Talk:Percy Grainger/Archive 1

Archive 1

Anti-semitic et al

i have been under the impression (mostly from the Bird bio) that he didn't so much feel anti-semetic as he felt that anglo music should use anglo markings, thus the strict maintaing of non italian based musical markings (louden as opposed to crescendo, etc). it seems that he was more of a 'to each kind there own' brand of racist than a general superiority kind. also, is a more indepth mentioning of his commitment to the folk song as performed by the native (instead of adapting to standard rhythms/markings ala Vaughn-williams) something we should address here?Cgrantmaledy 01:33, 28 April 2007 (UTC) cgrantmaledy

Sado masochism etc

unless there is citation on these claims surely they should be removed?? Kunchan 23:50, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Probably no cites as his sexuality is common knowledge among Australians. If you check the museum catalogue there are several whips described. The catologue is not comprehensive as the museum has over 250,000 Percy Grainger items. This bio is quite good and mentions the photo's, clothing and number of whips donated to the museum and also briefly his sexuality. I've added it to the external links. Wayne 03:33, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

It's actually well-cited in the 1999 John Bird biography; check out page 155 at Google Books. Gordonofcartoon 02:16, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Folksong recording

I restricted the claim that Grainger was the first to use Edison wax cylinders in recording folksongs, because according to de Val (2000), 357 (whom I've cited in the article), 'Eugenia Lineva had used a cylinder machine in 1897' for folksong collecting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by N p holmes (talk • contribs) 09:48, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Dates on free music machines?

Does anybody know the dates of the construction of Grainger's free music machines? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.107.240.1 (talk) 22:20, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Copied from the Comments page

This could easily be a good article if it had in-line cites and less external links.--Grahame (talk) 12:46, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

The above comment was on the comments page. I copied it here. Magic♪piano 15:12, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Composers project review

I've reviewed this article as part of the Composers project review of its B-class articles. This article is B-class, but it could really use some pictures of his machines, and audio of them, if possible. See my detailed review on the comments page. Feel free to leave comments or questions here or on my talk page. Magic♪piano 15:44, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Champion of Saxophone

This article titles him as a "champion of the saxophone" but never expounds on this at all other than that he played it in the Army band. I'm not saying this is not true, because I've heard that he enjoyed the instrument very much. But it'd be nice if there was more information on this. SousaFan88 (talk) 10:47, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I took out that section as he wrote nothing specifically for the saxophone, although he did make various arrangements for the instrument and also for sax ensemble. But then again, he made a lot of arrangements of most of his popular works for almost every combination you could imagine! Grainger was famous for using newer instruments and he certainly must have enjoyed the saxophone, but to call him a champion of it? That seems slightly far-fetched (he did actually write a polemic 'championing' what he saw as the underrated art form of whistling - and wrote a number of pieces specifically for whisters, such as 'Ye banks and breas' and "even the famous "Country Gardens' was originally conceived for whistling! The article I believe is in the OUP collection of his writings on music). This very over-the-top statement really annoys me and I'm guessing was probably added by an adolescent saxophone player who has an immature bias towards solely their own instrument. However, it would seem Grainger himself did not share this bias. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.34.55.57 (talk) 23:14, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Updated "facts"

I have been corresponding with Astrid Britt Krautschneider, the Curator, Collections and Research at the Grainger Museum, University of Melbourne (Website: www.grainger.unimelb.edu.au) who confirmed the following detail:

Grainger donated: 73 whips and 8 canes in his museum. And it is a blood-stained shirt, not a pair of shorts. Which can be confirmed directly from the Grainger Museum collection, University of Melbourne.

She also mentioned that this statement is incorrect: When Grainger was aged 11, his father left to visit London and Rose took Percy to live with her parents in Adelaide. He returned to Adelaide but did not rejoin his family.

She writes:

Grainger’s father John, who did suffer from syphilis, took a sea voyage in 1890 (which puts Grainger’s age at 8 or 9) in order to improve his health. This coincided with the end of his marriage. He was never to live with his wife and child again. Rose and Percy remained in Melbourne – of course the two of them visited Rose’s family in Adelaide from time to time but they did not move back there.

I will put in the changes. Ccrashh (talk) 12:20, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

What instruments did he play, and when?

