User talk:CHGiffen

From ChoralWiki
Revision as of 13:46, 28 June 2015 by CHGiffen (talk | contribs) (→‎Underlay text removed: reply (text restored))
Jump to navigation Jump to search


Romanization of non-English scripts

Chuck, I noticed that you created Category:山本 健司 compositions, and I'm concerned that this creates a precedence for page titles in other non Latin scripts as well, as Greek, Arab, Russian etc. Although CPDL is making an effort towards internationalization, I think we should discuss this better before giving such a big step. For the moment I'd suggest that the composer be contacted to allow for his pages to use w:Romaji transliteration instead of w:Hiragana (although we should keep redirects in the latter script). —Carlos Email.gif 17:23, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi Carlos. I agree with you, and it does indeed need discussion. I only made the compositions category to keep the indexing current. I think that such pages (including the composer and works pages) should appear transliterated. I'm in a hurry now. Hopefully, this will get some discussion so we can know how to proceed. Thanks! – Chucktalk Giffen 20:01, 18 May 2010 (UTC)


Hi Chuck, the lyricist names were written in a couple of different ways; after correcting them in the works pages, a few duplicate categories could be deleted. —Carlos Email.gif 00:09, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi Carlos, I'm aware of duplications in lyricist names due to middle names, initials, etc. ... but I thought I'd create all the relevant categories first, which makes it easier to scan the resulting list and find those which should be combined. You'll note I also created edition categories for the CPDL editors ... this should make it possible to keep better track of an editor's editions. – Chucktalk Giffen 00:14, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
You're right, creating the categories made it easy to spot the duplicates. I'm keeping the form used in Wikipedia as the standand whenever possible. —Carlos Email.gif 00:39, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
Yes, I agree that we should generally try to follow the Wikipedia form. I do know that Henry W. Longfellow will have to be changed to Henry Wadsworth Longfellow (I hope Wikipedia has it that way!), because every U.S. American knows him by his full name!! – Chucktalk Giffen 00:41, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Re; An editor's editions...

Hi Chuck,

Thanks for your message - I've added one of your links to my user page, and the resulting layout of my scores looks much neater! Thanks for this.

Best wishes,
Edward Tambling 13:15, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Metre (ok meter) for hymns

I've been discussing with Robert Nottingham the best way to add hymns and have been following the scheme he suggested, especially as regards meter. However, when I've done this for some (see Draw nigh and take the body of the Lord (Sullivan)) it comes up red, which presumably means the category does not exist. (We are stepping over the boundaries of my competence here!) Is there a simple way to correct this, or is it better for me to leave it to the editors to sort out? Robert says that you are the expert here, Chuck! --Jamesgibb 14:54, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

View counters

Hi Chuck, Just a curious note. I noticed the view counters at the bottom of the pages seem to have disappeared. Is that a policy revision that has gone into effect? Just wondering. Cheers, Paul Marchesa 15:44, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi Paul. I think we discovered that, when we went to a distributed structure with one Contributor and two Visitor sites, the counters became somewhat meaningless, because most views are on the Visitor sites, and they are daily updated with the previous day's Contributor site count. We are working on a different type of counter for downloads. Best, – Chucktalk Giffen 17:53, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Message from Angelina Figus

Hallo, I am Angelina Figus. Thanks for your help. You can remove the «cleanup template» on the one page, because it is OK now. Grazie ancora! Ange 11:58, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Category:SATB split

Hi Chuck,

Vaarky & I are talking about reorganizing SATB, modeling on your very attractive version of 2-part choral music. I'm afraid I dont quite understand all the details, though I've experimented with transplanting the code to 10-part choral music, with slightly less elegant results. How can empty categories be undisplayed, how can multichoir subcats be grouped with parent, and how would the new SATB minor divisi subcategories be created? Richard Mix 01:05, 23 January 2011 (CST)

score error

Please, explain a new user: What's the "relevant edition" and How to find the correct page ? Aspergillus 08:11, 1 March 2011 (CST)

Oh, I've seen the answer... Thank you. Aspergillus 08:16, 1 March 2011 (CST)


Hi Chuck, I tried to include {{EditionsLink}} on Glenn O'Brien's page, but a strange SQL error appeared. I suspect it's related to the apostrophe in his name. Would you like to check? Thanks. —Carlos Email.gif 09:57, 24 March 2011 (CDT)

