ChoralWiki talk:2005 news

My concern with the WIKI format is the general openness of the content. Is there any way to arrange to control access to certain pages at some point, permitting access to a particular page to be limited to a moderator? For example, I can see one contributor spending a great deal of time cataloguing the available works of Palestrina, only to have another contributor completely undo the work of the first, and substitute his or her own.

I also fear more deliberate mischief....

Noel Stoutenburg

=================

Hi Noel!

It is VERY open (a strength and challenge...) It is certainly worth a try. There may be some 'turf' battles, but pages can be edited and re-edited, and old pages can be retrieved. BTW, would you be interested in being a monitor?

Rafael Ornes

==================

1718 CDT 24 August

Rafel

My time is stretched rather thin at the moment, as I'm in the midst of major projects. So the best answer at this moment is probably "maybe". For the time being, I'll watch for and alert to problems as I see them. I think that it would be reasonable and proper at this point to establish some ground rules; for example the preferred way of handling a composer for whom there is ambiguity about the dates of his birth and death. Another example: I think some guideline needs to be set for naming scores. At the moment, under the Palestrina pages, all of the "Agnus dei" settings group together; three ways to deal with this come immediately to my mind: 1) establish a "super title", for example "Missa 'Tu es petrus'", which, if present would be the first sort criterion; 2) establish a uniform nomenclature, so that for any Mass the names of the movements are

"Missa 'name [if any]'" 1 Kyrie, "Missa 'name [if any];" 2 Gloria,&c.

A "Missa brevis", then, might omit the movements not set

ns