Talk:Don Carlos: Difference between revisions

Opera B‑class

This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Opera, a group writing and editing Wikipedia articles on operas, opera terminology, opera composers and librettists, singers, designers, directors and managers, companies and houses, publications and recordings. The project discussion page is a place to talk about issues and exchange ideas. New members are welcome!OperaWikipedia:WikiProject OperaTemplate:WikiProject OperaOpera articles B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

France B‑class Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

1

I propose that Template:Infobox opera be removed and replaced with Template:Verdi operas. Our traditional navbox is more useful and non-obtrusive, while this new Infobox opera is distracting and adds no information that is not already and better presented in the lead. --Robert.Allen (talk) 02:31, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Support restoration as a long-term contributor to this article dating back to 2005. Once again this infobox is problematic with regard to genre. Gerda Arendt should have proposed the infobox here first before taking any action, as she knows perfectly well the use of this particular box is controversial and prone to inaccuracy. --Kleinzach 02:48, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately there is a similar WP:POINT distraction at Rigoletto. --Kleinzach 02:53, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Do you understand that the composer navbox is redundant? There's a more complete navbox for the composer at the bottom of the opera. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:39, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, I disagree that the top right composer navbox is redundant. It has long been supported by a strong consensus. --Kleinzach 01:34, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For the infobox: feel free to change it. If the genre is not correct, just drop it or change to Grand Opera. - No, I don't know "perfectly well" that "this particular box" is controversial, - it's an option of project opera. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:44, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

An option of project opera? Whose option? Andy Mabbett's? Yours? --Kleinzach 01:38, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Update, quote: "Following discussions here last March ..., this is been under development at Template talk:Infobox opera. It is now in a usable state with complete documentation ... As this discussion has been open for over two weeks with some reservations but without any major objections to making this box available as an option for articles on individual operas, I've now gone ahead and added it to the list of templates on the main project page and to the Article Guide. Hopefully, this will not prove to be the end of civilization as we know it, although you never know ;). Voceditenore (talk) 06:32, 18 June 2013 (UTC)." end of quote --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:12, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• My general thoughts on the Infobox (including that in my personal history I argued exactly as shown above) is found on Wikipedia:QAI/Infobox, short: the infobox is meant to repeat, in structured form, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:49, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's not consistent with WP guidelines on infoboxes which stress that they are to summarise not repeat. --Kleinzach 14:46, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Without looking: How would you "summarize" a date of first performance, a subtitle, the name of a librettist, etc? If the guideline does not allow to repeat those key facts it needs to be changed, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:51, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, Gerda, the box is supposed to summarise the article, i.e the article as a whole. Kleinzach 15:07, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]