Proposal: move composer to above the image; combine current "genre" and "type" parameters into a single parameter that also appears above the image, on the same line as the composer (neither bolded); link BWV to the appropriate article in the header. Nikkimaria ( talk) 18:32, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
|type=
& |genre=
. What would be an example of "the appropriate article in the header"?
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
18:42, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
|genre=
.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
19:21, 13 December 2013 (UTC)I've created a trial version in Template:Infobox Bach composition/sandbox. You can try it out by editing one of the articles to change
{{Infobox Bach composition
to
{{Infobox Bach composition/sandbox
and then previewing, rather than saving of course. -- RexxS ( talk) 20:19, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
First: thank you all for your efforts! Second: I suggest to have the second line, "BWV xy", the same font size as the third "... Bach", because the catalogue # is not part of the title, more a disambiguation. I suggest to link only Bach, as the most important information, not "BWV", not the type, - that is done in the lead ;) -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 22:20, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
{{Infobox Bach composition/sandbox |title={{lang|de|Ich muss weg}} |bwv=999 |type=[[List of Bach cantatas by liturgical function|Church cantata]] |image=Road Runner decal 2 Detail.jpg}}
@
Nikkimaria: @
Gerda Arendt: As it's been 10 days without any dissenting opinion, I've implemented the changes I suggested above from the sandbox. I've checked the first few articles from 'What links here' (clear browser cache & purge page to see changes) and they look OK to me. I even don't mind the uncapitalised "church cantata", etc. type, but you may wish to capitalise the word after |type=
in each article. There probably isn't any rush. Just revert
my change to the template if you find any bugs and I'll try to fix them. Cheers --
RexxS (
talk)
21:34, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
I've been puzzled by lists of instruments preceded by the adjective "instrumental" (where I might expect "instrumentation"). Does this have a different function from "instruments"? Sparafucil ( talk) 07:30, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
If we choose "Instrumentation", the matching term would be "Voices", right? "Vocal" was chosen to avoid the arguments about choir size, one voice per part etc. - "Instruments" and then "2 violins" would tell me that two violins are playing, while it should say there are two violin parts, which can be played by 2 people but also by 6 or more, depending on orchestra size. "Intruments" of "Instrumentation" and then "organ" would look strange, no? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 10:33, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
I'd propose to merge this infobox with the more general {{ Infobox musical composition}}. Don't see a reason why this separate one would be needed. -- Francis Schonken ( talk) 06:42, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
Therefore, mostly by the first argument, I'd not merge. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:12, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
Proposal: add NBA volume and BC work number. The NBA is (presently) the most reliable complete edition of Bach's works, a vital source of critical information for Bach researchers and performers alike (read Bärenreiter's presentation and catalog). Similarly, the BC is a systematic catalog of Bach's works which was intended to supersede the traditional (and research-wise obsolete) BWV; it has become an especially informative means of ordering the Cantata production, at least in research settings (read Rifkin's review of the opus). Both the NBA and the BC are being used in different contexts as ways to reference a single Bach work (cf. Listing Bach's compositions), and the NBA number in particular is generally used to direct the reader to the work's state-of-the-art score and commentary; however, as of now, the quickest way to access this information is through searches on external websites such as bach-cantatas or this very long table on IMSLP, or similar Wikipedia catalog summary pages. I think adding these to the infobox would help, since it would make this information readily available on a work-by-work basis. -- Giobrach ( talk) 12:12, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
Proposal: move composer to above the image; combine current "genre" and "type" parameters into a single parameter that also appears above the image, on the same line as the composer (neither bolded); link BWV to the appropriate article in the header. Nikkimaria ( talk) 18:32, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
|type=
& |genre=
. What would be an example of "the appropriate article in the header"?
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
18:42, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
|genre=
.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
19:21, 13 December 2013 (UTC)I've created a trial version in Template:Infobox Bach composition/sandbox. You can try it out by editing one of the articles to change
{{Infobox Bach composition
to
{{Infobox Bach composition/sandbox
and then previewing, rather than saving of course. -- RexxS ( talk) 20:19, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
First: thank you all for your efforts! Second: I suggest to have the second line, "BWV xy", the same font size as the third "... Bach", because the catalogue # is not part of the title, more a disambiguation. I suggest to link only Bach, as the most important information, not "BWV", not the type, - that is done in the lead ;) -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 22:20, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
{{Infobox Bach composition/sandbox |title={{lang|de|Ich muss weg}} |bwv=999 |type=[[List of Bach cantatas by liturgical function|Church cantata]] |image=Road Runner decal 2 Detail.jpg}}
@
Nikkimaria: @
Gerda Arendt: As it's been 10 days without any dissenting opinion, I've implemented the changes I suggested above from the sandbox. I've checked the first few articles from 'What links here' (clear browser cache & purge page to see changes) and they look OK to me. I even don't mind the uncapitalised "church cantata", etc. type, but you may wish to capitalise the word after |type=
in each article. There probably isn't any rush. Just revert
my change to the template if you find any bugs and I'll try to fix them. Cheers --
RexxS (
talk)
21:34, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
I've been puzzled by lists of instruments preceded by the adjective "instrumental" (where I might expect "instrumentation"). Does this have a different function from "instruments"? Sparafucil ( talk) 07:30, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
If we choose "Instrumentation", the matching term would be "Voices", right? "Vocal" was chosen to avoid the arguments about choir size, one voice per part etc. - "Instruments" and then "2 violins" would tell me that two violins are playing, while it should say there are two violin parts, which can be played by 2 people but also by 6 or more, depending on orchestra size. "Intruments" of "Instrumentation" and then "organ" would look strange, no? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 10:33, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
I'd propose to merge this infobox with the more general {{ Infobox musical composition}}. Don't see a reason why this separate one would be needed. -- Francis Schonken ( talk) 06:42, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
Therefore, mostly by the first argument, I'd not merge. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:12, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
Proposal: add NBA volume and BC work number. The NBA is (presently) the most reliable complete edition of Bach's works, a vital source of critical information for Bach researchers and performers alike (read Bärenreiter's presentation and catalog). Similarly, the BC is a systematic catalog of Bach's works which was intended to supersede the traditional (and research-wise obsolete) BWV; it has become an especially informative means of ordering the Cantata production, at least in research settings (read Rifkin's review of the opus). Both the NBA and the BC are being used in different contexts as ways to reference a single Bach work (cf. Listing Bach's compositions), and the NBA number in particular is generally used to direct the reader to the work's state-of-the-art score and commentary; however, as of now, the quickest way to access this information is through searches on external websites such as bach-cantatas or this very long table on IMSLP, or similar Wikipedia catalog summary pages. I think adding these to the infobox would help, since it would make this information readily available on a work-by-work basis. -- Giobrach ( talk) 12:12, 16 January 2019 (UTC)