# Talk:Johann Sebastian Bach

With "Johann Sebastian Bach" in the opening paragraph.   Just like it's "Joseph Haydn" and then "Franz Joseph Haydn" in the paragraph.  Nobody called him Johann. He was Sebastian. Borges123xyz (talk) 19:22, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Doesn't matter. The majority of secondary reliable sources call him Johann Sebastian Bach, so Wikipedia does too. Aza24 (talk) 19:34, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
The preeminent biography of Bach, Christoph Wolff's JS Bach, the learned musician, calls him "Sebastian". Tony (talk) 02:19, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
Yes, but the average person is more likely to know him as "Johann Sebastian Bach," so per WP:COMMONNAME the current title should be kept.  Benpiano800 (talk) 16:51, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
The biography's title is "Johann Sebastian Bach: The Learned Musician"..... Aza24 (talk) 17:05, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
I've worked at standardizing "Joseph Haydn" on Wikipedia -- but that is different because the reference sources generally call him that. J. S. Bach not so. Opus33 (talk) 05:04, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
There were quite a few Johanns in the extended family. Indeed about 40% of males had Johann as their first name. Wolff refers to him often as "Sebastian" in the body of his book. Tony (talk) 19:10, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

The organ builder Wender died in the 1730s. Bach did play his instrument at the Bach Church in Arnstadt. But since then the organ has been replaced twice, each incorporating just one or two stops from the original. (I was shown organ number 2, and played it, in 1977; yet another organ has replaced that—call it number 3). So the Commons file is incorrectly labelled, and this has worked its way into the article. Tony (talk) 15:22, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

German Wikipedia is telling us something like: "Construction of a new organ for the New Church, the successor building to the burned-down Bonifatius Church, today's Johann Sebastian Bach Church." Its likely best to state that this is the recent version of the organ following the one lost to fire damage. ErnestKrause (talk) 20:05, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
No: that organ was replaced some time between 1977 (when I played it) and the early 2000s. The German WP is wrong if it's claiming otherwise. Tony (talk) 08:51, 17 June 2025 (UTC)
Another organ played by Bach is in Dresden. ErnestKrause (talk) 20:18, 24 May 2025 (UTC)::Utterly irrelevant. Tony (talk) 08:53, 17 June 2025 (UTC)
This is in the wrong section, but I can't see how to find it in the edit box. Tony (talk) 08:58, 17 June 2025 (UTC)
Fixed. Indyguy (talk)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Johann Sebastian Bach/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: ErnestKrause (talk · contribs) 19:57, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
Reviewer: Tim riley (talk · contribs) 07:19, 25 May 2025 (UTC)


### Comments
#### After first canter-through for spelling etc.
The article is supposed to be in British English (see the banner on the article talk page). On the whole it is – "calibre", "characterised", "favour", "honour", "kilometres", "popularise", "realised", "recognised", "secularised" and so on – but a few Americanisms have crept in: "centers", "favor", "fervor", "honor" (twice), "organization", "popularized", "program", "unfavorable/unfavorably". These need to be Anglicised, except where they are in quotations, where they should remain intact.
C. P. E. Bach is mentioned four times as "C.P.E. Bach". Our manual of style (MOS:INITS) requires a space after each full stop. (He could do with a blue link at first mention, too.)
The Dorian mode is not given its capital letter. As Grove, The Oxford English Dictionary and our own article on musical modes all capitalise the word, I think we should here.
More later after I've closely scrutinised the text. It's a big article and I shall probably need several goes, commenting and suggesting in batches. Tim riley talk 07:19, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi Tim riley; This is such a thorough list which I'll need to go through in detail. The above three items should now be done. I'll try to get through your 'first batch' by tomorrow or the day after. Its a very useful list. ErnestKrause (talk) 15:35, 25 May 2025 (UTC)


#### Detailed comments: first lot
All the present batch of comments (and I imagine the same will be true of most comments in further batches) are merely advisory, and whether or not you choose to act on them will not affect my decision about promotion to GA.

Language templates: I am unsure – and the Manual of Style doesn't say, as far as I can find – whether German titles should or shouldn't have the {{lang|de... template. You use it 25 times but omit it elsewhere. For instance it is not used for "Bach-Werke-Verzeichnis", " An Wasserflüssen Babylon", "Clavier-Übung", "Vom Himmel hoch da komm' ich her", " Wer weiß, wie nahe mir mein Ende?" and many others. I'd play safe and use a template for every German title. I had to do this when taking Robert Schumann through FAC and a right old fag it was, but worth the effort.
More tomorrow on this one. Nice effort for your Schumann improvements. ErnestKrause (talk) 01:31, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
There were many of them though they now appear to be converted to 'de'. ErnestKrause (talk) 13:41, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
"the Goldberg Variations and The Well-Tempered Clavier" – I notice that in your main text (and for that matter in the text of our article on the latter) the definite article in "The Well-Tempered Clavier" is sometimes capitalised and sometimes not. If it were up to me I'd capitalise it throughout, but as long as you are consistent it is up to you.
Interesting to find that the definite article is used on both the German and English version for The Well-Tempered Clavier, but that both German and English Wikipedia do not use the definite article for the Goldberg Variations in the article titles. Going with "The Well-Tempered Clavier" consistently in article, while the Goldberg Variations do not consistently use capital letters. ErnestKrause (talk) 01:00, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
"The Well-Tempered Clavier, was appreciated by both students and accomplished artists" – I don't see anything in the main text to back this up.
I've added the number of recordings of "Well-Tempered" up to 2013 in the Legacy section, and adapted the lede to it. ErnestKrause (talk) 13:54, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
"The 19th century saw the publication of some significant Bach biographies" – these are the wise words of Plain Words on "significant": This is a good and useful word, but it has a special flavour of its own and it should not be thoughtlessly used as a mere variant of important, considerable, appreciable, or quite large ... it ought to be used only where there is a ready answer to the reader's unspoken question 'Significant, is it? And what does it signify?'
Changing wording to "several biographies". ErnestKrause (talk) 13:58, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
"His father very likely taught him violin" – as we are in BrE I draw your attention to this advice from The Guardian's style guide:   In the UK, if not the US, using likely in such contexts as “they will likely win the game” sounds unnatural at best; there is no good reason to use it instead of probably. If you really must do so, however, just put very, quite or most in front of it and all will, very likely, be well.
'Very likely' is better; Bach as a youth was apparently known for his voice and his violin playing. ErnestKrause (talk) 13:58, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
"shortly after graduating from St. Michael's" – I think you should rationalise your use, or non-use, of full stops after the "St" in saints' names. I counted fourteen without a full stop and twenty-one with one. I don't see the need for them, but it's your choice, as long as you are consistent.
Going with St, no period, throughout text. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:10, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
"ordered Bach to be more moderate about the musical qualities he expected from his students" – this is the first we've heard of his having students.
Shorten narrative and go strait to example of his absence. Bach was lively in his discernment of talent and lack of talent in others. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:14, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
"he had a cantata performed on Easter, 24 April 1707" – you can write "on Easter Day" or "at Easter", but "on Easter" tout court looks most peculiar.
At Easter better. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:16, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
"likely an early version" – as above
Adapt wording. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:22, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
"The position included significantly higher remuneration" – as above
Higher wages. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:24, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
"Bach convinced the church and town government" – in BrE one convinces that but persuades to.
Persuaded is better. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:26, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
"many of these transcribed works are still regularly performed" – two points here. First, it lacks a citation and secondly, I think you mean "frequently" rather than "regularly" (at fixed times or uniform intervals – you use "regular" properly in "music for regular Sunday services" later.)
Shorten optional comment. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:29, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
"each containing 24 preludes and fugues in every major and minor key" – ambiguous: if read one way this would mean there were 1,152 preludes and fugues, if my arithmetic is correct. It would be safer to say "containing 24 preludes and fugues, one in every major and minor key" or some such.
Wording changed to pairings for each of the key changes. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:33, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
"Bach and Handel never met" – first we've heard of this Handel chap. I don't think you should assume that every one of your readers will know about him. Something on the lines of "Bach never met his celebrated musical contemporary George Frideric Handel", would be helpful, and at the very least a blue link is wanted.
Your version better. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:35, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
"who both, especially Johann Christian, became significant musicians" – what did they signify?
'Well-known' might work better. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:38, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
"in 1714, he attended the service at the St. Thomas Church on the first Sunday of Advent,[56] and in 1717 he had tested the organ … In 1716, Bach and Kuhnau met" – you have so far been admirably sparing with AmE-style commas after dates. Plain Words sums up the BrE model concisely: Some writers put a comma here as a matter of course. But others do it only if a comma is needed to emphasise a contrast or to prevent the reader from going off on the wrong scent ... On the principle that stops should not be used unless they are needed, this discrimination is to be commended". If I were you I'd go through the text and remove commas in such phrases as "In 1725, Bach lost interest" ... " In 1733, Bach composed" ... "In 1735, Bach started" etc. Elsewhere your existing form – "In 1703 he returned" ... "In 1723 he was hired" ... "In 1726 he began" ... "In 1746 Bach was preparing" – is clear, correct and uncluttered.
Going with uncluttered version. If you have more of these after the week-end then you can add them here, or directly to the article in case I've missed something. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:54, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
That's all for this batch. Further comments will follow soon, I hope. – Tim riley talk 09:09, 25 May 2025 (UTC)


