Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Mozart in Italy

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 promoted by SandyGeorgia 02:32, 31 January 2009 [1].

---

Mozart in Italy

Nominator(s): Brianboulton (talk)

This is a companion piece to Mozart family Grand Tour. It continues the story of the travels and musical education of the child genius Mozart, this time in Italy where he learns to write opera, gets a knighthood from the pope, meets Bonnie Prince Charlie and gets chased by brigands on the road to Rimini. And that's just the first of the three journeys! Thanks to the peer reviewers who gave the article a thorough going-over, and to Ruhrfisch who rescued my bungling efforts to draw a map. Brianboulton (talk) 21:46, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

• Support: the article gives an account of Mozart's trips in Italy wonderfully, describing each of the three journeys and the notable events. Brian has done a wonderful job in bringing this aspect of Mozart to life. Disclosure: I was one of the peer reviewers and have worked on the images to ensure compliance (so someone else should have a look at the images). Jappalang (talk) 22:19, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

• Few comments I've made a few minor word changes, but these would be beyond my knowledge of the field (which is minimal):

Background:

• • "illness and a bereavement in the imperial court prevented the children from performing there". Do we know who died? it might be worth piping the name to "a bereavement". Also, shouldn't Imperial Court be capitalized.
    • I've reworded to say who actually died. I don't think capitalization is required; it generally isn't in the sources. Brianboulton (talk) 01:16, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
  • "through his over-eagerness to secure a performance of Wolfgang's first real opera". Does over-eagerness need a hyphen? And Leopold offended one and complained about the other? The connection may not be absolutely apparent to the reader
    • You're right about the hyphen. As to the rest, Leopold offended Gluck, and complained to the emperor about Affligi, the connection being Wolfgang's opera, which Leopold was trying (a little too hard) to get performed. I hope this is clear in the text as it stands. Any suggestion for greater clarity would be welcome. Brianboulton (talk) 01:30, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Second paragraph, Nannerl: First paragraph says that Leopold's purpose was to basically show off his kids. The second paragraph implies his main purpose is their education. I see a disconnect.
    • Leopold always had joint a double motive - to show off his kids, and to further their musical education. I've clarified that in the first paragraph, so the disconnection should disappear. Brianboulton (talk) 01:42, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
      • Sounds like a lot of 21st century parents!--Wehwalt (talk) 01:49, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
  • "church music of the highest order" I imagine what is meant is the best church music, but that may not be clear.
    • I've changed "order" to "quality" (which is the word used by the source). Brianboulton (talk) 01:48, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
  • "women should stay at home" Nannerl and who else? Assume the reader has not read the Grand Tour article, and may be unfamiliar with the Mozart family generally.
    • Clarified: Nannerl and her mother. Brianboulton (talk) 01:48, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

More later.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:15, 23 January 2009 (UTC) Journey to Milan:

• "The general arrangement was the same as for the family's grand tour". Maybe "Leopold's financial plan for the Italy journey was the same ...". And for "travel and accomodation costs". Why not just "travel expenses"?
  • I've adopted the "Leopold's financial plans" suggestion, but I see no harm in emphasising "travel and accommodation costs", since much of Leopold's grumping is about the high costs (and poor service) of the inns. Brianboulton (talk)
• "extensive stops en-route" does that mean a lot of stops, or long stops. And I personally would say "en route" rather than "en-route".
  • "Extensive" should be "extended" - my error. Also, hyphen deleted. Brianboulton (talk) 11:14, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
• Leopold not revealing his finances: Did he always do this? Then I would state it in more general terms, as a personal characteristic, rather than something that relates to the tour only.
  • This point is, I think, covered in footnote [14]. In view of the density of information already in this narrative, I'd prefer to leave the information footnoted. Brianboulton (talk) 11:33, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
• "plenty of improvisation" maybe "much improvisation"?
  • Agreed and done.Brianboulton (talk) 11:33, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

More later.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:51, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Milan to Naples

