lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Lothar von Arnauld de la Perière

message: I think it was on the History Channel some years ago that I heard that this man, in spite of being Germany's champion at sinking enemy shipping, NEVER sank a ship without warning, and giving all aboard a chance to take to the boats. J S Ayer (talk) 02:19, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Never Sank Without Warning 

message: If it is true, as stated in the article that his name-carrying ancester left France in 1757, then this would be 82 years after the revocation of the Edict of Nantes in 1685 which led to a mass emigration of French Protestants. --Furfur (talk) 14:30, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for pointing that out. I removed it until someone comes up with a reliable source, which I doubt. ÄDA - DÄP VA (talk) 15:54, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Was he really of Huguenot descent ?
Talk:Lamentations of Jeremiah the Prophet

message: I hadn't thought of this and don't feel myself expert enough on the liturgical side to make a lot of noise about it, but in general it seems like it might be a good idea. --Wspencer11 (talk to me...) 21:26, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, let's please not merge.  The musical settings of the text, and the history of their musical settings, are a separate subject from the service itself, as they are a separate subject from the actual book of the Old Testament.  See here for a related discussion containing a cogent argument against merging related articles on Psalm 130 and De profundis.  In order for these articles to develop properly, and stay focused on their subjects, it's better to keep them separate and well-linked.  Thanks, Antandrus  (talk) 21:58, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Antandrus - no. What's gained?. (And just think, if we go further down this route, how much would end up bundled under the various feast days...) Bob aka Linuxlad 07:49, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm changing my vote...you both know about the issues and I was speaking out of misty ignorance. No merger, please. --Wspencer11 (talk to me...) 00:19, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger with Tenebrae 
Talk:London Festival Orchestra

message: To me this reads more like  a "plug" than an encyclopaedia article.Bashereyre (talk) 20:25, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed the worst of the puffery (and from the conductor's article too). Based on the fact that the website seems to be just a single page, and a google search shows little sign of recent activity, I'm not sure this orchestra is operating any more. Mowsbury (talk) 21:12, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tone
Talk:List of longest non-repetitive piano pieces

message: Also, it might be a good idea to order pieces either by author or length. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:53, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Organisation of the page

message: What is the minimal piece length that should be allowed on this page? Since this article includes Sorabji's Opus clavicembalisticum, it should also include at least five other Sorabji piano pieces (besides the ones included already). What about Bach's WTC? Toccata quarta (talk) 14:15, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Minimal length

message: Why, what, where, and how is this article missing citations or need footnotes and what should be done about it? Hyacinth (talk) 06:23, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Missing citations

message: Having just contributed to Talk:List of longest novels, I'm rather tempted to propose deleting entries from this list. Not on the basis of lack of notability or anything like that, but musical coherency. Beethoven could have stringed his 32 piano sonatas together and called them a single work, but that is obviously not very legitimate. The Sorabji Études and the Curran work do not have large scale motivic organisation, so perhaps they could go. I'm not sure about the status of The Road and Beatus Vir, though.—Toccata quarta (talk) 06:08, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removals 

message: I'm glad the AFD came to the right decision.  I do think that expanding the scope to include repetitive pieces is probably best though perhaps as a second table.  I think that the criteria for inclusion should involve "where the piece or the composer has received significant attention for its length or the length of her or his compositions."  To avoid people like me writing nonsense pieces that last months just to get on this list.  :-)  -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 00:08, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expand scope based on AfD discussion 

message: Why are Sorabji's transcendental studies listed here? Are they not individual studies, not one big piece?
MarcelDupré1886 (talk) 21:53, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Transcendental studies
Talk:Molly on the Shore

message: Molly On The Shore is actually an Irish song, as it is named "An Irish Reel". I will change it.
The end of the article "The tube part is impossible" is entirely opinion. I'm going to remove it, it isn't fact and doesn't belong in the entry. MystRivenExile (talk) 18:28, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
Talk:Notturno (Schubert)

message: I have reinstated the birdsong idea in the final paragraph of the ‘Formal Structure’ section, but without the earlier adverb (‘wonderfully’), as I feel the association might add something to a listener’s perception of the piece without suggesting any particular evaluation. If there is no reference to birdsong at all, I feel it is not clear why one should draw attention to the trills.Ranger2006 (talk) 22:16, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good. Do you know of any reliable sources for the analysis of the piece, or are these your own original observations?? I know that what you wrote is true and most of it can be gleaned from  the score, but describing the trills as evoking a songbird strictly needs a source to back it up. See the guidelines on Wikipedia articles about classical compositions. Graham87 03:58, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