Hi Carlos, As near as I can decipher from the error message, it seems definitely related to the apostrophe in a PAGENAME. When I pass "Glenn O'Brien" as the (optional) parameter, it works fine. I'm guessing that the internal code (to DPL) tries to use an apostrophe as a delimiter somewhere, and when it encounters the apostrophe in the name it aborts because of what follow the apostromphe. Smells like a bug that needs fixing. Thanks for the alert! – Chucktalk Giffen 14:51, 24 March 2011 (CDT)
Great to know that it worked fine with the trick! Thanks, —Carlos Email.gif 18:10, 24 March 2011 (CDT)

Page title problem

Hi Chuck, I've uploaded a new piece, but seem to have encountered some problem with one of the templates. It put the title of the piece in as the author as well. Unfortunately, I don't think I have that level access to change a page title or move it, so I ask for assistance. Or let me know what to do to change/move the page if I DO have the ability to do so. The composer is Claudio Monteverdi, and it is already listed on the Monteverdi page as well, linked I guess to here: the current page: [1]. Thanks! Paul Marchesano Marchesa 16:11, 26 April 2011 (CDT)

Hi Paul, it looks as if Richard Mix already fixed the problem. You do have the ability (permission) to move a page to a new title (use the "move" tab), in case you ever need to in the future. Thanks for the new Monteverdi "Angelus ad pastores ait". Chucktalk Giffen 08:02, 27 April 2011 (CDT)

New user

Hi Chuck, you wrote: Welcome to CPDL and thanks very much for your Morley edition. It is much appreciated. I've taken the liberty of creating redirects from User:B.peterson to User:Burkard Peter and from User talk:Burkard Peter to this page, which is the way that most users with an Editor username different from their Login username have things set up. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me or any of the Administrators. – Chucktalk Giffen♫ 08:21, 7 May 2011 (CDT)

Thank you for your message. Is it possible to change my login username also into Burkard Peter, so that no redirection is necessary? Another question: Why the scores I've contributed are only visible when I'm logged in? Thank you, bp 06:15, 10 May 2011 (CDT)
Hi Chuck, I already replied to Peter in his talk page. I thought it was a good time to install extension RenameUser and test it. Regards, —Carlos Email.gif 08:54, 10 May 2011 (CDT)
Thanks Carlos! I've been embroiled with Finale playback issues while working on a large-scale work that has diverted my attention - frustrating, to say the least. On the other hand, you've had an excuse to give the RenameUser extension a workout! Chucktalk Giffen 10:06, 10 May 2011 (CDT)

When texts cannot be translated…

Hello Chuck, thanks again for comments, feedback and suggestions on my translations.

I'm trying to answer all translation requests from IT or LA since I have a bit of time these days, but have found myself dumbfounded by some texts that, for lack of proper spelling, punctuations, etc., just don't mean anything. I have the advantage of graduate knowledge of IT and LA literature, at quite advanced levels, but simply can't make out what lyrics should be, or what they may have been intented to mean.

Is there a "please find the real text" flag on Wiki? If not, what would your advice be: leave the {{NoTranslation}} tag as it is, or remove it and place an explanation on the discussion page? Any guidance/advice would be most welcome.

Thanks Francesco aka Campelli 16:28, 9 June 2011 (CDT)

Hi Francesco, now you made me curious! :) Could you please cite a few of these texts that you've found difficulty in extracting the meaning? Perhaps I could help you by searching for better sources. By the way, thanks for correcting errors and punctuation in so many Italian texts! —Carlos Email.gif 22:06, 9 June 2011 (CDT)
Hello, Carlos! Here are some examples: Lodar voi donn'ingrate (Jacques Arcadelt), Poss'io morir (Jacques Arcadelt), Io mi pensai (Jacques Arcadelt). Other poems have the issue of ab-so-lu-te-ly no punctuation, but I'm looking for the texts within my employer's library (a university). For the Arcadelt, I haven't found source/authorship yet. Thanks for suggestions. Francesco (Campelli 13:30, 10 June 2011 (CDT))

Spanish names


Spanish surnames often come in two sections. The first surname comes from the father and the second from the Mother. This is explained here

So the primary surname for the composer Gabriel Garcia de Mendoza is "Garcia" not "Mendoza" which is effectively a "matronymic" and his name should in my view be sorted on "Garcia" in the same way as the composer "José de Torres y Martinez Bravo" has a primary surname of "Torres". The Novelist Gabriel José de la Concordia García Márquez is usually referred to as "García Márquez". See his entry on Wikipedia

Sometimes identifying the sort name is difficult as in "Sor Juana Ines de la Cruz". My view was that it was better to sort on Juana than on "Cruz". In any event I was not "monkeying about"!

