![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Maybe someone more articulate and knowledgeable than I could write a bit on when UE was under Nazi control - a fairly important event in its timeline, I think.
---
I have removed the IMSLP and boycott sections, as these are not historically relevant to the company and do not adhere to the Wikipedia guidelines on encyclopedic entries. The issue can be read at the IMSLP page, where it belongs. Cookerid ( talk) 15:48, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
---
They are relevant. Relevant enough for it to be featured in the news: http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/mpapps/pagetools/print/news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7074786.stm. Legally relevant, commercially relevant, historically relevant.
---
Please refer to the Wikipedia guidelines on including text. Wikipedia is not for news nor a battleground (referring to the recent vandalism of the page). And please sign your comments. Cookerid 21:24, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
---
I have again modified the disproportionate coverage of the IMSLP dispute. It completely goes against the concept of the Wikipedia to use a quarter of an entry on one of the most important music publishing companies of our time for a complaint in favour of a third party. This entry is about UE and should therefore concentrate on describing it as objectively as possible. The IMSLP entry covers its history and there has been enough said there. If you disagree, please explain here. Cookerid ( talk) 20:12, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Allow me to quote from the Wikipedia:Five_pillars: "Wikipedia is not the place to insert personal opinions, arguments or experiences." A company's "recent doings" are therefore certainly not the stuff of an encyclopaedic entry, whether you agree with them or not. Further: "Wikipedia has a neutral point of view, which means we strive for articles that advocate no single point of view." My point being, if information here is disputed, it is best left out, as it cannot be seen to have a neutral point of view.
With all sympathy for the fate of the IMSLP, one can only imagine it to be an insignificant event in the history of Universal Edition. Are we to list all legal disputes they may have been involved in? Cookerid ( talk) 22:19, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
CharlieRCD ( talk) 17:01, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
This article has been placed in the categories "Record labels established in 1901" and "Classical music record labels." Did Universal Edition in fact publish records? If not, then those categories should be removed. Drhoehl ( talk) 01:51, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
The current snippet from "Neues Wiener Tagblatt" contains typos/misreads and is shortened in a way that the German text is incomplete. The English summary/translation is fine in comparison to the full German text (see link to old newspaper).
Here is a version of the current German quote with only the typos corrected:
Die neue Musikausgabe, welche unter Zusammenwirken der hervorragendsten Interessenten des österreichisch-ungarischen [...] sowohl die Werke der Classiker wie auch die hervorragendsten Werke instructiver Art umfassen wird, denen sich Schöpfungen bedeutender moderner Meister ...
Full quote of the same paragraph:
Die neue Musikausgabe, welche unter Zusammenwirken der hervorragendsten Interessenten des österreichisch-ungarischen Musikverlages gegründet wurde, führt den Titel: "Universal Edition". Die "Universal Edition" ist eine musikalische Collectivausgabe, welche sowohl die Werke der Classiker wie auch die hervorragendsten Werke instructiver Art umfassen wird, denen sich Schöpfungen bedeutender moderner Meister, wie Bruckner, Goldmark, Liszt, Rubinstein, Smetana, Johann Strauß, Volkmann u.A., anreihen werden.
A suggested reduction:
Die neue Musikausgabe, welche unter Zusammenwirken der hervorragendsten Interessenten des österreichisch-ungarischen Musikverlages gegründet wurde, [...] [wird] sowohl die Werke der Classiker wie auch die hervorragendsten Werke instructiver Art umfassen [...], denen sich Schöpfungen bedeutender moderner Meister, [...] anreihen werden.
This puts back in "Musikverlage" ("publishers"), and renders proper German sentences with mild omissions / modification of word order (in square brackets). The English translation still fits.
What do you think?
Albertr ( talk) 13:54, 15 December 2023 (UTC) (my user account is on de.wikipedia.org)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Maybe someone more articulate and knowledgeable than I could write a bit on when UE was under Nazi control - a fairly important event in its timeline, I think.
---
I have removed the IMSLP and boycott sections, as these are not historically relevant to the company and do not adhere to the Wikipedia guidelines on encyclopedic entries. The issue can be read at the IMSLP page, where it belongs. Cookerid ( talk) 15:48, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
---
They are relevant. Relevant enough for it to be featured in the news: http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/mpapps/pagetools/print/news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7074786.stm. Legally relevant, commercially relevant, historically relevant.
---
Please refer to the Wikipedia guidelines on including text. Wikipedia is not for news nor a battleground (referring to the recent vandalism of the page). And please sign your comments. Cookerid 21:24, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
---
I have again modified the disproportionate coverage of the IMSLP dispute. It completely goes against the concept of the Wikipedia to use a quarter of an entry on one of the most important music publishing companies of our time for a complaint in favour of a third party. This entry is about UE and should therefore concentrate on describing it as objectively as possible. The IMSLP entry covers its history and there has been enough said there. If you disagree, please explain here. Cookerid ( talk) 20:12, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Allow me to quote from the Wikipedia:Five_pillars: "Wikipedia is not the place to insert personal opinions, arguments or experiences." A company's "recent doings" are therefore certainly not the stuff of an encyclopaedic entry, whether you agree with them or not. Further: "Wikipedia has a neutral point of view, which means we strive for articles that advocate no single point of view." My point being, if information here is disputed, it is best left out, as it cannot be seen to have a neutral point of view.
With all sympathy for the fate of the IMSLP, one can only imagine it to be an insignificant event in the history of Universal Edition. Are we to list all legal disputes they may have been involved in? Cookerid ( talk) 22:19, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
CharlieRCD ( talk) 17:01, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
This article has been placed in the categories "Record labels established in 1901" and "Classical music record labels." Did Universal Edition in fact publish records? If not, then those categories should be removed. Drhoehl ( talk) 01:51, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
The current snippet from "Neues Wiener Tagblatt" contains typos/misreads and is shortened in a way that the German text is incomplete. The English summary/translation is fine in comparison to the full German text (see link to old newspaper).
Here is a version of the current German quote with only the typos corrected:
Die neue Musikausgabe, welche unter Zusammenwirken der hervorragendsten Interessenten des österreichisch-ungarischen [...] sowohl die Werke der Classiker wie auch die hervorragendsten Werke instructiver Art umfassen wird, denen sich Schöpfungen bedeutender moderner Meister ...
Full quote of the same paragraph:
Die neue Musikausgabe, welche unter Zusammenwirken der hervorragendsten Interessenten des österreichisch-ungarischen Musikverlages gegründet wurde, führt den Titel: "Universal Edition". Die "Universal Edition" ist eine musikalische Collectivausgabe, welche sowohl die Werke der Classiker wie auch die hervorragendsten Werke instructiver Art umfassen wird, denen sich Schöpfungen bedeutender moderner Meister, wie Bruckner, Goldmark, Liszt, Rubinstein, Smetana, Johann Strauß, Volkmann u.A., anreihen werden.
A suggested reduction:
Die neue Musikausgabe, welche unter Zusammenwirken der hervorragendsten Interessenten des österreichisch-ungarischen Musikverlages gegründet wurde, [...] [wird] sowohl die Werke der Classiker wie auch die hervorragendsten Werke instructiver Art umfassen [...], denen sich Schöpfungen bedeutender moderner Meister, [...] anreihen werden.
This puts back in "Musikverlage" ("publishers"), and renders proper German sentences with mild omissions / modification of word order (in square brackets). The English translation still fits.
What do you think?
Albertr ( talk) 13:54, 15 December 2023 (UTC) (my user account is on de.wikipedia.org)