#### Concluding batch of comments
Mostly advisory, but there are a few requests for or queries about citations that I think require attention.

"The complete mass was not performed during his lifetime. It is considered among the greatest choral works in history." – I cannot open the citation for the Rathey article. Does it say sans phrase that the Mass is "considered among the greatest choral works in history"?
Link repaired. ErnestKrause (talk) 20:25, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
"Both Antonio Vivaldi and Jean-Baptiste Lully have been noted as significant antecedents" – citation? (and another "significant" where you mean "important" or "major")
Add cites for Vivaldi. Lully already cited at end of sentence. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:35, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
"especially by Bach and George Frideric Handel" – a bit late for full name and blue link. Should appear at first mention.
Handel was already linked. ErnestKrause (talk) 20:28, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
"The model for BWV 974 has been attributed to Vivaldi, Benedetto Marcello, and Alessandro Marcello. In the second half of the 20th century, the oboe concerto that was the model for Bach's transcription was attributed to Marcello again" – But which Marcello?
Alessandro. ErnestKrause (talk) 20:29, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
I lost the will to live while plodding glumly through the minutiae of the rest of the Antecedents and influences section. But the GA criteria do not rule out such exhaustive detail. Whether it is "unnecessary detail" is a matter of opinion, and I am not here to impose mine. All the same, if the article is ever taken to FAC (and why not?) I'm sure reviewers will have an opinion on this point.
At this point, I've left the link to the main article which contains that table at the top of that section. If the supporting paragraphs make the case in your eyes for Vivaldi as a source for Bach, then it should be fine. ErnestKrause (talk) 20:31, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
"Bach created an overall experience that has been found over the intervening centuries to be both musically thrilling and spiritually profound." – the cited source says no such thing.
Overstate from previous editor in 2012. Abridge text. ErnestKrause (talk) 20:35, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
"displaying a dizzying variety of structural, contrapuntal and fugal techniques." – I can't see this in the cited source, either.
Overstate again from previous editor in 2013. ErnestKrause (talk) 20:39, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
"his compositions are to a large extent considered to have laid down the rules for the evolving scheme that dominated musical expression in the next centuries" – no source cited for this assertion, which doesn't sit well with the neglect of his music you report in the 18th and early 19th centuries.
Overstate from previous editor. Stick to the facts and examples given without embellishment. ErnestKrause (talk) 20:43, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
"I have expended much effort to find another piece of this type by Bach. But it was in vain. This fantasy is unique and has always been second to none. – needs closing quotation marks
Close quote. ErnestKrause (talk) 20:45, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
"Similarly, the virtuoso cello suites seem tailored to the instrument, the best of what is offered for it" – I can't make out what this sentence is trying to say.
One of the cello suites transcribed for lute. ErnestKrause (talk) 20:53, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
"Bach exploited an instrument's capacities to the fullest while keeping the core of the music independent of the instrument on which it is performed" – citation?
Shorten uncited text. Overstated. ErnestKrause (talk) 21:17, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
"Bach's canons, and especially his fugues, are the most characteristic of this style, which he did not invent but contributed to so fundamentally that to a large extent he defined it" – citation?
Update wording of influence. Add cite. ErnestKrause (talk) 20:59, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
"The Forkel quotation runs to 331 words. The Manual of Style does not prescribe an arbitrary limit on the length of quotations, but this one strikes me as excessive. Again, a matter of opinion and I do not press the point.
Quote reduced in size; redone as single paragraph quote format now. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:39, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
"Bach devoted more attention than his contemporaries to his compositions' structure." – citation? And the phrasing is rather awkward: "devoted more attention than his contemporaries to the structure of his compositions" would flow more smoothly.
Going with your version. ErnestKrause (talk) 21:14, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
"His collaboration with Picander for the St Matthew Passion libretto is best known, but there was a similar process in achieving a multi-layered structure for his St John Passion libretto a few years earlier" – no such mention of Picander or the St Matthew Passion in the cited source.
Picander cite added. ErnestKrause (talk) 21:28, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
"staged some of his works" – staged? I see no mention that Bach wrote anything for the stage.
Presented is a better word choice. ErnestKrause (talk) 21:30, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
"Brahms, Bruckner, and Wagner were among the composers who promoted Bach's music or wrote glowingly about it." – citation?
Overstate from previous editor. Archive. ErnestKrause (talk) 21:36, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
"During the 19th century, 200 books were published on Bach. By the end of the century, local Bach societies were established in several cities, and his music had been performed in all major musical centers" – Are all three statements backed by the source? I cannot open the McKay article.
McKay link repaired. ErnestKrause (talk) 21:41, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
"he was inscribed in a religious revival" – strange verb: what do you mean by it here?
Archive odd wording. ErnestKrause (talk) 21:43, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
"Leading performers of classical music such as Willem Mengelberg, Edwin Fischer, Georges Enescu, Herbert von Karajan, Helmut Walcha, Wanda Landowska, I Musici, Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau, Yo-Yo Ma, and Philippe Herreweghe recorded his music." – I think your footnote 3 is lazy and shows too little respect for your readers. If you are citing something you should link to it if online and give page number and bibliographic details if printed.
Enthusiastic name-dropping by previous editor. No cites means it is archived now. ErnestKrause (talk) 21:47, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
"one of the most well known piano recordings" – strange phrasing: do you mean best-known?
Shorten text. Astonishing sales being stated is enough there. ErnestKrause (talk) 21:50, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
"an extraordinarily demanding transcription of the Chaconne" – who says it is extraordinarily demanding?
Shorten previous editor's text. Its a transcription. ErnestKrause (talk) 21:51, 26 May 2025 (UTC)


##### (arbitrary break added)
"Several 20th-century composers referred to Bach or his music, for example Eugène Ysaÿe in Six Sonatas for solo violin, Dmitri Shostakovich in 24 Preludes and Fugues, and Heitor Villa-Lobos in Bachianas Brasileiras." – citation?
Cites added. ErnestKrause (talk) 22:07, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
Footnote 4 is inadequate: you must give page numbers to comply with WP:V – you can't expect your readers to plough through whole books.
That looks like a list of biographer's books about Bach; its not meant as a page reference as presented by a previous editor. ErnestKrause (talk) 21:57, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
"In 2011, Anthony Tommasini, chief classical music critic of The New York Times, ranked Bach the greatest composer of all time" – the article has degenerated into a quote farm here, with a 192-word block quote immediately followed by a 158-word quote which, if it is to remain, should be another block quote: see MOS:BQ
Both of those quotes in that section have been reduced and I've redone the paragraph breaks. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:36, 26 May 2025 (UTC)


##### References
The references are good, on the whole (you might be surprised how badly some GAN articles are referenced, and this one is a pleasant find). I haven't done a systematic check of the whole lot, but opened (or have been unable to open) a random 10% of them. 

