Category talk:Music publications

From ChoralWiki
Revision as of 19:47, 6 February 2022 by BarryJ (talk | contribs) (→‎Are work pages of collections 'music publications'?)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

I propose that this page be reorganized, into about multiple subcategories. I'd reserve this category "Music Publications" for books about choral music, and music dictionaries.

Among the new categories I suggest are "Choral collections", page cataloguing collections of scores books and collections. I also propose as a new category, "Music Education Publications" for pedagogical materials. It might be worth considering another page, too: "Music Publishers" a listing of publishers of choral music, which might provide information about when a particular publisher was established, and what happened to it.

On further reflection, I believe I'd define a new category could be created for books about choral music, and music dictionaries, and use the Music Publications page (which needs to be added to the navigation contents bar) as a Meta page, listing all of the subcategories. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mjolnir (talkcontribs) on 03:14, 1 April 2006.

I quite agree with the suggestions above, and also have to add that the sorting order in this category needs to be redefined: sometimes publications are sorted by title and other times by composer name. Since there are publications that were a compilation of works by many composers, I suggest that only title be used as sorting key. -- CarlosTalk 10:24, 17 June 2008 (PDT)
The page should have both a unified listing for publications and also hosting different parallel ways to subcategorize works, such as by era (e.g. Renaissance choral collections). -- Vaarky 20:58, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Organization of Category:Music Publications page

Are there guidelines for how to list publications on this page? I notice that most of them are listed by title. If that's the way most users want it, that's all right, but I think a listing by author or editor would be more helpful. Could the list include publication date(s)? As it is, it covers a very broad range of genre and era.
As my library increases, I too have some suggestions for subcategories. These could also be categories of their own, especially if there is no one willing to do the task of reforming the general bibliography.

  • Music books of early America, 1640-1820
  • Shape note music books, 19th Century to present
  • Hymns and sacred poetry by original authors (Dwight, Cowper, Newton, Watts, Whitefield, the Wesleys, etc.; to exclude hymnbooks, covered better elsewhere)
  • Scholarly treatises and monographs on choral music

-- Barry Johnston, Bcjohnston523 (talk) 04:20, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

  • Posted by: Vaarky 05:12, 19 April 2015 (UTC)‎

Hi, Barry--thanks for raising this. I think it's a good idea to think about subcategories along the lines you suggest, and it would be good to expand the page further as a resource.

Regarding your suggested categories, I am no expert or authority, but think making them more concise and putting the more significant descriptors early in the title is a better approach, e.g.:

  • American music books through YYYY (why 1820, out of curiosity?)
  • Shape note music books (omit "19th Century to present" from the category?)
  • Hymns and sacred poetry by original authors
  • Scholarly treatises and monographs on choral music

I hope other users will have additional opinions to contribute.


I have been thinking about listing this page by author, so I composed a test page User:Bcjohnston523/Test Music literature just to see what it would look like without changing anyone's page titles. Notice this would require formulation of a ShortName, because some of the titles are quite long.
1. There is a great deal of variation in how book titles should be presented. Capitalization: Every word, First word and proper nouns, or as in original language? Use of abbreviations and acronyms (not recommended). Position of article adjectives: a, the, der, il, le, etc. A few used æ instead of ae, and œ for oe.
2. There is also variation in page titles. Most frequent: Title of publication (Author or Editor or Compiler). Title alone is also sometimes used. Variation as to whether complete title should appear here, or short title. The complete title should be on the publication’s page, certainly; but we would need a short title for the Category page. I feel entries on the Category Page should be Author Year - Short Title; Page names then would be Short Title – Author Year. The first few entries under “B” would be:
Entry on Category Page Page Name
Banchieri 1607 - Pazzia Senile = Pazzia Senile (Banchieri 1607)
Banchieri 1608 - Festino Giovedì Grasso = Festino Giovedì Grasso (Banchieri 1608)
Bartlett 2001 - Madrigals Partsongs = Madrigals Partsongs (Bartlett 2001)
Bassano 1598 - Motetti Concerti Ecclesiastici = Motetti Concerti Ecclesiastici (Bassano 1598)
Bassano 1599 - Concerti Ecclesiastici Secondo = Concerti Ecclesiastici Secondo (Bassano 1599)
Bateson 1598 - First Set Madrigals = First Set Madrigals (Bateson 1598)
Bateson 1618 - Second Set Madrigals = Second Set Madrigals (Bateson 1618)
Becker 1602 - Becker Psalter = Becker Psalter (Becker 1602)
Belknap 1797 - Harmonist's Companion = Harmonist's Companion (Belknap 1797)
Betscher 1800c - Gesellschafts Lieder Wieder = Gesellschafts Lieder Wieder (Betscher 1800c)
3. The index on the Category page is thus poorly alphabetized: look at M, for example, under which: The First Booke of Songes or Ayres (Robert Jones) (There isn’t an ‘M’ in it!) The First Set of Madrigals (Robert Jones) (Should be under ‘F’) Scherzi musicali (Claudio Monteverdi) (Should be under ‘S’)
4. The individual pages are also varied. Some pages don’t have a date of publication, or even an estimated date. There is also some duplication among certain pages: Editions of Arcadelt's libro primo de' madrigali a 4 voci and Il primo libro de' madrigali a 4 voci (Arcadelt 1539). Scherzi musicali (Claudio Monteverdi) and Scherzi musicali cioè arie et madrigali (Claudio Monteverdi)
5. There are also some misspellings, e.g., secundo for secondo in Italian titles.
6. I think there needs to be an add-pub form, like the add-works form, with certain requirements, such as author (or editor or compiler), complete title, short title (2-3 words), date of publication (or range of dates), and subcategory. These items would then be used to create the page title and the entry on the category page, like the add-works form does.
7. There should be a way to cite publications on works or composer pages, perhaps using the Short Title - Author Year format I'm proposing for publication page titles?

