Template talk:Michael Nyman

	Classical music

This template has many, many red links! This really isn't what navigation boxes are for - they should be for navigation. Can we remove all the red links please and make this box more manageable? Thank you and best regards. --Kleinzach 04:05, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The red links are gradually being taken care of. It is a lot of work, and no one else on the Michael Nyman e-mail list seems to be a Wikipedia editor, so it appears I'm doing this on my own for the time being. --Scottandrewhutchins (talk) 12:09, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've referred this to the Contemporary Music Project. They've just been discussing another navbox like this. --Kleinzach 02:45, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody there now, but this is what

Red links should be avoided unless they have a chance of being developed into articles, and even if they do, editors are encourage to write the article first.

So can you please remove all them? You can put them in your userspace - that's the best place for them. --Kleinzach 05:40, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It makes it easier to write the articles if they are already there and in the correct order. I have been averaging at least one new article off the template per day. --Scottandrewhutchins (talk) 13:34, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So why don't you do this on your userpage? That's what everybody else is doing. --Kleinzach 04:26, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because if it's on my user page, it pretty much guarantees that I'll be the only one who works on it. --Scottandrewhutchins (talk) 13:00, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is an encyclopedia. It's for the readers - for their convenience, not that of editors. I've removed the red links. --Kleinzach 13:26, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Scott,

talk) 10:35, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

Now we've dealt with the red links, we have the problem of the coherence of the box and whether it is too big. As one person has said here, " . . . this one seems too difficult to navigate and would best be split up into smaller categories. . .". There is also the problem of duplication with the opera navbox. What would be the best way to approach this, I wonder? --Kleinzach 09:21, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for bringing up the issue. Take a look at opera articles for example. The template has a section Additional Opera but where are the rest? I had to review the tiny titles one after another, spotted them listed along with non-opera articles under section Nyman-produced Albums. This is confusing and not a good navigation box at all. I would suggest for Opera articles to be taken out of the template since Opera nav template has been created -

talk) 10:01, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

As it stands now, the "Nyman-produced albums" contains every album Nyman has been directly involved with as a principal artist, other than original collections on which he was involved on only a track or two. The second category contains only two albums that are entirely Nyman's music,

tribute album by London Saxophonic, which contains only one previously-unrecorded work, "Plotting for the Shopkeeper" (1980). I put Taking a Line for a Second Walk in the second category because Nyman did not produce the album, or write liner notes, or do anything other than license his music to be perfromed. If we remove the opera albums from the list of albums, the omission would, I believe, create even more confusion.--Scottandrewhutchins (talk) 11:41, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply

]