I can't work out why you sometimes refer to the printed Grove and sometimes to the online version, but that is of no great consequence.
Previous editors in the plural. Its seems the result of a decade of editing by different editors. ErnestKrause (talk) 22:11, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
I don't know what the mysterious "‹See TfM›Mar" means in either of its appearances.
Redrose64: GAN in progress and this mysterious "See TfM" comes up as an old template now deleted with your name on the linked page. Two cites use it in this Bach article. Any clues? ErnestKrause (talk) 22:11, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
TfM is short for WP:TFM, which is to say, Templates for Merging, and it denotes that the template that is used for that reference - specifically, Template:Wikicite - has been listed for merging with another template. ‹See TfM› is a link, and if you follow that link, it takes you directly to that discussion. Yes, I'm mentioned there - but only because I posted a comment. I don't see why you're calling me out and not Rjjiii (talk · contribs), who filed the TfM. I also don't see why you chose me instead of Michael Aurel, SMcCandlish, Michael Bednarek, Izno and Bernanke's Crossbow, all of whom, like myself, posted there. I'm no more significant than any of those. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:33, 29 May 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for the ping. ErnestKrause, I think that Redrose64 has already offered a solid explanation, but will give some specific input on the template. Try clicking the link in short footnotes for Wolf 2013 or Marshall and Leaver 2001. The template {{wikicite}} is creating the anchors in the full citations for the those links in the short citations. There is another template that does the same thing. While the merge discussion is ongoing, transclusions of either template will have a "See TfM" link. As soon as the merge discussion ends, that link will go away. Rjjiii (talk) 22:33, 29 May 2025 (UTC)
Seems odd to give Michael Talbot his authorlink at second rather than first appearance in the lists, and to give so many duplicate authorlinks for Christoph Wolff.
Fix Talbot to correct link formats. ErnestKrause (talk) 22:11, 26 May 2025 (UTC)


##### Duplicate links
It is no longer regarded as a mortal sin to have duplicate blue links, but you could advantageously weed out a few here, to save your readers from being hit in the eye with excessive amounts of blue: in my view we could do without the duplicate links to Abraham Mendelssohn, assorted members of the Bach family, Augustus III of Poland, Berlin Sing-Akademie, cantata, Christoph Wolff, Frederick the Great, Glenn Gould., Halle, Handel, harpsichord, Johann Nikolaus Forkel, Kerll, Latin, Lorenz Christoph Mizler, Louis Marchand, Lully, Lutheran chorale, Maria Barbara Bach, Palestrina, Pergolesi, Picander, St John Passion, St Matthew Passion, The Well-Tempered Clavier, Vivaldi and Peter Williams.
For example, 'Cantata' appears 47 times and I've trimmed some of them. Some of them are a little tricky and link to particular cantatas or to other articles such as "Bach cantatas" rather than the general form. Trimmed some of the others as well. ErnestKrause (talk) 22:25, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
That's all from me. Over to you. There's quite a bit to attend to, and so I'll put the review on hold for a week. Tim riley talk 12:19, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

Really a good list to go through Tim riley. Let me know if I can add more edits by listing them here for me. Or, if you prefer to add some you feel are appropriate then it should all be fine. ErnestKrause (talk) 22:25, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
Good. I think we're there. If we were at FAC there's quite a lot I'd be quibbling about, but as far as I can see the article meets all the GA criteria, and I am very pleased indeed to be able to promote it. Bravo! (or whatever that is in German).


### Overall summary
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality: 

B. MoS compliance: 

Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources: 
Well referenced
B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary: 
Well referenced
C. No original research: 

Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects: 

B. Focused: 

Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias: 

Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc: 

Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales: 
Well illustrated
B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions: 
Well illustrated
Overall:
Pass or Fail: 

I found this an interesting and instructive article to review. It seems to me to have the potential for Featured Article Candidate (perhaps after a Peer Review) but for now, as GAN reviewer I have considerable pleasure in affirming its GA status. – Tim riley talk 12:32, 27 May 2025 (UTC)


### Johann Sebastian Bach
Previous peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because it has recently completed GAN successfully. The reviewer of the article and other editors have indicated that it may be worth improving the article further to move the article forward. ("It seems to me to have the potential for Featured Article Candidate (perhaps after a Peer Review)," TR).
Thanks, ErnestKrause (talk) 23:38, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt you may be interested in this. RoySmith (talk) 13:16, 30 June 2025 (UTC)


#### Octave
I should be able to provide some notes on this soon, maybe by the weekend? Couldn't resist such an important article :) UpTheOctave! • 8va? 16:14, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi UpTheOctave!; It would be useful to see your version of a peer review when you have time for it. ErnestKrause (talk) 22:32, 1 June 2025 (UTC)


##### Infobox
MOS:CAPSUCCINCT: suggest shortening caption, perhaps to "1748 portrait of Bach holding a copy of the canon BWV 1076"? I don't see how the specifics of the canon are important.
MOS:SEAOFBLUE: should be fixed here regardless (canon BWV 1076)
Shorten caption link. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:46, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
Not sure the brackets around (O.S.) and (N.S.) should be linked
Currently piped. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:48, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
I would generally expect a country as part of the places of birth and death for precision
Add country not required. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:51, 30 July 2025 (UTC)


##### Lead
MOS:FORCELINK: I agree with the points made below about a footnote for O.S. vs. N.S.
O.S. is curretnly blue linked.
Calling the cello suites and sonatas and partitas "solo instrumental works" implies that the keyboard or organ works are not for a solo instrumental
That list currently covers cello, keyboard, organ, choral, etc., which seems adequate for the lede. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:05, 2 August 2025 (UTC)
Similarly, distinguishing between keyboard and organ works implies that the organ is not a keyboard instrument
Bach distinguished between clavier, organ and harpsichord, as his preference. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:05, 2 August 2025 (UTC)
How should "Bach Revival" be capitalised? From a quick glance at Scholar, I see a split between lowercase and uppercase for revival
There are number of books and articles on this subject which seem to prefer to use capitals, especially when it is in quote marks. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:05, 2 August 2025 (UTC)
At a glance, the second paragraph seems to rest too heavily on "In [year]... In [year]" constructions
Now 'by 1723'. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:05, 2 August 2025 (UTC)
"In 1703 he returned to Thuringia ... where he was mostly engaged with chamber music": this is very long for a single sentence, I suggest splitting
Split sentence into two sentences. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:05, 2 August 2025 (UTC)
"its university's student ensemble Collegium Musicum" -> "Leipzig University's student ensemble, Collegium Musicum" for clarity
Specify University. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:05, 2 August 2025 (UTC)
"not only in his larger vocal works but, for instance": not seeing the need for "for instance"
Reworded example. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:05, 2 August 2025 (UTC)
"Many of his works use": suggest expanding pipe to "Many of his works use contrapuntal techniques", this makes it sound like we're linking to a full work list
Extend piping field. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:05, 2 August 2025 (UTC)
The start of the last lead paragraph reads disjointed, could these sentences flow better?
Added piping. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:05, 2 August 2025 (UTC)
Expand pipe to multitude of arrangements
Extended. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:05, 2 August 2025 (UTC)


