Kirnberger: how to undomoving of work pages

[Damoetas]

Hello,

Unfortunately I moved two work pages which should not be moved (overlooked that the fugues have their own EngK numbers).
This are:
https://imslp.org/wiki/Prelude_in_E_min ... n_Philipp) -> https://imslp.org/wiki/Prelude_and_Fugu ... n_Philipp)
and
https://imslp.org/wiki/Prelude_in_E_min ... n_Philipp) -> https://imslp.org/wiki/Prelude_and_Fugu ... n_Philipp)

I couldn't undo it. Should I simply wait until an admin has deleted the redirects? Or can somebody undo it?
Sorry for the mess.

[Sallen112]

So are the Preludes (and Fugues) themselves separate works then, originally speaking?

[Damoetas]

No, I suppose. Engelhardt numbered in her catalogue of Kirnberger's compositions the single pieces in the chronological order of their first publications. Kirnberger published the preludes initially as single pieces; at a later time he added the fugues to get the standard cycle of prelude and fugue. I couldn't find any publication of the fugues without preludes; apparently they were meant only as part of the cycles. (RISM has some manuscript copies of the fugue EngK 34 without prelude, but I don't know – and I don' know if anybody knows – if this is intended by Kirnberger.) I suppose, Engelhardt gave a separate number to the fugues only because they appear in a later publication and the preludes had already a number. Anyway, the combinations of EngK 16 and 33 / EngK 17 and 34 seem to be the composer's last will, which he published in https://imslp.org/wiki/Diverses_Pi%C3%A ... n_Philipp). (The list of movements on this page contains the mistakes which misled me to moving the work pages of the preludes.)
Following the Engelhardt catalogue, we had four work pages:
https://imslp.org/wiki/Prelude_in_E_min ... n_Philipp)
https://imslp.org/wiki/Fuga_%C3%A0_3_in ... n_Philipp)
https://imslp.org/wiki/Prelude_in_E_min ... n_Philipp)
https://imslp.org/wiki/Fugue_in_E_minor ... n_Philipp).
By now I think we should merge them in this form:
Prelude and Fugue in E minor / Phrygian, EngK 16 / 33
Prelude and Fugue in E minor, EngK 17 / 34
But Kirnberger was a German theorist, thus everything is as complicated as possible. He labelled the fugue EngK 33 "in modo Phrygio", but it has nothing to do with the phrygian mode of Renaissance music, it's simply A minor (!) with half cadence at the end (the first subject being in A minor, the first answer in E minor, the ambitus of the voices being two octaves and more – so all indicators of Renaissance phrygian mode are missed). But my suggestions retains Kirnberger's label, because it would be wrong to say: Prelude and Fugue in E minor (the possible version "in E / A minor" would at least require an explanation. The RISM label "in 3rd tone (Phrygian)" is even more wrong than Kirnberger's label, because it refers to the older difference between 3rd tone (phrygian) and 4th tone (hypophrygian), which can be identified only by means of the ambitus of the tenor voice.). On the other hand, the fugue EngK 34 is labelled "in modo Aeolio" – but it's simply E minor. Here my suggestion overrides Kirnberger's label.