Jump to content

Talk:Das jüngste Gericht

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: withdrawn by nominator, closed by Narutolovehinata5 (talk) 16:35, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(
)
  • Reviewed: to come

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk) and RandomCanadian (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 19:27, 21 November 2021 (UTC).[reply]

  • I don't think this is ready for DYK. There's a lot of scholarship on this particular piece (to which I have access). I think it would be better if we waited. WP:NORUSH is a thing, and there's enough for me to expand this to something more reasonable once I'm not busy with end-of-term business IRL. Cheers, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 19:40, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Nomination couldn't wait another day - 7 days after creation. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:26, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Gerda Arendt: The alternative path to DYK, which I assume you know too, is to expand this at a later point (possibly all the way to GA). I'm quite confident a more expanded article would be a more attractive thing to present to the reader (and there would be plenty of more interesting hooks. Did you know that a recently discovered 1692 libretto of an actual Abendmusik bears similarities to Wacht! Euch zum Streit?[1][2]. Or that the Abendmusiken were actually presented right after Vespers?[3] Vespers, which themselves lasted two or three hours, in addition to a further three or four hour Hauptgottesdienst in the morning?[4][5] That might be one of the reasons why the audience was reported to be so disorderly, to the point that the town watch had to be hired to maintain a semblance of order.[6] That, and a lot more, which would surely allow to take this to DYK at a later time, after having greatly expanded this. Or at least, it's my opinion that taking the sole opportunity for DYK now would be a waste when it can be done when the article is expanded and made into something significantly more attractive and informative. Cheers, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 22:22, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Schabalina, Tatjana (2017), "Eine neue Textquelle zu einer unbekannten Abendmusik von Buxtehude aus dem Jahr 1692", in Matthias Schneider and Jürgen Heering (eds.), Buxtehude-Studien, vol. 2, Bonn, Dr. J. Butz Musikverlag, p. 81-108.
  2. ^ Scheitler, Irngard (2017), "Das Jüngste Gerichtim Lichte eines Librettos einer Buxtehude Abendmusik von 1692 und eines Königsberger Jüngsten Gerichts", in Matthias Schneider and Jürgen Heering (eds.), Buxtehude-Studien, vol. 2, Bonn, Dr. J. Butz Musikverlag, p. 185-189
  3. ^ Snyder, Kerala J. (2007), Dieterich Buxtehude: Organist in Lübeck, Rochester (NY), Rochester University Press, p. 54-55.
  4. ^ Cantagrel, Gilles (2006), Dietrich Buxtehude et la musique en Allemagne du Nord dans la seconde moitié du XVIIe siècle, Paris, Fayard, p. 367-368
  5. ^ Heering, Jürgen (2017), "Gottesdienst und Liturgie in Lübeck zur Zeit Buxtehudes", in Matthias Schneider and Jürgen Heering (eds.), Buxtehude-Studien, vol. 2, Bonn, Dr. J. Butz Musikverlag, p. 11-27.
  6. ^ Ruetz, Caspar (1752), Widerlegte Vorurtheile von der Beschaffenheit der heutigen Kirchenmusic und von der Lebens-Art einiger Musicorum, Lübeck, Peter Böckmann, p. 44-49, cited and translated in Kerala J. Snyder, op. cit., p. 55-56.
Why don't you just go ahead and expand? This can't be approved without a qpq, - after nominating, there's time. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:34, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Because I'm busy IRL (as you can deduce from the fact of my lesser than usual activity)? Fact is, I have the score and the whole text (including in translation) with me, in addition to lots of critical commentary on the piece itself (too much of which is focused on the question of authenticity, but alas...) and on the Abendmusiken in general. This can be used to make a proper article, but it would require time, which at the moment I really need to put into meeting an actual deadline than here. I've given you a list of pertinent sources (many of which are in German, if that's easier for you), if you're interested you know where to ask. On top of all of that, there's the question of article title (should it be at the current one or at Wacht! Euch zum Streit gefasset macht (a title which is used in a fair amount of sources, too...) Cheers, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 00:01, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Short version of what I replied on my talk: The time for it is in Advent. This year or next, that is the question. I'm also busy with other things, and both your familiarity with the topic, and your better English, make me wish you did it. For DYK, just raising attention is the goal. If you want it GA, we probably better wait. You decide. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:50, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The title: Wikipedia goes by the common title, and the other (and probably more) should be redirects. On this day today I wrote A Boy was Born, in 2023, and the discussion about how to write that title, as published or as Wikipedia rulez demand, still hurts. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:53, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Full review needed. Though it would be nice if Gerda Arendt and RandomCanadian could decide as soon as possible if they prefer to withdraw it against an eventual nomination should the article be further expanded and achieve GA status. Thank you both. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:48, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    This is not my decision. RandomCanadian wants to not present it in this state, as he knows better details, and hasn't decided if he will have time. How long will you wait? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:29, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    This term (and the papers I have to write for it) will end within the next week. At that point I will have the time to expand this (beyond time, the other concern is that I don't want to be accused of copying Wikipedia in my work [something that is already unlikely since I'm writing in French and this is in English, but given I have my own quirks and personal style, precautionary principle is a strong reason for which I'd rather have undeniable evidence I wrote my paper first in case anybody complains]). Cheers, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 17:14, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I withdraw this nomination. The Fourth Sunday in Advent would have been the last good date, - let's make it GA next year. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:59, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Das_jüngste_Gericht&oldid=1206884238"