![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | → | Archive 10 |
Hello, just wanted to clarify some information on Gidon Saks's part in the Mikado. He was part of Brian Macdonald's wonderful performance of the Mikado at the Stratford Shakespeare Festival in 1982-84. Also broadcasted by CBC. See http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0163101/ and there is a wonderful clip on youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0xamGC458g&feature=feedf
Lullan73 (talk) 18:59, 16 August 2011 (UTC) Denise
The File Herr.Heesters is no longer a copyvio, and has received permission from commons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.207.144.173 (talk) 13:54, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for improving Giselher Klebe! Could you perhaps do that also for Andreas Scholl? I am running out of time for writing, concert program finished thanks to your input for the Messiah parts, now it's time for singing, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:25, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi Michael--
Atthis page, and further down in the discussion (it's confusing, because I inappropriately raised two different issues under the same heading), Kleinzach has suggested that you have a "script" recommended for organizing discographies.
I'm not a musician - I'm just trying to catalog a fairly large collection of classical CDs and LPs. It seems that nearly every discography I've been looking at is organized differently, some better, and some pretty dreadful. The present issue arose from the Arthur Rubinstein discography page, which I find especially bad - if you're interested, I had posted a message on that article's talk page quite a while ago, which only yesterday has finally been responded to.
Is there an easy way for you to post what Kleinzach is referring to as your script? And further, since discography pages in general differ so wildly from one to another in their organization and utility, would it not be possible to turn this into a WP recommended format?
One particular issue is the distinction between recording dates and issue (P) dates, which many editors seem either to not understand, or to ignore. One suggestion bandied about recently is to provide two separate columns, which if nothing else, may at least bring the distinction to a new editor's attention. Of course many recordings don't provide recording dates, but they ought to be shown whenever they are specified. I've run across things recorded in the mid-20th C, dated as their reissue date in the past 10 years.
Any help will be greatly appreciated. Milkunderwood (talk) 07:08, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi Kleinzach-- No, I don't have a model at all. My general experience has been that nearly every discography I've looked at so far is organized entirely differently from all others. I'm especially dissatisfied with the Rubinstein discography, but this has much more to do with what information is provided, or rather, not provided, than with how columns are arranged. I do think it would be very useful for WP to provide a model discography layout, though, so they aren't so disorganized and "homemade" looking. And I think, as was mentioned, that the model should provide columns for both recording date, when known, and separately for (P) date. In addition to the obvious places for other personnel, I would include recording venue if known, and for publisher (original and reprint). Does this make sense to either of you? Milkunderwood (talk) 23:26, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
For that matter, it would also be useful to similarly have a standardized format for List of Compositions - if there isn't one already. And a suggestion that links/notices of such lists of compositions be placed in a findable place in a composer's article. Sometimes they're at the top, sometimes at a section on Music, and sometimes neither. Milkunderwood (talk) 23:37, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
Here's part of a note that I had left fairly long ago at the Discussion tab to the Rubinstein discography:
2) About dates and other info: RCA released Rubinstein recordings multiple times under different catalog entries, and I personally don't see any point at all in providing the supposed release dates of the Collection, whether it's 1999 or 2000.
What anyone would want to know is the recording date, not the re-re-rerelease date of any specific reissue. And the actual recording dates (including month and date if ascertainable) of each separate performance, rather than a date spread for everything that's on any given disc.
Also the actual names of the individual performers in for instance the piano quartets, rather than just saying "members of the Guarneri Quartet". And, where ascertainable, the recording venue - what recording studio or concert hall? - or at least what city? If you look at a disc's liner notes much or all of this information will usually be provided.
For instance, the Brahms G minor quartet No. 1, Op. 25, and the C minor quartet No. 3, Op. 60, were together recorded "December 27-30, 1967" with no more specificity of date provided on RCA Victor Gold Seal 5677-2-RG, (c) & (P)1988, nor is the venue specified, but these notes do tell you that John Dalley was the violinist on #1, while Arnold Steinhardt was violinist on #3.
