text:
List of Baroque composers

Composers of the Baroque era, ordered by date of birth:

Transition from Renaissance to Baroque (born 1500–1549)
Composers in the Renaissance/Baroque transitional era include the following (listed by their date of birth):
 * Philippe de Monte (1521–1603)
 * Baldassare Donato (1525/1530–1603)
 * Costanzo Porta (1529–1601)
 * Jiří Rychnovský (1529–1616)
 * Guillaume Costeley (1530–1606)
 * Fabritio Caroso (1530–1605/1620)
 * Mateo Flecha the Younger (1530–1604)
 * Gianmatteo Asola (1532–1609)
 * Claudio Merulo (1533–1604)
 * Francesco Soto de Langa (1534–1619)
 * Rocco Rodio (1535–after 1615)
 * Mikołaj Gomółka (1535–1609)
 * Cesare Negri (1535–1605)
 * Simone de Bonefont (1535 – ?)
 * Johannes Matelart (before 1538–1607)
 * Stefano Felis (1538–1603)
 * William Byrd (1540–1623)
 * Matthäus Waissel (1540–1602)
 * Giovanni Ferretti (1540–after 1609)
 * Tiburzio Massaino (1540–after 1608)
 * Hernando de Cabezón (1541–1602)
 * Gioseffo Guami (1542–1611)
 * Giovanni Maria Nanino (1543/1544–1607)
 * Francesco Guami (1544–1602)
 * Anthony Holborne (1545–1602)
 * Luzzasco Luzzaschi (1545–1607)
 * Jakub Polak (1545–1605)
 * Ginés de Boluda (1545–1606)
 * Manuel Mendes (1547–1605)
 * Francesco Soriano (1548–1621)
 * Tomás Luis de Victoria (1548–1611)
 * Eustache Du Caurroy (1549–1609)
 * Bernardo Clavijo del Castillo (1549–1626)

Early Baroque era composers (born 1550–1599)
Composers of the Early Baroque era include the following figures listed by the probable or proven date of their birth:
 * Jacobus Gallus (1550–1591)
 * Charles Tessier (1550–after 1604)
 * Thomas Mancinus (1550–1612)
 * Ippolito Baccusi (1550–1609)
 * Emilio de' Cavalieri (c. 1550–1602)
 * Cesario Gussago (1550–1612)
 * Pomponio Nenna (1550–1613)
 * Riccardo Rognoni (c. 1550–c. 1620)
 * David Sacerdote (1550–1625)
 * Ruggiero Trofeo (1550–1614)
 * Orazio Vecchi (1550–1605)
 * Guillaume de Chastillon, sieur de La Tour (c. 1550–1610)
 * Tomasz Szadek (1550–1612)
 * Krzysztof Klabon (1550–1616)
 * Gregory (Gregorius) Howet (Huwet) (1550–1617)
 * Pedro de Cristo (1550–1618)
 * Vicente Espinel (1550–1624)
 * Juan Navarro (1550–1610)
 * Ambrosio Cotes (1550–1603)
 * Sebastián Raval (1550–1604)
 * Jan Trojan Turnovský (1550–1606)
 * Pavel Spongopaeus Jistebnický (1550–1619)
 * Giulio Caccini (1551–1618)
 * Benedetto Pallavicino (1551–1601)
 * Girolamo Belli (1552–1620)
 * Edmund Hooper (1553–1621)
 * Johannes Eccard (1553–1611)
 * Leonhard Lechner (1553–1606)
 * Elway Bevin (1554–1638)
 * William Inglot (1554–1621)
 * Emmanuel Adriaenssen (1554–1604)
 * Cosimo Bottegari (1554–1620)
 * Girolamo Diruta (1554-after 1610)
 * Giovanni Giacomo Gastoldi (1554–1609)
 * Giovanni Gabrieli (c. 1554/1557–1612)
 * Jacques Champion, Sieur de la Chapelle (before 1555–1642)
 * John Mundy (1555–1630)
 * Gabriele Villani (1555–1625)
 * Manuel Rodrigues Coelho (c. 1555–c. 1635)
 * Paolo Quagliati (c. 1555–1628)
 * Alonso Lobo (1555–1617)
 * Johannes Nucius (c. 1556–1620)
 * Thomas Morley (1557–1602)
 * Carolus Luython (1557–1620)
 * Jacques Mauduit (1557–1627)
 * Giovanni Croce (c. 1557–1609)
 * Alfonso Fontanelli (1557–1622)
 * Wojciech Długoraj (1557–after 1619)
 * Nathaniel Giles (1558–1634)
 * Matthew Jeffries (1558–1615)
 * Ferdinando Richardson (1558–1618)
 * Richard Carlton (1558–1638)
 * Philippus Schoendorff (1558–1617)
 * Giovanni Bassano (c. 1558–1617)
 * Scipione Stella (1558/1559–1622)
 * Richard Allison (1560/1570–before 1610)
 * Felice Anerio (1560–1614)
 * Giulio Belli (c. 1560–1621 or later)
 * William Brade (1560–1630)
 * Abraham Blondet (1560–1634)
 * William Cobbold (1560–1639)
 * Nicolas Gistou (1560–1609)
 * James Harding (1560–1626)
 * Diomedes Cato (c. 1560/1565–1618)
 * Camillo Lambardi (c. 1560–1634)
 * Giovanni Bernardino Nanino (c. 1560–1623)
 * Peter Philips (c. 1560–1628)
 * Hieronymus Praetorius (1560–1629)
 * August Nörmiger (1560–1613)
 * Thomas Robinson (1560–1610)
 * Lodovico Grossi da Viadana (c. 1560–1627)
 * Scipione Dentice (1560–1635)
 * Carlo Gesualdo (1560–1613)
 * Ruggiero Giovannelli (c. 1560–1625)
 * Antonio II Verso (1560–1621)
 * Leone Leoni (1560–1627)
 * Petrus de Drusina (1560–1611)
 * Juan Esquivel Barahona (1560–after 1625)
 * Elias Mertel (1561–1626)
 * Sebastian Aguilera de Heredia (1561–1627)
 * Jacopo Peri (1561–1633)
 * Francesco Usper, or Francesco Sponga (1561–1641)
 * John Bull (1562–1628)
 * Jan Pieterszoon Sweelinck (1562–1621)
 * Andreas Raselius (1562–1602)
 * Jean Titelouze (1562/1563–1633)
 * John Dowland (1563–1626)
 * Giles Farnaby (c. 1563–1640)
 * John Milton (1563–1647)
 * Cornelis Verdonck (1563–1625)
 * John Danyel (1564–1626)
 * Hans Leo Hassler (1564–1612)
 * Kryštof Harant z Polžic a Bezdružic (1564–1621)
 * Giulio Cesare Martinengo (1564/1568–1613)
 * John Hilton (1565–1609?)
 * Michael Cavendish (1565–1628)
 * John Farmer (1565–1605)
 * George Kirbye (1565–1634)
 * William Leighton (1565–1622)
 * Leonard Woodson (1565–1641)
 * Gregor Aichinger (c. 1565–1628)
 * Duarte Lobo (c. 1565–1646)
 * Erasmo Marotta (1565–1641)
 * Ascanio Mayone (c. 1565–1627)
 * Giovanni Pietro Flaccomio (1565–1617)
 * Simone Molinaro (1565–1615)
 * Francis Pilkington (c. 1565–1638)
 * Manuel Cardoso (1566–1650)
 * Gaspar Fernandes, or Fernández (1566–1629)
 * Alessandro Piccinini (1566–1638)
 * Lucia Quinciani (born c. 1566; fl. 1611)
 * Thomas Campion (1567–1620)
 * Christoph Demantius (1567–1643)
 * Jean-Baptiste Besard (1567–1625)
 * Nicolas Formé (1567–1638)
 * Girolamo Giacobbi (1567–1629)
 * Joachim van den Hove (c. 1567–1620)
 * René Mesangeau (fl. 1567–1638)
 * Lorenzo Allegri (1567–1648)
 * Claudio Monteverdi (1567–1643)
 * Bartolomeo Barbarino (c. 1568–1617 or later)
 * Philip Rosseter (1568–1623)
 * Adriano Banchieri (1568–1634)
 * Christian Erbach (c. 1568–1635)
 * Joan Baptista Comes (1568–1643)
 * Edward Gibbons (1568–1650)
 * Richard Gibbs (1568–1650)
 * Giovanni Francesco Anerio (1569–1630)
 * Tobias Hume (1569–1645)
 * Ottavio Vernizzi (1569–1649)
 * Orazio Bassani, "Orazio della Viola" (before 1570–1615)
 * Thomas Bateson (1570–1630)
 * Benjamin Cosyn (1570–1652 or later)
 * Giovanni Paolo Cima (c. 1570–1622)
 * Peeter Cornet (c. 1570/1580–1633)
 * Pierre Guédron (c. 1570–c. 1620)
 * Paul Peuerl (1570–1625)
 * Joan Pau Pujol (1570–1626)
 * Salamone Rossi (c. 1570–1630)
 * Girolamo Bartei (c. 1570–c. 1618)
 * Claudia Sessa (c. 1570–c. 1617/1619)
 * Giovanni Battista Fontana (c. 1571–c. 1630)
 * Thomas Lupo (1571–1627)
 * Filipe de Magalhães (c. 1571–1652)
 * Giovanni Picchi (1571–1643)
 * Michael Praetorius (c. 1571–1621)
 * John Ward (1571–1638)
 * Edward Johnson (1572–1601)
 * Daniel Bacheler (1572–1619)
 * Melchior Borchgrevinck (1572–1632)
 * Martin Peerson (1572–1651)
 * Thomas Tomkins (1572–1656)
 * Moritz von Hessen-Kassel (1572–1632)
 * Erasmus Widmann (1572–1634)
 * Salvatore Sacco (1572–1622)
 * Ellis Gibbons (1573–1603)
 * Géry de Ghersem (1573/1575–1630)
 * Cesarina Ricci de Tingoli (born c. 1573, fl. 1597)
 * Claudio Pari (1574–after 1619)
 * Francesco Rasi (1574–1621)
 * Gabriel Bataille (1574–1630)
 * John Wilbye (1574–1638)
 * Andreas Hakenberger (1574–1627)
 * John Bennet (1575–after 1614)
 * Vittoria Aleotti (c. 1575–after 1620)
 * Abundio Antonelli (c. 1575?–c. 1629)
 * Robert Ballard (c. 1575–1645)
 * Estêvão de Brito (1575–1641)
 * John Coprario, or John Cooper (c. 1575–1626)
 * Ignazio Donati (c. 1575–1638)
 * Daniel Farrant (c. 1575–1651)
 * Alfonso Ferrabosco the younger (c. 1575–1628)
 * Michelagnolo Galilei (1575–1631)
 * Ennemond Gaultier, le Vieux Gaultier (1575–1651)
 * Johann Groh (c. 1575–1627?)
 * Léonard de Hodémont (c. 1575–1639)
 * Esteban López Morago, or Estêvão Lopes Morago (c. 1575–after 1630)
 * Giovanni Priuli (c. 1575–1626)
 * Mateo Romero, or Mathieu Rosmarin (c. 1575–1647)
 * William Simmes (c. 1575–c. 1625)
 * Giovanni Maria Trabaci (c. 1575–1647)
 * Thomas Weelkes (1576–1623)
 * John Maynard (1577–between 1614 and 1633)
 * Robert Jones (1577–1617)
 * Stefano Bernardi (c. 1577–1637)
 * Antonio Brunelli (1577–1630)
 * Sulpitia Cesis (b. 1577; fl. 1619)
 * Agostino Agazzari (1578–1640)
 * John Amner (1579–1641)
 * Melchior Franck (c. 1579–1639)
 * Adriana Basile (c. 1580–c. 1640)
 * Domenico Brunetti (c. 1580–1646)
 * Andrea Cima, or Giovanni Andrea Cima (c. 1580–after 1627)
 * Jacques Cordier (c. 1580–before 1655)
 * Richard Dering (c. 1580–1630)
 * Michael East (1580–1648)
 * Thomas Ford (c. 1580–1648)
 * Johannes Hieronymus Kapsberger, or Giovanni Girolamo Kapsperger (c. 1580–1651)
 * John Lugg (1580–1647/1655)
 * Hans Nielsen (1580–1626)
 * François Richard (1580–1650)
 * Johann Stobäus (1580–1646)
 * Vincenzo Ugolini (c. 1580–1638)
 * Bellerofonte Castaldi (c. 1581–1649)
 * Johannes Jeep (1581/1582–1644)
 * Johann Staden (1581–1634)
 * Gregorio Allegri (1582–1652)
 * Severo Bonini (1582–1663)
 * Marco da Gagliano (1582–1643)
 * Sigismondo d'India (c. 1582–1629)
 * Thomas Ravenscroft (c. 1582–c. 1635)
 * Thomas Simpson (1582–1628)
 * Giovanni Valentini (c. 1582–1649)
 * Paolo Agostino, or Agostini (c. 1583–1629)
 * Girolamo Frescobaldi (1583–1643)
 * Orlando Gibbons (1583–1625)

