Talk:List of compositions by George Frideric Handel

message: I'd be very pleased not to see the many dates that are not autoformatted remain so, and perhaps those that are might be delinked. MOS and MOSNUM are now equivocal about what was formerly a mandatory system, given that it's widely recognised as partially dysfunctional. Looks as though the 25 February 1720 format is the one for this article. Tony (talk) 10:42, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Imposing underlying on so many dates is going to dilute the real links to other pages. As there are so many variations to the dates on this page (e.g. circa 1717-18), auto-formatting is going to be partially successful at best.  HWV 258  21:52, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  auto-dud system 

message: I wanted to create a page for, and therefore a link to, HWV 333, however I'm not sure what to use for the page title. I thought of HWV 333 (Handel) or Concerto a due cori in F major (Handel), but am not that happy with either. In addition, there's another Concerto a due cori in F major (HWV 334), so how will uniqueness be enforced? Any suggestions?  HWV 258  03:58, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Take a look at Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_%28music%29 and possibly ask a question at the talk page. Tony (talk) 13:54, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page title for HWV 333? 

message: set to words by Charles Wesley?
Gontroppo (talk) 00:57, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Handel hymns 

message: In regards to edit , I must admit that I'm yet to be convinced by the sweeping use of italics on a musical list page. I can see the benefit in using italics when the name of a work exists on an ordinary article page (e.g. as used a few times on the Judas Maccabaeus page); however a list page has a different purpose to an ordinary page. The fundamental purpose of a list (on a composer's compositions page) is to list works, and to tabulate the works with various properties in corresponding columns. As a result, there can be no confusion as to what is in a "Title" column—it is implicitly known that the words in the "Title" column are the name of the work. There is no need to add emphasis to each work individually as the table does that. Therefore, I can see no benefit in the use of italics; however, due to the limitations of screen resolution, there is a disadvantage in the use of italics in that they are harder to read. Is there a better forum to raise this formally? Any thoughts?  HWV 258  02:01, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm assuming this refers to my edit of opera titles, right? There is a well-established practice of putting all opera titles in italics. There are literally thousands of articles following this convention, see for example the series of :Category:Lists of operas by composer. If you disagree with it you could perhaps take it up with the Opera Project? Personally I don't agree that italics are harder to read. I've never heard this opinion before on WP - but that makes me wonder whether you might be using a special font/skin of some kind? Regards. --Kleinzach 05:18, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You honestly don't find "Mitridate, re di Ponto" harder to read than "Mitridate, re di Ponto"? There's still my observation that musical list pages are special in that the table draws attention to the title. I'm not suggesting that ordinary pages shouldn't use the italics convention—just that the purpose-built list pages could be exempt. Anyhow, I thought I'd publish my opinion in case anyone else finds merit in it. (I've not tried to apply any special font or skin). HWV 258  05:32, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Major titles (books, movies, opera, whatever else) are usually in italics in English convention. Quotes tend to be used for parts -- chapter titles for instance. This is pretty normal English practice that I, for one, learned probably in 4th grade. It's certainly nothing special on WP. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 12:26, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: For some reason (despite trying many times), I can't seem to convey the idea that a list of works doesn't need the italics convention in the same way that works mentioned in ordinary articles do. Sigh.  HWV 258  21:43, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I can see the point in a list like this one where it's all or none. But it works out great in, say, a works list done by catalog number, where you can see at a glance what is an isn't a 'named' work. But I was just pointing out that it's a very standard thing to do it, and I imagine the guidelines would suggest this. I honestly am not too passionate about it either way, myself. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 21:55, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Italics on a musical list page? 

message: Ok, since it's come up, here's my thoughts. Absolutely, 100% for sure, I would propose againt a single genre /alone/ be taken out. It looks like the main reason for the size is all the extra stuff most composer pages don't have...and as it stands now it's well over the recommended article size (if this matters, as it's a list with no pics, and not an article). I could see doing a much more base list with sub pages for the extra details, or simply leaving the whole gambit. As an aside, shouldn't there also be a list by HWV number? ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 23:22, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The entire page is driven by HWV number—those are the numbers you see in the HWV column in each separate list on the page. Due to the way the HWV number was originally selected, it would not add much to create a separate page with one global list containing all HWV numbers in order; and the disadvantage of having to update two pages with changes would outweigh any slight benefit. Please see HWV for more details. I'll deal with my thoughts on sub-paging in a new section below.  HWV 258  23:34, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah yes, I forgot that HMV is by genre and chrono-order within them. Silly me. What about a seperate list of the Opus numbers (which isn't going to be that big), though? Just a thought... ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 01:24, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's an interesting discussion. When I filled out the various lists, I purposely omitted the HG and HHA information (thinking that would eventually be documented on the pages for individual works). In terms of recognised "Opus" numbers—they are present in the current lists (e.g. in the Concertos and Concerti Grossi). I think I'd still lean away from duplicating that information on a separate page (but I could be talked into it if others see the need). Adding the sortable option to the "Opus" heading (as well as others) in the mentioned lists would add functionality and assist readers. Cheers.  HWV 258  01:58, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opera list/size 