##### Early life, marriages and education
"scores were so valuable and private and blank ledger paper was costly": suggest comma for clarity after private
Add comma. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:17, 9 June 2025 (UTC)
"From his brother": specify which
It was Johann Christoph; mentioned in the sentence before that one, and the sentence after it. It could be added again. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:17, 9 June 2025 (UTC)
Do we have no examples of North German composers Bach was exposed to?
Current version presents South Germans such as Johann Caspar Kerll, Johann Jakob Froberger, and Johann Pachelbel. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:17, 9 June 2025 (UTC)
The North German list looks something like: Georg Böhm, Reincken and Friedrich Nicolaus Bruhns from Hamburg, and the work of Dieterich Buxtehude. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:24, 10 June 2025 (UTC)
"By 3 April 1700, Bach and his school friend Georg Erdmann—who was two years older—studied at St Michael's School in Lüneburg": suggest "began studies" instead?
"who was two years older": is this relevant?
Could be abridged; they were near contemporaries. 'Began studies' added. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:17, 9 June 2025 (UTC)
"Anna Magdalena Wilcke": why italics?
Currently regular font. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:17, 9 June 2025 (UTC)


##### Career
Why is Bach Church is quotes in the caption, but not in prose?
Quotes taken out. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:32, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
"The position was offered to Bach only after it had been offered to Georg Philipp Telemann and then Christoph Graupner, both of whom chose to stay where they were—Telemann in Hamburg and Graupner in Darmstadt—after using the Leipzig offer to negotiate better terms of employment.": I think the dash ought to be moved to before "both"
Mdash adjusted. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:32, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
"went all the way to the Elector but was denied": do we know who was Elector at this time?
Elector Frederick Augustus. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:34, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
Link Gottfried Zimmermann more explicitly to the cafe so the reader doesn't have to make the connection themselves
Named by his name earlier in paragraph. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:41, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
Shouldn't "Court Composer" be lowercase?
It is derived from "Royal Court Composer", which is in quotes. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:41, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
"In 1733 Bach composed a Kyrie–Gloria Mass in B minor that he later incorporated into his Mass in B minor...He later extended this work into a full mass by adding a Credo, Sanctus, and Agnus Dei": do we need to talk about this twice? At least, these should be joined.
The two versions were separated by: "He presented the manuscript (the first version) to the Elector in a successful bid to persuade the prince to give him the title of Court Composer." ErnestKrause (talk) 14:44, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
"polyphonic structures and canons and other elements of the stile antico": convert to list
Rewrite sentence. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:51, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
"In January 1749 Bach's daughter Elisabeth Juliane Friederica married his pupil Johann Christoph Altnickol. Bach's health was declining.": needs better flow here
Rewrite both sentences. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:51, 3 August 2025 (UTC)


##### Music
"he often returned to the then-antiquated modes and genres...I have expended much effort to find another piece of this type by Bach. But it was in vain.": these sentiments seem to disagree?
The complete Forkel quote is in reference to the uniqueness he associated with the specific piece Chromatic Fantasia and Fugue: "The fantasy contains a great deal of harmonic movement by semitones, and the fugue theme is very chromatic (although not uniquely so for Bach), explaining the piece's nickname Chromatic. The virtuosic and improvisational toccata style of the fantasy, in which both hands alternate rapidly, and the expressive, tonally experimental youthful character, combined with the cogent structure of Bach's more mature period, make the work exceptional, and it has been particularly popular among Bach's keyboard works. This assessment was shared by Bach's contemporaries. The first biographer of Bach, Johann Nikolaus Forkel, wrote: 'I have expended much effort to find another piece of this type by Bach. But it was in vain. This fantasy is unique and has always been second to none.'" ErnestKrause (talk) 15:07, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
"about a century before they were fitted with valves, were tied to the key of their tuning": not entirely true, perhaps mention the use of crooks?
Use 'valves and crooks.' ErnestKrause (talk) 15:09, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
"5th Brandenburg Concerto" -> "fifth Brandenburg Concerto"
Use 'fifth'. ErnestKrause (talk) 15:14, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
"For instance, the sonatas and partitas for solo violin are considered the pinnacle of what has been written for violin, within reach of only accomplished players.": The pinnacle? I doubt there is a complete consensus on that.
Shorten wording. ErnestKrause (talk) 15:17, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
Is a 200-word block quote warranted?
Shorten quote. ErnestKrause (talk) 15:21, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
"In his last years, Bach revised several of his compositions. Often, recasting such previously composed music in an enhanced structure was the most salient change, as in the Mass in B minor.": to me, these read better joined
Shorten wording. ErnestKrause (talk) 15:30, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
Link hermeneutics
Linked. ErnestKrause (talk) 15:35, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
Why is "who copied whom" in quotes?
Reworded as a question. ErnestKrause (talk) 15:35, 3 August 2025 (UTC)


##### Reception and legacy
"old master": just say Bach
Change to Bach. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:00, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
Why the quotes around "patron"?
Delete quote marks. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:00, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
MOS:SEAOFBLUE: cantor Doles
He was Bach's student. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:05, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
Her name is Sara Levy, link to Sara Levy (née Itzig)
Linked. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:05, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
Link Breitkopf & Härtel, N. Simrock, Hans Georg Nägeli and Franz Anton Hoffmeister
Linked. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:12, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
"Ein feste Burg ist unser Gott (BWV 80)" don't put BWV no. in italics, it's not part of the title
No italic. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:12, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
Link for Felix should occur on first mention
Link is for 1829 performance of Passion. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:19, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
"In 1854, Bach was deemed one of the Three Bs by Peter Cornelius, the others being Beethoven and Berlioz. (Hans von Bülow replaced Berlioz with Brahms.)": parentheses inside sentence, full stop outside brackets.
Full stop moved. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:19, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
Personally I'd mention the actual sales number for the Gould recording.
Including Bzzana numbers for the 1950s recording. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:32, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
I'd rework the 21st century section to include more opinions. Currently it doesn't really summarise modern consensus, just quotes a couple music critics.
Article already covers 3 of his biographers from the 21st century and a number of critics; mention one if someone is missing. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:32, 4 August 2025 (UTC)


##### References
Case should be standardised to title or sentence
Should all be in title format, no exceptions. ErnestKrause (talk) 21:51, 5 August 2025 (UTC)
ISBN segmentation should be consistent
Standard ISBN format. ErnestKrause (talk) 22:04, 5 August 2025 (UTC)
Inconsistent linking of website, work, etc.
Ref 30 should use p. not pp.
Current ref 30 is singular. ErnestKrause (talk) 22:06, 5 August 2025 (UTC)
Ref 34 should use pp.
Current use is pp15-16. ErnestKrause (talk) 22:07, 5 August 2025 (UTC)
RISM identifiers should be either all included or not
Inconsistent use of website archiving
Refs 114 and 116 should use dashes for range, not hyphens
Could ref 129 have an OCLC?
Things that would be italicised in prose (work titles) should be italicised in references
Inconsistent use of access date
Ref 150 is missing pages
Inconsistent use of publisher parameter
Ref 180 should be pp.
Current numbering appears to have shifted due to a large number of upgrade edits in the last month. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:45, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
Books should all have ISBNs if possible, OCLCs if not
They were all updated to ISBN 13 format at one point in time. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:45, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
The versions of Geiringer, Karl (1966) and Chiapusso, Jan (1968) cited are too early for those ISBN, make clear what editions are used
Those are the updated ISBN-13 numbers; the orignial ISBN-10 numbers were different. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:42, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
Boyd, Malcolm, ed. (1999) and Herz, Gerhard (1985) are unused
Unused cited removed. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:28, 12 August 2025 (UTC)


#### Chicdat
I've never done one of these before, so if I completely botch it, let me know! 🐔 Chicdat  Bawk to me! 20:21, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

Help edits are appreciated; nice of you to stop here to discuss enhancements. ErnestKrause (talk) 13:21, 4 June 2025 (UTC)