 * Robert Johnson (c. 1583–1634)
 * Johann Daniel Mylius (1583–1642)
 * Mogens Pedersøn (c. 1583–1623)
 * Nicolas Vallet (c. 1583–c. 1642)
 * Michael Altenburg (1584–1640)
 * Antonio Cifra (1584–1629)
 * Francisco Correa de Arauxo (1584–1654)
 * Daniel Friderici (1584–1638)
 * Walter Rowe (c. 1584–1671)
 * Domenico Allegri (1585–1629)
 * Antoine Boësset, Sieur de Villedieu (1586–1643)
 * Jean de Bournonville (1585–1632)
 * Louis Constantin (c. 1585–1657)
 * Nicolò Corradini (c. 1585–1646)
 * Andrea Falconieri (1585–1656)
 * Johann Grabbe (1585–1655)
 * Peter Hasse (c. 1585–1640)
 * Francesco Rognoni (1585–after 1626)
 * Heinrich Schütz (1585–1672)
 * Nicolas Signac (1585–1645)
 * Alessandro Grandi (1586–1630)
 * Lucio Barbieri (1586–1659)
 * Stefano Landi (1586–1639)
 * Jacob Praetorius (1586–1651)
 * Claudio Saracini (1586–1630)
 * Johann Hermann Schein (1586–1630)
 * Paul Siefert (1586–1666)
 * John Adson (c. 1587–1640)
 * Francesca Caccini (1587–c. 1640)
 * Ivan Lukačić (c. 1587–1648)
 * Samuel Scheidt (1587–1654)
 * Guillaume Bouzignac (1587–1643)
 * Charles d'Ambleville (1588–1637)
 * Walter Porter (1588–1659)
 * Francesco Colombini (1588–1671)
 * Johann Andreas Herbst (1588–1666)
 * Nicholas Lanier (1588–1666)
 * Marin Mersenne (1588–1648)
 * John Tomkins (1589–1638)
 * Guilielmus Messaus (1589–1640)
 * Francesco Turini (1589–1656)
 * Caterina Assandra (c. 1590–after 1618)
 * Artus Aux-Cousteaux (c. 1590–1656)
 * Giovanni Pietro Berti (c. 1590?–1638)
 * Hans Brachrogge (c. 1590-c. 1638)
 * Dario Castello (c. 1590–c. 1658)
 * Giovanni Martino Cesare (c. 1590–1667)
 * Andreas Chyliński, or Andrzej Chyliński (c. 1590–after 1635)
 * Jacob van Eyck (c. 1590–1657)
 * Juan Gutiérrez de Padilla (c. 1590–1664)
 * Adam Jarzębski (c. 1590–c. 1648)
 * Manuel Machado (c. 1590–1646)
 * Carlo Milanuzzi (c. 1590–c. 1647)
 * Johann Schop (c. 1590–1667)
 * Johannes Thesselius (c. 1590?–1643)
 * Lucrezia Orsina Vizzana (1590–1662)
 * Robert Ramsey (1590s–1644)
 * Richard Mico (1590–1661)
 * Nicolò Borbone, or Borboni (c. 1591–1641)
 * Settimia Caccini (1591–1638?)
 * Robert Dowland (c. 1591–1641)
 * Isaac Posch (1591?–c. 1623)
 * Cornelis Padbrué (c. 1592–1670)
 * Jacques Gaultier (1592–1652)
 * Paul Auget (1592–1660)
 * John Jenkins (1592–1678)
 * Domenico Mazzocchi (1592–1665)
 * Melchior Schildt (1592/1593–1667)
 * Truid Aagesen (1593–1625)
 * Claudia Rusca (1593–1676)
 * Gottfried Scheidt (1593–1661)
 * Johann Ulrich Steigleder (1593–1635)
 * Nicolas Le Vasseur (1593–1658)
 * Matthäus Apelles von Löwenstern (1594–1648)
 * Francesco Manelli (1594–1667)
 * Biagio Marini (1594–1663)
 * Orazio Michi, "Orazio dell'Arpa" (c. 1594–1641)
 * Tarquinio Merula (1594/1595–1665)
 * Antonio Maria Abbatini (c. 1595–1680)
 * Giovanni Battista Buonamente (c. 1595–1642)
 * Henry Lawes (1595–1662)
 * John Okeover, or Oker (c. 1595–1663)
 * Bartolomé de Selma y Salaverde (c. 1595–after 1638)
 * Heinrich Scheidemann (c. 1595–1663)
 * John Wilson (1595–1674)
 * Constantijn Huygens (1596–1687)
 * Giovanni Rovetta (c. 1596–1668)
 * Andreas Düben (1597–1662)
 * Virgilio Mazzocchi (1597–1646)
 * Charles Racquet (1597–1664)
 * Luigi Rossi (c. 1597–1653)
 * Johann Crüger (1598–1662)
 * Giovanni Battista Fasolo (c. 1598–c. 1664)
 * Pierre Gaultier d'Orleans (1599–1681)
 * John Hilton the younger (c. 1599–1657)
 * Étienne Moulinié (1599–1676)
 * Thomas Selle (1599–1663)

 * John Marchant (died 1611)
 * Richard Martin (fl. c. 1610)
 * Girolamo Dalla Casa (fl. from 1568; d. 1601)
 * William Tisdale (born 1570)
 * Henry Lichfild (died 1613)
 * John Bartlet (fl. 1606–1610)
 * Thomas Greaves (fl. 1604)
 * Richard Sumarte (d. after 1630)
 * Richard Nicholson (died 1639)
 * Jean Boyer (15??–1648)
 * Thomas Vautor (1580/1590–?)
 * Henry Youll (1580/1590–?)
 * George Handford (fl. c. 1609)
 * Robert Tailour (fl. 1615)
 * Charles Coleman (died 1646)
 * William Corkine (fl. 1610–1617)
 * Juan Arañés (fl. 1624–49; d. c. 1649)
 * Giovanni Battista Grillo (died 1622)
 * Marcantonio Negri (died 1624)
 * Giovanni Battista Riccio (fl. 1609–1621)
 * Giuseppe Scarani (fl. 1628–fl. 1642)
 * Adam z Wągrowca (died 1629)
 * Mikołaj Zieleński (fl. 1611)

Middle Baroque era composers (born 1600–1649)
Composers of the Middle Baroque era include the following figures listed by the date of their birth:

