![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | → | Archive 15 |
Hello Classical Music buffs! I have been doing some work on the Disambiguation Links project, and have found that there is a style/type of music composed "for tape." This really seems like it's the sort of thing that should be explained, whether on the Minimalist music page or else in its own article, but I can't find an explicit definition of it. The term is used all over the place in naming pieces, it would seem, but I still don't have a clear conception of exactly what it means. This is the closest I was able to come to a definition.
Anyway, if someone knowledgeable on the subject would create this article, I would gladly use it to fix some of the many links which people now point at the general tape disambiguation page. Oh, and if this is the wrong Talk page for this, I'm sorry! Please let me know who I should ask about this. Thanks. -- ʞɔıu 06:50, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Regrettably, IP 131.111.213.37 has now removed the project banner (twice) from the Simon Rattle page, see [1]. -- Kleinzach ( talk) 07:11, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Here's the thing: even if we did decide WP:CM should cover conductors and instrumentalists, I feel we would be called up on ownership and bad faith by other editors by making this decision now so that we can use consensus we've reached here, at our WikiProject, on infoboxes. After all most of these articles have long been tagged by WP:BIO and a there a LOT of pro-infobox editors at that WikiProject. This all of a sudden means we have two WP at loggerheads. I reckon if we had a WikiProject Classical Musicians, we could make these subprojects of WP:BIO and then those projects could have the final say on the infobox matter. Centy – reply• contribs – 17:53, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
As far as what we decide, can I please remind people of the discussion at WT:WikiProject_Classical_music/Archive_5#Infoboxes for conductors? which left me with the impression that people thought it probably appropriate for conductors to fall here.-- Peter cohen ( talk) 18:33, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
On 7 September I started a new topic ('Infoboxes for conductors?', see here) and asked this question: "Do conductors come under your bailiwick, I wonder?" and "I was wondering whether this project has a policy on conductor infoboxes?" . (My main interest is in opera hence the focus on conductors (with many of them working in opera) rather than instrumentalists etc.)
After some discussion, Alton replied: "CM covers conductors in the broadest scope. Therefore, the answer to Kleinzach's question is: yes, WP:CM covers them" . This was tacitly accepted by all those taking part in the discussion (including Centy). Having settled that, we then went on to talk about whether the project should have a guideline on biographical infoboxes for classical musicians including conductors and musicians. (It was agreed not to have them.)
I believe this project should renew its commitment to classical music in general. If anyone wants to concentrate on compositions then it would be better to start a new project called Compositions. There's great scope for developing the structure of these music projects. No doubt we will have new projects in the future if we have a enough editors and sufficient interest in more specialized projects. However until that happens I hope this project will continue to undertake the responsibility of looking after classical music in general - in line with its name. -- Kleinzach ( talk) 23:32, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Kleinzach wrote: "No doubt we will have new projects in the future if we have a enough editors and sufficient interest in more specialized projects. However until that happens I hope this project will continue to undertake the responsibility of looking after classical music in general - in line with its name.". I would agree here. I had no idea this project was only concerned with compositions. It might account for the resounding silence when I posted this query about major problems with a conductor bio on the CM talk page.;-) I have to say, however, I received an equally resounding silence from both the Spain and the Biography projects as well. You might want to think about rewording the lead paragraph along these lines (my addition is in bold):
By the way, the Composers Project is a bit of an anomaly. It covers all genres of music according to their page, but from what I can see, the vast majority of both the participants and the work-in-progress etc. seem to be classically oriented. Best, (Voceditenore) 11:32, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
There's a old (unfinished) discussion whether 3 Études, No. 1 (Chopin), 3 Études, No. 2 (Chopin), 3 Études, No. 3 (Chopin) should all be merged into one article. Personally this seems wholly reasonable. The main short discussion happened here Talk:3 Études, No. 1 (Chopin). What do you guys think? Centy – reply• contribs – 02:39, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
You may have noticed the project page shorten somewhat. This is because I have moved all guidelines about works of classical music to the new task force Wikipedia:WikiProject Classical music/Compositions task force. This should mean that some guidelines concerning classical musicians should probably be drawn up and inserted in the relevant place. Also note that once I sort of the distinction between conductors and bandleaders, all conductors will join our flock.