• Is a string quartet a "genre" like, say, punk rock? I'm trying to come up with a better word.
  • A string quartet is not a genre; "chamber music" is the genre, and I have altered the text accordingly. Thanks for picking that up. Brianboulton (talk) 11:33, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
• "Leopold was anxious to develop a stronger connection" As there was not yet any connection, suggest deleting "stronger".
  • On this first Bologna visit Martini met Wolfgang and tested him with some musical exercises. That was the brief, initial connection. Leopold wanted a stronger connection, for the reasons given, and therefore planned the extended tuition for their return Bologna visit. Brianboulton (talk) 11:33, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
• "carrying letters from Pallavicini". He's referred to by a hyphenated name when he's introduced. Nickname? :)
  • There were other Pallavicinis around, including a cardinal, so I dare say the Bologna one added a bit to his name to avoid confusion with his namesakes. As he's the only one mentioned in this narrative, we can just call him Pallavicini.Insert non-formatted text here
• "close emotional friendship". Not sure what is being conveyed by the word "emotional". Suggest striking the word or rephrasing to make it clearer what is meant. Same paragraph, "making much music". Playing? Composing? It's a cute phrase, but I'm just not sure what is meant by it.
  • The "emotional" or "tender" nature of the friendship is thus described in the sources. No further details are given, but the inference is merely of two boys, in a strange land, surrounded by adults and yearning for company within their age group. To avoid misunderstandings I've withdrawn "emotional". As to the rest, "making music together" is standard phrasing for performing music. I've slightly reworded, removing the "much" to avoid sounding, as you put it, "cute". Brianboulton (talk) 11:33, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
• "It took five days to reach Rome, through wind and rain". I guess this is Leopold kvetching about the weather again. Not sure if this is saying they were delayed and took longer than usual.
  • Five days sounds about right for a 150-mile journey. I've rephrased to avoid the impression of a delay. Brianboulton (talk) 11:33, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
• "The route through the Pontine Marshes was believed to be harassed by brigands". Can brigands harass a route? And believed? Either there were pirates, excuse me, brigands there or there weren't.
  • Rephrased. Brianboulton (talk) 11:33, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

More later. Sorry, it is an excellent article, but it is filled with information and it takes time to read it with the attention it deserves, and I can only take so much at a time.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:48, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments thus far. I look forward to more. Brianboulton (talk) 11:33, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Return from Naples:

• "They were under military protection, because marauding pirates were attacking the road." Ah, pirates! I know just the guy for that. As they were travelling, were the pirates attacking? Sounds that way. Incidently, while we are on the subject of military, I think the article could use an offhand sentence here and there about the political situation in Italy, perhaps a mention of when they entered a town within the Papal States, or a mention that Naples was a part of whatever it was a part of then (Two Sicilies?). Especially since the map is that of today's Italy, which is the product of wars and compromises and is a bit different from what was thought of as Italy then. Not asking for an accurate political map of Italy then, because that would be a tremendous pain (though long term, if you could get one, with the Mozarts' journey superimposed, that would be a real boon.) This might be a good starting point.
  • Reworded to the road being "subject to attacks from pirates". As to your suggestion about the political state of Italy at the time, it's a good one, but I have to tread carefully. None of my sources mention this aspect. I am not an expert on 18thC Italy, so unless I'm careful, what I say could be challenged. I have therefore confined myself to the briefest description, after the first mention of "Italy" in the Background section. I have cited this to a general history book. I see no point in going beyond this, as the political situation did not affect the Mozarts' journeys in any way. On the question of the map, that's definitely for the future, after the painful birthpangs of the one we have. Brianboulton (talk) 19:55, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Milan revisited:

• "Evviva il maestro!" (Long live the master!) I think most people understand "maestro". Suggest "Evviva il (long live the) maestro" or a similar construction. I think maestro suffers in translation, though literally correct, especially since master is a (a bit archaic now) salutation for a boy. (not that archaic, my great uncle used to address letters to me as (Master so and so). And I'm uncertain if you need italics for that phrase, you are probably more of a MOS hawk than I am.
  • I think how I have it is OK. You are right that "maestro" suffers in translation. In Italy it had a particular connotation for musicians, signifying their mastery of the craft, but I don't want to put all that in. As to italics, per MOS, quotes should not generally be italicised; the maestro di capello is part of a quote in which italics are used. Brianboulton (talk) 19:55, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
• "Mitridate anywhere, before its revival in Salzburg in 1971." Probably you could lose that comma.
  • Got rid of the comma, and the anywhere, too. Brianboulton (talk) 19:55, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Journey home