 * Mlle Bocquet (early 17th century–after 1660)
 * Alessandro Poglietti (early 17th century–1683)
 * François de La Roche (?–1677)
 * François de Chancy (?–1656)
 * Henry Frémart (16..–1651)
 * Jean Veillot (16..–1662)
 * Pierre Méliton (16? – 1684)
 * Antonio de Jesús (????–1682)
 * Demachy ou le Sieur De Machy (16? – 1692)
 * Manuel Correia (c. 1600–1653)
 * Giuseppe Giamberti (c.1600 – c. 1663)
 * Bonaventura Rubino (c. 1600–1668)
 * (c. 1600–1675)
 * Simon Ives (1600–1662)
 * Nicolaus à Kempis (c. 1600–1676)
 * Adam Václav Michna z Otradovic (c. 1600–1676)
 * Marcin Mielczewski (c. 1600–1651)
 * Carlos Patiño (1600–1675)
 * (c. 1600–c. 1648)
 * Giovanni Felice Sances (c. 1600–1679)
 * Marco Scacchi (c. 1600–1662)
 * Delphin Strungk (1600/1601–1694)
 * Louis XIII (1601–1643)
 * Michelangelo Rossi (c. 1601–1656)
 * Jean-Baptiste Geoffroy (1601–1675)
 * Jacques Champion de Chambonnières (1601/1602–1672)
 * Francesco Cavalli (1602–1676)
 * Chiara Margarita Cozzolani (1602–c. 1678)
 * William Lawes (1602–1645)
 * Marco Marazzoli (c. 1602–1662)
 * Christopher Simpson (c. 1602/1606–1669)
 * (1602–1677)
 * Benedetto Ferrari (c. 1603?–1681)
 * Francesco Foggia (1603–1688)
 * Denis Gaultier, Gaultier le jeune (1603–1672)
 * John IV of Portugal (1603–1656)
 * Caspar Kittel (1603–1639)
 * Natale Monferrato (c. 1603–1685)
 * Diego Pontac (1603–1654)
 * Marco Uccellini (1603/1610–1680)
 * Heinrich Albert (1604–1651)
 * François Dufault (1604–1670)
 * Bonifazio Graziani (1604/1605–1664)
 * Charles d'Assoucy (1605–1677)
 * Orazio Benevoli (1605–1672)
 * Antonio Bertali (1605–1669)
 * Giacomo Carissimi (1605–1674)
 * Francesco Sacrati (1605–1650)
 * Johann Vierdanck (c. 1605–1646)
 * Jean de Cambefort (1605–1661)
 * Charles Coypeau d'Assoucy (1605–1677)
 * William Child (1606–1697)
 * Michel de La Guerre (c. 1606–1679)
 * (1606–1677)
 * Urbán de Vargas (1606–1656)
 * Sigmund Theophil Staden (1607–1655)
 * Abraham Megerle (1607–1680)
 * Philipp Friedrich Böddecker (1607–1683)
 * Ferdinand III, Holy Roman Emperor (1608–1657)
 * Jacques de Gouy (c. 1610–after 1650)
 * Valentin de Bournonville (1610–1663)
 * François Cosset (1610–1664)
 * Nicolas Hotman (c. 1610–1663)
 * João Lourenço Rebelo (1610–1661)
 * William Young (c. 1610–1662)
 * Nicolas Métru (1610–1668)
 * Sébastien Le Camus (c. 1610–1677)
 * Leonora Duarte (1610–1678)
 * (c. 1610–after 1682)
 * Henri Du Mont (1610–1684)
 * George Jeffreys (c. 1610–1685)
 * Michel Lambert (1610–1696)
 * Leonora Baroni (1611–1670)
 * Thomas Brewer (1611–c. 1660)
 * Pablo Bruna (1611–1679)
 * Andreas Hammerschmidt (1611/1612–1675)
 * Wolfgang Ebner (1612–1665)
 * Jacques Huyn (1613–1652)
 * Elisabeth Sophie, Duchess of Brunswick-Lüneburg (1613–1676)
 * Thomas Mace (c. 1613–1709?)
 * Louis de Mollier (c. 1613–1688)
 * Giovanni Antonio Rigatti (c. 1613–1648)
 * Wilhelm Karges (1613/1614–1699)
 * Jean-Baptiste Boësset, Sieur de Dehault (1614–1685)
 * Philipp Friedrich Buchner (1614–1669)
 * Juan Hidalgo de Polanco (1614–1685)
 * Marc'Antonio Pasqualini (1614–1691)
 * Franz Tunder (1614–1667)
 * Yatsuhashi Kengyo (1614–1685)
 * Francesca Campana (c. 1615–1665)
 * Heinrich Bach (1615–1692)
 * Angelo Michele Bartolotti (c. 1615–1696)
 * Guillaume Dumanoir (1615–1697)
 * Francesco Corbetta (c. 1615–1681)
 * Christopher Gibbons (1615–1676)
 * Francisco López Capillas (c. 1615–1673)
 * Maurizio Cazzati (1616–1678)
 * Kaspar Förster (the younger) (1616–1673)
 * Johann Jakob Froberger (1616–1667)
 * Johann Erasmus Kindermann (1616–1655)
 * Jacques de Saint-Luc (1616–c. 1710)
 * Matthias Weckmann (c. 1616–1674)
 * Carlo Caproli (c. 1617–c. 1692)
 * Nikolaus Hasse (c. 1617–1672)
 * Francisco Martins (c. 1617?–1680)
 * Joan Cererols (1618–1680)
 * Abraham van den Kerckhoven (c. 1618–c. 1701)
 * José Marín (1618–1699)
 * Pierre Robert (c. 1618 – 1699)
 * Giulio Cesare Arresti (1619–1701)
 * Anthoni van Noordt (c. 1619–1675)
 * Johann Rosenmüller (1619–1684)
 * Barbara Strozzi (1619–1677)
 * Juan García de Zéspedes (c. 1619–1678)
 * Joannes Baptista Dolar, also Janez Krstnik Dolar or Jan Křtitel Tolar (c. 1620–1673)
 * Adam Drese (c. 1620–1701)
 * Isabella Leonarda (1620–1704)
 * Johann Heinrich Schmelzer (c. 1620–1680)
 * Giovanni Battista Granata (1620/1621–1687)
 * Georg Arnold (1621–1676)
 * Albertus Bryne (1621–1668)
 * Massimiliano Neri (composer) (1621–1666)
 * Matthew Locke (c. 1621–1677)
 * Georg Neumark (1621–1681)
 * Bertrand de Bacilly (1621–1690)
 * Heinrich Schwemmer (1621–1696)
 * Ercole Bernabei (1622–1687)
 * Jean Lacquemant, known as DuBuisson (c. 1622–1680)
 * Gaspar de Verlit (1622–1682)
 * Dietrich Becker (c. 1623–c. 1679)
 * Antonio Cesti (1623–1669)
 * Jacopo Melani (1623–1676)
 * David Pohle (1624–1695)
 * Francesco Provenzale (1624–1704)
 * François Roberday (1624–1680)
 * Johann Rudolf Ahle (1625–1673)
 * Alexandre Gallot (1625–1684)
 * Jacques Gallot, le vieux Gallot de Paris (c. 1625–1695)
 * Marco Giuseppe Peranda (c. 1625–1675)
 * Wolfgang Carl Briegel (1626–1712)
 * Louis Couperin (c. 1626–1661)
 * Christian Flor (1626–1697)
 * Giovanni Legrenzi (1626–1690)
 * Charles Mouton (1626–1710)
 * Lucas Ruiz de Ribayaz (1626–1667?)
 * Nicolas Gigault (c. 1627–1707)
 * Johann Caspar Kerll (1627–1693)
 * Christoph Bernhard (1628–1692)
 * Robert Cambert (c. 1628–1677)
 * Samuel Capricornus (1628–1665)
 * Constantin Christian Dedekind (1628–1715)
 * Gustaf Düben (1628–1690)
 * Paul Hainlein (1628–1686)
 * Jean-Henri d'Anglebert (1629–1691)
 * Lelio Colista (1629–1680)
 * Lady Mary Dering (1629–1704)
 * Andreas Hofer (1629–1684)
 * Johann Michael Nicolai (1629–1685)
 * John Banister (c. 1630–1679)
 * Cristóbal Galán (c. 1630–1684)
 * Filipe da Madre de Deus (c. 1630–c. 1688 or later)
 * Carlo Pallavicino (c. 1630–1688)
 * Giovanni Antonio Pandolfi Mealli (c. 1630?–1669/1670)
 * Antonio Sartorio (1630–1680)
 * Vincenzo Albrici (1631–1696)
 * Thomas Baltzar (c. 1631–1663)
 * Nicolas Lebègue (1631–1702)
 * Sebastian Anton Scherer (1631–1712)
 * Francesco Antonio Urio (1631/1632–c. 1719)
 * Jean-Baptiste Lully (1632–1687)
 * Guillaume-Gabriel Nivers (1632–1714)
 * Giovanni Battista Vitali (1632–1692)
 * Jean-Nicolas Geoffroy (1633–1694)
 * Sebastian Knüpfer (1633–1676)
 * Joseph Chabanceau de La Barre (1633–1678)
 * Pavel Josef Vejvanovský (c. 1633/1639–1693)
 * Innocent Boutry (1634–1690/95)
 * Clamor Heinrich Abel (1634–1696)
 * Antonio Draghi (c. 1634–1700)
 * Carlo Grossi (c. 1634–1688)
 * Adam Krieger (1634–1666)
 * Andrés de Sola (1634–1696)
 * Pietro Simone Agostini (c. 1635–1680)
 * Lambert Chaumont (c. 1635–1712)
 * Jacques Thomelin (1635/40–1693)
 * Daniel Danielis (1635–1696)
 * Johann Wilhelm Furchheim (c. 1635–1682)
 * Miguel de Irízar (1635–1684)
 * Joannes Florentius a Kempis (1635–after 1711)
 * Paul I, Prince Esterházy of Galántha (1635–1713)
 * Augustin Pfleger (1635–1686)
 * Jacek Różycki (c. 1635–1704)
 * Angelo Berardi (c. 1636–1694)
 * Giovanni Battista degli Antonii, or degli Antoni (c. 1636?–after 1696)
 * Esaias Reusner (1636–1679)
 * Dieterich Buxtehude (c. 1637–1707)
 * Giovanni Paolo Colonna (1637–1695)
 * Johann Georg Ebeling (1637–1676)
 * Louis-Nicolas Le Prince (1637–1693)
 * Louis Chein (1637–1694)
 * Giovanni Maria Pagliardi (1637–1702)
 * Bernardo Pasquini (1637–1710)
 * Diogo Dias Melgás (1638–1700)
 * Giovanni Buonaventura Viviani (1638–c. 1693)
 * Pietro degli Antonii (1639–1720)
 * António Marques Lésbio (1639–1709)
 * Alessandro Melani (1639–1703)
 * Johann Christoph Pezel (1639–1694)
 * Juan García de Salazar (1639–1710)
 * André Raison (1640s–1719)
 * Amalia Catharina, Countess of Erbach (1640–1697)
 * Antonia Bembo (c. 1640–1720)
 * Cristoforo Caresana (c. 1640–1709)
 * Giovanni Battista Draghi (c. 1640–1708)
 * Carolus Hacquart (c. 1640–1701?)
 * Leopold I, Holy Roman Emperor (1640–1705)
 * Paolo Lorenzani (1640–1713)
 * Carl Rosier (1640–1725)
 * Monsieur de Sainte-Colombe, the father (c. 1640–c. 1700)
 * Gaspar Sanz (1640–1710)
 * Nicolaus Adam Strungk (1640–1700)
 * Esther Elizabeth Velkiers (c. 1640–after 1685)
 * Maria Francesca Nascinbeni (1640–1680)
 * Francesco Beretta (c. 1640 – 1694)
 * Wolfgang Caspar Printz (1641–1717)
 * Pierre Gaultier, dit Gaultier of Marseille (1642–1696)
 * Johann Friedrich Alberti (1642–1710)
 * Georg Christoph Bach (1642–1697)
 * Johann Christoph Bach (1642–1703)
 * Giovanni Maria Bononcini (1642–1678)
 * Benedictus Buns, or Benedictus a Sancto Josepho (1642–1716)
 * Michelangelo Falvetti (1642–1692)
 * Pierre-Richard Menault (1642–1694)
 * Friedrich Funcke (1642–1699)
 * Marc-Antoine Charpentier (1643–1704)
 * Johann Adam Reincken (1643?–1722)
 * Alessandro Stradella (1643–1682)
 * Ignazio Albertini (1644–1685)
 * Heinrich Ignaz Franz von Biber (1644–1704)
 * Juan Bautista Cabanilles (1644–1712)
 * Maria Cattarina Calegari (1644–1675)
 * Johann Samuel Drese (c. 1644–1716)
 * Johann Wolfgang Franck (1644–1710)
 * Tomás de Torrejón y Velasco (1644–1728)
 * Johann Georg Conradi (1645–1699)
 * August Kühnel (1645–c. 1700)
 * Johann Löhner (1645–1705)
 * Carlo Ambrogio Lonati (c. 1645–1710)
 * Pierre Tabart (1645–1717)
 * Christian Ritter (c. 1645–c. 1725)
 * Andreas Werckmeister (1645–1706)
 * Juan de Araujo (1646–1712)
 * Johann Fischer (1646–1716)
 * Rupert Ignaz Mayr (1646–1712)
 * René Pignon Descoteaux (c. 1646–1728)
 * Johann Theile (1646–1724)
 * Pelham Humfrey (1647–1674)
 * Antonio Teodoro Ortells (1647–1702)
 * Michael Wise (c. 1647–1687)
 * Pierre Danican Philidor (1647–1730)
 * Johann Michael Bach (1648–1694)
 * Johann Melchior Caesar (c. 1648–1692) (, de:s)
 * Giovanni Maria Capelli (1648–1726)
 * David Funck (1648?–after 1690) ([])
 * Johann Schelle (1648–1701)
 * Poul Christian Schindler (1648–1740)
 * Giuseppe Antonio Bernabei (1649–1732)
 * John Blow (1649–1708)
 * Jacques Boyvin (1649–1706)
 * Pieter Bustijn (c. 1649–1729)
 * Pascal Collasse (1649–1709)
 * Michel Farinel (1649–1726)
 * Francesc Guerau (1649–1717/1722)
 * Andreas Kneller (1649–1724)
 * Johann Philipp Krieger (1649–1725)
 * Johann Valentin Meder (1649–1719)
 * François-Joseph Salomon (1649–1732)

 * Pedro de Araújo (fl. 1662–1705)
 * Alba Trissina (born 1622)
 * Bartholomäus Aich (fl. 1648)
 * Gioan Pietro Del Buono (fl. 1641–1644; d. 1657)
 * John Gamble (fl. from 1641, died 1687)
 * Gervise Gerrard (16??–16??)
 * Bernardo Gianoncelli (fl. early 17th century; d. before 1650)
 * Louis Grabu (fl. 1665–1693)
 * Nicola Matteis (fl. c. 1670–1698; d. after 1713)
 * Peter Mohrhardt, or Morhard (fl. from 1662; d. 1685)
 * Bartłomiej Pękiel (died c. 1670)
 * Bernardo Sabadini (fl. from 1662; d. 1718)
 * Louis Saladin (fl. c. 1670)
 * Bernardo Storace (fl. 1664)
 * August Verdufen, or Werduwen (17th century)

Late Baroque era composers (born 1650–1699)
Composers of the Late Baroque era include the following figures listed by the date of their birth:

