Talk:Edmund Chipp

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians.

Composers Start‑class

	This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Composers, a group of editors writing and developing biographical articles about composers of all eras and styles. The project discussion page is the place to talk about technical and editorial issues and exchange ideas. New members are welcome!ComposersWikipedia:WikiProject ComposersTemplate:WikiProject ComposersComposers
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Classical music

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 page is young and still evolving.Bvrly (talk) 18:35, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have references and much more content to insert as soon as time allows. I can fill in where someone has added <citation needed> but it is my way to write a section and then fillin the refs later. Sometimes I miss one, but I do have them. You might even know it yourself and be able to fill it in for me. Bvrly (talk) 10:28, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chipp and Mendelssohn

Dear Bvrly, Please don't take my edits of this article as an attack on you personally. What you have written about Mendelssohn's untoward reception in the UK before 1844 is completely unsubstantiated by any biography of the composer - please look for example at R. Larry Todd's 2003 biography, Werner's biography or indeed any other. Nor was there any hint of anti-Semitism attached to M. in the press or elsewhere. There is no evidence that Chipp introduced M.'s music to the Royal Family. And it is just not true that Chipp was the first to play M.'s compositions in the UK before he became famous (or even I think that he was the first to give M's organ sonatas in public, as the composer himself played them frequently, but I am open to correction on this if you can provide citations). The Musical Times obituary which you cite does not say that Mendelssohn heard Chipp play the six sonatas from memory, only that the obituarist heard him do so - your citation as it stood was misleading. (Of course if you can find well-researched publications which you can cite backing such statements, I will gladly withdraw these comments). The Oxford DNB article on Chipp does not even mention Mendlessohn.I do not mean in any way to demean Chipp, but if you make unreasonable claims for him you yourself are devaluing him. With best regards, --Smerus (talk) 21:33, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have now found a reference which indicate that Chipp may have been the first to play the organ sonatas in public, and have cited this. This comment doesn't extend to Mendelssohn's other works of course.--Smerus (talk) 13:42, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Smerus, you are too quick to judge, and in particular to delete. As you admit in your last sentence, sometimes there ARE sources for information that you do not find yourself till later. Only a fool will come out with blanket statements like "There is no evidence" unless you know what I have in front of me and have read everything ever written in the history of the world. You do not know everything, and whilst some things may not feature in the biography of one man they may appear in reputable publications or biographies of another. Suffice to say that I have been greatly upset by your rapid deletions of my previous contributions and did as you said and did not put anything else on the Mendelssohn page, but now you pursue me to this. I do feel that this is a personal attack and as I have not interfered with your own postings and pages, I would be grateful if you can now leave me alone unless you are actually contributing new information. Enough sabotage and sarcasm. If you want to make comment restrict it to the talk page and I will look at it, but please stop tampering with my posts.In view of the tone of your previous communications however I would much prefer it if you actually did not bother to comment either. Give the pages a chance to develop and come back and look in one year or something. Thanks. Bvrly (talk) 10:14, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Smerus,, PLEASE stop deleting stuff.Or completely rewriting it. It is very discouraging. you have wikistalked me from the mendelssohn page where you deleted every single sentence I had written. Please step back now. Give the stub some time to develop rather than changing something every few hours. It is hard to keep up with you.

Formatting and references

Thankyou to everyone who has helped to create this article. I had never heard of E.T. Chipp and I've enjoyed reading about him.

I've done my best to format the article and its references. I've not achieved perfection so please feel welcome to make improvements. I'm unhappy about giving two separate references for successive pages of the same publications. However I've done so because the publications were viewed online and each page has a different URL. I don't understand the purpose of the reference for the Percy Chapel[1] as it links to its baptismal records for 1776-1808, long before Chipp was born, and in any case the documents seem to be unavailable for viewing online. Hence the reference doesn't seem to substantiate Dr Chipp's tenure or dates as chapel organist.

Is it wrong to include E.T. Chipp's doctorate in the article title? It doesn't seem normal Wikipedia style. For example, both Dr Beeching and Dr Crippen appear with just their forenames and surname. Should the article be moved to plain Edmund Thomas Chipp? Motacilla (talk) 20:53, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The title of this article should indeed be just "Edmund Thomas Chipp". I put a request in to make this happen by tagging Edmund Thomas Chipp with db-move template. Jweiss11 (talk) 05:53, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jweiss11 and Tikiwont: thankyou for the page move.

