User:Mathsci/comment

Herr, gehe nicht ins Gericht mit deinem Knecht, BWV 105
This was an article that I created from scratch in 2008 using standard WP:RSs. In 2010 I downloaded the images for the soprano and tenor arias. fr.wiki then used the soprano aria as the mascot for the template "cantates de Jean-Sébastien Bach". Since then, I have added two images for the article and upgraded the resolution. In 2013 you were a party in the infobox arbcom case. I made a comment before the case started, when I stated that infoboxes were added at the discretion of users. For reasons best known to you, you used my image for BWV 105 to create an infobox for the article "Bach cantata" when you were writing a list-like survey article (started in early 2010). In 2016 and later 2020 I upgraded the content of BWV 105. I added my own version of the infobox for BWV 105, with a compatible style. (Over the years, you have asked me to download lede images for many articles on cantatas.)

As mentioned elsewhere, that kind of overview can be sourced from WP:RSs — Whittaker, Westrup, A. Dürr, G. Cantagrel, Chr. Wolff's online Grove entry for Bach under "cantatas", etc. They give encylopedic yet concise introductions to the topic, handling history, chronology and cantata types. The article looked like this in February 2013 and like this in November 2015. Other editors have noticed your edits about "de:Bachkantate" that have sometimes involved shouting ...

User:Gerda Arendt/Bach cantata is a late 2015 version of Bach cantata. The list articles List of cantatas by Johann Sebastian Bach and Church cantata (Bach) date back to 2003 and 2005 and were written cumulatively by many editors with consensus. For specific articles, however, the links have become self-referential and circular, so often are not helpful for lay readers of wikipedia. The two paragraph stub church cantata is an example. It was unencyclopedic to exclude composers like Heinrich Schütz, Dieterich Buxtehude, Johann Christoph Bach and George Frideric Handel (cf Membra Jesu nostri).

Comment by Mathsci
I have some involvement because of edits to articles about baroque music. I am ambivalent about infoboxes, e.g. for Bach cantatas. Some of the negative characterizations of Gerda Arendt's editing seem incorrect. My own feeling is that, in music, infoboxes do not contain much valuable information (e.g. when compared with analogous abbreviated summaries in original sources). In specific articles, my limited experience has been that she has not insisted on the use of infoboxes and has responded positively and constructively to feedback. In some cases infoboxes had been added to articles which were not well written. I pointed that out with Brich dem Hungrigen dein Brot, BWV 39. Gerda and friends significantly improved the article (and simplified the infobox which had previously dwarved the article itself). I am not at all sure about the all-purpose Mabbett-Arendt template for Bach compositions. As currently written, it would be of no use for Bach organ compositions or several other works published within Bach's lifetime.

Although disaffected editors claim every imaginable wikipedia article has already been written, that is far from true. There are no articles on Bach's celebrated trio sonatas for organ BWV 525–530 or Handel's Op. 3 concerti grossi or Op. 2 and Op. 5 trio sonatas, some of the few works published within his lifetime. That indicates that concentrating on infoboxes—and unnecessarily creating a divisive editing atmosphere—is somewhat missing the point. In mathematics, infoboxes are often useful in pointing to related topics. I think an infobox for Handel Operas could be quite good, as there are so many; but even better would be to improve the articles, sometimes little better than lists, using the books of Winton Dean (compare Rodelinda (opera) and Rinaldo (opera)).

MastCell correctly points out the petty nature of these MOS-type discussions compared with real problems of misinformation in medical articles. It is nevertheless pointless to have long discussions about infoboxes where there are serious quality problems with the content or when the content itself does not even exist. I have been surprised how tempers can flare on this topic. Possibly the arbitration committee could help. Mathsci (talk) 08:17, 13 July 2013 (UTC)