle for renewed being" does this mean the dead are fighting each other with the prize new life? It's a bit unclear.

It IS unclear, we have to blame the poet. Actually, the dead are not depicted struggling, but caught by a storm to a restless existence (again translation of the recording): "And it pursues them tempestuously Through the endless desert wastes, Where life no longer exists, only the struggle Of unleashed forces Struggling for renewed being!" Reger composed: "nur - Kampf - nur - Kampf - nur - Kampf - nur - Kampf um erneuertes Sein. (I blame the translator of repeating struggle, and think it's too soft for "Kampf".) - Again, - improvements welcome.

"as a response to the author's death" in response to the author's death.

taken ---GA

More soon.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:34, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for excellent comments, trying to follow, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:51, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Jaguar

Per WP:LEADCITE, citations are usually discouraged from the lead unless it's citing controversial information. I've been shot down on this a couple of times, so I don't know if I'm right in this case... feel free to ignore

It's - in this case - a good summary which would be hard to top ;) --GA

"Reger had approached the topic before; In 1912, he composed Requiem" - unnecessary capital after semi-colon

no semi-colon when I looked last --GA

"It has been regarded as a work of "a lyrical beauty, a dramatic compactness, and an economy of musical means" in which the composer's "mastery of impulse, technique, and material is apparent"" - where is this quote coming from? Who said it? Just critics in general?
The source says that it was the summary of a dissertation, which is stated in the body. In the lead, I feel it might be too much, - compared to all the other things not said. --GA
"Income from publishers, for concerts and from teaching private students enabled him to marry in 1902" - unnecessary prepositions, how about Income from publishers, concerts and teaching private students enabled him to marry in 1902?

taken --GA

"he dramatist Friedrich Hebbel wrote in 1840 a poem in German titled "Requiem"" - should this be italicised?

no, poems and songs just quotation marks

"In the fall of 1914, he was in discussions with a theologian in Giessen about a project for a composition" - autumn?

taken --GA

"In was then performed with a German text adapted to suit Nazi ideas" - how about to suit Nazi ideology (just a suggestion, feel free to ignore)

good! --GA

"The Dies irae was first performed in Hamburg on 3 November 1979" - link Hamburg

To what? The Latin Requiem of which Dies irae is part, was a ready linked, and the article Dies irae hardly matters because Reger composed very little of it, and no details of his handling of the text follow. --GA

"Reger completed the composition on 25 August 2015. He wrote to the publisher N. Simrock on 8 September:" - is this meant to be 8 September 2015? I got confused as I looked at the article Fritz Simrock and he died in 1901

good catch! was fixed, --GA

I've come late to the FAC, and those were all of the minor nit-pickings I managed to find on my first read-through. Sorry for the delay in getting to this. JAGUAR 16:27, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Late is no problem, matches me nominating late ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:43, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Lingzhi

"(alto or baritone), chorus and orchestra" I don't see a need for three citations here. Unless this statement is somehow controversial, I suggest that you choose the citation that you think is "strongest" or "best known" and delete the other two. Ditto for " the memory of the German heroes who fell in the War 1914/15"

good point, - I left only the first (found last) for the general line, but left two (one for the text, one for the translation) for the dedication. --GA

"without further reference to the chorae tune for the chorus, without further reference to the chorale melody" If a chorae tune is the same thing as a chorale melody then one of these is redundant; if not, change to "without further reference to the chorale melody or the chorae tune for the chorus" (note that I switched their positions to avoid brammatical ambiguity). Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 13:12, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

another good point, simplified (a rest of my own ce, showing that the "l"-key malfunctioned) --GA

Thank you for looking closely, and thank you for copyediting, I liked most of it! This change: can we improve? It now sounds as if the Latin Requiem didn't deal with rest for the dead, but it does, just differently. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:23, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In the same line: "renewal" seems a bit too harmless for "erneuertes Sein". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:41, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Aye aye cap'n. :-) Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 17:20, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Existence", fine, English can't do better, German has Mensch and Sein ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:23, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator note: Unfortunately this nomination has failed to gain any consensus for promotion after more than a month. Therefore, I will be archiving the nomination. --Laser brain (talk) 23:02, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been archived, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. --Laser brain (talk) 23:02, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.