Talk:Christum wir sollen loben schon, BWV 121

Christum wir sollen loben schon, BWV 121 is currently a Music good article nominee. Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 21:43, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

Any editor who has not nominated or contributed significantly to this article may review it according to the good article criteria to decide whether or not to list it as a good article. To start the review process, click start review and save the page. (See here for the good article instructions.)

Germany Low‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Classical music: Compositions

	Classical music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical music, which aims to improve, expand, copy edit, and maintain all articles related to classical music, that are not covered by other classical music related projects. Please read the guidelines for writing and maintaining articles. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.Classical musicWikipedia:WikiProject Classical musicTemplate:WikiProject Classical musicClassical music
	This article is supported by Compositions task force.

References

A general question but it happened here. Nikkimaria, you reverted the Harvard referencing which is used in all higher quality articles on Bach's cantatas. I would like to improve this one to GA status for a DYK on 26 Dec, the 300th anniversary (and know that it's late). Harvard was used because it provides an elegant way to reference different pages from the same source with a direct link to those pages, - that information and helpful feature is now lost. Take Dürr/Jones: there will be references to pages 106, 110, 110-11, 112 and 113, probably more if comparing to other cantatas for the same occasion. They would all need individual definitions using the present system if we want to establish the same comfort for the readers. Consider restoring, please. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:49, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ps: for clarity: I planned - of course - to transform all references to Harvard. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:48, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you've implemented {{rp}}, which seems like a good solution for page numbers - they aren't strictly necessary given the short page range, but they can include direct links if so desired. See explanation here. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:23, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, for copy-editing and for pointing this out which I hadn't seen. Why, however, do you think references are more desirable within the prose? I see much more clarity in having them collected in a sorted system. - Many features of accessibility are not strictly necessary, but why would I not offer precise pages with a quick link instead of having the reader turn pages from 110 to 106? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:39, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to link to page 106 in the way described, {{rp|106|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=m9JuwslMcq4C&pg=PA106}}, but it doesn't work for me. I must be blind for something. I notice that in the linked discussion, there's also a user preferring {{sfn}}. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:01, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be strong enough sourcing to support an article on the concept of access friction, so to summarize: not all accessibility measures work the same for everyone, and sometimes different people in different circumstances have different needs that come into conflict. For example, GBooks pagelinks are variable based on factors like your geography or access history, so some users will be frustrated by encountering links that go to blank/different pages, even as others have the convenience of not needing to turn pages. Similarly editors may find one or another formatting of reference easier or more challenging to work with - CITEVAR exists as a means to promote coexistence. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:59, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]