Dear Marc Harwood,
Thank you for your help here. Yes, I am very willing to quote sources that any fair minded person can check for themselves.
May I suggest (just for the sake of fairness and to avoid confusion) that we all agree to use for our discussion (when refering to any particular 'Mozart' work) the references given to it by the Koechel catalogue - i.e. that list of 'Mozart' works which has always been consulted as an authority in such matters. A copy of this list can be found on most Mozart forums online including 'Mozart Forum'. (Ludwig Koechel was the person who first published - many years after Mozart's death - the first edition. The 'Koechel' catalogue has been revised from time to time since then - each time its Editor forced to dump numbers of musical works from the previously published edition as it became obvious they were NOT works composed by Mozart. (This ongoing leakage is unprecedented in scale and cannot be compared to any other composer list except perhaps that of Joseph Haydn). All Mozart researchers use Koechel and it does at least provide a reference number for each and every work under dispute. Perhaps we can agree then to use it for these discussions ?
2. We might begin by examining the supposed works of Mozart's childhood and youth - i.e. dozens of works claimed traditionally as his from this period being, in actual fact, lacking ANY firm evidence of having been composed by W.A. Mozart. But if that would be too tedious we could just as easily begin with Mozart's Requiem, the very last work traditionally attributed to Mozart, KV626, this supposedly commissioned of him during 1791, his last year. I say and so do others (and can provide documentary evidence in support of it ) that this manuscript is not, in fact, a work by Mozart. For example (and it must come as a real embarrasment to traditionalists) the signature and the inscription on this document (although claimed to be 'by me, Mozart' in Latin) is, in point of fact, a forgery.
Is this disputed ?
We might therefore, here on this forum, discuss first the case for and against 'Mozart's Requiem' being a work by Mozart. And let the readers judge the case. We can then move on to the next work. And so on.
We can consider 'Mozart's' symphonies also. Or many of 'his' operas. Once again, I and others are quite happy to present the case that these are NOT by Mozart despite them in many cases being claimed by Mozart himself. Let the Mozart 'expert' make his case for tradition and let the reader judge both arguments for himself/herself. That would surelt be a fair, open, and reasonable approach. Yes ?
So there are dozens of ways this issue can be tackled. None needs to be a personalised attack. And if such rules are respected I think it might be very informative to readers.
I therefore suggest that we begin with 'Mozart's Requiem', although we have touched on it already. But I leave the choice entirely up to you, as readers of this thread.
Yes, if a 'Mozart authority' is following this, let's see what he/she has to say (if anything) and whether they agree these ground rules are really fair.