Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical music/Contemporary music task force/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

→

Archive 10

John Cage works list - chronology

I'd like to organize List of compositions by John Cage chronologically, observing not only the year but also the exact date/month of composition (such details are known for more than half of Cage's works). However, its tricky, because for some compositions just the month is known, and for some just the year. I was wondering if it would be OK to include complete dates rather than just years? I know, simple catalogues don't normally do this, but I can't think of a method of organization which would be easy to explain (I can come up with something like (a) list according to exact date, (b) if the date is not known but the month is, list alphabetically next to the pieces completed the same month, and (c) add the works about which nothing is known after the chronologically sorted ones, sort them alphabetically - but I think anything like this would be too confusing). Or perhaps someone can suggest a better way of organizing the list? (Can't really organize by genre, its Cage after all.) --Jashiin (talk) 10:10, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

I would think that approximate dates of composition should be available for all works unless they were only discovered posthumously. Is this information not available? If any kind of approximate date is known that would probably be a preferable method of cataloging.

On the other hand, do we not have a list of his compositions organized by ensemble? That seems much more useful than by date to me. --S.dedalus (talk) 05:25, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

The Theremin Article

The Theremin article has, IMO, some issues: the "Uses" sections have degenerated into disorganized "theremin-spotting" lists, trying to list every single alleged or real use of a theremin by any notable or unknown artist, band, composer. I do not think these huge lists are in any way informative. Besides, they have become the battleground for edit wars between rivalling self-promoting thereminists, often editing as anonymous users... Now, could someone NOT personally involved (as a thereminist or a groupie of one, etc.) evaluate these sections and see what could be reduced? Maybe moving away from the laundry list format and adding some prose text instead? (As a thereminist and personal acquaintance of some of these people, I will not touch anything there, neither will I single out who I deem notable...) -- megA (talk) 10:46, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme

As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.

• The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
• The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
• A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 22:03, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

A discussion

An important discussion on " Should WikiProjects get prior approval of other WikiProjects (Descendant or Related or any ) to tag articles that overlaps their scope ? " is open here . We welcome you to participate and give your valuable opinions. -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - , member of WikiProject Council. 14:37, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Eyes please: articles related to Michael Daugherty

Ethreinen (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has created several articles on the compositions of Michael Daugherty (all within 24 hours). All of them contain a "Notes by Composer section" which are pasted in verbatim from a copyright web site: http://www.michaeldaugherty.net. Today I removed it from Jackie O (the opera). The other articles involved are Bells for Stokowski, UFO (composition), Dead Elvis (composition), Metropolis Symphony, Niagara Falls (composition). I've asked the editor to please remove these sections and any other copyvio material. Could this project keep an eye on them? He had also created articles on two other compositions which have been speedily deleted: Time Machine (composition) (Blatant copyright infringement); Fire and Blood (Blatant advertising: COI + Blatant copyright infringement). Given this editor's prior massive expansion of Michael Daugherty, with a great deal of person detail, I strongly suspect he/she has a very close relationship to the subject, or might even be the subject himself. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 07:59, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Time to archive?

This page is now over 90K. Would someone like to archive? If not, I'm happy to do it. --Kleinzach 04:15, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

More than a month has gone by without any objections so I will now do some archiving. --Kleinzach 01:30, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Classical music banner bot run

The Classical Music Project bot run has finished: there are now 9,258 articles. (It's the largest of all the mainstream music projects. By comparison, the Music Project itself only has 3,742 and this project has 2,692.)

Articles with Contemporary Music banners have been excluded from the Classical Music project, as that project covers "all articles related to classical music, that aren't covered by other classical music related projects" .

Nevertheless there are still a few articles on early 20th century music that have both banners:

Schoenberg

1. Talk:Drei Klavierstücke (1909)
2. Talk:Pelleas und Melisande (1903)
3. Talk:Sechs Kleine Klavierstücke (1913)
4. Talk:String quartets (Schoenberg) (1897-1936)

Walter Leigh

1. Talk:Concertino for Harpsichord and String Orchestra (1934)

Stravinsky

1. Talk:Capriccio for Piano and Orchestra (1926)
2. Talk:Feu d'artifice (1908)
3. Talk:Piano-Rag-Music (1919)
4. Talk:The Firebird (1910)
5. Talk:Violin Concerto (Stravinsky) (1931)
6. Talk:Symphonies of Wind Instruments (1920)