message: I don't believe the page of Handel's works should be broken into sub-pages. I hope the following points will give the reasons, and facilitate discussion:
*The current list page does not feature in the Top 1000 "long" pages, and is well short of the length of number 1,000 on that page (which is about 108K in length).
*Many of the pages in the top 1,000 are list pages, therefore there is ample precedence for allowing longer pages when in a list format.
*From Article length - Occasional exceptions: "Two exceptions are lists and articles summarizing certain fields". There is therefore basis for arguing that this list page should not be treated in the same category as normal "long pages".
*Other editors have found it convenient to list composer's works in entirety on "long" pages. E.g. Mozart and Bach are both greater than 85K in length.
*The Article length page has a section on No need for haste. For a change of this magnitude, there should be time to discuss the options.
*Due to the way modern browsers work (caching and staggered loading of individual parts of a page), there is not an inordinately long delay before the first (and subsequent) parts of the page are loaded. The breaking into categories of lists (operas, concertos, etc.) on the page help with browser caching and loading.
*If page size is an issue, what size is being attempted? With modern browsers and ever-increasing bandwidth, surely not the archaic 32K barrier? If not, then what size (40K, 50K, 60K, etc.)?
*According to Technical issues, an 85K page should take about 13 seconds to load in entirety—and that's with the slowest means possible of connecting to the internet (dial-up). Surely that's not a problem (and getting less of an issue all the time)?
*One or two sections alone should not be sub-paged in order to reduce the size of the page. If only a few sections are to be sub-paged, then how to decide? The first, the largest, etc.? 
*If all sections are to be sub-paged, the page would look ridiculous (little more than two sets of Contents).
*Because of the way the HWV numbering system was devised, and its implementation in separate lists on the page, other pages can link to categories as the page stands. For example, it is easy for another page to link to the List of Handel's operas section without it being on a sub-page.
*As the page stands, there is extra information in the various lists. I believe that much of that extra information will be moved to pages on individual works as they are created over time. For that reason, the page is not expected to grow much over the current 85K and will, over time, reduce in size.
*The current format is uncomplicated (no need for multiple-clicking to investigate Handel's works).
*The page is interesting in itself in terms of providing the reader with an idea of the scale of Handel's works. This would be lost with sub-paging.
*The strategy of seeing all the works together is utilised on just about all other composer's list pages.
To preserve the above points as a group, could further edits please take place below this line?  HWV 258  02:15, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds sensible to me. I'd like to get a sense of the breadth of the man's output, and the chance to cross-relate his different genres. Tony (talk) 10:00, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

text: The sub-page that was created (without discussion or consensus) has been marked for deletion here.  HWV 258  02:14, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sub-paging sections of this page (and page length). 

message: I wonder why the dates are now scrambled into the venues. Is there an advantage? Tony (talk) 10:03, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I can honestly see no benefit in the merge of the dates and venues columns. It simply makes the information harder to read, and sorting is now impossible. When the heat of recent events reduces a little, I would like to split the information again and implement the sorting functionality. I promise to standardise all the tables on the page in a similar way.  HWV 258  02:24, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  separate date column? 

message: One of the entries reads:
:125b	Lungi da me, pensier tiranno	London, after 1710			No autographs or Italian-period copies. One version copied for Ruspoli,1708.
This suggests it was copied for Ruspoli before it was composed, which seems confusing and would need explanation if it is true. --86.139.65.151 (talk) 18:28, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date issue 

message: How can Kyrie eleison (Greek) and Gloria in excelsis Deo (Latin) be classified as "Italian works?" Safebreaker (talk) 06:42, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Language issues 

message: I have a bound edition of Chandos Anthems in 2 vols, I'm sure dating from Handel's time.
Numbers as follows:
:Anthem I - key A - I will magnify Thee O God my King
:II - key A - Let God arise
:III - key Bb - Let God arise [II and III have some of the same verses, but different music]
:IV - key Bb - Have mercy on me O God/Lord
:V - key A - O Come let us Sing unto the Lord
:VI - key F - O sing unto the Lord a new song
:VII - key G - My song shall be alway
:VIII - key G - As pants the Hart for cooling streams
:IX - key Bb - The Lord is my light
:X - key F - In the Lord put I my trust
:XI - key Bb - O praise the Lord with one consent
:XII - key D - Praise the Lord [ye angels of his]
I could give you the instrumentation and the numbers in each of these, but the point is these Chandos Anthem numbers don't match up with those in the table here. The correspondences seem to be random:
:I -> 5
:II - > 11 (?)
:III -> 11 (?)
:IV - > 4 (a match!)
:V -> 8
:VI -> ?
:VII -> 7 (a match!)
:VIII -> 6
:IX -> 10
:X -> 2
:XI -> 9
:XII -> ? (HWV 257?)
Can someone please advise what's going on here.  I thought I could check these against the list in the article? P0mbal (talk) 19:27, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: A bit tricky without seeing the publication. Do you have the ISBN?  HWV258.  21:41, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chandos Anthems 

message: Why is this opera, which has been recorded by Curtis (REMOVED LINK TO EBAY LISTING FOR ITEM # 290461462816 THAT MENTIONED "Fernando"), missing on this list and not mentioned anywhere on the Wikipedia? It's rather strange. Please add it to the Handel opera cannon.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.1.159.11 (talk) 08:16, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: See Sosarme (HWV 30).  HWV258.  21:39, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fernando, re di Castiglia 

message: HWV 358 appears to be a sonata for recorder. This is what I read from The Sonatas for Violin and Continuo with Barton, Schrader and Rozendaal. I believe this information could/should be added.
ICE77 (talk) 23:34, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: There was no instrumentation indicated on the score by Handel, but both the article about the work (Sonata in G major (HWV 358)) and the notes on this List page mention the recorder. Does that not meet your concern? GFHandel ♬  23:57, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  HWV 358 

message: The nine German arias (Neun Deutsche Arien), HWV 202-210 are grouped under the sub-heading "Hymns".  Is this an error? Or was it intentional? In any case, I think they should be in their own section, just above Italian Arias. Beowulf (talk) 15:44, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nine German Arias 

message: Five famous compositions by Handel 105.116.2.219 (talk) 14:38, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Music