Wikipedia:Peer review/Tosca/archive2

Tosca

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.

Tosca is one of the world's best-loved and most performed operas, and with around 1,000 page hits on most days, deserves a top quality Wikipedia article. That is what Wehwalt and I are attempting to provide, with plenty of helpful advice from others. We would value further comments on all aspects of the article: please hold nothing back. Thank you. Brianboulton (talk) 16:37, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Comments from Tim riley I have very few comments to offer. The article is top-notch – well balanced, well paced, well referenced and well written. Here are the only points that caught my eye. They are neither numerous nor grave.

• Lead
  • "…and has inspired memorable performances from many of opera's leading singers." Very true, but your list of them at the end doesn't, to my mind, reflect that "many". More on that later.
  • "Musically, Tosca is structured as through-composed work." Should this be "… as a through-composed…"? (Also, there is an article on through-composed to which you might want to link.)
• Securing the rights
  • " in which she would star throughout Europe" – does the subjunctive add anything here? Perhaps just "in which she starred throughout Europe"?
  • "the reception La Tosca had received in Italy–particularly in Milan". You need to be consistent with dashes. This is an en-dash, but elsewhere you use em-dashes.
  • According to Amanda Holden in the Penguin Opera Guide, the subject was suggested to Puccini by Ferdinando Fontana, the librettist of Le villi and Edgar. If this is correct you might perhaps consider giving him a nod.
• Adaptation and writing
  • "Puccini had bells for the Roman dawn were cast to order" – one word too many here.
• Historical context
  • "and their leader, von Melas" – German convention does not use the "von" when surnaming a person. Just "Melas" is correct (and is used in the WP article on the chap).
  • "and the city would spend the next fourteen years" – another subjunctive that might perhaps be simplified – "the city spent…"?
• Act 1
  • "in the contrast between the blond beauty of his painting" – I rather hope it's a blonde rather than a blond, unless this is a very outré version of the opera.
  • "by the dreaded Royalist police chief" – if "republican "with lower case then "royalist" ditto, I suggest.
• Act 2
  • "Cavaradossi will be freed: She is revolted…". Either colon and "she" or full stop and "She".
• Early performances
  • "A contemporary indicator of its popularity is its ranking second among the ten most frequently performed operas in North America in 2008-2009." The reference to these modern years seems very out of place here, or should it read "1908–09"?
• Notable performers
  • "Before Jeritza established her reputation in the title role, Emmy Destinn had sung it regularly, as part of her long-standing partnership with the tenor Enrico Caruso. However, opera enthusiasts tend to consider Maria Callas as the supreme interpreter of the role." – Hold on a mo! What about at least a mention of Margherita Grandi, Ljuba Welitsch, Renata Tebaldi and Zinka Milanov? I don't dispute (who would!) your conclusion in re Callas, but her distinguished predecessors shouldn't be airbrushed out completely.
  • "Of those who sang Scarpia, Antonio Scotti, who first played the role in the London premiere, would later make the role 'particularly his own', according to Budden. For a later generation, the definitive Scarpia was Tito Gobbi." There's the same elision of eras here, too, as in the previous para: at the very least you might mention Mariano Stabile. And the same goes for the tenors: let's hear it for Giovanni Martinelli, Aureliano Pertile, Ferrucio Tagliavini and Carlo Bergonzi.
    • I agree that at least some of these illustrious names deserve a mention, and will find a way of working in a few. Brianboulton (talk) 22:12, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
      • Likewise, there have been many post-Callas performers of note missing. We've literally ignored the last 50 years of Tosca performers. Some names that come to mind are Leontyne Price, Montserrat Caballé, Mirella Freni, Renata Scotto, Eva Marton, Kiri Te Kanawa, and Angela Gheorghiu. Also a mention of the recent live Met broadcast into movie theatre's internationally with Karita Mattila might be of interest. I think that may be the first live performance of the opera that was broadcast all over the world. 4meter4 (talk) 18:21, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
        • I think you have got the balance right now, in this and the recordings section. The ghost of Martinelli may come and haunt you, but that apart this is now a good spread from 1900 to 2010. - Tim riley (talk) 21:04, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
          • But I think 4meter4 is right; we should at least mention that there have been some post-Callas Toscas! I will give a little thought to this. My anxiety about this section is growing, however. Will it forever be a magnet to those who insist on adding their favourite singers? I have put a hidden note in the edit window asking them to desist, but that won't stop the less scrupulous for long. Of the names offered above, Price isn't really modern enough; te Kanawa hardly ever sang the role on stage; Gheorghiu is controversial in the role, to say the least - in London, anyway. But I will drum up a line from somewhere. Brianboulton (talk) 22:07, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
            • Later: Following discussion, the "performers" section has been reduced and merged into "Subsequent productions". This follows the expressions my concerns, above, on the talkpage. I feel much less anxious now. Brianboulton (talk) 18:53, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
• Critical reception
  • "Gabriel Fauré was offended by 'disconcerting vulgarities'" – It is so unlikely that a composer of Fauré's exquisite sensibilities would take to Tosca that I wonder if this revelation counts as notable. I don't press the point; I simply mention it.
  • "In 1956 the musicologist Joseph Kerman called Tosca a 'shoddy little shocker' "– oh, no he didn't. He called it a "shabby little shocker" (my italics). See here. What Kerman wrote was "Tosca, that shabby little shocker, is no doubt admired nowadays mostly in the gallery. In the parterre it is agreed that Turandot is Puccini's finest work. But if Turandot is more suave than Tosca musically, dramatically it is a good deal more depraved, and the adjective is carefully chosen."
• Act 1
  • "As the police chief grills the sacristan", perhaps rather too informal a verb for an encyclopaedia?
  • "… Scarpia's lustful reverie" – in your synopsis of the plot, above, I think you don't make it clear at this point that Scarpia lusts after Tosca.
  • "Jerome Kerman mocked the final music" – You mean Joseph Kerman, I think, as in the shabby little shocker, above.
    • Show Boat on my mind, perhaps. Brianboulton (talk) 20:59, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
      • Tosca with book and lyrics by Guy Bolton, P. G. Wodehouse and Oscar Hammerstein. I'd pay money to see it. - Tim riley (talk) 07:06, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
• Recordings
  • "had been The Gramophone Company's house conductor since 1904, he had made recordings" – stronger stop than a comma needed
  • "the orchestra and chorus of Teatro alla Scala" – "of the Teatro alla Scala", possibly?
  • Osborne's verdict on the Maazel set is, to put it mildly, not representative of the critical consensus, which is more favourably disposed to F-D's Scarpia and less favourably to Nilsson's Tosca. See Philip Hope-Wallace 1967, and Desmond Shawe-Taylor here
    • I feel we should lose the critical comments on this and other recordings in the section. It is not meant to be a critical review section; if that is needed, the discography article is the place for it. By having Osborne's implacable views, and no one else's, we are inviting endless additions to this section as people seek to counter Osborne or plug their own favourite recordings, etc. So I have boldly edited the section down, removing nearly all the review comment. If this is thought too drastic perhaps a little of the material might be added back, but please let us be cautious. Brianboulton (talk) 21:29, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
      • Agreed, this is not a place people come for recommendations for the best Tosca recordings. This article is fairly long, and I suspect we will be called upon to add more stuff to it before we're done. Additionally, as Brian suggests, it's asking for trouble.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:43, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
  • "In 1976 he was joined by his son, Plácido Domingo Jr" – is this fact notable?
  • "Non-Italian recordings of Tosca are rare but not unknown" – recordings not sung in Italian, that is. There are a great many non-Italian recordings, e.g. the Nilsson/Fischer-Dieskau one.
• Notes
  • "Tosca: Performance historty. Stanford University…." – typo which I didn't dare correct for fear of messing up your link.
• References
  • "Gruber, Paul … Norton & Co.." – there are two full stops after Co, which I'm not quite sure how to prune.
  • "Roberts, David, ed" – not consistent with your usual form, viz, "Roberts, David (ed.)"

