User talk:Carlos

From ChoralWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Feel free to leave on this talk page questions and comments addressed to me.

  • Start new discussions by clicking here or on the "Add topic" tab at the top of this page;
  • Continue discussions by clicking on the "[edit]" link directly right of the appropriate title below;

If you have left a message on this page, I will reply here unless you request that I reply on your talk page. If I have left a message for you on your talk page, please reply there. The reason for this is to keep the discussion together. Thank you for your co-operation!


Add New Work form – Instruments

Hi Carlos, A few minutes ago I used the Add New Work form to create Sharon (James P. Carrell). Since it is an a cappella work, I entered that in the Instruments blank. But when I got to the page, there was an error message across the top, about a missing ) in a Multireplace.php program. The page was created correctly, except Instruments was blank. I tried inserting A cappella in the Instruments template, but it didn't work, I got the same message. I managed to get around it by typing '''Instruments:'''{{Acap}}, which gave the same result, it appears (the page was added to Category:A cappella). By the way, I looked at Template:Instruments and noticed that it was editable by me; it should be protected, right? (I did not edit it). Anyway, I thought you should know that this happened. Best to you — Barry Johnston (talk) 04:52, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi Barry, thanks for informing me of this. The problem with template: Instruments seems to be gone, it was just a test by Richard Mix that didn't work out as expected. Regards, —Carlos (talk) 17:50, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Monteverdi Magnificat Secondo edition

Hi Carlos: After a long period of neglect, someone reminded me that my edition of the Monteverdi Magnificat Secondo is missing a verse. Its CPDL number is 26082. I have tried today to upload a complete version--but each time I've tried, the result is still incomplete--on CPDL, that is, but not on my computer. The initial correct upload is

What might I be doing wrong?


David Cameron David Cameron (talk) 19:43, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

I hadn't given it enough time--seems to be OK now. Sorry to bother you! David Cameron (talk) 19:43, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi David, no problem. Yes, it's usually just a browser cache issue. Thanks again for this wonderful edition! :) —Carlos (talk) 18:25, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

apostrophes in Category names?

Hi Carlos, I got an error message after creating St. Peter's Chains and for the moment have temporarily renamed it. Is there a workaround? Richard Mix (talk) 23:03, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi Richard, what kind of error did you get? I could open the category normally and saw that there is a work already listed in it. —Carlos (talk) 20:00, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
I wasn't too clear: when I created St. Peter's Chains that page looked OK but Category:Sacred music by by season wouldn't load. I've forgotten the exact message but it said something about consulting a manual. Richard Mix (talk) 22:05, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
If you move back Chains of St. Peter or else put back the Cat:Sacred by season on St. Peter's Chains you may be able to see what I mean. I didn't want to leave it as it was with the whole Sacred music by season shut down. Richard Mix (talk) 01:36, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
Hi Richard, the problem lies inside the DPL code that was in the category header of Sacred music by season. For the moment I moved that code to ChoralWiki:Sacred music by season and will see what can be done to fix it. Regards, —Carlos (talk) 03:46, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Bug in template PostedOn

Hi Carlos. I think your 'localizing' the month changes to PostedOn have resulted in an error. Today (October 26th), PostedOn lists my score A Hymn for St Cecilia (Charles H. Giffen), but the score was posted on September 26th, not October 26th. The problem is that I also posted editions for the instrumental parts on October 1st, and that seems to have fooled the template PostedOn, which looks at the posting day (26) for one edition and the month (10) for another edition and decides that a score was posted on 10-26. I only noticed this because today my work is listed at the beginning of the works posted for today (2018-10-26), since it is first alphabetically. Here is the result of {{PostedOn|2018-10-26}} (which will probably only be valid for today (or perhaps until the end of the month?).

I'm hesitant to revert your changes, since I'm busy enough today that I won't have time to test any reversion. Could you check into the problem? Thanks. See you Sunday for the Board meeting!! -- Chucktalk Giffen 15:47, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi Chuck. You're right, the template tests for the day and the month separately, as far as I can remember. That could potentially give the results you cite, in that very specific situation. There's certainly room for improvement! I'll have a look at it as soon as I can, but feel free to make any corrections if you already envision a solution for it. Regards, —Carlos (talk) 17:23, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
Hi again. I've implemented a new system that seems to be working correctly. Thanks for spotting the error! —Carlos (talk) 14:49, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

Statistics of downloads of contributed works

Dear Carlos,

I was wondering if it were possible for me to see some statistics (downloads etc) of my contributions? I get the occasional question from a user who took the effort to find my contact, but that doesn't give much information.