 * Cataldo Amodei (c. 1650–c. 1695)
 * Giovanni Battista Bassani (c. 1650–1716)
 * Giovanni Battista Brevi (c. 1650–1725)
 * Christian Geist (c. 1650–1711)
 * Johann Anton Losy von Losinthal, or Comte d'Logy (c. 1650–1721)
 * Guillaume Minoret (c. 1650–1717/1720)
 * Juan Francisco de Navas (c. 1650–1719)
 * Antonio de Salazar (c. 1650–1715)
 * Stanisław Sylwester Szarzyński (c. 1650–c. 1720)
 * Theobaldo di Gatti (1650–1727)
 * Pietro Torri (1650–1737)
 * Robert de Visée (c. 1650–1732/1733)
 * Johann Jacob Walther (1650–1717)
 * Johann Georg Ahle (1651–1706)
 * Petronio Franceschini (1651–1680)
 * Domenico Gabrielli (1651/1659–1690)
 * Gilles Jullien (c. 1651/1653–1703)
 * Johann Krieger (1651–1735)
 * Jean-François Lalouette (1651–1728)
 * David Petersen (c. 1651–1737)
 * Ferdinand Tobias Richter (1651–1711)
 * William Turner (1651–1740)
 * Johann Philipp Förtsch (1652–1732)
 * (1652–1706)
 * John Abell (1653–after 1724)
 * Arcangelo Corelli (1653–1713)
 * Georg Muffat (1653–1704)
 * Johann Pachelbel (1653–1706)
 * Carlo Francesco Pollarolo (c. 1653–1723)
 * Johann Christoph Rothe (1653–1700)
 * Agostino Steffani (1653–1728)
 * Marc'Antonio Ziani (c. 1653–1715)
 * Pietro Antonio Fiocco (1654–1714)
 * Servaes de Koninck (c. 1654–c. 1701)
 * Christian Liebe (1654–1708)
 * Vincent Lübeck (1654–1740)
 * Pablo Nassarre (c. 1654–c. 1730)
 * Ludovico Roncalli (1654–1713)
 * Pierre Bouteiller (1655–1717)
 * Sébastien de Brossard (1655–1730)
 * Ruggiero Fedeli (c. 1655–1722)
 * Juan Serqueira de Lima (c. 1655–c. 1726)
 * Johann Caspar Ferdinand Fischer (1656–1746)
 * Marin Marais (1656–1728)
 * Jean-Baptiste Moreau (1656–1733)
 * James Paisible, or Jacques Paisible (c. 1656–1721)
 * Georg Reutter (1656–1738)
 * Thomas Tudway (c. 1656–1726)
 * Matías Juan de Veana (c. 1656–after 1708)
 * Johann Paul von Westhoff (1656–1705)
 * Philipp Heinrich Erlebach (1657–1714)
 * Michel-Richard de Lalande, or Delalande (1657–1726)
 * Gaetano Greco (c. 1657–c. 1728)
 * Giuseppe Ottavio Pitoni (1657–1743)
 * Damian Stachowicz (1658–1699)
 * Giuseppe Torelli (1658–1709)
 * Sybrandus van Noordt (1659–1705)
 * Henry Purcell (1659–1695)
 * Francesco Antonio Pistocchi (1659–1726)
 * Theodor Schwartzkopff (1659–1732)
 * Antonio Veracini (1659–1745)
 * Sainte-Colombe, the son (1660–1720)
 * Henrico Albicastro, or Johann Heinrich von Weissenburg (c. 1660–after 1730)
 * Rosa Giacinta Badalla (c. 1660–c. 1710)
 * Francesco Ballaroti (c. 1660–1712)
 * (c. 1660–1732)
 * André Campra (1660–1744)
 * Jerónimo de Carrión (1660–1721)
 * Sebastián Durón (1660–1716)
 * Gottfried Finger (1660–1730)
 * Johann Joseph Fux (1660–1741)
 * Friedrich Gottlieb Klingenberg (c. 1660?–1720)
 * Johann Kuhnau (1660–1722)
 * Johann Sigismund Kusser (1660–1727)
 * Gaspard Le Roux (c. 1660–1707)
 * Jacques-François Lochon (c. 1660–c. 1710)
 * Monsieur de Sainte-Colombe le fils (the younger) (c. 1660–c. 1720)
 * Alessandro Scarlatti (1660–1725)
 * Johannes Schenck (1660–c. 1712)
 * Christian Friedrich Witt (c. 1660–1717)
 * Georg Böhm (1661–1733)
 * Henri Desmarest (1661–1741)
 * Francesco Gasparini (1661–1727)
 * Giacomo Antonio Perti (1661–1756)
 * Giovanni Lorenzo Lulier (c. 1662?–1700)
 * Angiola Teresa Moratori Scanabecchi (1662–1708)
 * Jean-Baptiste Drouard de Bousset (1662–1725)
 * Pirro Capacelli Albergati (1663–1735)
 * Johann Nikolaus Hanff (1663–1711)
 * Franz Xaver Murschhauser (1663–1738)
 * Jean-Baptiste Matho (1663–1743)
 * Nicolas Siret (1663–1754)
 * Tomaso Antonio Vitali (1663–1745)
 * Friedrich Wilhelm Zachau, or Zachow (1663–1712)
 * Jean Mignon (1664–1694)
 * Nicolas Bernier (1664–1734)
 * Georg Dietrich Leyding, or Leiding (1664–1710)
 * Pierre Dandrieu (1664–1733)
 * Louis Lully (1664–1734)
 * Michele Mascitti (c. 1664–1760)
 * Georg Österreich (1664–1735)
 * Johann Christoph Pez (1664–1716)
 * Daniel Purcell (1664–1717)
 * Johann Speth (1664–after 1719)
 * Filippo Amadei, "Pippo del Violoncello" (c. 1665–c. 1725)
 * Benedikt Anton Aufschnaiter (1665–1742)
 * Nicolaus Bruhns (1665–1697)
 * Grzegorz Gerwazy Gorczycki (c. 1665/1667–1734)
 * Élisabeth Jacquet de La Guerre (1665–1729)
 * Joseph Valette de Montigny (1665–1738)
 * Jean-Baptiste Lully fils (the younger) (1665–1743)
 * Giovanni Maria Ruggieri (c. 1665–c. 1725)
 * José de Torres y Martínez Bravo (1665–1738)
 * Francisco Valls (1665–1747)
 * Gaetano Veneziano (1665–1716)
 * Domenico Zanatta (c. 1665–1748)
 * Jean-Conrad Baustetter (1666–1722)
 * Attilio Ariosti (1666–1729)
 * Johann Heinrich Buttstett (1666–1727)
 * (1666–1727)
 * Michelangelo Faggioli (1666–1733)
 * Jean-Féry Rebel (1666–1747)
 * Francesco Scarlatti (1666–c. 1741)
 * Bernardo Tonini (c. 1666–after 1727)
 * Georg Bronner (1667–1720)
 * Antonio Lotti (c. 1667–1740)
 * Jean-Louis Lully (1667–1688)
 * Michel Pignolet de Montéclair (1667–1737)
 * Johann Christoph Pepusch (1667–1752)
 * François Couperin (1668–1733)
 * John Eccles (1668–1735)
 * Jean Gilles (1668–1705)
 * (c. 1668–after 1731)
 * Georg von Bertouch (1668–1743)
 * Jean-Baptiste Gouffet (1669–1729)
 * Johann Nicolaus Bach (1669–1753)
 * Louis Marchand (1669–1732)
 * Alessandro Marcello (1669–1747)
 * Andreas Armsdorff (1670–1699)
 * Giuseppe Avitrano (c. 1670–1756)
 * Giovanni Bononcini (1670–1747)
 * (1670–1727)
 * Christian Ludwig Boxberg (1670–1729)
 * Arnold Brunckhorst (1670–1725)
 * Louis de Caix d'Hervelois (c. 1670–c. 1760)
 * Antonio Caldara (1670–1736)
 * Turlough O'Carolan (1670–1738)
 * Charles Dieupart (c. 1670–c. 1740)
 * Henry Eccles (1670–1742)
 * David Kellner (1670–1748)
 * Richard Leveridge (1670–1758)
 * (c. 1670–1719)
 * Jean-Baptiste Volumier, or Woulmyer (1670–1728)
 * Johann Hugo von Wilderer (1670/1671–1724)
 * Tomaso Giovanni Albinoni (1671–1751)
 * Giuseppe Aldrovandini (1671–1707)
 * Johann Christoph Bach (1671–1721)
 * Azzolino della Ciaja, or della Ciaia (1671–1755)
 * Gaspard Corrette (c. 1671–before 1733)
 * Charles-Hubert Gervais (1671–1744)
 * Teodorico Pedrini (1671–1746)
 * François Estienne (1671–1755)
 * Louis-Nicolas Blondel (?–1671)
 * Robert Valentine, also known as Roberto Valentino (c. 1671–1747)
 * Carlo Agostino Badia (1672–1738)
 * Francesco Antonio Bonporti (1672–1749)
 * André Cardinal Destouches (1672–1749)
 * Nicolas de Grigny (1672–1703)
 * François Duval (1672–1728)
 * Francesco Mancini (1672–1737)
 * Antoine Forqueray (1672–1745)
 * Georg Caspar Schürmann (1672/1673–1751)
 * Petrus Hercules Brehy, or Pierre-Hercule Bréhy (1673–1737)
 * Antonio de Literes (1673–1747)
 * Santiago de Murcia (1673–1739)
 * Jeremiah Clarke (c. 1674–1707)
 * Reinhard Keiser (1674–1739)
 * Pierre Dumage (c. 1674–1751)
 * Jacques-Martin Hotteterre, called Le Romain (1674–1763)
 * Evaristo Felice Dall'Abaco (1675–1742)
 * Michel de la Barre (c. 1675–1745)
 * Louis de La Coste, or Lacoste (c. 1675–c. 1750)
 * (1675–1719)
 * Jacques de Bournonville (1675–175?)
 * Giovanni Porta (c. 1675–1755)
 * Obadiah Shuttleworth (c. 1675?–1734)
 * Francesco Venturini (c. 1675–1745)
 * Johann Bernhard Bach (1676–1749)
 * Diogenio Bigaglia (1676–1745)
 * Louis-Nicolas Clérambault (1676–1749)
 * Thomas-Louis Bourgeois (1676–1750)
 * Giacomo Facco (1676–1753)
 * Nicolas Racot de Grandval (1676–1753)
 * Wolff Jakob Lauffensteiner (1676–1754)
 * Giuseppe Maria Orlandini (1676–1760)
 * John Weldon (1676–1736)
 * Jean-Baptiste Anet (1676–1755)
 * Johann Ludwig Bach (1677–1731)
 * Antonio Maria Bononcini (1677–1726)
 * Giovanni Carlo Maria Clari (1677–1754)
 * Johann Wilhelm Drese (1677–1745)
 * Francesco Nicola Fago (1677–1745)
 * Jean-Baptiste Morin (1677–1745)
 * Alexandre Villeneuve (1677–1758)
 * Christian Petzold (1677–1733)
 * Bonaventure Gilles (1678?–1758)
 * William Croft (1678–1727)
 * Ferdinando Antonio Lazzari (1678–1754)
 * , or Jean-Antoine Desplanes (1678–1760)
 * Antonio Vivaldi (1678–1741)
 * Manuel de Zumaya (c. 1678–1755)
 * Georg Friedrich Kauffmann (1679–1735)
 * Domenico Sarro (1679–1744)
 * Pietro Filippo Scarlatti (1679–1750)
 * Johann Christian Schieferdecker (1679–1732)
 * Jan Dismas Zelenka (1679–1745)
 * Françoise-Charlotte de Senneterre Ménétou (1679–1745)
 * Pietro Castrucci (1679–1752)
 * Toussaint Bertin de la Doué (c. 1680–1743)
 * William Corbett (1680–1748)
 * Giuseppe Fedeli, or Joseph Saggione (c. 1680–c. 1745)
 * Jean-Adam Guilain (c. 1680–after 1739)
 * Jean-Baptiste Loeillet of London (1680–1730)
 * Giovanni Mossi (c. 1680?–1742)
 * Jacques Morel (composer) (c. 1680–c. 1740)
 * Jean-Baptiste Stuck (1680–1755)
 * Richard Jones (1680–1744)
 * Emanuele d'Astorga (1681–1736)
 * Carl Heinrich Biber (1681–1749)
 * Francesco Bartolomeo Conti (1681–1732)
 * Johann Mattheson (1681–1764)
 * Anne Danican Philidor (1681–1728)
 * Pierre Danican Philidor (1681–1731)
 * Giovanni Reali (c. 1681–after 1727)
 * Georg Philipp Telemann (1681–1767)
 * Giuseppe Valentini (1681–1753)
 * Paolo Benedetto Bellinzani (1682–1757)
 * Giacobbe Cervetto (c. 1682–1783)
 * Jean-François Dandrieu (c. 1682–1738)
 * Jean-Joseph Mouret (1682–1738)
 * Valentin Rathgeber (1682–1750)
 * Johann Christian Schickhardt (c. 1682–1762)
 * Pietro Baldassare (c. 1683–after 1768)
 * Roque Ceruti (c. 1683–1760)
 * Christoph Graupner (1683–1760)
 * Johann David Heinichen (1683–1729)
 * Jean-Philippe Rameau (1683–1764)
 * (1683–1742)
 * François d'Agincourt (1684–1758)
 * François Bouvard (c. 1684–1760)
 * Bohuslav Matěj Černohorský (1684–1742)
 * Francesco Durante (1684–1755)
 * Francesco Manfredini (1684–1762)
 * (1684–1712)
 * Johann Theodor Roemhildt (1684–1756)
 * Johann Gottfried Walther (1684–1748)