Jonathang 03:08, 23 November 2011 (CST)

Hello Charles,

I noticed you posted a note regarding a possible error for my "Hyfrydol" descant. You suggested that the f/d chord in the penultimate measure should possibly be g/e. I confess I must be missing something; measure 31 doesn't contain an f/d chord. The only place the descant splits is the last two measures. Help me see what you're seeing! Thanks, Thurlow Tweedfour 15:42, 14 January 2012 (CST)


Nice work with categorising pages for Lent, Chuck. I'm sure a lot of church musicians will find your efforts very helpful :-) --Bobnotts talk 05:58, 25 January 2012 (CST)

Thanks Rob. This is something I've been meaning to do, now that Richard Mix has done such a great page of organizing the Sacred music by season categories. And, with the new English translation of the Roman Missal, there has arisen a greater interest in settings of the Mass Propers, especially amongst Roman Catholics. – Chucktalk Giffen 08:55, 25 January 2012 (CST)

Sweelinck move


I notice links to Cantiones sacrae (Jan Pieters Sweelinck) are broken; I'd be happy to move it myself but thought you might figure out a way to catch others remaining, if any. All the best! Richard Mix 17:10, 5 February 2012 (CST)

Thanks, Richard. I forgot to move that page to Cantiones sacrae (Jan Pieterszoon Sweelinck) (which is now done). – Chucktalk Giffen 21:14, 5 February 2012 (CST)


Hi Chuck, thanks for helping add the Voicing template. I'm going to sleep now and will leave the script running until it ends. I'm aware that there'll be a few cases that will require fixing; I'll take care of these tomorrow, ok? —Carlos Email.gif 01:13, 18 February 2012 (CST)

BTW, I'm planning to remove the unnecessary categories in a second step, you don't need to worry about them now. —Carlos Email.gif 01:15, 18 February 2012 (CST)

Hi Carlos, you're welcome! I'm also adding Genre templates when I see that they are missing. I'm also heading off to bed shortly. Some day, I need a tutorial on DotNetWikiBot, because it must have a lot of useful applicagtions. – Chucktalk Giffen 01:17, 18 February 2012 (CST)


Hi Chuck, the Category:Good-bad is now being populated with all Sacred works still requiring a sort key, hope this helps with your work.

On a related subject, do you think that Requiems should also be included in the Masses category? I've seen both uses ({{Genre|Sacred|Requiems}} and {{Genre|Sacred|Masses|Requiems}}), but the former seems to be more abundant. —Carlos Email.gif 23:58, 21 February 2012 (CST)

Thanks, Carlos! For Requiems, you're right that categorizing them both as Masses and Requiems is more prevalent. And I guess there is some precedence for this, since a Requiem is indeed a Mass ("Requiem" is the first word of the Introit for such Mass). Consequently, I've been adding Masses (or Requiems) whenever I encounter a Requiem which is missing one or the other of two categories. I'm being careful to list Masses first and Requiems second in the Genre template, so that removal of Masses would be a simple matter if at some later stage we don't want both categories. Right now, I'm working on the sort keys for Masses (and Requiems), but I'll be using the Good-Bad category later, once I'm finished with Masses and Requiems. One side note, I see that the script that has installed the Genre template (as well as the one that installed the Voicing template) definitely get some of the categories messed up (for instance when the link [[Mass]] appears instead of [[Masses]] in the Genre line, or when something like [[:Category:SATB.SATB|SATB.SATB]] appeared in the old Voicing line). It will take a while to sort all this out, I suppose. For some of the changes that got messed up, one can find funny looking categories (such as "Mas" instead of "Masses", because of the anomaly mentioned above). Anyway, it gives us something to do!! – Chucktalk Giffen 00:18, 22 February 2012 (CST)
Oh yes, I refined the script as much as I could so as to cover 4-5 different situations, but a few ones got messed up indeed. I already listed all those that had "Category:" inside the template (~32) and corrected them. Most of the other cases are showing up as wrong categories in Special:WantedCategories, and I've been correcting these one by one too, but this will take a bit longer.
With respect to the Mass/Requiem approach, it's ok for me. —Carlos Email.gif 01:03, 22 February 2012 (CST)
Yep, I've been looking at the WantedCategories, too (I do that from time to time, anyway), and when I get the present stuff done, I'll join you on that. – Chucktalk Giffen 01:06, 22 February 2012 (CST)

