Talk:Jan Bach

Establishing "notability"
The message, "An editor has expressed a concern that the subject of the article does not satisfy the notability guideline or one of the following guidelines for inclusion on Wikipedia: Biographies, Books, Companies, Fiction, Music, Neologisms, Numbers, Web content, or several proposals for new guidelines", currently appears at the beginning of this article. I'm not sure how to counter this. Articles about Jan Bach have appeared in Newsweek and Time magazine, excerpts of his works appear in Alfred Blatter's Orchestration, and so on, but I don't know where and how I'm supposed to make these sorts of things known. I'm not inclined to include them in the article proper. TheScotch


 * I put the nn tag on an earlier version which didn't establish notability. Items have been added to the article which may have corrected this. I am uncertain why you are not inclined to include the Time and Newsweek articles as this would establish notability. If you have the publication dates and volume nos. you should put them in. I'd have no objection with having the nn tag removed. Freshacconci 15:18, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, I don't have the dates and issue numbers (these are weekly news magazines we're talking about, remember), although I could track them down at the public library on microfiche or microfilm (I'm pretty sure both articles appeared either toward the end of 1980 or toward the beginning of 1981) if I decided to make the effort. I don't delude myself that editing wikipedia is anything other than a diversion (or less equivocally, a waste of time), but we'll see--maybe Tuesday.

Re: I am uncertain why you are not inclined to include the Time and Newsweek articles as this would establish notability.

Is this a question? It's worded very oddly. I'm not inclined to include them because I can't think of a way to do it that wouldn't damage the integrity of the article. The best I can think of is to stick them in with the "sources", but even that would be a lie (albeit a small one) if no one actually did use them as sources. In any case, the notion that a composer can be "notable" enough to justify his own article in Grove and yet not "notable" enough to justify an article in wikipedia seems to me absurd and indefensible. TheScotch 09:01, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Volume number format
Well, I found the articles bound in print without having to resort to microfilm or microfiche. I sidestepped the "sources" problem by creating a category called "Bibliography". I was wrong about "volumes": Both news magazines do use this designation. One spells out the word and uses Roman numerals, and the other abbreviates the word and uses Arabic numerals. Should I try to make these consistent with each other here or should I continue to retain the formats favored by the magazines--or is the question just ridiculously pedantic? TheScotch 21:24, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Ridiculously pedantic, no doubt. TheScotch 01:15, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Teaching and performing
Jan Bach is primarily known as a composer, and I think the inordinate emphasis the article originally gave to his activities as a teacher and an instrumentalist may have deceived certain editors as to the extent of his national--and international--significance. I have tried to correct this (just now), not by removing information, but by putting existing information into clearer perspective. TheScotch 17:21, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

The obvious question
Any relation to Johann Sebastian & family? His website bio doesn't address the issue.


 * Antediluvian67 (talk) 16:57, 6 June 2011 (UTC)


 * There have been numerous published newspaper and journal articles, as I recall, that insist (in passing), he is not related to J.S. Bach. Ultimately we're all related, of course. TheScotch (talk) 08:54, 16 October 2011 (UTC)