 * Giuseppe Matteo Alberti (1685–1751)
 * Johann Sebastian Bach (1685–1750)
 * Louis-Antoine Dornel (c. 1685–1765)
 * Lodovico Giustini (1685–1743)
 * Henri-Guillaume Hamal (1685–1752)
 * George Frideric Handel (1685–1759)
 * Václav Gunther Jacob (1685–1734)
 * Jacques Loeillet (1685–1748)
 * Roland Marais (c. 1685–c. 1750)
 * Wilhelm Hieronymus Pachelbel (c. 1685–1764)
 * Domenico Scarlatti (1685–1757)
 * Pietro Giuseppe Gaetano Boni (c. 1686–after 1741)
 * Jean-Joseph Fiocco (1686–1746)
 * François Campion (1686–1747)
 * Benedetto Marcello (1686–1739)
 * Nicola Porpora (1686–1768)
 * Giovanni Battista Somis (1686–1763)
 * Jean-Baptiste Semaillé (1687–1730)
 * Johann Adam Birkenstock (1687–1733)
 * Henry Carey (1687–1743)
 * Willem de Fesch (1687–1761)
 * Johann Ernst Galliard (1687–1749)
 * Francesco Geminiani (1687–1762)
 * Johann Georg Pisendel (1687–1755)
 * Jean Baptiste Senaillé (1687–1730)
 * Jean-Baptiste-Maurice Quinault (1687–1745)
 * Sylvius Leopold Weiss (1687–1750)
 * Michele Falco (c. 1688–after 1732)
 * Johann Friedrich Fasch (1688–1758)
 * Jacob Klein (1688–1748)
 * Jean-Baptiste Loeillet de Ghent (1688–1720)
 * Joseph Michel (1688–1736)
 * Thomas Roseingrave (1688–1766)
 * Domenico Zipoli (1688–1726)
 * Jacques Aubert (1689–1753)
 * Jean-Baptiste Cappus (1689–1751)
 * William Babell (c. 1689–1723)
 * Joseph Bodin de Boismortier (1689–1755)
 * Jan Josef Ignác Brentner (1689–1742)
 * Charles Levens (1689–1764)
 * Pietro Gnocchi (1689–1775)
 * Jean-Baptiste Quentin (before 1690–c. 1742) (not to be confused with his son 1718–c. 1750)
 * Francesco Barsanti (1690–1775)
 * (c. 1690?–c. 1740)
 * Giuseppe Antonio Brescianello (c. 1690 – 1758)
 * Fortunato Chelleri (1690–1757)
 * François Colin de Blamont (1690–1760)
 * Giovanni Antonio Giai, or Giay, Giaj (1690–1764)
 * Johann Tobias Krebs (1690–1762)
 * Gottlieb Muffat (1690–1770)
 * Jacques-Christophe Naudot (c. 1690–1762)
 * Charles Theodore Pachelbel (1690–1750)
 * Manuel José de Quirós (c. 1690?–1765)
 * Gottfried Heinrich Stölzel (1690–1749)
 * Carlo Tessarini (1690–1766)
 * Francesco Maria Veracini (1690–1768)
 * Leonardo Vinci (c. 1690–1730)
 * Jean-Baptiste Niel (Nieil or Nielle) (1690–1775)
 * Robert Woodcock (c. 1690 – 1728)
 * Francesco Feo (1691–1761)
 * Jan Francisci (1691–1758)
 * Conrad Friedrich Hurlebusch (1691–1765)
 * Louis Homet (1691–1767)
 * Martin Berteau (1691–1771)
 * Geminiano Giacomelli or Jacomelli (1692–1740)
 * Antonio Palella (1692–1761)
 * Giovanni Alberto Ristori (1692–1753)
 * Giuseppe Tartini (1692–1770)
 * Unico Wilhelm van Wassenaer (1692–1766)
 * Louis Lemaire (1693?–1750?)
 * Laurent Belissen (1693–1762)
 * Šimon Brixi (1693–1735)
 * Pierre-Gabriel Buffardin (1693–1768)
 * Christoph Förster (1693–1745)
 * Gregor Joseph Werner (1693–1766)
 * Louis-Claude Daquin (1694–1772)
 * (1694–1762)
 * Pierre-Claude Foucquet (1694–1772)
 * Leonardo Leo (1694–1744)
 * Antonín Reichenauer (c. 1694–1730)
 * Johan Helmich Roman (1694–1758)
 * Luigi Merci (c.1695–1750)
 * Johann Lorenz Bach (1695–1773)
 * Pietro Locatelli (1695–1764)
 * Marie-Anne-Catherine Quinault (1695–1791)
 * Giuseppe Sammartini (1695–1750)
 * Ernst Gottlieb Baron (1696–1760)
 * Pierre Février (1696–1760)
 * Jean-Philippe Borbollono (1696–?)
 * Maurice Greene (1696–1755)
 * Johann Melchior Molter (1696–1765)
 * Johann Caspar Vogler (1696–1763)
 * Andrea Zani (1696–1757)
 * Esprit-Antoine Blanchard (1696–1770)
 * Josse Boutmy (1697–1779)
 * Cornelius Heinrich Dretzel (1697–1775)
 * Louis-Maurice de La Pierre (1697–1753)
 * Adam Falckenhagen (1697–1754)
 * Johann Christian Hertel (1697/1699–1754)
 * Jean-Marie Leclair l'aîné (1697–1764)
 * Giuseppe de Majo (1697–1771)
 * Giovanni Benedetto Platti (1697–1763)
 * Johann Pfeiffer (1697–1761)
 * Johann Joachim Quantz (1697–1773)
 * Francesco Antonio Vallotti (1697–1780)
 * Pietro Auletta (c. 1698–1771)
 * Antonio Bioni (1698–1739)
 * Henry Madin (1698–1748)
 * Riccardo Broschi (c. 1698–1756)
 * François Francoeur (1698–1787)
 * František Jiránek (1698–1778)
 * Nicola Bonifacio Logroscino (1698–c. 1764)
 * (1698–1754)
 * Jean-Baptiste Forqueray le fils (1699–1782)
 * Joseph Gibbs (1699–1788)
 * Johann Adolph Hasse (1699–1783)
 * Juan Francés de Iribarren (1699–1767)
 * Jan Zach (1699–1773)

 * Jean-Baptiste Dutartre (16..–1749)
 * Ignazio Pollice or Pulici (fl. 1684–1705)
 * John Baston (fl. 1708–1739)
 * (fl. 1733–1758)
 * Domenico Della Bella (fl. c. 1700–1715)
 * Michielina Della Pietà (fl. c. 1701–1744)
 * Charles Dollé (fl. 1735–1755; d. after 1755)
 * Giovanni Giorgi (fl. from 1719; d. 1762)
 * Caterina Benedicta Grazianini (born 17th century; fl. from 1705)
 * Maria Margherita Grimani (b. before 1700; fl. 1713–1718)
 * Benoit Guillemant (fl. 1746–1757)
 * Gottfried Lindemann (fl. 1713–1741; d. 1741)
 * Le Sieur de Machy (d. after 1692)
 * Jacques Morel (fl. c. 1700–1749)
 * Antonio Orefice (fl. 1708–1734)
 * Mrs Philarmonica (fl. 1715)
 * Julie Pinel (fl. 1710–1737)
 * Marieta Morosina Priuli (fl. 1665)
 * Camilla de Rossi (fl. 1707–1710)
 * Giovanni Zamboni (later 17th century–after 1718)

Early Galante era composers – transition from Baroque to Classical (born 1700 and after)
Composers during the transition from the Baroque to Classical eras, sometimes seen as the beginning of the Galante era, include the following figures listed by their date of birth:

