User talk:BarryJ: Difference between revisions

From ChoralWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Seasonal music again)
 
(87 intermediate revisions by 9 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
==Welcome==
*<big>'''See also:'''</big> [[User talk:BarryJ/Archive1|Archive1]] – before 2020
Hi Barry,
== 2020 ==


Welcome to {{CPDL}}, and thank you for your editions, especially of Billings.  One small point regarding adding the text name to a tune on the Billings composer page.  You cannot add the material in parentheses inside the {{CiteTemp|NoCo}} template (ie. (i.e. "(Lord's Prayer)" for Kittery), because the template is designed to provide a link to the relevant work page.  I have already fixed this with Kittery:  if you check, you'll see that it now reads (correctly)
Happy new year to you, best wishes for 2020! --[[User:Music4Ever|Music4Ever]] ([[User talk:Music4Ever|talk]]) 20:41, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
<pre>{{NoCo|Kittery}} (Lord's Prayer)</pre>
and "Kittery" is a link (blue) to the [[Kittery (William Billings)]] page.  On the other hand, the code you had was (incorrectly)
<pre>{{NoCo|Kittery (Lord's Prayer)}}</pre>
which produced a (red) link to the nonexistent [[Kittery (Lord's Prayer) (William Billings)]] page.  I'll move "(My soul the great Creator praise)" out of the {{CiteTemp|NoCo}} template for Camden to fix that for you.  If you want to provide the text titles in parentheses for tunes in the future, just be aware of what you have to do to get them to come out right.  Again, many thanks, and welcome! &ndash; [[User:CHGiffen|Chuck]][[User talk:CHGiffen|<sub><small>'''talk'''</small></sub>]]&nbsp;[[User:Charles H. Giffen|Giffen]][[Charles H. Giffen|<sub>'''♫'''</sub>]] 04:20, 24 April 2014 (UTC)


== Voicing templates ==
== MultiPubList ==
Hi Barry,
I'm having trouble with MultiPubList: I split [[Novum et insigne opus musicum]] into [[Novum et insigne opus musicum (Ott & Formschneider)]] and [[Novum et insigne opus musicum (Berg & Neuber)]], and now the list of works isn't displaying correctly for either of them. Any idea what's going wrong? [[User:Adrianwall|Adrian M. Wall]] ([[User talk:Adrianwall|talk]]) 19:13, 15 May 2020 (UTC)


Thank you for your editions here, Barry. I've changed the 'Voicing' indication on the Read pieces you added today to SATB, because we have a set of categories to organise pieces by voicing (such as {{CiteCat|SATB|Category:SATB}}). When adding new editions, if you put the voicing into the 'Add work' form in this format, instead of giving the voices in full as 'Treble Alto Tenor Bass', this will put the work into the category. Thanks, [[User:EJG|EJG]] ([[User talk:EJG|talk]]) 17:52, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
:It was the use of ampersand in the parenthesis, and specification of a year as the second parameter of MultiPubList. I changed [[Novum et insigne opus musicum (Ott & Formschneider)]] to [[Novum et insigne opus musicum (Ott, Formschneider)]] – but it could be "Ott et Formschneider" or "Ott and Formschneider" if you like one of those better. (I wrote this up [https://www.cpdl.org/wiki/index.php/Help:Create_a_new_music_publication_page here]). I only changed one work page ([[Pater noster (Josquin des Prez)]]), but wanted to wait to see what you think about what I did. Let me know what you want. If you want me to change the other page and all the linked works, I can do that too. [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 21:37, 15 May 2020 (UTC)


==Joy to the World==
:: Thanks for your quick response. I had wondered whether the "&" was the problem but I thought it better to check with someone who knows what they're doing before making an even bigger mess! I think I'll go with "and".  [[User:Adrianwall|Adrian M. Wall]] ([[User talk:Adrianwall|talk]]) 09:17, 16 May 2020 (UTC)


Hi Barry! I noticed that you have contributed an edition of this song, attributing it to [[J. P. Storm]]; however, on reading the [[w:en:Joy to the World|Wikipedia article]] about this song, I could find no reference whatsoever to his name (neither on that article's talk page). Could you please inform where you got this information from? Thank you. —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [[File:Email.gif|link=User talk:Carlos]] 02:42, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
==[[:Template:Disambig]]==
Hi Barry,
I was wondering how [[Schumann (disambiguation)]] turned up in [[:Category:Disambiguation of works|Category:Disambiguation of '''works''']] and noticed you'd edited Template:Disambig. Unless I'm failing to appreciate a more complicated situation, could we put it back to including only the parent category? [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 21:49, 1 July 2020 (UTC)


:Oh, I think I got it: your edition is of Storm's arrangement of the tune "Sounding Joy", while the [[Joy to the world (Lowell Mason)|traditional version]] is based on "Antioch". Sorry for the confusion! —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [[File:Email.gif|link=User talk:Carlos]] 03:32, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
:Hi Richard, I should have changed [[Schumann (disambiguation)]] to <nowiki>{{disambig|name}}</nowiki>, but I missed this one; I just corrected it. [[User:Carlos]] enhanced this template in October 2019 to add a parameter, "work" "text" or "pub". I just added "name". As I recall, this was so the message in the box read correctly: "people who share the same name" in this case, or "pages that share the same title" in the case of works. I have discovered several pages to be added, there are probably more; and only the "name" ones have "(disambiguation)" in the title. Not sure about deflating these into one category, to me the current setup seems useful. — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 22:40, 1 July 2020 (UTC)


Hi Carlos! My information comes from the Commentary to ''The Norumbega Harmony'', page 284.
::Thanks for such a clear explanation! Rather than pushing for "style" I'll just add Category:Disambiguation to [[Classical (disambiguation)]] and [[Modern (disambiguation)]] [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 02:12, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
"SOUNDING JOY. TEXT: Joy to the world! The Lord is come! Isaac Watts... TUNE: J. P. Storm, Fuging Tune in D, in Thomas Atwill, ''The New-York Collection of Sacred Harmony'' (Lansingburg, N.Y.: Thomas Atwill, 1795), 42. ... Contributed by Nym Cooke." The music appears on pp. 180-181 of TNH.  The same tune appears with different text in Karen Willard's ''An American Christmas Harp'' (3rd Ed. 2009), where she quotes Warren Steel (Professor of Music, University of Mississippi) as suggesting that the composer may be Asahel Benham. "J. P. Storm" does sound a bit like a pseudonym.  I prefer to use the citation in the original publication, to say that J. P. Storm was the composer of the tune ''Sounding Joy''.
For more information about ''The Norumbega Harmony'', see http://www.mit.edu/people/ijs/thenorumbegaharmony.html; for a scan of the original publication, see http://imslp.org/wiki/The_New_York_Collection_of_Sacred_Harmony_(Various). -- [[User:Bcjohnston523|Barry Johnston]] [[User:Bcjohnston523|Bcjohnston523]] ([[User talk:Bcjohnston523|talk]]) 03:58, 25 February 2015 (UTC)


:Wow, thanks for all the info! It's all clear now. —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [[File:Email.gif|link=User talk:Carlos]] 05:19, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
:::Thank you! That's a good solution, and [[Classical (disambiguation)]] reads ''much'' better now. — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 11:39, 2 July 2020 (UTC)


==Shape notes==
==MultiPubList again==
Hi Barry,
Can you spot where I go wrong at [[Pseaumes de David mis en musique, 3vv (Claude Le Jeune)]]? [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 06:05, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
:Hi Richard, There needs to be a PubDatePlace for all three Livres; on the work page, Pub needs to include "|vol=Livre 2". I am confused by the numbering of works (they are not numbered in the original, as far as I can see): the first line with a number is line 10, which is number 9? Also the first line in Livre 2 is supposed to be "L", not "I", I think. This would look better if the lines were displayed like "1. ''Qui au conseil des malins'', Psalm 1" or something like that. Also "Sources (digital copies)" needs to be <nowiki>===External links===</nowiki>. — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 15:03, 18 July 2020 (UTC)


:On a related subject: great idea to group all shape-note editions in a category! But to my ears the title [[:Category:Shapenote-4 Editions]] sounds a bit awkward; what about [[:Category:Four-shape note editions]] or [[:Category:4-shape note editions]]? The 7-shape equivalents would follow the same pattern. What do you think? (don't worry about the work involved, this can be automated). Best, —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [[File:Email.gif|link=User talk:Carlos]] 05:19, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
== Missing pages ==


This sounds good to me, your first choice: [[:Category:Four-shape note editions]]. Just for curiosity, how would you automate it?  How can I help? Thanks for suggesting this!<br>
Hi Berry,
[[User:Bcjohnston523|Bcjohnston523]] ([[User talk:Bcjohnston523|talk]]) 20:38, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
I'm having trouble seeing why [[Il sol, qual or più splende (Carlo Gesualdo)]] is missing from the composer page; I've also noted a deepening [[Template talk:CheckMissing#a Byrd mystery]]. Any ideas? All the best, [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 23:55, 21 October 2020 (UTC)


:Hi again, Barry! I just realized that there was already a general category for editions in the shape note format: [[:Category:Shape Notes]]. It's in fact quite old (almost ten years now) but doesn't have many works listed yet. Should we merge your category into the more generic "Shape notes", or do you think that it's worth maintaining the more specific categories for 4- and 7-shape note editions? —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [[File:Email.gif|link=User talk:Carlos]] 02:38, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
:Hi Richard, I see [[Il sol, qual or più splende (Carlo Gesualdo)]] on [[Carlo Gesualdo]], under "Secular works for six voices" - it's in the second column. The remainder of discussion on [[Template talk:CheckMissing]] Cheers, — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 01:24, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
::You're right; thanks! [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 22:16, 22 October 2020 (UTC)


I noticed the [[:Category:Shape Notes]], but I was confused by it. It is in the list of "Subgenre" on the Add Work Form, it probably shouldn't be there, since shape-note is more properly a notation style, rather than a kind of music. (Although, shapenote singing, also known as Sacred Harp singing, is a fantastic music style and wonderful social network!  But I digress...)  Anyhow, it was because of this confusion that I decided to create a new Category, and because I wasn't sure what the creator of [[:Category:Shape Notes]] was planning to do with it. I hear that 7-shape notation is resurging, with new books, and Wikipedia gives them about equal coverage. So I think it's worth keeping different Categories for 4-shape and 7-shape editions.<br>
== DPL templates ==
On a related topic, if you have time, could you look at CPDL Bulletin Board for topic Titles of Early American Compositions?  I have some ideas about some little changes that might help our impasse. If you're not interested, that's okay. Thanks.
[[User:Bcjohnston523|Bcjohnston523]] ([[User talk:Bcjohnston523|talk]]) 04:00, 26 February 2015 (UTC)


:I too was a bit confused to see Shape Notes as a subgenre; I invited Chuck, who created that category, to join the discussion. He may be able to clarify this for us and give more ideas.
Hi Barry! I've found a couple of templates inside category [[:Category:DPL templates|DPL templates]] that do not use DPL at all. As it seems, they were included in this category by [http://www.cpdl.org/wiki/index.php?title=Template:CatAZ&diff=1057892&oldid=1057411| a query ] you ran in January. Could you please check? Thanks, —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [[User talk:Carlos|(talk)]] 17:19, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
:Concerning your request, I'm afraid I'm not the best person to help you with this, as my knowledge on the subject is very limited. But I'll post there if I come up with some good suggestions. Regards, —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [[File:Email.gif|link=User talk:Carlos]] 23:25, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
:Hi Carlos! Thanks for pointing this out. You're right, there were several that didn't belong; and there are several that need to be included. I am working my way through the category to make sure it's correct. PS. Perhaps you know how to answer my question at [[Talk:Anonymous#Works not yet on this page]] — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 20:06, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
::Thank you! —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [[User talk:Carlos|(talk)]] 02:45, 23 November 2020 (UTC)


== And can this mighty King ==
== DPL issue ==


Thanks for your note.
Hi Barry! Any idea why %USER% is not working for pages edited this year alone? Old pages at [[ChoralWiki:Recent discussions]] bring this information correctly, but not the recent ones. Quite weird! I've checked the DPL3 documentation but couldn't find any clues. I thought of asking you, since you're more familiar with this new version of DPL. —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [[User talk:Carlos|(talk)]] 15:58, 8 December 2020 (UTC)


In fact, I did not delete your original text page for this; someone else had spotted that it was part of a longer work and had converted it into a redirect. I merely deleted the redirect, perhaps out of a misplaced sense of tidiness and changed the LinkText appropriately.
:Hi Carlos! Weird, yes. Not sure why {{tl|TalkList}} behaves this way, I will keep checking. I was suspicious of the allrevisionsince parameter, but the template still shows Users wrong without it. Perhaps the answer lies with MediaWiki. What category is %USER%? It's not a parameter or a variable. — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 19:24, 8 December 2020 (UTC)


I think there are fuzzy areas whether a composer has set part of a longer work. In some cases, it's appropriate to have more than one text page for substantially the same work; in others, it's better to combine into a single text page.
:Names are shown for User before the last week in January, 2020 – about the time DPL3 and MediaWiki 1.33 were installed. I did notice that for some lines where User isn't shown, the last edit was by an editor not appearing on the Talk page (so they wouldn't have a <nowiki>[[User:]]</nowiki> entry?) — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 03:54, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
::Thanks for the info! I made several tests but couldn't find a solution. It's probably related to a database change in MadiaWiki 1.33, will have to check. Thanks again, —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [[User talk:Carlos|(talk)]] 05:14, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
::Probably related to this: [[w:mw:Actor migration]]. Apparently, our database hasn't been fully converted to the new schema (which would result in ''all'' editor names disappearing from the query, since DPL3 isn't compatible with the new table layout yet). —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [[User talk:Carlos|(talk)]] 06:23, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
:::Combining your discovery ([[w:mw:Actor migration]]) with my [https://gitlab.com/hydrawiki/extensions/DynamicPageList/-/issues/4865 issue] with allrevisionssince (and others like it) and [https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T167246 Phabricator T167246]: "… the migration is being done gradually, over several MediaWiki releases. It is expected to finish in MediaWiki 1.34." and "migration states: (1) Read and write old columns only (2) Write both old and new columns. Read from new preferentially, falling back to old. (3) Write only new columns. Read from new preferentially, falling back to old. (4) Read and write the new columns only." (this schedule has been modified since 2010)
:::*Migration of the data base is being done in parts: apparently MW 1.33 migrated Actors who made page revisions after MW 1.33 was installed (field rev_user →‎ rev_actor).
:::*MW 1.31 (or 32) apparently included migration of other fields, such as those used in allrevisionssince (''e.g.'', field rev_user_text →‎ rev_actor).
:::The way [[User:Choralia|Max]] dealt with this is to replace those fields with the new ones in the MW code, as I recall. What I don't know: how to reference the rev_actor field in WikiText? — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 16:31, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
::::Please also note [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension_talk:DynamicPageList3#DynamicPageList3_does_not_follow_the_Actor_Migration this] specific issue with DPL 3.3.3, and, even worse, the fact that DPL 3.3.3 is not compatible with the latest stable MediaWiki version (1.35)! ''You are advised against using this extension on a live site.'' It's a mess. I'm currently testing MediaWiki version 1.35 on the test server and the situation is not horrible, however I wonder how many subtle problems may exist like the one mentioned here. I've already repeatedly patched DPL 3.3.3 to make it work with MediaWiki 1.33, I'll try to find another workaround for this problem, too. Max a.k.a. [[User:Choralia|Choralia]] ([[User talk:Choralia|talk]]) 21:14, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
:::::I've made another patch to DPL 3.3.3, and it seems that [[ChoralWiki:Recent discussions]] works correctly now. It's the most horrible workaround I created ever: as the page ID is correctly determined, I patched the php code so that the corresponding page object is found, then the ID of the user who last edited the page is determined, and eventually the username associated to the given user ID is found. Quite garbled, however it seems OK. Max a.k.a. [[User:Choralia|Choralia]] ([[User talk:Choralia|talk]]) 21:06, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
::::::Very clever, Max! Thanks for the patch, good to see the lists working again. —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [[User talk:Carlos|(talk)]] 02:10, 11 December 2020 (UTC)


If we take the example of psalms, often composers set only a few verses, rather than the whole psalm. Nevertheless, it seems more sensible to group all settings into a single text page, but indicate on that which verses have been set in the list of settings by composers. An exception might be where a verse is used for a particular liturgical purpose, say an offertory, in which case it is probably more sensible to create a separate text page for all the specific settings, but show a clear link on the main text page.
== Calendar ==


Another example would be settings of Tantum ergo which, as you probably know, is the last two verses of Pange lingua. Again, as it has a separate liturgical use and there are many specific settings, the decision has been taken to have two separate text pages, but with clear links between them.
Hi Barry,
Thanks again for the remodeled [[ChoralWiki:Seasonal music]]. The Sunday link is correct but the displayed calendar date needs a tweek. I'm not sure where to look under the hood myself; sorry! [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 23:27, 8 February 2021 (UTC)


