IMSLP talk:Categorization/Project Members/archive6



At this moment, 11408 out of 22808 works on IMSLP have been tagged, meaning that we have just crossed the 50% threshold!!!! This is an important milestone in the project, and means that we can now introduce the category walker to the composer pages, which I'll be working on this weekend. The final roll-out should be in May, when Feldmahler should be able to make the technical changes needed for this to happen.

Thanks to everyone for sticking with it over these past 11 weeks! — P.davydov 10:38, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Next category to work on

I see that help is requested on the piano category. All the ensemble things I was working are now done, and I don't know that much about vocal/choral, so should I move to piano? (Steltz)

Yes, by all means. It accounts for almost a quarter of all the works on IMSLP, and as the note says, "assistance very, very welcome" :-) — P.davydov 23:30, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Film music as opposed to incidental music?

Does anyone think this deserves its own tag? While it serves a somewhat analogous function to incidental music for theater, my feeling is that it's distinct enough to be classified separately. Any opinions? KGill talk email 21:40, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

If that's the general feeling then we could make it a sub-category of incidental music. Are there many film scores on IMSLP (bearing in mind the post-1923 restrictions in the US)? — P.davydov 23:30, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
I have no idea if there are many, but I was thinking of L’Assassinat du duc de Guise, Op.128 (Saint-Saëns, Camille), and there may be more. KGill talk email 00:25, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

That is, by the way, the first film score by a "major" composer...late saint-saëns...-- Snailey Talk to Me Email me 02:56, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

I've always wanted to know -- I don't think they had sound tracks per se when that film came out. Did they issue the film canister with the sheet music? (Steltz)

OK, I've gone ahead and tagged it as 'film music ; orch', since there seems not to be much resistance to it. I think it's a good idea as Davydov said to put it as a subcategory of incidental music. KGill talk email 22:34, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

OK. Could I suggest "film scores" as the tag, which will be a sub-category of incidental music — P.davydov 09:05, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

El Agiaco Cubano (Bull, Ole)

Does anyone know what the original form of this piece is? I couldn't find anything from a web search. Thanks, KGill talk email 00:55, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Concert donné au souper du roy (Lully, Jean-Baptiste de)

I already tagged this as 2ob 2vn bc, going by the frequent designation 'Violins, Oboes, Continuo', put together with the number of staves in the score (5), but as there isn't an exact indication on the score, could someone be so kind as to confirm this? KGill talk email 22:30, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Lully was notoriously vague about his instrumentation (which has caused us problems with the tagging elsewhere), but we'll go with "2ob 2vn bc" for this one unless anyone disagrees — P.davydov 09:05, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Capricieuse vs Caprice

How close does one get to the actual word before using the tag for the not-exact word? Mussorgsky and Thalberg both wrote pieces entitled La Capricieuse or the plural of that. "The Capricious One" isn't exactly a caprice, but the sentiment is there, and it is awfully close. (Steltz) [edit] Also, La Bella Capriciosa by Hummel falls into the same category.

Going by the MLA cataloging rules, both these titles are considered descriptive rather than generic, so the correct tag would be "piece", rather than "caprice" or "capriccio" (unless the works have sub-titles giving rise to a different tag) — P.davydov 19:57, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Albums of piano pieces

Some of these contain works that would have tags other than "pieces". Since it doesn't work like a suite, where the individual parts are intended to be performed together, do the individual movements get tags (much like some of the baroque collections we've tagged)? For instance, someone looking for Saint-Saëns Toccata won't know to look in the Album. (Steltz)

If an album or collection is impossible to split into its constituent works, then there should be links to the album from the pages of each of the works included. So, for example, the page for the Saint-Saëns toccata should have a link back to the album(s) in which it was included. In practice this doesn't always happen, but adding those missing links is outside the scope of the tagging project, and not something we have to sort out now.
With this principle in mind, I'd say that any albums or collections of miscellaneous piano pieces should just be tagged as "pieces ; pf". Or if the contents of the album are themed by type, such as Famous Waltzes for Piano, then something like "waltzes ; pf" would be more appropriate — P.davydov 16:17, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
On this basis, then, I've also tagged the collections of transcriptions of Bach's (by Reger) and Bizet's (by Maylath) works as "pieces ; pf". (Steltz)

Tone poems for piano, blues, branles etc.

