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 FrB.TG via FACBot (talk) 22 October 2023 [1].


Appalachian Spring[edit]

Nominator(s): MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 19:48, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Martha Graham's ballet technique was one of the first American styles of dance, and it was beautifully executed in Appalachian Spring, a ballet commissioned for Graham and the composer Aaron Copland. Graham's unique choreography and the suites created from Copland's serene score remain essential in the American repertoire. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 19:48, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Mirokado[edit]

One of my favourites. First impression is: a well-written article.

More later. -- Mirokado (talk) 21:59, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All fixed- no, those aren't AmE spellings, just typos on my part, thanks for catching them! Clarified everything else MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 01:42, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

More later. -- Mirokado (talk) 21:59, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All fixed, added an efn for the first comment instead of parentheses- many thanks again! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 15:05, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

More later. -- Mirokado (talk) 21:59, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reworded the themes issue, and I think I got the columns thing fixed, let me know if it's still displaying wrong on your end. For the foreign performances: I can find very little info about performances. Most of the info I did get about performances was, as you noticed, from US newspapers. I can't find anything about a European or Asian premiere; I did find this 1946 article about a London performance of the suite, but it doesn't explicitly state that it's the European premiere. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 00:13, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not much we can add about performances without sources. This section would need to be updated if more information becomes available. -- Mirokado (talk) 10:43, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

More later. -- Mirokado (talk) 10:43, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed all - the tense should be all good, and the charivari thing was supposed to be present tense, thanks for spotting that! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:13, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have just checked with some other articles about musical works, and generally the present tense is used, so I think a few more tweaks may be needed. If it seems too complicated to describe the changes, I may make a few (more) copyedits and you are welcome to change further, discuss here or whatever. -- Mirokado (talk) 21:22, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

More later. -- Mirokado (talk) 21:22, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed all- I just linked the charivari because I couldn't find a citation for an efn. I clarified the Sparling fact, but that may be dangerously OR-y, since the article uses rather vague language. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 23:33, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Your changes are often better than my suggestions. -- Mirokado (talk) 23:55, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate it; I'm impressed by the fine details you're catching. Still working on my encyclopedic tone! Also, I think I;ve fixed the past/present tense issue- details about the music/dance are present tense, and details about Copland's composition of it are in past tense- let me know if I missed any. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 01:00, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that is the distinction we need to make: for music/dance we use the narrative present tense, which may mean we use a past tense for something like what the music has just accomplished. For what Copland or Graham intended and so on, we use the past tense. "Copland achieves this ..." is fine in the present tense. I'll continue our discussion in further bullet points below. -- Mirokado (talk) 20:04, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support. -- Mirokado (talk) 22:54, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for the thorough review! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 00:13, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Something I have just noticed which will not affect my support one way or the other:

Well, this was per a consistency comment by Gerald below. Some of the pubs were linked, some weren't- I opted to link them all because there is no option to delink Oxford Press in Template:Cite Grove. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 00:46, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Whether publishers are linked or not seems to me neither here nor there, and for obscure publishers it might be helpful – but who decides that? Anyway, it is possible to have ((Cite Grove)) emit output without linking the publisher: ((cite Grove|last1=Lerner|first1=Neil|date=2018|title=Aaron Copland|doi=10.1093/omo/9781561592630.013.3000000119|publisher=Oxford University Press)) gives: Lerner, Neil (2018). "Aaron Copland". Grove Music Online (8th ed.). Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/omo/9781561592630.013.3000000119. ISBN 978-1-56159-263-0.. This method of overriding the template's default behaviour is not obvious; it's a fortuitous byproduct of its implementation as a wrapper template. BTW, I'm not recommending that this should be done here, only pointing out that it can be done. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 08:01, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for clarifying! @Mirokado, if you feel the pubs should all be delinked, I don't feel too strongly about them, but leaving them is no net negative in my eyes. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 10:59, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Michael for the clarification. I would prefer that the publishers be unlinked in general. Linking one or two for a good reason such as "not well known" would not imply an inconsistent format. Most articles do not link all the publishers and our featured articles should present good examples for editors to follow elsewhere in Wikipedia. user:MyCatIsAChonk: I will be happy to make this change if you ask me to. -- Mirokado (talk) 22:52, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Mirokado, I very much appreciate that- go right ahead. I've gotten a bit busy IRL, so this is very much appreciated. If you ever need a future review for DYK, GAN, FAC, FLC, etc, I'd be happy to help. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 23:19, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done. -- Mirokado (talk) 12:11, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Weak support from ZKang123[edit]

I will take a look at this. I had studied the composition before in my A levels days, and I might have some understanding of the ballet.--ZKang123 (talk) 02:04, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lead:

Background and commission:

More to come.--ZKang123 (talk) 02:07, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All have been implemented; I replied above if I didn't implement the comment in its full form. Thank you! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 01:15, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Production, reception:

