Talk:Verbum caro factum est

SSATTB vs. SSAATB
Looking at the facsimiles from the 1591 publication of Hassler's Cantiones Sacrae, it is very clear that both the Tenor and Quinta Vox parts are for tenors—indeed, Hassler switches the music between the parts when repeating the opening "Verbum caro" text, so the tenor sings what the quinta had and vice versa, and again later in the piece. Both use C4 clefs. The tenor tessitura is a bit higher, though both parts go up to F4, and the tenor down to E3 while the quinta has one D3.

To say that this is SSAATB is misleading, if not inaccurate, and it shouldn't be offered even as an alternative. I have changed the article accordingly. The Sexta Vox uses a C2 clef, as compared to the Soprano's C1 and Alto's C3, but that's frequently thought of as a second soprano rather than a mezzo line (though it could be a high alto), so SSATTB is a reasonable call. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:00, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:07, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you!
Just noticed this article in the preps, and realised that I sang this recently! It was very interesting to learn some more of its history, so thank you for writing it! 09:55, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 6 March 2024

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. The request was made according to the order of other notes in Category:motets. The consensus was finding any other topic of same name which was later not doing for any DAB page. The consensus was that "any one searching for the motet already knew it was from Hassler." Regards! (non-admin closure) Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 21:55, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Verbum caro factum est → Verbum caro factum est (Hassler) – There is no obvious WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, but Incipit (Lastname) seems to be the patern at Category:Motets. CPDL's Verbum caro factum est a 3 (Hans Leo Hassler) is an arrangement of the same piece, apparently Hassler's only setting. Sparafucil (talk) 00:24, 6 March 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 05:56, 14 March 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. queen of 🖤 (they/them; chat) 19:41, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Is there another topic for this title that has a Wikipedia article? Other than, well, John 1:14. SilverLocust 💬 10:10, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
 * No, no other topic. People looking for this title probably mean the composition. Those looking for the Bible verse will probably search in English, or by verse number, and the Latin phrase is currently only in the image caption of that article. - Previously, I constructed with a dab to the composer, and it was removed as not necessary. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:20, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
 * @Gerda Arendt, when I do a google search for "verbum caro factum est", I see a lot of results about music, so I'm prepared to accept (to my surprise...) that people searching these words really are looking for a composition. What I don't know is if they're all trying to find the Hassler one. If there is a composer mentioned in the search results preview, it's always Hassler, so I'm inclined to think there isn't a "verbum caro factum est" by anyone else. Are you aware of any others? -- asilvering (talk) 23:03, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Support per WP:ASTONISH. It is jarring to find these famous words treated as if they primarily refer to a piece by Hassler. Srnec (talk) 17:11, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
 * @Sparafucil: I'm a little confused by this nomination. Parenthetical disambiguation is only necessary if there is another article at the ambiguous title. What are you proposing to have at the Verbum caro factum est title if the article is moved? —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 05:22, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I nominated because when browsing Category:Motets the title has the effect of an WP:EasterEgg. CPDL has a pretty good model for a Verbum caro factum est stub, for a start. Or it could just become a dab page.Sparafucil (talk) 18:48, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm still not sure I understand — WP:EASTEREGG refers to improper piping of links within articles, not article titles as they appear in categories, and so does not apply in a requested move discussion. Coming back to your nomination rationale, I would like to see some evidence in reliable sources of your assertion that there is no primary topic. There seem to be no shortage of similarly named pieces, as your link demonstrates, but that doesn't necessarily mean that this article title has to be disambiguated by default. Another rationale that would make sense to me is the creation of a primary redirect to the John 1:14 article at the Verbum caro factum est title (if, again, supported by appearances in sources), which would then justify parenthetical disambiguation for this article. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 21:26, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.