##### Lead
(31 March [O.S. 21 March] 1685 – 28 July 1750) Similar-period FAs like George II of Great Britain have a lengthy footnote explaining OS vs NS dates. Could that be useful in this article?
OS and NS are already linked with lengthy explanations. ErnestKrause (talk) 13:21, 4 June 2025 (UTC)
Four of his twenty children, Wilhelm Friedemann, Carl Philipp Emanuel, Johann Christoph Friedrich, and Johann Christian, became composers. After "children", change the comma to a semicolon.
That semicolon would seem to break the sentence flow of "children...were composers". ErnestKrause (talk) 13:21, 4 June 2025 (UTC)
Many of his works use contrapuntal techniques In the lead, I would advise using a less technical term such as "counterpoint-based".
That paragraph already uses and links 'counterpoint' at the start of that paragraph. ErnestKrause (talk) 13:21, 4 June 2025 (UTC)
In the 18th century Bach was primarily known as an organist, while his keyboard music, such as The Well-Tempered Clavier, has been appreciated in more than 150 recordings made of it up to 2013. Change "while" to "but", maybe improve flow by saying something like, "but his keyboard music has seen greater appreciation in the modern era, such as The Well-Tempered Clavier, widely regarded as one of the most important classical works in history."
"...150 recording" is supported in the main body of the article by citation; needs RS for "most important" if that's a preference. ErnestKrause (talk) 13:21, 4 June 2025 (UTC)
through periodicals (and later also websites) Maybe just a style issue, but the parentheses would be better expressed using commas.
Current wording already uses comma offsets in that sentence. ErnestKrause (talk) 13:21, 4 June 2025 (UTC)


##### Early life and education
Bach's mother died in 1694, and his father died eight months later. Do we know the month of his mother's death, or at least the season? Clears up the confusion of not knowing whether the father died in 1694 or 1695.
Father died in February the following year. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:57, 4 June 2025 (UTC)
Any idea when he graduated from St Michael's?
Attendance was 1700-1702. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:57, 4 June 2025 (UTC)


##### Career
In January 1703 shortly after graduating from St Michael's and being turned down for the post of organist at Sangerhausen A comma or two is probably needed here.
Two commas added. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:15, 12 August 2025 (UTC)
Despite strong family connections and a musically enthusiastic employer What were the family connections?
The relations referred to are with his employer; text shortened. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:23, 12 August 2025 (UTC)
As part of his application, he had a cantata performed at Easter, 24 April 1707, link Easter?
Linked. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:25, 12 August 2025 (UTC)
In 1708 Bach wrote Gott ist mein König, a festive cantata for the inauguration of the new council, which was published at the council's expense.[19] This was the only Bach cantata published in his lifetime. This is uncited text, which is not allowed in a GA. Find a source or remove the content.
Added second cite, Isoyama. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:34, 12 August 2025 (UTC)
Johann Sebastian and Maria Barbara had three more children—twins born in 1713 and a single birth; none survived past their first birthday. Any clue when the single birth was?
Johann and Maria Barbara had seven children, three of whom died in infancy:

Catharina Dorothea (28 December 1708 – 14 January 1774).
Wilhelm Friedemann (22 November 1710 – 1 July 1784).
Johann Christoph (23 February 1713 – 23 February 1713).
Maria Sophia (23 February 1713 – 15 March 1713), twin of Johann Christoph.
Carl Philipp Emanuel (8 March 1714 – 14 December 1788).
Johann Gottfried Bernhard (11 May 1715 – 27 May 1739).
Leopold Augustus (15 November 1718  – 29 September 1719). ErnestKrause (talk) 00:39, 12 August 2025 (UTC)
On 7 July 1720, while Bach was away in Carlsbad with Leopold, his wife, Maria Barbara Bach, suddenly died. We already linked his wife, so no need to link it again. Also remove the Bach at the end of her name.
Updated. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:08, 12 August 2025 (UTC)
The next year, he met Anna Magdalena Wilcke, a young, gifted soprano 16 years his junior, who performed at the court in Köthen; they married on 3 December 1721. No need to italicise Anna Magdalena's name, also link soprano. Change "who performed" to "while she was performing".
Linked. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:08, 12 August 2025 (UTC)
who both, especially Johann Christian, became well-known musicians; Johanna Carolina (1737–1781); and Regina Susanna (1742–1809). After the well-known musicians phrase, maybe add "as well as" to improve sentence flow.
Currently in list format for six names. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:08, 12 August 2025 (UTC)
He had to direct the St Thomas School Something more formal than "had to" would be nice.
Update wording. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:08, 12 August 2025 (UTC)
Link Weissenfels?
Add link. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:08, 12 August 2025 (UTC)
Telemann in Hamburg and Graupner in Darmstadt Link Hamburg and Darmstadt.
Added links. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:09, 12 August 2025 (UTC)
Bach's predecessor as cantor, Johann Kuhnau, had also been music director for the St Paul's Church, the church of Leipzig University. But when Bach was installed as cantor in 1723, he was put in charge only of music for festal (church holiday) services at St Paul's Church; his petition to also provide music for regular Sunday services there (for a corresponding salary increase) went all the way to the Elector but was denied. This is a long aside and needs some serious copy-editing. Maybe trim?
Shorten sentence. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:08, 12 August 2025 (UTC)
a secular performance ensemble Telemann started. There's a missing "had" in there.
Had started. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:12, 12 August 2025 (UTC)
The concerts, all free of charge, ended with Gottfried Zimmermann's death in 1741. Explain he's the owner.
Already presented as owner in the earlier sentence. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:12, 12 August 2025 (UTC)
He presented the manuscript to the Elector in a successful bid to persuade the prince to give him the title of Court Composer. We don't need to capitalise court composer here.
It is derived from "Royal Court Composer", which is in quotes and upper case. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:19, 12 August 2025 (UTC)
Bach obliged, playing a three-part fugue on one of Frederick's fortepianos Explain it's the ancestor of the piano or something similar.
Its an early prototype. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:19, 12 August 2025 (UTC)
Are we italicising Thomaskantor or not? One style should be consistent throughout the article.
No italic. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:19, 12 August 2025 (UTC)


##### Music
that Bach wrote for his eldest son when he was nine years old. Rephrase to "for his nine-year-old eldest son" to avoid the momentary confusion of who's nine years old.
Nine years old. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:23, 12 August 2025 (UTC)
After a performance of his St Matthew Passion, someone said it all sounded much like opera. "Someone said" is more weaselish than encyclopedic. Maybe "His St Matthew Passion was described as sounding like opera" or something similar.
Your version now. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:23, 12 August 2025 (UTC)


##### Reception and legacy
This has several unsourced statements and text that isn't really GA quality.

He was remembered more as a virtuoso organ player and a teacher. The bulk of the music printed during his lifetime, at least the remembered parts, was for organ or harpsichord. Thus his reputation as a composer was initially mostly limited to his keyboard music, which was relatively limited in its value to music education. All uncited.
Currently cited to Emans, Reinmar; Hiemke, Sven (2015). ErnestKrause (talk) 23:26, 12 August 2025 (UTC)
These are on Segovia's 1969 all-Bach album on Saga Records. Uncited.
Currently cited by year and Saga release number: Andres Segovia Plays Bach. Saga Records. 1969. STFID 2160. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:26, 12 August 2025 (UTC)
The entire second paragraph of the "20th century" section is either uncited or badly cited (to a self-published source). The information can all probably be verified, so let's try.
Added citation Chritoff Wolff. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:32, 12 August 2025 (UTC)
Also, I find it rather odd that details of his personal life (e.g. relationships, children, appearance, personality) are scattered throughout the article or, in some cases, not mentioned at all. Maybe add a section in with some of that. 🐔 Chicdat  Bawk to me! 20:24, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

Should all be in section for "Early life, marriages, and education". ErnestKrause (talk) 23:32, 12 August 2025 (UTC)
Hi Chicdat; From your edits earlier in the summer, its mostly added into the article now; does it look better? ErnestKrause (talk) 14:47, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Sure does. I like how you structured the marriages and children section, and the reception and legacy section is far more streamlined and well-sourced. Article overall looks much better now. 🐔 Chicdat  Bawk to me! 15:50, 24 August 2025 (UTC)