Until a couple of years back, the text pages were a total mess. Some editions were added to them, others were not. There was an attempt in the past the automate this. However, if one is looking for settings of a particular set of words, I guess the things most musicians would want to know are: the voicing, the language and what parts of the text have been set. Otherwise it is likely to be very frustrating checking individual links, only to find that the language was wrong or the choral requirements were not appropriate to the resources available. Although that information makes the text pages more useful (at least, to my mind) it does not seem possible to automate that aspect, hence the manual list on each page. The recent addition by Carlos of the textautolist template which identifies works which link to the page but which are not in the manual list is there so that, over time, the manual list can be brought up-to-date.
:Hi Richard, Please edit [[ChoralWiki:Seasonal music]]: the dates need to be changed in the section that begins <nowiki><!--WEEKLY CODE--></nowiki>. Sorry, I don't know how to do it, don't know which dates go with which feasts etc. — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 20:20, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
::Um, OK: I would have thought there's a function to get dates of Sundays though, or what was the automation about? [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 05:16, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
:::My recollection is that I designed several automation alternatives. But then I don't remember exactly: did you give up on all of them, and decide to continue manually updating? Or did we get busy with other things? In any case, nothing got implemented. — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 20:36, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
::::Oh, maybe the ball was in my court after all. [[ChoralWiki_talk:Seasonal_music#Automation_redux|Servus!]] [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 01:02, 12 February 2021 (UTC)


Coming back to your specific edition, it probably doesn't meet the test of a separate liturgical use, though I suppose of there are a lot of settings of "And can this might King", that point is debatable. Nevertheless, this is a wiki site and the ultimate test is what makes it most useful for users. If a lot of people would be looking for specific settings of "And can this mighty King", then, although they could find them via the search box, there would be a case for reinstating the text page, but making very clear on it the link to the longer text. Similarly, on the full text page, there should be a link back to the "And can this mighty King" text page.
==MultiPubList (yet) again==
 
Hi Barry,
Let me know what you think and, if you want your original text page reinstated, I'll see if I can do that. (Probably easier for me with Editor privileges than for you)
I'm missing a pair of sharp eyes at [[Lyons Contrapunctus]], which ought to have at least 3 linked works. BTW, is a paste-and-fill-blanks new publication page 'template' lying around somewhere (I can't find the new composer form either at Help) already? [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 02:18, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
So that I see any message from you, please add to my talk page, or send me an email on jamesgibb@ntlworld.com.[[User:Jamesgibb|Jamesgibb]] ([[User talk:Jamesgibb|talk]]) 15:20, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
:You could try {{CiteTemp|New publication}}, or <nowiki>{{subst:new publication}}</nowiki> (or "new lyricist" or "new composer"). In re: "Lyons Contrapunctus", neither PubDatePlace nor MultiPubList were complete (missing <nowiki>&nbsp;</nowiki>, and missing parameters 2 and 3, respectively). Also, "Lyon" is the name of the city of publication, not "Lyons". "Lyons" is possessive German (I think), not very proper in an otherwise Latin title, since the Latin name is Lugdunum, listed on the title page: I claim the publication title should be "Contrapunctus seu musica figurata", since that's what IMSLP calls it. And you made an interesting prose "list of works"; I will try to transcribe the index tomorrow if I have time. — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 05:20, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
 
::Thanks! "No works at CPDL" is a surprising default for missing parameters but I should have figured it out. (1) I wonder then if {{CC|Preload templates}} might be better listed in the parent category as well as in their hiding place; I'll consider adding a pointer to [[:Category:Help]] (2) Lyons with s merits at least a redirect, being both a traditional English spelling and (along with "Contrapunctus de Lyon") the version used in most secondary literature: that's why we still [[Cancionero de Upsala|misspell "Uppsala"]]. Do you mind if I move it back? [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 22:41, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
== Customizing your signature ==
:::You're right, "No works at CPDL" isn't quite right, I will see if I can change it. (1) I agree, and this is the reason I increasingly use [[Special:Categories]] (which lists all). I have added a subpage: [[Help:Score submission guide/Commands and shortcuts]] with these on it, please add to it ad lib. (2) You're right about "Lyons as an alternate for "Lyon". Feel free to change back as you wish. — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 03:23, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
 
Hi Barry, you may customize your signature if you wish. It's simple:
# Go to 'Preferences' (top right of the screen)
# At 'New signature', post the following text:
#: <nowiki>—[[User:Bcjohnston523|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:Bcjohnston523|(talk)]]</nowiki>
# Scroll to the bottom of the page and hit 'Save'.
Regards, —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [[User talk:Carlos|(talk)]] [[File:Email.gif|link=Special:EmailUser/Carlos]] 18:36, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 
==Rachmaninoff==
Thanks for these great editions! As work pages are created, it would be nice to link back to the main work; there are several ways to do this: [[Blagoslovi Duche (Op. 37, No. 2) (Sergei Rachmaninoff)]] for example adds a '''Larger work''' line below the title (as well as including the Opus No. in the page title). Or one could simply add "from [[Vsenoshchnoe bdenie (All-Night Vigil), Op. 37 (Sergei Rachmaninoff)]] to the title. Cheers, [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 23:06, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
:You're very welcome. I must say, working on these has been a delight and a pleasure; especially No. 12, which has become a personal favorite. There are now links on all the works pages to which I have contributed, and on the larger work page. Barry Johnston, [[User:Bcjohnston523|Bcjohnston523]] ([[User talk:Bcjohnston523|talk]]) 23:23, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
 
::I performed No.s 1-8 for the first time Sunday and am if possible even more smitten. Any chance you're about to start on the Opus 31 ''Liturgy''? :-) [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 00:33, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
 
:::I would like to; I will get started in the next few days. — [[User:Bcjohnston523|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:Bcjohnston523|(talk)]] 00:47, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
 
Yes, a welcome addition to the site, Barry. One small point; when you add an English transation, could you use Translation|English, rather than Text!English? Otherwise, the Russian appears in the list of English texts. (Of course, if the edition itself has English words in it, Text|English is appropriate.[[User:Jamesgibb|Jamesgibb]] ([[User talk:Jamesgibb|talk]]) 18:05, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 
:Thank you for catching this. How am I doing with these transcriptions? I would appreciate any comments. — [[User:Bcjohnston523|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:Bcjohnston523|(talk)]] 18:24, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 
I think these are excellent additions to the site, Barry. It is especially useful that you are adding transliterations under the text, since it makes the editions usable by a much wider group. (Most of us can struggle along in Western European languages, but Cyrillic script is a barrier to many of us.)
 
One other thing that you might like to do. I'm guessing that most of the translations are yours, so you should really get the credit for them! If you add the template Translator|Barry Johnston (can't remember how to include the double curly brackets on talk pages!) then an automatic list of your translations will be added to your User page. (I've taken the liberty of adding a heading to that page, with the template that does the listing) At the moment, it's only they one that you specifically attributed to youself that is listed.
 
One other thought. The translation that is attributed to Winifred Douglas, 1920. I wondered whether it was in fact (Charles) Winfred Douglas, an American priest and hymn writer of the right period. [[User:Jamesgibb|Jamesgibb]] ([[User talk:Jamesgibb|talk]]) 09:41, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 
:Thank you for your kind words. I will add myself as translator, as appropriate. By the way, it's <NoWiki><NoWiki>{{Translator|<Translator Name>}}</NoWiki></NoWiki>. I believe you are correct in ascribing the 1920 translations to Charles Winfred Douglas, 1867-1944 ([http://www.hymnary.org/person/Douglas_Winfred Hymnary.com article on Winfred Douglas]) -- a contemporary of Rachmaninoff. — [[User:Bcjohnston523|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:Bcjohnston523|(talk)]] 14:50, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 
:I've added a translator heading to his composer page. Surprised to find that it existed; he arranged ''Good Christian men rejoice". Thanks for the advice on wiki. I really must get round to learning it properly, rather than just coping what other people have done![[User:Jamesgibb|Jamesgibb]] ([[User talk:Jamesgibb|talk]]) 15:48, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 
== SortWorks ==
 
Barry, no need to point out to you that we've been making significant changes to the composer pages. Although this is still very much work in progress, particularly on the more complex pages, I'd be interested to hear any feedback you may have, whether positive or negative, on the changes so far.[[User:Jamesgibb|Jamesgibb]] ([[User talk:Jamesgibb|talk]]) 09:08, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
:James, thanks for asking. What I did for the [[Thomas Tallis]] page: Make the changes on a user test page, advertise this on the composer's talk page, and wait a few weeks. I received a few comments, all positive. Then I made the changes to the Thomas Tallis page, but first I commented out (<tt><nowiki><!-- ... --></nowiki></tt>) the old works list, as it existed. That meant someone else could go back and add back some things that the SortWorks format might have missed. (Or even revert to the old format; thankfully no one has done that yet). At some point, the old code would need to be removed.<br>
There are some pages for which you need to ask someone (or leave tracks, as above) before changing. Check the adopt-a-composer list. Some of these composer pages have a long history; the page history can give you some hints as to whom to ask.
:I don't fully understand Richard Mix's concerns expressed on [[Help talk:Automating the work list on composer pages]], but he raises some good points. There is a lot of inconsistency in page titling; perhaps that should be taken as inevitable, a part of the unique, eclectic flavor of this wiki (which I personally like). Still, there are page titles that are clearly much too long. Personally I like to avoid extraneous stuff in the page title -- but I deal with long lists! I applaud your efforts to make page titles more consistent.
:The way I see it, if a specialized list has been constructed on the composer page, or if the entry has more than a title, I would advise caution. SortWorks functions best if the items being listed have been consistently titled -- but if the list is now inconsistent, you need to seek advice about what the accepted way to retitle might be. Hope this was helpful. — [[User:Bcjohnston523|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:Bcjohnston523|(talk)]] 17:08, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
::Another thought: SortWorks is a limited function. If the composer page has several levels (multi-work pages in the same list as single-work pages), we really should wait until we have the proper functionality to automate these. — [[User:Bcjohnston523|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:Bcjohnston523|(talk)]] 17:13, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
::Thanks, Barry. That was very helpful. I'll assume you have no problem about name being attached to your comments, unless I hear from you to the contrary. Most of the comments I've received back from other people have been generally positive, but it struck me as sensible to ask a variety of users for their opinion. The one thing I've been adding to the more complicated pages is a catch-all listing, to make sure that any new works that are added don't fall through a hole. As there's apparently no limit to the number of exclusions (&&!), it's easy to do, even though the code looks cumbersome.[[User:Jamesgibb|Jamesgibb]] ([[User talk:Jamesgibb|talk]]) 19:03, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
:::You're welcome. (The signature missing is probably due to my internet connection intermittent most of today). One thing SortWorks can't do is include only pages linked to a larger-work page -- that would make it possible to automate several-tiered composer pages. But I think that's best left for a future function, it's beyond a simple revision to SortWorks, I think. Automating several-tiered pages would require some structural changes, like addition of a Subtitle template, to be included with the title on the Composer page, to include comments and alternative titles. Good luck! — [[User:Bcjohnston523|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:Bcjohnston523|(talk)]] 21:26, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
 
== Ode to the dissolution of time ==
 
Barry the easiest thing, rather than deleting the page, would be to move it, and replace to composer in the moved works page name.[[User:Jamesgibb|Jamesgibb]] ([[User talk:Jamesgibb|talk]]) 18:48, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
:Hi James. The problem is I don't know the identity of the composer; he is only just mentioned in one of the references I have. Nor do I have vital statistics or where he lived (''i.e.'', I don't have enough information to create a composer page). So I decided just to delete the page, and re-create it if I ever discover the composer's identity.— [[User:Bcjohnston523|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:Bcjohnston523|(talk)]] 19:46, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
A possible temporary solution, rather than lose the edition immediately, might be to change the composer to Anonymous and make a note on the composer page as to who the composer might possibly be. That way, you may get some information from other users of the site, Barry. [[User:Jamesgibb|Jamesgibb]] ([[User talk:Jamesgibb|talk]]) 20:11, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
:Thanks for the suggestion, I will do that. — [[User:Bcjohnston523|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:Bcjohnston523|(talk)]] 22:54, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
::Hi everyone! I don't like the idea of categorizing under {{CC|Anonymous compositions}} a piece where the composer is not in fact anonymous. If there's a chance "M." might stand for Mr., another solution might be to put [[Daniel Belknap]] in the composer field and list the work as questionable on his composer page. I tried but failed to download [http://imslp.org/wiki/The_Massachusetts_Harmony_(Janes,_Walter) the IMSLP facsimile]: is it clear whether M. B. is credited as the composer instead of the lyricist? A relative? I certainly appreciate your determination to do a proper job: if you want to see a real horror, peak at the composer page [[Miller]]! [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 05:46, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
:::To put it in Anonymous seemed odd to me, I will surely forget it and it will be lost forever under that composer. [https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B09Uuh0qA1qfNlVaM0o1aWZCYlE&usp=sharing Here] is the attribution from ''The Massachusetts Harmony''. (I believe it may be Morris Belknap, listed as one of the subscribers to this book). I cannot attribute this piece to Daniel Belknap. For one thing, it's not his style of writing. Also, there were many Belknaps in the area around the turn of the 19th century (and still are). In addition, there are a number of music researchers still active in the field. There are about five other composers that I am waiting on, there will be one more now. I will mark the page for deletion, and ask the question of better people than I. Thanks! — [[User:Bcjohnston523|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:Bcjohnston523|(talk)]] 13:48, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
 
== Attempt to add composer - Rodio ==
 
Hi Barry, thanks for your reply. Sorry, I really have no coding skills so have tried my best to add the page. It will definitely need some tweaking. I'd really appreciate it if you could have a look. Cheers, Will [[User:Wevans|Wevans]] ([[User talk:Wevans|talk]]) 04:32, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
:You misspelled the composer's name on the composer page, and you titled the work "Rocco" instead of "Missa Dominicalis". I corrected this; you should look at the two pages ([[Rocco Rodio]] and [[Missa Dominicalis (Rocco Rodio)]]) to see what I did. I notice there is a comma in the filename of the pdf score, and it's kinda long, but it's working. A better way to title future works would be "RoccoMissaDominicalisScore". I think I've got it working right. PS. Beautiful score! — [[User:Bcjohnston523|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:Bcjohnston523|(talk)]] 05:38, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
 
== Congrats ==
 
Hi Barry, congratulations on your promotion and welcome to the team.  Regards, [[User:Jkelecom|Jkelecom]] ([[User talk:Jkelecom|talk]]) 19:01, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
 
== Add new category listing ==
 
Hello Barry
 
I've been advised by James Gibb that you are a good person to ask about this issue
 
I would like to add some pages covering the Chester Books of Motets vols 1-16 using the same style as Carols for Choirs 3. The plan was to add these to the Anthem Collections and Music Publications categories.
 
I've created the pages in txt documents on my computer but I cannot find a way to transfer these pages onto CPDL. Any help/advice would be very welcome.
 
[[User:Dtmr|Dtmr]] ([[User talk:Dtmr|talk]]) 18:00, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
 
:Hello, I need to ask first, how familiar are you with editing on CPDL (using Wikimedia)? If you aren't I could start these for you, or I can explain how to do it if you prefer.
:Secondly, did you envision these volumes as appearing on separate pages? It looks like maybe four pages? It depends partly on how many musical works are to be added from each one.
:Third, you need to use caution when copying from these books, since they are still under copyright (this may apply to the words as well as the music). I try to transcribe music and copy words from sources that are not under copyright, then if there are editing changes made by a copyrighted editor (as seems to be the case here), they can be explained on the work page or in a note on the sheet music, with a proper citation to the editor. (Part of this is a personal preference to present music and words as close to the originals as possible, while using modern notation so they can be sung.) To find works in their original publications, or at least something out of copyright, I use imslp.org and archive.org a lot for music and words, books.google.com sometimes for the words. The Wikipedia articles on the composer and lyricist may be important too.
:That being said, there is nothing wrong with indexing the works to a modern compilation such as the series you asked about.
:Let me know how I can help, — [[User:Bcjohnston523|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:Bcjohnston523|(talk)]] 19:57, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
 
Thanks for getting back in touch Barry
 
I'm happy that my coding /editing is up to speed. The coding is ready to be input, I just need to understand the process of creating the initial page (in the style of Carols for Choirs 3) so that I can drop the code into the page.
 
There will be sixteen pages (one for each volume) with 7-15 links on each page to works already available on CPDL. I don't intend to create any new score pages (I don't have the software to do this). So basically, each page will index the works in the series.
 