Collection Vol 74 tells you that the Brahms A major quartet No. 2, Op. 26, was recorded on December 27, 1967, with Steinhardt on violin, in Webster Hall, New York City. Together with the Brahms on Vol 74 is the Faure C minor quartet No. 1, Op. 15, which was recorded December 28, 1970, with Dalley on violin, in RCA Studio A, New York City. Now obviously you can guess that the Op. 25 and Op. 60 were also recorded in Webster Hall, but you have no authority for making such an assertion, and so should not.
This is the kind of important information people would want; the (c) or (P) date is pretty irrelevant unless you're preparing a discography for RCA rather than for Rubinstein.
Milkunderwood (talk) 23:56, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
OK, you might like to work on a standard format for classical discographies. You could look at Category:Opera discographies which are more developed than the CM ones, and perhaps talk to User:Viva-Verdi who has been working on them. There is also a guideline: here. --Kleinzach 02:04, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
Kleinzach, I agree they're a nuisance, but for these factors:
(Sony is bad about a lot of things, including this howler - I have two CDs and an LP here of the 1963 performance of Brahms B-b Op 67 by the Budapest String Quartet:
Milkunderwood (talk) 06:54, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi Michael-- Hope you don't mind Kleinzach and me conversing on your page. :-) Milkunderwood (talk) 02:36, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
Hey Michael B - thanks for trimming, article+refs reads much better now! ---Shirt58 (talk) 13:54, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi Michael -
I see your post in the discussion there, where you mention "minor works of major composers". I've separately posted Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical music#Wikipedia talk:Notability (music), noting that (until you had joined the conversation) everything seemed to be about "popular" as opposed to "classical" music.
Perhaps you might want to look at the Classical music discussions, including the quote from DavidRF's earlier post at a now-deleted discussion of Hilary Hahn's recording of four miscellaneous Mozart pieces. I'd be interested in any comments you might feel like posting. I didn't post at the Notability discussion, but would have agreed with the OP. Milkunderwood (talk) 03:42, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
Fair enough. Maybe. No. I think I understand your point, but you're not making the crucial distinction, at least not here, between an article on a specific recording of classical music, as opposed to an article on a specific composition such as Hallelujah Junction, and as opposed to a discography of Hahn or of Mozart, etc. Certainly Hahn should have a discography, as she does; certainly Hallelujah Junction as a piece of music should have an article, as it does; and that article does contain its own discography, as it should. The point is whether or not those separate recordings listed in the discography section of the article should also have their own articles. No, they should not, except to the extent that a specific recording may be not only "notable" but also have an interesting and informative discussion of how that recording stands out from the others.
Looked at this way, we're nowhere near a slippery slope. Not only are pop and classical music entirely different kinds of animals in the distinction between their originality of composition, interpretation, and performance, but the difference between being listed or mentioned in an article, as opposed to having its own article, is far greater still, and leaves no room for confusion. Things like the Hallelujah Junction article will come up for deletion from time to time, but they will in any case. If you haven't yet looked over at that classical music post, I wish you would, and read the full quote from DavidRF. You might want to post your reasoning over there also, to get that conversation going.
