Hello. I notice you've added two entries for S.144/3ter and S.281d to the List of compositions by Franz Liszt (S.1 - S.350) page. I'm in the process of thoroughly checking and revising the Liszt pages on IMSLP, but none of the available literature mention those two works. Can you tell me more about them? If not, then the entries will need to be removed until they can be verified. Thanks — P.davydov 07:27, 19 July 2010 (UTC) (IMSLP Librarian)
The Searle numbering has changed a few times over the years, and I'm working from sources that should be right up-to-date, to it's probably best if you hold off any more changes until I've finished checking everything (probably another month or so). In the meantime I'll delete those two additions, as I'm pretty sure they're based on outdated information... — P.davydov 18:15, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. If you could hold off editing both those pages for now, it will avoid any further confusion — P.davydov 18:55, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Are you planning to upload any of his stuff? It's a nice list that you've made, but it's best to have all of the lists have composers to go with. Thanks-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 17:02, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. Also for the Medtner-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 22:21, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi, you can specify the that you're a composer the same way as you would for an instrument - the code would be 'com' (as in 'com-1', 'com-2', etc.). Please use the Instr template instead of creating your own custom userboxes - i.e. {{Instr|com-3|perc-2}}. Thanks, KGill talk email 17:56, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
Well, there is the page IMSLP:Userboxes, which lists userboxes for different composers, etc., but yes, in terms of other custom userboxes (such as the Washington one you created), there are certainly very few compared to Wikipedia. That's probably because this site has a much smaller community. KGill talk email 19:33, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
Dear Lisztrachmaninovfan, I made several additions/corrections on the WoO, due to the Robert-Schumann-Werkverzeichnis of McCorkle. This List give everything to be found: projects, sketches, fragment, works of youth etc., so it is difficult to do a choice. How did you choiced the WoO-Pieces? If you feel it is sensefull to accomplish the date and the RSW number (they are like RSW Anh M13), I will do. Greetings, yours --Konrad Stein 11:46, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Dear Lisztrachmaninovfan: could you please leave the tagging to the tagging team? One of the things you tagged was tagged wrongly, and the problem is that once tagged, it doesn't come up on our list of untagged pieces, so it is impossible to catch the mistakes and re-tag them. This was one I just happened to notice. Thanks, Steltz
Why have you broken this into separate sections so that it can no longer be sorted? This is intended as one master list that can be sorted by title, key, date, orchestration, etc. The headings are unnecessary because the Searle groupings are explained on the talk page — P.davydov 08:02, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
Hello Lisztrachmaninovfan,
Unless there is an editor actually credited on the cover, title page or first page of music, the editor field should be left blank. By the mid-19th century some of the larger publishers had (anonymous) staff editors who reviewed works before going to print, while others (the majority actually) had the composer review the copy before printing - if it was reviewed at all. Nearly everything you've been uploading from the Henselt collection does not require anything to be in the editor field. Also, a number of the things you're listing as "grayscale" aren't actually grayscale, but simply monochrome (black and white) scans. Actual grayscale files tend to be large in size, and are often low resolution. The files you've been uploading are pretty decent in resolution, despite the fact that the originals were sometimes very faded. Thanks, Carolus 23:48, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
Nice additions of the manuscripts!! Happy New Year! Carolus 03:42, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
I recall Kagan's argument that the only definite information we have is his baptismal notice. Have we learned the date of his family celebrations since her preface to the Ries-Wegeler notices was published, making this newly available information? (That was in 1987, I believe. Note that there is another biography available of Beethoven published soon after his death containing much inaccurate information. Thayer's, possibly- I forget.) Eric 04:16, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
The Wikipedia article proves my point very well. It says not born but baptised 17 December 1770, and has a footnote- click on the footnote. Eric 22:57, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
On a more general note, while I do appreciate the checking up you are doing on various composers, I'd just like to take the opportunity to let you know about another (normally) very reliable source for basic information. If you look at the newly codified naming guidelines, you'll see that the first recommended site to use is VIAF.org, a combined database of the information offered by many national libraries. In a reasonably large number of cases, the sources cited there are actually more recent than either MusicSack or Wikipedia - for instance, this LC record cites a 1999 source that gives Iosif Ivanovici's year of birth with a question mark (in contrast to the 1991 source cited by MusicSack, and subsequently transferred here by you, which has no question mark). Whatever the source of information - be it a national library, MusicSack, Wikipedia, or another site - it is always essential to look for the most recent source available, and I at least wouldn't trust a Wikipedia article without first looking at its sources (as I've seen some that cite, for example, Britannica 1911 when Grove 1980 lies forgotten), nor would I any other site. Not really a big deal, but I hope to at least be a bit of a help. Cheers, KGill talk email 01:56, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi Lisztrachmaninovfan! Do you have information I don't that would indicate that Carter (b.1835) is the same as Carter (d.1890)? MusicSack in fact lists those two in separate entries; I chose the one born in 1835 because it was the only one of the two that indicated that he was a composer. Thanks, KGill talk email 01:26, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
Dear Lisztrachmaninovfan,
Items with logos (like Google logos) are not allowed as they are technically violations of IP trademark rights. Unlike copyrights, trademarks have no limit of duration as long as they are in use. Google's affixing of its logos to the scans of public domain items from public institutional libraries is tantamount to an IP claim on the scans - which is the same method by which CD Sheet Music makes an IP claim upon scans of public domain works. All logos and the quasi-copyright claim made made by Google on the opening page must be removed before posting here. UPDATE: I stripped the logos and page from the Palmgren file you uploaded. Let me know if there are any other Google items of this nature that were uploaded recently. Thanks, Carolus 00:58, 7 February 2011 (UTC) (IMSLP Copyright Admin)
makes sense, though depends on the details of course of what the author wrote about the concerto etc. - whether the work was first composed in short score and then orchestrated before being released to the world, or first intended as a 'concerto' - concertante sonata, of sorts (to be sort of picky...) - for oboe and piano and orchestrated after publication (or if not published, - there the details become more difficult.) (I keep thinking of works like Alkan's 'concerto' for piano, Bach's Italian concerto, etc. to remember that the word does not imply a concerto-orchestra so much as collaboration, opposition etc. between groups- concerto vs. ripieno. Anyway. I digress. :) ) Eric 05:21, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi, are you sure about the MusicSack entry? It seems to suggest, based on his active period, this might be a different composer? Also note the spelling of the last name (ie. Luft vs Lufft). Daphnis 03:32, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
Can you list your source(s) for the 1954 ending flourished date? Daphnis 02:54, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
The latest date on his works is actually 1951 (Venti studi per oboe in due fascicoli), and if the 6 capricci were renewed in '54, it would have been Ricordi's doing, not the author's. Besides, it would not be unheard of for any of all of these works to have been posthumously published. I'm actively searching for information on this composer and will update the page with any of my findings. Thanks. Daphnis 05:37, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
- is by Joseph Marx, not Robert Marx, and he died in 1962, so he's PD-US only - he's on the PD-US server as is the score of the concerto, but not yet uploaded to imslp. (Even when done, could only be accessed by people outside the US ca.two years from now, of course.) Still, seems a good idea to do so... Eric 16:22, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi Lisztrachmaninovfan, I am never sure if my English explanations are really clear: The orchestral version is an arrangement. I uploaded the original. It's for piano (rediscovered by Gottfried Wolters).
BTW: I enjoyed regarding some of your user boxes at Wikipedia! Cheers --Ralph Theo Misch 23:53, 27 April 2011 (UTC)