All right, this definitely should be split up and resubmitted. The only problem is that it's unclear which works these belong to. Does anyone know the HWV numbers for these? A quick search of the worklist revealed nothing. Thanks, KGill talk email 01:26, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
- Whoops...they're arrangements of Giovanni Clari ;-)...(but I'm wondering how they were arranged, since I think they're for the same instrumentation as the original) KGill talk email 23:50, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
It would be nice if the scan of the entire volume could be reinstated. The trouble with the five-way split is that the title pages and foreword have been lost. Many other volumes in the Händelgesellschaft include multiple works, so it's not "definite" to me why this split should have taken place. GFHandel 23:58, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
- Didn't even notice that the introductory matter had been removed. I'll reupload it, but there is a very good reason this volume should have been split (any others which contain multiple works that have not been split should be at some point, by the way). There are five different works in it, which need to go on their own workpages instead of being artificially grouped under the title of one collection. There is quite a lot of precedent for this across the site. In any case, it shouldn't really make a huge difference here since the non-musical material can be linked to on each page anyway. Cheers, KGill talk email 00:03, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
- When you say "artificially grouped", please remember that the grouping is exactly as Chrysander published in 1892. It is important not to lose that fact in making things fit the structures of IMSLP. There are also many, many other volumes in the Händelgesellschaft containing multiple works that I hope will never be split (at least not without leaving the scan of each entire volume). GFHandel 00:09, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, but was it how the works were originally published? If so, a strong case could be made for regrouping the works onto one workpage; however, if Chrysander merely put five separate but similar works into one volume, then his grouping is indeed artificial. KGill talk email 00:24, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
- It is important to maintain the integrity of the 1892 publication (regardless of contents). Split by all means, but please leave an entire scan for those who are interested in other aspects of the Händelgesellschaft publications. GFHandel 00:28, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Sorry, but why is it so important to base our workpages after Chrysander's chosen volumes? I'm afraid I don't understand why it needs to be that way - in theory at least, the publication page should point to all pages which contain that publication, so there's no reason to restrict ourselves unnecessarily. The frontmatter is available on all five of the duet pages now, BTW, so "those who are interested in other aspects of the Händelgesellschaft publications" can satisfy themselves. KGill talk email 02:39, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
- "Restrict ourselves"? I did say "split by all means", but it is important to leave a scan of the entire volume, e.g. for someone referencing the volume (as opposed to any one particular work within it). The volume exists as an entity in its own right so it is nice to be able to get a straightforward download via a single link (e.g. for verification). To be honest, continuing comment on this is now tiresome and perhaps you should try to appreciate another point of view when I tell you that it is really annoying to have to perform six downloads to obtain this volume for the work I'm doing. Thanks for adding the title pages and foreword. GFHandel 19:31, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
- To be quite frank, if that's the main reason you have for wanting an unsplit file, then I'm not exactly sure why this argument was necessary... KGill talk email 20:38, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
- Because the useful unsplit volume doesn't exist (on IMSLP). GFHandel 20:45, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
