Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical music/Archive 49

Archive 45

←

Archive 47

Archive 48

Archive 49

Archive 50

Archive 51

→

Archive 55

Vandalism

As an experiment, Scott Warfield solicited problematic spots in WP, including vandalism. He just posted the summary of his findings at Wikipedia Summary (login might be require but it's free). He has identified vandalism by "a son of a musicologist." One example he identified was Auburn Arena. User at IP 108.203.193.219 indicated that John Philip Sousa performed there (the arena was built in 2010). Another instance of false information planted by this person (this time under the usernamee SkinnyBenny) is on a non-music article, Mack Brown, the offending statement being: It marked the second time since the founding of the Big XII conference that The Golden Lasso trophy awarded to the winner of the Chisholm Trail Rivalry resided in Manhattan, KS. for at least two consecutive years. The Kansas State Duplex Cats. If an admin is reading this, I suggest some kind of ban as this person seems to enjoy deliberate vandalism. -- kosboot (talk) 02:04, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Wouldn't it be better to post this at WP:AN or ANI? Toccata quarta (talk) 07:09, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Never had a need to go there previously. Thanks for pointing it out. -- kosboot (talk) 13:25, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Help welcome

If anyone is interested in helping, the article Jean-Philippe Tremblay needs some cleanup and referencing work. 11 maintenance templates in such a short article is not something one sees every day. The article used to be a stub, until this happened. Toccata quarta (talk) 20:36, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

I've reverted it to a stub, as it was copied from two external sources. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:54, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

I must say, this is one of the most impressive tag-bombings I've ever seen. Anyhow, I've re-expanded the stub slightly and added a reference to a rather lengthy article about him in La Presse which can be used to expand it further. Judging from the other contributions of the editor who added the copyvio, I'm virtually positive this wasn't a COI edit, just an ordinary editor who thought they were "helping" expand the article and didn't have a clue about copyvio, or chose to to ignore it. Voceditenore (talk) 07:45, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Another article with copyright issues: Josep Vicent. At least part of it comes from http://www.theworldorchestra.org/the-conductor/. Toccata quarta (talk) 11:05, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Stubbed and note left on Talk:Josep Vicent. This article has been deleted twice from the Spanish Wikipedia, once for blatant copyvio, and again for blatant promotion [1]. He is notable enough for an article, however. Voceditenore (talk) 12:47, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Piero Niro

Dear classical music experts: The above article is about to be deleted as a stale draft. It seems to me that there should be sources available, but they would not be in English so I can't find them. If anyone knows where to look, please feel free to edit the article, which will prevent its deletion for six months while it is improved. Thanks! —Anne Delong (talk) 06:18, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

@Anne Delong: Cleaned up, trimmed, referenced, and moved into article space. He has an entry in Enciclopedia italiana dei compositori contemporanei (Italian Encyclopedia of Contemporary Composers). Voceditenore (talk) 10:47, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Voceditenore, I figured that he was notable, but I didn't know enough to fix it up myself. I am digging through the old drafts, here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/G13 rescue, but there are so many! —Anne Delong (talk) 20:59, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Mario Marzi

Dear classical music experts: This submission at AfC will soon be deleted as a stale draft. According to the text, this musician has won multiple awards, but the references are poor. Is this indeed a notable musician, and, if so, can someone with more knowledge of Italian classical sources find some so that the article can be improved? Thanks. —Anne Delong (talk) 23:40, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

@Anne Delong: I've formatted this to save it from speedy. I'm sure he'd pass on the recordings alone, but it will take some time to reference it properly and hunt up the exact titles and labels of the CDs. Give another ping when the next 6 months expiry is due if it has't been improved by then. Vest, Voceditenore (talk)

German comment

Help from German-speaking editors would be welcome at Talk:Gerald Barry (composer). Thanks, Toccata quarta (talk) 17:58, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Daniel W. McCarthy, Composer

Hello again, classical music experts! This article was submitted last year at AfC without any references at all. Since this man appears to be a notable composer, I have found and added a few references, but with 43,000 more old drafts in need of checking, I don't have time to edit it into shape. Would someone like to take this on? —Anne Delong (talk) 00:28, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

