Talk:New Bach Edition

A fact from New Bach Edition appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 15 January 2011 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that it took more than half a century to complete the Neue Bach-Ausgabe, the second edition of the collected works of Johann Sebastian Bach?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2011/January.

Wikipedia

Classical music

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

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Germany 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Infobox

I suggest an infobox, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:05, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

taken and removed here, to avoid clutter --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:54, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Article name and more questions

The article name was until today the original German name of the edition, Neue Bach-Ausgabe. (It appeared like that on the Main page on Wikipedia's 10th birthday, see above.) In a time where Italian operas are performed in the original language, and German universities have articles under their original name, it seems anachronistic to me to move to an English name. Please remember that we talk about an East/West German project begun in the 1950s.

The website of the publisher has the name Bach-Archiv only in German, even in the Englishversion. I believe it could be used, matching Institut better. It hardly needs a translation. To have one organisation in German, one in English looks inconsistent to me. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:46, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:NCB#Title translations, last paragraph of the section.

Re. "The website of the publisher has the name Bach-Archiv only in German, even in the Englishversion" – No, they appear to be changing to Bach Archive, see [1] (Bach-Archiv once; Bach Archive trice). When the English name is used about as often (even: more often on certain pages), I'd prefer the English name. Note that also in English Wikipedia the article title of the Archive is in English (per the English-language webpages on the institution's website). --Francis Schonken (talk) 16:04, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Also books that haven't been published in English (yet) are preferably referred to by an English version of the title, if the title in the original language would not easily be recognised by the majority of English speakers." - Who tells you that Neue Bach-Ausgabe is not recognised by the majority of English speakers? It has been recognised for more than five years. I guess that I will not be translated. How about saying somewhere early in the lead that the edition is in German? Nothing a reader would guess from all that English. - I remember my failed effort to have The Flying Dutchman (opera) moved to a title that doesn't suggest Wagner wrote something in English.

Archiv vs. Archive: "I prefer ...", you say. - I, however, prefer to speak of both institutions in the same language, and find the mix strange. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:26, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note "easily" in the NCB guideline: it reads "easily ... recognised by the majority of English speakers": that's an argument that works even stronger for article titles than section titles (where you recently advocated the same principle). The example given in the guideline is "Lucidez", far easier to recognize as "Lucidity" than "Ausgabe" as "Edition" for English speakers, if you ask me.

Re. Göttingen Bach Institute: note the publisher says "Johann Sebastian Bach Institute, Göttingen", so seems more logical to translate both to English on this page (and probably best to move the page on the Institute to "Johann Sebastian Bach Institute"). --Francis Schonken (talk) 16:42, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

By your logic, we better move the cantatas to English titles, - if you think a reader doesn't get "Archiv", Todes Banden is unzumutbar. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:19, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Since when are cantatas "books"? The naming conventions for cantatas are at WP:NCM, those for books at WP:NCB. (The Flying Dutchman of course at WP:NCO) --Francis Schonken (talk) 17:22, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Further, remember this RM: Talk:Schweigt stille, plaudert nicht, BWV 211#Requested move 11 December 2015? If there is a fairly recognisable and often used English version of the title I support moving to that title. --Francis Schonken (talk) 17:33, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And some old discussion (old doesn't mean the concerns are to be forgotten): Talk:List of compositions by Johann Sebastian Bach#German or English titles?. --Francis Schonken (talk) 04:30, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on New Bach Edition. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:33, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]