More to come.--ZKang123 (talk) 01:24, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All fixed! On point three: these sentences are supposed to describe the choreography. I had a hard time deciding what counted as a review and what was effectively describing the dance, so I've cut some things. Let me know what you think- thanks! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:04, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Also fixed native american and added the west coast fact- thanks for finding that source! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:20, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Before I go on, may I know why the music and plot sections combined? I don't see as such for The Rite of Spring and The Firebird, though also for Petrushka (ballet).--ZKang123 (talk) 10:11, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@ZKang123, there is no particular reason to divide the two sections. The story and the music are closely connected, and explaining them at the same time is intuitive and helpful. Philip 2018 explains the plot and music the same way (though, with less detail). MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:02, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I tried modeling much of this article and The Firebird after The Rite's article, since The Rite is a FA. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:21, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Alright thanks for the above explanation. And yes, I can see the parallels made, though bear in mind they are slightly older FAs. Continuing.

Music and plot:

That's all for me.--ZKang123 (talk) 09:43, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Other minor points.

I am able to offer a weak support. I personally think this article would fare better at GAN than FAC as it still requires some work, and could see better writing by someone more familiar with American music. Understandably, this is also a rather modern piece which might not have sufficient coverage or commentary just yet and also more for a general audience than someone studying music.--ZKang123 (talk) 13:23, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough then. I appreciate the shift, and thank you for the full review. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 00:45, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image review[edit]

@Nikkimaria, I'm not sure what you mean by 2D tagged- can you clarify? The LOC website for the Coolidge Auditorium photo says it was published in 1925, and it was very likely published in the US since it was taken by a capitol architect. The music is under copyright internationally, but I believe the use is minimal, as in other FAs about copyrighted works like Short Symphony and Symphony No. 3 (Górecki). MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 12:17, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
PD-scan is based on mechanical reproduction of a 2D work - it can't be used for 3D works.
The LOC website says "published/created" - we don't know whether that means published and created, or just created, without more information.
Brief quotations from non-free works are allowed, but inline citation is required. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:39, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Nikkimaria: for the pulitzer medal, I added PD-coin, because I can't find anything else that would fit it. If this isn't proper, please let me know what is needed to verify that it's PD.
Coolidge auditorium: I am having an extremely difficult time finding information about this photo's provenance. The LOC listing says its found in a published guide called "Washingtonia Photographs". The (thankfully public domain) guide can be found online, but the page that mentions this photograph doesn't actually display the photo (see LOT 4021). Though it mentions a name on the back, I cannot find any information about a "John Crane", so the death date is unknown too. PD-US-unpublished won't work, since anonymous works must be created over 120 years ago to be PD, but I also can't prove its publication. Does the mention in "Washingtonia Photographs" qualify?
Added citations for the musical quotations. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 16:16, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A simple mention without the image doesn't qualify, no - have you found any publication of the actual image? Nikkimaria (talk) 23:58, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Nikkimaria, no, I have not. The only place I can find it is in the LOC exhibit linked under sources. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 00:16, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. You've stated that it was taken by a capitol architect - is that certain? I see "probably secured from" at the given source. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:23, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Nikkimaria: I didn't think "probably secured from" was sufficient- do you think it's enough to say it's PD since it's taken by a US gov't employee? MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 00:26, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No - unfortunately without more information I don't think we can use it. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:29, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Nikkimaria Cut MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 01:36, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Nikkimaria, does the image review pass? MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 23:24, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:25, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GWL[edit]