@Anne Delong: I've formatted it a bit, especially the references, added a couple of inline cites and authority control. I've moved it to article space and tagged for further clean up. It would probably survive an AfD, if not c'est la vie. In my view, AfC drafts shouldn't hang about until they're perfect, just good enough. BestVoceditenore (talk) 10:11, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks once more, Voceditenore, I agree. Articles are more likely to be improved once in the main encyclopedia where everyone can see them. I've been adding general references to these types of submissions, but biographies really should have inline citations, and that is better done by someone with a little subject knowledge. —Anne Delong (talk) 13:11, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Paul McGrath (conductor)

Dear classical music experts: Here's an old draft that was never submitted to Afc. Is this a notable conductor? —Anne Delong (talk) 03:38, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

@Anne Delong: Cleaned up and moved to article space. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 08:29, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks again for your help. I'm sure it won't be the last one I'll find, since we've only checked about 10% of the queue so far. —Anne Delong (talk) 13:17, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Hugi Gudmundsson - composer

Dear classical music enthusiasts: Is this a notable composer? This old Afc submission has some promotional links which could be easily removed. —Anne Delong (talk) 03:25, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

New article

Ruben Sargsyan – new article, may need some improvement. Its creator also appears to have a WP:COI. Toccata quarta (talk) 06:33, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Renaming Quartettsatz in C minor (Schubert)

I've just created this article and someone has queried the form of name I used for the article. The two sources actually used different names. The Naxos liner notes used the name in the form I used to title the article. The other article from the Chamber Music Journal refered to the piece as the "Grave-Allegro in C minor, D.103". A google search on that specific title bought up only one reference to that title. Searching for "Quartettsatz in C minor, D.103" on google brings up about 40 results including the article I created.

I'd prefer to keep the title I created the article with, but am willing to discuss changing the name, perhaps to "String Quartet Movement in C minor (Schubert)".Graham1973 (talk) 03:12, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

I note the Library of Congress call this work "Quartets, strings, D. 703, C minor" -- I gather because the work is longer than the single movement - apparently a fragment exists of the 2nd movement. By just referring to the one movement, one would be excluding the other existing part of the work. -- kosboot (talk) 03:47, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

I believe there are two different pieces here. The C minor movement D. 103 is an early work, and also literally a 'Quartettsatz', but the later, more famous work D. 703 is the one traditionally called the 'Quartettsatz'. They're both in C minor. The earlier is 1814, the later 1820. To avoid confusion I'd suggest not naming the current article 'Quartettsatz', or at least clarifying in the lede that there is another more famous piece of that name. Antandrus (talk) 04:12, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

(By the way, we have an article on the other -- Quartettsatz (Schubert)) Antandrus (talk) 04:14, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Already aware of the other Quatettsatz article as I cleaned it up last year.Graham1973 (talk) 16:07, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Burkard Schliessmann

I'm slightly out of steam at the moment, so, for what it's worth, this article lacks MOS: compliance, while not lacking a promotional tone. Toccata quarta (talk) 16:39, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

If you think this version is bad, you should have seen the struggles I had with the creator at Articles for Creation, including having to blank the original versions for blatant copyvio. The author works for his management (surprise, surprise): "The artist is on concert-tour next week, so it would be good if the article would appear on Wiki". It does need more clean up, but I'm out of steam too. I've tagged it for copyediting. The WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors folk are pretty good at taking care of this kind of stuff, and often clean up an article shortly after I've tagged it. Voceditenore (talk) 11:02, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Talk:A Boy was Born

Discussion of move request is still ongoing. Comment there while it lasts. --George Ho (talk) 01:31, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Wow! --Ravpapa (talk) 06:21, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Frédéric Chopin - peer review

I've asked for a peer review of the article because its seems to risk at present gettng bogged down in side issues and needs a lot of work on some major aspects. Comments could help develop a consensus to assist editors concentration on the most important aspects. All opinons welcomed. Thanks, --Smerus (talk) 15:37, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Anthony Plog

I'm not very good at determining whether Wikipedia is copying another site or is being copied. The page http://www.dublinbrassweek.com/faculty.html contains a portion of Wikipedia's article on Mr Plog. Help from more experienced editors would be welcome. Thanks, Toccata quarta (talk) 13:36, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Stubbed. Blatant copyvio. All the text apart from the first 2 sentences is actually from http://anthonyplog.com/about-me/biography. The infringing material pre-existed its addition to Anthony Plog in 2011 as a single block. See Talk:Anthony Plog for sleuthing details. Voceditenore (talk) 15:21, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