Grateful for your advice.

Wim Looyestijn ( Looyestijn (talk) 07:37, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi Wim, unfortunately we don't have that feature on CPDL, sorry! —Carlos (talk) 16:27, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Status 'incompleted'

Hi Carlos,

Thanks for catching Category:Requests Available at IMSLP! To answer this question, The Oratorio is available only in excerpts on CPDL, but complete at IMSLP. In decluttering Category:Requested, I've hesitated in some cases where it seems desirable to me to have the complete work available in the future, or where I myself might prefer a different format. Richard Mix (talk) 01:09, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi Richard! I noticed that you've been doing a great work in sorting out the requests, way to go! Regarding the completeness of a request, I'm of the opinion that it's 'complete' whenever a page for that work is created on CPDL. If for any reason the editions available here do not cover the whole of the request and IMSLP has a complete edition, that could be informed at the works page, with a link under the "External links" section. This way we'll be helping anyone visiting the works page, not just someone eventually consulting the request page. Regards, —Carlos (talk) 01:24, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
Fair enough as a traffic directing strategy; how would one have dealt with Request:Agnus Dei from Missa L'homme armé (Guillaume Dufay)? I guess I've used Template:IncompleteEdition before as a sort of request on my own behalf, but no one has ever taken the hint ;-) Richard Mix (talk) 01:49, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
Does IMSLP have the complete work? If so, a link to it could be added at the works page. Additionally, a note can be added at the request page informing this. Anyway, three movements is already better than nothing :) (thanks for the new edition, BTW!) —Carlos (talk) 02:12, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Internet links within Template braces

Hi Carlos! I am working though a lot of work pages, and along the way trying to update '''External websites:''' <text> to {{ExtWeb|<text>}}. I find that I am unable to embed certain urls within the braces; neither can I embed thinks like {{IMSLP2|<IMSPL page>}}. I can't seem to find a character that would cause a problem, but I haven't yet checked all strings of characters. I have discovered that I can put the url within double brackets ([[<url>]]) as a workaround, but that seems like a lot of work, and looks strange. Examples at Ach Gott, wem soll ichs klagen (Wolfgang Grefinger) and Ala guerra, ala guerra (Bartolomeo Tromboncino). Do you have any suggestions?

Or maybe I should write code for Template:{{ExtWeb}} to take care of this situation? Thanks! — Barry Johnston (talk) 17:26, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Barry! I'm still trying to figure out what's the advantage of using this new template. As I understood it, it just encapsulates the text that is passed as parameter (in this case, one or more links). But why should we abandon a template such as IMSLP2, for instance, in favor of ExtWeb, as was done here? Sorry for asking, maybe you're planning some kind of automation that I'm not aware of, and this is just the first step of the process.
Regarding the technical problem you cite, the solution is simple, although not very elegant: if a parameter contains an equal sign, it causes the MediaWiki to think that everything before the = is a named parameter. To avoid it, we have to add ourselves a numbered parameter, as I did here by adding |1=. The <nowiki /> part corrects another known MediaWiki bug related to the display of bulleted lists inside templates. Regards, —Carlos (talk) 02:40, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Ma bouche rit

Hi Carlos,

Just wanting to confirm that Ma bouche rit (Johannes Ockeghem) is a withdrawn edition, File:Ma bouche rit.pdf being a somewhat ambiguous filename which seems not to have been replaced. Cheers, Richard Mix (talk) 21:26, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Richard! I'm a bit puzzled by this situation... why did I delete the files and keep the edition unchanged? That's strange indeed. I found Benjamin Stone's withdrawal request at the forums: [1]. Maybe I was in a hurry at the moment and just plain forgot to return to this matter later. I just removed the links from the edition, thanks for bringing this to my attention. —Carlos (talk) 15:54, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Missing form and uploads

Hi Carlos: I'm afraid that I have botched something somewhere, though maybe with the help of a technical glitch.

Yesterday (19 July 2021) I tried to add a new score ("Blow, winds of God") to my list. I opened up the Add Work Form, made some of the preliminary entries, and moved to upload (1) a pdf file ("Blow, winds of God.pdf") and (2) a Finale file ("Blow, winds of God.musX"). I then returned to the Add Work Form, completed it and submitted it.

