This page is within the scope of WikiProject Classical music, which aims to improve, expand, copy edit, and maintain all articles related to classical music, that are not covered by other classical music related projects. Please read the guidelines for writing and maintaining articles. To participate, you can edit this page or visit the project page for more details.Classical musicWikipedia:WikiProject Classical musicTemplate:WikiProject Classical musicClassical music articles
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present.
Should musicians having memory lapse in concerts be added as an entire paragraph in their biographies?[edit]
A brief summary of my long paragraphs: Should incidents like musicians having memory lapse in concerts be added to controversy, career or personal life section, i.e. notable as an entire paragraph in their biographies? (As currently, biographies only include long-term memory lapse as a one-sentence description) Also, seeking for GA Nominee Advice. Thanks a lot.
Since the community has not discussed this matter before, I am asking to clarify my confusion: I am currently working on this classical pianist's biography, hoping to improve it to GA status. I just noticed two debates/discussions on its discussion page on whether him having a memory lapse in a 2015 concert should be added to the controversy section. In the first discussion in 2016, the two editors (according to edit history) seemed to have reached agreement that the inclusion may have violated WP:BLP trivial/gossip and it was not kept at last. In the second discussion in 2021, the other two editors didn't reach an agreement on the matter. So now, I am confused and want to know whether the memory lapse incident should be added to the controversy (or career or personal life section, as an entire paragraph) or not, and I want to get it resolved to one step forward meeting GA standards.
I have read some other musicians' biographies concerning memory lapse as references. I notice that although having memory lapse is a usual mistake in classical concerts, only a few musicians having long term (yearly) memory lapse were included as a one setence description in their career/personal life section, not controversy section e.g. Vladimir Horowitz, Anton Rubinstein.
It makes me doubt whether a one-time concert memory lapse is necessary to be included in the controversy section of musician's biography, and whether this may violate WP:BLP. (According to previous replies in teahouse, it seems that this should not be included in musicians’ controversy section) Also, I am wondering if such incident is relevant/has the necessity to be included as an entire paragraph in musicians’ career/personal life section
Got it, thanks. Other experienced editors at teahouse suggested that I could look at biographies as references (if it has the necessity to be included as other section).
Currently in Wikipedia's biographies, I observed that only musicians having memory lapse in concerts lasted yearly are listed-- this makes me wonder if there's a general agreement on this kind of incident.
If I just take other GA or of high quality biographies' as references on quality, is it enough for me to promote it to GA.
Hi there, I've just committed to reviewing your article, so can speak more about it on the review page.
The people at the teahouse mean well, but these kinds of situations vary wildly between different pianists, so looking for comparisons may be misleading. If reliable sources are covering something in depth, it should be mentioned. As Nikkimaria says, it should likely not be a section in itself, and should be incorporated into a large narrative of the article. Aza24 (talk)17:23, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just a thought, if the lapse was especially notable, e.g. the performer suddenly played a different piece or did an amazing improvisation or etc, then I think it warrants inclusion; but rarely as a whole paragraph. Unless of course it is a regular feature of their performances. Again as pointed out, the WP:RSs are key — Iadmc♫talk 05:32, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The correct answer is that an article should reflect what reliable sources have written about the subject. If there is a good biography written after the incident, what percentage of that biography is devoted to the incident? The article generally should have roughly the same percentage coverage. It's likely that, apart from news-of-the-day commentary, a memory lapse would get very minor coverage which probably means it should not be mentioned in the article. Another way of looking at it is to ask what impact the incident had. Was there a medical examination? Did the incident lead to the cancelation of a concert? Did the audience riot? It's likely that the impact, after a few days of news coverage, was zero. Therefore, it should not be mentioned. Johnuniq (talk) 05:50, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Discussion on Classical music Eligibility at Wiki Yearly Album List[edit]
I'm very pro-infobox, but it seems that most of the active users of this project (and the opera project) are very much against infoboxes. I'm pro because eventually infoboxes will be replaced with information pulled from Wikidata, which will make them easier to use across different language wikis and will be easier to update (in the case of those that have changing information, such as populations). Having witnessed these arguments over time, I'd say it's not worth spending effort to argue. You can create infoboxes for articles you create and I feel that's the best use of your time, rather than modifying existing articles where many editors will disagree. - kosboot (talk) 15:18, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would disagree - infoboxes are important and useful enough (and basically universal on every other chunk of Wikipedia) that it's worth going through the effort to get past the roadblocks. PianoDan (talk) 16:00, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the comments guys! I was involved in the RfC over at composers group... I know about the arguments. PianoDan is right: we should keep going despite the effort and resistance— Iadmc♫talk 14:42, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]