• "took a detour to Venice". Almost slangy. "detoured" might almost be as bad. And I am not sure it conveys what you want, because detoured is most commonly an unintentional act. Something like "journeyed home by way of Venice" might be better. Not sure, though
  • I've changed it to "travelled to Venice" Brianboulton (talk) 19:55, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
• "Despite the generosity of their treatment" What generosity of treatment? You mention signing a contract, giving some gigs and maybe playing the ospitali.
  • Reworded. Brianboulton (talk) 19:55, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
• "the Prince of Aragon" can you pipe to the actual guy?
  • The guy was Don Giuseppe Ximines, Prince of Aragon, and I've named him now. There's no place to pipe him to, so it would be a redlink, rather an unnecessary one I think. Brianboulton (talk) 19:55, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
• "subsequent performance history" Subsequent implies that there was an initial performance. You say there may not have been. Suggest striking word "subsequent"
  • Reworded. It's the "performance" that hads to go; the subsequent history is obscure.Brianboulton (talk) 19:55, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
• "In Verona a few days later, more commissions awaited" There's an implication that these commissions were almost dropping into the Mozarts' laps as they drove through the city. I'd suggest "were secured". Also, suggest ending the sentence here, the rest of the sentence can stand on its own.
  • Reworded and organized as you suggest. Brianboulton (talk) 19:55, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
• "clash of dates" Maybe "conflict of dates" or "scheduling conflict"?
  • Agreed and done. Brianboulton (talk) 19:55, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
• 2,900 florins. Is a modern day equivalent possible?
  • In note [10], dealing with the archbishop's gift of 600 fl, I compare this with Leopold's annual salary of 354 fl to indicate the value of the gift. I have added a footnote to the 2,900 fl, again using Leopold's salary as a comparator. I think this gives a better indicator of the size of Leopold's profit than saying something like "worth about £30,000 in today's values". Brianboulton (talk) 19:55, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

I'll finish this afternoon or tonight.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:33, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Second journey:

• Should "I'm sorry" be italicized in Leopold's quote? Just cauz this is about Italy ...
  • I have copied the exact format from the source. Brianboulton (talk) 21:47, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
• "The main reason that kept them". Awkward. Perhaps "The main reason for their extended stay ..."
  • Agreed and done. Brianboulton (talk) 21:47, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
• I'm confused by the timeline here. Rehearsals began on 23 September, but the Mozarts didn't arrive in Milan until 21 October? Were the rehearsals someplace else? And what happened to the convention that arias are composed in consultation with the artistes? I suspect 21 August or September is meant.
  • Sorry, my mistake. They arrived 21 August. Brianboulton (talk) 21:47, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Upheaval

• "This was an awkward matter for Leopold," "This" clearly refers to the death. The loss of the Archbishop no doubt put the Mozarts in an awkward situation, but unless Leopold was responsible for death coming for the Archbishop, the death itself was not awkward, if you appreciate the distinction.
  • Understood, and reworded more appropriately. Brianboulton (talk) 21:47, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Third journey:

• Second carnival opera: It says under the Return to Milan subsection that Mozart was not able to fulfil this commission due to a conflict in dates. Yet here he is fulfilling it.  ?
  • No, it says that he was unable to fulfil the San Benedetto (Venice) contract due to the conflict over dates. Brianboulton (talk) 21:47, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
• "until two o'clock the following morning". perhaps "until two o'clock in the morning"? You may use a different idiom than I.
  • Basically these are two ways of saying the same thing. Brianboulton (talk) 21:47, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Evaluation:

• Looks good, though I wish you could end the article with Leopold's "We shall not go under ... " quotation.
  • It would be dramatically more satisfying, but I think the short endpiece is necessary to round the story off. Brianboulton (talk) 21:47, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Anyhow, really good article. Make the changes you like, in your discretion, but I'm not going to waste everyone's time by withholding my:

• Support. This is a topic about which I was happy to know more, presented in a lucid style not without humor and irony, with information to satisfy anyone from the casual reader to the Mozart buff, who really knows his K numbers.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:00, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your detailed review and for the helpful suggestions, most of which I have happily adopted. Thanks also for your support. Just one last thing: if you are still watching this page, could I ask you to relocate the bolded support statement to left, or Sandy might miss it! (Not a major issue, though). Brianboulton (talk) 21:47, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:28, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Image review - All images have verifiable licenses and good descriptions. Awadewit (talk) 22:40, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose for now. Support. My concerns have all been addressed, and provided that the article remains stable in something close to its present form, and continues with a rational first sentence in the lead, I support it. My congratulations to the proposer on a valuable contribution to the music articles.–_⊥^{¡ɐɔıʇǝo}Noetica!^T– 11:51, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

I would like to see this well-researched article succeed. The content is worthwhile and thorough, and even considering the absence of Deutsch's standard work it uses its sources well.

