Template talk:Music topics

message: How do we determine what is put in this template? Hyacinth 22:38, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: if you want to, put it inCosprings 21:09, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

text: The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 
The result of the move request was: Moved -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 09:23, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Editing

message: Thanks. Yes, I'll mark that page for deletion once it seems the conversation and consensus is complete. I do have a couple of questions for everyone though: Adding the subtemplate seems to mean that the Music navbox itself always stays collapsed on a page unless clicked. Is that what we want? How can we avoid that? Also, I'd like to revisit Moxy's point that categories should not be linked on a navbox. It does seem rather odd to have them on the navbox; also, now that we've got the "by country" subtemplate, that makes the categories redundant (because the categories are lists of music articles by country). Perhaps if we are adding the "by country" subtemplate, we should delete the categories, but leave the links to the articles on continents and regions? Softlavender (talk) 11:24, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh bugger. As always, there are unintended consequences; this was not obvious in the testbed. When placed in an article, the template will always "autocollapse" because there are now always 2 templates wherever it appears:  and the embedded . The elements other than "By country" could be forced to always display uncollapsed, but that won't be in keeping with template custom when there really are additional templates in an article. I will think about this until tomorrow, but I'm not hopeful there's a solution. As for the links to categories: I have no strong feelings either way. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 13:06, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I can only suggest to change this template's default display state to uncollapsed; this can then be overridden on pages where that is not desired with . -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 11:25, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I dunno, I'm not opposed to ditching the idea of including it on the Music template -- in other words, reverting the main template to how it was a few weeks ago. In fact, that's what I vote. I have a mind to insert the new, separate "by country" template on a couple of articles myself, just to get it "out there", and then people can decide from there wherever else they want to place it (if at all). I think it's a nice thing to have on hand, but not imperative, and certainly not imperative on the Music template. I think the linked categories will cover the material on the main template, for now. Softlavender (talk) 01:14, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Always collapsed

message: Please indent indent Music by Country into continent sub-brackets? --173.51.29.188 (talk) 04:38, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: As you know, that sublist is included here via , so changes need to be discussed there. However, as the list is currently alphabetical, I don't think breaking it into paragraphs by continent is a good idea – nor do I think your change from "By country" to "By sovereign states" was an improvement; it should be reverted. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 08:43, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Continents

message: The inclusion of Impressionism, makes no sense, as I said in my edit summary: 
 insists on its inclusion and says "Impressionism in music is important" when... it is not (compared to the others on this list). I would like to see this user explain how it could stand up to the other eras here. Aza24 (talk) 09:16, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The other issue with not sticking to the big eras of Western Classical music is because then where does it stop? Ars antiqua had a bigger impact on the history of music than Impressionism, Galant music is just as notable, Expressionism is just as notable... pinging users who have commented on this talk page in the past:  - Aza24 (talk) 09:35, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: This template already contains >150 items; adding Impressionism doesn't seem to me a big deal. As for "importance": it's widely covered in encyclopedias and scholarly literature, so it doesn't seem undue to include it here. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 09:56, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Perhaps Impressionism should be replaced with Modernism (music), which it seems to fall under. We have to draw the line somewhere otherwise, according to your requirements of being "widely covered in encyclopedias and scholarly literature" I could add Ars antiqua, Ars nova, Ars subtilior, Expressionism, Neoclassicism etc. Aza24 (talk) 10:01, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

text:  I shall leave it to your discretion. —Cote d'Azur (talk) 08:06, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Impressionism included in this template