Talk:Sydney Opera House

Omission of the role of Peter Rice of Ove Arup

Peter Rice was THE engineer on site at the Opera House for most of the trouble-shooting period. He has his own well documented[Wikipedia Page] .

It is strange that he gets absolutely no mention on this page.

I have refrained from inserting any such edit given the level of dispute that is evident...but it still seems unfair/incomplete.

Artied (talk) 16:56, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

While he may have an article, his involvement with the Sydney Opera House is limited to one, completely unreferenced paragraph. None of that can be used unless references can be provided. --AussieLegend (✉) 17:15, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

It

The intro is written in the style of a 12-year old. It has eleven sentences and seven start with "it." It seems like a list of unrelated facts. It is unaided by a sentence structure that could actually like facts together. It could use help. :) 842U (talk) 13:51, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

I have just restructured the lead para, including moving some of the information into the Performance Venues section heading. Feel free to revert if its not an improvement I hate thinking of names (talk) 09:45, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Reference

Guardian Utzon Comment Any good? -- Clem Rutter (talk) 09:35, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Not just a comment—as stated at the end, "this is an edited extract from the book Utzon and the Sydney Opera House by Daryl Dellora, published by Penguin Specials." As an eyewitness and newspaper worker of the day in Sydney, I can confirm that this account is spot-on. It was common knowledge that the ABC (Moses) kyboshed the opera theatre to serve the interests of the Sydney Symphony Orchestra and its subscription concerts. The massive and intricate revolving stage was thus mindlessly scrapped, dooming the building to become at best a third-order purveyor of grand operatic productions. The state politics and corruption of those days was a minefield for anyone with any sort of principles. It was a woeful tragedy for Utzon, as well as for grand opera and for the people of New South Wales. Bjenks (talk) 13:31, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Bolding and / or Italicising of venue names in a list

The issue of whether the venue names can be either bolded or italicised is currently being discussed. I do not believe that the MoS supports italicising names of places or venues but I am willing to be shown otherwise. If there is something in the MoS then please provide it here so that it can be discussed and decided upon by consensus. Afterwriting (talk) 13:15, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

I have been researching the MoS and so far the indications are that it is okay to bold the venue names in the way I have done in the article (because they are done so in a list) as per MOS:BOLD. There is no indication that I can find that it is okay to italicise them instead ~ just the opposite from my reading of MOS:ITAL. Afterwriting (talk) 13:30, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Firstly, when something is under discussion, the WP:STATUSQUO prevails. You don't arbitrarily decide to ignore concerns by other editors and revert to your preferred version and demand that somebody provides a MOS reference when you've made edits that don't comply with the MOS. We revert to the version prior to to the disputed edits (yours). MOS:BOLD says Do not use boldface for emphasis in article text; instead use template {{em}}, or the underlying <em>...</em> HTML markup, which render as italics in most browsers.. Also, punctuation shouldn't be inside the markup. I forget where the MOS says this but it's something that we went through at WT:TV because editors were bolding punctuation inside markup. I agree with Machina.sapiens here when he says On re-reading the MOS, I see that WP doesn't really want bolding used in this kind of situation, but I think it helps readability to have the venue names picked out in some way - so what would you think of italicising the venue names instead? Italics are what the MOS says. Wher in the MOS do you claim that it says bolding is appropriate? --AussieLegend (✉) 13:44, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

According to the MoS bolding is acceptable in lists and this is common practice in most articles. What we have here is a list. Where in the MoS does it say it is okay to italicise the names of things such as venues? Probably nowhere but I'm open to your evidence otherwise. Afterwriting (talk) 14:12, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Afterwriting Again, when your edits are disputed, as they have been, we revert to the status quo. You've received an edit-warring warning and chosen to edit-war after that, so there's a case for an AN3 report, unless you revert your last revert. I've presented you with a link to the MOS and a quote from it. You have not, despite my request, so your claim is unsupported. Bolding is appropriate in some cases, such as definition lists, which is not the case here. The example used by the MOS is Glossary of the American trucking industry, which is not the type of list used here. In this case we aren't listing terms per say, we're merely emphasising names. Note that you have not provided justification for bolding punctuation. --AussieLegend (✉) 14:34, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

FYI User:AussieLegend:

From the Manual of Style at MOS:TITLEQUOTES in the "Neither" section:

"There are a few cases in which the title should be in neither italics nor quotation marks (though many are capitalized): .... Names of buildings."

