Portal talk:Classical music

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the portal about Classical music.
Content dispute discussions should take place on the appropriate article's talk page.

For discussions about general portal development, please see the WikiProject Portals talk page.
If you are a regular maintainer of this portal, please add yourself to this list.

Classical music has had a portal peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this portal.

Classical music

This page 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 page or visit the project page for more details.Classical musicWikipedia:WikiProject Classical musicTemplate:WikiProject Classical musicClassical music articles

Portals

	This page is a portal. Portals are within the scope of WikiProject Portals, a collaborative effort to improve portals 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.PortalsWikipedia:WikiProject PortalsTemplate:WikiProject PortalsPortals articles
???	This portal has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
???	This portal has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	See also: List of Portals
	This portal's subpages have been checked by an editor, and are needed. Please take care when editing, especially if using automated editing software. Learn how to update the maintenance information here. (June 2018)

Changed of overall format / layout

I have changed the layout and format - Jay (talk) 15:24, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I like the layout, but the featured picture looks a leetle kooky (jutting out of the border). I'm also not a big fan of the colors. Perhaps black and gray would look nicer? With some fancy transparency? —La Pianista ^{(T•C•S•R)} 22:49, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe what is more important now is the content. The portal has been "abandoned" for quite sometime. About the color, it is up to majority's idea. I changed it because the former colors are too dull. I am in a process of changing contents and create archived pages like what I do for Portal:Opera (the contents are updated every month). I will post suggestion contents in Classical Music talk page, feel free to suggest for contents. I wil update Portal:Opera first. If we have volunteer to manage this portal, it is even better, so I can concentrate to Portal:Opera only. - Jay (talk) 02:44, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I will be more than willing to volunteer (I'm hungry for a serious task); but first, what exactly needs to be worked on, in your opinion, before I accept? —La Pianista ^{(T•C•S•R)} 03:32, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great, read at CM talkpage (bottom page). I have list down some of the tasks to do every month and the most important is, this portal content must not clash with Opera portal contents - Jay (talk) 03:37, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastique, thanks for your collaboration, Jay. :) —La Pianista ^{(T•C•S•R)} 03:48, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Projected schedule

I have started a schedule for selected articles, bios, and images in My sandbox. Any help regarding the selection of future selections is needed. Collaboration may be carried out directly beneath the table I have provided.

Thanks muchly for your help,

La Pianista ^(T•C•S) 16:44, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why...

...is the images for WikiProject Contemporary music a helicopter...? :) Allanon ^{♠The Dark Druid♠} 07:44, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Beats me. :) I've always been wondering the exact same thing. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 04:41, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See Helikopter-Streichquartett. Michael Bednarek (talk) 06:19, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it could be that. :) Thanks, Michael. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 06:27, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Portal peer review

Portal:Classical music

I'm hoping to take this to P:FP soon, and I'd like a thorough peer review to ensure its pass. Thanks! :) —La Pianista ^(T•C) 04:36, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This should probably have a sound section: We do have quite a lot.
- Will add when the February selections come out. Is this good enough? —La Pianista ^(T•C) 22:11, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Done. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 02:20, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Did you know sections contains facts not referenced by the articles linked, e.g, no description of The Deliverance of Theseus appears... anywhere, that I can find. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 11:46, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Removed that one, and will see what else I can do. Thanks, SH. :) —La Pianista ^(T•C) 22:11, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest you create your own bespoke "Associated Wikimedia" box and get rid of {{WikimediaForPortals}} as the only links that currently work from that are Commons and Wiktionary. At least with a bespoke box you can specify targets individually. You could also set the images in selected articles to not use the thumb parameter but just stand alone if you so wish. Nanonic (talk) 17:27, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Done I think. —La Pianista ^(T•C) 18:39, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's better not to use the thumbnail marking for pictures, see Portal:Fish for presenting Selected pictures. feydey (talk) 19:19, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Jh12