The article refers to early public performances but doesn't specify what instrument, although piano seems likely. Later, with no reference to any intervening study of winds, he enters an Army Band as an oboist and saxophonist. It would be nice to have some idea when or how he learned these three instruments--or if he played others. By the way, I smiled at "His use of chance music in 1912 predated John Cage by forty years." I refrained from adding "...but postdated Mozart by about 130 years." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ccerf (talk • contribs) 13:23, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Completion of Museum restoration

...this is indicated by the Architects' site to have been completed in 1980, but today, in 2010, the University's site seems to indicate that renovations/conservation is still underway. Can anyone assist in clarifying this?

Maceis (talk) 06:34, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Article expansion and upgrade

The article needs some serious treatment, to rescue it from the proliferation of cleanup banners and to bring it to a standard worthy of this unusually interesting composer. I have started this process by splitting off the list of works into a subarticle. Over the next few weeks there will be major additions to the text and images of the main article. Comments from interested editors will be welcome, as the expansion proceeds. Brianboulton (talk) 23:00, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Nice. If you're interested in making the works list good, the best source is, AFAIK,The New Percy Grainger Companion (ISBN 9781843836018). But I see the list is already nicely comprehensive with all the various versions listed. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk)

The list is an ongoing project, and will be updated as new information arises. It will never be possible to list every version of every work – for example, Grainger used to prepare "novelty" versions for individual performances – but it should be comprehensive at least as far as published works are concerned. Brianboulton (talk) 08:33, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Note

I have replaced the former "References required" banners with an "Under construction" banner at the head of the article. This should remain in place until the expansion is completed. Brianboulton (talk) 16:49, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Possible New External Link

I moderate the Culture Victoria website and considered adding a link to our material relating to the architect John Harry Grainger (Percy’s father). Is that appropriate since there is no Wikipedia article on him as such? http://www.cv.vic.gov.au/stories/john-harry-grainger/. Let me know what you think.Eleworth (talk) 06:06, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

I intend to do a short article on John Grainger when I have brought Percy up to scratch. Your link is an obvious source - I have it listed somewhere, but thanks for the tip. (If you want to do the John article, that's fine by me). Brianboulton (talk) 08:56, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

"Grainger Studies" - new open access peer review journal

I've just stumbled upon Grainger Studies: An Interdisciplinary Journal, a new open access peer review journal to be published annually by the University of Melbourne Library (the 2011 issue is already online). This editorial initiative seemed to me to be important enough to warrant inclusion among the External Links. MistyMorn (talk) 12:41, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Piano roll prom: legacy or recordings?

I've supplied a citation that provides some detail on Percy's posthumous appearance at the Proms. The related sentence currently comes at the end of the 'Legacy'. But nice as it must have been to for the prommers hear Percy play, even by proxy, I find it hard to see this event as the culmination of the man's legacy! I was wondering whether the sentence would be better located elsewhere? While writing the last sentence, the thought occurs to me that the Proms sentence might already fit under 'Recordings', given that a piano roll is, by definition, a recording format. Since that solution would have the advantage of grouping together the information about the Duo Art method and the reproduction machinery, I think I'll go back and make the move. But feel free to revert or discuss the issue. Regards --MistyMorn (talk) 09:47, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

File:Seventeen Come Sunday.ogg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Seventeen Come Sunday.ogg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests December 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 23:41, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Atheism

His atheist belief that he would only survive through his legacy is documented and explains the obsession with his own museum. I'm surprised this fact was excluded from the article. Alatari (talk) 10:53, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

RE "...and explains the obsession with his own museum."

I have a query here: Who's interpretation is this? The corresponding sentence in the article (ie "From this belief he took action to ensure that survival with the establishment of his own museum to Australia") is currently unreferenced. One could object that most atheists do not appear particularly anxious to set up their own personal museums, and a believer may have analogous projects. Irrespective of the plausibility of the interpretation, prefacing the paragraph dedicated to the Grainger Museum in this way raises concerns regarding undue emphasis. Unless, of course, that's what Grainger himself proclaimed specifically in the context of his museum project.