Here's the way I would classify it, always assuming "notability" in each category:
Milkunderwood (talk) 11:06, 1 October 2011 (UTC) (edited Milkunderwood (talk) 05:13, 3 October 2011 (UTC))
Sorry to have irritated you (or anyone for that matter) - point taken. The bulk of my edits to Don Carlos were, in fact, removal of extraneous spaces, which is why they do not appear to show when comparing versions. I know that a good typist always puts two spaces between sentences, but Wikipedia can only interpret this as one space; so the extra space that would be needed on a typewritten or non-fully justified word-processed document is not needed. By my maths, I must have removed something like 49 of them. Emeraude (talk) 14:18, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello. Just edited a 2+ yr. old edit of yours @ Joan Sutherland. You linked her performance in the 1995 movie to Rudd's article, when an article on the movie itself exists. I changed the link to the movie itself. I'm curious as to why it was done to link to the author in the first place. Thanks for any reply. Tapered (talk) 19:02, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for your improvements! A new user would like a native speaker to have a look at Pillnitz Castle, could you do that? It's beautiful! (I wonder if it should be named palace instead of castle, but its website doesn't.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:53, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
I noticed you removed Julie Andrews and Sergio Franchi's duet from Wiki this page, that I posted in the "In Modern Times" section. I am not sure I agree with you for several reasons. While it is unusual for what is a traditional soprano aria to be sung as a duet, there is nothing in the lyrics to limit this non-traditional performance. But, it is certainly a "Modern" treatment. Also, Julie Andrews' show was a critical succes, although it wasn't renewed for a second year. But having these famous singers perform the aria on national television was notable. I personally think it may have been bad taste for Julie Andrews to involve a guest in a "soprano" duet, but it is a matter of history that it happened. The other matter for notability is the fact that it a "very rare" video of a Sergio Franchi Franchi performance! In spite of his tremendous exposure on National TV, unlike many other stars, only 2 or 3 videos are available to the general public. One source is an Ed Sullivan video capturing 12 songs performed. The rest are 2 or 3 videos available on YouTube.. of which this performance is one. That's my take. Interested in your response. CatherineCathlec (talk) 14:30, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
I'm new to Wikipedia, so not sure why my Talk subject not showing up correctly. Catherine againCathlec (talk) 14:34, 15 October 2011 (UTC) Got it! Had a leading space. CatherineCathlec (talk) 14:35, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply, Michael. Are you aware that Sergio Franchi was an opera singer in South Africa and he made an Italian debut in Tosca before switchin to pop music to support his young family (wife and 2 children returning to Italy)? After I complete all the work associated with his discography, I will be doing a major revision to the stub article on his Wiki page. So, Franchi was an operatic performer in his early career. I agree that the "Vesti la giubba" article has a lot of trash, but then American Popular culture tends to "trash" a lot of subjects. Another point, why do you not consider Franchi's recording of "Vesti la giubba" a song? It has a page, like a song. Is "song" differentiated from "aria.?" Also, if a performance is captured for video does it not become a "song," and a "recording?" Interested in your responses. Thanks, CatherineCathlec (talk) 20:08, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
I lookes at all your remarks and references on your removal of "E lucevan.." from Sergio Franchi songs. Clearly you object to Sergio Franchi's recordings from opera. You have me a disadvantage temporarily because I am new to Wiki Politics, classifications, contributions, articles, etc. Of course Franchi's popularity in America eclipsed his earlier operatic career, but he did appear in an Italian opera production of Tosca. As far as the song "O Sole Mio" is concerned, Sergio may have been eclipsed in later years by the younger Pavarotti and Domingo, but his album recording of "O Sole Mio" was considered a hit because it was on a Billboard Hit as number seventeen in his American debut album. There are still people who believe that Franchi's recordings of many Italian and Neoploitan songs are up there near the top.
