Talk:In the Bleak Midwinter

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs 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.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles

Christian music Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christian music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christian music 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.Christian musicWikipedia:WikiProject Christian musicTemplate:WikiProject Christian musicChristian music articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Christianity: Christmas Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity 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.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Christmas task force.

Second verse

It always seems to me that the first line of the second verse beginning with 'Our God' doesn't scan and so it is much easier to sing this line without these first two words. Almost all the published versions include these two words but very occasionally they are dropped. It may have worked when Christina wrote the poem, but since Holst came up with a tune there seems there has been no significant move to make a the words fit. JMcC (talk) 13:52, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm probably quite wrong, but isn't "The Lord God Almighty" the wording more usually sung in the penultimate line to this verse, rather than "... incarnate"? Captain Pedant (talk) 19:30, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah McLachlan tune

The article says Sarah McLachlan recorded the Holst tune, Her recording on Wintersong sounds more like the Darke tune to me. RogRev RogRev (talk) 11:25, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on In the Bleak Midwinter. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110724042624/http://www.robert-walker.net/catalogue.php to http://www.robert-walker.net/catalogue.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:31, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Peaky Blinders

Hi, It seems to me that there should be a reference to the netflix serie the Peaky Blinders, where this line is being said when a Peaky Blinder dies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.97.247.59 (talk) 21:17, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can you provide one from a reliable source? Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:22, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Removing Text of Poem in the Article

Do we really need the whole text of the poem here? It takes up more space than the rest of the article. Also, we have a lovely illustration of the poem as it first appeared in Harper's with the full text clearly visible. We also have links to the poem. I suggest removing the text from the article as it is superfluous and makes the article look ugly imo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ficaia (talk • contribs) 15:29, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

In the bleak midwinter (Harold Darke).ogg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:38, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

In the bleak midwinter (Harold Darke).ogg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:23, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As deletion seems uncontestable, I have now replaced this with a 29-second extract under fair use. I hope this resolves the issue. Cnbrb (talk) 09:38, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It has not. The arrangement itself is still under copyright. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:02, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Great! So what's the solution? Cnbrb (talk) 23:35, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not to upload any renditions of this version of the work until after the copyright expires (and assuming that copyright cannot be extended). It will simply be deleted at the source. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:53, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I just realized that if the article makes a detailed analysis of Darke's composition, including a recording of it might be considered fair use. However, since it is less popular than Holst's version, that would be out-of-place unless the same were done to its setting. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:56, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you actually look at the media data, you'll see that I've uploaded it under fair use terms and tagged it exhaustively in line with WP:NFCCEG. Cnbrb (talk) 21:39, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I looked at the application of FUR and I don't care if you applied it or not, but the nominator does. I wish I had the time to explain FUR to you, but I don't. You'll just have to read what I wrote again (the "detailed analysis" part) and then ask somewhere how FUR can apply for a song like this where an arrangement is still under copyright. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:29, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm sorry the read that you are too pressed for time to offer anything genuinely constructive. I've been doing this for years and I don't need FUR "explained" to me, thank you. If you have actual suggestions for how the rationale can be improved, I will gladly discuss with you, but just responding to a good faith contribution with "don't upload it" is not in the spirit of a collaborative editing environment. I put a lot of effort into sorting out a suitable replacement for this article. Cnbrb (talk) 09:49, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Genuinely constructive? I'm soft-selling the plain and obvious fact that no recording of this composer's rendition will be acceptable on Wikipedia. If you have the grace to accept that, fine. If not, stop blaming me for the copyright laws in England and Wikipedia's policy to honour such laws. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:44, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to thank me for taking the time and trouble to sort this file out. You're very welcome. Cnbrb (talk) 08:42, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Right, well I'm glad that's all sorted out now, and we can move on. Cnbrb (talk) 12:05, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Full text of poem unnecessary

Anyone else agree we might remove the text of the poem here? The formatting is rather ugly, it takes up half the article space, and there are already several links to the text in the article. We also already have this image 1 in a prominent position. Ficaia (talk) 20:41, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Ugly" is subjective, but I'm sure we can make it look better.

