Template talk:History of Western art music

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Classical music
WikiProject iconThis template 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.
 

Modernism[edit]

Is musical modernism an era or a movement? If it is an era, as is romantic music, then it should be in the template. Hyacinth 07:00, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Placed in template Stirling Newberry 18:21, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Leveled[edit]

This version gives a little more information:

History of European art music
Early
Medieval (476 CE - 1400)
Renaissance (1400 - 1600)
Common practice
Baroque (1600 - 1750)
Classical (1750 - 1820)
Romantic (1820 - 1910)
Contemporary
Modern (1910 - 2000)
Contemporary (2000 - present)

Hyacinth 00:19, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Looks nice, not sure so many people would think the present is modernism though. Even "post-tonal" attracts controversy. What do other people think? Stirling Newberry 00:51, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The present isn't modernism, it is contemporary. Not even the 20th century is modernism, but "modern". Hyacinth 21:45, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Removed Modernism (music) per SN's suggestion (part of 20th century classical music). Hyacinth 23:42, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Ooh, how about having the 20th century and contemporary being their own "eras"? Hyacinth 00:10, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Eras[edit]

{{European art music eras}}

Years[edit]

The years given in the template do not match up with what is written in the very articles linked to. Please give justification for current years listed. Hyacinth 21:45, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

ANYONE? Hyacinth 22:18, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Classical?[edit]

Considering this is to be placed on the page European-influenced classical music as the main article, shouldn't this template read "History of European classical music" and not art music, for consistency's sake?--Dmcdevit 04:19, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:European art music eras[edit]

Template:European art music eras has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Pax:Vobiscum 16:56, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Note: Discussion ended (Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2007_May_3#Template:European_art_music_eras). Template deleted since it was made redundant by this template. Hyacinth 22:11, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Baroque is a part of "early music"[edit]

Hi! Baroque is part of "Early music" AND "Common practice". In fact, I don't know if "Common Practice" is a good categorization here... Lfjslohll (talk) 18:20, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Pop/rock?[edit]

QUestion about the template about western art music[edit]

(Copied from my talk page) -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 13:43, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Umm, i am perfectly aware that pop and rock music is not art music. but progressive rock is. Do you have a suggesion for your change? McLennonSon (talk) 14:34, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

The template is named {{History of Western art music}} and its headline link is to Classical music. That article does not mention the items you added to that template: Baroque pop, Progressive rock, Progressive metal, Krautrock; even the article art music barely mentions these genres. That's why I saw no good reason to include them in this template which is used in those articles which it listed before your addition.
All that is my opinion. If you felt that these genres ought to be included, you should have raised a discussion at the template's talk page and at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical music. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 10:39, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Since then, McLennonSon has reverted to her version. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 13:43, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Periods and Eras[edit]

I've modified the template several times in recent weeks to try and bring some consistency to the uses of the terms "period" and "era". It appears from general usage documented on the talk page of the article "Common practice period" that in music history, a period normally represents a longer span of time than an era even though the opposite hierarchy is used in geology where an era is the longer span of time. A curious exception is the classical "period" which is frequently so called even though is is a shorter span of time than the common practice "period" of which it is a part. In this case I have edited to call the classical time span an "era or period" to recognise both usages. ChrisCarss Former24.108.99.31(talk 10:38, 23 February 2015 (UTC) ChrisCarss Former24.108.99.31(talk 13:00, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Style vs. calendar[edit]

What's with the inclusion of style era and calendar era in Modern and contemporary period? It seems overly complicated. I think we should make a decision rather than sit on the fence. Squandermania (talk) 15:34, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

I was bold and removed "CE". If someone wants to return it, fine, but please remove "AD" in that case. Using both styles side-by-side is pretentious nonsense. Even the "Jesus" article was able to rid itself this problem after years of foolishness, reaching FA in the process. I'm fairly confident that Wikipedia will survive if this template lowers itself from the proverbial fence of which you speak. Joefromrandb (talk) 06:17, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Post common practice period[edit]

Since no concise or official name has been given to the post common practice period, and since calendar eras don't really belong with the style eras, I think the best approach is to combine the most recent calendar eras into a single descriptive title for our own musical period. ChrisCarss Former24.108.99.31(talk 23:00, 20 June 2018 (UTC)