Noetica's concerns that have been addressed

Despite recent fixes, I cannot think that it meets criterion 1a: "well-written: its prose is engaging, even brilliant, and of a professional standard". I don't rule out doing some editing myself, but I have had no involvement with the article so far except to correct "fons et origio". Let's have a look at the lead: Mozart in Italy describes three journeys made by the young Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart and his father, ... Am I alone in thinking this an inept way to begin? Why not something more direct, like this: Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart made three journeys into Italy with his father, ... This is surely a case in which the article's title does not happily transfer to the first sentence of the lead, and as such is exempt by the usual provision at WP:LEAD: As a general rule, the first (and only the first) appearance of the page title should be as early as possible in the first sentence and should be in boldface: [...] However, if the title of a page is descriptive it does not need to appear verbatim in the main text, and even if it does it should not be in boldface. Response: I am grateful to Awadewit for the copyedits in the first paragraph, but I'm not convinced by your suggested opening sentence, which to me seems flat and dull. A similar change was considered and rejected during the peer review. Using the same approach as your suggestion, I have posted a variation which I think sounds better on the read-aloud test, and also flows better into the next sentence. Now this: The second and third journeys were shorter visits to Milan, fulfilling opera commissions that Wolfgang had acquired during his first visit. The wording that Wolfgang had acquired during his first visit is flat-footed like so much else in what follows; and we have too much use of during in the lead. Response: I'm sorry you find this wording "flat-footed". It is a simple statement of fact; if you have an alternative phrase, let's hear it. The number of "durings" in the lead has been cut to one. Since that date, he had ... Again, since that date is quite a pedestrian way of moving forward. Response: Resolved by Awadewit's copyedit to furthering the musical education of his gifted children, ... This use of furthering is inelegant and unnecessary. You can do it without any such verbal form, perhaps like this to the education of his musically gifted children, ... Response: I am happy that "furthering" has been deleted, but I think we must be clear that it was the children's musical education that was Leopold's primary concern. Now this: an extensive European "grand tour" during 1764–67, and, later, on a visit ... Extensive is redundant. The tour is already "grand", and it is already longer than three years. And then, during 1764–67 is poor for this sort of article; more suited in a company report than here. How would it be read aloud, after all? I would suggest from 1764 to 1767. Then ..., and, later, on a visit .... This can surely be managed without a flurry of commas. Response:This has been reworded, broadly as you have suggested, with reduced commas. During these journeys the children's performances made a considerable impression across European society. From this perspective, the journeys were a considerable success. (During, once more.) I would start from a simpler formulation: The journeys were in a way successful, since the children impressed audiences across Europe. Response: I dislike "...in a way successful", but the sentence has been rephrased and trimmed to a neater form. Now about Italy: Italy, the fons et origo of modern music and much of its terminology. This doesn't help much. Sure, Italy was an important destination for musicians at the time, but "modern music" is ill-focused. And why mention terminology here? Response: I'm not clear what doesn't help much. I wrote a fair summary of what the source, Zaslaw, says about Italy: "...the land where the terminology and much else of modern music had originated." This I believe gives weight to the otherwise unexplained fons et origo, though I am happy for it to be left as "of modern music". ... to write three operas to be produced in successive seasons (1770–72) at Milan's prestigious Teatro Regio Ducal, ... The repetition in to ... to ... is typical of the article's style. And again this range ... (1770–72) ...: why not say ... from 1770 to 1772 ..., which at least we know how to read out because it uses words! Try this: ... to write an opera for each season from 1770 to 1772 at Milan's prestigious Teatro Regio Ducal, ... Response: I believe this has been resolved in the copyedit. There is clunky repetition here, too: He met many of Italy's leading musicians, including the leading musical theorist Giovanni Battista Martini, ... Many readers would be allergic to leading ... leading ..., and again it is unnecessary. So are the qualifications with Italy's and musical, in the context. This is neater: He met many leading musicians, including the theorist Giovanni Battista Martini, ... Response: The repetition of "leading" is an obvious mistake that should have been picked up in the peer review. The repetition has been removed. However, some indication of Martini's standing should be given. Sadie uses "leading", Gutman "unparalleled", Halliwell calls him "acknowledged master" and Solomon "renowned". Of these, perhaps Solomon's is the one that fits best. The rest of the lead is similarly inflated, like this: ... and was pursued by him to a point where his persistence offended the imperial Habsburg court and precluded any appointment being offered. Response: This wording has been simplified The rest of the article needs tightening and