Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: CurryTime7-24 (talk · contribs) 19:47, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• I will review this article later today (PST). —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 19:47, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks! I'll embed any replies to your comments underneath them inside the box. Ligaturama (talk) 08:44, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	A few wrinkles: The sentence that begins with "Urhan was an early champion of Schubert" is a little confusing. (It took me a couple of read-throughs to understand it.) I suggest splitting it into more than one sentence and perhaps using a pair of em-dashes to enclose the passage listing out the titles of Urhan's works. "Liszt allegedly fell asleep during this": MOS:DOUBT. It would be more helpful to the reader if this observation were clearly attributed to somebody (i.e. "According to..."). Just checked this against the source (it wasn't my addition) and it isn't there, I've removed it completely. "in order to support his daughter Cosima's festival dedicated to her late husband Richard Wagner": The wording implies that the Bayreuth Festival was established by Cosima after Wagner's death. (He managed to participate in two iterations.) Ditto "while in Bayreuth for Cosima's festival dedicated to Wagner". "Hamilton identifies": Who Hamilton is and why he is relevant to Liszt needs to be established for the reader. The article appears to not use the Oxford comma, but it does show up occasionally (e.g. "Up to 1840, most concerts featuring a solo pianist included other acts, such as an orchestra, singers, and ballet"). The article must consistently use one comma style. I don't believe the section of the MOS about Oxford commas is a GA requirement. Italicization of non-generic titles of musical works are inconsistent (e.g. "La lugubre gondola", L'isle joyeuse, "Nuages gris", Nuages gris, etc.). The terms "Gypsy" and "Romani" are inconsistently used. Pick one. All points apart from the one about Oxford commas have been addressed: diff
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Very minor issues relating to MOS:LINKCLARITY, MOS:EGG, MOS:MORELINK, and MOS:SPECIFICLINK (e.g. "Archbishop of St Petersburg", "Consistory Court of Zhytomyr", "in order to support his daughter Cosima's festival dedicated to her late husband Richard Wagner", etc.). Sorry, I thought this was just advisory as it has a . I'm not clear on the problems with the first two of those examples: there's no specific page for the Archbishopric of St Petersburg or the Consistory Court of Zhytomyr, so what are you thinking in terms of changing them?
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Article has a few tags: "which may be caused by his father's insistence on practicing with a metronome": This has a "non-primary source needed" tag. How come? This entire section was a nightmare of primary sources and OR, and unfortunately I don't have access to that source. All the text has been reshuffled to the extent that I don't have confidence in that statement at all so I'm going to remove it. "works by his former teacher Czerny": Has a "citation needed" tag. Removed the statement. All addressed in diff
	2c. it contains no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Couple of issues: Shostakovich is name-dropped as having performed Liszt's music. So do a lot of other pianists. Unless his relevancy to that section can be better established, he should be cut. I've extended the Shosta mention slightly but I'm not entirely sure what you mean - the section is about the legacy of Liszt's compositions, so it's surely relevant that a number of significant composers studied them? The "Media portrayals" is basically an "In popular culture" list that mostly lacks citations. This needs to be properly cited, then rewritten into more informative prose or simply cut altogether per MOS:POPCULT. Very happy to cut this diff
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	Outstanding work, barring the problems listed above. Giving nominating editor 7 days to respond. Once these problems are fixed, we can move on to citation spot checks. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 04:07, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Replies to nominating editor:

• The Oxford comma is not a requirement, but consistency in style is. Please pick one and stick to it.
• OK, so Shostakovich played Liszt's music. That would be notable, perhaps, had he also been a concert pianist his whole life. However, Shostakovich only played other composers' music professionally for about 5 years. He was a composer first and foremost. In that capacity was he lastingly influenced by Liszt at all? Aside from his very earliest works, this is debatable. Looking through the biography by Sofia Khentova, which was written with Shostakovich's involvement and approval, Liszt is only mentioned five times in volume 1 (covering the period 1906–1941). Of these, only two mentions have, at best, an indirect bearing on Shostakovich's life: the first having to do with his rejection by Alexander Siloti, who is referred to as a former pupil of Liszt (p. 85); the other in a passage that states that Shostakovich's music, unlike Liszt and some other composers, was not explicitly programmatic (p. 455–456). The second volume covering the rest of Shostakovich's life does not mention Liszt at all. Vladimir Delson's 1971 monograph on the piano works contains nothing about Liszt, save for a brief passage wherein Shostakovich is listed as the latest of several composers whose piano music was influenced by their performing style (p. 6).