Just my 2 obols--MistyMorn (talk) 17:55, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

This is from the source:

"Percy Grainger was much obsessed with posterity. It itched at him that his reputation was made and sustained as a performer of other people's work, that his most distinctive innovations were either ignored or co-opted without acknowledgement, and that he should be remembered best for his least demanding efforts. (Mention Grainger's name now and 'Country Gardens' comes inevitably and solitarily to mind.) "Grainger took positive steps to ensure his posthumous survival. A life-long atheist, he had every basis for belief that whatever of himself would endure would be found in his work. An obsessive genealogist of style, he believed implicitly that the es sence of any work could be found in the influences brought to bear on it.

I want to get the meaning of this sentence A life-long atheist, he had every basis for belief that whatever of himself would endure would be found in his work. without plagiarizing. His work would include the museum and all it's contents and as an atheist his enduring survival was that work. So how would you fit that interpretation into the article? Alatari (talk) 02:59, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

My understanding is that this is the interpretation of a single commentator, and that it is far from being self-evident fact. As I've argued above, on logical grounds 'being an atheist' is, in itself, neither a sufficient nor a necessary condition for wanting to build one's very own museum. Clearly, it could have been a contributing factor. However, alternative/additional explanations are possible, perhaps somehow linked to Grainger's eccentricities and a belief that his artistic creativity was not restricted to his music (cf [1]). So while the interpretation you are supporting may be notable, I think we should avoid giving it undue prominence in the context of an NPOV biography.

Just my 2 systematically skeptical cents. Regards, --MistyMorn (talk) 14:04, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Your edit is fine with me. Atheist wasn't mentioned at all before. Alatari (talk) 21:57, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

BDSM people

As its well documented, ive added him to this category.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 04:36, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Full name

Some sources I saw say his full name was "George Percy Grainger", others "Percy Aldridge Grainger". Can someone straighten this out? Wondering simply, -- Infrogmation 18:40 28 Jun 2003 (UTC)

He was born George Percy Grainger but later changed his name to Percy Aldridge Grainger in October of 1911 concurrently with the the first publication of his compositions. Aldridge is his mother's maiden name.

--Melias2083 06:43, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Grove V (1954) calls him Percy Aldridge Grainger, but Slonimsky (1998) calls him George Percy Aldridge Grainger. If the latter's correct (and I usually trust Slonimsky), that would mean he added Aldridge to his existing name but didn't remove any part of it. JackofOz 07:16, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Also, he never used George but preferred Percy; however, the above suggests that George always remained part of his legal name. JackofOz 08:31, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Revisited

The facts seems to be as follows:

• His name registered at birth was George Percy Grainger, but from a very early age he was generally known by his middle name Percy - Percy Grainger
• In 1911-12 he assumed the professional name Percy Aldridge Grainger, and that is the name under which his music was published thereafter
• Despite what I said above, at no time in his life did he ever use the name George Percy Aldridge Grainger.

I'm editing the article accordingly. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 21:59, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

TFAR

Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/Percy Grainger --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:39, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Percy Grainger/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)

