Talk:EuropaChorAkademie

Notability
Notability on wikipedia is not the same thing as notoriety or importance of the group. While they may have had the first performance a work by Bernd Alois Zimmermann at Carnegie Hall (based on a comment left on my talk page, since Requiem für einen jungen Dichter does not have an article, it can't be considered a notable work) that does not mean that they meet WP:GNG. What sort of reviews did that performance receive? Did it go unnoticed in the media? If not, you should be able to supply significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the choir on that and other events. The Bach choirs website does not appear to meet WP:RS. All of the other sources fail the independence criteria. That is why I placed the notability template.

As for being a biography of living people, since it is composed of living people, even though none of them are named, it must adhere to the rules of WP:BLP. Feel free to confirm at that project. I will comply with the consensus there. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:00, 21 April 2017 (UTC)


 * I did Wikipedia the service of filling a red link by translating from German. I added sources. I will fill the next link, that seems more important to me than finding more refs for this group. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:32, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Walter Görlitz I sourced now everything visible, more to come. I understand that 1 or two recordings establish notability, they made 64, performing with notable orchestras and conductors, including Penderecki. Please remove the tags. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:39, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Sourcing is only part f the problem. The sources should be independent of the choir, in other words, not their record label or a concert promoter. The sources must also meet the requirements of WP:RS. The website on Bach choirs does not meet that requirement. The only thing close to helping make them notable is that they were one of multiple parties involved in the (minor) award-winning recording of "Requiem for a Young Poet". Nothing else really helps the choir meet WP:GNG.
 * Also, you don't have to ping me or mention me by name as this article is on my watchlist. 15:46, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
 * We have many articles that rest on the official website of the institution. Symphony orchestras or festivals such as Lucerne Festival are no "promoters". Recordings are facts. Being invited to perform in Carnegie Hall, Berlin Philharmonic and at the Beijing Festival are facts that make them notable in my view. Which fact(s) do you question? I will not have much time until May, and this article is of low importance to me, so please be patient. We can do without BC, it's dated anyway. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:10, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
 * ps: Bach-Cantatas was used only supporting the Association of profession concert choirs (VDKC), because I assume readers have less trouble reading English than German. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:14, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I came to say thank you for the sources that you added. I don't want to seem ungrateful for them. They do not help the subject meet GNG though.
 * There are many groups who perform at Carnegie Hall, or with the Berlin Philharmonic and at the Beijing Festival and are not notable. You seem to think that facts are what make the subject notable. That's not the case. It's whether the group receives 1) significant coverage 1) in reliable sources 3) that are independent of the choir. And yes, festivals will write whatever they think is necessary to get people to attend a performance. It's also often supplied by the choir. So that they performed is not enough to indicate notability. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:52, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

