![]() | This page 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. |
Hello, Marc Shepherd/Archive 1, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Newcomers help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}}
on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Kukini 15:27, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
Responded on my Talk page. Hope that clears up my reasons for the revert. Hope this won't start an edit war. :) --Quuxplusone 04:54, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your message, Marc and welcome to the Opera project.
G&S are probably closer to Offenbach's operetta than anything else, but I think they belong in a category by themselves. I'd prefer to see them referred to as Savoy Opera - or 'Savoy operettas' as per David Russell Hulme in Grove.
The article on comic opera begins by saying "Comic opera, or light opera, is a genre of opera". This is misleading. 'Comic opera' is not really a genre. It's just a description like 'tragic opera', 'short opera' or indeed 'boring opera'.
The article lists a number of different genres that appeared in different countries at different times (opera buffa, Singspiel etc.). These are useful and 'Savoy opera' can go alongside them.
Actually there are a lot of problems with Wiki opera genres which we will have to deal with at some point. Best - Kleinzach 00:48, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
Marc, Thanks for your reply and kind words.
"Comic opera" equals comedy in opera. It includes everything from Meistersinger and Falstaff to G&S - works that don't belong together in a single category. Opera is highly stylized. Rules created by major works are then followed by lesser ones, thereby creating traditions or genres. These are usually local/national, so we create problems if we translate opera buffaoropéra-comique etc. into English.
In order not to re-invent the wheel, the Opera Project follows the New Grove Dictionary of Opera. All the main contributors for the project use this source to ensure accuracy, correct style and terminology etc. I strongly recomend using it. Kleinzach 11:53, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
I've noticed that you changed the colors in the station infoboxes in various station articles, describing the change as "standard bgcolor". Please refer to User:Flamurai/NYCS colors for the proper line colors. Thank you. Pacific Coast Highway (blah • lol, internet) 21:50, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
Another thing: In subway articles, the break between the External links section and the template call for the navbox should be <br style="clear: right;" />
. This is because of a difference in the way Apple's Safari browser renders the pages; without this, the navbox might not be centered if the article is too short; instead, it will be centered between the left margin and the infobox, not centered over the whole article width. The other break (before the stub tag) can remain simply <br />
. Thanks. --Larry V (talk | contribs) 20:03, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
I see that you've been doing quite a bit of work on articles regarding the New York City Subway, and many thanks to you for your contributions. I must take issue with you on a few minor points.
{{NYCS ref|http://www.nycsubway.org/perl/stations?217:1753|IND Fulton|Kingston Throop Aves.}}
. Not "IND Fulton Street Line," but "IND Fulton."Again, thanks a lot for everything! Feel free to add your name to the list at Wikipedia:WikiProject New York City Subway. --Larry V (talk | contribs) 03:20, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
The same could be said for all of the Japanese and UK station articles. Yes, eventually they should all be tagged as such. I got that one on the list because it showed up on the unwatched pages list (requires admin permissions) the last time I checked it. I've tagged the appropriate articles from my watchlist and I intend to tag all rail transport related articles as such; I just haven't gotten to that step yet. I'm tagging articles as I see them. If you could tag articles as well, it would help greatly in the Wikipedia:WikiProject Trains/Assessment efforts to identify which articles still need to be rated against the WP:1.0 guidelines. I'm working through assessing the articles in Category:Unassessed rail transport articles this month. Thanks. Slambo (Speak) 13:17, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
What it looks like to me is that someone decided to rate the 155th Street article, and the rating process happens to be a part of WikiProject Trains. It doesn't seem that the articles particularly belong to that WikiProject, as they have only been added to their respective rating categories (e.g., Category:Start-Class rail transport articles). However, I do agree that the subway is somewhat too specialized to be lumped in with the other rail transport. Maybe we should start a rating project for WP:NYCS only, design our own little『This article is a part of …』box, and so forth. This way we can retain the rating system (which I find useful) but avoid the general categorization of WikiProject Trains. --Larry V (talk | contribs) 13:19, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
What about the Bab Ballads? Shouldn't that be in the list? Or at least on Gilbert's page? I see on the Gilbert page you have one Stedman book. Is that sufficient? Also, for a general audience, I would add the Benford book. Most newbies to G&S, especially new performers, just want to know what the heck the funny words it mean. Ssilvers 17:34, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
I put up a quick page for him. Is it an article or a stub? Ssilvers 06:22, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, I was still typing this up when you sent me that last talk message.