It's quite useful to have present due to the text in the analysis section. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:09, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What you've done is an improvement, but there's still a lot of white space. Perhaps there is a way to format the poem in 2 columns (3 stanzas in the 1st column, 2 in the 2nd)? Maybe also put the poem in a box as in this 1 example? I'm a technological dunce, so I'm just making unfounded suggestions here ;) Ficaia (talk) 01:25, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There are several ways of addressing the breaks, but the problem is the image, not the text. Poems should not be in quote boxes, and that is formatted wrong anyhow. Walter Görlitz (talk) 08:54, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is precedent for putting the poem in a quote box. This (1) is a better example than the one I mentioned above. How do you feel about the quote box I made (2) for this article? It seems to me like a neater way of showing the text. Ficaia (talk) 04:45, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify, there may be instances of placing poems in quote boxes, but its not an approved style. According to Wikipedia:WikiProject Poetry that should be done only when quoting multiple lines, not when including the source. Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:35, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, regardless, I feel the formatting in the version I'm proposing is neater and takes up less space (1). What do you think? Ficaia (talk) 09:59, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The featured article about To Autumn does have the text, so I don't think there's prohibition on featuring the text. Having said that, it is longer - the solution on another featured article The Raven might work? Rob (talk) 16:36, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

{{poemquote}}, as used in "To Autumn", might work. Clearly "The Raven" is a much longer poem and including its text would cause the article to be unnecessarily long. The text of this poem is at the limit of what I would consider use able. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:13, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How do you feel about this solution? Ficaia (talk) 22:02, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"A Christmas Carol" (1872)

In the bleak mid-winter
Frosty wind made moan
Earth stood hard as iron,
Water like a stone;
Snow had fallen, snow on snow,
Snow on snow,
In the bleak mid-winter
Long ago.

Our God, heaven cannot hold Him
Nor earth sustain,
Heaven and earth shall flee away
When He comes to reign:
In the bleak mid-winter
A stable-place sufficed
The Lord God Almighty —
Jesus Christ.

Enough for Him, whom cherubim
Worship night and day,
A breastful of milk
And a mangerful of hay;
Enough for Him, whom Angels
Fall down before,
The ox and ass and camel
Which adore.

Angels and Archangels
May have gathered there,
Cherubim and seraphim
Thronged the air;
But only His Mother
In her maiden bliss
Worshipped the Beloved
With a kiss.

What can I give Him,
Poor as I am? —
If I were a Shepherd
I would bring a lamb;
If I were a Wise Man
I would do my part, —
Yet what I can I give Him, —
Give my heart.

That works OK. We could probably avoid the breaks by marking it as a poem. Also, I saw your tests with {{Col-begin}}, etc. probably better to just use preview. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:02, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Analysis - biblical refutation of Bradley criticism

The quote from Ian Bradley that questions the poem's theology addresses two ideas of Rosetti's text both of which actually directly resonate with portions of scripture. In this light, it does seem a rather spurious criticism by Bradley. Could a rebuttal be included in the article here by citing biblical verses? Or is it necessary in Wikipedia to find an external source that has identified the bible texts as a rebuttal?

For suggested bible texts, see: I Kings 8.27; Psalm 102:25-27; Matthew 24: 35; Hebrews 1:10-12 (directly quoting the text from Psalm 102:25-27); II Peter 3. 10-11; Revelation 20: 11. Christoooj (talk) 11:15, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It would require citing a reliable source that rebuts Bradley; simply quoting Bible passages would amount to original research. It's not Wikipedia's job to provide rebuttals, only to reflect what others have written. Cnbrb (talk) 15:59, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK - thanks for outlining the correct approach ... I'll look to see if anything turns up. Christoooj (talk) 21:54, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Who knows, maybe you'll find something. I think it would be interesting for the article to present both views too. Good luck. Cnbrb (talk) 21:47, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]