Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical music/Archive 38

French capitalization
This issue has been re-discussed at the Opera Project, see here. I've reverted a change to the guidelines here which seems to be related to that discussion (see here). I think we should try to keep the guideline as clear as possible. If anyone wants to suggest an improvement, perhaps we can discuss it here first before changing the text? -- Klein zach  10:41, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

German Requiem discography
The discography of A German Requiem was "trimmed" - I rescued the former content to A German Requiem discography, so far without a link, because I think we should discuss first how it should look, a table perhaps, sorted by release date? Input welcome, also at the discussion of the work, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:51, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
 * See Category:Classical music discographies for ideas. Its usually a sortable table where people can sort by date or conductor.DavidRF (talk) 21:35, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
 * So I started a table. Stopped when I noticed the differences between date of recording and release date. Include both? Other thoughts? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:23, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I like the way you are doing it, with the recording date in the notes column. Could make a separate column for it, I suppose, but I think it's good as is. Antandrus  (talk) 23:17, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Being the person who "trimmed" the list, I thought I ought to express my concern regarding why I trimmed it. The section was titled "Notable recordings", yet the majority of the recordings listed don't seem to have any claim to notability (mostly, they were in the form recorded by such-and-such orchestra, with so-and-so, soprano, other person, baritone. It was released on this date, and re-released on this day, by this publisher). Is there some sort of guideline that dictates what recordings are notable, and which ones are not (for example, are recordings by certain orchestras, conductors, soloists, etc. considered notable, or must there be some extraordinary claim to notability, such as "first recording with period instruments", etc.)?  Bramble  claw  x   23:27, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
 * WikiProject Opera used to list recordings under the heading "Selected recordings", but, after a discussion, decided to be non-selective in order to avoid challenges (pirate recordings are normally excluded, however). I'd suggest comprehensive listing, with footnoted refs for such things as "first recording with period instruments". --GuillaumeTell 23:50, 8 May 2011 (UTC)


 * That's a good idea. Avoids the mud-pit of subjective selection.  In cases where the number of recordings is enormous (as may be the case with the German Requiem) perhaps the separate article is the best solution. Antandrus  (talk) 00:04, 9 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Yeah, IMO all or nothing is always the best way to go. For something with an inordinate number of recordings (a Beethoven symphony or whatnot) any truly notable recordings should be listed in prose with references and explanations as to why they are so notable.. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 00:09, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
 * That's fine. The list either needed to be trimmed or forked into a child page.  Once Gerda Arendt is done with his edits, we can remove the duplicate list from the parent page.DavidRF (talk) 02:12, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I didn't read this, but removed the duplicate list anyway, because something was added yesterday, it's better to maintain one list. I am not going to edit the table all by myself and confess that I am quite surprised to see many entries with a choir mentioned! Adding refs and footnotes would be great, help welcome. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:32, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

New Bach articles
By chance I found two complex Bach articles by a new contributor, Weimarer Passion and St Mark Passion pastiche, which look different and certainly need a lead. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:37, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Adding: I never saw "Rate this page" before, as at the bottom of "pastiche", --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:59, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Weimarer Passion was improved, but still might be improved in formatting. It appears now as a "possible premiere" in both 1713 in music and 1714. I think that is at least one to many, if not two, thoughts welcome,

David J. Sosnowski
The bio of this composer of contemporary classical/electronic music is being discussed for deletion at Articles for deletion/David J. Sosnowski, I'm posting this here as the Contemporary music task force seems to be dormant at the moment. Voceditenore (talk) 06:52, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Help with Adagio in G minor
There has been some editing going on in the "Provenance" section of this article. There has been a lot of uncertainty as to how much of a hoax this piece of music is and one of the anons involved in editing want to give Albinoni as much credit as he possibly can (and doesn't seem to understand that a stylistic imitation and hoax are not inconsistent). Recently someone else chimed in with evidence from a very recent Italian-language masters thesis. Can we get more knowledgeable editors to chime in here? I tried to moderated for a bit, but I'm not an expert and I'm having trouble trying to figure out what the consensus is here. This section of this article is a "FAQ" in classical music and I'd like to get this story right. Thanks.DavidRF (talk) 20:07, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Afd: Renaissance and Baroque Society of Pittsburgh
Any opinions on the notability of the Renaissance and Baroque Society of Pittsburgh? The Afd is here. Thanks. -- Klein zach  04:55, 25 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Does anyone have access to the online Grove? (I don't at the moment) From Google books, it appears they may be mentioned there but there's no way of knowing how significant the mention is. Voceditenore (talk) 06:52, 25 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Yup -- in the entry for Pittsburgh, section 3, the following sentence is all they have: "Early music is well served by the Renaissance and Baroque Society, which has developed one of the area's most faithful and enthusiastic followings."  Antandrus  (talk) 13:55, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 * It seems to be right - they brought to Pittsburgh excellent early music ensembles and musicians. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 15:15, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Jascha Heifetz update
There's a lot of current interest in Jascha Heifetz this year, due to three things that are happening in 2011: Russellbyrne (talk) 23:00, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
 * The new 103 CD collection from Sony/BMG, which has won the Guiness World Record for largest CD box set by a classical musician.
 * The premiere of Jascha Heifetz: God's Fiddler, a film by Peter Rosen, that was shown at the Colburn School, and will air on PBS and in Europe this year.
 * John Maltese and John Anthony Maltese are publishing a book on Heifetz in late 2011.
 * I've left some suggestions and made a few tiny changes noted here.

