Talk:Geschwinde, geschwinde, ihr wirbelnden Winde, BWV 201: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 19:02, 11 February 2020

Germany Start‑class Low‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany 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.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Classical music: Compositions

	Classical music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical music, which aims to improve, expand, copy edit, and maintain all articles related to classical music, that are not covered by other classical music related projects. Please read the guidelines for writing and maintaining articles. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.Classical musicWikipedia:WikiProject Classical musicTemplate:WikiProject Classical musicClassical music articles
	This article is supported by Compositions task force.

Title and consequences

The article was moved from the German beginning of the printed text to the translation to English of a German work title, Der Streit zwischen Phoebus und Pan. I read now "The Dispute Between Phoebus and Pan was likely composed for Leipzig's autumn fair of 1729." which reads wrong to me. Both the librettist and the comoser wrote a work in German. The move to any English title, with references to it following, creates such problems. Please see The Flying Dutchman (opera), which is an English article name, but the text carefully avoids saying "Wagner composed The Flying Dutchman." He didn't. All references to "The Flying Dutchman" refer to the mythical character and his story, not to Wagner's work. - We could offer the same diligence to Bach and his librettist. Easiest way: move it back. Other way: move it to the German work title, and refer to that. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:54, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Will think about it. Nonetheless the An Alpine Symphony article has "In 1981 a recording of An Alpine Symphony, made with ..." etc. – I'll try to phrase judiciously, in order to avoid ambiguity, but basically there should not be a problem to use an English title in English Wikipedia. --Francis Schonken (talk) 11:49, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I see no problem in using an English title for saying (staying with the opera) "produced in English at the ENO", or "known in English as". I see less of a problem for a symphony, but would still prefer Eine Alpensinfonie as original, while I'd be less critical of "Sparrow Mass" - no original title anyway. In 2012, we had a long fight about the title of Beethoven's 14th piano sonata, which resulted in not using the popular English nickname. - My point: in a text-driven work, such as lied, opera, cantata, it seems wrong, once the authors thought of it in one language, to speak about its creation in a different language. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:15, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BD

The other day, you moved an article because the title deviated from Bach Digital. Bach Digital has it [https://www.bach-digital.de/receive/BachDigitalWork_Work_00000251?lang=en like Bach). - Also a German work: Die Wolke. The article title is German, because most literature deals with the German, and also it was translated to different English names. I go for the least ambiguous = the original, for Bach's work also. Translations ae always in danger to take something away, - good for redirects, and to be mentioned and explained in the article. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:30, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Die Wolke was moved to Fall-Out per WP:NCB. --Francis Schonken (talk) 18:11, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not a good idea to move without a discussion. I see the writer choosing a harmless-sounding title, not a sensational one. Can we respect her a bit more than teh rulez? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:15, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I read in that guideline:

"If the original language does not use the Latin alphabet, the title is normally translated. Preferably in English." - But the book title is in the Latin alphabet!
"If the book is best known by an English title, use that version of the title." - but the book is NOT best known in English, as the literature shows. Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:23, 11 February 2020 (UTC)--[reply]

Not impressed by your selective quoting of WP:NCB, which is no more than an attempt to misrepresent the guidance. Please read the guidance as a whole. --Francis Schonken (talk) 19:02, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 15: / Line 15: @@
 ::* "If the original language does not use the Latin alphabet, the title is normally translated. Preferably in English." - But the book title is in the Latin alphabet!
 ::* "If the book is best known by an English title, use that version of the title." - but the book is NOT best known in English, as the literature shows. [[User:Gerda Arendt|Gerda Arendt]] ([[User talk:Gerda Arendt|talk]]) 18:23, 11 February 2020 (UTC)--
+{{unindent}} Not impressed by your selective quoting of [[WP:NCB]], which is no more than an attempt to misrepresent the guidance. Please read the guidance as a whole. --[[User:Francis Schonken|Francis Schonken]] ([[User talk:Francis Schonken|talk]]) 19:02, 11 February 2020 (UTC)