And that's all. A meagre gleaning, but what is one to do, faced with such a fine article? I had cause to look at an article on one of Verdi's major operas recently (no names, no pack-drill) and was underwhelmed: this one shows how it should be done. – Tim riley (talk) 10:54, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

I've taken care of the easy ones, the various matters that are easily corrected by substituting a word or punctuation. I have also added a bit to the Act 1 synopsis to make Scarpia's dual aims clear. The others Brian and I will confer on, or if he feels comfortable just going ahead, that works too. Many thanks for the praise.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:32, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

I'd like to thank Tim very much for his perceptive and good-humoured comments, which I think are now all addressed except for the question of up-to-date Toscas as discussed. If he can tear himself away for a minute from his favourite Monteverdi recordings, perhaps he will confirm that this is so.Brianboulton (talk) 22:14, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

On the contrary, I have been bopping to today's cover artiste Gus Mahler (congratulations, en passant). Shall review tomorrow and report back. - Tim riley (talk) 22:38, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

My suggestions – few and minor as they were – have been addressed. I look forward to FAC, where, I need hardly say, I shall be enthusiastically supporting. – Tim riley (talk) 21:00, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Comments from elcobbola (talk · contribs)

• File:Puccini6.jpg - The LoC's assertion of "No known restrictions on publication" is generally interpreted to mean public domain by en.wiki and commons. Obviously the known and the additional disclaimer of "Rights assessment is your responsibility" are problematic in "the real world", but I suspect it would take affirmative evidence that the work is copyrighted to get it deleted. If you're uncomfortable with it, there are dozens of verifiably free alternatives available.