As to all of the other categories referred to in your lists... Italian-Language songs, subcategories Arias by Puccini, ets; Italian Songs; Neapolitan songs; Italian folk songs, tec..... all of these "Categories" are Hopelessly Inadequate for the ammount of material that they should contain! Only ELEVEN songs in the category Neapolitan Songs???? Well, at least some start has been made, because it was not until Modugno (Volare a "one-hit wonder"???) and Rascel began to record and write songs that had an impact upon America, that English-language natives of America began to notice Italian song, and songs in the Italian language. Catherine18:42, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
Voceditenore: Left a reply for you on your talk page. I have completed the Sergio Franchi Discography, and it is on the waiting for review list. CatherineCathlec (talk) 15:55, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Michael: I am not sure why an editor would object to adding Sergio Franchi's recordings to the Song Wiki pages? That seems to be past practice. Tell me more. Thanks, CatherineCathlec (talk) 15:55, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Michael, by Sonk Wiki I mean Wikipedia pages on songs, by name. I have re-read the guidelines for Songs, and have come to the conclusion that you are completely right regarding Franchi's recordings. In fact, of the more than 100 song pages I have visited, there are far too many recordings listed, and I have added to the problem. I intend to undo and remove Franchi from the category on most of the song pages. Sergio Franchi clearly belongs on some of the pages due to his songs on hit albums. As I explained to someone else (Voceditenore), I started this misguided prctice because I was trying to use internal references in existing songs pages. However, this internal referencing did not need to go into adding his name to the Song page. I have already listed all of Franchi songs on his Discography (awaiting approval), and therfor his Main page looses nothing by removing his name from the categories on the "song wikis." Thanks for following me on this. Next time I will not be so "Bold" (as encoursged to new editors), and so slow to see the point. Again, sorry it took me so long to "get it." Regards, CatherineCathlec (talk) 00:39, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
I liked this very much. Which tools are you using, if any? --John (talk) 07:52, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
InBWV 169, the title line appears many times, how can I call that? Motto (Dürr: "... gleichsam als Motto zitierten Zeilen ...", "Inbegriff des gesamten Kantatentextes") is not quite it, looking at both article and dab, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:12, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
hello Michael, could you take a look at Loreto Vittori, and Carlo Ambrogio Lonati. Nobody discovered these new lemmas.Taksen (talk) 11:24, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello Michael, as your English seems better than mine, and you are interested in the same topics, could you take a look at Oper am Gänsemarkt too?Taksen (talk) 07:25, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
Just a note to say I've removed my name as maintainer of List of opera genres. Given the time wastage/aggro etc. I don't think I'll continue to work on this kind of material. (Specialized knowledge is a liability around here!) Thanks again for your help. --Kleinzach 04:26, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
Good question, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:46, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
Next biggy. I started by removing that Brahms and Schumann planned the same title "A German Requiem". I doubt that. It may be known under that title in English, but it was certainly not given by B and Sch. In de I read that Brahms compiled the text well before his mother died, - just one more item (of many) I would like to change, but how? Help? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:35, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
Hi Michael. Gerda Arendt referred me to you. I have been working on the article Grünes Gewölbe for quite some time and did all the editing during the last couple of days. Now I am finished but I would like that an English native speaker goes through it. Could you help me with this? (You might find it interesting to learn about a cherry stone with 113 faces carved on it, etc.) It was so much work -- now I would like to see it getting 'polished' by correcting any English mistakes I did. Your help would be really appreciated! (BTW, the names of the rooms and the objects are from the museum guide -- help is more needed with the general statements, object descriptions, etc.) Thank you very much! --Linear77 (talk) 17:16, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
I am looking for terms such as Trägerschaft, Studiengang, Hochbegabtenförderung for Musikhochschule Hannover, also think that highly gifted should link to something broader than Intellectual giftedness - not a great construct anyway, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:48, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
Greetings, Michael. I noticed you went to the trouble to add spaces after the name params, e.g., <ref name=xxx /> in place of <ref name=xxx/> (inParis Opera). Is this important? (Either syntax seems to work OK with my Safari browser.) The name param is shown without the following space here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources#Repeated_citations. If this is important, perhaps we should change it in the linked guideline. Thanks for info. --Robert.Allen (talk) 09:32, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
<br />
. The link you mention further links to WP:NAMEDREFS where the correct form is shown; I'm going to correct Wikipedia:Citing sources#Repeated citations shortly. XHTML has some bearing on the way Wikipedia code is converted to the HTML code which a browser sees. Thanks for fixing the error I introduced in the "List of venues" table at Paris Opera. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 10:24, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
Your improvement of the Brahms Requiem table (no taken to German also) made me ask if you might perhaps improve the appearance of the translations in Es ist ein Ros entsprungen. I also placed a question about the translation on the talk. For Christmas we will sing Sandström one, 12 parts, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:49, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
Fritz Grasshoff was started by someone who copied the complete works from German. Once they are there, I don't like to remove them. The playful artist of words (Graßhoff) created some lines which seem to defy translation, such as Halunkenpostille, Graßhoffs unverblümtes Lieder- und Lästerbuch, Bilderreiches Haupt- und (G)liederbuch ... - but are less fun untranslated. He himself sometimes wrote Grasshoff, especially as a painter, so I don't mind the page move too much. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:50, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
You managed to violate both Be careful with edit summaries and Avoiding personal attacks with the same 7 keystrokes -- which isn't what makes your tag removal wrong. But the {{copyvio}}-placed comment "Please do not remove or change this Copyvio message until the issue is settled" should have should have alerted you, if insight into what appears to have been your state of mind did not, that the removal involved was unlikely to be constructive. In fact, Wikipedia:Copyright_problems#Responding_to_articles_listed_for_copyright_investigation says
and i can see that you are no admin (and i'm sceptical in the extreme that you hold either of the other two relevant statuses).