Hey there! As an appreciation for the plethora of comments you put on my PR, I thought perhaps this would be a fun little QPQ. I've put invisible comments to divide my comments based on sections. GeraldWL 07:33, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from GeraldWL 03:43, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
* Shortdescs must be as brief as possible, with the majority of articles having 40 or less characters. I think here, "music" can be dropped since the music is part of the ballet.
  • Trim some of the alt texts; per accessibility guidelines they must be brief enough for blind readers to get the gist of it. For example, photographic elements like B&W, sepia, chromolitograph, unless they are contextually important, can be dropped.
  • Infobox: Should "Coolidge Auditorium" be in brackets?
  • Pennsyl should be linked like the lead does.
  • For consistency the ref publishers should be linked: ref 19, 59, 87, 94, 121-124, 157. Also those in Sources.
  • Aaron Copland (121-124, 157) fits better as pub than web
  • Locations should be placed out of the ExLinks, e.g. "Aaron Copland Collection at the Library of Congress"
  • Since Portal bar has a white background, putting it above the navboxes would make it less awkward.
  • I think there should be a repeat of "Appalachian Spring" replacing "the ballet" in "The ballet follows the Bride" and "The ballet features eight episodes".
  • Shouldn't it be "in the United States"?
  • Link ragtime
  • "his left-wing political stances strengthened"-- Left-wing political stances, no need for pipe
  • "This "ordinary music" idea is certainly present"-- certainly sounds pretty subjective and essayistic, I think it can be replaced by other words, but removing it doesn't really change the intended message.
  • "about Medea" --> "about the Greek mythology figure Medea"
  • "Graham's east-coast-based work"-- the article doesn't hyphenate and decapitalize east coast
  • If my point on Medea was to be done, then Greek mythology in "drew from Greek mythology and French poetry" should be unlinked
  • There's a more specific Slavery during the American Civil War
  • Just wanna say, I love these meta footnotes, it gives the article a specific touch!
    • Thank you! I tried including information in efns in this article, rather than putting them in parenthesis or the like; the use of efns on Mahler, Debussy, etc is excellent and I strive to achieve the quality of those articles MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 22:49, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • If you were to list all eight episodes with individual refs, I don't think ref 44 is needed in "The final scenario featured eight episodes".
  • You start off number 1, 3, and 4 with the title, but then repeat it, e.g. "Prologue: Graham did not want "Prologue" to be long". It can be resolved with "Prologue: Graham did not want this chapter to be long".
  • "spring of 1944 [...] fall of 1944." "Avoid the use of seasons [...] as such uses are ambiguous".
    • I have no choice, the cited sources say use that time frame, and saying "the later months" is (IMO) more vague. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 22:49, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • I think spring and fall is easily interpretable as early and late 1944. The later months is definitely ambiguous but so are seasons. GeraldWL 05:08, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "a Japanese-American sculptor"-- I don't think Jap-Am is needed, like how you don't state Copland is Lithuanian-American.
  • "combined with Copland winning"
  • If you linked Pennsyl, then Hawaii, Tennessee, Indiana, and Florida should also be linked.
  • Link Tchaikovsky, Stravinsky.
  • "Throughout the "Prologue""-- chapter names shouldn't probably begin with "the"
  • Consonance and disonance should prob be linked in Backg rather than here, or link in both occassions
  • "Halfway through"
    • Not done- this is how it used to be, but was changed per a comment by Mirokado above
  • Link County fair
  • "Its great success made the (then on-tour)"-- not sure what the brackets serve, I think we can assume that the shows have ended.
    • "Then on-tour" shows that the ballet was still showing in theatres when the suite debuted; this in turn made the ballet more popular, and it was likely seen more as a result (but I don't have a source for that last point) MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 22:49, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Instead of making a footnote J, the prose can be tweaked to: "exist as created by Copland; in chronological order:"
  • Video recording or film? They're two really different stuff
  • "there over" --> "there have been over"
    I disagree that US states other than Pennsylvania, the setting of the ballet, should be linked; MOS:OVERLINK. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 07:51, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Perhaps, yeah. MyCatIsAChonk, feel free to ignore that cmt. GeraldWL 07:54, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Gerald Waldo Luis: I think I've gotten everything; if I didn't respond to a comment, I implemented/fixed it without question. Thank you so much for the thorough read-through! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 22:49, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Your welcome! I've responded to two comments, you can notice them by my signature. GeraldWL 04:41, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Gerald Waldo Luis Fixed both MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:27, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments and support from Gerda[edit]

I am pleased with changes made in response to remarks in the PR, and will read it once more as if I hadn't seen it before. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:02, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

Lead

Background

Commission

Production

Premiere

Themes

Music and plot

I'll look at this more closely later. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:16, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Gerda Arendt, all have been fixed except a few that I responded to above- thank you very much! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 02:08, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, appreciated! - I was busy all day yesterday to improve a biography, and am behind with a few more, - patience please. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:18, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
One quick reply: we have only one image of Bach, and he is old, and therefore we have few of his works showing an image of the composer. We have many of Rossini, and it was fun to assign them to his operas by time frame, and further even with a smile for the buffa and serious for the seria ;) - Some editors absolutely want an image of the composer, and others think it has nothing to do in a work's article. I don't like old Handel being pictured in his youthful works, but can't prevent it for articles I didn't write. Take Rinaldo. Not too long ago, that even was the first image you saw, because it came with the side navbox. Now deleted. If you never saw that you didn't miss much ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:28, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You make a fair point- cut then. I worry about the lack of illustration in that section, but there's not much to be added. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 00:41, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Before going over the responses (which I all read) I'll read to the end.

Prologue

Eden Valley

Wedding Day

Fear ...