More copyvio: [2], (much of it) taken from http://gerhard-staebler.de/pages/en/biography/short-biography.php and http://gerhard-staebler.de/pages/en/works.php. Toccata quarta (talk) 17:38, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Reverted text to last clean version. A simple list of works without analysis or commentary isn't normally considered copyvio, so I left that. Voceditenore (talk) 18:42, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Note also the copyvio at Roger Steptoe, with material taken from an (apparently) older version of http://www.rogersteptoe.com/biography.shtml. Toccata quarta (talk) 17:48, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Yep. Stubbed. Voceditenore (talk) 18:42, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Aside from the works list here, I have never heard of, much less heard, a single composition by Anthony Plog, but to my eye the list is buggy. For instance, it includes "Double Concerto for Two Trumpets for 2 trumpets and chamber orchestra (2001)" under "Solo and Orchestra" and also "Double Concerto for Two Trumpets for 2 solo trumpets and wind ensemble (2001)" under "Solo and Wind Ensemble." Under "Chamber Music" we have both "Short Meditation for 12 euphoniums or trombones (2010)" and "Short Meditation for 12 violoncelli (2010)." Are these actually just two works, each in alternate scorings? Why are there at least two "Concerto No. 2" entries with no corresponding "Concerto no. 1"? And more generally, given the composer's apparent obscurity, why are we propounding such a lengthy, detailed list that may well be misleading in appearing comprehensive? I'm usually the first to prefer more detail to less, but in this case I'm wondering if we might better server our readers by replacing this extended listing with a summary sentence or two along these lines: Among Anthony Plog's compositions are pedigogical works; numerous works for winds, particularly brasses, in various combinations or with wind or symphonic ensembles; and a few works for orchestra. They date from the 1970s through the 2010s, with around half dating to the 1990s. Drhoehl (talk) 17:42, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Definitely not. Toccata quarta (talk) 20:17, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Toccata quarta, do you mean definitely do not summarize his compositions this way? If so, I disagree. Drhoehl's proposal is entirely appropriate (much better than the current list and more informative). Publications can be referenced from his authority control. It is also acceptable to simply note that his music is published by Editions BIM. They are a well-known Swiss music publisher specialising in music for brass instruments. We don't "punish" COI editors by removing useful information. All that does is punish the reader. Plog also has several recordings [3] (predominantly with Crystal Records) which could be usefully added to the article, and his Concerto no. 1 for solo trumpet, brass ensemble, and percussion has been the subject of a PhD. dissertation [4]. Voceditenore (talk) 12:03, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

just when we thought the Schubert symphony numbering issue was sort of resolved

I've recently seen a YouTube video with Newbould's completion of the D.708a fragment (which really should be listened to), where it was labelled as Schubert's "7th". I suppose this recreates Grove's original system where the Great is #10 and the Unfinished is #9, but the last thing we needed here was even more numbering confusion. Hopefully that number will not be copied around too much... Double sharp (talk) 13:23, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

New editor

An enthusiastic new editor, Tal Brenev (talk · contribs), has created two articles for this project, about the first prelude of the WTC and slow movements in sonatas. I've had a bash at the former article but don't really have the time or energy to work on the latter page. Any help with either of them would be appreciated. Graham87 04:57, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Kudos to any new editor. BWV 846 however, is a big fish - there's a lot of information about this piece (and would take a lot of work to get it up to something appropriate). -- kosboot (talk) 13:10, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

AfC submission

Hello there! Here's a submission which needs reviewing. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 18:19, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Another new editor

Here's a small project for someone who knows what they are doing. Alfred Stelzner invented a musical instrument called the cellone. However, this link goes to an article on a phone service provider. It probably needs a disambiguation page and a stub, but since this edit is my first I don't feel that bold. Alternately, if this rarely used instrument is not noteworthy, I guess it could just be unlinked. Thoughts? Markelf (talk) 03:00, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The Montreal Women's Symphony Orchestra and Montreal Women's Symphony Orchestra

Dear fellow music lovers: These two articles are about the same subject. The first will soon be deleted as an abandoned stale draft. However, it has considerable cited information that is not in the mainspace article. I happened to be listening when the CBC documentary about this orchestra was broadcast last year and I guess that's why this article caught my attention. Is there a way to merge some of the information from the draft into the mainspace article without attribution problems? —Anne Delong (talk) 06:34, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Never mind; the draft is gone now. —Anne Delong (talk) 13:51, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi Anne, I suggest you ask User:DGG (or another admin) to restore the page. Then, after the material has been manually added to Montreal Women's Symphony Orchestra, move Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The Montreal Women's Symphony Orchestra to The Montreal Women's Symphony Orchestra. Delete the text and make it a redirect to Montreal Women's Symphony Orchestra. Then, place Template:Copied on Talk:Montreal Women's Symphony Orchestra. I think this is probably the only way to preserve the history of the deleted draft and thus attribution for any material copied from it to Montreal Women's Symphony Orchestra. A straight WP:history merge can't be done because the two pages have parallel histories. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 15:59, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