Afterwriting (talk) 14:47, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

That is about the building, not spaces within the building. As Machina.sapiens has explained, we're trying to emphasise the name of spaces within the building. Emphasis is correctly done with italics, per MOS:BOLD. --AussieLegend (✉) 14:56, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

I suggest that (contrary to AussieLegend above) MOS:DEFLIST (definitions lists) does apply, and that semicolon-colon should be used rather than direct bold markup. Mitch Ames (talk) 09:18, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Did you look at the definition list example? The content isn't being uses as a defintion list, it's being used simply to emphasise the names, and regardless, the punctuation should not be bolded. Semicolon-colon markup would result in a messy section compared to what should be there now:

The Sydney Opera House includes a number of performance venues:

The Concert Hall

With 2,679 seats, the home of the Sydney Symphony Orchestra and used by a large number of other concert presenters. It contains the Sydney Opera House Grand Organ, the largest mechanical tracker action organ in the world, with over 10,000 pipes.

The Joan Sutherland Theatre

A proscenium theatre with 1,507 seats,^[1] the Sydney home of Opera Australia and The Australian Ballet. Until 16 October 2012 it was known as the Opera Theatre.^[2]

The Drama Theatre

A proscenium theatre with 544 seats, used by the Sydney Theatre Company and other dance and theatrical presenters.

The Playhouse

An end-stage theatre with 398 seats.

The Studio

A flexible space with a maximum capacity of 400, depending on configuration.

The Utzon Room

A small multi-purpose venue, seating up to 210.

The Forecourt

A flexible open-air venue with a wide range of configuration options, including the possibility of utilising the Monumental Steps as audience seating, used for a range of community events and major outdoor performances. The Forecourt will be closed to visitors and performances in 2011–2014 to construct a new entrance tunnel to a rebuilt loading dock for the Joan Sutherland Theatre.

That's not as neat as:

The Sydney Opera House includes a number of performance venues:

• The Concert Hall With 2,679 seats, the home of the Sydney Symphony Orchestra and used by a large number of other concert presenters. It contains the Sydney Opera House Grand Organ, the largest mechanical tracker action organ in the world, with over 10,000 pipes.
• The Joan Sutherland Theatre A proscenium theatre with 1,507 seats,^[1] the Sydney home of Opera Australia and The Australian Ballet. Until 16 October 2012 it was known as the Opera Theatre.^[2]
• The Drama Theatre A proscenium theatre with 544 seats, used by the Sydney Theatre Company and other dance and theatrical presenters.
• The Playhouse An end-stage theatre with 398 seats.
• The Studio A flexible space with a maximum capacity of 400, depending on configuration.
• The Utzon Room A small multi-purpose venue, seating up to 210.
• The Forecourt A flexible open-air venue with a wide range of configuration options, including the possibility of utilising the Monumental Steps as audience seating, used for a range of community events and major outdoor performances. The Forecourt will be closed to visitors and performances in 2011–2014 to construct a new entrance tunnel to a rebuilt loading dock for the Joan Sutherland Theatre.

