Talk:Karl Haas/Archives/2015

Haas had No College Degrees

He had no college diplomas, but he spoke English with a perfect American accent, which is strange being that he fled Germany at age 23. He miserably butchered the French Language, when attempting to pronounce music titles in that language. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.184.143.196 (talk • contribs) 05:07, 24 February 2007

"Miserably butchered" is a subjective description. It reflects your personal opinion and is not generally valid or authoritative.Lestrade (talk) 15:01, 5 March 2008 (UTC)Lestrade

And "perfect American accent"? Which one would that be? I loved his work, I knew where he was from, and he did speak English beautifully - but if I heard his voice for the first time, and knew absolutely nothing about him including his name, I'd have said he spent a considerable time in Germany, probably from birth. -- JackofOz (talk) 15:33, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Perfectly true. The hard "L" and the soft "R" give a German away every time.Lestrade (talk) 15:15, 6 March 2008 (UTC)Lestrade

Family heirloom?

Quote: The theme music for Adventures in Good Music, the 2nd movement from Beethoven's "Pathétique" Sonata (Sonata No. 8 in C minor), was performed by Haas who considered it a family heirloom.

What is this referring to? How can a movement of a Beethoven piano sonata be "a family heirloom" unless his family owned the original MS or something? -- JackofOz (talk) 07:28, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Section on "Adventures in Good Music"

This section of the article is almost word-for-word exactly like the Wikipedia article "Adventures in Good Music". There should be a difference between the two. AlbertSM (talk) 00:55, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome to do the research and add to either article. Right now, each article is notable and necessary, and contains information relevant to that particular article. There is a fair amount of crossover because AIGM is practically all that Haas is known for, and AIGM is indistinguishable from Haas. However, there is plentiful information available re: each subject, and you are welcome to contribute to one or both of the articles. Softlavender (talk) 04:08, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm not aware that there's any policy saying sections in different articles about the same thing should be arbitrarily worded differently just for the sake of being different. Presumably the text is properly sourced, not plagiarising anything etc. If a good form of words can be developed that satisfies our rules, why not use it more than once if appropriate? -- JackofOz (talk) 04:15, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. The info is valuable to both articles, and a reader who only looks up one of the articles should not be deprived of any of the info. Softlavender (talk) 05:06, 12 July 2009 (UTC)