Press [show] to view →

==Composers Project Assessment of Percy Grainger: 2008-11-20== This is an assessment of article Percy Grainger by a member of the Composers project, according to its assessment criteria. This review was done by Magicpiano. If an article is well-cited, the reviewer is assuming that the article reflects reasonably current scholarship, and deficiencies in the historical record that are documented in a particular area will be appropriately scored. If insufficient inline citations are present, the reviewer will assume that deficiencies in that area may be cured, and that area may be scored down. Adherence to overall Wikipedia standards (WP:MOS, WP:WIAGA, WP:WIAFA) are the reviewer's opinion, and are not a substitute for the Wikipedia's processes for awarding Good Article or Featured Article status. ===Origins/family background/studies=== Does the article reflect what is known about the composer's background and childhood? If s/he received musical training as a child, who from, is the experience and nature of the early teachers' influences described? Good ===Early career=== Does the article indicate when s/he started composing, discuss early style, success/failure? Are other pedagogic and personal influences from this time on his/her music discussed? Good ===Mature career=== Does the article discuss his/her adult life and composition history? Are other pedagogic and personal influences from this time on his/her music discussed? Good ===List(s) of works=== Are lists of the composer's works in WP, linked from this article? If there are special catalogs (e.g. Köchel for Mozart, Hoboken for Haydn), are they used? If the composer has written more than 20-30 works, any exhaustive listing should be placed in a separate article. Composition list appears to be partial. It might be useful to indicate who published his music, as some may still be copyrighted. ===Critical appreciation=== Does the article discuss his/her style, reception by critics and the public (both during his/her life, and over time)? His style and musical ideas are discussed; descriptions of reception by critics and public are minimal. It is clear from the article who influenced him; less so on who he influenced. ===Illustrations and sound clips=== Does the article contain images of its subject, birthplace, gravesite or other memorials, important residences, manuscript pages, museums, etc? Does it contain samples of the composer's work (as composer and/or performer, if appropriate)? (Note that since many 20th-century works are copyrighted, it may not be possible to acquire more than brief fair use samples of those works, but efforts should be made to do so.) If an article is of high enough quality, do its images and media comply with image use policy and non-free content policy? (Adherence to these is needed for Good Article or Featured Article consideration, and is apparently a common reason for nominations being quick-failed.) There are an adequate number of images; the text cries out for additional images and audio; see summary. ===References, sources and bibliography=== Does the article contain a suitable number of references? Does it contain sufficient inline citations? (For an article to pass Good Article nomination, every paragraph possibly excepting those in the lead, and every direct quotation, should have at least one footnote.) If appropriate, does it include Further Reading or Bibliography beyond the cited references? Article is referenced but has few inline citations. Reference works should be called out in a separate section (WP:LAYOUT). ===Structure and compliance with WP:MOS=== Does the article comply with Wikipedia style and layout guidelines, especially WP:MOS, WP:LEAD, WP:LAYOUT, and possibly WP:SIZE? (Article length is not generally significant, although Featured Articles Candidates may be questioned for excessive length.) Lead is short. ===Things that may be necessary to pass a Good Article review=== Article requires more inline citations (WP:CITE) Article lead needs work (WP:LEAD) ===Summary=== This is an interesting article about a fascinating eccentric figure. His personal and musical biography is generally quite good, although specifics on some aspects are sometimes difficult to determine: what ensembles did he conduct? where his concert tours conducting ensembles? solo performance? a combination? Critical and popular views of his music are generally not covered. The list of works does not appear to be complete; if a complete list is made, it should be in a separate article, as the selected set here is already too long, in my opinion. The article is poorly referenced; there is no list of reference works; and there are only a few foot notes. This is a significant barrier to successful GA review. The lead is too short; an article this length should have one of 2-3 paragraphs. While the article has an adequate number of images, it cries out for some specific media to be included, simply because the things being discussed are sufficiently odd. There should be images of his machines (which may even merit a separate article), as well as audio clips of the sounds they produced. Sample images of some of his odder time signature work would also enhance the article. This is a B-class article that has some great potential, if some of the above can be fulfilled. Magic♪piano 15:38, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Last edited at 13:30, 11 December 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 02:38, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Percy Grainger. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.pianola.org/concerts/concerts_archive.cfm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:12, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

LGBT?

Percy Grainger was certainly into BDSM, but I can see nothing in the article that refers to him as being gay, bisexual or trans*. So why is he tagged and listed as a LGBT composer? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.68.209.88 (talk) 11:29, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Same question occurred to me. As no answer has been forthcoming, I have removed it. William Avery (talk) 10:13, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Recent change of the lead image and infobox text

As predicted, the rather inane infobox that we currently have (that tells us nothing that the first few lines of the lead section doesn't, by the way) is being screwed around with despite their being hidden text telling people specificaly not to do so. Also, the lead image, and without no consensus whatsoever, is being changed by the same drive-by editor. I believe that such an edit goes against the version that passed FAC and should therefore be discussed here first where a consensus should be sought. Cassianto^Talk 09:38, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Do you mean this? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:25, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

I do, yes. Sorry, what's your point? Cassianto^Talk 12:31, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

It looks to me that the editor who nominated the article for FA chose this way, and it was stable for years. I may have misunderstood what you meant by "currently", - you wrote that possibly before reverting? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:39, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

