Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion is closed.

I've listed this article for peer review because I would to nominate it as a FAC in the foreseeable future,

Thanks, Amitchell125 (talk) 19:49, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Are you sure the Digital Image Archive of Medieval Music is subscription based? It has an article you could link to btw.

Sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 06:45, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Wondering why you're saying 1511 instead of 1510/11 like ODNB?

Sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 06:51, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• While this isn't really an issue, the title "Instrumental music - incomplete works or single complete parts" results in the TOC being oddly skewed, perhaps just "Instrumental music - incomplete works" would be fine? I don't think the inclusion of 'single complete parts' would be out of place in such a section.

Agreed, title amended. Amitchell125 (talk) 06:54, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Generally headers are capitalized in tables, e.g. "Description", "Composition" etc.

Done. Amitchell125 (talk) 06:56, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• You might consider enlarging (and then possibly moving up) the image in the Composing career with "upright=1.3/1.5/something".

Thanks, it's an improvement. Amitchell125 (talk) 06:59, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• The Life and musical career is a bit bloated; any chance you could divide into two–three sections?

Done, not sure about the titles, please amend them if you're dissatisfied. Amitchell125 (talk) 07:32, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• To help with my comment above, I'm wondering what you might thinking of having the map on the let and the larger quire image on the right. Might help some of the 'visual balance' as the large picture & text are on the same side at the moment. The map might be worth enlarging as well.

I've tweaked the images, but not followed through on alll your suggestions here. If more text appears (from the Further reading section?) I may be able to enlarge/move the map. Amitchell125 (talk) 07:39, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• At FAC you will certainly be questioned about using the ~hundred year old source Grattan Flood so often. I would attempt to switch out these with other references as much as possible.

Down to seven six uses, and working on these. Amitchell125 (talk) 07:58, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• FAC will also probably question why so many sources are in further reading in article on the shorter side. You might consider incorperating more of them, or removing some that don't have additional info on Parsley.

Off to the cathedral library this morning to look at what they have, other sources hidden. Amitchell125 (talk) 08:40, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Boston now incorporated into the text. Amitchell125 (talk) 14:44, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• IMO, music more should be said about his musical style and composing career in the lead, presumably in the first paragraph. Maybe mentioning he often wrote for viol.
• Done. Amitchell125 (talk) 18:01, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Theoretically the lead is supposed to sum up the entire article, so a line or two addressing the 'Compositions' section might be good as well. Maybe something about how many compositions survive, the fact that many are fragmented, etc.
• Done. Amitchell125 (talk) 18:00, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Anyways, impressively thorough and well written! I probably should have brought up most of my above comments at the GAN... heh – Aza24 (talk) 22:41, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks​, I've made a start on your comments and will return to address the others you have raised in a little while. Amitchell125 (talk) 08:01, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Looking better already. Would you be opposed if I added a brief section listing recordings of music by Parsley? It would probably look something like this. Best – Aza24 (talk) 19:07, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Great idea. Amitchell125 (talk) 19:14, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]