Unreferenced BLPs - the final surge
Since early in 2010, many editors have assisted in the referencing or removal of over 90% of the Unreferenced Biographies of Living People, bringing the total down from over 50,000 to the current 4,861 (as of 16:08, 1 June 2011 (UTC)). Thank you for all of the work you've done to date, but we are now asking for your help in finishing this task. There are two main projects which are devoted to removing UBLPs from en.Wikipedia:
 * WP:URBLP has set up a large number of topic based lists, which are updated each day by a WP:BOT. Your project's list is located at WikiProject Classical music/Unreferenced BLPs and currently contains 80 articles.
 * WP:URBLPR is focusing on clearing out the backlog based on the month in which each article was tagged as being unreferenced. The current task is Category:Unreferenced BLPs from September 2009, and it is the last month remaining from 2009.
 * You can also reference a or make your own lists using one of the catscan tools, such as this search for |9&doit=1 British classical musicians.

All you have to do is pick your articles and then add suitable references from reliable sources and remove the BLP unsourced template. There is no need to log your changes, register or remove the articles from the list. If you need any help, or have any comments, please ask at WP:URBLPR or WT:URBLP.

Thank you for any assistance you can provide. The-Pope (talk) 16:08, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Giovanni Francesco di Caspará
Per this discussion, I have nominated the article for deletion as a hoax. See Articles for deletion/Giovanni Francesco di Caspará. Voceditenore (talk) 13:24, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Van Nuffel
The database for Flemish composers, Studiecentrum voor Vlaamse Muziek, changed their web, please see Jules Van Nuffel or Ryelandt (where I noticed) for the new link if you know (or want to know) composers, many Flemish, some also English. a good source as long as the link is not broken. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:37, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Mfd: WikiProject Music of the United Kingdom
Please see Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Music of the United Kingdom. Thanks. -- Klein zach  00:59, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Lera Auerbach
A bot reverted the entry of a Russian Requiem of Lera Auerbach on Requiem, let's discuss work and composer first. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:11, 18 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I had a really nasty run-in with her husband about four or five years ago -- here is where I made the report and here is a bunch more -- he was putting her name absolutely everywhere. She's become quite a bit more notable in the last several years, so I no longer object to inclusion of mention of her works, but she still shouldn't be in short lists such as "Barber, Hindemith and Auerbach have written sonatas for the instrument."  It's often a hard call on living composers and their relative notability.  What do other people think? Antandrus  (talk) 20:50, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I will shorten the entry on Requiem which is out of proportion and put it on her page. I didn't look closely, but her selection of poets didn't look like the typical vandalism, and performers on her page also appear notable. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:03, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
 * That looks good now. It's not obvious to me what triggered ClueBot. Antandrus  (talk) 21:07, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I cleaned a lot on her page, performance from awards, will not understand how you work with so great people on such festivals and don't link them. I didn't dig deeper in the orchestras, those names remain a riddle for me. The Hochschule is on my to-do-list, sigh. Did you see one of my better articles on the Main page? Paulinerkirche, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:31, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Reply on my talk, for context, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:09, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Back to Requiem: both Britten and Rutter are rather Latin with English than the other way round. Polish Requiem has just one Polish hymn in the complete Latin text, and I wonder about the heading "Nonlinguistic", --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:39, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Lists of orchestra members
Query: It seemed bizarre to me that this article had a list of all the orchestra members. I've removed it but I expect someone will put it back. I note in passing that London Symphony Orchestra does not list all the members; nor does Chicago Symphony Orchestra; but Berliner Philharmoniker does. Yes, those are the only three I looked at: sue me. Is there not a guideline on this somewhere? I don't want to be rude or disrespectful, but unless I am I can't tell you how useless I think it is to list all the players in an orchestra article. :) Best wishes DBaK (talk) 23:38, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * In the past it's been agreed that members of orchestras are not notable, however notable their orchestras — hence names should not be included, unless the musicians are soloists. -- Klein zach  23:52, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Many of the Berlin Philharmonic players are notable enough to have Wikipedia articles. Further, I was under the impression that principal players in notable orchestras were automatically notable. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 02:06, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * That is true, except that principal players have been regarded as notable as soloists rather than as principals. I don't know if this was ever codified. I've looked at the BPO list. Maybe it would be better to remove the rank and file names, leaving those in bold? In any case the list is dated. -- Klein  zach  02:39, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * There is a similar issue with members of dance companies, and no doubt elsewhere too. The content will often be out of date if we rely on someone checking the company's web site from time to time and the updates usually have no source which means it can be time consuming to check them and many probably go unchecked. Also there is little point in merely duplicating the lists on the official website. Wikipedia is neither a directory nor a mirror. As long as someone is actively maintaining such a list, I see little point in spoiling their fun, but a clearly out-of-date, unmaintained list should be removed. --Mirokado (talk) 02:59, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I would support removing these lists of members from all orchestra articles, not least because they will rapidly become out-of-date. Not sure if we have a written guideline about this though.  --Deskford (talk) 06:11, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I've removed a similar list of members from Cape Philharmonic Orchestra. --Deskford (talk) 16:45, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Orchestras in South Africa
Do we need a separate list of Orchestras in South Africa, or does it just duplicate a part of List of symphony orchestras? Editor, who created the separate list, argues his case on Talk:Orchestras in South Africa, but has placed a WP:PROD notice on the article. I can see both sides of the argument, but would be interested in the opinions of others. --Deskford (talk) 17:33, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * ...and now this one has gone to AfD: Articles for deletion/Orchestras in South Africa --Deskford (talk) 22:56, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Youth orchestras
Do we have criteria specified anywhere for the coverage of youth orchestras? The Johannesburg Youth Orchestra has now been nominated for deletion: Articles for deletion/Johannesburg Youth Orchestra. The article is lacking in independent sources, but seems to assert notability, and I have no reason to think it any less notable than most of the 100 or so other orchestras in Category:Youth orchestras and its subcategories. --Deskford (talk) 09:42, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Proposal on changing this project's guideline on the structure of articles about compositions
A user has asked for a change to this project's guideline on articles about compositions, see here. Opinions? -- Klein zach  00:10, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