Sometime we will have to tag all classical musicians and conductors with our banner. I suggest using SatyrBot for this so we can keep the To-do lists together. For now I will try and start up my new task force. Feel free to join. Centy – reply• contribs – 05:27, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
As the portal didn't show any image I tried to add a few here but can't see them in the portal. Any idea on what's going on ? P-e ( talk) 17:01, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
Hello all. I just joined the project and recently created an article on the Boston Chamber Music Society. I would love your feedback and I look forward to working with everyone. Nrswanson ( talk) 18:25, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I've grown weary of defending articles against infoboxes. The conflict level is increasing, and let's face it: classical music enthusiasts are vastly outnumbered on Wikipedia. The future of a policy that simply rejects the infoboxes seem bleak.
So, what if we set up our own infobox for classical composers and performers? What I mean is something that would have just a picture, and a single field, whose content would be determined by the article editor. Example: imagine a box containing a nice picture of Simon Rattle, with a single text field below it saying (e.g.) "Simon Rattle (1955- ) is the conductor of the Berlin Philharmonic."
This strikes me as quite harmless (no horrible stuff like "associated acts"), and it would probably keep the infobox people happy (since their concern is usually just matters of procedure and formatting, not content). Does this strike people as a plausible way to end the unpleasantness that the infoboxes are causing? And is there someone out there who knows how to design infobox templates and would be interested in giving it a try?
Thanks for listening, Opus33 ( talk) 16:21, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
Born |
19 January
1955 Liverpool, UK |
---|---|
Princliple conductor for |
Berlin Philharmonic 1974 - present |
Years active | fl. 1974 - present |
Simon Rattle | |
---|---|
Princliple conductor to the Berlin Philharmonic | |
Assumed office 1974 | |
Incumbent | yes |
Preceded by | Claudio Abbado |
Personal details | |
Born |
19 January
1955 Liverpool, UK |
Hmm. . . Let's be clear about this! Navigation boxes already exist for orchestras/chief conductors etc. sometimes with all holders (e.g. Template:LSO principal conductors, sometimes with preceded by/followed by sections (e.g. see Valery Gergiev). These are uncontroversial. They don't need to be re-invented - because they already exist and are fully utilized. -- Kleinzach ( talk) 13:44, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Talk:Ima_Hogg/Archive_1#Infobox.3F I refer people to this debate which may allow us to set a precedence. Turns out FAC do not require an infobox even through projects such as WP:MILHIST require one to even be considered B-Class. Centy – reply• contribs – 00:14, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | → | Archive 15 |
Hello Classical Music buffs! I have been doing some work on the Disambiguation Links project, and have found that there is a style/type of music composed "for tape." This really seems like it's the sort of thing that should be explained, whether on the Minimalist music page or else in its own article, but I can't find an explicit definition of it. The term is used all over the place in naming pieces, it would seem, but I still don't have a clear conception of exactly what it means. This is the closest I was able to come to a definition.
Anyway, if someone knowledgeable on the subject would create this article, I would gladly use it to fix some of the many links which people now point at the general tape disambiguation page. Oh, and if this is the wrong Talk page for this, I'm sorry! Please let me know who I should ask about this. Thanks. -- ʞɔıu 06:50, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Regrettably, IP 131.111.213.37 has now removed the project banner (twice) from the Simon Rattle page, see [1]. -- Kleinzach ( talk) 07:11, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Here's the thing: even if we did decide WP:CM should cover conductors and instrumentalists, I feel we would be called up on ownership and bad faith by other editors by making this decision now so that we can use consensus we've reached here, at our WikiProject, on infoboxes. After all most of these articles have long been tagged by WP:BIO and a there a LOT of pro-infobox editors at that WikiProject. This all of a sudden means we have two WP at loggerheads. I reckon if we had a WikiProject Classical Musicians, we could make these subprojects of WP:BIO and then those projects could have the final say on the infobox matter. Centy – reply• contribs – 17:53, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
As far as what we decide, can I please remind people of the discussion at WT:WikiProject_Classical_music/Archive_5#Infoboxes for conductors? which left me with the impression that people thought it probably appropriate for conductors to fall here.-- Peter cohen ( talk) 18:33, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
On 7 September I started a new topic ('Infoboxes for conductors?', see here) and asked this question: "Do conductors come under your bailiwick, I wonder?" and "I was wondering whether this project has a policy on conductor infoboxes?" . (My main interest is in opera hence the focus on conductors (with many of them working in opera) rather than instrumentalists etc.)
After some discussion, Alton replied: "CM covers conductors in the broadest scope. Therefore, the answer to Kleinzach's question is: yes, WP:CM covers them" . This was tacitly accepted by all those taking part in the discussion (including Centy). Having settled that, we then went on to talk about whether the project should have a guideline on biographical infoboxes for classical musicians including conductors and musicians. (It was agreed not to have them.)