Bach template

Hi Chuck,

Couldn't we use the naming convention Incipit, BWV n (JSB) rather than Cantata n nonmdash Incipit (JSB) for Bach and the other for everyone else? It might not be as much work as one would fear, since I notice several pages already do this: Erfreut euch, ihr Herzen, BWV 66 (Johann Sebastian Bach) and the not-yet-created but linked from Johann Sebastian Bach - list of cantatas Aus der Tiefen rufe ich, Herr, zu dir, BWV 131 (Johann Sebastian Bach), to which I wish to move two other pages. Richard Mix 23:53, 8 March 2012 (CST) p.s. I now see why it was red; will update composer page Richard Mix 00:04, 9 March 2012 (CST)

User:CHGiffen/CPDL organization

Hi Chuck. It would be quite nice to publish this document at some point soon. Do you plan on updating it in the near future? If not, would you object to me bringing it up to date? --Bobnotts talk 18:01, 19 March 2012 (CDT)

Edward Tambling editions

Are you allowed to say why they are all being withdrawn, Chuck? A pity, since they are valuable additions to CPDL. Jamesgibb 12:00, 6 June 2012 (CDT)

transcluded Editions

Chuck, may I ask you to please stop creating and adding these "Edition" pages until this is discussed and agreed upon by the other admins? I fail to see the advantage of this; on the contrary I only see disadvantages the way it is now; how is the contributor supposed to change his/her own submission if when he/she edits the page they only see a cryptic "*{{:Edition:CPDL xxxxx}}" and nothing else? You know that I am also in favor of keeping data in a structured format, but there are better solutions using templates (these Edition pages should not be in the main namespace, BTW), and ultimately we should give Semantic Forms a try if we want to properly implement what you and I have in mind. Regards. —Carlos Email.gif 21:17, 10 June 2012 (CDT)

Hi Chuck, I'm sorry for the unnecessarily harsh tone of my message above. I've been trying to deal with my general tendency to react impulsively sometimes, but I don't always succeed, as you probably noticed... Regards, —Carlos Email.gif 15:55, 26 July 2012 (CDT)
Hey Carlos, no problems. I understand where you're coming from. I was giving a dry run to my ideas, mainly with pages for which editions have been marked as removed and went on to do the whole page. I do think we need a separate "Edition:" namespace for this. I'm still hesitant about Semantic Forms, though. Anyway, we're good! – Chucktalk Giffen 17:12, 26 July 2012 (CDT)

Surrexit pastor bonus

Chuck, I've just added a version of this, where the previous version has been witHdrawn at the request of Edward Tambling. I don't think I overwrote anything on the works page, but the withdrawal message seems to have disappeared!

I'll get back to you on the other matter you raised shortly. Jamesgibb 13:24, 12 June 2012 (CDT)

Hi James. For some reason "wanted" appeared in the status field for the edition record, but it should have been "withdrawn" - and I've fixed that now. I also un-commented out the Sheet music and Renaissancxe music categories on the "Et respicientes viderunt (Luca Marenzio)" page, so all is well now. Thanks for the question and I'll hear from you soon. – Chucktalk Giffen 15:57, 12 June 2012 (CDT)


Hi Chuck, the template above uses #ifexist, which is considered an "expensive parser function": when used above a limit it stops working and adds the page in category:Pages with too many expensive parser function calls. This is currently happening with a couple of large work pages:

This problem affects other templates as well; Composer is not working in these pages. If you don't mind I'll try to fix this by replacing #ifexist with another function; if it doesn't work, I'm afraid that we'll have to remove the #ifexist and let the links appear in red (we still can make them blue with font color). Regards, —Carlos Email.gif 11:21, 17 August 2012 (CDT)

Hi Carlos. Thanks for the catch! I forgot about #ifexist being expensive. It's probably best to go with the simplest solution and not worry needlessly about workarounds. Leaving red links is alright with me. – Chucktalk Giffen 17:08, 17 August 2012 (CDT)

