Talk:Cello Concerto No. 2 (Boccherini)

	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 articles
	This article is supported by Compositions task force.

Comment

I believe it is Concerto no.6, not no.2 ? Dilbert (talk) 16:16, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This concerto, G. 479, is known as Boccherini's second concerto because it was the second to be publisehd in his lifetime. However, as the Gerard catalogue suggests, this is actually the sixth concerto, so you're right. It should be mentioned in the article, in my opinion. AdamChapman (talk) 12:17, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So near as I can tell, this wasn't published at all until 1946 (edit: OCLC 18492281, Caruana/Lupi edition...), so "second to be published in his lifetime" is a dubious claim. That said, more information about such nittygritty as that in the article would have been more useful, as against what's actually there now which is wholly useless. ELSchissel (talk) 01:58, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

IMSLP says it's the second concerto. https://imslp.org/wiki/List_of_works_by_Luigi_Boccherini Go to the "Cello Concertos" section. Baccherini (talk) 18:18, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm an editor and administrator there, but there as much as here (unfortunately IMSLP could use a reference template of some kind, but...) it's not meant to be used as an ultimate citation. Musiqueorguequebec.ca does give concerto no.2, actually, though no other reason besides Gérard is given for calling it this. (This may have to suffice for this time being, but a better reason should be sought.) ELSchissel (talk) 18:20, 3 February 2021 (UTC) Wait, are we talking about G.475 or G.479? The page seems to have changed since the comment by User:AdamChapman, and the page now refers to G.475, which it should I guess...[reply]

Quality of article

There is a lot of opinion and next to no information here. This reads, in fact, like it was written in order to be used as program notes... ELSchissel (talk) 01:40, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]