#### FAC PR sidebar
@ErnestKrause: I have added this to the FAC PR review sidebar. Please consider reviewing other articles listed there, and please remove this entry when this is closed. Z1720 (talk) 15:05, 26 June 2025 (UTC)


#### Comments from Gerda
I'll take the memory of his day of death as a reason to begin looking, and will comment as I read. I'll focus on what's there and not on what perhaps should be there. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:27, 28 July 2025 (UTC)
Usually I look at the lead last, but make an exception. As soon as I did that came the next exception: I miss the cantatas in the first paragraph. He may not still be known for them that much, but he put a lot of work and thinking into them and that deserves mentioning rather soon. (The Schuebler Chorales are only a small by-product of them.) The Mass in B minor deserves also a bit of halo ;) - it's not just some mass in some key but an overview about his cantata creation up to the last composition at all, the Et incarnatus est. 
Infobox

I wonder how we can mention Thomaskantor there, and the title of a Saxon court composer, also perhaps in occupation that he was a violinist, keyboard player, organ expert, school director.
Added. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:23, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
Lead

The churches in Anhalt and Mühlhausen were as Lutheran as in Leipzig (vs. an overly general "Protestant") but it would perhaps help to say that the Köthen court was reformed (and therefore no church music but chamber).
Added. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:35, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
(cantor at St Thomas's) is a translation, but doesn't include his much larger responsibilities for 4 churches and the school which the term implies. Perhaps better explain, as you can find in cantatas such as BWV 79.
Added related duties. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:35, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
If you say August of Poland, you better say "court composer of the Elector of Saxony", or readers might think of Warsaw not Dresden.
Added. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:35, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
When we come to the cantatas, we might want to add that he composed systematic yearly cycles for the liturgical year when he began in Leipzig, because it's not generally known. 2 are mostly extant.
Many of these were lost to posterity upon inheritance by his sons; it might be difficult to cover this in this lede. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:46, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
We could still mention two complete cycles, with links, because in many GA reviews of these works I noticed that even Wikipedia editors are unaware of the concept of the Liturgical year and his perhaps most magnificent work: these two cycles. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:56, 7 August 2025 (UTC)
The list of cantatas article for Bach on Wikipedia seems to prefer the conventional numbering of all the 224 cantatas which it covers in its table list. Do any of the current articles on Wikipedia which you may have worked on follow the liturgical year designations, rather that the BWV convention of numbering. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:27, 7 August 2025 (UTC)
Between "known mainly as an organist" and 2013 in the next sentence, we might add that it took until 100 years after he died for the first edition of his works, and 100 more to the next edition, naming both.
Rewriting to add time frame for when his reputation eventually became enhanced. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:46, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
If "Jesu, Joy of Man's Desiring" is mentioned how about "Play Bach" and others, reflecting the expansion of 20th-century adaptions?
There seem to be a number of "Best of Bach" releases; which ones should be singled out for the lede. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:49, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
"Man's Desiring" is singled out ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:56, 7 August 2025 (UTC)
"Jesu" currently is accompanied by "Air on the G String" in the lede. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:27, 7 August 2025 (UTC)
Early life

avoid "valuable" in two sentences in a row
Drop second valuable. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:52, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
Marriages ...

it's tough to summarise these before his move from station to station has been detailed, - saying "born also in Weimar" makes no sense, when Weimar wasn't mentioned before.
Drop Weimar. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:00, 7 August 2025 (UTC)
saying of two late-born sons that they became "well-known musicians" seems unfair to at least two earliet-born sons, and doesn't include "composers" which would be true for all.
Add that they became composers or musicians. Drop superlatives. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:00, 7 August 2025 (UTC)
For many biographies we have "Personal life" at the end. None of the children's info seems to be needed to follow the career.
Need a break. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:09, 28 July 2025 (UTC)
Weimar, Arnstadt ...

"he had a cantata performed at Easter, 24 April 1707, that resembles his later Christ lag in Todes Banden." If it's supposed to mean that it may have been this cantata, it's not clear. The average reader will not know this cantata and may be too lazy to link, - we might say at this point that it is an Easter cantata, an early chorale cantata (Bach), or what would the resemblance be?
The link gives it as Chorale cantata, Psalm: Psalm 110; Is this too much detail? I'll add your chorale cantata link. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:06, 7 August 2025 (UTC)
I recommend to add the BWV No. to works, in this case BWV 4, because it clearly separates form "Christ lag in Todesbanden", and for some the numbers might be easier than the all-German titles.
Added. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:08, 7 August 2025 (UTC)
Return to Weimar

I suggest to link the description of a Concerto grosso to that article.
Could you specify where; that section deals mostly with quotes about several of his cantatas. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:11, 7 August 2025 (UTC)
"Bach fell out of favour in Weimar" - that seems a bit too simply for that he had hoped to succeed his boss but instead that person's son got the post (as had to be expected) and Bach didn't work well under him (as had to be expected).
His arrest seems to take center stage in this episode of his life. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:11, 7 August 2025 (UTC)
Köthen

 
The manuscript image is lovely but a pic illustrating Köthen would serve better.
Is this image good enough to replace the Bach autograph image? ErnestKrause (talk) 00:20, 7 August 2025 (UTC)
Leopold was a Calvinist and did not use elaborate music in his worship, - this wasn't his personal decision, but Calvinist worship - at the time whatever the religion of the ruler was became the religion of the duchy - didn't want elaborate music.
Add that musical expression differs between denominations. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:20, 7 August 2025 (UTC)
"Despite being born ..." - in that sentence, "Handel" comes too late for my taste.
Move to front of sentence. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:20, 7 August 2025 (UTC)
Leipzig

I would describe the city first, then the office
Added. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:27, 7 August 2025 (UTC)
I find strange that we first read about how long his service was and the disagreements, and then the appointment.
Paragraph rewrite. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:27, 7 August 2025 (UTC)
Appointment

Graupner didn't "choose" to remain, he would have gone, but his employer didn't let him go. We shouldn't describe both together.
Telemann is listed next to Graupner as two composers who were preferred to Bach by the supervising committee; should both of their histories be added as to their reasons for declining the invitation. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:35, 7 August 2025 (UTC)
The cantata sentence would be better right after serving the four churches than after the school details, - cantatas in two of the four.
There may be an opportunity to discuss the annual cantata cycles here, if you might have some preferred wording for this section. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:35, 7 August 2025 (UTC)
Both cantata and teaching don't really belong under "Appointment".
The details of Bach's accepting the position, and assigning various assistants to help him with the various assignments is touched upon in that section. Possibly the composition of cantatas should be emphasized, while his duties in teaching which he often seems to have delegated might be abridged. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:35, 7 August 2025 (UTC)
Cantata cycle years

For this section best consult the Background section of Easter Oratorio#Background. Key is that Bach decided to write these new cantatas - it was not part of the job description, - he could have performed music from the archives.
It could be added chronologically for 1725 though that section is already 3-4 paragraphs long; any thoughts? ErnestKrause (talk) 14:12, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
a link to chorale cantata cycle is absolutely needed, and a description of how a chorale cantata by Bach sounds - different from others and his own BWV 4 - might be a good idea.
I've linked it and made a short addition to distinguish the first and second cycle. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:21, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
nobody knows for sure if the five cantata cycles actually existed or were just in the obit, so the math based on the assumption that it did is to be taken with a grain of salt, - perhaps better to say what's there.
The mention of over 100 lost out of 300 from Wolff is often repeated; I'm not sure there are RS to contravene this. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:25, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
better link at least one motet, BWV 227 recommended.
Added. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:35, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
I first didn't recognise that St. Pauls means the Paulinerkirche. Saying Thomaskantor would match better to have the churches' and school's names also in German, no?
Changed over to Paulinerkirche. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:35, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
"festal (church holiday) services" - how about simply "church holiday services"?
Shortened. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:41, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
how about subheaders for School, Paulinerkirche, Collegium musicum?
Which piping for subheaders would be useful here. 14:41, 13 August 2025 (UTC)ErnestKrause (talk)