 * Romano Antonio Piacentino (c. 18th century)
 * Louis-Joseph Marchand (17??–1743)
 * Philibert Delavigne (c. 1700–1750)
 * Francesco Biscogli (after 1700–after 1750)
 * Mlle Guédon de Presles (early 18th century–1754)
 * Johann Bernhard Bach (the younger) (1700–1743)
 * João Rodrigues Esteves (1700–1751)
 * François-Lupien Grenet (1700–1753)
 * Jean-Baptiste Masse (c. 1700–c. 1757)
 * Sebastian Bodinus (c. 1700–1759)
 * Louis-Antoine Lefèbvre (1700–1763)
 * Domenico Dall'Oglio (c. 1700–1764)
 * Nicola Fiorenza (after 1700–1764)
 * Michel Blavet (1700–1768)
 * Christophe Moyreau (1700–1774)
 * Giovanni Battista Sammartini (1700–1775)
 * Johan Agrell (1701–1765)
 * François Rebel (1701–1775)
 * Jean-Pierre Guignon (1702–1774)
 * Alessandro Besozzi (1702–1775)
 * Johann Ernst Eberlin (1702–1762)
 * José de Nebra (1702–1768)
 * Francisco António de Almeida (c. 1702–1755)
 * Joseph-Hector Fiocco (1703–1741)
 * René Drouard de Bousset (1703–1760)
 * John Frederick Lampe (1703–1751)
 * Johann Gottlieb Graun (1703–1771)
 * Jean-Marie Leclair le cadet (the younger) (1703–1777)
 * Carlo Zuccari (1703–1792)
 * Carlos Seixas (1704–1742)
 * Rosanna Scalfi Marcello (1704 or 1705–after 1742)
 * Carl Heinrich Graun (1704–1759)
 * Giovanni Battista Pescetti (c. 1704–c. 1766)
 * František Tůma (1704–1774)
 * Philippe Courbois (1705–1730)
 * Nicolas Chédeville (1705–1782)
 * Henri-Jacques de Croes (1705–1786)
 * Michael Christian Festing (1705–1752)
 * Louis-Gabriel Guillemain (1705–1770)
 * Johann Peter Kellner (1705–1772)
 * Peter Prelleur (c. 1705?–1741)
 * Pancrace Royer (1705–1755)
 * Andrea Bernasconi (c. 1706–1784)
 * Carlo Cecere (1706–1761)
 * Baldassare Galuppi (1706–1785)
 * Johann Gottfried Donati (1706–1782)
 * William Hayes (1706–1777)
 * Giovanni Battista Martini, or Padre Martini (1706–1784)
 * Jean Barrière (1707–1747)
 * Thomas Chilcot (c. 1707–1766)
 * Michel Corrette (1707–1795)
 * Ignacio de Jerusalem (c. 1707–1769)
 * Johann Baptist Georg Neruda (c. 1707–c. 1780)
 * Domenico Paradies or Pietro Domenico Paradisi (1707–1791)
 * António Teixeira (1707–1769)
 * Felix Benda (1708–1768)
 * Egidio Duni (1708–1775)
 * Johann Gottlieb Janitsch (1708–1763)
 * Václav Jan Kopřiva, known as Urtica (1708–1789)
 * Georg Reutter (the younger) (1708–1772)
 * Johann Adolph Scheibe (1708–1776)
 * Francesco Araja (1709–after 1762)
 * Franz Benda (1709–1786)
 * Princess Wilhelmine of Prussia (1709–1758)
 * Christoph Schaffrath (1709–1763)
 * Charles Avison (1709–1770)
 * Domenico Alberti (c. 1710–1740)
 * André-Joseph Exaudet (1710–1762)
 * Joseph Abaco, or dall'Abaco (1710–1805)
 * Thomas Arne (1710–1778)
 * Wilhelm Friedemann Bach (1710–1784)
 * Élisabeth de Haulteterre (fl. 1737–1768)
 * Salvatore Lanzetti (1710–1780)
 * Giovanni Battista Pergolesi (1710–1736)
 * William Boyce (1711–1779)
 * Ignaz Holzbauer (1711–1783)
 * Gaetano Latilla (1711–1788)
 * Davide Perez (1711–1778)
 * Chadwille Wagon (1711–1799)
 * Barbara of Portugal (1711–1758)
 * Charles-Henri de Blainville (1711–1769)
 * Jean-Joseph Cassanéa de Mondonville (1711–1772)
 * James Oswald (1711–1769)
 * Frederick the Great (1712–1786)
 * John Hebden (1712–1765)
 * Giacomo Puccini senior (1712–1781)
 * Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–1778)
 * John Christopher Smith (1712–1795)
 * John Stanley (1712–1786)
 * Antoine Dauvergne (1713–1797)
 * Johan Henrik Freithoff (1713–1767)
 * Johann Ludwig Krebs (1713–1780)
 * Johann Nicolaus Mempel (1713–1747)
 * Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach (1714–1788)
 * John Alcock (1715–1806)
 * Jacques Duphly (1715–1789)
 * Josef Seger (1716–1782)
 * Princess Philippine Charlotte of Prussia (1716–1801)
 * Johann Wenzel Anton Stamitz (1717–1757)
 * Richard Mudge (1718–1763)
 * Abraham Caceres (1718–1740)
 * Leopold Mozart (1719–1787)
 * Joan Baptista Pla i Agustí (c. 1720–1773)
 * Pieter Hellendaal (1721–1799)
 * Matthias Vanden Gheyn (1721–1785)
 * Anna Amalia, Abbess of Quedlinburg (1723–1787)
 * Rafael Antonio Castellanos (c. 1725–1791)
 * Karl Kohaut (1726–1784)
 * Henri Moreau (1728–1803)
 * Pierre van Maldere (1729–1768)
 * Antonio Soler (1729–1783)
 * Capel Bond (1730–1790)
 * Gabriele Leone (c. 1735–1790)
 * Simon Simon (1735?–1787?)
 * José Joaquim dos Santos (1747?–1801)
 * Alexander Maasmann (fl. 1713)
 * Santa della Pietà (fl. c. 1725–1750, d. after 1774)

title: List of Baroque composers


text:
Wikipedia talk:Association of Members' Advocates/Guide to Advocacy

Advocates workshop
Shouldn't a good bit of this be under the FAQ section? An advocacy guide should be very comprehensive, methinks, and assume a certain level of knowledge from its readers — maybe what might help is scheduling a regular "Advocates' Workshop"? Wally 04:59, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * Sure, why not ;) (Sam Spade | talk | contributions) 16:18, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Effective representation during an arbitration
I have tried to give my perspective as an Arbitrator (and trial lawyer) Fred Bauder 13:35, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Restoration
Someone went on a tear redirecting these articles when AMA went dark. I have resurrected them and tagged as historical there so the information is still here for reference. --WGFinley (talk) 18:05, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Porter Mountain

Porter Mountain is one of the Adirondack High Peaks. It is number 38 in order of height, and one of the easier hikes of the Adirondack Forty-Sixers. It is named after Noah Porter, one of the first to climb it, later president of Yale University.

It is often climbed to with Cascade Mountain. While it lacks the pseudo-alpine open summit of Cascade, there are nevertheless wide views available from the summit, particularly of the Johns Brook Valley to the east (which Porter blocks from Cascade); it is often less crowded than Cascade.

A yellow-blazed trail leaves the trail to Cascade about 0.5 mi short of that mountain's summit, and leads down into the mountain pass between the two peaks about 1 mi to Porter's summit.

It is also possible to follow this trail from its other terminus, over neighboring Blueberry Mountain from Keene Valley, although that involves a greater vertical ascent and a longer trip. The trailhead to Blueberry Mountain and subsequently Porter Mountain is accessible from a parking lot next to Marcy Airfield on route 73.

title: Porter Mountain


text: Talk:RSP

title: Talk:RSP


text:
Talk:Alben W. Barkley

President Barkley
I wondered what would have happened if Barkley had become President?
 * Me too, actually, which is why I was kind of dissapointed by this article, which doesn't really say anything about his positions. --Mihoshi 18:21, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Well ,I think had Truman been assassinated (1950), and thus Barkley would've become President, he probably would have run for a full term in 1952 ,though again his age would have been an issue (75 in 1952). If a President Barkley would have gotten elected to a full term, he probably wouldn't have survived it (full term 1953-57), and his VP would have become President. Mightberight/wrong 22:54, 3 November 2005 (UTC).
 * It's not logical to assume if events had happened differently that he still would have died at the same time. --71.131.31.243 (talk) 10:11, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

That last picture
The final picture in this article is entirely unnecessary. Maybe in its own article, but not about a politician who visited, even if we were talking about Truman rather than his V.P. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.10.240.33 (talk) 00:49, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

 * It seems more necessary than any other picture, to me. It shows the world Barkley faced.  Why would it be inappropriate?  DBaba (talk) 00:58, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Recent rewrite
I anticipated there would be some necessary adjustments to my rewrite, but I hope the net result was (or at least will be) a better article. I have concerns about a few edits: Let me know your thoughts. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 19:14, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * This is presently unsourced. I don't necessarily dispute its accuracy; I just didn't run across this information in my research. The edit also introduces information in the lead that is not supported in the body, which is not a good thing. I have no opposition to its inclusion once it is sourced, but it needs to go in the body as well.
 * This and this add sources to the bibliography that are not presently cited in the article. I'd prefer to put them in "Further reading" until they are directly cited, per convention.
 * This citation needs to be consistent with the others in the article (i.e. the footnote should be of the form "author, page number", with the more detailed bibliographic information in the appropriate section). I'm also unclear why the citation needs to be changed from the Libbey biography.
 * If we move other sources to the Further reading section, then this has to be undone, although I wouldn't be opposed to adding subheadings to the further reading section.
 * The text in question is "He gained statwide stature by leading the anti-gambling crusade, in cooperation with Protestant ministers. " and it can be sourced at . As for changing the citation style that requires a consensus on this page and I certainly oppose it. Acdixon seems gto have done this without consulting here or anywhere, a tactic that Barkley never would have attempted because it loses friends. Rjensen (talk) 19:45, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * As I said, if it can be cited, by all means, add it with a cite. Just don't add it without one. Per WP:BURDEN: "The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material." If I can find the relevant page number within this source (since I assume it's a limited preview) I will add this material.
 * As for citation style, it seems strange to me to contend that the previous version had an established style of citation. At least one of the whopping five footnotes that previously existed was just a link with a title. One of the magazine articles had no page numbers at all, while another cited a single fact to a range of seven pages within a work. The citation style used here is largely the same one I've used in each of the 30 articles I've shepherded through the FA process, so it's hardly some alien style that I invented myself. Still, if you'll state what, specifically, bothers you about it, maybe we can find something that works for both of us, as well as anyone else who may read the article. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 19:56, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Acdixon's rewrite
Can we please discuss the changes you are making to my rewrite of Alben Barkley? I have concerns that are mostly about form rather than substance, but I can't express them because I keep getting edit conflicts. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 18:59, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * You should use the talk page to discuss your proposed radical changes and your dropping so much scholarship in favor of light-weight stuff. Rjensen (talk) 19:02, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you for dismissing about a month's worth of research and editing as "light-weight stuff". I'm glad to discuss changes on the talk page. Look for a post there shortly. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 19:04, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * The Libbey book is light weight and I'm sorry you depended on it so much and did not read the more weighty scholarship. Rjensen (talk) 19:06, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * It's published by a university publishing house and meets the Wikipedia requirements for reliable sources. I read what I had access to, including a few of the articles you added to the bibliography later. Are you suggesting I actually made the article worse by expanding its content by more than five-fold? Acdixon (talk · contribs) 19:25, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Libbey's scholarly articles are excellent; his short book is light-weight and not nearly as useful--it was designed for a popular series, while the articles were written for serious historians. Rjensen (talk) 19:49, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * OK, but what is your complaint? Is it that Libbey's book is inaccurate? Has the inclusion of something from the book made this article worse? I fail to see the utility in citing the same fact to a different source just because it could be regarded as "more scholarly". A reliable source is a reliable source, as far as Wikipedia is concerned. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 19:58, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Libbey does not make many mistakes (at least I did not notice any), but he avoids the complex issues that scholars explore -- and which he explores in his journal articles. Likewise scholars like Blakey Hard Times and Klotter & Pearce, Divide and Dissent: Kentucky Politics, 1930–1963 and Ritchie on Senate leadership all get overlooked. So it's a matter of best quality versus mediocre. Let me add it's very annoying to have line after lines of ibid-like cites to the same source (they should be used sparingly, say once per paragraph unless it's a quote). Rjensen (talk) 20:37, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I have Divide and Dissent, but it's been a while since I read through it. I remembered it focusing much more on Bert T. Combs' administration, but I'll go back through and see if I missed any relevant details about Barkley. I don't have the other two, but I don't have any problem with information from them being added as long as it is cited. My revision wasn't meant to be the be all and end all, but I have to think it is a substantial improvement over what was there and a decent starting place for further improvement.
 * As for the citation issue, I've heard that before. Here's the problem. Wikipedia requires cites for "material that is challenged or likely to be challenged". That's subjective enough to include almost anything. Plus, information gets added, deleted, and moved around all the time. If each sentence has its own cite, the cite usually goes with it. If not, the cite usually gets lost, making it difficult for later readers to verify the sentence. Further, if that sentence later gets challenged, it's difficult for one of the article's primary authors to remember where it came from so it can be cited again. So while you may find it annoying to have so many refs, I find it annoying to have to track down a source six months or a year after writing something because someone decided it needed a direct citation. The style I have used doesn't suit everyone, but it has passed muster on numerous occasions during review processes.
 * I also have a problem with the citation style you have been employing. Take, for example, your recent addition about Barkley's support in the 1938 senatorial primary coming from "farmers, unionized workers and coal miners" while Chandler's support came from the middle class. Surely, this information appears on one, maybe two pages of a source, but it's presently cited to a span of 21 pages in one source and 15 pages in another. That makes it very difficult for an interested reader to verify. It would be better to cite just the page and source that contains that information. And by the way, citations should almost always go in the body, since the lead is meant to briefly summarize the (sourced) information in the body. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 20:57, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * This article looks unprofessional with many, many useless ibids to one weak source. As for scholarly articles, people who get to read the acual RS itself will want not one sentence on one page but will want to read all about the campaign in context ("farmers" for example are repeatedly mentioned).Rjensen (talk) 22:46, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

"Looks unprofessional" is subjective. Does it look like what you would see in a professional journal? Probably not, but Wikipedia serves a different purpose and a different audience than a professional journal. Your characterization of the numerous citations as "useless" is incorrect. When I read a Wikipedia article, my particular interest in checking a footnote is to determine exactly what portion of what source the information comes from in order to verify that it is true. I know I am not the only one with this interest. For this reason, I also disagree with your contention that everyone who checks the references will want to read the entire article. I certainly would have no problem with adding the page ranges to the bibliographic information at the end of the article for those folks who do, but I insist that we should maintain exact page numbers for verification of individual sentences for the portion of our audience interested in that component.