Thanks for attending to the other concerns! —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 00:04, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I just did a quick check of Shostakovich's correspondence with Isaak Glikman. Liszt is only mentioned once in a letter from December 8, 1967, wherein he inveighs against Via Crucis for its "sheer hideousness and tedium" (p. 149). A footnote by Glikman states: "Shostakovich naturally understood Liszt's importance in the history of music, but in his maturity he had little enthusiasm for his music" (p. 300). —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 00:23, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for looking into this so thoroughly. Given your well-grounded objections I've expunged Shostakovich from that section. I've also handled the Oxford commas. Ligaturama (talk) 09:30, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work to you both so far! Does this nomination still need anything else? Aza24 (talk) 19:19, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I left CurryTime a talk page message a few days ago, they've been less active recently due to personal reasons but indicated they'll be back soon. Ligaturama (talk) 09:57, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your patience. Time to move on to spot checks! Without further ado, may I please have the quoted text that support the following citations?

• 30: "Much of Urhan's emotive music which moved beyond the Classical paradigm, such as Elle et moi, La Salvation angélique and Les Regrets, may have helped to develop Liszt's taste and style."
  • "Urhan was also a composer. No one plays a note of his nowadays; indeed, copies of his music have become collectors' items. Liszt scholars are thereby denied the opportunity of exploring Urhan's musical influence on the younger composer. Urhan's compositions ... bore such fanciful titles as Elle et moi, La Salutation angélique, and Les Regrets. This music was anti-classical, highly subjective; it gave the young Liszt an early taste for musical romanticism."
• 26: "The countess returned to Paris with the children, while Liszt gave six concerts in Vienna, then toured Hungary."
  • Unfortunately I don't have access to this source. Looking at the revision in which it was added shows that the context hasn't changed since it was inserted. I did try to replace it while I was revising the article, but couldn't find anything for it in any of my own sources.
• 50: "Many witnesses later testified that Liszt's playing raised the mood of audiences to a level of mystical ecstasy." (FYI, this passage should probably be rewritten to something more precise. "Mystical ecstasy" is hard to quantify objectively. Maybe attribute this comment to somebody if possible.)
  • This wasn't one of mine, turns out it's a close paraphrase of the source so it needs changing anyway. I'll remove the sentence completely, after this review is finished so it doesn't mess up the footnote numbers.
• 70: "In 1859 Franz Brendel coined the name "New German School" in his publication Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, to refer to the musicians associated with Liszt while he was in Weimar. The most prominent members other than Liszt were Wagner and Berlioz (although Wagner rejected the label), and the group also included Peter Cornelius, Hans von Bülow and Joachim Raff. The School was a loose confederation of progressive composers, mainly grouped together as a challenge to supposed conservatives such as Mendelssohn and Brahms, and so the term is considered to be of limited use in describing a particular movement or set of unified principles."
  • "New German School ... A term coined in 1859 by K. F. Brendel, editor of the Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, to describe the group of musicians associated with Liszt during his time at Weimar ... and generally attaching themselves to the ideas of Wagner (who did not accept the appellation). They included Peter Cornelius, Hans von Bülow, and Joachim Raff; Berlioz's name is also often included ... The term served largely as a challenge to alleged conservatives such as Mendellssohn and Brahms; but as the composers and their many successors and adherents who came under its description had much more to divide them than to unite them, it ultimately has little meaning."
• 76: "she became a recluse, working for the rest of her life on a long work critical of the Catholic Church."
  • "[Carolyne] had become an eccentric. Still smarting from the Vatican's volte face she was obsessed with Canon Law. ... She was preparing herself for the task of writing her magnum opus ... The Interior Causes of the External Weaknesses of the Roman Catholic Church. This monumental project was to take twenty-five years to write; Carolyne completed it only a fortnight before she died. ... The book was ... a gigantic rationalization of her differences with the theologians. ... To the end of her days she remained a recluse."
• 98: "He had been in good health up to that point"
  • "His health, until now perfect, was showing signs of strain. In 1881 he had taken a severe fall down the stairs..."
• 106, 107: "He died during the festival, near midnight on 31 July 1886, at the age of 74—officially as a result of pneumonia, which he had contracted prior to arriving in Bayreuth, although the true cause of death may have been a heart attack."
  • 106: "By the time he reached Bayreuth in the early hours of July 20 ... he was already suffering from pneumonia"
  • 107: "Cosima ... sought a second opinion from Dr Fleischer, a physician from Erlangen University, who diagnosed pneumonia. ... Liszt died at 11.30 pm on Saturday 31 July, according to the death certificate in the Bayreuth archives. From all the anecdotal evidence, death appears to have been caused by heart infarction."
• 118: "Chopin's relatives and friends found the timing of this insensitive, and many declined to help with Liszt's enquiries."