Messiaen

1. Talk:L'Ascension (1933)
2. Talk:Thème et variations (1932)

As these are obviously not contemporary can we leave the Classical Music banner on them and remove the Contemporary music ones. Thanks and regards. --Kleinzach 04:04, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Consensus currently seems to be that Schoenberg at least is firmly within our scope due to his heavy influence on modern music. I’ve removed the tag from Concertino for Harpsichord and String Orchestra. I also think our tag could come off the Stravinsky and the Messiaen pieces since none of those works has had a particularly critical influence on recent music (accept perhaps for The Firebird). I’d like to hear a little discussion about these articles. --S.dedalus (talk) 01:06, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I would keep Stravinsky and Schoenberg's works in the Contemporary music project, as their modernist aesthetic has much in common with the music being composed today. Badagnani (talk) 01:12, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your thoughts on this. Whichever way you decide I hope we can keep double bannering to a minimum - I think it works better that way. --Kleinzach 09:14, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree. Does anyone else have an opinion on these specific articles? --S.dedalus (talk) 05:01, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Any more progress on this? I've just checked and all but one article still has both banners. --Kleinzach 23:18, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Badagnani, how about if we remove our tag from Stravinsky’s Capriccio for Piano and Orchestra and Feu d'artifice? We seem to be tagging works articles on a case by case basis, and it seems to me that these specific works have had virtually no effect on modern music and are essentially products of an earlier period. --S.dedalus (talk) 20:22, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Francesco Cilea (1866 – 1950)

Does this composer really belong in the Contemporary Music category? I'm not familiar with his chamber works, but his operas certainly don't and note that he only actively composed between 1889 and 1913 and then devoted himself to teaching. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 09:29, 26 December 2007 (UTC) Voceditenore (talk) 07:26, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

It would seem his works resemble those of Puccini's, and I would not consider those to be composed in a contemporary idiom. Badagnani (talk) 08:18, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

That was my feeling too. In fact, they are even less 'modern' than P's Turandot, for example. It already has a composers banner and an opera banner. I'm going to remove the contemporary one if no one else objects. Voceditenore (talk) 08:43, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

A lot of articles on composers were tagged by a bot simply based on catagories, so if you come across an 'obvious' one like that, just be bold and remove it. If anyone actually thinks your wrong, it can then be discussed. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 10:54, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I notice we don't have Rachmaninoff in the project either. Badagnani (talk) 09:08, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Articles flagged for cleanup

Currently, 2676 articles are assigned to this project, of which 481, or 18.0%, are flagged for cleanup of some sort. (Data as of 14 July 2008.) Are you interested in finding out more? I am offering to generate cleanup to-do lists on a project or work group level. See User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings for details. Subscribing is easy - just add a template to your project page. If you want to respond to this canned message, please do so at my user talk page. --B. Wolterding (talk) 08:35, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

This would be useful. The Opera Project is already using a WolterBot generated list. --Kleinzach 23:10, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, please. I think that would be very useful here. --S.dedalus (talk) 20:28, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

I've put a note on Wolterding's user page. --Kleinzach 23:33, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Music Project proposals

I've posted about the future direction of our Music Project 'parent' here. It's relevant to this project because it involves a decision about whether or not a Music Project banner goes on all music article talk pages (and other things). I'd be grateful for opinions/comments. Thanks and regards. --Kleinzach 09:16, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Official adopt a section challenge!

Okay, so we now have our cleanup listing thanks to User:B. Wolterding. It turns out the WORST article in the project in terms of cleanup listings, and the ONLY article with 13 cleanup listings is. . . contemporary classical music! Our foundation article! How ironic!

I think we should make getting this article in good condition a priority. Let’s each take a section or two to improve. This is the official adopt a section challenge! Please check in here and report which part of the article you will be improving. --S.dedalus (talk) 02:34, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

• Unless someone else wants it, I will be improving the Developments since the 1970s section in the next few weeks. --S.dedalus (talk) 03:00, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Bots on the loose/'rewriting' references

Several bots are being used to automatically rewrite references with sometimes unpredictable results. I and some other editors have already complained about Polbot, see here, but there seem to be others (e.g. DumZiBoT). It seems approval has been given prematurely to bot operations which should really have been tested first. Problems can be reported to the Bot owners' noticeboard. --Kleinzach 02:13, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

John Cage template

User:JuPitEer has just created a template for Cage's work - Template:John Cage. Does anybody else think that the template is not really needed in this case? My arguments are that

• Its current functions are handled by an existing template for Cage books (Template:Cage books),
• It will eventually become too big to be useful, because I keep adding articles about various works,
• Half of it simply links to the same pages over and over.