2 articles on databases
Yesterday I stumbled across the following previously unbannered stubs: Do with them what you will. :-) Voceditenore (talk) 07:13, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Handel Reference Database (cleaned-up, now bannered for Composers Project, notability is a bit marginal)
 * Virtual Library of Musicology (now bannered for Classical Music Project, it needs copyediting)

WikiProject Music of the United Kingdom
The recent Mfd closed with no consensus. Please see Recent Mfd/proposal to redirect for a new attempt to resolve this impasse. (I'm open to any solution that people think might work.) -- Klein zach  01:03, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Natal Philharmonic Orchestra

 * Articles for deletion/Natal Philharmonic Orchestra

The Natal Philharmonic Orchestra (now KwaZulu-Natal Philharmonic Orchestra) is up for deletion. I'm pretty sure it's notable as a professional orchestra, but the article looks like it needs a major re-write. Any experts in the area? --Deskford (talk) 22:16, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Not an expert but I have popped in to try and help. DBaK (talk) 23:38, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Article was kept, then taken to Deletion Review, asking to overturn the "Keep" decision. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 04:11, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Task force on compositions - nav tables?
I was going to post in the task force discussion, but realized it had been edited or likely monitored in a long time.

I really enjoyed stumbling across the article on: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tableaux_de_Provence

The only thing I desired was a navigation table between this article and other articles that are the backbone of the alto-saxophone classical repertoire. I do not have the time, nor technical ability to make this, but I thought this might be the place to post. Tkjazzer (talk) 23:24, 4 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Welcome. The Compositions Taskforce is indeed inactive. As far as I know, there is no-one else interested in saxophone music here, so simply contributing to the relevant articles would probably be the most productive course of action. Good luck! -- Klein zach  23:49, 4 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Tkjazzer, did you notice the Category:Compositions for saxophone (currently with five entries)? Once there is a substantial body of such works, a List of compositions for saxophone in the Category:Classical music lists might be feasible. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 04:58, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

References: expansion of guideline
Please see: Classical Music References about the proposed development of this guideline. Thanks. -- Klein zach  01:47, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Rowan Taylor
There's a discussion going on in Talk:Rowan Taylor (footballer) which suggests that a new disambig page for "Rowan Tayor" be discontinued, as "Rowan Taylor (composer)" may not be notable enough. Feel free to join in. --Matt Westwood 19:54, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Messiah
Messiah is experiencing a major expansion. A list of movements seemed too long for that article, therefore is now taken to Messiah structure, to be discussed and improved. Some of the sources are covered in detail, others - especially some psalms - not (yet). Lists for the music (instrumentation, key, time ...) are to follow, probably one for each part. Idea: call them Messiah I (II, III), have a numbering within as the movements, to enable an easy link to let's say Messiah II, at the moment Hallelujah Chorus. Any help welcome, especially for the music, I am in the preparation to sing "my" first Messiah. First question: the Bärenreiter edition says harpsichord, I hear organ on a recording? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:01, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
 * added tables for Messiah Part I (some movements covered), II, III, please check and expand, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:18, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Michael! Part I expanded to all movements, structure also with more details, please check. Question: Why is it "Part the first" in the Bärenreiter edition which claims Urtext, and Part I everywhere else? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:51, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Messiah I and III appeared at DYK, Messiah Part II is expanded and nominated, a check is welcome, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:19, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Paula Szalit
Just created this article about a pianist/composer for whom information is very scant. All contributions appreciated. -- kosboot (talk) 18:50, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Johann Georg Mozart nominated for deletion
Our article on Johann Georg Mozart has been nominated for deletion. I'm not knowledgable enough about this topic to know whether or not it's notable. Can someone from this project look into this? A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 17:33, 27 July 2011 (UTC)