Are work pages of collections 'music publications'?

I started to answer a question about Gesualdo's Book One at User talk:Chrysalifourfour#Gesualdo Book 1 before realizing I don't know if there's a reason not to overlap Larger works and Publications. Thoughts welcome! Richard Mix (talk) 06:04, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Collections can be called Music publications if they have been published, either on paper, in a manuscript, or online (at CPDL or elsewhere). There are many collections in this category. Madrigali_a_5_voci,_libro_primo_(Carlo_Gesualdo) isn't really a collection, is it? It isn't a larger work either, in my estimation. It is a publication, no doubt: I think your question should be: "Can there be scores on a publication page?" Yes, there can be publication pages with scores, and there are 39 of them currently; see examples here and here. These would all be in both categories: Music publications and Sheet music.
There are currently 43 larger work pages, 19 of which have scores on them (containing all or part of the larger work); 12 larger works are also publications. Examples LW-S, LW-P, LW-S-P. Or see this page for complete lists. These numbers are probably low, as we discover new possibilities. So you needn't worry about combining these on the same page. What templates are on which pages really haven't been completely worked out yet, still in process – a different conversation for later, perhaps?
A special issue that awaits resolution on a larger scale: what to do with a compilation page with a complete score on it? Especially, how to properly categorize the works on a compilation page? Such pages are often publications. Several of them contain detailed analysis of the works, and are major works in themselves, requiring many hours of work to produce. Here are several examples: (1), (2), (3). — Barry Johnston (talk) 03:10, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi Barry (and Richard)! Barry, I think your answer covers all the points, I couldn't have done it any better. Regarding your question, I'm afraid there isn't a simple answer for it: Hymns and Worship Songs, for example, would be more useful if we created a works page for each of the 16 pieces. The editions would be basically identical, only changing the CPDL#, voicing (eventually), and text. With Le Arie di Cavalli e di Cesti, on the other hand, we can't do that as we have a single PDF, and not a link to point to. —Carlos (talk) 17:37, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks Carlos! I agree with your suggestion about Hymns and Worship Songs.
In the other case, where the works cannot be separated, the most I can think to do for such a compilation under current conditions is to put a list on the appropriate composer page(s). Of course, that will make the composer page(s) not completely automated, and the list of works there will no longer be in sortkey order – not a big problem for short composer pages like Cavalli and Cesti, but it would make longer pages difficult to read. Perhaps we need a "short page" format for such work pages, that only contain a link to the compilation page and the templates necessary to do the categorizations? — Barry Johnston (talk) 19:45, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
A solution as the one you propose, of intelligent redirects acting as "works pages", would be great! Maybe Max could make them appear with a different colour on the works list (just like withdrawn works appear in gray). —Carlos (talk) 20:33, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
I have made the first one – Prologo (L’Ormindo) (Francesco Cavalli); feel free to change it (or the template {{CompilationWork}}) as you wish. One comment:
  • The work page must be in Category:Sheet music, otherwise it won't appear in lists (e.g., Score catalog) – but the page doesn't actually have "sheet music" on it. In another discussion, it was pointed out to me that a Sheet music page should have a score. I don't think this a problem here, but maybe it is?
I have also created a new Category:Compilations, with a restricted definition – surely there are more. — Barry Johnston (talk) 15:39, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi Barry, the soft redirect looks good! But I was thinking maybe about a true redirect, like Ardo, sospiro e piango. It is equally listed at the composer page, because it has templates {{Composer}} and {{Genre}}, and Category:Sheet music. One disadvantage of such approach is that all the texts (and other details) will continue on the compilation page. On the other side, users won't need to stop at an intermediate page. —Carlos (talk) 02:55, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi Carlos, Ardo, sospiro e piango (Francesco Cavalli) looks good! – I have added a few more necessary templates. This is a better solution, I think. I agree that the texts would have to continue on the compilation page. But I think Lyricist, Voicing, Language, Pub, and ExtWeb would have to be on the work page, because they could change. We will have to have some careful explanation (perhaps on the work page itself) for future editors wanting to add their edition of this work, so they add the right templates and remove the redirect.
Another issue: what do we do when there is already a page for the work, like Intorno all’idol mio (Antonio Cesti) in this compilation? Maybe CompilationWork could be modified for use in this situation? (This is going to come up a lot with other compilations, such as the Christmas songs.) — Barry Johnston (talk) 03:35, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
Oops, I forgot to add the composer name to Ardo... (and the extra templates), thanks for the corrections! Indeed, CompilationWork will be very useful in the case you cited, of works that already have at least one independent edition! —Carlos (talk) 13:56, 20 September 2021 (UTC)