OK Cass-for the record-it went to FAC like this <!-- please do not add an infobox, per [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Composers#Lead section]]--> [[File:Percy Aldridge Grainger.jpg|thumb|Percy Grainger in 1922, at the height of his popularity as pianist and composer]] My guess is that it may be under consideration for TFA and thus "couldn't" be allowed on the FP without the box. ;) We hope (talk) 12:48, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Repeating: it was added in 2013, has nothing to do with TFA considerations for 2017 or (rather) later. It was peaceful until today, and I see no reason to change that. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:09, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Change what? I'm not here on an infobox crusade. If you want to help dumb down the article to a load of lazy arsed readers, that's up to you. Unlike you, Gerda, or your sheep that follow you around, I'm not here to enforce my POV and will respect Brian's wishes to include an idiot box. I'm here as Richard Arthur Norton swapped the images and fucked around with the fields, despite there being a respectful hidden message not to do so. Cassianto^Talk 14:29, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

This pd box looks modeled after my 2013 suggestions for Verdi and Beethoven in the infoboxes case. Do you think the one who created it - as an experiment, because Beethoven and Verdi were not yet in the articles then - it is a sheep following me around? - In 2017, I am interested in filling red links, and followers are welcome. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:52, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

I really cannot be bothered to work out what you've just said. The image seems to have stayed and that's all I'm concerned about. Cassianto^Talk 09:59, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Hope this remains the case re: peaceful. We hope (talk) 14:20, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

As a stalker I had a look to see what changes you were talking about, and have removed the 'unknown parameter "italic title"' that was flagging as an error. It does not affect the display, being simply ignored. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 12:37, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. Yes there was little point to that field, but indicative of the kind of crap that gets added when there is an existing box of little intellect. I don't quite see what's "experimental" about the box either, as the hidden text suggests, but ours is not to reason why, I suppose. Cassianto^Talk 12:43, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

It was experimental when it was added. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:04, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Curious. Although I still don't know what "experimental" is supposed to mean. Cassianto^Talk 14:30, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

I understood it as a compromise. Perhaps ask Brianboulton. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:30, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

As this thread is about the unauthorised changes of the lead image and the fields, and not about the infobox itself, I don't feel as if I need to. Cassianto^Talk 16:22, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Percy Grainger. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130906120206/http://www.chandos.net/pdf/CHAN%209584.pdf to http://www.chandos.net/pdf/CHAN%209584.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:43, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Percy Grainger. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110809133838/http://www.prestoclassical.co.uk/r/Chandos/CHAN10638%252819%2529 to http://www.prestoclassical.co.uk/r/Chandos/CHAN10638%252819%2529

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:05, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Trial basis

In 2013, this person was described in an "identibox" on a trial basis. It was more or less stable until today. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:30, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Edit wars

There are at least two overlapping edit wars going on the article page today. Everybody involved needs to stop warring and discuss here on the talk page. Remember, it is edit warring even you don't exceed three reverts in 24 hours. - Donald Albury 17:23, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

I did ask that the edit wars stop and changes be discussed back here, and yet the infobox image descriptor was reverted again. I will also note that the article clearly states that Grainger joined the United States Army during World War I as a bandsman, became a naturalized United States citizen while in the U.S. Army, and maintained his residence in the U.S. until his death, so the categorization of him as 'American' is quite appropriate. - Donald Albury 21:51, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

External links

Sometimes things can just creep in and I was wondering if the "External links" section has been reviewed lately. Eight links is a little excessive and can be considered link farming. -- Otr500 (talk) 12:12, 7 January 2020 (UTC):

I reviewed them now, and found all helpful. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:28, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

It's even missing one -- an IMSLP link. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 13:28, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

All the links look pukka and useful to me. There were seven ELs when the main editor, the sorely missed Brianboulton, last edited the page, in July 2018, which suggests that we are OK with what is there now. Tim riley talk 16:16, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Since local consensus seems to indicate that not only is eight alright but a ninth should be added, that does not seem to conform to policies and guidelines as well as the more broad community consensus (and per a discussion here) I have listed this at Wikipedia:External links/Noticeboard#Percy Grainger to possibly get a wider range of opinions. Otr500 (talk) 01:59, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Which links do you think are bad? Just saying "omg it's too many!" doesn't help. I could see removing the link to the Country Gardens performance and integrating it into the text instead, granted. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 05:54, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt, Melodia, Tim riley, and Otr500: the remark '8 is too many' is indeed not helpful. As I mentioned on ELN, on some articles 3 is a linkfarm, on others 25 is a linkfarm. That being said, helpfulness is not necessarily an inclusion standard (not being helpful is an exclusion standard, though). E.g. people find having social networking on a page 'helpful', however we quite strictly exclude most of them as it simply is not Google's task to point to everything that someone might consider helpful. Just to comment (not necessarily arguments to exclude them all):