  • "not even a month after Chopin's funeral, Liszt writes to the deceased composer's sister, Ludwika, requesting information about Chopin, some of which was too personal in nature to suit the surviving sibling ... The latter's distaste for Liszt's poor sense of timing ... prompted her to forward the questionnaire to ... Jane Stirling. ... Liszt was not discouraged by the lack of cooperation from Chopin's family ... had Stirling and Ludwika been more forthcoming with information, such a mistake would not have occurred. ... Ludwika found these questions entirely inappropriate, and considering that Liszt's questions reached her not even a month after Chopin died, she was right. Liszt's timing could not possibly have been worse. ... These are certainly not the type of questions one would want to receive or answer right after burying one's brother."
• 123: "The relationship between Liszt and the couple remained frosty. Liszt dedicated his 1854 piano sonata to Robert, who had by that point been committed to a mental institution in Endenich. Clara asked for Liszt's help that year in finding a performance venue in order to earn an income. Liszt arranged an all-Schumann concert with Clara as the star performer, and published an extremely positive review, but Clara did not express any gratitude. In a posthumous edition of Robert's works, Clara changed the dedication of the Fantasie from Liszt to herself. After Liszt's death, she wrote in her diary "He was an eminent keyboard virtuoso but a dangerous example for the young. ... As a composer he was terrible." (A range of two pages is fine for a citation, but three is too much. Please consider splitting this citation.)
  • Page numbers provided so I can split it up later:
  • "Spring 1854 (completed in 1853): Liszt's Sonata in B Minor is published, which is dedicated to Robert Schumann. 25 May 1854: Schumanns receive a copy of Liszt's Sonata in B Minor. Schumann was incarcerated at this time in the asylum at Endenich." (p. 26)
  • "October 1854: Clara Schumann writes to Liszt asking if her [sic] could provide her a stage upon which to perform. Clara needed the performances, as she had Robert's and her children to support on her own. Liszt complied with an all-Schumann concert, in which Clara was the spotlighted performer. No acknowledgement or thanks from Clara." (p. 26)
  • "1 August 1886: Clara Schumann writes in her diary: "He was an eminent keyboard virtuoso but a dangerous example for the young. ... As a composer he was terrible."" (p. 27)
  • "the relationship does appear to become strained sometime around the mid-1840s." (p. 27)
  • "When it was time to republish the Fantasy, Clara struck out Liszt's dedication and substituted her name in its place." (p. 29)
• 52, 134: "At his performing peak Liszt was considered the greatest pianist of his time, and was perhaps one of the greatest who ever lived"
  • 52: "Was Liszt unique, then? “The word could have been invented to describe Franz Liszt,” maintains Hilmes. “He was possibly the greatest pianist that has ever lived,” Gerstein agrees: “a composer of revolutionary works that exerted pivotal influence on those that followed – also a great teacher, humanist and possibly the nicest of the great musicians.”"
  • 134: "He was the greatest pianist of his day and most likely the greatest of all time. ... He was probably the greatest sightreader who ever lived."
• 172: "Liszt coined the terms "transcription" and "paraphrase", the former being a faithful reproduction of the source material and the latter a more free reinterpretation."
• 194: "The morbid focus on loss may be ascribed to Liszt's mental state in his final decade, when he suffered episodes of depression."
  • N.B. I got the wrong page range for this one, it's 87-88, not 97-98. I'll update it now.
  • "From around 1876, Liszt was prone to bouts of depression. His personality even from youth seems to have manifested a morose side and a fixation on death ... The deaths of [Daniel and Blandine] brought another phase of deep personal anguish that impacted greatly on his creative life. As he grew older, Liszt was deeply affected by the deaths of certain political figures, artists, and personal acquaintances ... These events, among others, triggered within him impulses resulting in elegiac outpourings"
• 231: He was troubled when German newspapers revealed that pedagogue Theodor Kullak had earned more than one million marks from teaching: "As an artist, you do not rake in a million marks without performing some sacrifice on the altar of Art". He wrote an open letter to Kullak's sons, published in the Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung, urging them to create an endowment for needy musicians, as Liszt himself frequently did. (The first citation within this passage of the same source should be cut per WP:REPEATCITE.)
  • "He was troubled when the German newspapers published details of Theodor Kullak’s will, revealing that the great pedagogue had left more than a million marks generated from his lucrative teaching practice. ... ‘As an artist, you do not rake in a million marks without performing some sacrifice on the altar of Art’, Liszt declared to Lina Ramann (E1983, pp.297–8). He wrote a letter to the Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung in which he urged Kullak’s sons to create an endowment for needy musicians (5 September 1885). From anyone else, such an idea would have been presumptuous. But through his personal example, Liszt had earned the right to propose it."

Just a reminder: although the issues brought up in comment 1b are very minor, they still need to be fixed. Please do so when you have a moment. Thank you! —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 18:50, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]