The Work entity includes a text string "name". But neither Style/Work nor Style/Classical/Works mention the Work name, let alone give guidance for how to write it.
Is it settled consensus that:
- For classical Works, the Work name should follow the guidelines of Style/Classical/Track/Title, but applied to what name is in the music score instead of on a Release liner?
- Similarly, for Works outside of classical, we follow the guidelines of Style/Titles, but applied to the work name printed on the song score or sheet music?
- For either kind of Work entity, since frequently the Work is added to MB based on a Recording Title, which is based on a Track Title, which is based on a name printed on a Release liner — with no music score in sight — that it's acceptable to use the track title on the Release liner as an approximation of the Work name, until something better comes along?
Is this settled enough, that it would be an editorial task rather than a Style policy decision to write something like this in Style/Work? I suppose @reosarevok could make that ruling.
If so, I propose to be bold, and add "Name" sections to wiki:Style/Classical/Works and wiki:Style/Work. Others could review and improve from there.
If this isn't settled consensus, then I suggest it would be helpful to achieve a consensus. I'm happy to write a proposal. I'd have to learn how the Style process works these days.
(By the way, I'll observe that Style/Titles doesn't actually say clearly that titles should be based on what's printed on a Release. Funny how sometimes we overlook what seems obvious.)
Background: Name field discussed in thread What language to use for classical work names . Supports the consensus as stated above, but no conclusion that Style Guidelines should be improved.
While I have those wiki pages open, I'd like to add a "see also" link from "Style/Work" to "Style/Classical/Works". Otherwise it's hard to discover that Style/Classical/Works exists. Also, I'd like to add the big Style link box to the bottom of "Style/Classical/Works".
Why do I think this matters? I just added some classical-music Works to MusicBrainz. I consulted Style/Work for guidance, didn't see from that that Style/Classical/Work existed, and overlooked the consensus that Works which are movements of a parent Work should have the name of the Parent work as a prefix to the name of the movement. That's in Style/Classical/Track/Title, but not in the Style/Work guide.