I restored it as requested DGG ( talk ) 20:01, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. There seem to be too many articles to be rescued for me to keep up with them all. —Anne Delong (talk) 22:09, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Okay, I have moved some information and redirected the newer article. There is more information that I didn't move because it wasn't directly cited, but which may be of interest if anyone wants to take the time to add citations. Someone who knows about orchestras may want to check my work. —Anne Delong (talk) 06:30, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Copyright, WP:COI and WP:UNDUE issue

I've been rather busy recently, so I hope others find time and interest in looking at this edit. Thanks, Toccata quarta (talk) 19:25, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Further spamming may be found here. Toccata quarta (talk) 20:17, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

I read Toccata quarta's above comment about spamming by Cedriclee (talk · contribs), I reverted much of the spam; some had already been remediated by Toccata quarta ([5]) and User:DemocraticLuntz ([6]). In response, Cedriclee left me a note asserting that it's not spam (characterizing them as "references") and asking them to be reinstated. He also notes that in one case, he didn't add the initial link, he just updated it.

My take is that these links are all spam, just links to a commercial site in order to sell product. The one from Johann Christoph Pepusch was located in a "Notes" section, but I don't see any indication that it was really being used as a reference, and in any event, the site appears to be self-published and does not qualify as a WP:RS in any event; the fact that it's not a blog and exists to sell product doesn't change its self-published nature.

Since this is not about one article or just my edits, and Toccata quarta had already started a discussion here, I am pointing Cedriclee here. My take is that these ELs do not belong here, but if there's a consensus that they do indeed belong, I'll go along with that consensus. TJRC (talk) 18:43, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi TJRC. These clearly do not belong as references (or notes) as they were not used to source any of the articles to which he added them. It's typical "citation spam". As external links they are possible in very restricted cases. The complete scores themselves are available free from the IMSLP (already in the articles' external links), thus any sample page images from that site are redundant. Any text on the Green Man Press pages which has information not already in the article and which is freely accessible without buying the scores, may be useful to add as an external link per the guidelines on external links. Note that Cedric Lee's forewords to two scores by William Croft are listed as references in Music and Ceremonial at British Coronations: From James I to Elizabeth II published by Cambridge University Press, so I would suggest they are a reliable source. Given Mr. Lee's obvious conflict of interest as the owner of the publishing company and our guidelines on editing under those circumstances, he should suggest these links on the talk pages of the articles concerned or here rather than adding them himself. He might also like to expand and improve those articles rather than simply using them to link to his commercial site. Voceditenore (talk) 14:53, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Talk:The Lord bless you and keep you

Move request under discussion. --George Ho (talk) 17:47, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Is Magnificat a song?

There is a discussion at Talk:Magnificat#Italics about whether or not the Magnificat is a song as described in the Manual of Style, and as such should be in quote marks. The same question seems to apply to Benedictus, Nunc dimittis, Te Deum, and probably others. Opinions would be appreciated. Thank you. SchreiberBike talk 21:35, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

I did a quick tour through encyclopedias and reference books in my library, and then through JSTOR. The New Grove italicizes it. Many books give the word in upper case, when discussing it generally, unless they refer to a specific Magnificat by an individual composer, in which case it is italicized. In no case have I been able to find it in quotes, certainly never when discussed generally. I suppose if there were a popular song called "Magnificat" it would make sense to do it with quotes. Antandrus (talk) 22:49, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

I replied where the discussion started and see no need for a separate discussion here, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:48, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

24 Preludes and Fugues (Shostakovich)

I have noticed that in the article "24 Preludes and Fugues (Shostakovich)", the "The pieces" section consists mostly of just headings, and has two cleanup tags: a tone tag from 2012, and an expansion tag from 2008. Since no one has expanded the section since 2008 (that's six years!), I think it would be best to delete the section, but I don't want to do that without community consensus. Thoughts? Tal Brenev (talk) 20:44, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

I've trimmed the presentation a bit, without removing a word. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 13:50, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

New Quartet Article String Quartet (Jadassohn) and a query about the Verdi Quartet article.

