Template talk:Music topics

Editing

How do we determine what is put in this template? Hyacinth 22:38, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

if you want to, put it inCosprings 21:09, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 09:23, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Move

Template:Music portal → Template:Music topics — "Music portal" is an unintuitive name for this template. I propose moving it to "Music topics", which is more intuitive and in line with similar templates. Waldir ^talk 12:05, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Makes sense. -- Quiddity (talk) 19:39, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. As it is, the title gives the inappropriate impression that the articles linked in the template deal exclusively with Portal:Music. The proposed move title is much more sensible. Munci (talk) 18:10, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support the current name suggests it is a template that links to Portal:Music like all other portal linking templates. 70.29.210.242 (talk) 03:50, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

"Music by country" getting too large for this template?

Does anyone think that adding every country in the world that has a Wiki music article onto this template is making it too large? Would it not be better for these articles to have a separate template all to themselves, which could be placed as desired at the bottom of any "by country" music article? The main Music template could have a link to that separate template. Some articles would have both templates at the bottom.

What do you think? Softlavender (talk) 05:45, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I have removed the overlarge by country section, and have placed it at that linked subpage for the time being. It's a good thing to have, but is so large it needs to be its own template. I tried to make a template out of it, but since I've never made a template before I was unable to. Could someone familiar with creating templates create a "Music by Country" template, and add that material to it? (A link to the template can then be placed on this main Music template.) Thank you. Softlavender (talk) 01:28, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've worked the list at /by country into a template. Note that the proposed name of that template is {{Music by country}} with a lower case "c". -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 04:25, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Like the new template - think linking to categories in this template is a very odd move and is something we actually try to avoid on purpose as per WP:NAVBOX. We make templates for articles not cats. This is a step backwards in the navigational purpose of a templates like this. See also Wikipedia:Navigation templates "navigation between existing articles" Moxy (talk) 04:31, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't care much whether the Category:Music is included in the template(s) or not, although I think it is a useful navigational help in this particularly broad template. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 05:04, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

looking at my post it sounds like a ramble - sorry. Links to Category:East Asian music are odd because normally one would think its a link to an article. Category:Music the parent cat is linked in the "below" section I think this is fine. Cant we just link /by country under "Cultural and regional genres" and not cats.Moxy (talk) 05:16, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think I understand now: you are pointing out an excessive number of links to categories in the Template:Music topics in its section "Cultural and regional genres". I agree that they are misleading and should be removed.

As to the fate of what's now in /by country: I haven't given any thought to where such a template might be used – I only followed up on Softlavender's request. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 06:34, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

you don't need a separate template for this, as you can do it automatically with template:world topic, like this {{World topic|prefix = Music of}} Frietjes (talk) 15:17, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nice. But some articles would need to be moved to conform to that template's naming convention and allow auto-bolding: Music of Central African Republic, Music of Comoros, Music of Republic of Macedonia, Music of Maldives, Music of Solomon Islands. I'm not convinced that those titles will find approval. Maybe the naming conventions at {{World topic}} can be tweaked, or the idea of auto-bolding be disregarded. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 05:54, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for doing that, Michael. When the template gets a name and goes live, can you also put a link to it on this main Music template? Cheers. Softlavender (talk) 03:48, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, but we need to decide 1) which of the two versions at /by country should be used; 2) the name of such a template; 3) how/where to incorporate it into {{Music topics}}, if at all. On the first question, I have no preference; the bespoken version contains no REDIRECTs, the version based on {{World topic}} requires less code and no maintenance as it will automatically pick up all articles beinning with "Music of". Ad 2), I think it should be called {{Music by country}}, although the category is called Category:Music by nationality. Ad 3), I'm not sure how to incorporate new template into {{Music topics}}; a transclusion would expand it to it former large size, a link would be an unusual thing to do. Maybe as a collapsed sub-template, although that would still include the full code, but only collapse its display (does the Wikipedia software do that on all platforms?). The most meaningful option, in my opinion, is to place the new template in those articles where it helps navigation most, but I'm not sure what those are; in other words, I can't really see any meaningful purpose for it, but I won't object to whatever is decided. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 07:04, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Personellement, I have no preference on which of the two to use. I guess go with the majority, make an independent decision, or flip a coin. In terms of (2), I agree on "Music by country". (3) I would just add it as a link to the Music template (on either "Related topics" or maybe "Lists"); so what if that's unusual -- we are meant to break all rules and be bold. I think the "Music by country" is more useful than the [hard to read, by the way] "Cultural and regional genres" thing that's already there, which is why I personally think it deserves a placement on the template. Putting it on the template as a link would obviate the need to personally start adding it to appropriate articles. Anyway, just my thoughts. PS: I don't really understand the collapsible subtemplate thing, but if it would always stay collapsed unless clicked then that actually sounds good. Softlavender (talk) 08:15, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've now created the template {{Music by country}} using {{World topic}}. I then presented a draft of a possible embedding of that template into {{Music topics}} at /by country#Music topics with World topic embedded. Is that suitable? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 11:14, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My opinion is that's pretty cool. The only thing I don't like is the word "topics" added to the template title. My reasons are: (1) It looks ugly to have one word linked in a title and the other not; (2) This isn't really a list of music topics, and the template leaves out most of the actual important music topics; (3) The word "topics" (to my knowledge) does not appear in the titles of similar templates. Softlavender (talk) 11:33, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Changed. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 12:45, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks very much for doing all of that. I guess you can make it live, or add the subtemplate like that to the live Music template, at will, unless there is objection to that. Softlavender (talk) 04:29, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done; code incorporated into {{Music topics}}. I suppose that at some time the pages /by country and Template:Music by country should be deleted. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 11:01, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Always collapsed