skilful tuning if it is to meet criterion 1a. Just one more particular point, for now. You can indeed say string quartet genre, and it is better than saying chamber music genre. Look at the impeccable sources to be found with a simple Google books search, for example. The genre is distinct in its aesthetics and compositional technique from others that are closely related, like string trio. In any case, wording like this is possible, and it sidesteps any contentious issue: ... a string quartet, K.80/73f: his first attempt in that genre. Depending on your definition, you might think that Mozart wrote chamber music before this quartet (see Köchel catalogue). –⊥¡ɐɔıʇǝoNoetica!T– 23:47, 24 January 2009 (UTC) Response: I am happy to revert to my original description of string quartet music as a genre, and I think your suggested wording deals with it neatly. Ah, I see that Awadewit has edited since I began writing all that. But many of the points still apply; and they still illustrate the general problem with the whole article. –⊥¡ɐɔıʇǝoNoetica!T– 23:55, 24 January 2009 (UTC) Thank you for your review. You make some challenging points, though I don't agree with all of them. I will consider each in turn, and give you my views in due course. Brianboulton (talk) 01:27, 25 January 2009 (UTC) (Later): I have responded to your specific points, with alternative suggestions where necessary. I will go through the remaining text, hopefully with the help of a non-involved editor, to identify other areas that may need attention. If you have further specific suggestions I will be glad to attend to them. Brianboulton (talk) 13:37, 25 January 2009 (UTC) Thank you, Brian. I think the article is in better shape now. Some responses to concerns you had with my comments. Here are three of the excerpts mentioned above, in the form they take as I write (after subsequent editing, that is): Excerpt 1: The second and third journeys were shorter visits to Milan, fulfilling opera commissions that Wolfgang had acquired during his first visit. I would still prefer to see the wording with acquired done away with. I propose something like this: The later journeys were to Milan, for Wolfgang to complete operas that had been commissioned there on the first visit. Response: I am happy to adopt this version. Brianboulton (talk) 17:06, 26 January 2009 (UTC) This is enough detail in a lead. It goes without saying that they were shorter, since the first visit is described as "extended". Excerpt 2: However, he had devoted much time to furthering the musical education of his gifted children, Wolfgang and Nannerl, taking them on a "grand tour" between 1764 and 1767 and, later, on a visit to the Imperial capital, Vienna. However is unnecessarily awkward; but is natural. The date 1767 seems incorrect, if we are to believe Mozart family grand tour. And then there are those commas. We know very well from other statements that the children are "gifted". The following gives more new information, more concisely (passing over the briefer time in Vienna in late 1766, which was interrupted by the smallpox epidemic): But he had also devoted much time to Wolfgang and Nannerl's musical education, taking them on a "grand tour" between 1764 and 1766, and spending most of 1767 with them in Vienna, the Imperial capital. Note the markup with " " outside the piped link; this may be better, since the underlining no longer falls under the quote marks as well. Response:I apologise for the date error. I would be happy with this version subject to two things. First, neither "However" or "But" really fits the bill at the start of the sentence. We need something that conveys a sense of "As well as these duties..." "As well as..." is ugly; What about: "Beyond these duties..." followed by your version? Secondly, should it not be Wolfgang's and Nannerl's musical education, since they are separate entities? (That is how I have now written it, but feel free to copyedit if you think otherwise). Brianboulton (talk) 17:06, 26 January 2009 (UTC) WE also have to say who Nanerl is, since this is her first mention. Therefore "Wolfgang's and sister Nannerl's..." Brianboulton (talk) 17:24, 26 January 2009 (UTC) Excerpt 3: ... in Italy, the fons et origo of modern music. Once we have discovered a fine phrase like fons et origo, it is hard to let it go. But it serves little purpose here, and can only be contentious. What is not contentious is this: ... in Italy, a crucially important destination for any young composer in the 18th century. Response: Clearer, if less poetic. I'm happy to adopt this. Brianboulton (talk) 17:06, 26 January 2009 (UTC) I hope you will consider changes such as this, and also give some thought to putting spaces in all the Köchel numbers – preferably hard spaces, using  . That is by far more standard than omitting the space. Also please adjust the form of numbers: why 13-year-old Wolfgang's education but his fifteen-year-old prodigy pupil, for example? Agreed, I will do these things, though this may take a little while. Brianboulton (talk) 17:06, 26 January 2009 (UTC) (Later) K numbers fixed with &nbsps. General numbers (ages, etc) have been standardised, I think. Brianboulton (talk) 18:19, 26 January 2009 (UTC) I'll come back and have a look after 24 hours or so. I might then edit it myself a little, which I have only done very sparingly so far (too many cooks, and all that). Looking better all the time! (Note that I have made an article for Giovanni de Gamerra in the meantime, reducing the redlink problem.) Thanks – and, inspired by this example, I will do one for Quirino Gasparini Brianboulton (talk) 17:06, 26 January 2009 (UTC) –⊥¡ɐɔıʇǝoNoetica!T– 08:39, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