  I am tagging on here to add my opinion on this photo. First off, good grief... trust the LoC to mess up somebody's name... it is Frank C. Bangs, not Bango! I was constantly wondering what kind of race or culture would come up with "Bango"...

  This is likely copyright number H 91721 or H 91722 (registered with dates: Mar 19 or Apr 24, 1907); see p. 333 of Catalog of copyright entries, Part 4, New Series, Volume 2 (1907). However, there is no hard proof, so those who look to maintain this photo here can help by contacting the LoC and confirm the copyright registration number on the photo (after all, they claim the photo is copyrighted by Bango—give me an eye-roll icon here...)

  What leads me to this idea is that the LoC states this photo of Caruso to be copyrighted by Bango again; 1907 of the same date as that of Bangs's Pucini especially when one sees the entry for a set of 3 Caruso photos (H 91718–91720) by Bangs on the same page in the Copyright Catalog pointed above. Good grief again, Bangs, not Bango, officers! Jappalang (talk) 21:21, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

• File:Sarahlatosca.jpg - Use of the PD-UK-unknown tag requires "reasonable enquiry" to determine author (there's a substantial difference between "unknown" and "unknown to us"); what entities have been contacted? Better, perhaps, to upload this to en.wiki, where the work need only be PD in the US (which it is, per pre-1.1.1923 publication). Works on the Commons must be PD in the US and country of origin; I don't see support provided for the latter.

  I agree and must note this here for all the Sarah La Tosca pieces floating around: there is an author and he is visibly identified there. It is very unlikely for a Punch cartoonist not to sign his work... and the signature at the bottom right of this one. Several Punch cartoonists have not been dead for more than 70 years.[1]

  This caricature is from Punch, July 21, 1888, p. 28, vol 95, and the higher resolution version is here. The signature reads "EJW", or E J Wheeler, who joined Punch in 1880.[2] It only qualifies for 70 year pma if he dies before 1940 (thankfully, we need not concern ourselves with the URAA for pre-1923 publications). This is a grey case: he was young when he joined Punch, so it would be best to move his works to Wikipedia. Jappalang (talk) 21:31, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

• File:Scottiasscarpia.jpg - If you'd like to match the style of Cavaradossi and Tosca, this version is available; image is otherwise fine after this (never just paste the raw URL in these cases; if Google changes the URL, how would we know the source?) Эlcobbola _talk 14:15, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

I really do not see a problem with File:Puccini6.jpg. I have now amended the description on the commons with a link that proves it was published in the US in 1906. Voceditenore (talk) 14:48, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

That is fine. If it is considered good, I see no reason to vary this article from the others by using a different shot of Puccini. I will follow Elcobbola's suggestion and reupload the drawing to Commons. As Punch is out of business, I don't know who you would ask who sketched this in 1888 (probably it wasn't recorded then either).--Wehwalt (talk) 14:53, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Puccini6.jpg is not that frontispiece; the angle and lighting are all different. That frontispiece can be better seen here and a version (albeit inferior quality) of it is already up at File:GiacomoPuccini.jpg. Jappalang (talk) 21:24, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

If you're interested, I have temporarily put a better scan of the Punch Sarah B. cartoon here - scanned from the primary source this very day. - Tim riley (talk) 16:26, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

If you change the Puccini photo in the navigation template, you automatically change it for all the other articles in which it appears. If you get issues at FAC about the Puccini image (which would be ridiculous) it is possible to substitute this one File:Giacomo Puccini by Mario Nunes Vais.jpg, which I just uploaded now. The photographer is Italian and died in 1932, verified in the source. Voceditenore (talk) 16:32, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

I've downloaded the Sarah sketch and will upload it to Wiki shortly, then will change the link and nom the old one for deletion. If I seem overcautious about images and copyrights, well, I think we all are anxious to go into FAC with all our ducks in a row in that department.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:17, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Comments from Voceditenore (talk · contribs)