I have on more general principles demanded restoration of the tags at the article's talk page, and intend to comment at the process page in due time. I trust that this time you'll cooperate with the due process.
--Jerzy•t 06:37, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
A lot of storytelling was added to Andris Nelsons, what do you think? (I reverted Hildegard of Bingen already today, could you perhaps take her on your watchlist?) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:01, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
Like in other article on remarkably old people, does not Heesters long life by itself merit a section of it's own, like this. Especially considering his smoking and drinking habits, it is pretty interesting and not unseen in other articles. Sturmi (talk) 06:08, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
Kent Tritle moved in N.Y. from Loyola to St John the Divine. A new user added resume-like prose, I reverted. Looking closer, the whole article is like that, and there is a remark on the talk page that it even might be right?? Too high for me. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:58, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
Thank you very much Mr.Bednarek for your improvements at the article on August Sander. May I ask you if you have the time to help me to get the necessary license for the file.jpg http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:August_Sander,_self-portrait.jpg in a way that the picture can be shown on the August Sander article? Although reading through the corresponding help sections, I'm stuck. Following link shows the copyright holder and I don't see how the second last sentence in their Reproduktionsbestimmungen could be handled http://www.blossfeldt.info/wDeutsch/kontakt/anfrage_bild.php?navid=26 (The linked Susanne Lange is a mistaken identity and not the author Susanne Lange who published on August Sander) [[Phoebe krusenstern (talk) 15:02, 1 December 2011 (UTC)]]
Michael, I don't understand why you have twice removed my edits on the page Islamey, the first standing from early August until your edit of a few days ago. The information which is there now is simply wrong - which is why I edited it in the first place. Indeed it contradicts the page that it links to on Ossias. My edit was:
This is a piece of music I play often. Yes, I do mean on the piano, not on a CD player. I know it well, and I know when a passage is easier or more difficult than another. I have referenced examples with bar numbers in support. And the Wikipedia page on the ossia agrees with me. It is wrong to promulgate such false information on the ossias in Islamey when the evidence to the contrary is clearly put before you.
If it is simply my style of writing that you don't like, then of course you could change that. And of course you are welcome to do so, if you think you can improve on it.
I await your reply before re-inserting my edit.
