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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
Everything I just put in is from the New Grove, with one exception: that Schikaneder played the role of Papageno in the premiere of The Magic Flute, which I extracted from my fallible memory. I'll try to find a real reference source for this claim.
Hello 131.130.135.193, This won't do - if you have better information than the New Grove, you have to add a citation of this source, and explain why it's better. Note in particular that nobody gets to edit Wikipedia just on their own personal authority; it's against the organization's policy. Opus3302:36, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Opus33, as an expert you will easiliy discover that none of the factual material was removed. There is no loss - quite the contrary, both the files - Ratisbon Theatre and the interior of Theater an der Wieden - also refer directly to the text; e.g. “the Theater an der Wien was "the most lavishly equipped and one of the largest theatres of its age".” Can't you be convinced that they not only enrichen the optical presentation of the page, but also deepen the understanding of its contents. Should the article on an impresario, dramatist, actor, singer and composer be without the interior of his theatres? Greetings from Ratisbon --Ratisbon (talk) 20:50, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As to the edit summary that stated, "Previous edits removed factual material without explanation; please discuss on Talk page before proceeding". This is incorrect. The previous edits included some rewording and image captions were brought down to a reasonable length. If the material being referred to as having been removed is in reference to those captions - such detail belongs in the body of the article, not the image captions. The too-large images were resized to a normal, reasonable size. As it was, they were essentailly gigantic and ridiculously too large in comparison to most articles of its type. I have also reordered the images within the article. As the article is now, it is no longer overshadowed by huge images (which, I might add, resizing them reduced a large amount of whitespace). The resizing makes the article more readable and more "Wikipedia-like". This is supposed to be an encyclopedia, not a picture book - images should never overshadow the text content. Perhaps reading the Wikipedia policy on images and captions in the manual of style would be helpful. Comments? Questions? Bring them -- but please do not revert back without discussion first. Thanks. Lhb1239 (talk) 21:08, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm frustrated with your edits because (a) the policy on image size that you seek to enforce is distinctly reader-hostile -- no decent published book on Schikaneder would ever abuse the reader with such tiny images; (b) The image of Schikaneder as Papageno is an iconic and defining one and should not have been demoted; (c) the colleagues of Schikaneder depicted in the group image played an important role in his career and deserve to be identified; several of them have their own WP articles. The goal here should be to have a vivid and informative article about Emanuel Schikaneder, and with all respect I think your editorial punctiliousness is getting in the way of this goal.
If you plan to edit the article further I suggest you read the Honolka biography, cited in the references, if you have not already. Sincerely, Opus33 (talk) 02:42, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(1) Wikipedia editors don't need to read anything other than Wikipedia policy and any pertinent essays to know how to copy edit and repair a Wikipedia article.
(2) I'm sorry you're frustrated.
(3) As far as your accusations of "abuse" toward Wikipedia readers: hyperbolic hogwash.
(4) The policy on image size is the policy and if you don't like it, I suggest you take your complaint to the appropriate notice-board to complain. Until the policy is changed, however, the images in the article need to comply with policy.
(5) "The colleagues of Schikaneder depicted in the group image" are not what the article is about. Further, since, as you say, they have their own articles, your point is moot. Giving undue weight to them -- especially in an image caption -- is decidedly not in line with Wikipedia policy according to the manual of style.
(6) Your statement, "The goal here should be to have a vivid and informative article about Emanuel Schikaneder" is also moot because the article achieves that goal.
(7) Your statement, "...I think your editorial punctiliousness is getting in the way of this goal" is an unfortunate perspective. Unfortunate, because it's quite off the mark. Of course, if you think my edits are disruptive and/or against policy in any way, shape, or form, you are free to take your concerns to the appropriate administrator noticeboard.