We're not out to draw excessive attention to the spaces, just to emphasise their names. And, of course, MOS:ACCESS says Do not make pseudo-headings using bold or semicolon markup. Screen readers and other machines can only use correctly formatted headings. --AussieLegend (✉) 09:40, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

According to the Australian Manual of Style, the names of the spaces (Concert Hall, etc) are being used here as "run-on headings" (where the heading appears on the same line rather than above its content - a more compact form suitable for short content, which is the situation here). The MoS does not appear to discuss this particular type of heading (or at least I could not find it!) but, as headings, I think they should be bold rather than italic (as that is the WP style). Certainly if the associated content were to grow, we would almost certainly explode them into true headings and subsections. Aside, if these spaces were presented as subsections (with actual headings) rather than a bullet list, it would enable other articles to link to specific spaces in the building. E.g. The New Crystal Silence is one of many articles that talks about a performance in the concert hall but can only link to the Opera House article. I didn't do searches for the other spaces but I would assume a lot of the larger ones would get mentioned in many other articles. Indeed, some of the larger spaces are probably notable in their own right as they are likely to be performance venues for world premieres and other such events. Kerry (talk) 21:35, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, User:Kerry Raymond, for your considered comments. The MoS is quite clear that the names of buildings (and, by logical inference, the names of any particular parts of buildings) should not be italicised for emphasis. There is not, therefore, any valid MoS reason to italicise the names of specific venues within the opera house for emphasis. As to whether they can or should be in bold in some form of list then I am open to persuasion and your comments and suggestions are very sensible. Afterwriting (talk) 01:52, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Regardless of whether the names are bolded or italicised, the names should be the actual name of the space. Afterwriting has arbitrarily decided that "The" is part of the name when the Sydney Opera House website excludes this from all of the names.[1] And, of course, the colons added by Afterwriting should neither be bolded or italicised. --AussieLegend (✉) 16:27, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

While being slightly nervous about putting my toe back in this pool :-), I have been checking out how other PAC articles have actually Listed the component venues.

egJohn F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, Barbican Centre, Arts Centre Melbourne, Overture Center for the Arts, Southbank Centre, Lincoln Center for the Performing Arts

There's not a standard Way, but almost all do provide a List, and in almost every case, the venue names are bolded in the style of a headword (unless they're wikilinked) - either just bolded manually in-line, with or without bullets, or made into a heading.

Having thought about this a bit, I think there's case for making the list a subheading/body list, rather than what I would call an elaborated List, where the headword is just inline, with a few explanatory words, as it currently is in the SOH article. The venues which compose a PAC are of course a critical part of its description, and it might be useful, as User:Kerry Raymond points out, to go into some more depth (for the major spaces at least) in such a list, without breaking its Listiness. (It would seem that the Glossary template could possibly legitimately be used for this sort of List, although it's obviously not a Glossary. MOS talks about using it for "terms and definitions, metadata topics and values, questions and answers, or any other groups of name–value data", (and also almost-deprecates the ;/: method)). That would give us something like the KenCen version (although that's done with actual subheadings, of course). I'd be happy with any of those options, or indeed the original version, which just manually bolded the venue names in a simple list, but I'm beginning to change my mind and think that a heading/body list might be better - for future development. Machina.sapiens (talk) 03:39, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

'No War' protest

Is there any reason this fairly 'notable' incident on 18 March 2003 isn't mentioned? Too trivial? image, [2], [3]. 220 of ^Borg 12:12, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

WP:NOTNEWS would seem to apply. --AussieLegend (✉) 14:13, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

I think it should be included.--Jack Upland (talk) 08:16, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Architectural design role of Peter Hall

The entire section is based on only two sources, of which one ("ABC, The Opera House Project, online") would appear to be nonexistent. Given the contentious nature of the subject this does not seem appropriate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.248.189.133 (talk) 16:03, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

The Opera House Project is at http://theoperahouseproject.com. --AussieLegend (✉) 20:54, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Suitability for Opera

Can anything be said about its performance as an opera house? I have heard that the acoustics are totally dreadful. Does anybody know about this aspect? Seadowns (talk) 17:02, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Voyager

Is it worth mentioning the inclusion of the Opera House as one of 116 images featured on the Voyager Golden Record??? I'd argue this is worth including. SecretName101 (talk) 03:54, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Usage of the Word 'Surrounds' and Several other Rare Words

