Talk:Meistersinger

Germany High‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Poetry Mid‑importance

	Poetry portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poetry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of poetry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoetryWikipedia:WikiProject PoetryTemplate:WikiProject PoetryPoetry articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

One source...[edit]

Hi, this is User:Psychonavigation - but I'm not logged in. Leave a note on my userpage if you wish to speak further or in a less public arena (not that this page is especially popular). Anyway, I've just added both a "one source" and an "original research" template to the top of this article, for reasons that should be quite evident if one scrolls to the bottom of the article. For a topic that is rather well-known - at least parochially, in Germany - and has been the subject of an opera by Wagner, you'd think there would be more reliable sources on the subject. I know nothing about it and intensely dislike pre-20th century "classical" music, but through a cursory google search I found quite a few sources that had at least the appearance of being reliable. Anyway, hopefully someone takes a look at this... someday! 124.171.110.229 (talk) 01:56, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are three (not one) sources listed. The article is taken from those three sources and does not represent original research. Please contribute to the article with another source, but posting banners with no foundation is not useful. Bob Burkhardt (talk) 14:45, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Revisions[edit]

I've revised the first paragraph under Rules for correct English usage and clarity. I also removed the subcategories (a) and (b) that were previously Under point 3. I think the paragraph would be improved by the deletion of the numbers as well; good prose doesn't require outline-like format to be clear and logical. But I left them in deference to the style of the original author.

In revising point (3), I substituted "poetic meter" for "number of syllables," but I do not know what the author meant by poetic "harmony," so I deleted that term without replacing it. The paragraph seems solid to me as it stands, but please do restore any salient point I have missed. KC 09:53, 1 April 2016 (UTC) KC 09:53, 1 April 2016 (UTC)