Thanks. Yes, I'll mark that page for deletion once it seems the conversation and consensus is complete. I do have a couple of questions for everyone though: Adding the subtemplate seems to mean that the Music navbox itself always stays collapsed on a page unless clicked. Is that what we want? How can we avoid that? Also, I'd like to revisit Moxy's point that categories should not be linked on a navbox. It does seem rather odd to have them on the navbox; also, now that we've got the "by country" subtemplate, that makes the categories redundant (because the categories are lists of music articles by country). Perhaps if we are adding the "by country" subtemplate, we should delete the categories, but leave the links to the articles on continents and regions? Softlavender (talk) 11:24, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh bugger. As always, there are unintended consequences; this was not obvious in the testbed. When placed in an article, the template will always "autocollapse" because there are now always 2 templates wherever it appears: {{Music topics}} and the embedded {{Tl:World topic}}. The elements other than "By country" could be forced to always display uncollapsed, but that won't be in keeping with template custom when there really are additional templates in an article. I will think about this until tomorrow, but I'm not hopeful there's a solution. As for the links to categories: I have no strong feelings either way. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 13:06, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I can only suggest to change this template's default display state to uncollapsed; this can then be overridden on pages where that is not desired with |state=collapsed. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 11:25, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I dunno, I'm not opposed to ditching the idea of including it on the Music template -- in other words, reverting the main template to how it was a few weeks ago. In fact, that's what I vote. I have a mind to insert the new, separate "by country" template on a couple of articles myself, just to get it "out there", and then people can decide from there wherever else they want to place it (if at all). I think it's a nice thing to have on hand, but not imperative, and certainly not imperative on the Music template. I think the linked categories will cover the material on the main template, for now. Softlavender (talk) 01:14, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Continents

Please indent indent Music by Country into continent sub-brackets? --173.51.29.188 (talk) 04:38, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As you know, that sublist is included here via {{World topic}}, so changes need to be discussed there. However, as the list is currently alphabetical, I don't think breaking it into paragraphs by continent is a good idea – nor do I think your change from "By country" to "By sovereign states" was an improvement; it should be reverted. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 08:43, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Impressionism included in this template

The inclusion of Impressionism, makes no sense, as I said in my edit summary:

"Impressionism in music" was perhaps a 50 year "movement", not era – which both Debussy and Ravel denied even being part of. It is not significant when compared to its "counterpart" in painting and to the other Western Classical movements: Medieval (900 years), Renaissance (200 years), Baroque (~300 years), Classical (~80 years) Romantic (~110 years) etc.

Cote d'Azur insists on its inclusion and says "Impressionism in music is important" when... it is not (compared to the others on this list). I would like to see this user explain how it could stand up to the other eras here. Aza24 (talk) 09:16, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The other issue with not sticking to the big eras of Western Classical music is because then where does it stop? Ars antiqua had a bigger impact on the history of music than Impressionism, Galant music is just as notable, Expressionism is just as notable... pinging users who have commented on this talk page in the past: @Michael Bednarek and Softlavender: - Aza24 (talk) 09:35, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This template already contains >150 items; adding Impressionism doesn't seem to me a big deal. As for "importance": it's widely covered in encyclopedias and scholarly literature, so it doesn't seem undue to include it here. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 09:56, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Michael Bednarek: Perhaps Impressionism should be replaced with Modernism (music), which it seems to fall under. We have to draw the line somewhere otherwise, according to your requirements of being "widely covered in encyclopedias and scholarly literature" I could add Ars antiqua, Ars nova, Ars subtilior, Expressionism, Neoclassicism etc. Aza24 (talk) 10:01, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the immediately surrounding items the navbox are major eras, not subgenres, so the list should follow the main eras in {{History of Western art music}}, and what follows "Romantic" should therefore be "Modernism" and "Contemporary", not the single subgenre Impressionism. So I agree Impressionism does not belong, at least not where it is, unless we are listing all the subgenres of that era. Softlavender (talk) 10:15, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I shall leave it to your discretion. —Cote d'Azur (talk) 08:06, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]