[[User:Dtmr|Dtmr]] ([[User talk:Dtmr|talk]]) 15:32, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
 
:Hello, thanks for answering. I would model your overall page after [[Carols for Choirs]], which is the overall page for that series. Be sure you are logged in, then in the search box on any page, put the name of your new page, Chester Book of Motets (or something similar). The search results will give you the option of creating the page; just key in or paste the content of the page. Add the code <tt><nowiki>[[Music publications]]</nowiki></tt> at the bottom. I assume the individual volumes will appear as links on this page. Once you save the overall page, the links for the individual volumes will appear as links, but in red, indicating they don't exist. Just click on the first one, and you will be able to create that one, modeled after [[Carols for Choirs 1]]; and so on for all of them. I assume each of these pages will have a table showing the works in the volume (and <tt><nowiki>[[Music publications]]</nowiki></tt> at the bottom). These works may already exist on this wiki, so you would need to check for each and link to on your pages (sometimes the titles are a bit different). I would be glad to help with any part of this process. Let me know. — [[User:Bcjohnston523|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:Bcjohnston523|(talk)]] 16:39, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
::"Add the code <nowiki>[[Music publications]]</nowiki> at the bottom." Don't you mean <nowiki>"[[Category:Music publications]]"</nowiki> instead? [[User:Claude T|Claude]] ([[User talk:Claude T|talk]]) 18:27, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
 
Thank you Barry, everything is working fine now. Thanks for all your help.


[[User:Dtmr|Dtmr]] ([[User talk:Dtmr|talk]]) 19:34, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
== CompFromWorkTitle ==


::Hello. You did a great job! Just one little thing, it might be helpful to include the subtitles on the overall page, so the user can find the volume of interest. I did the first one. — [[User:Bcjohnston523|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:Bcjohnston523|(talk)]] 19:59, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
Hi Barry! Is [https://www.cpdl.org/wiki/index.php?title=Template:CompFromWorkTitle&diff=1339413&oldid=412546 this extra #if] really necessary? This template is used on thousands of pages, and apparently it was working fine until now. Are you planning new uses for it that require that #if? —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [[User talk:Carlos|(talk)]] 16:30, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
:Thanks for the heads up, Carlos! I was working on a new template, and needed the #if for that – but the issue was better resolved by using TitleOnly, and I forgot to go back and clean up. I did undo my revision, sorry for the inconvenience. — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 17:17, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
::That's fine! TitleOnly is a nice addition, by the way. —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [[User talk:Carlos|(talk)]] 03:17, 25 March 2021 (UTC)


== Legend's template... ==
== Text & Text2 ==


...is becoming a legendary one! Thanks Barry!
Hi again, Barry! I just noticed that template Text was recently changed by you. I didn't have the time to analyze the new logic, but I did notice some problems that surfaced in the examples:
It's nice, smart and accurate. Congrats. Welcome among admins. [[User:Claude T|Claude]] ([[User talk:Claude T|talk]]) 18:21, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
#The template is being categorized in {{CiteCat|Text requests}} even after I added {{para|cat|no}} to the examples
#{{tl|Text|Unknown}} and {{tl|Text|Quenya}} are both displaying a <code>{{{2}}}</code> after them; this is not the expected behaviour, I suppose
#Maybe because of #2, the Documentation itself is broken. {{tl|Doc}} found something it wasn't expecting :)
Could you please check? Thanks! —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [[User talk:Carlos|(talk)]] 15:31, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
:Thanks again, Carlos! I don't fully understand, because I had checked Text2 against many pages yesterday – probably my fault. In any case, both should be working better now. [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 16:06, 25 March 2021 (UTC)


:Thanks, Claude. [[User:Massimo Capozza|Max]] also did a lot to make this happen, deserves most of the credit. — [[User:Bcjohnston523|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:Bcjohnston523|(talk)]] 23:51, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
== ExtWeb problems? ==
 
::Now you'd perhaps include the [http://www.cpdl.org/wiki/index.php/File:File_details.gif Headphones-lollipop] icon that is on quite all pages (some pages have only edition(s) with external links, anyway). [[User:Claude T|Claude]] ([[User talk:Claude T|talk]]) 08:32, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
 
:::I will do it later today. I'm thinking the label should be "File Details," — [[User:Bcjohnston523|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:Bcjohnston523|(talk)]] 14:04, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
 
::::Included the File details icon. — [[User:Bcjohnston523|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:Bcjohnston523|(talk)]] 18:02, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
 
:::::Well done, and rapidly! ;-) [[User:Claude T|Claude]] ([[User talk:Claude T|talk]]) 20:40, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
 
::::::Let me point you to [http://www.cpdl.org/wiki/index.php/User:Claude_T/DPL_queries/XMLnotMXL that list], where the template produces obsolete informations about XML icon (for nine pages) and erroneous ones (for the last page). A mystery for me. [[User:Claude T|Claude]] ([[User talk:Claude T|talk]]) 07:38, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
 
:::::::Mysterious to me as well! Apparently the call to the XML template is embedded somewhere where we can't see it. I tried copying the contents of one of the pages to a new page [[X-O quam tu pulchra es a 3 (Alessandro Grandi)|here]], and the XML call disappears. The next step would be deleting the original page and renaming the new one -- the problem is that the page's history is then lost. I don't know how to copy and paste a page's history, do you? (Moving the page doesn't work) — [[User:Bcjohnston523|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:Bcjohnston523|(talk)]] 14:01, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
::::::::I don't know, either. And I'm sure we want to keep the page's history. [[User:Claude T|Claude]] ([[User talk:Claude T|talk]]) 15:58, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
:::::::I've got it! Delete the <nowiki>{{#Legend:}}</nowiki>, save the page, re-insert <nowiki>{{#Legend:}}</nowiki>. And the XML icon is gone. — [[User:Bcjohnston523|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:Bcjohnston523|(talk)]] 18:39, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
 
::::::::You're the best, Barry! [[User:Claude T|Claude]] ([[User talk:Claude T|talk]]) 18:53, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
 
== Congrats ==
 
Hi Barry
 
Belated, but sincerely all the same: congrats and welcome to the club.  Regards, [[User:Jkelecom|Jkelecom]] ([[User talk:Jkelecom|talk]]) 23:42, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
 
== redirects ==


Hi Barry,
Hi Barry,
Check out [[Template talk:ExtWeb]], where I point out two pages where ExtWeb doesn't seem to work (these pages have external website links, but the template wouldn't show anything). Hope you can figure out what's going on. -- [[User:CHGiffen|Chuck]][[User talk:CHGiffen|<sub><small>'''talk'''</small></sub>]]&nbsp;[[User:Charles H. Giffen|Giffen]][[Charles H. Giffen|<sub>'''♫'''</sub>]] 19:03, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
::Hi Chuck, I too have noticed this. I will correct these pages; I have a [[User_talk:Carlos#Internet_links_within_Template_braces|request]] to Carlos for help. I'm thinking I might have to add code to ExtWeb to take care of various issues. — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 19:10, 25 March 2021 (UTC)


Just a friendly reminder that when deleting superfluous redirects like [[Salve Regina misericordiae II (Orlando di Lasso)]] you can use the "What links here" button to check whether any red links are being left behind. Cheers, [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 03:52, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
== ligatures with #SortWorks ==
 
:Thanks for the reminder! I usually do this, but I guess I must have missed one. I would be interested to see what you think of my proposal [http://forums.cpdl.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=8763 here], if you have time. — [[User:Bcjohnston523|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:Bcjohnston523|(talk)]] 04:10, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
 
::Very interesting; thanks for the pointer! I miss a lot that goes on in the parallel forum, but will put your pages on my watchlist and comment [[Creating Talk:Orlando di Lasso|here.]] [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 19:57, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
 
== Problem with the Published template ==
 
Hi Barry, James Gibb noticed that your latest modification to the ''Published'' template is introducing a small glitch. See details  [[User_talk:Choralia#Published|here]]. Could you please check? Please do not hesitate to contact me if you need help (although I'm not best to program templates, you're much better than me). Max a.k.a. [[User:Choralia|Choralia]] ([[User talk:Choralia|talk]]) 12:32, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
 
:Hi Max, I have reverted Template:Published back to the version before I started modifying it. Sorry for the inconvenience. — [[User:Bcjohnston523|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:Bcjohnston523|(talk)]] 17:26, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
 
::Everything alright now, Barry. Thank you very much! Max a.k.a. [[User:Choralia|Choralia]] ([[User talk:Choralia|talk]]) 18:02, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
 
== [[Johannes Ockeghem]] ==


Hi Barry,
Hi Barry,


Could we discuss layout at [[Talk:Johannes Ockeghem]]? I'm mainly taking exception to the delinking of the sortable list, but the Automated part seems to add clutter, too. [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 19:10, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
Claude's move of [[Regina Cœli (Peter Philips)]] seems to have resolved the title's absence on [[Peter Philips]], which I guess might have had to do with "œ"? Is there a warning I missed? [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 20:26, 28 March 2021 (UTC)


:Hi Richard, I will add some words to [[Talk:Johannes Ockeghem]]. Please forgive me, I should have noticed that talk page before, I didn't until now. [[User:Bcjohnston523|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:Bcjohnston523|(talk)]] 20:04, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
:I don't remember any notice about ligatures; I did make sure to include them in MultiPubList, which of course deals with publication titles, not work titles. I don't know much about SortWorks, which is Max's parser function. [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 21:18, 28 March 2021 (UTC)


== Linebreak in Voicing template ==


== Mellange d'Orlande de Lassus () a 4, 5, 6, 8, et 10 parties (Orlando di Lasso) ==
Hi Barry.  I see that you added a <nowiki><br></nowiki> at the end of the Voicing template today.  Unfortunately, this clobbers (ie. puts on a new line) any voicing information that is added after the template - which is something that happens quite a bit.  As an example, see my own [[At the dawning of creation (Charles H. Giffen)]].  I think the linebreak should be removed. Happy 4th of July weekend! -- [[User:CHGiffen|Chuck]][[User talk:CHGiffen|<sub><small>'''talk'''</small></sub>]]&nbsp;[[User:Charles H. Giffen|Giffen]][[Charles H. Giffen|<sub>'''♫'''</sub>]] 04:38, 3 July 2021 (UTC)


Johnston! What have you done? Where has the former page with the full list of the works and links gone? Why do you tamper with things of which you don't understand anything? You should rather leave these pages alone and let those modify them who know what they are doing. I never liked what you did, but now you have gone too far. If you cannot do any decent work, you should not destroy what others have done. I want to have the former page back!!!!!
:Hi Chuck.  Thanks for bringing this to my attention! My intention was to remove the manual line-feed after the template, and make the template consistent with other work page templates. I have already begun removing the manual <nowiki><br></nowiki> from pages without the extra material, done 500 pages so far (out of 36,000 or so). On first reading of your message, I thought to remove the line-feed from the template until I could resolve the issue – you're right, it happens "quite a bit", on fewer than 1,500 pages I estimate. However, I noticed that the Voicing template already has a "third optional parameter", apparently designed to handle extra text.  On most of the pages where this third parameter is used, display is incorrect, omitting the the second parameter! So design and documentation both need work.
[[User:Imruska|Imruska]] ([[User talk:Imruska|talk]]) 01:15, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
:I was able to edit [[At the dawning of creation (Charles H. Giffen)]] to bring the extra text into the template itself. Unfortunately, this text apparently cannot contain category assignments (or the letters "sol"), so I moved the category assignment to the Description field. I'm guessing that when this third parameter was added, template {{tl|Vcat}} was not adjusted to handle this – {{tl|Vcat}} needs redesigning, in my opinion. The effect of the dependent template, {{tl|Solo}}, was apparently not considered when designing the "third optional parameter" – and all three templates are incompletely documented. This is definitely not a "user-friendly" situation, if I spent an hour trying to figure out how this works.
::I am so sorry. Please forgive me. The page you are seeking is at [[Mellange d'Orlande de Lassus (...) a 4, 5, 6, 8, et 10 parties (Orlando di Lasso)]], not [[Mellange d'Orlande de Lassus (…) a 4, 5, 6, 8, et 10 parties (Orlando di Lasso)]]. Someone replaced the three periods in parenthesis <tt>(...)</tt> to an ellipsis <tt>(…)</tt>, and that confused me. I have corrected the publications list back to the correct link. What I was trying to do is clean up the links on works pages, so that they point to to the correct publication (and the page [[Au temps jadis (Orlando di Lasso)]] had the wrong link) – [[User:Bcjohnston523|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:Bcjohnston523|(talk)]] 02:39, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
:I noticed that among the 1,500 pages containing material after the {{tl|Voicing}} template, there are many that can be easily handled by bringing the material into the main part of the template. For example,
::"<tt><nowiki>{{Voicing|5|SSTTB}} or {{Cat|SSATB}}<br></nowiki></tt>"  can be changed to "<tt><nowiki>{{Voicing|5|SSTTB,SSATB}}</nowiki></tt>" → "'''Number of voices:''' 5vv  '''Voicings:''' SSTTB or SSATB"
:So with some modifications to Vcat and Solo, I am confident that the 1,500 can be edited to make this happen. I would do the modifications on experimental templates and test them extensively before implementing. If you wish, I can remove the line-feed from Voicing template until I can make the modifications. And happy Fourth to you too! — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 15:58, 3 July 2021 (UTC)


== [[Hymni per totum annum (Orlando di Lasso)]] ==
::Hi Chuck. Thanks for the new <nowiki>add=</nowiki> parameter, great idea! I am bringing the extra text into the template, about half of pages done, also added documentation to {{tl|Voicing}}. I will continue to remove the <nowiki><br></nowiki> after the template. — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 20:01, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
:::May I request another tweek, to suppress the unwanted comma before add= [[Te Deum (Nathaniel Patrick)]]? [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 20:12, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
::::Hi, Richard. The comma was Chuck's idea, with which I agree – it separates the primary vocalization from modifications, exceptions, and comments. The primary vocalization is the category that shows in MultiPubList, for example.
::::The only way I know to remove the comma in N. Patrick's Te Deum is to remove it from the Voicing Template; that would require going over about 1,500 pages where <nowiki>|add=</nowiki> occurs to ensure that the display is correct. Unless you are willing to do that, may I suggest changing the line in Patrick's Te Deum to <tt><nowiki>{{Voicing|4|SATB|add=with {{Cat|SATB.SATB}} options for antiphonal singing}}</nowiki></tt>? Or maybe <tt><nowiki>{{Voicing|4|SATB|add= antiphonal ({{Cat|SATB.SATB}})}}</nowiki></tt>, or something else? — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 02:47, 24 July 2021 (UTC)


Hi Barry,  
==Penitential Psalms==
Thanks for the tidying up of '''Hymni per totum annum anno 1581'''. I long ago took it back to the library and realize I remember nothing at all about the dating of its compilation: is 1577 (or for that matter 1581) ascertainable from watermarks, notes by the scribe or some other documentation? [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 21:00, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
Hi Barry, I'm not sure if you already spotted [[User_talk:Cjshawcj#Croce_penitential_psalms]], but thanks for the work on Lasso! [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 07:03, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
:Hi Richard, I don't remember where 1577 came from, sorry - over a year ago. I will change that. But I did manage to find where 1581 comes from - footnote 26 on p. 53 in an article by Daniel Zager, ''Lasso's Cycle of Polyphonic Latin Hymns'', from the compilation volume ''Orlando di Lasso Studies'' (see [https://books.google.com/books?isbn=0521028132 this link]). But maybe I'm reading this wrong? – [[User:Bcjohnston523|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:Bcjohnston523|(talk)]] 05:16, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
::Ah, just thought maybe you were on to something interesting ;-) [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 00:10, 25 November 2018 (UTC)


== [[Liber generationis Jesu Christi (Josquin des Prez)]] ==
== Patrick service in G ==


Hi Barry,
Sorry to do it to you here, Barry, but it seems the most opportune place to fire a shot across the bows of Mike Wallen and you seem to have been enabling his misinformation. He seems to have started creating workpages with no regard whatsoever to the veracity of his information. The Patrick in G is a typical example. All authorities from Boyce to RISM to Grove to Le Huray ascribe this to Nathaniel Patrick. Wallen is alone in claiming it for Richard Patrick (author in Grove of 3 vvv. obscure anthems). The key is G Minor as a cursory glance at the PDF will shew. Under that key and Nathaniel's name, all pieces are already on CPDL and cross-referenced to Boyce [There is a discrete Samuel Arnold Cathedral Music, but cross-references provided on CPDL to IMSLP lead one to the second edition of Boyce, in which Arnold had a very minor role). Similarly the Cathedral Anthems page that you set up up under the name of Arnold is Boyce II (I'm afraid I don't have current access to the Arnold volumes, only a distant recollection) Wallen has given all constituent elements of this service his own titles. They already correctly appear on CPDL under their correct titles according to BCP and general usage. Wallen is also the only person to describe SATB music with antiphonal passages as double choir.
In short to save a lot of future merge requests I think the administrators should ask Mr Wallen to conform to current practice, and to check what a body of cotributors of Anglican liturgy have already provided. Bonne chance & tschuss[[User:Cjshawcj|Cjshawcj]] ([[User talk:Cjshawcj|talk]]) 00:30, 22 July 2021 (UTC)