Suites

Recording

That's it for now, I'll be back. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:12, 12 October 2023 (UTC) New run across, with a few new comments below. I accept all your previous replies (even if I would probably do some things differently if "my" article).[reply]

Lead

Background

Commission and composition

Production

Initial run

Later

I do not see any links to the MGD center present- am I missing something? MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 20:48, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In that section, piped "Martha Graham Center". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:05, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Gerda Arendt, I'm not sure what to clarify. The dance company is for actual performing and the center includes her estate and the dance school with her name. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 23:52, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Now that's something I can understand, thank you ;) - Perhaps bring as much clarity into the introduction of the Center? --GA
@Gerda Arendt, all addressed- I don't think there's any link for licensing that makes sense for this, so I think it's fine as is. Thank you! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 20:52, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:42, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Coord question[edit]

@WP:FAC coordinators: , three and a half supports and it's been over 21 days- may I open another nomination? Thanks! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 12:07, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid not, it also needs to have passed image and source reviews. Ask again once it has. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:08, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Gog the Mild, image and source reviews have passed- now may I? MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:36, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You may. (Apologies for the delay, I have been away. You may get a swifter response from ((@FAC)) in future.) Gog the Mild (talk) 13:18, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Source review[edit]

Spot-check only on request and qualifying that I am not familiar with the article topic. The archive links for Dickinson, Peter (2016) and Salas, Juan Orrego (Autumn 1948) are probably unnecessary and somewhat inconsistent with the use of archives elsewhere in this article. The sources in the "Sources" section include some choreographers; are these "high-quality reliable sources"? It seems like the source formatting is consistent and the necessary information is available. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 13:16, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jo-Jo Eumerus, cut archive links. I don't see why the choreographer-written sources would be low quality since they're either about dance or memoirs of people involved with the production. de Mille 1991 is used for choreography and the production's film history. That's the only source I can find that matches your description- are there others you're concerned about? MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 18:47, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I was thinking of the few sources whose authors have linked Wikipedia pages that call them choreographers. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:55, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Jo-Jo Eumerus, in that case, de Mille is the only one, and I've stated my case for her above. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 19:22, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it's not the only source - Martha Graham is another one. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:27, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Jo-Jo Eumerus Whoops, forgot about that- but, still, Blood Memory is a memoir. The citations to it are used to support details about Graham's life and how she produced the ballet. IMO, this usage is appropriate and a "high-quality reliable source" for details about her life. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 00:04, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OK then. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:04, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Jo-Jo Eumerus, to clarify, does the source review pass? MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:10, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, with the abovementioned two caveats. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 11:26, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Phlsph7[edit]

This is not my field of expertise so I'll focus mainly on some general observations without properly assessing things like factual accuracy, undue weight, and comprehensiveness.

Phlsph7 (talk) 08:42, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Phlsph7, thank you very much for the review! Replied to one above, and on your last point- I'm not too sure what you mean, but I added something that I think matches your suggestion. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 02:04, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
One example of what I meant was that the paragraph talks about other Americana ballets by Copland but does not mention that Appalachian Spring also belongs to this style. I was thinking about something along the following lines: Appalachian Spring is characterized by Graham's unique technique of dance, which she invented... It further incorporates relatable and accessible music characteristic of the Americana style, which Copland... But take this more as a neutral point to consider than a required change since you are more familiar with the topic and this type of article to decide whether this would be an improvement.
Overall, the article seems to be in great shape. A few more observations:
  • During the depression, his left-wing political stances strengthened, motivated by addressing replace "depression" with "Great Depression"
  • distinguishing Copland as one of the most versatile composers of the 20th century Is there wide academic consensus on this point or should this be attributed?
  • Furthermore, the subsequent "Day of Wrath" episode can be seen as the Husbandman leaving for war, clarified by the closing waves of goodbye. I'm not sure what to make of the last phrase "clarified by the closing waves of goodbye". What about replacing it with a sentence like "This is reflected in its final scene, which features waves of goodbye"?
  • Moment of Crisis: The women of the town gather and suggest "a barely suppressed hysteria". This sentence could be clarified. I assume their behavior suggests hysteria. What about The women of the town gather, their behavior suggesting "a barely suppressed hysteria."
Phlsph7 (talk) 10:01, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Phlsph7, all addressed, and I tried changing some stuff in the lead- take a look and let me know if it's what you meant. As for the second point: I do not know if this needs another ref. That statement is currently referenced to Pollack's book, which I formerly accessed through Internet Archive, but access to it has now been removed (probably due to the lawsuit) and the Google Books preview doesn't include the referenced page. Though, I'm quite sure I would not have referenced something unsupported in the source. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:56, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know whether Pollack is a primary source on this claim (making his own assessment) or a secondary source (reporting a widespread opinion in the academic discourse). In the second case, there is no problem. In the first case, one solution would be to attribute the claim to Pollack. Another might be to weaken the claim, maybe something like "distinguishing Copland's versatility as a composer". Phlsph7 (talk) 08:05, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Phlsph7, weakened the claim as suggested, thanks for that MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 16:00, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, looks good now. I think all the main points have been addressed and I'm happy to support this nomination. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:12, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks for the thorough review! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 12:40, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.