  • Bubbling Spring by Rive-King for piano has a subtitle of "tone poem", but since that is listed as being a symphonic poem, I have tagged it as "piece". Is this correct?
A symphonic poem doesn't necessarily have to be for orchestra (and there are other examples), so it might be better to stick with that rather than the generic "pieces"
  • Brawl on Duval Street has a subtitle of "Blues". Though we don't have many of these because most aren't PD, it is an acknowledged form, much like variations. I think we should consider a blues tag.
We already have a "jazz" tag, so on that basis "blues" would be fine as well
  • Branle, is a dance, similar to Rigaudon. Should it be tagged as a "dance"? (Steltz)
Yes, that makes sense — P.davydov 16:17, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Similarly, then a Blumenlied for piano is tagged "lieder"? Steltz

Absolutely — P.davydov 17:36, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Bach, 4-part chorale harmonisations

At the moment, this is in the genre "piano piece". Surely not? Does someone have a better idea what to classify this as? (Steltz)

Hymn? At least, its a vocal genre explicitly setting a metrical, poetic text. (Apologies for no action recently – I am busy with other stuff at present.) PML
I suppose the next question is, piano was obviously not the original instrumentation, so were these exercises like The Art of the Fugue, or were they intended to be sung? (Steltz)
These harmonisations are usually sop alt ten bass, but that would be amply covered by the choir tag ch, so the question is if it’s literally only intended for voices, or whether the instrumentation is in fact “open”. Yes, the harmonisations may be played on piano or organ (or perhaps even played by string quartet!) without too much difficulty, but if so then it’s an arrangement/accompaniment. The performance practice of Bach’s cantatas is perhaps of relevance – usually the final chorale of the cantata has each choral line doubled by the appropriate instrument used in the remainder of the work, treble instruments doubling sop, bass instruments doubling bass, etc. So, are these works for choir alone (ch) or choir with open accompaniment (ch open sop alt ten bass), or perhaps both tags are appropriate. Even theoretical vocal music is still vocal music. :-) PML

Pas redouble = Pasodoble?

This came up in a piano piece by Blessner. (Steltz)

The only references I can find to the term suggest that it was more of a march or two-step, with the earliest example being a work by Cherubini from 1813 (which wouldn't fit the description for "pasodoble" as a 20th-century Spanish dance). Unless anyone more knowledgeable objects, I'd go out on a limb and suggest "march" as the appropriate tag — P.davydov 07:46, 13 April 2010 (UTC)


Kirchner's op.47 has this title. Not that fluent in German (took 2 years of it at University), but "zeichnung" can be translated as sketches, which we do have as a tag. "Feder" can translate as a pen (though it has several meanings), which seems to reinforce the sketches translation. Tag as "sketches"? (Steltz)

Yes, that seems reasonable — 07:46, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Johann Krebs, Fugue in G

This is listed as a piano piece, but Krebs (d.1780) was an organist. Although he wrote some Clavier pieces, Grove doesn't list any entitled "fugue". All the listed fugues are in the organ category. When I downloaded this piece, it said "edited by Moritz Moskowski". Should I change this to an arrangement? It seems this was originally organ. (Steltz)

Yes. Good catch! — P.davydov 05:46, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Merikanto, Finnish Songs

These songs look to me to be in Finnish, for which we don't have a tag. I have tagged the language for vol.1 'fn' for the moment, but there probably is some internationally recognized tag that I don't know. Perhaps we can add it to our list, then I will change vol.1 if I need to, and then finish the other volumes. By the way, the uploader listed these as piano transcriptions, but the words exist on the score, and Grove specifically lists this collection under songs. Do I remove the reference to piano transcriptions or just add a note underneath? (It looks like some songs were done separately for piano, but this specific collection is listed as songs.) (Steltz)

The code should be "fi", but I'll fix that if you like. If the pieces have a singable vocal part then they should be "songs", but if it's just a piano line with the words above then that would count as a piano transcription — P.davydov 17:05, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
I'll check the vocal line again. (Steltz)
The part only has two staves, but the vocal line is clearly delineated by stems up as opposed to stems down for the rest of the treble clef part. The fact that Grove doesn't count these as piano transcriptions makes me think it's best to classify it as songs. Can someone else take a look at the part and see whether they also think it's best to do that? (Steltz)
Next related query: The Sibelius Finnish folksongs are clearly piano transcriptions, since there are no words. Should I make a transcriptions/arrangements hierarchy and put them under that? (Steltz)
Bearing in mind that we're tagging the work itself (by Sibelius), the "Arrangements and Transcriptions" header should only be used if someone else makes an arrangement of Sibelius's pieces. So the tag "folksongs ; pf" is all that's needed here.

Meaning of title "Gradus"?