• There are two links to Grainger societies there. Obviously the document is not about the societies, but about the person. Only one of the societies has a very fleeting mention in the article. I could ask 'why are they here?' (noting that sometimes people start societies that are totally unrelated to themselves, but more to a single cause they believe in).
• The museum link should go. This article is not about the museum, it is about the person. The museum link belongs on the (mentioned) Grainger Museum. (this one I really believe it should go, it directly fails ELNO#13)
• "Country Gardens": Performance by Grainger on pianola, 1919 seems cherry picked, why one individual performance by the subject. Is there not a directory somewhere with multiple works (e.g. a youtube channel/playlist/collection)? (I now see that it is deemed the subject he is most known for, but also that it has an own article: Country Gardens)
• Percy Grainger America is rather unclear what it is, and un(der)presented in the article.

So there is a lot of material here where I question why they are of importance to the article though where quite some (not all) indeed do contain a lot of material that cannot be included in the article. For the material that has an own article I believe that the focus is in the text, and that material should expand on the text - the museum and Country Gardens is covered in the text and in own article and should be linked there, not here. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 08:46, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

I have little time, so just two: for many composers from that period, we have NO record of them playing there own works, so I cherish to have one here, and I doubt that many readers of the bio will go to the composition. It's interesting to me what kind of museum was dedicated to him, and as long as we have no article about the museum, it's best linked here. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:50, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Gerda Arendt, that was the point: we do have an article on the museum

And yes, it is interesting to hear that, that is why it is linked from that one article on the one that does have that. Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 13:05, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Well, that link looked red to me, and I had no time to check if perhaps something else was meant. I agree then about the museum link. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:15, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

I removed one "society" that looked duplicate, and added the Melbourne University as publisher. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:05, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

I would note as far as Country Gardens goes, the article in question isn't about Grainger's version but the folk song in general. The article actually talks very little about Grainger but his arrangements of it ARE his most well known work, so if any piece with him playing (which, as noted, is a rarity) should be there, that one should. But as I said, if possible integrating it into the article instead of an EL seems like a good choice. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 13:34, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

• This is not a matter on which I feel strongly. If others are exercised about a plethora of external linking from this page I am content to indulge them. It would be interesting to know how useful external links sections are to our readers, but I suppose there is not yet any means of totting up the clicks out of a WP article into another website. My suspicion that few readers ever read anything below the footnotes may be entirely wrong, but it would be salutary to know. Tim riley talk 19:54, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

I look at them all the time. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 05:40, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

If not all the time, at least pretty often. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 10:07, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

I do look at them also but that could be with editing bias. As a reader (probably my first two years before editing) I ran across several articles and the links provided additional constructive information, so fueled an interest in the section. I would offer that the general reader, that goes a little deeper than those that just read the introduction, will likely not follow the "Further reading" or "External links" on any kind of normal basis. Links in the "See also" section might be followed more closely.

I suppose that my issue is when the section becomes a dumping ground because many editors don't "feel strongly" one way or another. Projects and sub-projects can add links (and we allow many templates to facilitate this), that often times does not contain any additional information just adding to the section and promoting that particular interest of the editor or group of editors. Over time the section grows with this unneeded content and it is ripe for geography and biography articles, especially those like movie stars and singers. Look at Bruce Willis, with IMDb, Internet Broadway Database, Internet Off-Broadway Database, Rotten Tomatoes, and TCM Movie Database links and Kim Basinger with the added AllMusic, to John Wayne that starts getting more elaborate. Most of these links don't offer anything unique, and in fact many times just repeat information like from a prepared bio. They are all over Wikipedia so I just concentrate on when "length" does become an added issue. An article can generally be just fine without any EL's, but these "related" links are just a form of inundating Wikipedia (advertising) that particular site on as many articles as possible. That is my opinion, likely "spot-on", yet it continues usually unopposed. Find a Grave was a big "add-on" with a full-blown project to place it on every article of a deceased person on Wikipedia. This "inattention" is why I choose to pay particular interest to the section. Thanks everyone, Otr500 (talk) 15:26, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Recent addition