Re: Unintended(?) side-effects of Vcat

Hi Chuck, have you come to a conclusion about the best option? Shall we leave things as they are now? Regards, —Carlos (talk) 23:29, 3 October 2012 (CDT)

Adoramus Te, Christe (Lassus)

Chuck, as I am about to do an edition of the 4-part version of this, I'll split the page into two before I load the new version. Jamesgibb (talk) 10:34, 12 November 2012 (CST)

James, that sounds good to me. – Chucktalk Giffen 11:13, 12 November 2012 (CST)


What is the difference between CiteCat and Cat? Jamesgibb (talk) 20:13, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

  • Hi James. The template Cat simultaneously categorizes a page in a category and provides a link to that category. The template CiteCat just provides a link to the category (without categorizing the page). The various categories such as Advent I, Advent II, Good Friday, etc. are intended to be used for categorizing actual works, not text pages. Hence, on the text pages, I've been changing the instances of "Cat" to "CiteCat". Don't worry, though, because it's an easily fixed subtlety. What you have been doing is fantastic!! – Chucktalk Giffen 20:28, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Right. Will endeavour to remember in future! (Every time I think I'm beginning to master things, I realise the greater extent of my ignorance! How like life! Jamesgibb (talk) 20:34, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Text categories

Hi Chuck, I notice your edition to Category:Ave Maria‎ and would like to suggest that we keep using the template {{TextPageCat}} for these categories (new name of template TextSettingsCat), and create a new template similar to {{CompCatLink}} to be added to the Text pages, with a wording in the line "The list of works on this page is manually maintained. See <text category> for a possibly more up-to-date list of settings based on this text, sorted alphabetically by title." What do you think? —Carlos (talk) 18:59, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

PS: On a second thought, your idea is not bad either, as it puts everything together in a single page; but in this case I think we should take a step further and really unify both pages: the text inside Ave Maria, for instance, would be moved to the category and Ave Maria would become a redirect to it. I believe I can tweak the wiki code to allow for category moves. —Carlos (talk) 19:10, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

  • Hi Carlos. Thanks for your message. We need to do something, because I was a little stunned to see a not-yet-created "Ave Maria" category at the bottom of my "Ave Maria a 3" page, and then I realized that the LinkText template categorizes pages as well as pointing to a text page. I'm still thinking this through, but I feel that probably the text category pages are the way to do, with other material (basically what is on the current text pages, with some modifications) transcluded to the corresponding category page (this would be more in keeping with Wikipedia styles of transcluding all or parts of other pages in a major article). If we go with text categories, then perhaps the corresponding textual material should either be subpage or else reside outside the Main: namespace. I'm still thinking about this, and I'm sure you are, too. Let's keep each other informed as to our current thinking before going whole-hog into making sweeping changes. Thanks for your message. I hadn't even thought of CompCatLink and TextSettingsCat ... I was just making a knee-jerk reaction to seeing an uncreated category. – Chucktalk Giffen 02:41, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

If ye love me

Hi, I noticed this is described as a communion antiphon for Easter 6; am I right in guessing this is a Sarum thing? Richard Mix (talk) 07:20, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Richard, I'm not sure if it was Sarum use, but it is given as the communion antiphon in the current 3rd edition of the Roman Missal. I first encountered it in the Sacramentary and the St Joseph's Missal in the 80's. Chucktalk Giffen 19:51, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
Ah! Is it given as an official English equivalent to Spiritus Sanctus docebit then? Richard Mix (talk) 02:50, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
Never mind, I see it in Today's Missal too. Is there a Latin equivalent? Richard Mix (talk) 02:59, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
In the Divine Office for Saints Philip and James, Apostles, there are some antiphons, one of which is Si Diligitis Me: “If you love Me, keep my commandments, alleluia, alleluia, alleluia” (Jn 14:15). Chucktalk Giffen 03:30, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Search engine for CPDL

Is it possible to configure the search engine on CPDL so that a search on a given string of text retrieves instances of that string where a letter bears an accent. In other words, where the title of a work contains an accented letter as in "Válgame dios y que tres" should one always include an alias without the accent? Jonathang (talk) 11:05, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

17,000 scores

Hi Chuck, the score count has just surpassed the 17,000 mark. Shall we add a "news" item on the main page? Max a.k.a. Choralia (talk) 08:14, 16 November 2013 (UTC)