Obviously this means graded, hence intended for study, and since Clementi's Gradus ad Parnassum lists individual pieces within it as studies and exercises, I tagged it studies. Manookian's Gradus is obviously intended in the same way but the individual pieces within it are not all entitled "study", though a good many of volume 1 are. He does say in the preface, though, that this isn't a method, but repertoire. "studies" or "pieces"? (Steltz)

I'd say that "studies" would be the best fit in thses circumstances, as it's used as the title for at least part of the collection — P.davydov 11:34, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Steps to parnassus is basically a treatise, actually (in Fux's case), in Clementi's, etudes.-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 16:28, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Busoni, Bach: On the Transcription of Bach's Organ Works

This is in the piano piece category, but it is in fact not a performable work, it is a treatise on transcribing organ to piano, using examples from Bach's works. In fact, many of the examples aren't full works. It seems to me this should be in the genre of books, but then what's the tag? I think we've discussed treatises and such things before, but I don't see anything in the tagging chart that indicates a decision was made? (Steltz)

Where with the musical works we had a model on which to base the classifications, there isn't anything similar with respect to books, but "thematic catalogues" and "biographies" have both already been used. Let's go with "treatises" for Busoni's book for now, and review the situation as we get more examples — P.davydov 16:03, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Song Cycles

There really should be a separate category for these. Really. It's a whole genre, certainly, and many will be searching for them...-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 03:09, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

In fact, "cycles" would probably be a good idea.-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 15:00, 18 April 2010 (UTC)


I just noticed that someone tagged one of the "Fantasias on themes of . . . . ." as a fantasia, but also a paraphrase. I haven't been using the paraphrase tag, because it hasn't been in the titles, but it makes sense, because this type of work is a paraphrase. None of them have "paraphrase" in the title, but it could be a searchable genre. Should I go back and add it in? (Steltz)

The tag "paraphrase" should only be used when it's part of the composer's title or subtitle, or if there's no alternative (like "fantasias") but I've just seen that dozens of works have been wrongly tagged in this way!!! Please everyone be careful to follow the guidelines! It's going to take hours to fix... — P.davydov 13:24, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Agh! I thought that we were supposed to use that tag for all works that were paraphrases, not just ones that were called paraphrases. This is completely and utterly my fault, and I will devote some time later to going through Category:Paraphrases and removing the incorrect entries, all of which were created by me... KGill talk email 20:52, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Wait a second...I just looked over the guidelines again and it just says 'use for 19th century virtuoso works based on well-known tunes, usually taken from popular operas'. I don't see any mention of only using it if it was specifically titled as such. Are you certain it should be like that? KGill talk email 21:00, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
This comes under the rule of "Always use the work type designated by the composer, even if you think it must be wrong". So if the piece is just called a "fantasia", then it shouldn't be tagged as a "paraphrase" as well. The latter can be used if there's no available alternative, as in the case of pieces styled "Reverie sur un theme de l'opera...", where "reverie" isn't a tag, and "paraphrase" might be the most appropriate term. So we're only talking about those works that have been given an extra "paraphrases" tag in addition to the one(s) derived from their titles. I'm sorry if the guidelines were open to misinterpretation, and thanks for offering to put things right. I'll help out as well when I can... — P.davydov 22:24, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
OK, I just finished going through the category. There were 165 to start with, and I got it down to 42....I'm not entirely sure that a couple of them would still lose the 'paraphrases' tag, though. For instance, Air de Nelusko from Meyerbeer's 'L'Africaine', Op.128 (Jaëll, Alfred) is titled on the score as 'L'africaine', and 'Air de Nelusko' is a subtitle solely to indicate which part is being transcribed. So would that just be tagged as 'airs ; pf'? KGill talk email 00:33, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
It depends whether it's a straightforward transcription. If that's the case then the file really belongs on the page for the original work, under "Arrangements and Transcriptions". But if it's a free transcription loosely based on the original then use "airs" for the moment, and (if possible) add a "See also" link from the original work page to the air. This type of linking needs doing systematically when all the tagging's been finished, and it's easier to identify derivative works. Thanks for all your hard work in sorting out these tags — P.davydov 05:49, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
Hm, looks like we don't actually have a page for L'africaine, so I can't verify how close it is to being a transcription. In the meantime, I changed it so it's just listed under 'airs'. I'll also look through the remainder of Category:Paraphrases. I kind of feel it's the least I could do :-) KGill talk email 01:09, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Don't worry about it. You're doing a great job with the tagging, not to mention all your other IMSLP jobs! — P.davydov 08:06, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Thank you very much :-) KGill talk email 16:18, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Liszt's transcription of Beethoven's Septet op.20 for pno4h

On Beethoven's page this is listed correctly as an arrangement. On Liszt's page, it's the same file number (13636), but because there is no arrangements/transcriptions hierarchy, so it would have to be tagged as "septet ; pf4h", which will look a bit odd. Is there any way around this, or does it matter? (Steltz)

If you copy and paste the following tags to the Liszt page it will correctly display as an arrangement, not an original work: "septets ; for piano 4 hands (arr)"
The Liszt arrangement pages are a nightmare, but they will be sorted out in the near future. The Bach cantatas really need separating out as well before they can be properly tagged... — P.davydov 16:53, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Editions, part 2 -- the Busoni/Bach, The Well-Tempered Clavier

