This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Composers, a group of editors writing and developing biographical articles about composers of all eras and styles. The project discussion page is the place to talk about technical and editorial issues and exchange ideas. New members are welcome!ComposersWikipedia:WikiProject ComposersTemplate:WikiProject ComposersComposers articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 07:27, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I believe this article contains an error in the date Blavet began working for Louis, Count of Clermont; according to other sources I have seen, the date should be 1731, not 1721. The source from which Wikipedia's data is taken (http://www.musicologie.org/Biographies/blavet_michel.html) does indeed list the date as 1721, but it appears to be a mere typo: dates on this webpage are listed in chronological order, and the beginning of Blavet's service under Louis is listed between other events happening in 1728 and 1731-35. I am cautious about making a change to the Wikipedia article directly without further musicological corroboration that this hunch is correct; so I will simply put it forward here.BenjaminShute (talk) 18:44, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, indeed, that is a typo in the cited source. Thanks for catching it. I have corrected the chronology and added a reference to the New Grove article by Neal Zaslaw, as well as an editorial cautionary note in hidden text mentioning the typo.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 22:13, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