Cerddferch (talk) 21:57, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
Before introducing such a thing as Christmas cantata, I started in German, Weihnachtskantate, please check, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:55, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
Back to the cantata: One of my critics - who didn't read carefully - improved the de MP to FA, incipits, coloured table, - funny timing but better than Weihnachtskitsch. I found several cantatas and don't know how to include this The Animals' Christmas, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:19, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi, i wanted to tell you that we generally tag some decent article with the FA tag in order to get some options for the article section of the main page, however we on't mark it as a FA till it has got a good size and is well referred. If you have any other doubt then feel free to ask me on my talk page here. Regards, ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 13:52, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
I just blocked this user for this edit. I'm the author of the Josquin article and current on the recent scholarship -- now I'm sure this person is making this stuff up. Let me know what you think; it's been an odd case. Antandrus (talk) 01:42, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
Do you happen to know which church in Halle is the one where Handel had a job for a while. Articles of his teacher and his differ, and I don't see a former Dom turned "reformed" anyway, Lutheran maybe. I happened to be on the Weihnachtsmarkt in Halle, eating a roll and drinking Glühwein under Handel's statue today, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:20, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
The author of Grotrian-Steinweg asked me to get the pics from the German article to the commons. I would like to know how, but only next year. Could you help there sooner? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:42, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
...and a very Happy New Year, Michael! Thanks so much for all your work at the Opera Project. All the best, Voceditenore (talk) 10:09, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
An article that you have been involved in editing, Olga Alava, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Cloudz679 20:28, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
Would you like to participate in the new round of the nickname sonata, Beethoven #14? (See my talk, or Milkunderwood, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:22, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
You already quoted the dedication from Henle, which starts with "SONATA QUASI UNA FANTASIA" and continues in German. Ricordi, 3rd ed. 1919, has:
SONATA QUASI UNA FANTASIA |
Comparing search results for the German and the Italian text leads me to believe that Beethoven wrote the Italian version on the title page. If he didn't write that, it was at least first printed that way, no doubt with his approval. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 11:55, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
The source you listed (http://saints.sqpn.com/saintn44.htm) does not give any backing for its claim that this man lived to be 116 (which would make him the oldest man of all time, by the way). An extraordinary claim like this needs extraordinary evidence, and this does not suffice. Mr. Anon515 05:02, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
No music this time, Anna and Bernhard Blume covers two people (one living, to make it more complicated), now someone moved cats to the redirects of the single names. It seems strange to me to have a redirect with personal categories, but I'm still learning. What do you think? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:11, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing what I missed! I left the positioning of the colour explanation where I found it. Yours makes more sense. I can't ask the author about his intentions, not wanted on his user page (I placed our organinhis list, considered Lokalpatriotismus - too bad the instrument is not old). You will remember the discussion about Weihnachtskantate. New year's resolution: translate his MP list also, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:09, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your attention! This was just started yesterday and will grow to comfortably have 3 pics. "Theater" is closer to the German than "theatre",『Hänsel und Gretel』is pictured that way and was certainly sung in German, why confuse? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:01, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Hello. Thank you for providing a rating. I saw your "...or should that be stub?" query in the edit summary. Personally, I couldn't say. In the next couple of days, I hope to try to help get the page into a state presentable enough to make a DYK submission. Regards, MistyMorn (talk) 12:20, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Actually, I didn't write anything about your intentions, but you seem to have made an assumption about mine. Sorry for talking. Hyacinth (talk) 22:31, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing out WP:NAMB, I don't know how I haven't run across it yet but I didn't even knew that there was a specific policy for hat tips. I also took the liberty of removing the hat tip from Thus Spoke ZarathustratoAlso sprach Zarathustra (Strauss) to make it reciprocal, if one shouldn't hat tip to the other than the other shouldn't either. Cat-five - talk 14:24, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
eyes and brain | |
Thank you for your keeping watch on "my" articles - List of Bach cantatas, Christmas cantata ... - with your wonderful tools, eyes and brain. I was reminded yesterday of the very first discussion I had on Wikipedia, you asking: is Graham Waterhouse a classical German cellist? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:14, 10 February 2012 (UTC) |
Thanks for catching the extra revert I did on the Cello Suites page, which accidentally put "tromboney" back in, after I'd already taken it out! When someone makes a bunch of back and forth edits as the anon editor did, it's easy to lose track. I do wish people would find something better to do with their time (and ours). Cheers.--TEHodson 10:27, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi Michael, Many editors prefer the hyphenated form of the ISBNs, but they do not show up as targets when searching for pages citing particular ISBNs when using the unhyphenated form as the search string. I have been unable to persuade other editors that the unhyphenated form might be preferable. Do you know of a way to add the unhyphenated form to pages so it will be found by search engines, but not be visible to readers? Then in my view it would not matter as much, if we use the hyphens.
I tried adding an anchor with the unhyphenated form (see User:Robert.Allen/Busoni revamp), but a Google site search did not find it. My results searching with the hyphenated form in the Google site search worked to find the displayed hyphenated target, but with the unhyphenated string it did not find the hidden one. Using the Wikipedia Help search box, I was able to find both, and the hyphenated form seemed to work better in quotes, ie, it did not pick up irrelevant results.