[[Harmonice Musices Odhecaton (Ottaviano Petrucci)|Odhecaton]] reads very clearly now, thanks! I spent a long time thinking about [[Liber generationis Jesu Christi (Josquin des Prez)]] before I was finally able to dredge up that other Greek title, [[Dodecachordon (Henricus Glareanus)]] (RISM 1547/01)! [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 22:12, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
:Your objections are quite understandable. Mike Wallen is a relative new-comer to CPDL, and I am trying to guide him as best I can. You are correct that Nathaniel Patrick wrote the Service in E minor, I just discovered this and will make the necessary corrections.
:Hi Richard, Thanks very much for your gracious reply. Harmonice Musices Odhecaton is a little confusing. I am more concerned about how to handle second editions in general (or second printings or volumes or other). I would appreciate your thoughts on [http://forums.cpdl.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=9725 this forum post].
:However, Mike Wallen does own some rare books! Greene's first edition (both volumes), and now it turns out he has the Arnold original 1790 ''Cathedral Music'' as well (at least the first three volumes) (see the photo he took of Vol. 1 title page on [[Cathedral Music, Volume 1 (Samuel Arnold)|this page]]) – and Johnstone (1975, Music and Letters 56(1):26-40) says Arnold's volumes are very different from Boyce's. The titles that Wallen has given these works come from his original editions of Arnold's volumes, not made up by him (though they could have been made up by Arnold). Both Mike and I would appreciate your help, since neither of us know much about what we're doing. Tomorrow you will see some changes along the lines you suggest. Feel free to edit and change as you see fit. Thank you for the comments! — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 00:50, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
:I'm a little dense (and as usual way out of my league), but why is Dodecachordon important? – [[User:Bcjohnston523|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:Bcjohnston523|(talk)]] 19:50, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
Just off to bed, so will reassess developments tomorrow. I would now clarify that general usage is as per titles on the Arnold publication page, first lines are redundant. There seems to be no distinction between major an minor keys (the Child is, I am fairly sure, the latter). Why the permissive use of Tr and C in the voicing? these fell out of general usage years ago. So SATB now becomes TrTrCCTTBB. Bah-this misrepresents all Anglican choral convention. Ownership of originals is no distinction I own all three volumes of Boyce (Knyvett's copies - look him up in the subscription list): it didn't induce me put a premium on distancing my posting from precedent. This pobably sounds crustier than its supposed to; but I am loth to start reinventing the wheel. G'night[[User:Cjshawcj|Cjshawcj]] ([[User talk:Cjshawcj|talk]]) 01:05, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
::I'll check out the forum thread; I already moved Josquin to the other -ton/-don ;-) [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 01:22, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
:I have spent a considerable amount of time today correcting unforced errors, and the end is still not in sight. I consider any further effort on my part will merely be reinforcing failure.. Please prevail upon Mike Wallen to post up volumes 2-4 with a little more accuracy.[[User:Cjshawcj|Cjshawcj]] ([[User talk:Cjshawcj|talk]]) 17:18, 22 July 2021 (UTC) And as a final gesture, I have tidied up the Te Deum page to get rid of all the irrelevant redundancies. I have inverted the voicing so that SATB is the norm (with SATBSATB possibilities downgraded). Anyone performing this style of canticle would expect that. At no point are more than 4 parts singing together. Therefore to link these items into SATBSATB categories is superfluous tautology (?see what I did there) and redundant complexification.[[User:Cjshawcj|Cjshawcj]] ([[User talk:Cjshawcj|talk]]) 12:40, 23 July 2021 (UTC)


== Your signature ==
== template:Pub ==


Hi Barry,
Hi Barry,
Something ([[Template talk:Pub#0 for parameter 1?]]) is still amiss and (non-)publication is invisible at [[Hubble (John Reager)]]. Can you see what's wrong? [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 20:08, 23 July 2021 (UTC)


For some strange reason your signature has changed from wikilinks
:I's not sure. It seems that John Reager published his work 'Hubble' in 2013, when he posted his work to CPDL. Is that not right? That happens on quite a few pages, and most times it's just cited as <nowiki>{{Pub|1|<Year>}}</nowiki>. But maybe there's something different about this one? Do I need to add a note about self-published works? (I have published several books electronically, on the web) — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 02:33, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
: <tt><nowiki>— [[User:Bcjohnston523|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:Bcjohnston523|(talk)]]</nowiki></tt>
to URLs
: <tt><nowiki>— [http://www.cpdl.org/wiki/index.php/User:Bcjohnston523 Barry Johnston] ([http://www.cpdl.org/wiki/index.php/User_Talk:Bcjohnston523 talk])</nowiki></tt>
was it deliberate? Don't you prefer the simpler wikilinks? —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [[User talk:Carlos|(talk)]] 02:38, 13 January 2019 (UTC)


:Hi Carlos, No, it was not deliberate on my part. I will change it back. Thanks for noticing! — [[User:Bcjohnston523|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:Bcjohnston523|(talk)]] 23:40, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
::Yes, I suppose that counts as 'first published' (see however the [https://www.cpdl.org/wiki/index.php?title=Hubble_(John_Reager)&action=edit&oldid=491711 page as edited by John]) but my main question is whether 0 is still a valid parameter ([https://www.cpdl.org/wiki/index.php?title=Hubble_(John_Reager)&oldid=1543069 here's the page before I edited it]). [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 05:14, 24 July 2021 (UTC)


::No problem! I took the liberty to run a script to replace the URLs by wikilinks on talk pages. Regards, —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [[User talk:Carlos|(talk)]] 01:07, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
:::Now I get it. 0 still works, see what I did with [[Hubble (John Reager)]]. Note that the result is that ''Hubble'' is not listed in [[:Category:2013 works]] – is that what you want? — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 14:33, 24 July 2021 (UTC)


== Tate and Brady ==
::::Thanks, looks slightly odd to me, but I was merely trying to clarify John Reager's intention. For [[:Template:Pub]] 'parameter 1'=0 seems to be a special case, in that "cmp=" is non-optional. From the '''Syntax C''' documentation one might think that the 'parameter 3' argument has to be used as parameter 4.
::::With [[Protector noster, MH 501 (Johann Michael Haydn)]], I don't know whether 1789 is the composition date or copying (ms=) date, but it's odd to have the '''Published:''' field just disappear. [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 20:52, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
:::::I'm relieved the 'stormy waters' below are smoothed! Let me propose something new at [[Template talk:Pub#0 for parameter 1?]]. [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 01:42, 28 July 2021 (UTC)


Hi Barry! I noticed that you made a text replace for this duo to make them appear as "Tate and Brady". Do you intend to create a single page with that title, or were you just not pleased by their full names appearing on the Lyricist line? If you use the template {{tl|Alias}} you can have the best of both worlds: {{tl|Lyricist|2|Tate|Brady}} will display as {{Lyricist|2|Tate|Brady}}. Regards, —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [[User talk:Carlos|(talk)]] 01:46, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
== Samuel Arnold ==
:Hi Carlos,
:Thanks for noticing this! Actually, I have been working on the [https://www.cpdl.org/wiki/index.php/Template:PubList Template:PubList], as requested by [[User:Claude T]]; this template uses dpl to create a table of works that link to the publication. If in the <tt>include=</tt> line there is just <nowiki>{Lyricist}:1</nowiki>, that works for single lyricists, but for two or more, the output table shows "2" in the Lyricist column. See, for example, ''[https://www.cpdl.org/wiki/index.php/The_Chorister%27s_Companion_(Jocelin_and_Doolittle)#Works_at_CPDL The Chorister's Companion]'' which uses PubList with Lyricist in the fourth column. So I began converting some of these pages to Lyricist: Tate and Brady so they would display correctly in the PubList table.
:Lately, I have tried to modify my code to make this happen without creating a new page (I'm not really sure how that would work anyway). But I'm stuck on one little issue: how do you refer to a template parameter in a parser function? Such as <nowiki>{{#ifeq:{{Lyricist|1}}|2|...</nowiki> (which doesn't work)? My experimental code is at [https://www.cpdl.org/wiki/index.php/Template:PubList3 Template:Publist3]. Do you have any advice? Thanks! — [[User:Bcjohnston523|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:Bcjohnston523|(talk)]] 05:27, 15 January 2019 (UTC)


== an other Voicing template ==
Was a drunken sot. Anecdotes of his dealings with Haydn and of his premature death should persuade you of that. If you look at the "Miserere" (thank you for countermanding my advice twice) you will find that you have linked it to a page of Kyries. It seems ridiculous to me the lengths you and Wallen are going to perpetuate and spread errors which should be silently corrected before posting. In addition I dislike the continuing references to two choirs. That category is reserved for the likes of Venetian cori spezzati, or at least for pieces which divide into more than 4 parts at any juncture whatsoever. If you can't understand the subtlety of difference between pieces for two choirs and pieces for one choir splitting antiphonally, then perhaps you should restrict your posting to psimplistic psalmody. Kindly reverse your uncoupling of the Patrick Mag & Nunc that I had posted up. On the Magnificat and Nunc Dimittis pages you will find c.180 examples of the coupling, which has been honoured by all usage since c.1580, including by Boyce. I see no reason why the general usage should be reversed one the whim of one new contributor, who is too lazy to find out how such things are evidenced. Or alternatively, apply a moronic system which catalogues all evening services by constituent items only. But if the latter, PLEASE obtain the consent of your administration peers before commencing a general dumbing-down.[[User:Cjshawcj|Cjshawcj]] ([[User talk:Cjshawcj|talk]]) 23:51, 26 July 2021 (UTC)


Hi, and thanks for the Chigi/Ockeghem notes: I'll have to look into ''Missa Ma maitresse' (Ma mattresses as the spell checker would have it).
:I have reverted to the page [[Magnificat and Nunc dimittis in G minor (Nathaniel Patrick)]]; you created it, within your prerogatives as an editor. It was my mistake to separate this into two pages. Please forgive me.
:On this and the other matter you discuss, there is uncontested variation among editors at CPDL; please allow Mike Wallen the same editorial privileges you enjoy.
:In my understanding, ''Decani'' and ''Cantoris'' refers to two choirs on opposite sides of the chancel. Is this not correct?
:Details of Samuel Arnold's life belong on his page, not on a work page.
:It would help if you would please identify the "c.1590" manuscript.
:And finally, I see my role here as helping a new user get started. I try to be as considerate and careful as I can, (sometimes I make mistakes, not the best at dealing with people). Nonetheless, I will not enforce one editor's preferences over another. — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 14:44, 27 July 2021 (UTC)


At [[Motectorum cum 5, 6 et 8 vocibus. Liber primus (Ippolito Baccusi)]] I noticed MultiPubList misses MultiVoicing arguments. In many cases of course Voicing + comma is more appropriate. [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 20:24, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
::I apologise for my asperity. The reason is that I was a boy chorister in a cathedral choir in 1965 (boarding school bilked me of the Summer of love as my voice broke), and have been editing/performing similar material for 25 years. Arnold is nothing out of the ordinary (I have been consulting the 1843 revision by Rimbault for 20 years). In short, I know a lot about this subject. It is not a question of respecting Wallen's editorial decisions, but of trying to steer his contributions into bog-standard conventions which all the other contributors of Anglican music observe on here. Arnold is far from infallible, and the treatment of his errors as holy writ, to be carried down unto the tenth generation, is risible. Actually, I don't consider Mr Wallen to be an editor, since he retails Arnold's work as close to the original as he possibly can, with no exercise of critical faculties whatever. The resultant transcriptions are unperformable for most choirs and unintelligible to virtually everyone, including apparently, Mr Wallen himself. The multi-choir gloss he gives to the source doesn't stand scrutiny, and it certainly doesn't warrant the fumbling essay it is accorded on each and every work page.
::I think that, rather than see further damage done to the extensive and apparently fragile ecology of the Anglican repertoire on here, I would offer to post Mr Wallen's contributions (after creation of the initial score) myself. But he must be prepared to observe generally observed conventions. The one currently leaping off the page at me is that the title of pieces should include the key. I don't know the American usage, but the English usage (under which his pieces were conceived) is to omit the "major" from major keys. Thus the Child service should be titled in E flat (not E flat major). A quick scrutiny of the Magnificat page will prove that.
::I made up the 1590 manuscript (as a verifiable item). Clearly Patrick was dead by 1595, and his works were not transmitted orally. Manuscripts tend to be undated, with clusters around 1630-40 and 1720. Boyce acted as a clearing-house for all that had gone before, and I have dated a lot of pieces, sometimes with semi-fictitious sources, to counter the clumsy "First published" line, which leads those with less knowledge to think that there was no flourishing Anglican choral tradition before 1768. Mea culpa (not much)
::I think we are probably through the stormiest waters, since Nathaniel Patrick is the composer Arnold misstated most. You appear to be in close communication with Mr Wallen. I e-mailed him direct on 20th re Maurice Greene (supportive, not abusive) but have had no acknowledgement. Did it perhaps miscarry?[[User:Cjshawcj|Cjshawcj]] ([[User talk:Cjshawcj|talk]]) 18:39, 27 July 2021 (UTC) P.S. upon re-reading, forgot to thank you for the un-decoupling of the NatPat M&G


:Hi Barry, let me take the opportunity to congratulate you for this new template {{tl|MultiPubList}}! You've done an amazing job there! —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [[User talk:Carlos|(talk)]] 02:44, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
== Anonymous lyricist settings ==


::Hi Carlos, thank you! It has definitely been a learning experience. [[User:Claude T|Claude]]'s patience and encouragement have been great help. I have discovered a few things. Perhaps you already know about dplvar – it can be set early in a page, and then used in other templates later. In designing the new version of {{tl|MultiPubList}}, I set some dplvars (years of publication) in the template {{tl|Volumes}}, then used them later in {{tl|MultiPubList}}.
Hi Barry, did you find out the answers you were looking for? Being succinct, the invisible [[Anonymous lyricist settings]] is basically a "ghost" page, used to mimic the inclusion of the work in a category. Instead of looking for all works in [[:Category:Anonymous lyricist settings]], the DPL checks for all pages that ''link to'' the hidden page [[Anonymous lyricist settings]]. I made that change to avoid having to create hundreds of categories, one for each lyricist. Hope that helps! PS: Whenever you need a prompt reply from me, please email me, ok? Regards, —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [[User talk:Carlos|(talk)]] 01:46, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
::Also, at [[User:Choralia|Max]]'s suggestion, I have been testing dpl 3.3 on the test server. A few changes, new to me at least: 1. category= cannot be blank, so parameter calls like <nowiki>category={{if#{{{2|}}}|{{{2|}}} works}}</nowiki> gives an error if <nowiki>{{{2|}}}</nowiki> is undefined or blank; so multiple categories need to be concatenated and nested if any of them could be undefined or blank. 2. suppresserrors has been deprecated, it's easy enough to replace it with <nowiki>noresultsheader=&#38;nbsp&#59;</nowiki> or =0; I just have to remember  not to use suppresserrors any more! 3. A major bug in dpl3 is that it won't produce output in columns, but Max made a patch for us that allows columns!
::I would be interested in your thoughts or suggestions about how things are going with publications, or other things I am involved in. I suspect many of the issues we face have been discussed before. — [[User:Bcjohnston523|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:Bcjohnston523|(talk)]] 03:52, 2 July 2019 (UTC)


== Arrangers' categories ==
:Hi Carlos, I did find the answers I needed, thank you. I wrote the post on your talk page, and later deduced how you had designed the page. I removed the  post after my realization, not wanting to bother you with a question I had the answer to. Thanks for following up, and I will use email next time. — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 03:35, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
::No problem! And sorry for being so absent lately, I'll try to reply promptly next time :) —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [[User talk:Carlos|(talk)]] 16:33, 5 September 2021 (UTC)


Hi Barry, I noticed that some time ago you started creating new categories for arrangers, like [http://www.cpdl.org/wiki/index.php?title=Gabriel%27s_Message_(Traditional)&diff=next&oldid=914187 in here]. This could be automated inside template {{tl|Composer}} when used with the parameter <tt>composertype</tt>, as you probably already know. Do you have a reason for preferring to add these categories by hand instead? Regards, —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [[User talk:Carlos|(talk)]] 15:53, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
== In dulci jubilo ==
:Hi Carlos, Automating creation of Category:<name> arrangements sounds like a good idea to me; I would rather not have to do it by hand. I usually use the template {{tl|Arranger}} in these situations (it's easier), so perhaps the automation should be in that template? My motivation in creating these categories is to be able to distinguish works original to a composer from works they arranged, as [[William_Walker|here]] or [[Ananias_Davisson|here]]. Both Composer and Arranger are in most of these work pages. Both are display options in PubList and MultiPubList, so I want there to be separate templates on the work page for Arranger and Composer, not <nowiki>Composer|…|composertype=Arranger</nowiki> – that last would be interpreted as another composer and shown in the composer column of the table. Also notice the template {{tl|ArrangerCatTxt}}, which works like {{tl|CompCatTxt}}. Are there other composertypes allowed in Composer? The explanatory text with the template doesn't discuss this, which is why I was hesitant to change the Composer template. Thanks for your help! — [[User:Bcjohnston523|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:Bcjohnston523|(talk)]] 03:55, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
::I don't remember where the discussion took place for creation of the Arranger template, but for some reason it was decided back then that arrangers would also have a "_compositions" category (just like composers), instead of an "_arrangements" category. That's why the Composer template was used, instead of creating new code for Template:Arranger. But that behaviour can be changed if we agree on it. —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [[User talk:Carlos|(talk)]] 16:41, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
:::I agree, arrangements must also be shown as compositions (with the arranger as composer); otherwise they would not appear on the arranger/composer page. To me, the _arrangements category is an addition to the existing design (and I hope an improvement), rather than a replacement for it. However, without an _arrangements category, SortWorks wouldnt be able to distinguish original compositions from arrangements. My suggestion, to change the code for Arranger rather than Composer, comes from observing that to change Arranger looks easier; it doesnt matter to me. (Sorry, send from a Linux system, and I dont remember how to do apostrophes or quotes) — [[User:Bcjohnston523|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:Bcjohnston523|(talk)]] 20:18, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
::::Ok, I've changed the Composer template so that it now also categorizes arrangements under a <arranger>_arrangements category. Please check if that's what you expected. Regards, —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [[User talk:Carlos|(talk)]] 04:03, 9 June 2019 (UTC)