Hi Chuck, I can see that 'original pitch' might be confused with varying pitch standards. Mightn't 'original key signature' also lead to some confusion with 18c practice and dorian/lydian signatures? "Original transposition", "originally notated pitch" might not be improvements either. "Original key" (even in a Webernian context!) at least has an unequivocal meaning to Lied singers and ought to work for modal music as well. Richard Mix (talk) 01:40, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi Richard. Good point ... I shall not use "original key" instead of "original key signature" from here on out (and go back and remove the one word later. I should have been thinking in modal music terms, for then I might have got it right from the outset. Many thanks. – Chucktalk Giffen 02:25, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Matías Juan de Veana


Matías is the correct first name of the composer in question. "Mathias" is the archaic Spanish spelling. Could you make the correction please? The link to Wikipedia will then work correctly. Jonathang (talk) 14:07, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Done! Thank you. – Chucktalk Giffen 16:49, 23 March 2014 (UTC)


Hi Chuck, I noticed that you are also removing the {{NewWork}} template after the 3-month period is gone. I've requested Claude not to remove it when the posting date is different from the submission date, so that we may eventually keep track of this difference. I hope you agree with this. Best, —Carlos Email.gif 16:30, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Carlos. Oops, sorry, I didn't realize this. I'll be sure and compare in the future (actually, I don't think it is absolutely necessary to remove the templates, since it "turns itself off" after 90 days anyway). Best wishes! – Chucktalk Giffen 16:36, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
It's not exactly true, Chuck: on each page opening, the template NewWork calls the template IsNew, calculates the difference between today's date and NewWork's template date, then decides not to show the red flag. And that, even a thousand years after the end of its usefulness!! Claude (talk) 14:29, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Finale versions

Hi Chuck, I don't think it was a good idea to remove version information from every Finale link! You could have added the Finale icon without removing this info. It's something that I particularly consider useful, and other users might think so, too. Please discuss with the other admins before performing mass replaces like this one. Thank you. —Carlos Email.gif 13:40, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, Carlos. With the recent iconifying of the LilyPond files (and it not being brought up), it seemed the logical next step, and it does seem a little odd that apparently only Finale files carry a version date. Although I used to feel differently about this (and I am a long time Finale user), I no longer feel that it is necessary to track version numbers (all the way back to something like 1998) of Finale scores, when they can be opened and viewed and edited by current versions of Finale. – Chucktalk Giffen 15:41, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
I've got Finale 2009, after having bought Finale 2005. I can't open Finale 2012 files, for example to extract lyrics. Sibelius has also versions 6 and 7.Claude (talk) 15:52, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
I agree with Carlos and Claude, I think Finale versions are relevant information, since Finale files are not backward compatible. I even think it would be (have been) a good idea to add version number to Lilypond files, since Lilypond syntax is also changing continuously, and a later version of Lilypond may give quite different results than the one the file was written for. Imruska (talk) 09:26, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

formatting of withdrawn editions pages

Hi Chuck,

I've been updating some links to the Robert Parsons Project but am in doubt about how Ave Maria (Robert Parsons) is supposed to be edited: is the code really meant to stay on a different page Edition:CPDL 03801? Richard Mix (talk) 21:10, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Categories of categories

Hi Chuck,

We currently have three categories that serve the same purpose, but with quite different titles: Compositions by composer categories, Lyricist settings categories and Compositions by editor. I'd like to standardize these titles; what do you think of "Works by composer categories", "Works by lyricist categories" and "Works by editor categories"? Another option would be the much simpler "Composer categories", "Lyricist categories" and "Editor categories". Do you have any other suggestion? Regards, —Carlos Email.gif 03:19, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Reply by: Chucktalk Giffen 04:28, 8 August 2014 (UTC)


Hi Carlos,

This sounds like a good idea to me. I like your shorter category names better than the longer ones, but I also think that something like Composer works categories, Lyricist works categories and Editor works categories might be even better, since it retains the notion that subcategories list works according to the relevant Composer, Lyricist and Editor.

