Talk:Octet (Bruch)

A fact from Octet (Bruch) appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 27 March 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the String Octet by Max Bruch was premiered in a live BBC broadcast in 1937 and then forgotten for several decades?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2021/March. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Octet (Bruch).

Wikipedia

Classical music: Compositions

	Classical music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical music, which aims to improve, expand, copy edit, and maintain all articles related to classical music, that are not covered by other classical music related projects. Please read the guidelines for writing and maintaining articles. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.Classical musicWikipedia:WikiProject Classical musicTemplate:WikiProject Classical musicClassical music
	This article is supported by Compositions task force.

External links inline

@Intforce: As already explained, these inline links do not meet the criteria of ELOFFICIAL nor the example set by ELLIST. Additionally, as per ELBURDEN disputed external links are excluded by default unless and until there is consensus to include them. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:00, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Nikkimaria: ELOFFICIAL doesn't apply here, as they are not official links. The links are accessible, useful, tasteful, informative, factual, functioning and likely to remain functional, as specified in the guideline. They are also not copyright violations. No criterion in ELNO directly applies here. Regarding ELBURDEN, the links have been here since the start of the article, and several editors have edited it since then without objection to the links. Thus an implicit consensus can be assumed. intforce (talk) 12:42, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You quoted specifically a portion of EL that references ELOFFICIAL, although you are correct that it doesn't apply here. This is why these links, if they are to be included, should be in the appropriate section for external links rather than within the article body. And since disagreement has been voiced, implicit consensus cannot be assumed. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:38, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Recordings section is not a body section, but part of the appendix, similar to MOS:BIB. intforce (talk) 11:06, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ELPOINTS indicates that external links should be in an external links section, not some other section. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:40, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You argue with pedantry. If EL specified that external links should be included in an external links section only, it would say so specifically. But then again, it is only a content guideline, and we are allowed to apply some common sense here. If you really think that readers are better off when the links are removed, take it to WP:ELN. I have articles to write. intforce (talk) 13:47, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing you've said here leads me to believe "common sense" would support including these inline. And as I've said, the burden here is for inclusion, not exclusion. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:42, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Begins with a slow introduction?

Allegro moderato is not a "slow introduction". ELSchissel (talk) 23:02, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The introduction is characterized as slow due to the long note values, not necessarily the tempo indication. Allegro may also indicate cheerfulness rather than a brisk tempo (referring to its original Italian meaning). But in any case, we may only speculate as "slow introduction" is what the cited source states. intforce (talk) 23:26, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I do find it a little misleading all the same, though, as it even so does not sound quite like an Andante, or not for long- as "slow introductions" to works go, it's atypical and I feel that a better phrasing could be used? It's more like the opening to Schubert's quintet than that of a Haydn "London symphony"- one is not the same as the other and deserves a different name... ELSchissel (talk) 13:41, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you can find a source which uses better phrasing, sure. intforce (talk) 14:03, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

String Quintet source

Do sketches of the original string quintet that this work is based on remain, or what is meant is that parts of the octet are based on the still-existing, complete (but recently-published) 2 string quintets (in A minor and E-flat)? I'm confused. ELSchissel (talk) 13:38, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is based on a third string quintet in B-flat that Bruch was apparently unsatisfied with (source). If you like you can dig up more sources and add them to the article. intforce (talk) 14:02, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]