== Novello Part-Song Books ==
Hi Barry, thanks for your messages, I think (after much googling and trial and error) I have succeeded in getting the composer list to sort correctly - I have also added 'Latin only' to the bottom table - see what you think (although actually the score in question is not Latin only, it has both English and German text!)
[[User:MandyShaw|Mandy Shaw]] ([[User talk:MandyShaw|talk]]) 18:06, 31 December 2021 (UTC)


Sorry to take so long to reply to your note about Vol.1 changes, Barry. Actually, I thought I had replied but I’ve been having some problems with my email ISP. On checking through, I found my reply was still in the draft folder!
:Hi Mandy, wow! I learned a few things here, thank you very much. It looks good, all except for the "Latin only" issue. You're right, [[Medley of Renaissance carols (James W. Keefe)]] was incorrectly categorized – I have changed it to Language: Latin, English, German. As I look further, there are some in German, English, and Latin; as well as in German and Latin, and Latin and English. The "Latin only" issue involved one score (CPDL 61987) in [[In dulci jubilo (Bartholomeus Gesius)]] – Maybe this edition should be moved to a page of its own, to facilitate its inclusion in the "Latin only" table? Meanwhile, I have created a manual-only table, I agree, not very satisfying.
Firstly, belated apologies for messing up your work. As you are aware, I am not a native Wiki speaker, but I’m fairly certain I did not get any error messages when making my original changes to the volume name and the links in the works pages. The error messages only appeared the next morning when I checked after receiving your email.
:This is a very big issue, that I have not been able to completely solve yet – adding editions to a page with different language, text, lyricist, or voices than the original composition. I dealt with this in cleaning up the [[Johann Sebastian Bach]] page (and all of his works!) – where I decided that editions in a different language deserved a separate page. However, with [[In dulci jubilo]], someone decided to deal with this by turning the text page into a disambiguation page – which is okay, it just makes CPDL more internally inconsistent. And it still looks weird on the {{CiteCat|Works in German}} page to see ''In dulci jubilo''. There are several other ways editors have dealt with this, and many pages that are a combination of approaches, like [[In dulci jubilo]]. — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 21:08, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
Once I have transcribed all the works in a volume, your tables contain much more information than  mine, so I see no problem with deleting my tables at that point. Before that, it is useful to have a full list of the works in a volume so that I can see what still needs to be done.
In terms of which particular version I prefer, I think the table you have created in Volume 3 is best. It contain more information and also updates instantly when I add a new work. The table in Volume 2 has not picked up 1 work, no.83 All ye woods (Henry Lahee).
Once again, many apologies.
[[User:Jamesgibb|Jamesgibb]] ([[User talk:Jamesgibb|talk]]) 15:51, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
:Hi James. Thanks for your gracious reply. A great deal has happened since my e-mail to you; in short words, MultiPubList has been modified to take care of the problem (punctuation in publication titles), so there should be no more error messages, I hope!
:I have changed Volumes 1 and 2 so that they display the same table format as Volume 3. Please consider keeping both tables, as it is useful to have both an alphabetical list and a sequential list. Some editors include other parameters (''e.g.'', key) in their manual tables that MultiPubList cannot, because it depends on templates on the work page. For most pages that have a manual list, only a fraction of the works are represented at CPDL.
:I got All ye woods (Henry Lahee) included – it turns out the problem was it was missing the category {{CiteCat|Sheet music}}!
:Your apologies are accepted, but it is I who should be apologising for changing a title without asking. Best wishes, — [[User:Bcjohnston523|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:Bcjohnston523|(talk)]] 03:00, 13 June 2019 (UTC)


== [[Florilegium Portense]] ==
== Anonymous disambiguations ==


Thanks for re-merging the two volumes! I like the column format too. [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 02:25, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
Hi Barry,
 
== MultiPubList ==
 
Hi Barry, did you make any recent change to {{tl|MultiPubList}}? There seems to be a problem with it, please look [[Cancioneiro de Elvas|here]]. Regards, —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [[User talk:Carlos|(talk)]] 15:38, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
 
:Hi Carlos, I fixed this temporarily – currently "yr" can't be used in {{tl|MultiPubList}} for publications with manuscripts. The problem arose from changes to {{tl|Pub}} to better represent manuscripts. I will have to adjust {{tl|MultiPubList}} also. Thanks for catching this! — [[User:Bcjohnston523|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:Bcjohnston523|(talk)]] 16:02, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
 
:All fixed now. Sorry it took longer than I thought. — [[User:Bcjohnston523|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:Bcjohnston523|(talk)]] 19:41, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
::That was quite fast! Thanks for your great work on publications. —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [[User talk:Carlos|(talk)]] 02:58, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
 
:Hi Barry, not sure if this is part of the same problem, but the “Works at CPDL” auto-list is suddenly not working on any of the four pages of Pierre Attaingnant Motettorum volumes (eg. [[Motettorum, Book 14 (Pierre Attaingnant)|Book 14]]). I can’t see immediately why this is so, as the identical MultiPubList construct is working perfectly on other pages (eg. [[Cantionum sacrarum liber 5 (Pierre de Manchicourt)]])...? —[[User:Fysh|Andrew Fysh]] [[User talk:Fysh|(talk)]] 22:12, 22 December 2019 (UTC)


::That was quick, Barry! Whatever you did, it has worked...thanks! —[[User:Fysh|Andrew Fysh]] [[User talk:Fysh|(talk)]] 22:23, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
I was about to update the textpage link to [[Agnus Dei (Old Hall Ms.) (Anonymous)]] but would like to get your ideas first: I've been using things like title (source) Anonymous and the roman numeral convention, ending up with [[Salve sancta parens IV (D-Ju MS 33) (Anonymous)]] and the like, but with OH there's a conventional numbering so I've treated it like a catalog number in [[Gloria, Old Hall 21 (Leonel Power)]]. So, do you think we need parentheses for [[Agnus Dei (Old Hall 139) (Anonymous)]] or as it now stands [[Agnus Dei 13 (Old Hall Ms.) (Anonymous)]]? [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 19:45, 15 June 2022 (UTC)


:::Hi Andrew, thanks for bringing this to my attention. About a month ago, we changed the code in order to properly account for manuscripts. I know, these publications aren't manuscripts, but now the third parameter of {{tl|PubDatePlace}} must be stated: <tt>Manuscript</tt> if it is a manuscript, or <tt><nowiki>&#38;nbsp&#59;</nowiki></tt> if not. I have changed the three publications you mentioned so that {{tl|MultiPubList}} displays correctly. I thought we had caught all of these, but apparently not. Let me know if you see others. — [[User:Bcjohnston523|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:Bcjohnston523|(talk)]] 22:25, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
:Hi Richard,
::::Understood, thanks. I’ve checked the 26 publications that I have hyperlinked on the [[Pierre de Manchicourt]] page, and all are (now) working. I’ll let you know if I see others. Cheers! —[[User:Fysh|Andrew Fysh]] [[User talk:Fysh|(talk)]] 22:52, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
:When I first made the complete works table, I assigned a number after the title, so ''Agnus Dei 1 (Anonymous)'', ''Agnus Dei 2 (Anonymous)'', etc. I thought about Roman numerals, but some of these run to 15 or more! Nonetheless, soon after that, another editor ([[User:Droopop]]) changed most of the disambiguation numbers in the table to the sequence in the publication, as ''Agnus Dei, Old Hall 6 (Anonymous)''. He seems to know more than I do about this manuscript, so it looked like a good idea to me. But he didn't change all of them, there's still some that need renaming (moving) – I was waiting until others noticed the full table and had a chance to comment. I think we are there, so I say go ahead and move [[Agnus Dei 13 (Old Hall Ms.) (Anonymous)]] to [[Agnus Dei (Old Hall 139) (Anonymous)]]. There are several others that need moving (or renaming in the table), too.
:By the way, what does the abbreviation "tro" mean in the DIAMM list? — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 20:44, 15 June 2022 (UTC)


== 2020 ==
::Sounds good. I'm hoping at some time in the future the composer page will look for a parenthetical argument to the left of "(Anonymous)", so [[Gloria, Old Hall 21 (Leonel Power)]] but [[Gloria (Old Hall 1) (Anonymous)]] instead of [[Gloria, Old Hall 1 (Anonymous)]], if that makes sense.
:: Not spotting "tro" at the moment, though. [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 00:06, 18 June 2022 (UTC)


Happy new year to you, best wishes for 2020! --[[User:Music4Ever|Music4Ever]] ([[User talk:Music4Ever|talk]]) 20:41, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
== Boyce Cathedral Music ==


== MultiPubList ==
Hi Barry,
Hi Barry,
I'm having trouble with MultiPubList: I split [[Novum et insigne opus musicum]] into [[Novum et insigne opus musicum (Ott & Formschneider)]] and [[Novum et insigne opus musicum (Berg & Neuber)]], and now the list of works isn't displaying correctly for either of them. Any idea what's going wrong? [[User:Adrianwall|Adrian M. Wall]] ([[User talk:Adrianwall|talk]]) 19:13, 15 May 2020 (UTC)


:It was the use of ampersand in the parenthesis, and specification of a year as the second parameter of MultiPubList. I changed [[Novum et insigne opus musicum (Ott & Formschneider)]] to [[Novum et insigne opus musicum (Ott, Formschneider)]] – but it could be "Ott et Formschneider" or "Ott and Formschneider" if you like one of those better. (I wrote this up [https://www.cpdl.org/wiki/index.php/Help:Create_a_new_music_publication_page here]). I only changed one work page ([[Pater noster (Josquin des Prez)]]), but wanted to wait to see what you think about what I did. Let me know what you want. If you want me to change the other page and all the linked works, I can do that too. [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 21:37, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
I was just about to add [[Blessed is he that considereth the poor (Michael Wise)]] when I discovered IMSLP is missing pages. Do you happen to know other facsimiles of [[Cathedral Music (William Boyce)]]? British Library looks confusing on my first stabs at a search. [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 22:08, 23 July 2022 (UTC)


:: Thanks for your quick response. I had wondered whether the "&" was the problem but I thought it better to check with someone who knows what they're doing before making an even bigger mess! I think I'll go with "and". [[User:Adrianwall|Adrian M. Wall]] ([[User talk:Adrianwall|talk]]) 09:17, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
:Second edition of Vol. 3 at [https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10071339k/f7.item BNF]. That's all I could find right away. I'll look more later. — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 02:11, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
::Thanks! [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 05:16, 24 July 2022 (UTC)


==[[:Template:Disambig]]==
== Choralis Constantinus ==
Hi Barry,
I was wondering how [[Schumann (disambiguation)]] turned up in [[:Category:Disambiguation of works|Category:Disambiguation of '''works''']] and noticed you'd edited Template:Disambig. Unless I'm failing to appreciate a more complicated situation, could we put it back to including only the parent category? [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 21:49, 1 July 2020 (UTC)


:Hi Richard, I should have changed [[Schumann (disambiguation)]] to <nowiki>{{disambig|name}}</nowiki>, but I missed this one; I just corrected it. [[User:Carlos]] enhanced this template in October 2019 to add a parameter, "work" "text" or "pub". I just added "name". As I recall, this was so the message in the box read correctly: "people who share the same name" in this case, or "pages that share the same title" in the case of works. I have discovered several pages to be added, there are probably more; and only the "name" ones have "(disambiguation)" in the title. Not sure about deflating these into one category, to me the current setup seems useful. — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 22:40, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
Thanks again for the autolist at [[Choralis Constantinus (Heinrich Isaac)]], which I've been using to update Introits & Communions in the hand list. I might be tired right now, but can't spot the reason [[Jerusalem surge (Heinrich Isaac)]] is omitted? [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 20:03, 5 August 2022 (UTC)


::Thanks for such a clear explanation! Rather than pushing for "style" I'll just add Category:Disambiguation to [[Classical (disambiguation)]] and [[Modern (disambiguation)]] [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 02:12, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
:[[Jerusalem surge (Heinrich Isaac)]] was missing the "<nowiki>|vol=Volume 1</nowiki>" and the pub reference was "<nowiki>[[Choralis Constantinus]]</nowiki>" (a redirect page) rather than "<nowiki>{{NoComp|Choralis Constantinus|Heinrich Isaac}}</nowiki>". (Also, the MultiPubList call shouldn't include the date when Template:Volumes is used.) Cheers. — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 21:15, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
 
:::Thank you! That's a good solution, and [[Classical (disambiguation)]] reads ''much'' better now. — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 11:39, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
 
==MultiPubList again==
Hi Barry,
Can you spot where I go wrong at [[Pseaumes de David mis en musique, 3vv (Claude Le Jeune)]]? [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 06:05, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
:Hi Richard, There needs to be a PubDatePlace for all three Livres; on the work page, Pub needs to include "|vol=Livre 2". I am confused by the numbering of works (they are not numbered in the original, as far as I can see): the first line with a number is line 10, which is number 9? Also the first line in Livre 2 is supposed to be "L", not "I", I think. This would look better if the lines were displayed like "1. ''Qui au conseil des malins'', Psalm 1" or something like that. Also "Sources (digital copies)" needs to be <nowiki>===External links===</nowiki>. — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 15:03, 18 July 2020 (UTC)


== Missing pages ==
::Of course; thanks! Some others are [[Domine quinque talenta (Heinrich Isaac)]] & [[Fidelis servus et prudens (Heinrich Isaac)]] (I assume latency issue?) and [[Missa Paschalis a 4 (i) (Heinrich Isaac)]]. [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 21:23, 5 August 2022 (UTC)


Hi Berry,
:Both of these last two have been corrected. [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 02:37, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
I'm having trouble seeing why [[Il sol, qual or più splende (Carlo Gesualdo)]] is missing from the composer page; I've also noted a deepening [[Template talk:CheckMissing#a Byrd mystery]]. Any ideas? All the best, [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 23:55, 21 October 2020 (UTC)


:Hi Richard, I see [[Il sol, qual or più splende (Carlo Gesualdo)]] on [[Carlo Gesualdo]], under "Secular works for six voices" - it's in the second column. The remainder of discussion on [[Template talk:CheckMissing]] Cheers, — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 01:24, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
== [[God Will Provide for Me (Charles Albert Tindley)]] ==
::You're right; thanks! [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 22:16, 22 October 2020 (UTC)


== DPL templates ==
Hi Barry.  I've added some discussion to the talk page of this work, about the (short) syllable count in verses 2 & 3 (only 10 syllables, where there should be 11). -- [[User:CHGiffen|Chuck]][[User talk:CHGiffen|<sub><small>'''talk'''</small></sub>]]&nbsp;[[User:Charles H. Giffen|Giffen]][[Charles H. Giffen|<sub>'''♫'''</sub>]] 02:41, 21 August 2022 (UTC)