I've just uploaded a stub article on the only string quartet composed by Salomon Jadassohn. I had very little to go on so it just includes the very basic information, composer, publication date, dedication, structure. I've left a note on the talk page outlining what I think needs to be added.

On to the second topic, I've noticed in the case of composers who only composed one quartet (Elgar, Debussy, Faure) the standard format is String Quartet (Composer Name) the exception is the Verdi Quartet article which gives the key as part of the article name. Does anyone have any objections if I rename the article to conform what appears to be the standard format. Graham1973 (talk) 03:52, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

No objection. -- kosboot (talk) 06:22, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, looks like toccata quarta beat me to it. Also if anyone could have a look at String Quartet (Fitzenhagen) and find some references other than the Edition Silvertrust website.Graham1973 (talk) 17:35, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

I'd be very surprised if an unrecorded piece meets WP:N. Toccata quarta (talk) 17:49, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

I've just given the Verdi Quartet Article a quick once over and there's a Reference improve tag dating back to mid 2013 on it. The actual references are to three books, two of which date to the early 2000's and the third dates to 1895, however there are no internal citations and at least one quote. This one might be a worthwhile clean-up project.Graham1973 (talk) 09:09, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

City Scape (Higdon) - Cleanup needed, Help wanted

I found this neglected article while in the planning stages of writing stub articles for three of the composers compositions for string quartet. The article was uploaded in 2011 by a user calling themselves Ttktran who was only active between the 22nd and 24th of April 2011. The article history shows that after Ttktran stopped working on the article no one else has attempted any large scale editing. I don't think that the article is laid out properly and there is at least one unattributed quotation in the text. If anyone wants to join me in cleaning this article up and can help with reliable sources please add your comments below mine. Graham1973 (talk) 04:22, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Invitation to User Study

Would you be interested in participating in a user study? We are a team at University of Washington studying methods for finding collaborators within a Wikipedia community. We are looking for volunteers to evaluate a new visualization tool. All you need to do is to prepare for your laptop/desktop, web camera, and speaker for video communication with Google Hangout. We will provide you with a Amazon gift card in appreciation of your time and participation. For more information about this study, please visit our wiki page (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Finding_a_Collaborator). If you would like to participate in our user study, please send me a message at Wkmaster (talk) 12:14, 30 January 2014 (UTC).

Sydney Symphony Orchestra page needs updating

Dear Classical Music experts, I wanted to bring to your attention that the Sydney Symphony Orchestra page needs updating. An update about 2013/2014 is needed. The orchestra's current chief conductor is no longer Vladimir Ashkenazy, but David Robertson. I would also like to alert you to the availability of an updated logo, which can be found on the SSO's website [7]. Thanks Sydney Symphony (talk) 22:42, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

I've updated the information and done a considerable amount of copyediting per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch. The puffery and use of "current" everywhere was inappropriate and made the article read like an an alternative version of the SSO's website rather than an encyclopedia article. The article is still extremely poorly referenced. The SSO and the Sydney Opera House section is an appalling example of personal commentary/soapboxing devoid of any citations and possibly out of date as well. The history section also needs much better sourcing and I've fact tagged this one about Eugene Goossens: "His tenure was abruptly cut short in March 1956 under personal circumstances deemed 'scandalous' at the time, and he was forced to return to England in disgrace." Hopefully some of our Australia-based editors can help remedy some of these problems. Re the logo, I'll see what I can do, but it might take a few days.Voceditenore (talk) 07:38, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Update I've now uploaded the new logo and replaced the old one in the infobox. It was easier than I thought. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 08:29, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

The Goossens story was pretty much exactly as in the quote above. It wouldn't raise an eyebrow these days, but he was apprehended arriving at Sydney Airport with a pile of porn in his luggage. This was 1956, when we were a much more straight-laced society than now. He was dismissed from the SSO and the Sydney Con and had to leave the country abruptly. There's more detail in his own article. (Personal note: The senior Customs official who arrested him was my uncle, Nat Craig. All before my time: I was all of 5 years old at the time and knew nothing of these events till decades later.) -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 09:28, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, I knew it was true. :) But we can't have a rather extraordinary statement like that in article without some sort of inline citation. I've now snaffled one from the Goossens article and added to the SSO article. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 10:01, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Fair enuf. Cheers. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 12:18, 31 January 2014 (UTC)