I'm notifying the creator of the template on his talk page about this. --Jashiin (talk) 16:16, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

I have removed the repeated links. When I was creating it I didn't realise quite how many of the links were duplicated!

I think currently it is not too large and it is useful - before i added it I found moving between various articles on John Cage difficult. I do however see a problem could occur if too many new articles are created, although if too many articles are created to fit in the template then it could be remade to have links to articles such as "Works for Prepared Piano" etc to minimise links but still make browsing easy? --JuPitEer 16:29, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

I have edited it a bit more as it really was unnecessarily long --JuPitEer 16:38, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Michael Nyman template

Perhaps I can also ask for opinions about Template:Michael Nyman?

This is a huge navbox. More than half the links seem to be red. On other projects navboxes only have blue links (since you can't navigate to red ones). Should all the red links be removed? Thanks. --Kleinzach 02:42, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Sound clips now appearing on music articles

Sound clips have recently being added to a number of music articles, see the discussion on the Classical Music Project. Thanks. --Kleinzach 08:50, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Contemporary music

Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 22:51, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Portal:Classical music

The portal - which I guess is shared by this project - has been refurbished by Jay who has asked for suggestions for boxed articles and other content, see here. Best. --Kleinzach 08:25, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

3 recent articles

On my daily trawl through User:AlexNewArtBot/OperaSearchResult, I found these: Tiziana Scandaletti, Riccardo Piacentini (her husband) and Duo Alterno (their ensemble). I've bannered them with {{Contemporary music}}. She has been an opera singer, but seems to have specialized for many years now in contemporary music and appears most notable (if at all) for that. Feel free to remove or change the banners to a more appropriate project. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 09:25, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

That seems like good call to me. Thanks! --S.dedalus (talk) 00:34, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Genres in infoboxes

There's currently an important discussion going on about the removal of genre fields in artist and album infoboxes. You can read the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music#Time to remove genre section on info box? and provide any opinions you may have. WesleyDodds (talk) 07:34, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Actually this relates to popular music. --Kleinzach 08:11, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

20th century classical music

This page - 20th century classical music - currently has a tag requesting attention from an expert from this project. The list of sections reads oddly and I think the first task would be to completely restructure the article. But this is challenging. Does anyone feel up to taking it on? --Kleinzach 22:42, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

This is article has serious problems that I and others have been aware of for quite a while. It is a big job however, and I currently don’t have time in my life to do the thorough rewrite this article needs. When you’re less busy in real life would you be interested in rewriting it in collaboration with me Kleinzach? --S.dedalus (talk) 03:47, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately much of the content is either beyond me, or more important, my library. Even in the first paragraph there are a lot of unfamiliar names and while I'd be tempted to take them out, I don't feel I know enough to do so. I'd be happy to copyedit, but not rewrite it. --Kleinzach 04:39, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Inactive?

This project has been inactive for the past month. I'm wondering whether it might be better to make it into a task force of the Classical Music Project. Any thoughts about this? Best. --Kleinzach 04:02, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

We haven’t had a lot of activity here for a while, but it’s probably due to a lack of Wikidrama rather than inactivity on the writing front. :) We should be grateful. The task force idea has been proposed at least once before and consensus has been against it for a number of reasons, the fact that contemporary music is not really part of “classical music,” and the large subject area we cover to name two examples.

Incidentally it seems like it might be a good idea if we focused again on tagging articles for a few weeks. --S.dedalus (talk) 04:23, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, no drama is good, but there has been no growth either. On 10 July this project had 2,693 articles. It now has 2,723. Maybe you would like to advertize on the Music Project or wherever to try to revive it? --Kleinzach 06:51, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Some drama for you: Tarik O'Regan

Tarik O'Regan is tagged with the Composers project and the Contemporary music project. I reviewed it as part of the Composers B-class project review, and note a few things that might be of interest here.

• article ratings on other projects have been assigned by the article's contributors
  • does he really rate a High importance article in contemporary music? (One of the article contributors set this. S/he also set the Contemporary music project rating to A-class, which was later bounced down to B by a non-contributor.)
• article is deficient from a biographical perspective, and reads a lot like promotional material. See my review, wherein I demote the Composer rating from B to Start.