Like several other admirers of the main author of the present article, the late and painfully missed Brianboulton, I keep an eye on his FAs. The recent addition of a para on Grainger's vegetarianism seems to me proportionate. Grainger was so odd in so many ways that vegetarianism and teetotalism slip into the narrative smoothly enough. Do others who keep an eye on this page concur? Tim riley talk 17:45, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

There are very many references to his vegetarianism that could be added to further expand on this section. One paper published about his vegetarian eating by the University of Melbourne in 1998 that includes essays and letters is this: [2]. BrikDuk (talk) 17:50, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Quite. He was clearly a very odd person, but unless you propose an addition I think the present addition is proportionate and reasonable. Tim riley talk 17:59, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

I agree; I think the new section fits into the article well, and it seems to be appropriately written and referenced. Noahfgodard (talk) 18:09, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Good! Thank you both for your thoughts on this. We can leave the text as it is, I think, if we are all agreed. Tim riley talk 20:17, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Australian?

Someone (208.187.9.24) replaced "Australian-born" by "Australian" and removed the English references in the categories. Since Grainger moved to England when he was 13 and to the US when he was 32, I think the previous designations were fair and in fact we should add the American category (the other day the bass trombonist for my orchestra told me he had played under Grainger in a Massachusetts youth orchestra, and he had thought of PG as American). David Brooks 23:59, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Well I did an assignment for year 10 and he was on our list as a choice of an Australian Composer and I entered in the Australian Composer section for a music esteidford with one of his pieces

June 2006

Just to quantify this a little - adding evidence of his visits to Australia. Three visits that amount to several months.Tradimus (talk) 14:56, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

• 1927 for two concerts
• 1934
• 1948 to open his Grainger museum

Is there any evidence that Grainger identified as Australian? The article states Grainger felt Australia rejected him - there is evidence to suggest this is true.

References

As the article opens with the statement that PG "was an Australian-born composer, arranger and pianist who lived in the United States from 1914 and became an American citizen in 1918" I'm not sure of the import of the above question. Tim riley talk 17:12, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

I agree that the lead should say "Australian-born" in any case, but for the sake of answering the question posed, it does seem that Grainger was proud of his Australian origin. See the program note in the score of Colonial Song, for example. Sources used in the article's Legacy section support this, as well. Noahfgodard (talk) 17:38, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

It is as well to remember that Percy Grainger's parentage was British, and his birth in British soverign territory, as the colonies were not federated into an Australian nation until after his birth. The program note in the score of Colonial Song|citation above alludes to such a 'provincial' or back-water impression, without stipulating any fondness for it. Perhaps the footnote is a device to authenticate and advertise the work as an curio or other-worldly souvenir. The main source from the Legacy section by Roger Covell is a book entitled with a question as to Graingers naionality. One seldom hears the term 'Australian-American', as in Pat Sullivan (film producer), but I argue this is appropriate. Tradimus (talk) 02:15, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

The present wording of the opening is factually correct and gives the reader the necessary information about Grainger's place of birth and later residence and nationality. I would not support an attempt to alter it. If a consensus arises for such a change, fair enough of course, but otherwise leave the wording alone is my view. It ain't broke, so don't fix it. Tim riley talk 08:39, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Percy Grainger as a musicologist

Why anyone would disagree that Percy Grainger was a musicologist is baffling to me. Several sources directly describe him as one, and through his work as an educator and folklorist, it's easy to see why. As mentioned in the sources below, one of Grainger's most important contributions to the field of ethnomusicology was through his use of technology (namely the phonograph) to collect folk music.