text: Hi Graham, I am afraid I have never come across any serious analysis of this piece, so the observations are all my own.  Please feel free to remove my ‘reminiscent of birdsong’ phrase if you think it is inappropriate.  On reflection I think the rest of the sentence is still worth retaining, i.e. in the form in which you had it before my re-instatement, as it does at least draw attention to the trills, which I think are a notable feature.Ranger2006 (talk) 21:28, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I've removed the subjective observations. Graham87 02:10, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Re reference to birdsong
Talk:Nuper rosarum flores

message: Nice article. I particularly appreciated the translation of the motet.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.72.74.207 (talk) 10:10, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good stuff 

message: I'm afraid I am not convinced that the edits of 15 June 2007 are an improvement, but am unwilling to get into any kind of a revert war. Perhaps the person who made the edits could explain them here...? --Wspencer11 (talk to me...) 13:19, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Latest edit
Talk:Halberstadt D.II

message: The article on the Halberstadt D.II mentions the D.I, D.III, D.IV, and D.V. In fact it would be hard to imagine the article without those mentions of these other types. The subject of the article is currently the D.II, however - the only Halberstadt single seat fighter to be manufactured in series. If you want to change this then it is the main title at the head - not the upper caption to the picture, that needs changing. Perhaps move the article to "Halberstadt D types"?? I think not - but this would at least make sense. But the caption over the infobox - even in this case, would refer to the exact aircraft type illustrated. At least that is what happens everywhere else. Soundofmusicals (talk) 10:23, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Caption of Infobox

message: I have removed the "refimprove" template - adding what I hope are suitable references. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 21:44, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  References added 

message: Are we sure Boelcke's aircraft was painted "prussian blue"? If we're going from the photograph, it should be noted that photographs from this period falsely darkened blue colors, making even light blue seem very dark. Ianbrettcooper (talk) 10:11, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: No idea how this caption ever got so specific, and on what grounds--Soundofmusicals (talk) 00:37, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prussian Blue?
Talk:Concerto for Piano and Concerto in G♯ΔA♭

message: Funny characters in the title.  Several composers?  How should this article be named and categorized?  DavidRF 01:05, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The funny characters are pronounced as "Gis Maj As", which goes to show something about the composer's sense of humor. Kuusisto is given credit for orchestration in the liner notes, but I think the "official" composer still is Iiro Rantala. I can dig more quotes from the liner notes if necessary and perhaps try to explain the piece a little bit if I have the time.--Wormsie 09:29, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is this piece? 

message: Per the back of the CD and the linar notes, I moved the title to its proper name. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 21:59, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: And again, this is the title used on the CD and linar notes, so it should stay at this name unless someone has evidence to the contrary. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 00:19, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move
Talk:Piano Quintet No. 2 (Dvořák)

message: seemed much better than adding a trivia section, since the footnote isn't unmoored; it's specifically about the second movement, and avoids one failing which has caused the trivia sections to be deprecated with reason. (And lengthy footnotes are a tradition :) ) Hope it's ok, seriously- itself it does need some improvement. If both pieces were IMSLP-accessible it would be easy to say eg reasoning-by-observation. As is, the score of op 83 there is presently [B]-blocked... Schissel | Sound the Note! 17:17, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Long footnote

message: I changed this to just "masterpieces" for NPOV. Even though the opinion is sourced it is still just an opinion, and I suspect an eccentric one. Raff but not Schubert, Franck or Shostakovitch? Definitely enters the realms of the debatable/POV. I hope my change solves the neutrality issue to everyone's satisfaction; in any case, the article is about Dvorak, not Raff.  Mentioning Schumann and Brahms makes sense however, as it might point the reader to two important influences on Dvorak. Mcoverdale (talk) 21:44, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: "Four masterpieces"?
Talk:Ahn Shi Il

message: Can we make a calendar with the Ahn Shi Il dates marked in bold? --Uncle Ed 14:02, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Calendar

message: I don't think a merge is a good idea.  Ahn Shi Il itself would not be of interest to people who came to the main article on the church looking for basic information.  The fact that is is catagorized with other church beliefs will enable people who are interested to find it. Steve Dufour 03:48, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll merge it to Family Pledge, which (in turn) could be merged to Unification Church. --Uncle Ed (talk) 19:38, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I couldn't find anything about Ahn Shi Il on the Unification Church page, so I undid the redirect. After it's merged, we can redo the redirect. Anyone care to help? --Uncle Ed (talk) 17:49, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: And I have reimposed the redirect. Where an article contains no sourced material, it is entirely appropriate to merge-as-bare-redirect (as introducing the unsourced material into the merged-to article would violate WP:V). If you think that Unification Church should say something on the subject, then find a reliable source and include mention of Ahn Shi Il there. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 04:42, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Did you overlook this source material? (P.S., there's lots more where that came from. Please help build the article.) --Uncle Ed (talk) 22:09, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