I'm going to judge this portal against many of the featured portals I've looked over, Wikipedia:Portal guidelines, and Wikipedia:Featured portal criteria. I'll try to start with the biggest suggestions first:
I highly recommend converting from selections by year/month to randomized selections: see Portal:Islam, Portal:Criminal justice, Portal:Sustainable development, and Portal:Japan. All of these portals are easier to maintain and they allow a reader access to all of the content that has ever been available on the portal instead of just static selections for one month. All of these portals also use a layout system for their randomized selections, with instructions on how to add a new selection. (Portal:Criminal justice/Selected article) Per Wikipedia:Portal guidelines; I don't think thumbnail formatting should be used in any of the selections for article, biography, and picture; instead, see the layout system used by Portal:Criminal justice/Selected picture.
So I would recommend getting the layout system in place in the selection subpages, editing the main portal page to use {{Random portal component}}, and adding a big Show new selections button like the portals I've listed to check that everything works. For this portal, you should have at least 10 randomized selections each for Selected article, Selected picture, Selected biography, Selected sound, Selected Quotes (Portal:Oregon), and Did you know... (Portal:Islam). Also note that after that is done selections should be changed to be of similar size: under Portal:Classical music/Selected biography/Archive, the selection for Schoenberg is much larger than the one for Beethoven
Selected picture needs credits like at Portal:Schools
The portal needs a Topics section per Wikipedia:Portal_guidelines#Required
Having a Project introduction box seems a little too self-referential for me. I think you should add a Things you can do box instead like at Portal:Sustainable development or Portal:Peru. Most of the featured portals I've seen separate Portals and Project more clearly so you may wish to change this box to a separate Wikiprojects box and remove them from Related portals like at Portal:Criminal justice or make it look like Portal:United Nations
I recommend having a featured content section like at Portal:Islam
I think selected article, biography, and picture should all have in-text bold links to that particular article like Portal:Oregon and Portal:Islam
- Done.
Add a {{browsebar}} to the top of the portal like at Portal:Criminal justice or Portal:The Beatles
- Done. —La Pianista ^{♫ ♪} 05:40, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
For additional content, you could also add a Selected anniversaries selection like at Portal:Oregon or Portal:Schools
It may take awhile to get all this stuff done, but it could lead to a much more polished portal and a smoother featured review. In my opinion, the primary issue is getting at least ten randomized selections for all of the important boxes and ensuring their selection quality (i.e. only GA or FA articles for Selected article like at Portal:Criminal justice/Selected article Best of luck! --Jh12 (talk) 17:00, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment – Jh12 has many good comments that will take some time to implement. Usually, since the listing has been inactive for 1 month and 11 days, it would have been archived. However, from her talk page, La Pianista will not have Internet access possibly until June 14. [sd] 21:30, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What with with the likes of Stravinsky, Debussy... in the Notable composer list... while REALLY notable ones aren't in the list ?! Pardon my rudness, but I just went to modify the list. If you guys are okay with... I could have removed Chopin in the list in the same move as well. YES, he is an important pianist composer, I didn't say less. But What about Beethoven then? He WAS the GENIUS PIANIST COMPOSER. So, Chopin does not deserve to be in the list. Sorry, again, for the highlight.Reiko-chin—"I wish I was an artist to be able to be an anarchist and live like a millionnaire..." (talk) 08:43, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We no longer accept portals that run on monthly-update system because, as demonstrated in the selected biography, once the portal no longer is maintained, it will be out of date within 1 month or less. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 06:17, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Notable Composers section

This section is really just "notable composers from Classical/Romantic periods plus J.S. Bach". There are plenty of notable composers from different time periods who would make a better, more representative list. I think the list should represent all of the major periods. The problem is that when a name is taken off, someone will undoubtedly be offended and revert. Therefore, I will add a few names, and then we can discuss who does not belong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.194.39.41 (talk) 16:04, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't we do away with that section altogether? It seems only to be the cause of headache and numerous disputes over the perpetual argument about who is notable and who isn't. If no one dissents, I'll be happy to remove it. —La Pianista ^{♫ ♪} 05:35, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe 'Featured composers' (using highly rated articles) would be better? --Klein zach 05:47, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea. The list should be based on fact, not whim. How about a "Top Ten" or sorts? (Not that we should put that in the title, of course.) —La Pianista ^{♫ ♪ How's my driving?} 06:35, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, what I meant was FA and GA. --Klein zach 07:14, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, what I meant was the section under Portal:Classical music/Topics. :) —La Pianista ^{♫ ♪ How's my driving?} 06:50, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly, which are articles . . . . --Klein zach 06:54, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And I thought you were referring to the "Featured article" on the left column...

Anyhow, is there a way to select a top ten? A way to find the hit counts for the top ten classical composers? I will be off to bed now - I'll mayhap respond tomorrow. —La Pianista ^{♫ ♪ How's my driving?} 06:58, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, right, see Category:FA-Class Composers articles, Category:A-Class Composers articles, and Category:GA-Class Composers articles. --Klein zach 07:14, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I was thinking of picking out a top ten using hit counts. Tell you what, if no one has any issues with it, I'm going to go ahead and pick out the top ten most viewed composer pages and will check back when I figure them out. —La Pianista ^{♫ ♪ How's my driving?} 06:17, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

luthier

Please help me stop an apparently British editor from violating WP:ENGVAR by censoring well-sourced information about US usage. Ironically he even feels authorised to remove Oxford online dictionaries' information that he feels is wrong. --Espoo (talk) 21:46, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, on his user page, he claims to be a US citizen of Ukrainian descent. He's also a member of Wikipedia:WikiProject Musical Instruments; I suspect you might do better to raise the issue for discussion there. Totally anecdotal, to be sure, and possibly idiosyncratic, but for whatever it's worth I'm from the United States, and I do use the word "luthier" with some regularity, admittedly more for those who make plucked instruments than for those who make bowed ones.Drhoehl (talk) 01:40, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Segnalation