Some sample searches:
I would like for it also to work with Google, Yahoo, etc. --Robert.Allen (talk) 00:53, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
Many thanks for your typo-spotting in my recent Georg Solti discography confection. I was delighted to notice this morning that we had both overlooked "A Midsummer Bight's Dream" (which I have now rather reluctantly amended). Tim riley (talk) 13:20, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
Others fast at this time, I turn to the St Matthew Passion structure (no better name found yet), a table from de is in my user. Before going further I would like some general ideas. I think that we don't need a link to every Bible verse, because it's consecutive. If we don't place the table within the main article we should link the other authors, though. What do you think? Other comments welcome! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:37, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Please look at the table again, I inserted a 3rd column for everything Gospel (but #1), what do you think? I wanted to respond to the no-colour request for the very personal reason, but left them, solved that differently. He retired with serenity, didn't have to be blocked on top. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:13, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
Nelsone appeared a third time. I wonder if it's something Latvinian, like ...dottir? I ordered tickets for his Mahler II at the Rheingau Musik Festival. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:40, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
Latvian grammar has a difference between male and female names. The male names mostly ends with s or is, female names with e or a. In this case it is Nelsone. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latvian_declension — Preceding unsigned comment added by 21.trolejbuss (talk • contribs) 14:46, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the edits - much appreciated. I must admit I hadn't read the WP:DASH guidance, and the curled quotes were due to editing drafts in MS-Word. Sorry about that. pgbrown (talk) 15:47, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for adding ru. I am travelling, or I might try to find a bit more on him in the sources Yoninah added (article and talk). How about you? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:50, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
Please see my comments on the talk page of this article. Thanks. Jonyungk (talk) 02:19, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
Thank you ! :) I went on a massive de-pufferizing operation for this little beauty the other day. People never cease to amaze me. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 12:19, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to The Windmills of Your Mind, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. ÐℬigXЯaɣ 13:28, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
Sorted out my citation error! Thanks YellowFratello (talk) 17:24, 19 March 2012 (UTC) |
Hi Michael, I am finally getting around to writing a draft proposal with some of the ideas we discussed earlier (see User:Robert.Allen/Draft). I would appreciate your feedback and/or contributions (from any editor, for that matter). Please feel free to modify the proposal or leave comments on the talk page. (I'm especially concerned about errors or misunderstandings I may have.) --Robert.Allen (talk) 22:21, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi - You recently added and restored the Peacock tag to the article about Andre Heller. The other two tags I can understand, but could I ask what, specifically, prompted you to tag it with peacock?
For context, let me say that I am not disagreeing with the inclusion of the tag, I just wanted some clarification. The primary contributor to the article (User:Jtamsin) is still quite new to Wikipedia and was a little confused by it, so he came to me for help (I'm the one who welcomed him to WP originally). I explained the refimprove and the linkrot tags to him, but I haven't been able to explain the promotion tag completely because I don't have all of the context. (I also addressed his continual reverts - he had never been introduced to the policy at WP:WAR.) I'm still waiting for a response from him, so I don't know how he has taken my advice to him, but I'd like to be able to answer his questions as well as possible. Sleddog116 (talk) 19:04, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Hello Michael and Sleddog116, Thanks for the feedback. I just want to say that I am a "she" not a "he" :-) I read the discussion. You didn`t scare me off, I just had to wait for the go ahead to continue editing and I also have other work. Unfortunately though, I do not have access to him directly and so I have no other way of accessing except using google, which as you said, is not very helpful. Yes, I am new to wikipedia and so I wasn`t to know that a translation from the German version was not enough or verifiable or that there were two different editorial policies--as I now know. The German one seems fine with using promotional language which is where I translated it from. Just a question: do you think I should stop editing now as it seems that I do not have any more references except from Google? I do not have any other access except to google and so I