I'm imagining I may run into other examples of this for living composers... -- Magic♪piano 15:04, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

I’ve bumped our rating down to C-Mid. (Perfect use for the new C class.) He certainly isn’t as notable as say, John Adams (who is rated High), so I think this is a good call. I’m also wondering why there needs to be pictures of all his albums on that page. --S.dedalus (talk) 07:13, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Okay, after reading more carefully and looking at your review I agree. I’ve been bold and dropped it down to Start class. --S.dedalus (talk) 07:37, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

La Passion de Simone

This was recently created as a very stubby stub. I've expanded it slightly and bannered it with the Contemporary Music banner. If it's not the appropriate project, please change. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 09:09, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! You came to the right place. :) --S.dedalus (talk) 20:47, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

AfD

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yakov Kazyansky--please comment. --S.dedalus (talk) 22:07, 18 November 2008 (UTC) closed

Notation Project

I'd like to expand the Extended_technique article to include symbols, templates covering some technical information and list of pieces where they were first used. Is there anybody interested? (09:57, 20 November 2008 Artacho)

That would be great! I’m not so sure about including lists of pieces where they were first used though. That might be pretty difficult to discover. How do you want to go about this though? --S.dedalus (talk) 22:28, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

New articles

Is anyone creating new articles? The same redlinks have lingered for many months. Even stubs would be great; we can all work together to add to them. Badagnani (talk) 01:08, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

As I've said to S.dedalus, I'm happy to talk about revitalizing this project, but I think it's essential to redefine and reduce its scope. If that's done I think it will be possible to interest editors in working here. --Kleinzach 01:17, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

• Comment: I was just expanding the Cathy Berberian article in response to a query on its talk page and in the process gave it a "start/mid importance" rating on the WikiProject Contemporary music banner (where the article had remained unrated and untouched by this project. But I've noticed that this project seems to be pretty inactive. Even its stubs rated "high" importance, like er... Contemporary music, remain stubs, visited only by vandals and bots reverting vandals. Today I removed some nonsense from that article which had been sitting there for 5 days ("The most performed contemporary composer is the esteemed *Mailmann Wretskee)"). Likewise Contemporary classical music is still a mess, and rarely edited by anyone other than vandals or bots. Shouldn't members at least have the high importance articles on their watchlists? In future when I encounter new articles relating to Contemporary classical music that could also be bannered under either the Opera, Composers, or Classical projects (compositions task force), I'm going to double banner them with one of those as well as this project so that at least someone will be looking after them. I also agree with Kleinzach that with a scope this broad, it's going to be very hard to revitalize this project or coordinate your editing. Voceditenore (talk) 13:36, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, I've created Yefim Golïshev last November and expanded it slightly a few days ago. I guess he should be mentioned somewhere in the articles dealing with 12-tone technique, but which articles I have no idea. I've created and expanded Evryali recently as well, its an important piano piece by Xenakis; I've also worked on List of compositions by Iannis Xenakis a few days ago, and I believe it is now the most complete list available anywhere (because of the early works list from an obscure article). There's a really great Xenakis dissertation available online (see the Evryali article for the link); at the very least Herma (Xenakis) could be expanded using that source, and maybe some other articles. Harley's book on Xenakis, available at Google Books, is another great source. I have a draft for John Cage on my harddrive; I've created a ton of articles on his works, but his biography is kind of difficult to write, particularly because different sources report different things. I've completed the first two sections and the lead, but the rest is coming slowly; and I'm horrible at writing biographies. Still, I hope to actually kick the article into shape during the next month or two, after I'm finished with some early music articles I've been working on. As for the red links on the project page, I'm sorry, but unfortunately I can't help with those. I have no ideas on how to define the "scope" of the project, either; sorry about that too. Just answering Badagnani's question. --Jashiin (talk) 14:19, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Regarding 'scope', this project originally bannered articles on music going back to the 1900s (Schoenberg, Stravinsky, Bartok, Shostakovich etc.), much of it already well covered by the Composers and Classical Music Projects. I think it should have concentrated on post-1975 music and living composers. Incidentally the Music project has about 70 inactive or closed down descendants so if this one goes under as well it will be nothing new. --Kleinzach 08:19, 16 February 2009 (UTC)