I've read your user page, and I fully understand that you forgot more about history and publishing in journals last night in your sleep than I will probably ever know. My graduate degree is in computer science, after all. However, you have to realize that the guidelines for a Wikipedia article are different than those for a professional journal. The style I have employed here has been accepted by a variety of different reviewers during reviews for good article, A-class article, featured article, and peer review. The expansion I have done is, by any reasonable account, an improvement on the content, since broad portions of Barkley's life were completely omitted in the version I replaced. The source I used may be "weak", but it is reliable, and thus any expansion based upon it is valid. I did read the old version multiple times in an attempt to ensure that I did not omit any extant relevant information. As far as I can tell, the only part I left out was a section that referred to a Mississippi senator as a "race-baiting demagogue", which seemed to me to run afoul of WP:NPOV.

I'm more than open to you or anyone else expanding this article using the sources you mentioned above or any other relevant reliable source. In fact, I hope you will, and as you can see, I already integrated one fact and source that you pointed out. We can work out this citation issue, even if it takes community input via the WP:RFC process; that's a normal and productive part of editing Wikipedia. I felt that being bold (per Wikipedia policy) and greatly expanding the content and usefulness of this article would give other interested parties a new and better starting point for further improvements. I'm sorry to see that you seem to disagree with that. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 23:44, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Barkley had a successful career that is not very controversial (unlike Truman or FDR who were very controversial). So the judgment that every sentence has to be referenced is not true and leads to a silly result--it shows an ignorance of Barkley and his life and times and the historiography. That will be annoying, I suggest, to many thousands of history teachers and their more advanced students. As for the general public--well the first thing a publisher tells a history author is that the general public hates footnotes. Rjensen (talk) 00:00, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
 * While I understand conceptually where you are coming from, I must insist that you cite Wikipedia policy in support of your position that the footnotes have to be changed. This simply isn't a professional journal; it has different guidelines and policies. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 00:21, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
 * WP:cite section 3.1.5 "As with other citation formats, articles should not undergo large scale conversion between formats without consensus to do so." that's what happened here. also WP:CITEVAR " 6.1 Variation in citation methods: Editors should not attempt to change an article's established citation style merely on the grounds of personal preference, or without first seeking consensus for the change. If the article you are editing is already using a particular citation style, you should follow it." Rjensen (talk) 03:17, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
 * As I said above, there was no established citation style in the previous draft. This is the last revision before my rewrite. Look at the citations. First, there are only six of them, which is insufficient for an article of that length.
 * The first is a magazine article that gives no author; whether there is no by-line or the editor who added this cite just failed to include the author's name, I'm not sure. The citation does not use any of the established citation templates; cite magazine would have been appropriate here. Beyond that, it includes neither the page number for the specific fact nor the range of pages on which the article can be found.
 * The second is actually in pretty good shape. It does use an established citation template (cite web) and does not require page numbers because it isn't a paginated source.
 * The third source goes back to not using a citation template, but unlike the first source, it does include a specific page number on which the cited fact can be found. Other than omitting an OCLC number, it looks OK.
 * The fourth cite is actually consistent with the first, since it uses no citation template, but gives no author and no page number, but it differs from the previous two in ways already noted.
 * The fifth reference does not use a citation template, but it does include an author (although, per every convention I've seen, the author's name is misplaced within the citation). It also includes page numbers, but instead of it being the exact page, it is the range of pages for the entire chapter on Barkley – a span of seven pages total. At most, this could be a citation for two facts, since the prior footnote occurs just two sentences earlier. Those two facts – "Barkley was 74 at the time. Two days later, Barkley withdrew from consideration." – surely do not require the reader to read all seven pages to verify.
 * The final reference is nothing more than a titled link. It uses no citation template and no citation style (eg. MLA, APA, etc.) at all. Further, I checked the link during my rewrite and found no actual mention of Barkley there; it strikes me as an attempt to promote the history center itself rather than make any information more verifiable.
 * So, as I have demonstrated, at most one-third of the previous scanty footnotes (that is to say, two out of six) use the same citation style. There was no established citation style in the previous draft. I realize that numerous sources appear in the References section, but they are not inline, as required by policy. Therefore, what I have done not only didn't violate the policy you cited, it actually made the article more compliant with policy. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:15, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Acdixon was unaware of the rules, he imposed his own style, erased the other cites, and complained when I did not follow his new style. He did that without attempting to discuss it or reach a consensus, and he violated the rule: " if there is disagreement about which style is best, defer to the style used by the first major contributor." wp:citevar. Rjensen (talk) 17:16, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Honestly, I can no longer follow your complaints. You started by alleging that I had removed content from the previous version, but the information you "re-added" either wasn't in the previous version or was in my revision in a different form. You then charged that I had used "light weight" sources instead of "more weighty" scholarship. Before we were able to resolve either one of those, you complained that I used too many footnotes, and now you are upset about me "changing" the style of citation. Does that cover all the issues? And what is your proposed solution? To revert to the previous version of the article? To change to a citation style you find more acceptable? I ask because I feel we need to solicit community input via the RFC process, and I want to be clear on all the issues before I initiate that process. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 18:51, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
 * My main complaints are 1) that an average medium length article on a major figure has been turned into a below average excessively long article over three times longer, which is full of (accurate) trivia based mostly on light weight popular stuff. It is now much less useful to readers because the main points are buried. 2) It also suffers from bloat, which the rules war against. WP:CITEVAR 3.1.5 "Inline references can significantly bloat the wikitext in the edit window and can be extremely difficult and confusing." 3) I think the problem is the editor who made all the drastic changes all at once and without consulting anyone is largely unfamiliar with the material. For example, the info on Barkley is not contentious (unlike FDR say) and over the years there have been no serious challenges. 4) Yet the zillions of footnotes --the bloat-- were added to head off imaginary potential challenges that never were likely as the edit history proves. (there have been only 3 comments over the last seven years, see above; one challenges the need for a photo and the other two speculate on Barkley as president.  Rjensen (talk) 22:21, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

RFC
Is the recent rewrite too long and/or too detailed, and does it contain too many footnotes? Acdixon (talk · contribs) 13:09, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Per the suggestion at WP:RFC, I have notified each of the WikiProjects that have tagged this article of this RFP. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 13:44, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

My recent, admittedly WP:BOLD, rewrite of this article seems to have generated some controversy, as can be seen above. This was the last revision prior to my rewrite; this is the draft I composed in my user space and replaced it with. After a good bit of back and forth, I asked, who has issues with my rewrite, to distill his complaints to a manageable list so we could start this RFC. As best I can tell, the issues with the article itself are 2: that the rewrite is too long, containing unnecessary detail; and that it contains too many footnotes. Another issue – that I did not discuss these changes with anyone prior to making them – is a user issue that we can discuss somewhere else, if desired. Because this discussion is on an article talk page, I think it should be confined to article issues. Since there are two broad issues, I'll try to organize two separate sections below. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 13:31, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Too long/too much detail
This complaint honestly surprised me. The previous article was rated as start class by three of the four WikiProjects that maintain it. There were large sections of the subject's life that received little or no treatment in the article, despite reliable sources that discuss them in detail. Rjensen's complaint seems to be that the additional detail obscures the most important parts of Barkley's life. I contend that it provides context for those details. I did try to avoid "human interest"-type stuff that did not advance the narrative. For example, several sources mention how Barkley made his first campaign for office by electioneering door-to-door a one-eyed horse across rural McCracken County, but I didn't feel that rose to the level of needing to be included in the article. The length and level of detail seem comparable to other articles I've taken to FA status such as John J. Crittenden and Paul E. Patton. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 13:31, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Barkley as a major national figure fades away when every trivial factoid gets included. Acdixon's edit can' tell the reader what is important and what is not, which is what readers need to know. Rjensen (talk) 13:43, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

OK, I know this is not the large-scale revision some of you are looking for, but through a combination of copyediting and eliminating some small details, I carved almost 8K from the article. I have done this as a show of good faith that I am trying to respond to this feedback, even though at present, the opinions on the length issue find no problem by a count of 5 to 3. In the absence of specific comments about what "factoids" and "trivia" should be eliminated, this is the best I can do. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 18:37, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment I agree that it is too long. Articles should explain why someone was important rather than write the story about the man behind the image.  I agree too that the sources used should have been more in the nature of serious assessments of his career.  Even though Dear Alben  is from an academic publisher, it is written as a popular book.  You could develop spin-off articles for readers who are interested in specific aspects of Barkley's life.  TFD (talk) 14:49, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
 * If this turns out to be the community's consensus, which information, specifically, do you think should be removed? Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:59, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment: I have always said that more information is better than none at all. What I see is sourced information and well written.  I see no problems. -  Neutralhomer  •  Talk  • 12:12, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Not too long: comparing this to other articles about public figures that have been recognized as Wikipedia's best work. It is about the same size as Richard Nixon and Avery Brundage, which both passed FAC without a problem. It's smaller than Ronald Reagan too. In any case, general comments like "too long" are very unhelpful--if there are specific issues about trivial facts being included--point them out. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:30, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Far too long and with way too much trivia. Wikipedia furnishes references to the reader for good reason - to point readers to where they can find more details.  Articles with this much detail turn off readers, and thus do not aid the project.  I have no problem with all sorts of sources - it is up to the reader to figure out which ones help him the most, but listing every factoid is not the way to go about this.   And Barkley is not as complex as Nixon by a long shot.  I raher think a 30% reduction in the size would double the article's utility.  Compare  to .  The earlier version definitely covered all the bases - but took 184K,  The 60K article is ten times as useful for readers.  The same will be true here - 24K was likely "too short" but overkill is not the answer either. Collect (talk) 12:12, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Not too long For someone who was a VP and over 50 years in politics, I don't think it's too long, this man has had a lot going on in his life, and it would take a bit to overview it. — raeky  t  21:02, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Not too long: While I do not share the enthusiam for the subject, it is complete and as well written as any other bio of an important historical figure. Just because some may feel this individual is "not important" enough to warrant a certain length (which would never be defined anyway) - leave it!Patriot1010 (talk) 07:14, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Too many references
This falls more along the lines of something I might have expected. I stated my rationale for my style of referencing above, but I'll restate it here for simplicity. Wikipedia requires cites for "material that is challenged or likely to be challenged". That's subjective enough to include almost anything, in my opinion. Plus, information gets added, deleted, and moved around all the time. If each sentence has its own cite, the cite usually goes with it. If not, the cite usually gets lost, making it difficult for later readers to verify the sentence. Further, if that sentence later gets challenged, it's difficult for one of the article's primary authors to remember where it came from so it can be cited again. Although concerns about this referencing style do get raised from time-to-time, I have used it on each of the 30 articles I've shepherded through FA review, and each time it has eventually been accepted. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 13:31, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
 * "material that is challenged or likely to be challenged" is the rule and there have been no challenges at all in seven years. That refultes the "likely" business and leads to the degraded confusion of bloat. Rjensen (talk) 13:40, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