Sadly, this article is limited in readability because of the usage of several rare words or uncommon forms of words. For instance talking about 'the surrounds of the structure' instead of allowing it to be changed to 'the surroundings' inhibits flow and causes most readers to stop and try to understand what they just read. If this is the goal of the article, that is an issue. If not, why not allow the editing of the article for grammatical flow instead of reverting back to difficult or improper grammar and punctuation? I am simply posting this here as a reference and a challenge to make Wikipedia better and not a wall to 'leave your mark on'. I will not be monitoring this page as the article will either be improved by this challenge or it won't be and the article will remain flawed. The choice is up to you, CrowdSource World. DoulosBen (talk) 19:49, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Surrounds is actually quite commonly used. It is generally taken to mean (in the context used here) the building and its immediate surroundings. i.e. only the land very close to the building. "The White House and surrounds" would generally mean the White House and any grounds within the fences surrounding it. Here there are no fences so it means anything up to the water on three sides and, on the fourth, the ground immediately behind the Opera House. You changed the text to "The building and the areas around it" but that is rather ambiguous as it could include water outside the surrounds as well as parts of Bennelong Point toward Circular Quay. --AussieLegend (✉) 21:00, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Windows

What type of windows did the opera house have. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 105.250.26.164 (talk) 20:05, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Quite big ones. They had to make special windows as they couldn't find any suitable off-the-shelf-items. --Merbabu (talk) 04:38, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Should the car park be mentioned?

This article outlines some interesting details about the car park structure that explains how unique it is. This youtube video (which is unlikely to be a reliable source) claims it is the world's deepest basement. I don't know where in the article this information fits due to the section headings. - Shiftchange (talk) 05:27, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Yes, i think it should be mentioned. --Merbabu (talk) 04:39, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• 20040324-135654-6-1920x1381we.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:39, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Festivals section

I don't know what happened to my edit summary that I wrote when undoing Merbabu's removal of the content I'd added about the Message Sticks and Homeground Festivals. It took me some time to put the content together, which I went looking for after stumbling into mentions of the Message Sticks festival all over the place. At this point this article is its most logical home as it was the Opera House itself which staged the events, and I do not have the time at the moment to create a separate article with all of the relevant information that could go into it. However (as noted in editors' comments), there are several redirects pointing to the section, used in a number of articles across Wikipedia, which can be reassigned when a separate article is created. So please do not remove this section unless you are creating a separate article for the content. Message Sticks was an important event in the history of Indigenous cinema. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 08:24, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

I've now created the article per your suggestion above. Message Sticks Festival. Per my edit summary, this Opera House page is not the place for such lengthy description of an event...and your suggestion for separate articles alludes to this. The new article is a bit raw, but your content seems well-referenced and is a good start (just not well placed in the Opera House article), and is a good place for more content that you have alluded to.

I did notice your unexplained revert of my explained content removal. But I'm glad to see you note it was an accident. --Merbabu (talk) 10:53, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi Merbabu yes, I'm not sure what happened there - it showed me the usual auto-populated message when I did the undo (Twinkle wasn't working on my tablet) and I added a few more words trying to convey what I wrote above. I never intentionally leave edit summaries blank. Thanks for creating the article - I will try to get back to it soon and build some further content. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 23:44, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): RobertYe.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 10:34, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 March 2019 and 8 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): AIHTNY.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 10:34, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Sydney Opera House logo.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:22, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

CC-BY 3.0 or 4.0?

This reference "Sydney Opera House". New South Wales State Heritage Register. Department of Planning & Environment. H01685. Retrieved 3 September 2017. Text is licensed by State of New South Wales (Department of Planning and Environment) under CC BY 4.0 licence., seems to be referring to the same thing as this, under Attribution: This Wikipedia article contains material from http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/heritageapp/ViewHeritageItemDetails.aspx?ID=5054880 Sydney Opera House, listed on the "New South Wales State Heritage Register" published by the Government of New South Wales under CC-BY 3.0 AU licence (accessed on 3 September 2017). Davidships (talk) 03:05, 5 January 2023 (UTC)