Great, Chuck! I like your suggestions, they are concise while still conveying the proper notion. I'll make the changes tomorrow, need to sleep now. Thanks, —Carlos Email.gif 06:04, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Main page

Hi Chuck,

I was just looking at the main page listing of seasonal music, which has Music for Advent, Christmas & Epiphany, Music for Lent and Holy Week & Music for Easter. What if there was a rotating display, with say Advent/Xmas for medium-range planning and then the coming Sunday? Ideally the calendar could be automated. THere should also be a simple link to Sacred music by season, I think. Richard Mix (talk) 20:24, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Reply by: Chucktalk Giffen 20:32, 14 September 2014 (UTC)


Hi Richard,

I've been thinking of something very much along the lines of what you suggest. In fact, I'm already thinking about how to implement it, so I'll ramp up my efforts and see what I can come up with. Thanks for bringing this up!

Hope something is in the works! I haven't updated in a while. Carlos made a separate page [[]] btw. ChoralWiki:% pages aren't categorized (by design?) so there's a guessing element in finding out whether ChoralWiki:Music for Lent, ChoralWiki:Music for Lent, Holy Week and Easter, ChoralWiki:Music for Lent and Easter, or (bingo) ChoralWiki:Music for Lent and Holy Week are already created… Richard Mix (talk) 10:08, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Carlos is interested too and suggested I start ChoralWiki talk:Seasonal music. Richard Mix (talk) 04:10, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Alice V. Stuart

I'm currently having another trawl through the English text pages, and also adding Lyricist pages where they are missing. One I've just added is the above, about whom I have found very little, apart from birth and death years. It turns out that there are 7 settings of her verse by Huub de Lange but, as she didn't die until 1983, they are almost certainly under copyright in the EU until 2033, and possibly still under copyright elsewhere. Question: how do I (or we) deal with this?
Jamesgibb (talk) 19:13, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing this, James. The scores of all these works (there are actually only five) say "Copyright text (c) 1953 A.V. Stuart, Scotland." It is 61 years since they were copyright; however, if the EU provision is in effect, that works are copyright for 70 years after the author's/composer's death, then we may have a problem, because then her works would be copyright until 2053. I've posted a note with the copyright issues group at the forums. – Chucktalk Giffen 22:26, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Chuck. Seemed sensible to pass it through you, since I don't always know the best destination for such issues. I think there are 6 settings; I had mistakenly counted "4 Stuart songs" as a separate item, but there are also "A Christmas Fable" and "In a green arbour".
Jamesgibb (talk) 17:27, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

You're right, there are six (not seven or five) settings; I had miscounted, too! More discussion at the Copyright Concerns section of Administrative Discussions over at the Forum. – Chucktalk Giffen 19:24, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Need a new Meter category

Hi Huck! Would you be able to create a new meter category? "44. 6. D (with refrain)" needs created for a tune I recently composed (CPDL #34301). Thanks! Tweedfour (talk) 16:55, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Actually, I assigned the meter 86. 86 (C.M.) with refrain to the tune, since that is what both the poetic text and the musical structure of the tune dictate. I hope this is okay with you. – Chucktalk Giffen 21:19, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
I hadn't though of that, but it's probably easier. "Songs for the Cycle" includes the meter, and "44 6 D with refrain" is how it's listed, along with Coventry Carol as the suggested tune.Tweedfour (talk) 21:26, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Help with a dissertation

Hi Chuck. Cindy Bauchspies is interested in writing a dissertation focusing on CPDL, and I suggested her to contact you, since Bob is not having much time lately to dedicate to the project. I'll be glad to help by answering her questions, if you happen to be busy at the moment. Regards, —Carlos Email.gif 15:33, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi Carlos. I just received a (forwarded?) email from Cindy Bauchspies, and I should be able to answer her questions and offer help. Thanks! – Chucktalk Giffen 16:01, 27 January 2015 (UTC)


Hi, Chuck. Thanks for having changed the obsolete template for the new one. Any way, in this edit, you restored the old one and switched dates so that edition appears now as created after its publication. How is this possible? BTW, what do we do with these long strings as [[Category:Posting dated]][[Category:2014-06-11]]{{#ifexpr:{{#time:Ymd|20140611+30days}}<{{#time:Ymd}}|[[Category:Posted over 30 days ago]]}}{{#ifexpr:{{#time:Ymd|20140611+90days}}<{{#time:Ymd}}|[[Category:Posted over 90 days ago]]}}. Are they still useful? Claude (talk) 08:27, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Claude. I've no idea at all how that happened, because at the time I was using ReplaceText to make changes from NewWork to PostedDate. That particular case is unusual in that, while it was originally posted on 2011-12-28, the NewWork template had been applied with the date 2011-08-16 (the original date of submission), which you corrected earlier in the day yesterday. I can only guess that, since I ran a ReplaceText on the same day, it must have accessed a cached version from before your edit—strange behavior, to say the least!! Anyway, I've rolled back the wrong edits so that it is correct now. Thanks for picking that up. – Chucktalk Giffen 15:43, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Shape notes