I have been unable to finish a little polishing of the article that I intended to contribute (I'm away interstate at the moment). I'll do it within about 18 hours from now, and then probably change my oppose to support. One thing: there has been talk of music samples for the article. While this seems like an enhancement, I don't think this article (being biographical and historical) cries out for such a thing, and it certainly should have no bearing on its FAC.

–_⊥^{¡ɐɔıʇǝo}Noetica!^T– 13:28, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

---

Note: I am copyediting this article. Awadewit (talk) 00:05, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

I have finished copyediting the article. Awadewit (talk) 02:07, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Leaning towards support - I thoroughly enjoyed reading this article - for a classical music fan like myself, FAC is like a desert. :) This article is well-researched and comprehensive. I have listed some places which require clarification or rewording on the article talk page. My only real substantive suggestion would be to add audio clips of the pieces Mozart composed during this trip. Let's exploit the multimedia possibilities of Wikipedia to the hilt! Awadewit (talk) 02:07, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your encouragement, and especially for your copyediting help. I will look into the matter of clips. Brianboulton (talk) 16:44, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

All my questions and issues have been resolved (see the talk page for my offer to help obtain clips). Awadewit (talk) 20:29, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Support - in the interest of full disclosure, I helped with an earlier version of the map in the article, and have made a few edits and suggestions for improvement along the way. While I agree some sound clips would be a plus, I feel this already meets the FA criteria. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:15, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Support: Great article on my favourite composer and an obvious FA. I have just a few comments, but they have no impact on my vote. The article starts as if it is in the middle of book or the beginning of a chapter. Perhaps the first sentences could be slightly rewritten so that the article appears more independent. Is a reason given for Prince Michael of Thurn and Taxis' snub? If not, then perhaps it should be mentioned that it was unexplained. Finally, the Hieronymus Count Colloredo image should probably be moved down a paragraph in order to conform to WP:ACCESS#Images. Let's hope we see more musical history FAs. --RelHistBuff (talk) 11:28, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

We have wrangled quite a bit over the beginning, Rel. I think it's all right to start in medias res, myself. After all, it is effectively a chapter in Mozart's life, isn't it? And the links to the larger story are all plainly visible.

–_⊥^{¡ɐɔıʇǝo}Noetica!^T– 13:28, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you RHB for the support. I have added a bit about the possible reasons for Prince Michael's snub, and I've shifted the Colloredo image as you suggest. I too am inclined to think that the first sentence lacks some force. Among other things, I have thought about adding the description "the young composer", so that the beginning reads: "Between 1769 and 1773 the young composer Wolfgang Anmadeus Mozart..." etc. I don't think we should rely on links to provide context - though some may say that everybody knows who Mozart is. Your thoughts on this would be appreciated. Brianboulton (talk) 18:00, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

This is probably just something personal with me, but I tend to ignore the lead section when I read an article. The lead is a stand-alone independent summary so there shouldn't be anything in the lead that is not in the article. So when I started with the Background section, it seemed to assume that a previous "chapter" was already read. Mozart's family is not introduced which kind of threw me off. By the way, that's why I linked Nannerl. I consider the links in the lead and the links in the article to be separate and are not examples of double-linking. The independence of an article is not a WIAFA issue though so I leave the decision on how the article should begin with you all. --RelHistBuff (talk) 11:02, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

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