Talk:Ach wie flüchtig, ach wie nichtig, BWV 26

Wrong text copied from BWV 24

It seems that parts of the article is copied from Ein ungefärbt Gemüte, BWV 24. According to the Allmusic article about BWV 26, the information here is wrong. --Frokor (talk) 15:55, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

The article is now completely re-written, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 03:16, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Infobox

{{Infobox Bach composition
| title                 = {{lang|de|Ach wie flüchtig, ach wie nichtig}}
| bwv                   = 26
| image                 = File:Johann Crüger.jpg
| caption               = [[Johann Crüger]], the composer of the hymn melody
| type                  = [[Chorale cantata (Bach)|Chorale cantata]]
| occasion              = 24nd Sunday after [[Trinity Sunday|Trinity]]
| performed             = {{nowrap|{{Timeline-event|date={{Start date|1724|11|19|df=y}}|location=[[Leipzig]]}}}}
| movements             = 6
| text_poet             = anonymous
| chorale               = by [[Michael Franck]]
| vocal                 = [[SATB|{{abbr|SATB|soprano, alto, tenor and bass}}]] choir and solo
| instrumental          = {{flatlist|
* [[horn (instrument)|horn]]
* [[flauto traverso]]
* 3 [[oboe]]s
* 2 [[violin]]s
* [[viola]]
* [[basso continuo|continuo]]
}}
}}

I would like to add the infobox to the article. However, I am under a restriction by the arbitration committee. While I feel like the creator of the article, having created more than 80% of the content, the arbs are not so sure. It would be nice if someone who understands that an infobox here would be good for the readers and consistent with more than 100 Bach cantatas which have an infobox (including the chorale cantata for last Sunday BWV 139 and the other cantata for the same Sunday BWV 60) moved it. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:25, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

No thank you. It would be better for the readers and for editors to not include such a template in this article. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:02, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

I think the article is incomplete looking without an infobox, I think that it should be added, and I will add it to see how it looks. Content, of course, is always open to discussion. I will not edit war over this issue, but I think it is entirely appropriate here and because we are doing these on a case by case basis, I see no reason to exclude it altogether. Montanabw^(talk) 18:10, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Ach wie flüchtig, ach wie nichtig, BWV 26/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Dr. Blofeld (talk · contribs) 11:54, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Lede

• "Its aspect of the transience of human life " -can you reword a bit, it's not clear what you mean. Theme rather than aspect?

"theme" tried --GA

History

• As we know its 1724 you can remove "of 1724" in second instance.

yes --GA

• "The cantata is based on the hymn in 13 stanzas by Michael Franck (1652)[4] on a melody by Johann Crüger (1661),[" -"to" rather than "on" a melody. Comma after Franck needed too.

yes --GA

• "kept" -retained?

yes, more later --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:22, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Scoring

• "The text and tune of the hymn are kept" -kept isn't the right word here.

tried differently --GA

• As you've linked the instruments here you should probably do so in the lede too, or don't link them, either one.

This has grown in history. To link to violin is nonsense in a way, as the kind of violin Bach knew sounded different from what our article is focused on. Most people will know what a tenor is. I retained that from the earlier versions, but find it distracting in the lead, where you have a link to Baroque instruments, same as in the infobox for "instrumental". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:39, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Music

• "The Bach scholar Klaus Hofmann notes: "A " -I would tweak to "The Bach scholar Klaus Hoffman describes it as a "far-reaching coloratura [which] culminates in an uneasy dissonance" to improve flow.

taken --GA

• ""unusual oboe trio"" -unusual according to whom?

ref doubled --GA

• " Mincham sees a connection of the runs to those of movement 1, but" -strange to end the line with "but" and then the block quote. I would find a way to shorten it and paraphrase inline.

I added, but find the description too good to paraphrase ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:39, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Delighted that you look into this, and hoping that some of our past disagreements will prove fleeting and futile: I will get to this, but have family first, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:52, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Excellent job!♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:46, 31 December 2015 (UTC)