I believe this project should renew its commitment to classical music in general. If anyone wants to concentrate on compositions then it would be better to start a new project called Compositions. There's great scope for developing the structure of these music projects. No doubt we will have new projects in the future if we have a enough editors and sufficient interest in more specialized projects. However until that happens I hope this project will continue to undertake the responsibility of looking after classical music in general - in line with its name. -- Kleinzach ( talk) 23:32, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Kleinzach wrote: "No doubt we will have new projects in the future if we have a enough editors and sufficient interest in more specialized projects. However until that happens I hope this project will continue to undertake the responsibility of looking after classical music in general - in line with its name.". I would agree here. I had no idea this project was only concerned with compositions. It might account for the resounding silence when I posted this query about major problems with a conductor bio on the CM talk page.;-) I have to say, however, I received an equally resounding silence from both the Spain and the Biography projects as well. You might want to think about rewording the lead paragraph along these lines (my addition is in bold):
By the way, the Composers Project is a bit of an anomaly. It covers all genres of music according to their page, but from what I can see, the vast majority of both the participants and the work-in-progress etc. seem to be classically oriented. Best, (Voceditenore) 11:32, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
There's a old (unfinished) discussion whether 3 Études, No. 1 (Chopin), 3 Études, No. 2 (Chopin), 3 Études, No. 3 (Chopin) should all be merged into one article. Personally this seems wholly reasonable. The main short discussion happened here Talk:3 Études, No. 1 (Chopin). What do you guys think? Centy – reply• contribs – 02:39, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
You may have noticed the project page shorten somewhat. This is because I have moved all guidelines about works of classical music to the new task force Wikipedia:WikiProject Classical music/Compositions task force. This should mean that some guidelines concerning classical musicians should probably be drawn up and inserted in the relevant place. Also note that once I sort of the distinction between conductors and bandleaders, all conductors will join our flock.
Sometime we will have to tag all classical musicians and conductors with our banner. I suggest using SatyrBot for this so we can keep the To-do lists together. For now I will try and start up my new task force. Feel free to join. Centy – reply• contribs – 05:27, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
As the portal didn't show any image I tried to add a few here but can't see them in the portal. Any idea on what's going on ? P-e ( talk) 17:01, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
Hello all. I just joined the project and recently created an article on the Boston Chamber Music Society. I would love your feedback and I look forward to working with everyone. Nrswanson ( talk) 18:25, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I've grown weary of defending articles against infoboxes. The conflict level is increasing, and let's face it: classical music enthusiasts are vastly outnumbered on Wikipedia. The future of a policy that simply rejects the infoboxes seem bleak.
So, what if we set up our own infobox for classical composers and performers? What I mean is something that would have just a picture, and a single field, whose content would be determined by the article editor. Example: imagine a box containing a nice picture of Simon Rattle, with a single text field below it saying (e.g.) "Simon Rattle (1955- ) is the conductor of the Berlin Philharmonic."
This strikes me as quite harmless (no horrible stuff like "associated acts"), and it would probably keep the infobox people happy (since their concern is usually just matters of procedure and formatting, not content). Does this strike people as a plausible way to end the unpleasantness that the infoboxes are causing? And is there someone out there who knows how to design infobox templates and would be interested in giving it a try?
Thanks for listening, Opus33 ( talk) 16:21, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
Born |
19 January
1955 Liverpool, UK |
---|---|
Princliple conductor for |
Berlin Philharmonic 1974 - present |
Years active | fl. 1974 - present |
Simon Rattle | |
---|---|
Princliple conductor to the Berlin Philharmonic | |
Assumed office 1974 | |
Incumbent | yes |
Preceded by | Claudio Abbado |
Personal details | |
Born |
19 January
1955 Liverpool, UK |
Hmm. . . Let's be clear about this! Navigation boxes already exist for orchestras/chief conductors etc. sometimes with all holders (e.g. Template:LSO principal conductors, sometimes with preceded by/followed by sections (e.g. see Valery Gergiev). These are uncontroversial. They don't need to be re-invented - because they already exist and are fully utilized. -- Kleinzach ( talk) 13:44, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Talk:Ima_Hogg/Archive_1#Infobox.3F I refer people to this debate which may allow us to set a precedence. Turns out FAC do not require an infobox even through projects such as WP:MILHIST require one to even be considered B-Class. Centy – reply• contribs – 00:14, 1 April 2008 (UTC)