Hi Barry! I've found a couple of templates inside category [[:Category:DPL templates|DPL templates]] that do not use DPL at all. As it seems, they were included in this category by [http://www.cpdl.org/wiki/index.php?title=Template:CatAZ&diff=1057892&oldid=1057411| a query ] you ran in January. Could you please check? Thanks, —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [[User talk:Carlos|(talk)]] 17:19, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
== MultiPubList on [[Pratum musicum (Emanuel Adriaenssen)]] ==
:Hi Carlos! Thanks for pointing this out. You're right, there were several that didn't belong; and there are several that need to be included. I am working my way through the category to make sure it's correct. PS. Perhaps you know how to answer my question at [[Talk:Anonymous#Works not yet on this page]] — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 20:06, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi Barry, I wonder if you could help me solve a mystery on this page I just added.  As I have many times, I used the Volumes template to distinguish between the three editions of the book.  Lacking any information about the contents of the third edition, I proceeded to enter the contents of the other two, as normal.  I then added Pub templates, using the vol= parameter and NoComp, since there are multiple composers.  Long story short, the MultiPubList only displays two works in Edition 1 if I include the 'seq' parameter, and it includes several items in Edition 2 for which I did not add a Pub field indicating such when I don't include the 'seq' parameter.  For example, [[Appariran per me (Orlando di Lasso)]] shows up in both editions in the 'Works at CPDL' section, but should only appear in Edition 1.  What am I missing?  I went back and made sure every Pub template on every work page has the no= parameter as well, but other than that I am stumped. - [[User:GeoffG|GeoffG]] ([[User talk:GeoffG|talk]]) 01:48, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
::Thank you! —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [[User talk:Carlos|(talk)]] 02:45, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
:Hi Geoff, I looked into this a little, and see what you're talking about. I tried some simple tests, but no solutions so far. The two that appear in Ed. 1 are the two for which you have two Pub lines, not sure if that's significant. I will look into this more later, it might take a while. Thanks! — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 16:39, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
::Thanks, Barry. As you can see, I added two Pub lines for those two works because the same piece appears in the same edition twice, with two different arrangements. I can't recall ever doing that before. Is there a better way to express that with the current templates? Might it be better to include both items on one Pub line (with a note about the arrangements)? - [[User:GeoffG|GeoffG]] ([[User talk:GeoffG|talk]]) 01:19, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
:::No, please don't change that, you did it the best way. There really isn't a better way, and others have done the same before anyway. The current problem is in a different area, I think, maybe with design of MultiPubList? — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 04:12, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
:::I have a possible solution to the second issue, works being listed in both volumes when only one is intended. I modified MultiPubList to include not only "Category:Edition n" but also "Category:YYYY works". (Because yesterday, works were included in the list if they were in the "Category:Edition n", and some works were in that category but not in ''Pratum musicum''.) My modified code is in Templates:MultiPubList5 (and MPList5). I applied my test code temporarily to [[Pratum musicum (Emanuel Adriaenssen)]] – could you please check the lists there to see if they are correct now?
:::And further, do you think is this fix going to function correctly in future? In other words, do you foresee a case where a work will have two Pub lines (from different publications) from the same year, both with the same vol word? If so, then I need to do more work.
:::I can deal with the first issue, using the seq parameter causes incomplete output, a little later. — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 02:37, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
::::Thanks, Barry.  That definitely helped.  There are still four works showing up in both lists, however. They are all works by Lasso that appear in the first edition of 'Pratum musicum' (1584) and also appear in [[La fleur des chansons (Orlando di Lasso)|a Lasso compilation from 1592]].  As for other cases, it is already the case that a work such as [[Ancor che col partire (Cipriano de Rore)]] appears in two different publications from 1584, both with the vol word 'Edition'.  This doesn't seem to cause a problem. It is also the case that a publication such as '[[Il terzo libro de madrigali a cinque voci (Cipriano de Rore)]]' has two editions from the same year. This also appears to be working properly. - [[User:GeoffG|GeoffG]] ([[User talk:GeoffG|talk]]) 03:32, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
:::::Thank you. I made some changes, but there are still 26 works in Edition 2, including several that shouldn't be there.  This is going to take some time to resolve. — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 15:40, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
:::::Still working on this: there are works in Edition 3 that shouldn't be there either. I will keep going… — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 16:50, 2 September 2023 (UTC)


== DPL issue ==
==Robert Barber (I) and (II)==
Hi, Barry.
I see that you have tidied up the pages for the two Robert Barbers, but I wonder whether their numbering could be reversed. You have allotted (II) to the Tudor composer and plain 'Robert Barber' to the 18th century man. Normally when there are two composers with the same name, '(I)' is allotted to the elder and '(II)' to the younger (as in Grove's Dictionary, for example). I realise that the plain 'Robert Barber' has more compositions than the Tudor man and also that his page was created first, but surely these should not be the criteria by which composers are categorised? It just seems illogical to me to have (II) coming before (I).


Hi Barry! Any idea why %USER% is not working for pages edited this year alone? Old pages at [[ChoralWiki:Recent discussions]] bring this information correctly, but not the recent ones. Quite weird! I've checked the DPL3 documentation but couldn't find any clues. I thought of asking you, since you're more familiar with this new version of DPL. —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [[User talk:Carlos|(talk)]] 15:58, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
Best wishes,
[[User:Jason Smart|Jason Smart]] ([[User talk:Jason Smart|talk]]) 07:37, 28 March 2023 (UTC)


:Hi Carlos! Weird, yes. Not sure why {{tl|TalkList}} behaves this way, I will keep checking. I was suspicious of the allrevisionsince parameter, but the template still shows Users wrong without it. Perhaps the answer lies with MediaWiki. What category is %USER%? It's not a parameter or a variable. — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 19:24, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
:Hi Jason, you are correct; it was laziness on my part. I would like to lose the parenthesis, though, for two reasons. First, it looks odd in CPDL's syntax:
:<tt>The night is come (Robert Barber (II))</tt>&nbsp; ''versus''&nbsp; <tt>The night is come (Robert Barber II)</tt>
:Second, there are several CPDL programs that might have to be rewritten, that search on the final parenthesis in a page name.  
:I will make the changes that you asked for. Thanks for the input. — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 15:15, 28 March 2023 (UTC)


:Names are shown for User before the last week in January, 2020 – about the time DPL3 and MediaWiki 1.33 were installed. I did notice that for some lines where User isn't shown, the last edit was by an editor not appearing on the Talk page (so they wouldn't have a <nowiki>[[User:]]</nowiki> entry?) — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 03:54, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
::Hi Barry,
::Thanks for the info! I made several tests but couldn't find a solution. It's probably related to a database change in MadiaWiki 1.33, will have to check. Thanks again, —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [[User talk:Carlos|(talk)]] 05:14, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
::Many thanks for that. Much appreciated! Yes, there would be no harm in losing the parentheses.
::Probably related to this: [[w:mw:Actor migration]]. Apparently, our database hasn't been fully converted to the new schema (which would result in ''all'' editor names disappearing from the query, since DPL3 isn't compatible with the new table layout yet). —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [[User talk:Carlos|(talk)]] 06:23, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
::Best wishes,
:::Combining your discovery ([[w:mw:Actor migration]]) with my [https://gitlab.com/hydrawiki/extensions/DynamicPageList/-/issues/4865 issue] with allrevisionssince (and others like it) and [https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T167246 Phabricator T167246]: "… the migration is being done gradually, over several MediaWiki releases. It is expected to finish in MediaWiki 1.34." and "migration states: (1) Read and write old columns only (2) Write both old and new columns. Read from new preferentially, falling back to old. (3) Write only new columns. Read from new preferentially, falling back to old. (4) Read and write the new columns only." (this schedule has been modified since 2010)
::[[User:Jason Smart|Jason Smart]] ([[User talk:Jason Smart|talk]]) 15:25, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
:::*Migration of the data base is being done in parts: apparently MW 1.33 migrated Actors who made page revisions after MW 1.33 was installed (field rev_user →‎ rev_actor).
:::*MW 1.31 (or 32) apparently included migration of other fields, such as those used in allrevisionssince (''e.g.'', field rev_user_text →‎ rev_actor).
:::The way [[User:Choralia|Max]] dealt with this is to replace those fields with the new ones in the MW code, as I recall. What I don't know: how to reference the rev_actor field in WikiText? — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 16:31, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
::::Please also note [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension_talk:DynamicPageList3#DynamicPageList3_does_not_follow_the_Actor_Migration this] specific issue with DPL 3.3.3, and, even worse, the fact that DPL 3.3.3 is not compatible with the latest stable MediaWiki version (1.35)! ''You are advised against using this extension on a live site.'' It's a mess. I'm currently testing MediaWiki version 1.35 on the test server and the situation is not horrible, however I wonder how many subtle problems may exist like the one mentioned here. I've already repeatedly patched DPL 3.3.3 to make it work with MediaWiki 1.33, I'll try to find another workaround for this problem, too. Max a.k.a. [[User:Choralia|Choralia]] ([[User talk:Choralia|talk]]) 21:14, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
:::::I've made another patch to DPL 3.3.3, and it seems that [[ChoralWiki:Recent discussions]] works correctly now. It's the most horrible workaround I created ever: as the page ID is correctly determined, I patched the php code so that the corresponding page object is found, then the ID of the user who last edited the page is determined, and eventually the username associated to the given user ID is found. Quite garbled, however it seems OK. Max a.k.a. [[User:Choralia|Choralia]] ([[User talk:Choralia|talk]]) 21:06, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
::::::Very clever, Max! Thanks for the patch, good to see the lists working again. —[[User:Carlos|Carlos]] [[User talk:Carlos|(talk)]] 02:10, 11 December 2020 (UTC)


== Calendar ==
== Funeral (Samuel Wakefield) ==


Hi Barry,
Hi Barry.  First of all Season's Greetings and Happy New Year!
Thanks again for the remodeled [[ChoralWiki:Seasonal music]]. The Sunday link is correct but the displayed calendar date needs a tweek. I'm not sure where to look under the hood myself; sorry! [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 23:27, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
There is a slight (but glaring, to me) underlay error in your edition of Funeral by Samuel Wakefield.  The 1837 edition of Christian's Harp ( https://archive.org/details/christiansharpco00wake/page/12/mode/1up ) which you cite as a source, has first line of text "Stoop down, my tho'ts, that '''used''' to rise," -- where you (and several other editors through the ages) have the grammatically incorrect "'''use'''". Even the text page at CPDL has it wrong!  I'm not sure what we should do about this, at least eventually.  My preference would be to change all instances of "use" to "used" (perhaps leaving alone the sometimes abbreviated "us'd").  What do you think we should do?
-- Best wishes for a truly great and happy 2024! -- [[User:CHGiffen|Charles]][[User talk:CHGiffen|<sub><small>'''talk'''</small></sub>]]&nbsp;[[User:Charles H. Giffen|Giffen]][[Charles H. Giffen|<sub>'''♫'''</sub>]] 23:04, 30 December 2023 (UTC)


:Hi Richard, Please edit [[ChoralWiki:Seasonal music]]: the dates need to be changed in the section that begins <nowiki><!--WEEKLY CODE--></nowiki>. Sorry, I don't know how to do it, don't know which dates go with which feasts etc. — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 20:20, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
:Hi Chuck, Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to you!
::Um, OK: I would have thought there's a function to get dates of Sundays though, or what was the automation about? [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 05:16, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
:I noticed this also, but I didn't think it was incorrect. Back in 2015, I got the text for [[Stoop down, my thoughts, that use to rise|this page]] from the [https://ccel.org/ccel/watts/psalmshymns Christian Classics Ethereal Library], which was transcribed from an eighteenth-century book. The oldest book I have access to at the moment is a 1735 edition of Watts' hymns, printed in London, and it clearly says "Stoop down, my thoughts, that use to rise." So, I thought, maybe "use to" is archaic, and should be changed? Or maybe it's a British-ism? I regularly change old texts to more modern spelling, capitalization, and punctuation, but this seems to be a different case.
:::My recollection is that I designed several automation alternatives. But then I don't remember exactly: did you give up on all of them, and decide to continue manually updating? Or did we get busy with other things? In any case, nothing got implemented. — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 20:36, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
:Then (after your post) I noticed [https://www.scribbr.com/commonly-confused-words/use-to-or-used-to/ this web page]. It appears that currently both are correct, though I'm not sure I fully understand the discussion there. And here's [https://www.merriam-webster.com/grammar/is-it-used-to-or-use-to another page] from Merriam-Webster.
::::Oh, maybe the ball was in my court after all. [[ChoralWiki_talk:Seasonal_music#Automation_redux|Servus!]] [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 01:02, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
:Now I'm inclined to leave it the way Watts wrote it. But I'm not very sure, since I don't use "use to" in speech or writing.
: — And best wishes to you and your family! Thanks for all you do for CPDL. — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 04:14, 31 December 2023 (UTC)


==MultiPubList (yet) again==
==[[ChoralWiki:Seasonal music]]==
Hi Barry,
Hi Barry,
I'm missing a pair of sharp eyes at [[Lyons Contrapunctus]], which ought to have at least 3 linked works. BTW, is a paste-and-fill-blanks new publication page 'template' lying around somewhere (I can't find the new composer form either at Help) already? [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 02:18, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
Could you take a look at where [https://www.cpdl.org/wiki/index.php?title=ChoralWiki:Seasonal_music&diff=1781700&oldid=1781699 these edits] went wrong? I'm assuming the week ending Feb 18 is no. 7 and am working with [[ChoralWiki:Seasonal music/Test]] for now, which dosen't seem to be breaking the main page so far.  [[User:Richard Mix|Richard Mix]] ([[User talk:Richard Mix|talk]]) 23:33, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
:You could try {{CiteTemp|New publication}}, or <nowiki>{{subst:new publication}}</nowiki> (or "new lyricist" or "new composer"). In re: "Lyons Contrapunctus", neither PubDatePlace nor MultiPubList were complete (missing <nowiki>&nbsp;</nowiki>, and missing parameters 2 and 3, respectively). Also, "Lyon" is the name of the city of publication, not "Lyons". "Lyons" is possessive German (I think), not very proper in an otherwise Latin title, since the Latin name is Lugdunum, listed on the title page: I claim the publication title should be "Contrapunctus seu musica figurata", since that's what IMSLP calls it. And you made an interesting prose "list of works"; I will try to transcribe the index tomorrow if I have time. — [[User:BarryJ|Barry Johnston]] [[User talk:BarryJ|(talk)]] 05:20, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 23:34, 11 January 2024

2020

Happy new year to you, best wishes for 2020! --Music4Ever (talk) 20:41, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

MultiPubList

Hi Barry, I'm having trouble with MultiPubList: I split Novum et insigne opus musicum into Novum et insigne opus musicum (Ott & Formschneider) and Novum et insigne opus musicum (Berg & Neuber), and now the list of works isn't displaying correctly for either of them. Any idea what's going wrong? Adrian M. Wall (talk) 19:13, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

It was the use of ampersand in the parenthesis, and specification of a year as the second parameter of MultiPubList. I changed Novum et insigne opus musicum (Ott & Formschneider) to Novum et insigne opus musicum (Ott, Formschneider) – but it could be "Ott et Formschneider" or "Ott and Formschneider" if you like one of those better. (I wrote this up here). I only changed one work page (Pater noster (Josquin des Prez)), but wanted to wait to see what you think about what I did. Let me know what you want. If you want me to change the other page and all the linked works, I can do that too. — Barry Johnston (talk) 21:37, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for your quick response. I had wondered whether the "&" was the problem but I thought it better to check with someone who knows what they're doing before making an even bigger mess! I think I'll go with "and". Adrian M. Wall (talk) 09:17, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Template:Disambig

Hi Barry, I was wondering how Schumann (disambiguation) turned up in Category:Disambiguation of works and noticed you'd edited Template:Disambig. Unless I'm failing to appreciate a more complicated situation, could we put it back to including only the parent category? Richard Mix (talk) 21:49, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi Richard, I should have changed Schumann (disambiguation) to {{disambig|name}}, but I missed this one; I just corrected it. User:Carlos enhanced this template in October 2019 to add a parameter, "work" "text" or "pub". I just added "name". As I recall, this was so the message in the box read correctly: "people who share the same name" in this case, or "pages that share the same title" in the case of works. I have discovered several pages to be added, there are probably more; and only the "name" ones have "(disambiguation)" in the title. Not sure about deflating these into one category, to me the current setup seems useful. — Barry Johnston (talk) 22:40, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for such a clear explanation! Rather than pushing for "style" I'll just add Category:Disambiguation to Classical (disambiguation) and Modern (disambiguation) Richard Mix (talk) 02:12, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
Thank you! That's a good solution, and Classical (disambiguation) reads much better now. — Barry Johnston (talk) 11:39, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

MultiPubList again

Hi Barry, Can you spot where I go wrong at Pseaumes de David mis en musique, 3vv (Claude Le Jeune)? Richard Mix (talk) 06:05, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi Richard, There needs to be a PubDatePlace for all three Livres; on the work page, Pub needs to include "|vol=Livre 2". I am confused by the numbering of works (they are not numbered in the original, as far as I can see): the first line with a number is line 10, which is number 9? Also the first line in Livre 2 is supposed to be "L", not "I", I think. This would look better if the lines were displayed like "1. Qui au conseil des malins, Psalm 1" or something like that. Also "Sources (digital copies)" needs to be ===External links===. — Barry Johnston (talk) 15:03, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Missing pages

Hi Berry, I'm having trouble seeing why Il sol, qual or più splende (Carlo Gesualdo) is missing from the composer page; I've also noted a deepening Template talk:CheckMissing#a Byrd mystery. Any ideas? All the best, Richard Mix (talk) 23:55, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Richard, I see Il sol, qual or più splende (Carlo Gesualdo) on Carlo Gesualdo, under "Secular works for six voices" - it's in the second column. The remainder of discussion on Template talk:CheckMissing Cheers, — Barry Johnston (talk) 01:24, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
You're right; thanks! Richard Mix (talk) 22:16, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

