We're using cookies to make this site more secure, featureful and efficient.

Issue 245: Identical to »William Ritchie Esq.«

Object
William Ritchie Esq. (Tune)
Submitter
Anselm Lingnau (anselm)
Assigned to
Eric Ferguson
Priority
Normal
Disposition
Fixed
Description

This tune is identical to William Ritchie Esq. and the two should be merged under that entry (possibly with tune aliases for the recordings as required).

See, e.g., The Kinpurnie Collection, p.15.

Previous Actions

  • Date  May 20, 2013, 7:11 p.m.
  • User  Anselm Lingnau (anselm)

New issue submitted

  • Date  June 13, 2013, 5:31 p.m.
  • User  Eric Ferguson (EricFerguson)

Assigned changed to »EricFerguson« (previously »None«)
Disposition changed to »Needs help« (previously »New«)

As “William Richie Esquire” is the earlier SCDDB entry, all recordings with reference to “William Ritchie Esq.” have been transferred to the former. “William Ritchie Esq.” has been added as a spelling alias, and the tune “William Ritchie Esq.” has been deleted.

Help needed: I suspect that “Richie” may be a spelling error for “Ritchie”. Can some editor with access to the original recordings check the correct spelling please, and change the tune’s name if needed?

Eric

  • Date  June 13, 2013, 5:43 p.m.
  • User  Anselm Lingnau (anselm)

The tune is actually called »William Ritchie Esq.«, as I wrote in the original issue. Please use that as the actual title (and create aliases ad libitum). The »William Richie Esquire« entry is in error.

  • Date  June 13, 2013, 6:30 p.m.
  • User  Eric Ferguson (EricFerguson)

Disposition changed to »Fixed« (previously »Needs help«)

Tune name changed to »William Ritchie Esq.«. “William Richie Esquire” kept as spelling alias (just in case), because that is how Alan Paterson probably entered it. Issue fixed. Eric