• https://csuepress.columbusstate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1240&context=theses_dissertations
• https://www.google.com/books/edition/A_Commonsense_View_of_All_Music/Awo4AAAAIAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=0
• https://www.google.com/books/edition/Grainger_the_Modernist/Iau1CwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=Percy+Grainger+musicology&printsec=frontcover
• https://grainger.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/2036659/PG_and_Folk_Music_catalogue.pdf
• https://www.jstor.org/stable/25654172

Why? I Ask (talk) 09:36, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

It depends on how to define a musicologist, but I am with you in this question. A musicologist isn't only someone who held a professor position with the description, or published scientific standard works. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:40, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, I want to avoid having a metadiscussion on what musicology is, but I definitely think Grainger fits inside the "studied music" boundary. Why? I Ask (talk) 09:43, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

I disagree – PG was no more a musicologist than other collectors of folk music like Bartók or RVW – but I don't feel strongly about it, as I don't think most readers ever look at article categories, which are apt to be footling. Some well-meaning soul added "Military personnel from Middlesex" to Noël Coward's article the other day. Technically correct, as he served briefly in the army in WWI, but not frightfully helpful, it seems to me. In short, I shall not press my objection here. Tim riley talk 11:01, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Bartók's lede literally says that he was a founder of ethnomusicology. Why? I Ask (talk) 11:51, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

I know. So does Grove. Not the term I'd choose, preferring the OED's take on the meaning, but to each his own. Tim riley talk 13:38, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Fair enough; I completely disagree, but fair enough. Why? I Ask (talk) 13:40, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Well is it really defining enough for a category? The lead doesn't call him one, neither does Grove and the article currently has no source calling him one. Yes he was a folk-song collector (oxford reference calls him that), but that does not automatically make someone a musicologist/ethnomusicologist. In this case, I think the "folk-song collectors" categories suffice. If Grove calls Bartok an ethnomusicologist, but not Grainger, then we should follow suit. Aza24 (talk) 23:18, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

If it's not too contentious, then could I not add a mention of Grainger's work in musicology? If there are several reputable sources mentioning his involvement in the field, I don't believe it'd be too out of place. Personally, I think that people who collect folk songs, study them, and catalogue them are ethnomusicologists. But Wikipedia is not based on my opinions, it's based on references. (Also, I don't really think Grove is the be all end all.) Why? I Ask (talk) 02:04, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Aza24 rings the bell and wins a cigar or coconut according to choice, though in reality do any of the readers for whom we are writing ever look at the categories? A few dedicated editors get very excited about them, but as long as something added to categories is not egregiously idiotic or plain inaccurate I'm inclined to ignore it, though I defer to those taking a more purist view. Tim riley talk 23:46, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Short tutorial on misplaced modifiers

Of late the rare Wikipedia editor has been reverting corrections I have made of misplaced modifiers, without showing any understanding of what the error means and appealing to an authority called Fowler (absent from my bookshelf) who apparently condones it. This appeal strikes me as akin to expecting others to let their shirttail hang out over their trousers because some etiquette authority said it might be done. That permission doesn't oblige one to do it, if one sees a reason not to. Because sometimes, as in the example below, misplaced modifiers create confusion, and because they can always be gracefully averted, I find it sensible to do so.

What is the intended meaning of this sentence, taken from a manufacturer's manual:

Only install refrigerant lines outdoors in dry weather.

Any of five meanings could be drawn from it, depending on what the reader considers only to be modifying. If you can't see what these meanings are, the example will be lost on you.

You may say “It doesn’t matter! You could figure it out from the context!”

Sometimes you can...and if there is context. But why should anyone have to “figure out from the context” what a competent writer can easily express with unequivocal and graceful clarity, irrespective of context? Is the job of a writer and editor to make readers work harder than they would need to work if (s)he took the trouble to write clearly?

Please consider also that there may be readers whose first language is not English and whose understanding depends on literal translation. Literal translation of idioms, semantic or syntactic, doesn’t work well. If you don’t know any foreign languages and have never labored to translate idiomatic phrases like il n'a qu'une verbe, this proposition will be lost on you.

When we place a modifier directly before the term it's intended to modify and not before terms it isn't, the meaning is clear. In this case, the writer wished to say, and should have said, Install refrigerant lines outdoors only in dry weather.

A final note on edit wars: they take two to fight: an editor and a reverter. One who tucks in the shirttail and one who yanks it out again. Chenopodiaceous (talk) 00:08, 12 February 2022 (UTC)