At once I received two error messages, first the old one which claims that <> isn't a valid address, adding this time that my name was wrong too; and then a message that the system had stalled, and might be available later. I copied this material and sent it to all of you admins, as you know.

Today I can't find anything from yesterday; no uploads, no incomplete Add Work Form, not even my report (I suspect that I'm looking in the wrong place). How much you admins. must shudder at the technical illiteracy of us computer users who don't understand anything under the hood--I'm sorry!

But I have no idea how to proceed now, and I do want to post the piece. Thanks in advance for your help.

David Cameron (talk) 15:47, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi, David, thanks for your contributions! I suppose that you're known here under an email address at Your two files are already present on our servers. Please fill the AddWork form as yesterday, using your previous address. (I haven't received any mail yesterday). By the way, you could spare a bit of my time uploading an MXL (compressed MusicXML) file in lieu of the .musx one, to allow users using MuseScore, Sibelius or Capella to use your file. Claude (talk) 16:43, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello guys, sorry for the belated reply. David, I see that you've managed to create a page for Blow, winds of God already, with Claude's gracious help. Way to go! —Carlos (talk) 19:54, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Brazilian sacred publications

Hi Carlos!

I have been trying to help User:Catuí Côrte-Real Suarez with three publications, including Harpa de Sião, Cecília, and Magnificat, coletânea de cantos litúrgicos. But I have run into some difficulty with a recently-created publication, Harpa de Sião: suplemento – I don't have access to early editions of this book, apparently very popular in Brasil. I feel like the two pages for Harpa de Sião should be one page, but I don't know how to combine them: the situation with all the editions is a mystery to me. Do you have suggestions? — Barry Johnston (talk) 16:43, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi Barry! A belated Happy New Year! :) I need to get acquainted with this subject first, will inform you about whatever I find, ok? Regards, —Carlos (talk) 16:35, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks Carlos! And a belated Happy New Year to you. Sounds good, I will wait to see what you find. — Barry Johnston (talk) 18:50, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi again, Barry. From what I could see, the supplement could very well be on the same page of the main publication. Note that this was done at IMSLP: Harpa de Sião (Lehmann, Padre João Baptista). We could maybe create a new section and move the supplement under it, what do you think? I'm still in doubt if this supplement belongs to the 1st or 3rd edition, so I wrote Catuí asking for clarification. —Carlos (talk) 01:12, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi Barry, I talked with Catuí and he explained to me that the Supplement is an independent book; that was the reason why he put it on a separate page. But he wouldn't mind if the pages are eventually merged. —Carlos (talk) 00:12, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Pone luctum

Christ is risen! I would like to ask about the real Composer of tune "Pone luctum, sume vestem", if he is known? There are two persons with the same last name "Mohr", but with different first names: Joseph Franz and Joseph Hermann. Both of them are born after 1750, when probably the tune was composed and can't be a Composer of this tune. Joseph Franz Mohr was text author of some Hymns, but Joseph Hermann Mohr was known as composer of many Latin Hymns (tunes). In edited of Hermann Mohr "Cantiones Sacrae" in 1878 there is his arranged hymn "Pone luctum, sume vestem" under nr. 71 on the page 170 of downloadable PDF file: That arrangement is different from the present edition of Rev. Abel Di Marco on CPDL page, where as Composer is indicated Joseph Franz Mohr. The same harmonization is on the page of "Cappella Gregoriana" of Rev. Abel Di Marco, but with alternative file: , where is indicated a Composer J. B. C. Schmidts and arranger Joseph Hermann Mohr. However that version is different from Joseph Hermann Mohr's arrangement in "Cantiones Sacrae". To whom belong the harmonization, edited by Rev. Abel Di Marco?? Is it his proper harmonization? I think that it is a misattribution of Composer name to Joseph Franz Mohr, as we have indication of harmonizer Joseph Hermann Mohr. The real Composer of tune may be remain unknown!?! Andris Solims (talk) 14:14, 3 May 2023 (UTC)Andris Solims

Hello Mr Solims! Sorry that I can't be of any help to you on this, my knowledge on the subject is quite limited. Kind regards, —Carlos (talk) 01:34, 7 June 2023 (UTC)