Hi Chuck,

Barry Johnston and I started a discussion about the categorization of shape-note editions; since you've dealt with this subject in the past, you're welcome to join the discussion. —Carlos Email.gif 03:09, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Hey Chuck, do you have any strong reason to make these cosmetic changes like this one? I particularly prefer it the way it was before, because when we mix the text with the closing curly brackets on a single line, chances are higher of someone making mistakes when moving text around or deleting duplicate lines of text at the end.
PS: I'll be making the suggested changes to the Shape notes categories in the next few days. I suppose you're not against it, since you haven't commented on the ongoing discussion yet, but there's still time. —Carlos Email.gif 23:42, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Solo voice categories

Hi Chuck,

I tried moving Category:Solo Countertenor to Category:Solo countertenor as an experiment, and as I expected the works are left on the redirect page. Is there a way to automate moving the works in Category:Solo vocal music to a consistent capitalization? Richard Mix (talk) 00:19, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi Richard. Moving a Category page doesn't recategorize the pages. One has to go in separately and change the category assignments. But the good thing is that most of this can be done by invoking Special:ReplaceText. As background, when those solo voicing categories were originally set up, we used capital letters for actual standard voice names (Soprano, Alto, etc.) as opposed to lower case for broader rangers (high, medium, low), mostly because of the capitalization of (Soprano, Alto, etc.) elsewhere in voicing categories, and especially so for multiple solos (Solo SS, etc.). I'm not averse to making the change you seem to be suggesting (or perhaps change from "Solo Soprano" to "Soprano solo" etc., which actually "feels" and "looks" better to me). However, whatever changes we might decide to make with these categorizations would have to be mirrored in the AddWorks forms (else we would continually have to update the categorizations). – Chucktalk Giffen 04:44, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Form:Add work, Add music, Addworks whatever else I've missed are certainly a confusing mess! The naming convention of Category:Choral solo music would be consistent with "Soprano solo" which I agree is more elegant. I'll wait and post something to Category talk:Voicing before using ReplaceText: shall we continue there? Richard Mix (talk) 04:26, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi Richard. Noticing your discussion with Chuck, I decided to put into practice an idea that I had been considering for some time. You can see it in action here. It's just a workaround that can potentially avoid having to rename all solo categories, simultaneously making the text displayed on works pages look more natural (as examples, Solo ST is displayed as Soprano-Tenor duo, and Solo SATB as SATB quartet). But, just like Chuck, I wouldn't oppose to renaming the categories themselves; we just need to thing of all dependencies before undertaking such a move. (e.g., the Multi-category Search also depends on these cats and is probably no longer working for Solo Countertenor!) —Carlos Email.gif 05:45, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi Carlos, as I try to explain at Category talk:Voicing it's not reading the display that's an issue as much as remembering what to type. Or do I misunderstand what Template:Solo does? Btw, Countertenor is back. Richard Mix (talk) 06:09, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Underlay text removed

Chuck, I think it is not a good option to remove the transcription of the score underlay text as you did recently. I noticed that the contributions on that pages are no editions, but just links to scores grabbed from IMSLP. If you want to remove such "editions" or the whole pages, please proceed. But please remember that the usefulness of the text on a work page is to retrieve a work from a part of its text, especially when you aren't sure of its exact title on CPDL. When removing text (or text link), you restored the sentence: "Text and translations need to be added". If you removed the text, I'm sure you don't want someone to restore it! What I've in mind: 'NoText' should be reserved to "No text on the score" so that "No text will be found on the score", which is important regarding a choral work! The present 'NoText' template means "No (existing) underlay text has yet been added" and "Please, do it yourself". Another bad named template ;-) Claude (talk) 09:34, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi Claude. I restored the text you refer to. It got deleted by accident. Sorry. – Chucktalk Giffen 13:46, 28 June 2015 (UTC)