Unlike the transcriptions publications which was clearly a treatise explaining how to do something, and using only examples, these volumes do actually have entire pieces. It seems like it should be tagged as pieces, but Busoni does have some text and then gives a few technical variants. Is this enough to change the tag to "treatises"? Also, oddly enough, not all of these show up on the Bach page as well. For instance, only nos. 1-12 appear on Bach's page, although the file numbers in some cases are different, even though the publisher and plate numbers are the same (Schirmer plate 1160 is listed as file 35042 on the Bach page and files 35006-35010 on Busoni's). (Steltz)

sketches/skizzen vs pictures/bilden

We have a category for sketches, so would pictures be in this category, or does it qualify for a similar tag (might open a can of worms, with Aquarelles and similar things), or is it "pieces"? (Steltz)

It should be "pieces". Beware of the worms  :-) — P.davydov 16:09, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Be careful with these two words: märchen vs marsch or märsche (pl)

I just removed a "marches" tag from something called "Walzer-märchen". This is not, in fact, a march. Märchen means tales (marsch or märsche (pl) is the word for marches). Watch out for the "s". If it isn't there, don't tag it as a march. (Steltz). [edit] Since I did the trios, this is probably my mistake. Guess I'll have to try to stay more alert when I'm working quickly . . . . . .

Glinka, Kamarinskaya

If a work is a Fantasie, but the subtitle mentions folksongs, is the tag "fantasias ; folksongs"? (Steltz)

Yes, that's fine if both are mentioned by the composer — P.davydov 18:05, 21 April 2010 (UTC)


This is a popular Spanish dance form - which is why I'm a little surprised that it isn't one of the standard work types. I have no idea how many of these we have on IMSLP, but still. Thoughts? KGill talk email 23:50, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

I also thought so, but I tagged them as pieces, because there wasn't another tag. If the decision is to add it, I'll search the Malagueñas and re-tag the ones I did. At the very least, maybe we could consider 'dances'? (Steltz)
It wasn't on the list of standard work types on which our list is based, although for technical reasons we can't have accented characters in our category names anyway. I think 'dances' would be OK, if that's the general view? — P.davydov 08:00, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Vehni, Vehni Fijolica (Peroš, Grga)

I've tagged as hr for now.-- Snailey (_@/) Talk to Me Email me 03:05, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, thanks — P.davydov 08:00, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Mendelssohn, Compositions for Pianoforte

There is a note on this page that it is marked for cleanup because it's a collection of other works. Does this mean that the page itself will disappear, i.e. there is no point in trying to tag it? (Steltz)

The note is from 6 months ago though, so I'd suggest "pieces ; pf" (as for similar collections) — P.davydov 08:00, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
I feel a little guilty as I'm the one who put that note there and never did any work on it...someone else started to split the enormous file; at some point, I will probably continue where he left off (but most likely not until the summer...lazy ;-) ) KGill talk email 18:53, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
In the meantime, I have tagged it "pieces", but if it eventually gets completely split and that particular page disappears, that's not a bad thing -- I'm not sure how useful that file is at its current size!!! (Steltz)

How does one standardize spacing?

A few of the pages are spaced doubly, which makes it difficult to see things at a glance. I much prefer the way the vast majority of pages are spaced, but I can't work out how to change the spacing (the normal alt<o> for formatting doesn't work). How do I do this? (Steltz)

Not something I've seen before. Do you have any examples? — P.davydov 08:00, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Now that they are off the page, I can't remember, but I'll post the next time I find one. (Steltz)


Just double checking -- a "Melodie" when it is for solo piano is tagged "piece"? The syntax on the genre definition could be read a couple of different ways. (Steltz)

Sorry, I didn't realise there was any ambiguity there, but the intention is that only vocal pieces called "Melodies" should receive the tag. If it's just instrumental then "pieces" would be correct — P.davydov 12:26, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
OK, but wouldn't the instrumentation tag distinguish vocal melodies from instrumental ones anyway? KGill talk email 15:27, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
There is an ambiguity in this particular case, because "melodies" could be the plural of "Mélodie" (a specific type of vocal piece), or "Melody" (a much vaguer term for 'tune'). In that respect it differs from "Songs" or "Romances", which can both be understood from the orchestration. (If we could use accents in tags then that would clarify matters, but Feldmahler says that's not possible.)
Now that we're 63% of the way through it's probably not a good idea to change the definition at this stage, although there are certainly arguments both ways — P.davydov 16:12, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
I've tagged all the piano solo "melodies" as pieces -- sorry for the delay in answering -- my part of the planet was affected by the cable issues in the Mediterranean, so the internet has been too slow to try to cope with!! (Steltz)