Talk:Symphony No. 4 (Vaughan Williams)

I agree that a citation is needed for the Goldsmith interview, but the transcription has vanished from the Internet. I think it was a BBC interview, but it has been a couple of years, so I could be wrong about that. The nearest I can find is http://198.63.35.24/goldsmith/startrek.pdf, page 5, in which James Cameron notes the same similarity and the author says "Goldsmith said publicly that it was his 'Vaughan-Williams score'". This quote comes from the same interview that I can no longer find. Symphony_Girl 71.252.152.7 12:52, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Does the symphony actually use B-A-C-H? I though it used a similar but distinct four-note notif (something like B-A-H-B). Myopic Bookworm (talk) 10:40, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Citations

I've corrected the VW quote, based on a recent BBC documentary which displays the quote in a letter in VW's own hand, so I know it's fully correct. What would be the correct way to cite a TV documentary? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.125.223.64 (talk) 21:03, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Trivia section

Trivia sections are "discouraged" in wikipedia. Not to put too fine a point on it, this effectively means the one in this article needs to go. It seems to me three of the four entries in this section as it now reads can be easily incorporated into the main article (or "integrated", as the template puts it)--assuming they're true and accurate, that is--and a fourth (the movie one) should probably be deleted. TheScotch (talk) 16:24, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

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

"Discouraged"? The Po-faced need not read the Trivia section. Those seeking information might well wish to do so. One could argue, and I would, that none of the information in this Trivia section is trivial, and a change of title (or application by its critic of a less paralytic sphincter) would suffice.

Are "Additional Information" or "Further Facts" or "Interesting Appendix" or "More Stuff" also discouraged? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.111.81.110 (talk) 08:55, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

"You need not read [the inappropriate parts]" is not a rational argument. TheScotch (talk) 19:31, 30 June 2011 (UTC)