do not think I can contribute really further and probably needs someone who knows more about him? This would help me a great deal. I will continue rewriting and it would be great Michael if you can point out exactly which URL`s I need to change and which phrases need a citation. I really want to be able to finish this and not have a tag at the top. Just another question. How much longer do think it needs for me to for get it up to your standard? Or is it really someone else who has more knowledge of him, not just from wiki articles and google would be needed here. Your replay are appreciated. By the way, it`s not that I was intimidated, I was just wanted to know exactly what and where it needed improving. The above phrases put in bullet points help a great deal, I can now change this (they were not what I would have put, I took them from the German. Now I need more of these points so that I can see exactly what:which parts, words, links etc needs to be improved and how. Thanks. from a "she" :-) (Jtamsin (talk) 18:24, 25 March 2012 (UTC))
Hi Michael, I have changed the wording of the points you mentioned and given additional citation. Are all the peacock tags still relevant? even the one about the wording sounding like it is promoting. Bare URLs I cleaned up the links see the Notes section, so that they are no longer ‘bare url`s’ and have information of where the links are from including the date retrieved and author (When it can be found, in some cases these details are not available) Promotional Wording, I also re-wrote the wording (see below) and so it is less “promotional” (I took the originally wording directly from the German, so the German version is promoting as well-but the editors in German do not seem to mind this, nor do they pick up on the lack of citations or bare urls which is evident in the German version) Inline Citations, I included more inline citations by doing research on google, but as it was said google isn`t particularly helpful and more rigorous sources are perhaps needed--which I don`t have access to. If this is the case can you point out what more needs to be done. Otherwise I wouldn`t know where to start. (Jtamsin (talk) 13:00, 26 March 2012 (UTC))
The Music Barnstar | ||
For your valuable and tireless contributions to music-related articles. I came across your contributions when helping another editor at Andre Heller, and said contributions do indeed merit this award! Cheers. Sleddog116 (talk) 03:08, 23 March 2012 (UTC) |
Hi Michael, I just wanted to let you know that I went ahead and submitted a proposal at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Proposal to improve Wikipedia's ISBN Magic. Thanks for your help on this. --Robert.Allen (talk) 19:25, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the tidy up of the Simone Young discography etc. --Design (talk) 13:16, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi! Why did you remove the infobox from the article about the french opera singer? --Georgedes (talk) 13:48, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Oh dear, we've run into this problem again... I had Eggerth under List of centenarians (actors, filmmakers and entertainers), because "entertainer" can encompass both singing and acting, whereas I didn't feel that "musicians, composers and music patrons" did due justice to her acting career. But I'm flexible as always. Thoughts? Canadian Paul 15:23, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for looking over the pages edited/created yesterday, really appreciate the help. I apologize for some errors in the pages as, I am new to editing wiki articles, thus still learning the process. Thanks again.--ZSNES (talk) 18:56, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
re: [7]
The talk page comments are evidence that the content in the article is being placed there to lead the reader to come to a conclusion that is not in the sources. I ask you to revert yourself. -- The Red Pen of Doom 14:10, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
100px | Invitation to diacritics guideline discussion at WT:BLP |
Hi, you were one of 100+ Users who has commented on a living person Requested Move featuring diacritics (e.g. the é in Beyoncé Knowles) in the last 30 days. Following closure of Talk:Stephane Huet RM, a tightening of BLP guidelines is proposed. Your contribution is invited to WT:BLP to discuss drafting a proposal for tightening BLP accuracy guidelines for names. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:04, 20 April 2012 (UTC) |
Feel free to duplicate this invite on the pages of others who have commented, for or against. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:08, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
I just started Vier ernste Gesänge, feel free to add to history, translation ... and start music and recordings. I plan a structure table, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:06, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
Michael, I know that. I also know that WP:copy requires us to give credit, and I want to do that. IMHO, I don't think the edit history and even the talk page is good enough. Given the wholesale use of their verbiage, I think it should be acknowledged somewhere in the article itself. Just the way it is done when public domain documents are used. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 12:11, 23 April 2012 (UTC)