the default meaning of 'composition' seems to be 'composition of music', them WP:RM is thataway where you can argue the case for making a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT or even a WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. But the existing consensus is that musical composition is not the primary topic for "composition".
Note that I have not included some subcats of Category:Musical compositions where the "musical" context is arguably inferred from the name, e.g. Category:Compositions by instrumentation+subcat, Category:Compositions by key+subcats, Category:Classical compositions + subcats.
Category:Compositions by Johann Sebastian Bach is currently sanctioned as an example of how it should be done at the WP:NCM guidance.
A stand-alone list of a composer's compositions is titled "List of compositions by <composer name>".I can see nothing in Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and navigation templates that suggests we should use different conventions for naming categories as we do for any other Wikipedia page. The arguments that categories such as Category:Compositions by Michel van der Aa should be disambiguated by the prefix "Musical" is much weaker when we examine where the reader might actually encounter the category: either in a parent category such as Category:Compositions by composer, where there is no doubt that they are looking at musical compositions; or at the foot of an article such as One (opera), where again the reader is no doubt about the topic they are looking at. We should not be attempting to make exception to our MoS without very good reason, and I don't believe the supportors – especially those relying entirely on WP:C2D, which only concerns topic categories, not the set categories under discussion here – give good enough reasons to make an exception. --RexxS (talk) 16:24, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
"This criterion may also be used to rename a set category in the same circumstances, where the set is defined by a renamed topic"(my emphasis). That means that if we renamed the article Michael Nyman to Michael L Nyman, we would use C2D to speedy rename Category:Compositions by Michael Nyman to Category:Compositions by Michael L Nyman (i.e. to match the eponymous article). That's all C2D can be used for. In the proposed renamings, there are not 1,342 composers or years (or whatever defining item) that have been renamed, so C2D simply does not apply.
Use "(instrumental)" or "(composition)" for instrumentals and non-lyrical musical compositions (excepting classical music).Note not Use "(instrumental)" or "(musical composition)".
If two or more musical compositions share the same title, and disambiguation is necessary:- necessary in that case to distinguish between two different kinds of composition that may share the same title.
If two or more musical compositions share their title but they are not of the same type, simple disambiguation may still be used,- as preceding.
Collaborative songs—those in which two (or more) performers release a musical composition together ...- necessary in that case to distinguish between cases where collaboration could exist in other kinds of composition.
Only descriptive titles (including category names) would usually give the full name for any composer after "by" (List of compositions by Johann Sebastian Bach, Category:Compositions by Johann Sebastian Bach).
"Nowhere in NCM is there any explicit guidance to use "compositions" instead of "musical compositions"turns out be false. That page is part of the manual of style, which enjoys project-wide consensus, and it will take more than a local consensus here to overturn it. I'm sorry, but that makes this is an invalid proposal. CfD doesn't have the authority to overturn MoS. --RexxS (talk) 17:34, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
personal preference, as if it's something I made up. As you will know from the nomination (which I assume you actually read), I have proposed it because it is the unambiguous term, per the dab page composition.
Only when period, style, way of naming compositions etc can be confusing the added first name can give additional clarity, e.g. Requiem (Michael Haydn). A particular example of this is Johann Sebastian Bach and his many composing namesakes. Conventionally J. S. Bach's compositions would be the primary topic in any genre, i.e. without disambiguating term (Brandenburg Concertos) if not needed, and disambiguated or serialized by BWV number (Passacaglia and Fugue in C minor, BWV 582) or (Bach) parenthetical disambiguating term (Orchestral suites (Bach)). Only descriptive titles (including category names) would usually give the full name for any composer after "by" (List of compositions by Johann Sebastian Bach, Category:Compositions by Johann Sebastian Bach). For the other Bachs, if parenthetical disambiguation by name of the composer is needed: add the initials (with periods and spaces) in the parenthesis:
change the guidance in NCM, because NCM does not offer guidance on this point.
Musical composition, music composition, or simply composition, [..]. --AFBorchert (talk) 09:54, 27 March 2020 (UTC)