Smerus: thankyou for the amendments and additional references. I have now wikified their formatting and added the missing details of Percy Scholes' The Mirror of Music 1844-1944. Please note the templates for standardising citations from books and journals and for combining identical inline citations. They help to keep articles tidy, and they help fellow-Wikipedians to remember all the publication details that they should include when citing sources. Motacilla (talk) 15:47, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Commissioning of organ pieces

The commisioning of Mendelssohn's organ sonatas was quite independent of Novello and of Chipp. It resulted from the commissioning by Chalres Coventry of en edition of Bach's chorales and a set of voluntaries. See Todd (2003), 478-479. Best, --Smerus (talk) 17:06, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Smerus - STOP DELETING MY POSTS and give me a chance to substantiate things. I have other sources which disagree with your view and back up what I have written. I am going to undo you revision. Please leave me alone as I have requested before. 92.29.46.165 (talk) 18:48, 11 March 2010 (UTC) M.s letters are a better source than any biography you have read, and I trust the news reports of the time over retrospective information such as Scholes.Bvrly (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:00, 12 March 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Unfortunately MS letters are WP:OR and not appropriate as Wikipedia references. Please take a moment to read and understand the procedures of Wikipedia. Furthermore, please understand that noone in Wikipedia 'owns' articles, or can tell others to leave them alone. You are welcome to write what you like in a website of your own, but Wikipedia is a cooperative institution that works on a consesnsus basis - you cannot invent your own rules and impose them on others. What 'you' trust as evidence is not the issue; what others can refer to, is. Best regards --Smerus (talk) 08:03, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mendelssohn's Introduction to the Royal Family

Claims have been made in this article that Chipp was responsible for the introduction of Mendelssohn to the British Royal Family. The facts are as follows:

In his 1842 visit to London, Mendelssohn had with him a letter of introduction to Prince Albert from his cousin the Prussian King Frederick William IV. Her presented this letter and met with Albert, on June 14th 1842. The following evening he met with both Albert and Queen Victoria, and played the piano to them. These meetings are recorded in Mendelssohn's own letters to his mother and his brother, and in Queen Victoria's own journal for 16th June. A full coverage of these matters is given in R. Larry Todd's 'Mendelssohn: A Life in Music' (Oxford, 2003), p. 439.

The assertion that Chipp made the introduction is clearly incorrect and casts doubts on the veracity of other information in the article. This is a good example of why Wikipedia requires assertions to be clearly referenced, in particular when they appear to be controversial.--Smerus (talk) 09:02, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mendelssohn's introduction to the Philharmonic Society

Claims have been made in the article that Chipp introduced Mendelssohn to the Philharmonic Society in London. Mendelssohn began his relationship with the Society in 1829 during his first London visit, when Chipp was six years old. During 1829 he played at a number of concerts at the Society, with which he continued to be associated during later visits. He was almost certainly introduced to the Society by Moscheles, who was an active member of the Society and was his host during many of his London visits. (see Todd (2004), 207-210). I have therefore removed the claim that Chipp was responsible for this introduction.--Smerus (talk) 09:10, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They ARE FACTS_ give me a chance to put the references and stop interfering eery few hours! Bvrly (talk) 11:13, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you have facts you should have them to hand and introduce them as references when you write. I suggest you do not add controversial materials in future unless you are able to justify them. It will I think be hard to find factual evidence that Chipp at the age of 6 introduced Mendelssohn to the Society, but if you can do so I will unreservedly apologize. Best regards,--Smerus (talk) 15:25, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In fact I now find on reading the journals of Sir George Smart (President of the Philharmonic Society) (Leaves from the Journal of Sir George Smart, London, 1907, p. 64) that he called on the Mendelssohn family in Berlin in 1825 and recommended Felix to come to London at that time. In 1825 Chipp was only 2, and therefore probably had little or any influence on the situation. Best regards, --Smerus (talk) 19:25, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First performances of Mendelssohn's music in England

It has been claimed in this article that Chipp 'was credited with being the first person to perform his [Mendelssohn's] music in England. In fact Mendelssohn himself was the first performer of his own music in England at the 1829 Philharmonic Society concerts (when Chipp was 6 years old). Others performing Mendelssohn's music during this season included the cellist Robert Linley.(Todd (2004), 207). I have therefore removed this claim from the article.--Smerus (talk) 09:14, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]