In the "list of articles every Wikipedia should have" there are nine composers of XIX century, and only one (Pierluigi da Palestrina) of pre-bachian "ancient music". I have suggested to add at least Dieterich Buxtehude. The talk is here. --95.232.195.147 (talk) 00:03, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Linking new articles

My first Wikipdia article about a classical piano duo has just been approved and I just wanted to know if is it possible to "link" or relate this article to the Classical music portal and how should I do it. Please find the link to the article here: Carles and Sofia piano duo Thank you very much — Preceding unsigned comment added by Littleparrot (talk • contribs) 08:31, 4 September 2013 (UTC) --Littleparrot (talk) 13:13, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Given the articles currently linked to from this portal are of such stature as Bach and Stravinsky, where do you propose that the Carles and Sofia article link be placed? Not even artists of such stature as Yo-Yo Ma or Jascha Heifetz or Enrico Caruso are linked from this page. By the way, very nice, well-sourced article. Encore! Encore! 78.26 (I'm no IP, talk to me!) 15:15, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Near-inaudible mp3

The file is very soft (low volume). Even with my computer's volume and the "Play" volume both at maximum, I can barely hear it. Can anything be done about this? --Thnidu (talk) 19:37, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Contrary to your section heading, this file is not an mp3 file but a MIDI file. On my system (W7) it plays at perfectly audible volume in Firefox/Pale Moon using Media Player Classic and in Internet Explorer which uses Windows Media Player. It doesn't play in Chrome because I don't (want to) have Quicktime installed. What's your environment and what happens when you press the "Play" link? have you consulted Wikipedia:Media help (MIDI)? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 12:03, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Bednarek D'ohhh! (facepalm) Yes, that was a dumb mistake of mine (MP3 for MIDI). I have

OS X 10.7.5
Firefox 30.0
QuickTime Player 10.1
QuickTime Plug-in 7.7.1

When I click "play", e.g., "play midi example" in the first line of Wikipedia:Media help (MIDI), I hear the content play, but very faintly. This is, as I said above, with the volume turned up to max on both the "Play" link and my computer. With the same settings, File:Anthem of Bashkortostan.ogg is perfectly audible, the tune and the words both clear.

I've just tried to follow the instructions for QuickTime with Firefox, but I'm not getting any improvement.

--Thnidu (talk) 05:05, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know anything about OS X, but there quite a few discussion threads in various forums about that problem. Does any MIDI file play at an audible volume on your system? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 05:38, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Schubert, Trout Quintet

I hoped to amend the musical example in this article, but was told that "the melody" had been "more clear" before. I am rarely working in the English Wikipedia, so I wonder if this is consensus? --INM (talk) 13:13, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Design

The yellow background is really irritating, has anybody thought about changing that to a slightly calmer color?—‎Lost Whispers _talk 11:50, 13 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Status report from the Portals WikiProject

Wikipedia:WikiProject Portals is back!

The project was rebooted and completely overhauled on April 17th, 2018.

Its goals are to revitalize the entire portal system, make building and maintaining portals easier, and design the portals of the future.

As of April 29th, membership is at 56 editors, and growing.

There are design initiatives for revitalizing the portals system as a whole, and for each component of portals.

Tools are provided for building and maintaining portals, including automated portals that update themselves in various ways.

And, if you are bored and would like something to occupy your mind, we have a wonderful task list.

From your friendly neighborhood Portals WikiProject. — The Transhumanist 03:36, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

New article

Hello all...I just started an article, Hickford's Long Room, about a concert hall in London (1713 - c. 1779) in which a variety of then popular but now classical music was performed. Looking up the name "Hickford's" in Newspapers.com or Newspaperarchive.com brings up articles from the era, with the names of singers and instrumentalist performers. At a glance, I would say there is potential to bring out some of these early performers and give them a modern presence in the new article. I will add some myself, but there are a lot of names to research. Welcome to anyone.Jacqke (talk); Timestamp 09:08, 8 June 2019

"Notable" recordings

I often consult Wikipedia for factual information about classical music composers and compositions. I noticed that many articles about compositions have a section called "Notable recordings". I have been searching Wikipedia to find the criteria for what is considered a "notable" recording, but to no avail. Please enlighten me. 2A02:1810:2423:3700:7CD6:302E:32BD:8ECF (talk) 15:45, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]