Talk:Wie schön leuchtet der Morgenstern, BWV 1 discography

Derived from a cantata article
This article was begun as a copy from a section Wie schön leuchtet der Morgenstern, BWV 1, oldid=1002023628, 22 January 2021. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:45, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
 * if I remember correctly, there were several referencing-related tags in the original where this was copied from. Can these be transferred here, until these issues are resolved? Tx. --Francis Schonken (talk) 10:41, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Consider this a work in progress for which I don't have as much time as I'd like to have. This is not a FAC, and the multiple tags were one of the reasons to split. It's on my mind. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:22, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, I restored the tags, etc. Probably cost you more time to filter them out. --Francis Schonken (talk) 11:40, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
 * You do know that I hate these tags. Everybody seems to know that Concentus Musicus Wien promoted HIP, etc. - I want to find a way not to have to add a ref to each individual field, - it's distracting. Do you have a solution? I want to focus on the bio and not think of this but this makes me think of it. Makes me sad. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:48, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Suggesting to drop the Cantata discography row layout. I've tried to work with it a few times in the past, but find it rather counterproductive. I won't go as far as to say I "hate" it, but my feelings towards that layout come pretty close.
 * Anyway I hate missing references and references to unreliable sources, far more than I hate tags, which I don't like very much either, but still a bit more than the Cantata discography row layout. --Francis Schonken (talk) 12:02, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Having a separate discography is fine if there is WP:consensus; that seems to be the case. What do you mean by Everybody seems to know that Concentus Musicus Wien promoted HIP, etc.? Mathsci (talk) 14:32, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
 * A bit of history: We have recordings lists for Bach's major works, such as Mass in B minor discography. It used to look like this: two separate lists, one for "normal" instruments, a different one for period instruments. The idea was to have one list, sortable by various criteria, but somehow retain the information where it came from, - in other words, the "Period" is not something that needs a citation, but something that was there before, meant to not loose the original information. Concentus Musicus Wien is a HIP ensemble, regardless which piece. I received a review from the beginning of their cantatas cycle. https://www.jstor.org/stable/741467?seq=1 - similar Koopman and Suzuki. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:08, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
 * And of course historically the Mass in B minor developed from cantatas ... Mathsci (talk) 22:20, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Former DYK article
The article was shortened and made a bulleted list. Just to explain how that could ever have been a DYK article. I am not sure that the bullets really improves the quality. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:36, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Converted to prose again. IMHO, however, there is still rather too much prose for a discography (discographies are, if I remember correctly, in Wikipedia rather regarded as lists). A list can have a decent, even an extended, intro, but when prose and list proper largely double one-another, and use around the same amount of words, that doesn't seem to be very balanced. --Francis Schonken (talk) 12:57, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for understanding (that it was a way of noting the work on the Main page on 25 March). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:01, 30 April 2021 (UTC)