##### Middle period ...
Arriving at St Mark Passion, I notice that we missed St John (1724) and St Matthew (1727). See the mentioned background.
Added note of their composition before the Mark Passion. It looks like Aza24 is planning to discuss them in a separate section. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:14, 18 August 2025 (UTC)
We don't need all this detail about St Mark in the bio- Picander should be mentioned for St. Matthew or even when the collaboration began in 1725.
Some details of the Matthew Passion added. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:14, 18 August 2025 (UTC)
We should mention sooner that the Bach's Missa of 1733 was composed for the court in Dresden that had become Catholic.
Dresden added into text. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:25, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
"successful bid" - debatable, he received the "title" after some waiting (as the last sentence in the section has), but may have hoped to get the "position", - I wouldn't call the title an "appointment", - more like a decoration
The accolade appears to have helped him. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:28, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
the extension to the full Mass belongs in Final years, - about the last thing he did - where it is, no need to repeat that here
Shorten text. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:28, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
instead, we'd need the Christmas Oratorio (!734/35), possibly also the two others.
Added. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:43, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
I read sucessfully to his death. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:00, 28 July 2025 (UTC)
Music

I'd leave only the list as Main, but move the cantata etc. articles to the sections dealing with them.
Moved 'see also' links to continuo section. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:56, 21 August 2025 (UTC)
I see too many audio files for my taste and think we should limit them to a few crucial samples, and otherwise move them to the compositions' articles. It would be tough for someone new to the topic to tell what's worth listening to.
There are currently six of them; how many to remove? ErnestKrause (talk) 23:56, 21 August 2025 (UTC)
I question the usefulness of the sidebar. All these lists are in the navbox, at a predictable place.
Navbox is easy to find; which sidebar is being question in which section. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:02, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
I recommend to link compositions once more, to help readers who only read Music. This is done in several composers' FAs.
Various compositional categories currently are linked several times; which one do you have in mind to link again. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:02, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
Italian

This whole section is very detailed, and I wonder if the bio needs that. It's fine in a dedicated article, but here - at the beginning about Bach's music - the readers are confronted with detail about compositions they may not even know to exist, and then called only by BWV number which may mean nothing to them.
It is appearing to be the case that the Italian school of influence was larger upon Bach than the French school influence. The table size was shortened during GAN and possibly you could suggest further trims. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:16, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
We should perhaps strive to have the names of compositions as in their articles, for example not Wer weiß, wie nahe mir mein Ende? (BWV 27), but Wer weiß, wie nahe mir mein Ende? BWV 27.
Parenthesis removed. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:20, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
French

This section seems too short and general to be useful.
Expanded to include mention of Lully's use of various dance forms which Bach adopted in many of his own works. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:13, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
Creative range

Why another link to the list of compositions on top?
Remove link. Its already linked earlier in the article. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:56, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
The image is a great one of his thinking but too small to show his handwriting. Perhaps better a different crop? The caption should perhaps be expanded in the prose, and shortened as a caption?
The image is enlarged when clicked; though its still not accessible to most English language readers. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:54, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
The studies from an early age would better fit "influences" (above, with Italian and French as subsections.
Moved higher in table of contents as indicated. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:51, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
"He had taught Luther's Small Catechism as the Thomaskantor in Leipzig, and some of his pieces represent it." Why focus on one small piece by Luther? ... and then make it sound as if composition of sacred works began in Leipzig?
Change wording to show that it was one aspect of his Lutheran faith. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:47, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
"Bach published or carefully compiled in manuscript many collections of pieces that explored the range of artistic and technical possibilities inherent in almost every genre of his time except opera." - The majority of his works were the cantatas, by number and complexity, and we have exactly one that was published and is extant, and exactly one more that was published but lost. Perhaps a litle more detail of what was published and what was not might be in order at this point, - the lead seems to be precise than this.
Added Emans cite for Compositions of his own printed during his lifetime. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:20, 14 August 2025 (UTC)
Continuo ...

"organ, viola da gamba, or harpsichord", - better: "viola da gamba or cello, and harpsichord or organ"
Added. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:20, 14 August 2025 (UTC)
Structure ...

"His collaboration with Picander for the St Matthew Passion libretto is best known, but there was a similar process in achieving a multi-layered structure for his St John Passion libretto a few years earlier.[" - really? ... I don't know of a librettist with whom he'd have worked for the St John.
It is attributed and cited here: Don O. Franklin. "The Libretto of Bach's John Passion and the Doctrine of Reconciliation: An Historical Perspective", pp. 179–203 Archived 31 January 2016 at the Wayback Machine in Proceedings of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences Vol. 143 edited by A. A. Clement, 1995. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:42, 14 August 2025 (UTC)
Fugue ...

I doubt that we have to repeat all the details from the Fugue article.
Its fairly short; what could be condensed. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:49, 12 August 2025 (UTC)
I am sure that we don't need life data for linked people (ever).
I've taken out the life years for the other biographies; I'm not sure where to abridge the short fugue section since it uses mostly basic vocabulary. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:49, 12 August 2025 (UTC)
Copies ...

I think this should have a hint at him intentionally writing the same music for two purposes, prominently in the Christmas Oratorio.
That Bach used some of his previous secular material in some of his later religious compositions is fairly settled ground? ErnestKrause (talk) 23:49, 12 August 2025 (UTC)
Need a break. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:51, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi Gerda Arendt; It would be nice to see the rest of the your peer review comments here for the rest of the sections. I've just added the prose edits for the UpTheOctave comments above which might be nice to review. Also, Aza24 may be starting on a new version of the "Music" section as currently mentioned on the Bach Talk page in case you might have a comment there. ErnestKrause (talk) 22:29, 5 August 2025 (UTC)
I may have time again on Friday. It would be nice to see responses ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:12, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
More tomorrow I think. Will look forward to your other section reviews and comments. Aza24 has started an early form of a new proposed Music section if you might take a look here: User:Aza24/Bach music. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:27, 7 August 2025 (UTC)
Since yesterday, Tim Riley has added some interesting comments about Bach which you might comment upon here: [1].ErnestKrause (talk) 14:38, 7 August 2025 (UTC)
I'll end reading first, then (probably tomorrow) your responses, then the others.
Reception ...

I'd mention 1850 as beginning of the Bach Gesellschaft Ausgabe (BGA), and 1950 as beginning of the Neue Bach-Ausgabe.
1850 mentioned in the 19th century section below. I've also made a short addition to that section of the article. ErnestKrause (talk) 01:35, 9 August 2025 (UTC)
How about lilypond for the Bach motiv?
If you know how to do this and it looks ok, then maybe you could add it into the article. ErnestKrause (talk) 01:35, 9 August 2025 (UTC)
18th century

Several cantata articles mention that his widow inherited parts and sold them to Leipzig, - should that be mentioned? How about that his chorale cantatas were in use by his successors?
This is a fairly sad story. Bach had originally carefully indexed and wrapped in bindings his church compositions on a yearly basis. However, the poor condition of his estate in very low cash value, caused the inheritors, mostly his children, to sell off the manuscripts for paper stock, for use in cheese shops and the like for wrapping purposes. This narrative is already largely covered in the history of Mendelsohn's recovery of the Passion manuscript, though in this case the annual cycles are considered to be completely lost to posterity at this point in time. ErnestKrause (talk) 01:35, 9 August 2025 (UTC)
19th century

BWV 1 has much more about the BGA, which could be linked, pointing at the choice of this work for the beginning.
BWV 1 redirects to Wikipedia's Wie schön leuchtet der Morgenstern, BWV 1, which gives a short account about why this cantata was selected as number 1; I'll try to add something into this section about it. ErnestKrause (talk) 01:15, 9 August 2025 (UTC)
21st century