• Perhaps the only thing missing is one line about the designer and director of the original production.[3] Opera is theatre after all. It was directed by Nino Vignuzzi and the scenery and costumes were designed by Adolfo Hohenstein, who also did the designs for Puccini's La Boheme. Voceditenore (talk) 17:01, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

According to an old Covent Garden programme (22 Sept 1995) I have dug out from my shelves, Ricordi insisted on Hohenstein's importation from La Scala, which was not well received at the Rome Opera House, and contributed to the pre-premiere atmosphere of alarm and despondency. En passant, this programme refers to him several times as "Federico Augusto Hohenstein" - Tim riley (talk) 17:23, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

I have added a line mentioning Vignuzzi and Hohenstein. Brianboulton (talk) 22:48, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Image comments from Jappalang (talk · contribs)

Comments on File:Sarahlatosca.jpg and File:Puccini6.jpg are inserted into Elcobbola's comment section.

• File:Act1finaletosca.jpg and File:Executiontosca.jpg: Photo Boyer and Cliche (Cliché) Boyer mean the same thing: Photo by Boyer. This Boyer is very likely Paul Boyer of Paris,[4][5][6][7] who was still active in 1905.[8] It will be safer to move his pre-1923 works onto Wikipedia instead.
• File:Killingofscarpia1.jpg: note that later versions of Victrola Book of the Opera may leave out the original credits they have in earlier versions; compare 1921, 1919, and 1912. This photo is taken from Le Theater, a French entertainment magazine. As can be seen on this ebay page, Le Theater credits practically all its images, so one cannot claim the reused shots are anonymous works. It will be best to move the Le Theater images to Wikipedia until the authorship can be determined (hint: someone get the magazine).

Tip: for those book scans on archive.org that are not taken from/digitized by Google, e.g. http://www.archive.org/stream/standardoperasth00upto#page/232/mode/2up/search/tosca, you can magnify the pages to 100%, then right-click and "save as" to save a page in full-size to edit to your preference. Jappalang (talk) 21:46, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

• Question: Paul Boyer (1850-1937) [9] died more than 70 years ago. Regardless of when it was published, wouldn't the photo be out of copyright? Or is the problem that the credit says only "Boyer" and not "Paul Boyer"?Voceditenore (talk) 06:30, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

I note they seem to give only last name credit in that book. Dupont, for example. I think what I will do is change the creator lines in those images to "Paul Boyer (1850-1937)" Does that suit?--Wehwalt (talk) 13:17, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Hmmmm. Can that be done if the source specifically says only "Boyer". Perhaps Jappalang can advise us here. I have a similar problem with this photo of Puccini (linked above by Jappalang) which I have now saved and cleaned up. The book credits it to "Bertieri" of Torino. From this documentation and the date of the book, it must be Oreste Bertieri (1870 - 1908). But I'm reluctant to upload any more images to Commons if this kind of documentation isn't considered good enough. Voceditenore (talk) 14:45, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

I am obviously inclined to think that the photos of important people were taken by the studio head, but I can't prove that it wasn't taken by his son in knee pants who (hypothetically) lived to a ripe old age before dying in 1992. Can you email me so I can send you a copy of the Puccini image taken by Herman Mishkin the Met sent me? There the issue is pre-1923 publication, the Met has the 1910 image but doesn't have info on publication..--Wehwalt (talk) 14:50, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Learning his death date is good news for us on Boyer's works. Depending on circumstances, a photo may still be copyrighted in the US even if the copyright holder has died more than 70 years ago; the most common situation would be something first published in the period of 1923–77. See http://copyright.cornell.edu/resources/publicdomain.cfm. Items on Commons must be "free" in both US and its country of origin (country of first publication), so we have to consider two copyright regions. Storage on Wikipedia would only need to consider US copyrights.

The 70 year pma rule is primarily for works that were never published before 2003 (it can also be applied to those first published in 1978–2002 without compliance to copyright procedure). It is also to verify that foreign works are out of copyright in their country of origin.

What this means unfortunately for photos of foreign origin is that we have to investigate their authorship more carefully before uploading it to Commons; if it was published (not created) before 1923, we can upload to Wikipedia without issue. Jappalang (talk) 04:44, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Addendum from Tim riley I'd be wary of referring to the de Sabata recording as "the Columbia" one, as "Columbia" in the 1950s meant different things in the UK and the U.S., viz, half of EMI in the UK; and CBS, now Sony, in America. Safer to call it the EMI recording, I think. - Tim riley (talk) 21:15, 7 July 2010 (UTC)