Talk:Music of Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Moved by Kwamikagami. Jafeluv (talk) 05:24, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Music of Pyotr Il& → Music of Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky — The subject's name is spelt Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky in his own article. In articles about his works etc, it makes no sense to spell his name in any other way. This move was done without any prior discussion, and an invitation extended to the author to discuss it after the event has received no response. --  Jack of Oz    ... speak! ...   09:27, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Rename to Music of Tchaikovsky. -- Ja Ga  talk 09:37, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't have any objection to that version of the title. I've looked around and I can find no other composer who has a "Music of ..." article, so maybe this one will be a template on which others will be modelled.  It would also obviate the patronymic issue.  But maybe the majority prefer it the way it is now (with the spelling fixed, of course).  I'm easy either way.   --   Jack of Oz    ... speak! ...   08:53, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Move to Music of Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky to align with main article (which is infact an FA). Rambo's Revenge (talk)  11:49, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Move to Music of Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky per above. Jonyungk (talk) 15:34, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Move per nom. Although both versions are valid transliterations, it makes no sense to spell the name differently in different articles. Jafeluv (talk) 07:19, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Move to Music of Tchaikovsky. Main article should be at just Tchaikovsky as the common name used in reliable English sources. Rare to see any other part of his name (unlike, for example, Beethoven or Mozart).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:57, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I think WP:COMMONNAME arguments about Tchaikovsky belong in Talk:Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky. This article can be included in the move request and moved along with the main article if there's consensus to do that. In any case I believe that this page should follow the naming of the main article. Jafeluv (talk) 20:45, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree with Jafeluv about arguments about moving the main Tchaikovsky article belonging on the talk page for that article. One point, though: There is more than one Tchaikovsky (for example, Boris Tchaikovsky, the 20th century Russian composer). To avoid any confusion, perhaps we should stick to Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky and Music of Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky. This, as Jack has pointed out and I have found in my own research, has also been the generally accepted spelling and use of Tchaikovsky's name. Jonyungk (talk) 23:33, 6 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Move as proposed with immediate effect. If a further move is going to be proposed, then I'd also prefer simply "of Tchaikovsky" (but that doesn't mean I'd support the main article being called "Tchaikovsky"). --Kotniski (talk) 17:12, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Now that the main article has been moved as per above, can we finish the job and have this talk page called Talk:Music of Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky and not Talk:Music of Pyotr Il'yich Tchaikovsky? Thanks. --  Jack of Oz    ... speak! ...   02:24, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Proposed deletion of Music of Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky


The article Music of Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * The content of this article has been re-incorporated into Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky. As this material was extensively reworked in terms of quality and conciseness, simply merging the two articles is not practical. Therefore, I am suggesting this article be deleted as it is now redundant

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jonyungk (talk) 18:24, 9 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Oppose – First: I believe this article started as a split from Tchaikovsky's article; merging it back there seems unneeded. Second: I spot-checked two topics: songs and solo piano music; neither seem to covered in the composer's article. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 01:55, 10 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment: I was the one who created the article. At that time there were concerns voiced about article size, hence this spin–off. Material on Tchaikovsky's compositional style in general, aesthetic concerns and reception were extensively revamped and incorporated into a new Music section located at Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky. This section was created as a result of discussion on Talk:Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky as part of an effort to upgrade the overall quality of writing and content and maintain the article's FA status. Material on specific genres in which Tchaikovsky composed, such as the songs and solo piano works, are either being incorporated in List of compositions by Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky or supplanted by new, better material. The two sections mentioned by Michael Bednarek were based on David Brown's New Grove article on Tchaikovsky and, due to bias on Brown's part, was going to be rewritten or replaced once material from Wiley (either his New Grove entry on the composer or his recent book-length bio/music analysis on the same) had been evaluated. All this makes this article redundant and unnecessary, so deletion seems only appropriate. I would encourage Michael to peruse the two other articles to see their progress for himself and perhaps revisit his opinion here. Jonyungk (talk) 02:16, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Comment There is a problem here that the 'list' article is now more than a list....... Is there a case for simply renaming the 'list' article as 'Music of....'?--Smerus (talk) 11:01, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Response Well, it was always more than a list but it has expanded as concerns on Talk:Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky have been taken into consideration and efforts made to improve quality and content. We could just as easily transfer material from that article to this one, since it is already called "Music of ..." and delete the other one. Jonyungk (talk) 15:08, 10 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Jonyungk is probably right about the fate of the three articles involved, but a proposing this article for speedy deletion seems to be well outside Criteria for speedy deletion and that's why I removed the template Proposed deletion. Jonyungk's proposal should be discussed here (or at Articles for deletion), with a notice at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical music. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 03:53, 12 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Honestly, I had no idea that I had applied for speedy deletion. Since this is the first article for which I've requested a deletion, period, I just followed what I thought were the instructions.


 * Another alternative for the articles would be moving the text in question from the List article to make it just a list, as apparently is the case with lists of compositions by other composers, and incorporate it into this one. No articles become deleted and the redundancy issue is taken care of. Jonyungk (talk) 05:19, 12 March 2012 (UTC)


 * I only commented here for procedural reasons: 1) a speedy delete was (unintentionally) inappropriate; 2) the article was created as a split from the composer's main article – I wasn't sure that taking it back there is a good thing. I think the original concept of three articles – one bio, one list, one on his music – was not altogether unreasonable; however, if Jonyungk wants to take a different route, that's fine with me. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 13:21, 17 March 2012 (UTC)


 * If there are to be three articles, I believe the list should be a pure list as per similar articles.--Smerus (talk) 17:56, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Music of Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/19971109050527/http://clover.slavic.pitt.edu/~tales/snow_maiden.html to http://clover.slavic.pitt.edu/~tales/snow_maiden.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:38, 9 February 2018 (UTC)