text: Are you saying that if the Catholic Church is the only source about a particular Catholic doctrine or celebration, then (1) there are no 3rd party sources so (2) we should not cover it? --Uncle Ed (talk) 21:30, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes I am. For doctrines or celebrations celebrated across the entire Catholic Church, the probability of this occurring is very low. But I dare say there is any number of celebrations of some subset of the Catholic Church that has escaped third-party notice, and so does not have legitimate call on having an article. And in response to your nonsensical edit summary, I have no "object[ion] to the previously agreed-upon merge" -- nor have I expressed any -- it is you who are attempting to undo it after all, nor do I have any objections to you including sourced material on this topic in Unification Church. As is too often the case with you Ed Poor, your WP:DISRUPTion appears to serve no coherent purpose, and appears to be nothing more than ill-considered reflex. Get a clue! I would hit you with a WP:TROUT, but if you haven't learnt anything useful in your years on wikipedia (and it would appear that you haven't), it is unlikely that 100 trouts would have any effect. You appear to treat wikipedia as being the same 'anything goes' epistemological 'Wild West' that it apparently was when you first joined. Wikipedia has passed you by, and it is time to either (i) make a genuine effort to learn the new rules & culture, or (ii) move on. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 02:54, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: merge
Talk:Empfindsamkeit (music)

message: I understand that the creators of this article may have wanted to use a name that would be easily understood (and spelled) but I believe that the article, per WP:COMMONNAME, should use the most commonly used name for this period/style, which is universally referred to by German terms.  The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians (English) uses "Empfindsamkeit".  The 1969 Harvard Dictionary of Music (English) uses "Empfinsamer Stil".  Neither has even a cross-reference for "Sensitive Style".  Daniel Hertz in New Grove (2001) writes:
:The term is usually translated as ‘sensibility’ (in the 18th-century or Jane Austen sense, which derives from the French sensibilité). ‘Sentimental’ is another translation, sanctioned by Lessing when rendering Sterne’s Sentimental Journey as Empfindsame Reise. One modern scholar, W.S. Newman, gives ‘ultrasensitive’ as an English equivalent.
Given that the term used in this article does not appear even as a cross-reference or translation, and no English translation is commonly used, I recommend a move to "Empfindsamkeit" but also would not object to "Empfinsamer Stil".  -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 07:10, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Seeing through the history that it was moved in 2010 without discussion per MOS:FORLANG which does not discuss the actual article title, rather than WP:English which states: "The title of an article should generally use the version of the name of the subject which is most common in the English language, as you would find it in reliable sources (for example other encyclopedias and reference works, scholarly journals, and major news sources)" -- all the reliable sources cited use German language terms.  Hence, moved.  If there is an edit war, administrators can revert to Sensitivity Style since it was there for 11 years, even though I object to the title.  -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 07:22, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I regret that none of us will benefit from Jerome Kohl's thoughtful comments on this topic, as a major contributor to this article. (RIP).  -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 07:24, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: , RIP indeed to Jerome... on the matter above, it seems that Empfindsamkeit is certainly the most widely used per Google Ngrams and google search results 478,000 vs 47,000. Aza24 (talk) 18:27, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

text: Since it seems no one will do so, I've boldly moved to "Empfindsamkeit (music)" (since it could refer to the equivalent literature movement) Aza24 (talk) 18:34, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks!  Any of these outcomes is better than "Sentimentality Style"!  -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 22:34, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move to Empfindsamkeit or Empfinsamer Stil?
Talk:Songs and Dances of Death

message: Can anyone provide some information about recordings? AdamChapman 17:19, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Your wish is granted.  207.237.243.185 (talk) 02:49, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Recordings

message: 1885, not 1882, if this is accurate. Schissel | Sound the Note! 04:54, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Publication date of Trepak orchestration 

message: and another attribute the orchestration (or an orchestration) of no.2 to Glazunov, not Rimsky, while yet another Worldcat link/reference give the honor of the orchestration of Trepak to Rimsky rather than Glazunov. Rather confusing, there; I hope your source on the subject knows of what they speak... Schissel | Sound the Note! 05:15, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orchestrations
Talk:Sonnerie de Sainte-Geneviève du Mont de Paris

message: The beginning of the article is the same as Ludwin Music's page.  But did we copy them or vice versa? Matchups 18:18, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The Wayback Machine would suggest that ludwinmusic plagiarized the Wikipedia article. Their earliest article chronologically follows the addition on wikipedia of that text, yet does not contain the text. njaard (talk) 02:08, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  copyvio? 