DPL templates

Hi Barry! I've found a couple of templates inside category DPL templates that do not use DPL at all. As it seems, they were included in this category by a query you ran in January. Could you please check? Thanks, —Carlos (talk) 17:19, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi Carlos! Thanks for pointing this out. You're right, there were several that didn't belong; and there are several that need to be included. I am working my way through the category to make sure it's correct. PS. Perhaps you know how to answer my question at Talk:Anonymous#Works not yet on this pageBarry Johnston (talk) 20:06, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
Thank you! —Carlos (talk) 02:45, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

DPL issue

Hi Barry! Any idea why %USER% is not working for pages edited this year alone? Old pages at ChoralWiki:Recent discussions bring this information correctly, but not the recent ones. Quite weird! I've checked the DPL3 documentation but couldn't find any clues. I thought of asking you, since you're more familiar with this new version of DPL. —Carlos (talk) 15:58, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi Carlos! Weird, yes. Not sure why {{TalkList}} behaves this way, I will keep checking. I was suspicious of the allrevisionsince parameter, but the template still shows Users wrong without it. Perhaps the answer lies with MediaWiki. What category is %USER%? It's not a parameter or a variable. — Barry Johnston (talk) 19:24, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
Names are shown for User before the last week in January, 2020 – about the time DPL3 and MediaWiki 1.33 were installed. I did notice that for some lines where User isn't shown, the last edit was by an editor not appearing on the Talk page (so they wouldn't have a [[User:]] entry?) — Barry Johnston (talk) 03:54, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the info! I made several tests but couldn't find a solution. It's probably related to a database change in MadiaWiki 1.33, will have to check. Thanks again, —Carlos (talk) 05:14, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
Probably related to this: w:mw:Actor migration. Apparently, our database hasn't been fully converted to the new schema (which would result in all editor names disappearing from the query, since DPL3 isn't compatible with the new table layout yet). —Carlos (talk) 06:23, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
Combining your discovery (w:mw:Actor migration) with my issue with allrevisionssince (and others like it) and Phabricator T167246: "… the migration is being done gradually, over several MediaWiki releases. It is expected to finish in MediaWiki 1.34." and "migration states: (1) Read and write old columns only (2) Write both old and new columns. Read from new preferentially, falling back to old. (3) Write only new columns. Read from new preferentially, falling back to old. (4) Read and write the new columns only." (this schedule has been modified since 2010)
  • Migration of the data base is being done in parts: apparently MW 1.33 migrated Actors who made page revisions after MW 1.33 was installed (field rev_user →‎ rev_actor).
  • MW 1.31 (or 32) apparently included migration of other fields, such as those used in allrevisionssince (e.g., field rev_user_text →‎ rev_actor).
The way Max dealt with this is to replace those fields with the new ones in the MW code, as I recall. What I don't know: how to reference the rev_actor field in WikiText? — Barry Johnston (talk) 16:31, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
Please also note this specific issue with DPL 3.3.3, and, even worse, the fact that DPL 3.3.3 is not compatible with the latest stable MediaWiki version (1.35)! You are advised against using this extension on a live site. It's a mess. I'm currently testing MediaWiki version 1.35 on the test server and the situation is not horrible, however I wonder how many subtle problems may exist like the one mentioned here. I've already repeatedly patched DPL 3.3.3 to make it work with MediaWiki 1.33, I'll try to find another workaround for this problem, too. Max a.k.a. Choralia (talk) 21:14, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
I've made another patch to DPL 3.3.3, and it seems that ChoralWiki:Recent discussions works correctly now. It's the most horrible workaround I created ever: as the page ID is correctly determined, I patched the php code so that the corresponding page object is found, then the ID of the user who last edited the page is determined, and eventually the username associated to the given user ID is found. Quite garbled, however it seems OK. Max a.k.a. Choralia (talk) 21:06, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Very clever, Max! Thanks for the patch, good to see the lists working again. —Carlos (talk) 02:10, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Calendar

Hi Barry, Thanks again for the remodeled ChoralWiki:Seasonal music. The Sunday link is correct but the displayed calendar date needs a tweek. I'm not sure where to look under the hood myself; sorry! Richard Mix (talk) 23:27, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Richard, Please edit ChoralWiki:Seasonal music: the dates need to be changed in the section that begins <!--WEEKLY CODE-->. Sorry, I don't know how to do it, don't know which dates go with which feasts etc. — Barry Johnston (talk) 20:20, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
Um, OK: I would have thought there's a function to get dates of Sundays though, or what was the automation about? Richard Mix (talk) 05:16, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
My recollection is that I designed several automation alternatives. But then I don't remember exactly: did you give up on all of them, and decide to continue manually updating? Or did we get busy with other things? In any case, nothing got implemented. — Barry Johnston (talk) 20:36, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
Oh, maybe the ball was in my court after all. Servus! Richard Mix (talk) 01:02, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

MultiPubList (yet) again

Hi Barry, I'm missing a pair of sharp eyes at Lyons Contrapunctus, which ought to have at least 3 linked works. BTW, is a paste-and-fill-blanks new publication page 'template' lying around somewhere (I can't find the new composer form either at Help) already? Richard Mix (talk) 02:18, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

You could try New publication, or {{subst:new publication}} (or "new lyricist" or "new composer"). In re: "Lyons Contrapunctus", neither PubDatePlace nor MultiPubList were complete (missing  , and missing parameters 2 and 3, respectively). Also, "Lyon" is the name of the city of publication, not "Lyons". "Lyons" is possessive German (I think), not very proper in an otherwise Latin title, since the Latin name is Lugdunum, listed on the title page: I claim the publication title should be "Contrapunctus seu musica figurata", since that's what IMSLP calls it. And you made an interesting prose "list of works"; I will try to transcribe the index tomorrow if I have time. — Barry Johnston (talk) 05:20, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
Thanks! "No works at CPDL" is a surprising default for missing parameters but I should have figured it out. (1) I wonder then if Preload templates might be better listed in the parent category as well as in their hiding place; I'll consider adding a pointer to Category:Help (2) Lyons with s merits at least a redirect, being both a traditional English spelling and (along with "Contrapunctus de Lyon") the version used in most secondary literature: that's why we still misspell "Uppsala". Do you mind if I move it back? Richard Mix (talk) 22:41, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
You're right, "No works at CPDL" isn't quite right, I will see if I can change it. (1) I agree, and this is the reason I increasingly use Special:Categories (which lists all). I have added a subpage: Help:Score submission guide/Commands and shortcuts with these on it, please add to it ad lib. (2) You're right about "Lyons as an alternate for "Lyon". Feel free to change back as you wish. — Barry Johnston (talk) 03:23, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

CompFromWorkTitle

Hi Barry! Is this extra #if really necessary? This template is used on thousands of pages, and apparently it was working fine until now. Are you planning new uses for it that require that #if? —Carlos (talk) 16:30, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up, Carlos! I was working on a new template, and needed the #if for that – but the issue was better resolved by using TitleOnly, and I forgot to go back and clean up. I did undo my revision, sorry for the inconvenience. — Barry Johnston (talk) 17:17, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
That's fine! TitleOnly is a nice addition, by the way. —Carlos (talk) 03:17, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Text & Text2

Hi again, Barry! I just noticed that template Text was recently changed by you. I didn't have the time to analyze the new logic, but I did notice some problems that surfaced in the examples:

  1. The template is being categorized in Text requests even after I added |cat=no to the examples
  2. {{Text|Unknown}} and {{Text|Quenya}} are both displaying a {{{2}}} after them; this is not the expected behaviour, I suppose
  3. Maybe because of #2, the Documentation itself is broken. {{Doc}} found something it wasn't expecting :)

Could you please check? Thanks! —Carlos (talk) 15:31, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks again, Carlos! I don't fully understand, because I had checked Text2 against many pages yesterday – probably my fault. In any case, both should be working better now. — Barry Johnston (talk) 16:06, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

ExtWeb problems?

Hi Barry, Check out Template talk:ExtWeb, where I point out two pages where ExtWeb doesn't seem to work (these pages have external website links, but the template wouldn't show anything). Hope you can figure out what's going on. -- Chucktalk Giffen 19:03, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Chuck, I too have noticed this. I will correct these pages; I have a request to Carlos for help. I'm thinking I might have to add code to ExtWeb to take care of various issues. — Barry Johnston (talk) 19:10, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

ligatures with #SortWorks

Hi Barry,

Claude's move of Regina Cœli (Peter Philips) seems to have resolved the title's absence on Peter Philips, which I guess might have had to do with "œ"? Is there a warning I missed? Richard Mix (talk) 20:26, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

I don't remember any notice about ligatures; I did make sure to include them in MultiPubList, which of course deals with publication titles, not work titles. I don't know much about SortWorks, which is Max's parser function. — Barry Johnston (talk) 21:18, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Linebreak in Voicing template

Hi Barry. I see that you added a <br> at the end of the Voicing template today. Unfortunately, this clobbers (ie. puts on a new line) any voicing information that is added after the template - which is something that happens quite a bit. As an example, see my own At the dawning of creation (Charles H. Giffen). I think the linebreak should be removed. Happy 4th of July weekend! -- Chucktalk Giffen 04:38, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Chuck. Thanks for bringing this to my attention! My intention was to remove the manual line-feed after the template, and make the template consistent with other work page templates. I have already begun removing the manual <br> from pages without the extra material, done 500 pages so far (out of 36,000 or so). On first reading of your message, I thought to remove the line-feed from the template until I could resolve the issue – you're right, it happens "quite a bit", on fewer than 1,500 pages I estimate. However, I noticed that the Voicing template already has a "third optional parameter", apparently designed to handle extra text. On most of the pages where this third parameter is used, display is incorrect, omitting the the second parameter! So design and documentation both need work.
I was able to edit At the dawning of creation (Charles H. Giffen) to bring the extra text into the template itself. Unfortunately, this text apparently cannot contain category assignments (or the letters "sol"), so I moved the category assignment to the Description field. I'm guessing that when this third parameter was added, template {{Vcat}} was not adjusted to handle this – {{Vcat}} needs redesigning, in my opinion. The effect of the dependent template, {{Solo}}, was apparently not considered when designing the "third optional parameter" – and all three templates are incompletely documented. This is definitely not a "user-friendly" situation, if I spent an hour trying to figure out how this works.
I noticed that among the 1,500 pages containing material after the {{Voicing}} template, there are many that can be easily handled by bringing the material into the main part of the template. For example,
"{{Voicing|5|SSTTB}} or {{Cat|SSATB}}<br>" can be changed to "{{Voicing|5|SSTTB,SSATB}}" → "Number of voices: 5vv Voicings: SSTTB or SSATB"
So with some modifications to Vcat and Solo, I am confident that the 1,500 can be edited to make this happen. I would do the modifications on experimental templates and test them extensively before implementing. If you wish, I can remove the line-feed from Voicing template until I can make the modifications. And happy Fourth to you too! — Barry Johnston (talk) 15:58, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi Chuck. Thanks for the new add= parameter, great idea! I am bringing the extra text into the template, about half of pages done, also added documentation to {{Voicing}}. I will continue to remove the <br> after the template. — Barry Johnston (talk) 20:01, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
May I request another tweek, to suppress the unwanted comma before add= Te Deum (Nathaniel Patrick)? Richard Mix (talk) 20:12, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi, Richard. The comma was Chuck's idea, with which I agree – it separates the primary vocalization from modifications, exceptions, and comments. The primary vocalization is the category that shows in MultiPubList, for example.
The only way I know to remove the comma in N. Patrick's Te Deum is to remove it from the Voicing Template; that would require going over about 1,500 pages where |add= occurs to ensure that the display is correct. Unless you are willing to do that, may I suggest changing the line in Patrick's Te Deum to {{Voicing|4|SATB|add=with {{Cat|SATB.SATB}} options for antiphonal singing}}? Or maybe {{Voicing|4|SATB|add= antiphonal ({{Cat|SATB.SATB}})}}, or something else? — Barry Johnston (talk) 02:47, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Penitential Psalms

Hi Barry, I'm not sure if you already spotted User_talk:Cjshawcj#Croce_penitential_psalms, but thanks for the work on Lasso! Richard Mix (talk) 07:03, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Patrick service in G

Sorry to do it to you here, Barry, but it seems the most opportune place to fire a shot across the bows of Mike Wallen and you seem to have been enabling his misinformation. He seems to have started creating workpages with no regard whatsoever to the veracity of his information. The Patrick in G is a typical example. All authorities from Boyce to RISM to Grove to Le Huray ascribe this to Nathaniel Patrick. Wallen is alone in claiming it for Richard Patrick (author in Grove of 3 vvv. obscure anthems). The key is G Minor as a cursory glance at the PDF will shew. Under that key and Nathaniel's name, all pieces are already on CPDL and cross-referenced to Boyce [There is a discrete Samuel Arnold Cathedral Music, but cross-references provided on CPDL to IMSLP lead one to the second edition of Boyce, in which Arnold had a very minor role). Similarly the Cathedral Anthems page that you set up up under the name of Arnold is Boyce II (I'm afraid I don't have current access to the Arnold volumes, only a distant recollection) Wallen has given all constituent elements of this service his own titles. They already correctly appear on CPDL under their correct titles according to BCP and general usage. Wallen is also the only person to describe SATB music with antiphonal passages as double choir. In short to save a lot of future merge requests I think the administrators should ask Mr Wallen to conform to current practice, and to check what a body of cotributors of Anglican liturgy have already provided. Bonne chance & tschussCjshawcj (talk) 00:30, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Your objections are quite understandable. Mike Wallen is a relative new-comer to CPDL, and I am trying to guide him as best I can. You are correct that Nathaniel Patrick wrote the Service in E minor, I just discovered this and will make the necessary corrections.
However, Mike Wallen does own some rare books! Greene's first edition (both volumes), and now it turns out he has the Arnold original 1790 Cathedral Music as well (at least the first three volumes) (see the photo he took of Vol. 1 title page on this page) – and Johnstone (1975, Music and Letters 56(1):26-40) says Arnold's volumes are very different from Boyce's. The titles that Wallen has given these works come from his original editions of Arnold's volumes, not made up by him (though they could have been made up by Arnold). Both Mike and I would appreciate your help, since neither of us know much about what we're doing. Tomorrow you will see some changes along the lines you suggest. Feel free to edit and change as you see fit. Thank you for the comments! — Barry Johnston (talk) 00:50, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Just off to bed, so will reassess developments tomorrow. I would now clarify that general usage is as per titles on the Arnold publication page, first lines are redundant. There seems to be no distinction between major an minor keys (the Child is, I am fairly sure, the latter). Why the permissive use of Tr and C in the voicing? these fell out of general usage years ago. So SATB now becomes TrTrCCTTBB. Bah-this misrepresents all Anglican choral convention. Ownership of originals is no distinction I own all three volumes of Boyce (Knyvett's copies - look him up in the subscription list): it didn't induce me put a premium on distancing my posting from precedent. This pobably sounds crustier than its supposed to; but I am loth to start reinventing the wheel. G'nightCjshawcj (talk) 01:05, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

I have spent a considerable amount of time today correcting unforced errors, and the end is still not in sight. I consider any further effort on my part will merely be reinforcing failure.. Please prevail upon Mike Wallen to post up volumes 2-4 with a little more accuracy.Cjshawcj (talk) 17:18, 22 July 2021 (UTC) And as a final gesture, I have tidied up the Te Deum page to get rid of all the irrelevant redundancies. I have inverted the voicing so that SATB is the norm (with SATBSATB possibilities downgraded). Anyone performing this style of canticle would expect that. At no point are more than 4 parts singing together. Therefore to link these items into SATBSATB categories is superfluous tautology (?see what I did there) and redundant complexification.Cjshawcj (talk) 12:40, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

template:Pub

Hi Barry, Something (Template talk:Pub#0 for parameter 1?) is still amiss and (non-)publication is invisible at Hubble (John Reager). Can you see what's wrong? Richard Mix (talk) 20:08, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

I's not sure. It seems that John Reager published his work 'Hubble' in 2013, when he posted his work to CPDL. Is that not right? That happens on quite a few pages, and most times it's just cited as {{Pub|1|<Year>}}. But maybe there's something different about this one? Do I need to add a note about self-published works? (I have published several books electronically, on the web) — Barry Johnston (talk) 02:33, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
Yes, I suppose that counts as 'first published' (see however the page as edited by John) but my main question is whether 0 is still a valid parameter (here's the page before I edited it). Richard Mix (talk) 05:14, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
Now I get it. 0 still works, see what I did with Hubble (John Reager). Note that the result is that Hubble is not listed in Category:2013 works – is that what you want? — Barry Johnston (talk) 14:33, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, looks slightly odd to me, but I was merely trying to clarify John Reager's intention. For Template:Pub 'parameter 1'=0 seems to be a special case, in that "cmp=" is non-optional. From the Syntax C documentation one might think that the 'parameter 3' argument has to be used as parameter 4.
With Protector noster, MH 501 (Johann Michael Haydn), I don't know whether 1789 is the composition date or copying (ms=) date, but it's odd to have the Published: field just disappear. Richard Mix (talk) 20:52, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
I'm relieved the 'stormy waters' below are smoothed! Let me propose something new at Template talk:Pub#0 for parameter 1?. Richard Mix (talk) 01:42, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Samuel Arnold

