Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of transcriptions of compositions by Johann Sebastian Bach


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result was keep. John254 01:19, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

List of transcriptions of compositions by Johann Sebastian Bach

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Listcruft, utterly irrelevant. The compositions are relevant, not their transcriptions. Lilac Soul 10:50, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Don't see why transcriptions are irrelevant.  Plenty of CDs out there with titles like "Bach transcriptions" (see e.g. this Google Search) suggest otherwise. Grover cleveland 11:31, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep These are not trivial transcriptions, because they are by well known composers, including Mozart and Liszt. Beorhtric 11:38, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Transcriptions are important, as any musicologist will tell you, and offer radically different interpretations of the music. It's not like photocopying the music in a Kenkos.  This is a list which needs greatly expanding rather than deleting.  There are hundreds of transcriptions of Bach for a start. Nick mallory 12:13, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Needs MAJOR cleanup and sourcing, but there's no reason to delete it. As said above, the transcriptions in Bach's case are VERY relevant -- hell, one of them is the opening piece in Fantasia, after all. I could go on about why, but I'm sure others will say it better than me. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 12:55, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Needs some form of organization (chronological?  genre of transcribed work?), but the data are interesting as a kind of historical mirror of how Bach's music has been heard over time.  Opus33 14:37, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Did anyone actually look at this list before assuming it's notable. It's a bullet-style format of ambiguous and utterly uninformative sentences. "Busoni also transcribed many of Bach's organ works for the piano." Maybe a list of people who did the transcriptions, or at least, an ARTICLE about transcriptions. This is total listcruft per nom. Bulldog123 16:09, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I looked, and as I said, the concept itself IS notable, it just needs to be majorly cleaned up, not deleted because the start of it happened to be a mess. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 17:10, 25 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletions.   -- the wub  "?!"  17:04, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep, Cleanup and Expand JS Bach was a prolific composer, certainly notable and he still is an inspiration to many. Article needs work, I agree but has a lot of promise Rackabello 20:33, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. This article needs revision, but the list will be useful. Matthias Röder 11:45, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep assuming proper references can be provided to show it's not original research and is verifiable I agree with the sentiment that individual transcriptions have important individual properties that can make them useful for study outside of simply studying the composer. That being said, I notice the list doesn't provide any references to show why any of these particular transcriptions are notable, nor any references to show that the list as a whole is a notable topic.  So my keep recommendation is contingent on the article being mostly properly referenced in the relatively near future.  If no changes occur in the article over the next few months I would be inclined to change my recommendation to deletion. Dugwiki 23:22, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.