With regards to WP:BLP, how does this choir (and all other choirs across the world) compare with, say, Liverpool F.C. (and all the other football teams across the world)? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:07, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Don't know. Don't care. Take that up at WP:FOOTY. Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:23, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Biographies of living persons is a guideline not a project? If members are unnamed how does BLP apply? Martinevans123 (talk) 08:24, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
 * The music project has adopted it and if you want the football project to adopt it, feel free to discuss it there. Walter Görlitz (talk) 13:58, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Which music project adopted what? I am a member of Project Classical music from 2009, and have not seen one choir, not one orchestra, not even a string quartet, regarded as BLP. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:05, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
 * ps: not even a vocal ensemble with named musicians, such as amarcord (ensemble). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:07, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry. I should have pointed you to the project page: Wikipedia:WikiProject Musicians. Notice that its parentage is both WikiProject Biography and WikiProject Music and it has "expanded to include musical groups as well". If this is a book club, or a football club, or a film's cast and crew, a corporation or some other collection of individuals, it doesn't fall under WikiProject Musicians and Biography. Feel free to discuss this at the project to see if there are exclusions. Walter Görlitz (talk)
 * Ah right, thanks Walter. Yes, that's where it will be decided, I guess. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:05, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
 * New to me. Is it relevant at all for classical music? If yes, it says that the project deals with groups, but I don't find that BLP applies to them. It is not a project I'd put on the talk of any classical vocal ensemble, classical pianist, conductor etc. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:33, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Classical music has some exceptions, such as their desire to eschew infoboxes, and since many of the people who are of interest to classical music are dead, those subjects don't apply to BLP. Otherwise, they should follow the parent project. You could always ask at Wikipedia:WikiProject Classical music. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:17, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
 * , I may be a bit thick, but I can't find any policy or guideline at WP:WikiProject Musicians that demands to apply BLP standards to articles about choirs, ensembles, orchestras, and similar groups. All I see is the line you quoted ("…expanded to include musical groups…"), but you forgot to include the next bit, "This aspect of the project is currently in progress." What does "in progress" mean exactly? Is there a discussion somewhere? Could you please provide a link? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 02:10, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
 * It's part of the BLP project so therein is the requirement to apply BLP. Thick, no? Discussing this here instead of asking there, probably not your best option.
 * Since I didn't add "in progress", I can't tell you what it means. Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:28, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
 * No links, then? At WP:WPBIO I find, "only articles about individual persons, not about an organization or group or association, unless a substantial section of the article is a biography of a person related to that organization or group." At WP:BLPGROUP: "The extent to which the BLP policy applies to edits about groups is complex and must be judged on a case-by-case basis. A harmful statement about a small group or organization comes closer to being a BLP problem than a similar statement about a larger group; and when the group is very small, it may be impossible to draw a distinction between the group and the individuals that make up the group." None of that suggests to me that an article about this choir must follow BLP rules. Further, the above banner WikiProject Biography ought to be removed because this article is no such thing. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 06:45, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
 * No links but I have stated that you discuss it at the project yet you continue to not do that. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:08, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Restored:
 * WP:WikiProject Musicians? I can't find any hint on their project page or in their guidelines that would support your assertions. As for WP:WPBIO and WP:BLPGROUP: I can read the advice there, and it doesn't support your assertions for this article either. Please remove WikiProject Biography from this talk page and BLP sources overleaf. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 15:02, 2 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Michael Bednarek, you have not undertaken a discussion to determine if the template should be removed. Based on my understanding of the policy, this article applies. You have only attempted to have me clarify and have read there. You have not discussed it there. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:01, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * a) Per WP:TALKNO, you should not have removed my earlier contribution (15:02, 2 May 2017). b) I have discussed and disputed the validity of those templates above. You removed one of my contributions, which casts doubt on your good faith. c) You added those templates here and overleaf; you need to justify it. You have not provided any links to guidelines or policies that would support those templates in this article. d) After my edit which you removed, you were silent here; your revert of my removal of those templates is in violation of WP:BRD. e) For the 3rd time: where is "there"? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 14:23, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. The removal was inadvertent and part of the tool that I used to revert with. I have asked you to discuss at the the project page and you have not and I did discuss: when I warned you on your talk page. For the second time, pick a project and discuss: WP:BLP or Wikipedia:WikiProject Musicians. I don't care. If I push you in one direction and they give you an answer you don't like you may feel bound to that answer, so I won't point you to one or the other. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:35, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Arbitrary break
Any article which mentions living people is subject to BLP; that is why we have the policy, living people do not get special protection solely in bio articles but in all articles where they get mentioned, ♫ RichardWeiss talk contribs 12:01, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
 * That's not what WP:BLPGROUP says; where else then does it say that every orchestra, choir, opera company, every contemporary opera performance, every article about a musical recording, falls under BLP rules and has to bannered as such? My objections are a) pointless cluttering with banners of articles and their talk pages; b) the application of inappropriate levels of required citations; c) impossible classification (class) for the BLP project. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 13:28, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I was referring to Joshard Daus not to every orchestra, choir etc, that we mention living people in the article is why it should be tagged for BLP. I agree we shouldn't overtag but BLP is an important tag and should be used because living people are mentioend by name in the article. For living people what is an inappropriate level of citation? Strikes me you are trying to undermine BLP and you shouldn't be, there are better things to do. ♫ RichardWeiss talk contribs 07:00, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
 * By that logic (if I understand it right), mark every Bach cantata as BLP because it mentions living conductors. There must be a limit, and where is it? Daus, mentioned here, has his own article. The choir article is not a biography of him, nor any of the singers, nor the other conductors working with the group. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:22, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Well indeed, any artice which mentions living people is subject to BLP, regardless of whether or not it is tagged. BLP does NOT merely apply to bios, as the policy makes very clear. ♫ RichardWeiss talk contribs 09:35, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't think that is right, "mentioning" is not enough, - or show me one article that doesn't mention a name of a living person, such as a journalist. In this case, yes the conductor and a few living composers are mentioned, but only their names, nothing biographical. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:14, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

More notability
I added more about their Moses und Aron, concerts and a recording which was nominated for the Grammy in 2015. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:19, 1 May 2017 (UTC)