message: I do not think this title should be considered a chaconne/passacaille. I consider passacaille a synonym of chaconne and prefer to say just chaconne. I analyzed a lot of them and never found a chaconne made of just one looping bar. This is actual program music, obviously imitating the sound of bells--comparable to Biber's imitating animals, battles etc. The chaconne is a Spanish kind of a dance with a very old tradition, with either four or eight bars. I consider La Folia a chaconne, which indeed has been danced during the baroque period and also long before baroque (I dance it too and I dance it like any chaconne). This Sonnerie sounds like an experiment, just making music over something inspired by bells--seemingly improvised by Marais and fellow musicians. We also know looping bass phrases from fugues, so it's not always a chaconne. I could dance over this Sonnerie, but wouldn't do it, because dancing over bells of a monatic church would be kind of weird. You might do it in 2016, but in 1716 you would look like the ultimate jerk. Which is my after all strongest argument against this Sonnerie being a chaconne: It makes sense to imitate church bells with musical instruments, but dancing and clapping with castanets doesn't seem to belong here.--Demoiselle Clarisse (talk) 15:15, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Classification
Talk:Sunless (song cycle)

message: Hi, I'm new to Wikipedia, and would like to suggest adding information/linking this article on Sunless to the orchestration by Dutch composer Theo Verbey. The recording features mezzo Marion van de Akker with the Netherlads Radio Chamber Orchestra conducted by Mark Foster. The score is available throught the MCN webshop. Maybe these could be in external links. ThanksStevey-22 (talk) 08:52, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Symphony No. 4 (Tippett)

message: Okay - I'm not sure exactly why a few comments about the style of the 4th symphony appears under the heading "Tippett's Periods".  Then there is the comment made that the fact this symphony appears to have representatives of all his previous periods apparently means that this work is the inauguration of a 3rd period (so "all his previous styles" means both of the other two styles?)  There's a comment in the Tippett article suggesting that his works should be divided into three periods, but it's not clear where that idea comes from, and there's no reference to why or who says that Tippett 4 is the first work of his third period - so it really comes over as original research to me. -- PaulHammond (talk) 14:56, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Periods" is OR?
Talk:Tableaux de Provence

message: Would love to see a Nav table at the bottom of this article between this very noteworthy saxophone piece and others on the saxophone repitoire.
Thank you to those who made this excellent article / stub.  Really made my day to stumble across it!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.174.31.174 (talk) 23:18, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  One of the best pieces ever. Very noteworthy.  Also, would love to see a nav table at the bottom between...
Talk:The Five Sacred Trees

message: While doing some RC Patrolling, I ran into an edit where an IP modified this article. Upon reverting, I noticed this edit, particularly this part: The Tree of Ross (or Eó Rosa) is a yew, and although the yew is often referred to as a symbol of death and destruction, The Tree of Ross is often the subject of much rhapsodizing in the literature. It is referred to as "a mother's good," "Diadem of the Angels," and "faggot of the sages." Hence the lyrical character of this movement, wherein the bassoon oncants [sic] and is accompanied by the harp! - John Williams -- is this legitimate? Or was this vandalism that hasn't been caught since it was added in 2008? ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs)  23:56, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Completely legitimate! This is verbatim from the program notes in the published version of the piece. (Using the original meaning of "faggot" as a branch or bundle of branches. Notable: the word for bassoon is "fagot"/"fagotto" in quite a few other languages, as it is basically a large hollowed-out stick.) Kat Walsh (spill your mind?) 08:00, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Faggot of the sages"
Talk:Lord Torphichen

message: The death date given for "James Sandilands, 1st Lord Torphichen" is suspect; see James Sandilands, 1st Lord Torphichen#Notes.  J. Peterka 14:11, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Death date corrected on 13 July 2007. J. Peterka 17:10, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: I have now removed this phrase of my own volition;  "As such the title is one of the few recognised peerage titles that could be legally sold, or passed on to heirs not of the body."  I maintain, however, that this is the consequences of the barony's remainder being to "assigns whatsoever", ie. it can be assigned. --Counter-revolutionary (talk) 14:32, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Assigns Whatsoever