Was a drunken sot. Anecdotes of his dealings with Haydn and of his premature death should persuade you of that. If you look at the "Miserere" (thank you for countermanding my advice twice) you will find that you have linked it to a page of Kyries. It seems ridiculous to me the lengths you and Wallen are going to perpetuate and spread errors which should be silently corrected before posting. In addition I dislike the continuing references to two choirs. That category is reserved for the likes of Venetian cori spezzati, or at least for pieces which divide into more than 4 parts at any juncture whatsoever. If you can't understand the subtlety of difference between pieces for two choirs and pieces for one choir splitting antiphonally, then perhaps you should restrict your posting to psimplistic psalmody. Kindly reverse your uncoupling of the Patrick Mag & Nunc that I had posted up. On the Magnificat and Nunc Dimittis pages you will find c.180 examples of the coupling, which has been honoured by all usage since c.1580, including by Boyce. I see no reason why the general usage should be reversed one the whim of one new contributor, who is too lazy to find out how such things are evidenced. Or alternatively, apply a moronic system which catalogues all evening services by constituent items only. But if the latter, PLEASE obtain the consent of your administration peers before commencing a general dumbing-down.Cjshawcj (talk) 23:51, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

I have reverted to the page Magnificat and Nunc dimittis in G minor (Nathaniel Patrick); you created it, within your prerogatives as an editor. It was my mistake to separate this into two pages. Please forgive me.
On this and the other matter you discuss, there is uncontested variation among editors at CPDL; please allow Mike Wallen the same editorial privileges you enjoy.
In my understanding, Decani and Cantoris refers to two choirs on opposite sides of the chancel. Is this not correct?
Details of Samuel Arnold's life belong on his page, not on a work page.
It would help if you would please identify the "c.1590" manuscript.
And finally, I see my role here as helping a new user get started. I try to be as considerate and careful as I can, (sometimes I make mistakes, not the best at dealing with people). Nonetheless, I will not enforce one editor's preferences over another. — Barry Johnston (talk) 14:44, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
I apologise for my asperity. The reason is that I was a boy chorister in a cathedral choir in 1965 (boarding school bilked me of the Summer of love as my voice broke), and have been editing/performing similar material for 25 years. Arnold is nothing out of the ordinary (I have been consulting the 1843 revision by Rimbault for 20 years). In short, I know a lot about this subject. It is not a question of respecting Wallen's editorial decisions, but of trying to steer his contributions into bog-standard conventions which all the other contributors of Anglican music observe on here. Arnold is far from infallible, and the treatment of his errors as holy writ, to be carried down unto the tenth generation, is risible. Actually, I don't consider Mr Wallen to be an editor, since he retails Arnold's work as close to the original as he possibly can, with no exercise of critical faculties whatever. The resultant transcriptions are unperformable for most choirs and unintelligible to virtually everyone, including apparently, Mr Wallen himself. The multi-choir gloss he gives to the source doesn't stand scrutiny, and it certainly doesn't warrant the fumbling essay it is accorded on each and every work page.
I think that, rather than see further damage done to the extensive and apparently fragile ecology of the Anglican repertoire on here, I would offer to post Mr Wallen's contributions (after creation of the initial score) myself. But he must be prepared to observe generally observed conventions. The one currently leaping off the page at me is that the title of pieces should include the key. I don't know the American usage, but the English usage (under which his pieces were conceived) is to omit the "major" from major keys. Thus the Child service should be titled in E flat (not E flat major). A quick scrutiny of the Magnificat page will prove that.
I made up the 1590 manuscript (as a verifiable item). Clearly Patrick was dead by 1595, and his works were not transmitted orally. Manuscripts tend to be undated, with clusters around 1630-40 and 1720. Boyce acted as a clearing-house for all that had gone before, and I have dated a lot of pieces, sometimes with semi-fictitious sources, to counter the clumsy "First published" line, which leads those with less knowledge to think that there was no flourishing Anglican choral tradition before 1768. Mea culpa (not much)
I think we are probably through the stormiest waters, since Nathaniel Patrick is the composer Arnold misstated most. You appear to be in close communication with Mr Wallen. I e-mailed him direct on 20th re Maurice Greene (supportive, not abusive) but have had no acknowledgement. Did it perhaps miscarry?Cjshawcj (talk) 18:39, 27 July 2021 (UTC) P.S. upon re-reading, forgot to thank you for the un-decoupling of the NatPat M&G

Anonymous lyricist settings

Hi Barry, did you find out the answers you were looking for? Being succinct, the invisible Anonymous lyricist settings is basically a "ghost" page, used to mimic the inclusion of the work in a category. Instead of looking for all works in Category:Anonymous lyricist settings, the DPL checks for all pages that link to the hidden page Anonymous lyricist settings. I made that change to avoid having to create hundreds of categories, one for each lyricist. Hope that helps! PS: Whenever you need a prompt reply from me, please email me, ok? Regards, —Carlos (talk) 01:46, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi Carlos, I did find the answers I needed, thank you. I wrote the post on your talk page, and later deduced how you had designed the page. I removed the post after my realization, not wanting to bother you with a question I had the answer to. Thanks for following up, and I will use email next time. — Barry Johnston (talk) 03:35, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
No problem! And sorry for being so absent lately, I'll try to reply promptly next time :) —Carlos (talk) 16:33, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

In dulci jubilo

Hi Barry, thanks for your messages, I think (after much googling and trial and error) I have succeeded in getting the composer list to sort correctly - I have also added 'Latin only' to the bottom table - see what you think (although actually the score in question is not Latin only, it has both English and German text!) Mandy Shaw (talk) 18:06, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi Mandy, wow! I learned a few things here, thank you very much. It looks good, all except for the "Latin only" issue. You're right, Medley of Renaissance carols (James W. Keefe) was incorrectly categorized – I have changed it to Language: Latin, English, German. As I look further, there are some in German, English, and Latin; as well as in German and Latin, and Latin and English. The "Latin only" issue involved one score (CPDL 61987) in In dulci jubilo (Bartholomeus Gesius) – Maybe this edition should be moved to a page of its own, to facilitate its inclusion in the "Latin only" table? Meanwhile, I have created a manual-only table, I agree, not very satisfying.
This is a very big issue, that I have not been able to completely solve yet – adding editions to a page with different language, text, lyricist, or voices than the original composition. I dealt with this in cleaning up the Johann Sebastian Bach page (and all of his works!) – where I decided that editions in a different language deserved a separate page. However, with In dulci jubilo, someone decided to deal with this by turning the text page into a disambiguation page – which is okay, it just makes CPDL more internally inconsistent. And it still looks weird on the Works in German page to see In dulci jubilo. There are several other ways editors have dealt with this, and many pages that are a combination of approaches, like In dulci jubilo. — Barry Johnston (talk) 21:08, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Anonymous disambiguations

Hi Barry,

I was about to update the textpage link to Agnus Dei (Old Hall Ms.) (Anonymous) but would like to get your ideas first: I've been using things like title (source) Anonymous and the roman numeral convention, ending up with Salve sancta parens IV (D-Ju MS 33) (Anonymous) and the like, but with OH there's a conventional numbering so I've treated it like a catalog number in Gloria, Old Hall 21 (Leonel Power). So, do you think we need parentheses for Agnus Dei (Old Hall 139) (Anonymous) or as it now stands Agnus Dei 13 (Old Hall Ms.) (Anonymous)? Richard Mix (talk) 19:45, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi Richard,
When I first made the complete works table, I assigned a number after the title, so Agnus Dei 1 (Anonymous), Agnus Dei 2 (Anonymous), etc. I thought about Roman numerals, but some of these run to 15 or more! Nonetheless, soon after that, another editor (User:Droopop) changed most of the disambiguation numbers in the table to the sequence in the publication, as Agnus Dei, Old Hall 6 (Anonymous). He seems to know more than I do about this manuscript, so it looked like a good idea to me. But he didn't change all of them, there's still some that need renaming (moving) – I was waiting until others noticed the full table and had a chance to comment. I think we are there, so I say go ahead and move Agnus Dei 13 (Old Hall Ms.) (Anonymous) to Agnus Dei (Old Hall 139) (Anonymous). There are several others that need moving (or renaming in the table), too.
By the way, what does the abbreviation "tro" mean in the DIAMM list? — Barry Johnston (talk) 20:44, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Sounds good. I'm hoping at some time in the future the composer page will look for a parenthetical argument to the left of "(Anonymous)", so Gloria, Old Hall 21 (Leonel Power) but Gloria (Old Hall 1) (Anonymous) instead of Gloria, Old Hall 1 (Anonymous), if that makes sense.
Not spotting "tro" at the moment, though. Richard Mix (talk) 00:06, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Boyce Cathedral Music

Hi Barry,

I was just about to add Blessed is he that considereth the poor (Michael Wise) when I discovered IMSLP is missing pages. Do you happen to know other facsimiles of Cathedral Music (William Boyce)? British Library looks confusing on my first stabs at a search. Richard Mix (talk) 22:08, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Second edition of Vol. 3 at BNF. That's all I could find right away. I'll look more later. — Barry Johnston (talk) 02:11, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
Thanks! Richard Mix (talk) 05:16, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Choralis Constantinus

Thanks again for the autolist at Choralis Constantinus (Heinrich Isaac), which I've been using to update Introits & Communions in the hand list. I might be tired right now, but can't spot the reason Jerusalem surge (Heinrich Isaac) is omitted? Richard Mix (talk) 20:03, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Jerusalem surge (Heinrich Isaac) was missing the "|vol=Volume 1" and the pub reference was "[[Choralis Constantinus]]" (a redirect page) rather than "{{NoComp|Choralis Constantinus|Heinrich Isaac}}". (Also, the MultiPubList call shouldn't include the date when Template:Volumes is used.) Cheers. — Barry Johnston (talk) 21:15, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
Of course; thanks! Some others are Domine quinque talenta (Heinrich Isaac) & Fidelis servus et prudens (Heinrich Isaac) (I assume latency issue?) and Missa Paschalis a 4 (i) (Heinrich Isaac). Richard Mix (talk) 21:23, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
Both of these last two have been corrected. — Barry Johnston (talk) 02:37, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

God Will Provide for Me (Charles Albert Tindley)

Hi Barry. I've added some discussion to the talk page of this work, about the (short) syllable count in verses 2 & 3 (only 10 syllables, where there should be 11). -- Chucktalk Giffen 02:41, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

MultiPubList on Pratum musicum (Emanuel Adriaenssen)

Hi Barry, I wonder if you could help me solve a mystery on this page I just added. As I have many times, I used the Volumes template to distinguish between the three editions of the book. Lacking any information about the contents of the third edition, I proceeded to enter the contents of the other two, as normal. I then added Pub templates, using the vol= parameter and NoComp, since there are multiple composers. Long story short, the MultiPubList only displays two works in Edition 1 if I include the 'seq' parameter, and it includes several items in Edition 2 for which I did not add a Pub field indicating such when I don't include the 'seq' parameter. For example, Appariran per me (Orlando di Lasso) shows up in both editions in the 'Works at CPDL' section, but should only appear in Edition 1. What am I missing? I went back and made sure every Pub template on every work page has the no= parameter as well, but other than that I am stumped. - GeoffG (talk) 01:48, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi Geoff, I looked into this a little, and see what you're talking about. I tried some simple tests, but no solutions so far. The two that appear in Ed. 1 are the two for which you have two Pub lines, not sure if that's significant. I will look into this more later, it might take a while. Thanks! — Barry Johnston (talk) 16:39, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, Barry. As you can see, I added two Pub lines for those two works because the same piece appears in the same edition twice, with two different arrangements. I can't recall ever doing that before. Is there a better way to express that with the current templates? Might it be better to include both items on one Pub line (with a note about the arrangements)? - GeoffG (talk) 01:19, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
No, please don't change that, you did it the best way. There really isn't a better way, and others have done the same before anyway. The current problem is in a different area, I think, maybe with design of MultiPubList? — Barry Johnston (talk) 04:12, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
I have a possible solution to the second issue, works being listed in both volumes when only one is intended. I modified MultiPubList to include not only "Category:Edition n" but also "Category:YYYY works". (Because yesterday, works were included in the list if they were in the "Category:Edition n", and some works were in that category but not in Pratum musicum.) My modified code is in Templates:MultiPubList5 (and MPList5). I applied my test code temporarily to Pratum musicum (Emanuel Adriaenssen) – could you please check the lists there to see if they are correct now?
And further, do you think is this fix going to function correctly in future? In other words, do you foresee a case where a work will have two Pub lines (from different publications) from the same year, both with the same vol word? If so, then I need to do more work.
I can deal with the first issue, using the seq parameter causes incomplete output, a little later. — Barry Johnston (talk) 02:37, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, Barry. That definitely helped. There are still four works showing up in both lists, however. They are all works by Lasso that appear in the first edition of 'Pratum musicum' (1584) and also appear in a Lasso compilation from 1592. As for other cases, it is already the case that a work such as Ancor che col partire (Cipriano de Rore) appears in two different publications from 1584, both with the vol word 'Edition'. This doesn't seem to cause a problem. It is also the case that a publication such as 'Il terzo libro de madrigali a cinque voci (Cipriano de Rore)' has two editions from the same year. This also appears to be working properly. - GeoffG (talk) 03:32, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
Thank you. I made some changes, but there are still 26 works in Edition 2, including several that shouldn't be there. This is going to take some time to resolve. — Barry Johnston (talk) 15:40, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
Still working on this: there are works in Edition 3 that shouldn't be there either. I will keep going… — Barry Johnston (talk) 16:50, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Robert Barber (I) and (II)

Hi, Barry. I see that you have tidied up the pages for the two Robert Barbers, but I wonder whether their numbering could be reversed. You have allotted (II) to the Tudor composer and plain 'Robert Barber' to the 18th century man. Normally when there are two composers with the same name, '(I)' is allotted to the elder and '(II)' to the younger (as in Grove's Dictionary, for example). I realise that the plain 'Robert Barber' has more compositions than the Tudor man and also that his page was created first, but surely these should not be the criteria by which composers are categorised? It just seems illogical to me to have (II) coming before (I).

Best wishes, Jason Smart (talk) 07:37, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi Jason, you are correct; it was laziness on my part. I would like to lose the parenthesis, though, for two reasons. First, it looks odd in CPDL's syntax:
The night is come (Robert Barber (II))  versus  The night is come (Robert Barber II)
Second, there are several CPDL programs that might have to be rewritten, that search on the final parenthesis in a page name.
I will make the changes that you asked for. Thanks for the input. — Barry Johnston (talk) 15:15, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi Barry,
Many thanks for that. Much appreciated! Yes, there would be no harm in losing the parentheses.
Best wishes,
Jason Smart (talk) 15:25, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Funeral (Samuel Wakefield)

Hi Barry. First of all Season's Greetings and Happy New Year! There is a slight (but glaring, to me) underlay error in your edition of Funeral by Samuel Wakefield. The 1837 edition of Christian's Harp ( https://archive.org/details/christiansharpco00wake/page/12/mode/1up ) which you cite as a source, has first line of text "Stoop down, my tho'ts, that used to rise," -- where you (and several other editors through the ages) have the grammatically incorrect "use". Even the text page at CPDL has it wrong! I'm not sure what we should do about this, at least eventually. My preference would be to change all instances of "use" to "used" (perhaps leaving alone the sometimes abbreviated "us'd"). What do you think we should do? -- Best wishes for a truly great and happy 2024! -- Charlestalk Giffen 23:04, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi Chuck, Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to you!
I noticed this also, but I didn't think it was incorrect. Back in 2015, I got the text for this page from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library, which was transcribed from an eighteenth-century book. The oldest book I have access to at the moment is a 1735 edition of Watts' hymns, printed in London, and it clearly says "Stoop down, my thoughts, that use to rise." So, I thought, maybe "use to" is archaic, and should be changed? Or maybe it's a British-ism? I regularly change old texts to more modern spelling, capitalization, and punctuation, but this seems to be a different case.
Then (after your post) I noticed this web page. It appears that currently both are correct, though I'm not sure I fully understand the discussion there. And here's another page from Merriam-Webster.
Now I'm inclined to leave it the way Watts wrote it. But I'm not very sure, since I don't use "use to" in speech or writing.
— And best wishes to you and your family! Thanks for all you do for CPDL. — Barry Johnston (talk) 04:14, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

ChoralWiki:Seasonal music

Hi Barry, Could you take a look at where these edits went wrong? I'm assuming the week ending Feb 18 is no. 7 and am working with ChoralWiki:Seasonal music/Test for now, which dosen't seem to be breaking the main page so far. Richard Mix (talk) 23:33, 11 January 2024 (UTC)