 * Comment I think the initial version had too few citations to even reach B class, let alone GA or FA. The second version is better but you could trim down the number of footnotes. Do we need to know that references 79 to 83 are from separate pages of "Libbey in Dear Alben" or could we just have one foot note for the lot saying "Libbey in Dear Alben, pp. 42-46"? Road Wizard (talk) 13:58, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
 * If the consensus is that there are too many footnotes, I would be willing to consolidate the footnotes when an entire paragraph can be cited to a range of pages in the same source. This still makes it relatively easy for interested readers to verify a particular fact from the paragraph, while minimally complicating the issue of making sure the cite information stays with facts that get moved. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:22, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment There are two many footnotes. (I count about 400 references to about 200 footnotes.) For example, the first paragraph of "Early life" has seven.  There is no reason to provide three sources for the first sentence, which is straightforward information about his birth.  Otherwise all the information in the paragraph comes from pp. 1-3 of the same book and therefore requires only one footnote.  TFD (talk) 14:40, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
 * One of those first three was an oversight on my part. There was no need for one reference to page 1 and another to pages 1 and 3 of the same source. I fixed that. But the cite to The Kentucky Encyclopedia is, I believe, the only one that supports Barkley's mother's full name. If you think that isn't likely to be challenged, you haven't run into one of Wikipedia's resident genealogists. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 15:04, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Both seem fine - I read through the article and looked at the references and both seem fine to me. Its not uncommon for some articles of well known people to be this long. As examples look at Theodore Roosevelt and Albert Einstein. Both are close to this length. Its also common for complete articles to have 150 -200 references and sometimes more when they get to GA or FA level. Kumioko (talk) 14:46, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment: I have always said it is better to have a ton of sources than none at all. I see no problems with the amount of sources you have.  Just do make sure they are in the proper format.  Some GA and FA reviews are sticklers about that and always check Checklinks to make sure you have up-to-date sources. -  Neutralhomer  •  Talk  • 12:16, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Pending the result of this discussion, this article is definitely headed for GA and FA. I'm sure I will get reference formatting feedback there. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:14, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
 * No: There is absolutely nothing wrong with citing each sentence. This is pretty common among recently promoted FAs. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:36, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
 * No: There are NOT too many refs and it is not too long. It's 115K, a big chunk is refs, and that's about the size of a well-developed article on a major political figure. 1-3 refs per sentence is not unusual. Nowhere do I see 5 or more per sentence. Pumpkin Sky  talk  20:50, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
 * No: Dido - There are NOT too many refs in anyway - that said there is no need to have 2 refs for one statement looks like a synthesis of many refs for one conclusion (use the best one only). Will need every ref and more for GA and FA review.Moxy (talk) 20:57, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Not especially Note that refs can be catenated to prevent "too many footnote numbers".  That said, it is not necessary to cite every single sentence - if a source supports a full paragraph, that is fine.  And use of popularly written material is fine for a biography like this - not a lot of major academic books have been written about this person. Collect (talk) 12:17, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
 * No. I think, as has been already mentioned, that more are better than less. Sometimes a source might become a dead link, and it's nice to have backup. That being said, my computer-illiterate self wonders, has there ever been an article which has little "folding" gizmos on it? Those little pockets that say hide, or open, or some such thing, if the references take up too much space. That might address the problem? --Leahtwosaints (talk) 11:01, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

excessive reliance on Libbey etc.?
This biography seems to rely to a great extent on a very small group of authors - and, in some cases, may even use language too close to the cites given. I suggest this reliance be substantially reduced. Collect (talk) 16:25, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, Libbey's is the only full-length biography of Barkley that I'm aware of, so it's not surprising that I relied on it to fill in the gaps between major events in his life. I also consulted as many other sources as I could easily get access to. Can you point out places where you find "overreliance" problematic? If so, I can try to see if there are other sources that either corroborate or contest Libbey's assertions. Also, I'll be happy to try and address any specific issues you raise about too close paraphrasing. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 18:01, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
 * In any case, we ought be very careful to avoid plagiarism by slavishly using each point Libbey speculates on. Collect (talk) 18:38, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree about plagiarism, which is why I asked if you could point out problem areas. Sometimes, it's hard to see too-close paraphrasing when you yourself wrote the paraphrase. I don't feel I have "slavishly" used each point Libbey raises. I tried to cull out relatively unimportant details while still giving a complete picture of Barkley's service in each office. I hate writing an article where I say that someone served nine terms in the U.S. House (for instance) and then only being able to supply two sentences to say what they did while they were there. It happens sometimes, if there isn't a lot of documenatation on the person, but that isn't the case here. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 19:49, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Alben W. Barkley. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://berlin.wolf.ox.ac.uk/published_works/singles/bib139a/bib139a.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 06:56, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Pronunciation
Is his surname really pronounced /ˈbɛərkli/ and not /ˈbɑːrkli/? --Potapt (talk) 19:28, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 August 2020
Please add the category Category:People who died in office. 73.110.217.186 (talk) 03:22, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅. ◢  Ganbaruby!   (Say hi!) 09:22, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 September 2020
In the succession box at the bottom, please change the link for United States Senate elections, 1954 to 1954 United States Senate election in Kentucky. 73.110.217.186 (talk) 22:34, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. I can't find the links that you are asking to change. Please provide more context. Thanks.  GreaterPonce665  (TALK) 20:04, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
 * The link is in the following succession box.

 * ✅. ◢  Ganbaruby!   (Say hi!) 03:57, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 June 2022
In the succession boxes at the end of the article, for the first one under the political party offices section, please replace the section with the following so it links to the specific state elections for those years:

2601:241:300:B610:39:E564:87F2:4525 (talk) 02:17, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ — CAPTAIN JTK (talk) 15:17, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Emory University Barkley Forum Debate
Since at least sometime in the 1950s or early 1960s, the debate team at Emory University was renamed and has been known nationally as the Barkley Forum. (I debated for them from 1975-79.)

The Barkley Forum has been one of the preeminent debate teams in the country since the late 1960s, if not before.

It also was the founder of and remains the driving force behind the high school national Urban Debate League and has been a leader in high school debate also since the 1960s. 50.55.175.92 (talk) 20:26, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Alben W. Barkley


text:
Citroën TUB

The Citroën TUB (from the French Traction Utilitaire Basse or Traction Utilitaire type B) was a light van produced by Citroën from 1939 through 1941, derived from the Traction Avant passenger car. In May 1941 an upgraded version, the Citroën TUC replaced the TUB, but by the end of that year the last of these vans had probably been produced.

The TUB is the first commercial vehicle ever equipped with a lateral sliding door.

Origins
Pierre Michelin and Pierre-Jules Boulanger were brought in to take charge of Citroën by Michelin following their acquisition of the bankrupt auto-maker in December 1934. During the Summer of 1936 Boulanger received the results of an extensive investigation of customer requirements that he had commissioned. The exercise had been undertaken in preparation for the development of a van of approximately 800 kg capacity - slightly more than the load that could be accommodated by a simple car-based van. Boulanger accumulated a large dossier of photographs, statistics, sketches and comments. From this he laid down a specification which was simple and demanding. To maximise available load space, the new van must position the driver as far forwards as possible on the chassis. It should be possible to stand up in the vehicle, and the load area should be accessible from the driving seat, without exiting the vehicle. In addition to conventionally positioned doors at the back, the load area of the new van should have a door on the pavement side to facilitate loading and unloading. The decision had already been taken to base the new van on the running gear of the company's recently introduced front-engined front-wheel drive Citroën Traction, making it easier to meet Boulanger's brief because, without an under-floor drive shaft, the floor of the load space could be kept low.

The van
The Citroën product development department had the first prototype running by the Autumn of 1937, and on 12 May 1939 the van was homologated for sale in the French market. Although low floored vans with the driver set well forwards and sliding side-door on the pavement side would have become relatively mainstream 20 years later, in the 1930s the radical new van was quite unlike anything else available.

The van took its 4-cylinder 35 hp engine, initially of 1628 cc, from the company's Traction 7C. In the car the engine sat comfortably just behind the front wheels, but in the van most of the engine's weight, along with the driver's feet, was ahead of the front wheels. The driver's cab was raised sufficiently to allow most of the mechanical elements to be installed beneath it, although the engine itself intruded from the front into the central portion of the cab. The floor of the load area was just 42 cm (16 inches) above ground level, and it was possible for anyone less than 175 cm tall to stand in it without stooping. Access from the driver's seat to the load area behind was excellent, since on the right side of the driver's cab there was normally no second seat fitted. The side door on the pavement side was a sliding door, and in this respect another radical innovation. The sliding door on the right of the load area was fashioned from light-weight low cost materials. On each side of the load area, the upper side portions of the van's sides consisted tarpaulin-material curtains, incorporating small windows of flexible plastic. Again, the emphasis was on simplicity, saving weight and minimising cost. On the left-side, there being here no side door, the curtain ran the full length of the load area and could be rolled up and fixed to the roof edge, revealing a load space in excess of 6 cubic meters. The overall result was a structure which combined extreme practicality with extreme simplicity. The spare wheel and battery were stored in a locker on the left side of the van, accessible from the outside but completely sealed off from the load area. Production of the van's bodywork was entrusted to coach building firm Fernand Genève.

The engine was the 1,628 cc four-cylinder water-cooled unit which by now powered the 7C version of the manufacturer's Traction passenger car, which also provided the van's three-speed manual transmission and front torsion-bar suspension and front-wheel drive drive train. The van's rear suspension came from a simple leaf-spring arrangement. The 1020 kg carrying capacity was a little greater than had initially been envisaged by Boulanger, which presumably led to a firming of the rear suspension settings. The light weight of the van's body, the lack of weight balance resulting from positioning the engine and driver at the extreme front of the vehicle and the rudimentary nature of the rear suspension meant that drivers quickly learned that without the weight of a load in the van, it was prone to tail slide. The hydraulic braking system also came from the Traction, though the drum brakes were the slightly larger ones from the 1911 cc Traction 11 version.

The 1628 cc TUB went on sale on 5 June 1939, less than four weeks after its homologation. It was priced at 36,000 francs at a time when the base versions of the passenger cars from which it was derived were priced slightly above 26,000 francs.

The TUB replaced by the TUC
In September 1939 France declared war on Germany, and on 13 February 1940 a replacement version of the van appeared, described as the 11-T série U. The "11" in the van's name referred to its promotion to the 11CV taxation class which resulted from an increased engine size, now of 1,911 cc. Since the new vehicle was clearly an improved version of the Citroën TUB, respect for alphabetical logic ensured that it quickly became known as the Citroën TUC. The maximum load capacity was unchanged at 1020 kg but there were numerous detailed improvements including the fitting of a second windscreen wiper to match the one on the driver's side of the screen. This may have been the point at which a small protruding ridge appeared beneath the front panel, apparently as a half-hearted acknowledgement that most motor vehicles of this size featured a front bumper. Despite the German invasion in May/June 1940, the TUB continued in production until the Spring of 1941, and the TUC replaced it on the production lines only in May 1941. By now raw materials for civilian product and fuel for civilian transport were rapidly disappearing. Few TUC vans were produced, and production of them ceased in December 1941.

About 100 models were transformed by Fenwick in 1941–1942 to be powered by an electric engine.

Commercial
Probably only about 1,740 of the vans were produced, most of them being the earlier 1628 cc TUB version which may appear a poor return for the effort that Citroën committed to the project. Nevertheless, when normal life began to return after the war Citroën were quick off the mark in 1946 with the Citroën H which was in many ways a slightly larger and less aggressively light-weight version of the TUB. The commercial success of the long-running H van owed much to its 1939 predecessor.

title: Citroën TUB


text:
Right This Way

Right This Way is a Broadway production that opened at the 46th Street Theatre on January 5, 1938, and ran for fifteen performances. It was categorized as an original musical comedy and was set in Paris and Boston. It starred Joe E. Lewis as Spaulding, Leonard Elliott as Bomboski, and Leona Stephens as Lissa.

The interpolated song "I'll Be Seeing You", written by Irving Kahal and Sammy Fain, was featured in the production and has since been recognized as a jazz standard, covered by many musicians.

title: Right This Way