Talk:Transit of Venus March

A fact from Transit of Venus March appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 3 November 2008, and was viewed approximately 2,018 times (disclaimer) (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that John Philip Sousa's "Transit of Venus March" (listen) was rediscovered by a staffer at the Library of Congress in 2003 after it had been believed lost for over 100 years?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2008/November.

Wikipedia

Huh?[edit]

This article seems to be very misinformed, which is a shock, considering Loras Schissel is a forerunning Sousa expert. "The Transit of Venus" was never lost.. It couldn't have been "rediscovered" in 2003 after being unplayed for 100 years, because it was recorded by the United States Marine Band in the 70's for the "Heritage of John Philip Sousa" LP series. It was also recorded again by numerous modern bands, including the Detroit Concert Band for it's 2001 CD release entitled "The Complete Marches of John Philip Sousa" (which many of these recordings come from even earlier cassettes). Granted, this marches' copyright was never renewed (as most music during the period), but this march certainly hasn't been completely out of society until 2003. SousaFan88 (talk) 09:14, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see what you mean. I have reported the following at Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors.

The factual accuracy of the lead item, Transit of Venus March, is disputed on its talk page (Talk:Transit of Venus March).

In particular, User:SousaFan88 - and someone with that username is presumably in a position to know - says it can't have been lost until 2003 because it was recorded, inter alia, by the United States Marine Band in the 70s for the "Heritage of John Philip Sousa" LP series (but I can't immediately find a reference for this) and by the Detroit Concert Band for its 2001 CD "The Complete Marches of John Philip Sousa" (see the track listing from Amazon - [1] - track 8 on disc 3).

In any event, the web page on which it is based, [2], has a copy of a Washington Post report by Reilly Capps from October 2003 which indicates that it was performed in 2002 ("... Schissel had to rework the score for a modern ensemble. Last year, the Virginia band trotted the new version out for a test run") but I can't find the original WaPo report on the website. -- Testing times (talk) 10:07, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I hope this helps. -- Testing times (talk) 10:09, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, a NASA webpage [3] reports that "Mr. Schissel was kind enough, not only to translate the older score into modern clefs and keys, but to re-perform this march on September 13th, 2003 at the Schlesinger Concert Hall in Alexandria, Virginia so that others might enjoy this march. The last known performance of this march before then was at a concert at the White House during the summer of 1883." Perhaps this is the source of the confusion? At the other end of the "lost for over 100 years", the Library of Congress has sheet music from 1902.[4] -- Testing times (talk) 10:19, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[5] looks pretty convincing. --NE2 10:53, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry for my mistake. I didn't know anything about this to start with, and was just building an article around a Google search and some facts another Wikipedian gave me on Skype. The 100 years thing was what they told me, and I searched '"John Philip Sousa" "Transit of Venus" "100 years"' in Google and this came up. Feel free to alter the article - I should have chosen something I know about. Dendodge Talk^Contribs 15:50, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the Washington Post got it wrong :\ --NE2 17:00, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Washington Post article[6] read "Loras Schissel, who works in the music division of the Library of Congress, found the old sheet music for "Venus" languishing in the library's files." Found languishing means that the sheet music had languished in the library with few people looking for it. It wasn't lost; The Washington Post made it clear that there was little to no interest in seeking it out. The word "rediscovered" does not appear in the Washington Post article. -- Suntag ☼ 07:16, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just copying the following from my reply to a similar comment at Wikipedia talk:Did you know. -- Testing times (talk) 19:02, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I think the original error was clearly an honest mistake - see Talk:Transit of Venus March - the reprinted Washington Post article by Reilly Capps here clearly claims that "...the "Transit of Venus March" never caught on, and went unplayed for more than 100 years. Sousa's copies of the music were destroyed in a flood. ... fans of Sousa are resurrecting the forgotten march" Unfortunately, that is plainly incorrect. It could be made a bit clearer in the article (I know - {{sofixit}}). ... -- Testing times (talk) 17:47, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

out by three[edit]

The introduction says a "piano transcription published in 1893" was found by the LoC, however it looks like it is this edition which was found, and that was published in 1896.

Is this an error? John Vandenberg ^(chat) 00:11, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're right - I used the roman numerals on the front of the sheet music and counted wrong. I'll change it now. Dendodge Talk^Contribs 21:46, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Transit of Venus March. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131213121232/http://www.nas.edu/history/members/henry.html to http://www.nas.edu/history/members/henry.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:44, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]