I think John Eliot Gardiner should not only be mentioned as a biographer but also as the conductor of the Bach Cantatas Pilgrimage beginning that century, a musical and logistic miracle, which adds weight to his biographical work. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:03, 8 August 2025 (UTC)
The Bach Pilgrimage CD collection was released c2000 with over 50 Cds in it; possibly worth adding in. However, the Wikipedia artilce for John Eliot Gardiner has a "Controversies" section which you might look it; it describes an unpleasant slapping incident from 2-3 years ago which went poorly for his reputation. ErnestKrause (talk) 01:02, 9 August 2025 (UTC)
See also

Can we link the portraits somewhere else? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:03, 8 August 2025 (UTC)
They are mostly from after Bach's death and could be moved to the Legacy section if that's better? ErnestKrause (talk) 01:02, 9 August 2025 (UTC)
Hi Gerda Arendt; It looks like the above comments have been all looked at and updated in the article. Does it look better? ErnestKrause (talk) 14:22, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

According to Spitta though his death was blamed on ineffective eye surgery, he regained his eyesight on 18 July and was stuck down with apoplexy and a fever a few hours later, which were the proximate cause of his death on 28 July.  ~~ All the best: Rich Farmbrough 17:32, 31 May 2025 (UTC). 17:32, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

The last report that I've read on this was from c. 2000 from a Tampa newspaper here: [2]. Bach's burial at the time of his death apparently was not extensively rehearsed. Some relate that he was more or less taken directly for burial without much of even conventionally applied ceremony. ErnestKrause (talk) 22:30, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

If an FA push is truly the intention of some editors here. Then we still have a lot of work to do. As when I spoke to ErnestKrause, sourcing and the dramatically incomplete music section are the biggest hurdles. I'll begin to tackle sourcing but will have essentially no time to help during July—so will do what I can now, and then return in August. 
For starters in the life section(s), We should not be citing Forkel, Spitta, or Schweitzer at all unless in addition to a more recent source, or for a very specific historiographical reason. I would also avoid Eidam and Gardiner, as not particularly acknowledged biographies.
Of course, Wolff (2000; only Grove if necessary) is our best source, but we need to mix it more with Boyd, Geck (a German source!) and Williams. Aza24 (talk) 03:04, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

The first body sentence alone: "Germany" unsourced, "duchy of Saxe-Eisenach" unsourced (now sourced), "31 March 1685 N.S." unsourced! I've moved 31 March to a note (still looking for a source for the date, but found one for the information); the fact that his main biographies hardly even mention it suggests it is mostly a trivial matter. In fact, I'm struggling to even find a reliable & secondary source saying "31 March". Aza24 (talk) 04:22, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
Now the next few sentences... No information on the importance of the family he was born into, uncited note about violin/music theory (and incorrect! this is all uncertain!), incorrect note about organ instruction from Christoph (this is debated!). We can't just make things certain if they're not, this is happening all over the place.
I've fixed all of these things, but this is illustrative of the kind of work we need to do. Pull out Boyd, Geck (2006!), Williams, and Wolff—we evidently need to go sentence by sentence. Aza24 (talk) 05:34, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
I've added the McKay citation to the lede which appears to be the main source for this do deal with your cite tag in the lede. There might be some interesting comments for your review on the peer review page linked at the top of this talk page for Bach. The McKay cite is also used in the Reception section of the article. More later. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:41, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
I've also added a short 'Fugue composition' section in the Music section. ErnestKrause (talk) 22:51, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
ErnestKrause, I should be direct. The music section needs to be entirely rewritten. Starting essentially from scratch; maybe the Creative range section could change. We need a genre-based presentation, see Maurice Ravel#Music, Josquin des Prez#Music, Richard Wagner#Works etc. The Chopin/Tchaikovsky style does not work here. The reason: There are a huge number of major works by Bach not even discussed. This "Compositional style in the High Baroque" is too general and could apply to every major late Baroque composer. The fugue section you've written is nice, but doesn't belong here; it's like including a "Portrait" section in Leonardo da Vinci instead of discussing the actually portraits he made. Look at how Grove does his music; we need something like that. Again, I'm happy to lead the charge on this, but not until August. – Aza24 (talk)
 23:43, 28 June 2025 (UTC)
Aza24, It looks like August is nearly arrived and I'm thinking to ask you how your schedule looks for possibly returning to the Bach article in early August. It seems like Gerda Arendt, Chicdat, and Octave have left a number of responses on the Peer Review section which is included above on this Talk page. Maybe these responses will bring up some new ideas for the Bach article. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:35, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
@ErnestKrause, thanks for the ping. Yes, about this week onwards I should have more time for this. I'm thinking we need to start a new music section in the draft/sandbox space. I'll get on that soon Aza24 (talk) 17:01, 5 August 2025 (UTC)
Hi Aza24: Just two short comments for the "Music" section. Gerda Arendt has left some notes for a new "Music" section at the currently open page for Wikipedia:Peer review/Johann Sebastian Bach/archive3, which might be of interest. Also, two of the previous top editors (now apparently no longer editing) tried to write an old version of the "Music" section as a reduplication of the "List of Bach Compositions" Wikipedia article with some prose added, which looked quite poorly and seemed to keep the article from getting to GA. It was archived and the article then went to GA (I could link the old version if you need to see it.) Otherwise, good to see you on board again and ping me if needed for any edits or questions. ErnestKrause (talk) 22:22, 5 August 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for this @ErnestKrause. I've started a new draft at User:Aza24/Bach music. Aza24 (talk) 16:32, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
Hi Aza24: Its the end of the month and is there any update for the status of editing; Myself and Tim Riley on a separate page has stated he is ready to assist as needed. ErnestKrause (talk) 19:41, 29 August 2025 (UTC)
Hi @ErnestKrause, thanks for checking in. I'm aiming to be done be mid September, say before Sept 15. A bit of IRL and other WP commitments getting in the way. If either of you want to start on the keyboard & lute section, feel free. Aza24 (talk) 22:10, 29 August 2025 (UTC)
Hi Tim riley; Here are some indications from Aza in case you are able to get to any of them; I'm currently going through the references for clean-up edits on the Bach peer review page. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:50, 30 August 2025 (UTC)
I'm wondering if we should close the PR soon. More comments at this point might be more helpful after the new music section is good to go. Aza24 (talk) 02:50, 30 August 2025 (UTC)
I've brought in most of the 150 edits or more from the PR and you can close it when you like. Many of the sections are somewhat improved now after all those PR edits and it might be worth your looking at them while deciding what a new TOC for the article would look like. With all of these peer review edits added I'm sort of leaning to keeping more of it as being now better suited for the enhanced article. What are your thoughts? ErnestKrause (talk) 00:27, 31 August 2025 (UTC)
Hi Aza24; It looks like you had mentioned something about Sept 15 above; any updates? ErnestKrause (talk) 14:19, 19 September 2025 (UTC)
Sorry, still delayed. Going to take another crack this upcoming week but will be very busy. There's no rush, I promise we will make this happen! This is a big and important article, VIT3 even, let's make sure we take our time and do it right. Aza24 (talk) 22:19, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
Hi Aza24; I've added in one of the missing sections in your Sandbox box Bach section from an old archive page, which you can alter/change/delete as needed. ErnestKrause (talk) 01:49, 6 October 2025 (UTC)
Thank you! I'll use that as a starting point. I'm almost done with the opening music para, and then will delve into finishing up the vocal/choral genres. Aza24 (talk) 20:01, 16 October 2025 (UTC)
Any further thoughts for more or less when it might be ready for the article, and how you would modify the TOC for it? ErnestKrause (talk) 16:17, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Poorly written and unclear section. Not succinct, unclear family lineages 2600:8806:3602:5B00:29F2:3411:50B4:6071 (talk) 00:34, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

"Four months after arriving at Mühlhausen in 1707, Bach married Maria Barbara Bach, his second cousin. Later that year their first child, Catharina Dorothea, was born, and Maria Barbara's elder, unmarried sister joined them." Which part is unclear? ErnestKrause (talk) 20:43, 24 October 2025 (UTC)