You are correct in your observation that the Manhattan Bridge south tracks carry both Q and non-late-night N service. However, N service over the bridge does not stop at DeKalb Avenue; it uses the center bypass tracks. Same for most D service; most of the time, these two services bypass DeKalb on their way to the bridge.
As for the nested templates, see Wikipedia:Avoid using meta-templates. Although the policy was rejected, it points out several problems that nested templates may cause. In the case here, the nested templates are by no means necessary and are easily substituted with non-template coding.
--Larry V (talk | contribs) 12:46, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
I happened to notice that you are a self-proclaimed Wolverine. It just so happens that I have a friend who will be attending Ann Arbor in the fall; see User:Zouf. --Larry V (talk | contribs) 20:53, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
Ah, I was just in the process of splitting up the tables. --Larry V (talk | contribs) 21:30, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
I finished his page. Please take a look when you have a moment. -- Ssilvers 05:54, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
![]() |
The Working Man's Barnstar | |
I hereby award you this Working Man's Barnstar to recognize your tireless contributions to WikiProject New York City Subway, especially those contributions of a repetitive and tedious nature. For those I am especially grateful. =) |
--Larry V (talk | contribs) 02:59, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
Congratulations on the Barnstar. You've made thousands of edits on the subway articles, and I have no doubt that you've enhanced the resource greatly.
I put up a page on J. M. Gordon -- please take a look. I did quite a lot of research, but there's not much on his early career. -- Ssilvers 12:44, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
Okay, thanks for the heads-up.
Speaking of editing as a full-time job… I work during the summer as a technical analyst at Citigroup Corporate and Investment Banking. I work a 9-hour day, but mostly take phone calls from employees having computer and PDA issues. Usually I have a lot of free time between calls, so what do I do? Edit Wikipedia, of course. It really does get me through the day; amazing how 9 hours flies by when you're Wiki-ing. =) --Larry V (talk | contribs) 13:25, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
I noticed that in your recent edit to Canal Street (BMT Nassau Street Line), you removed one of the nycsubway.org references. (See here.) While consistency (through the NYCS ref template) is important, it is more important to provide all the references used, and I had made use of the second site (an article about early transit in Brooklyn) to write the article. This is why I reverted that part of the article. --Larry V (talk | contribs) 20:57, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
I put up articles on Derek Oldham, Courtice Pounds, George Thorne and Nellie Briercliffe. Take a look when you get back. Note that there is a new active member of WP:G&S. --Ssilvers 04:35, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
Aye, sorry to disappear like that - was visiting my parents last month, and between the preparations for that, the visit itself, and the jetlag when back, I wasn't able to do much. And I have the exams I missed due to my Spring illness coming up... but, oh well! Have adopted W.S. Gilbert as I had started on the revision already anyway. Might as well finish! Adam Cuerden 15:23, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
Say, Marc, how interested are you in the original version of "Is life a boon"? Adam Cuerden 20:24, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Major changes to this today! Combined the version listings a bit, added a couple cites. Also added a short section to Yeomen saying where the autograph score and such are though it should probably move a bit. Adam Cuerden 18:35, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your contributions to the New York bridge pages. Unfortunately, however, the changes that you made to categorization are contrary to the method decided at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Bridges and were inconsistent with the way that every other bridge in the U.S. is categorized. The New York City bridges are used as a specific example on the Wikipedia:Categorization/Categories and subcategories guideline page. Thanks Cacophony 17:43, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
I put up a page on Fred Billington. I also did a quick page on The Nautch Girl, because it annoyed me that we couldn't link to it on everyone's pages. Also expanded the pitiful Francis Burnand page. --Ssilvers 05:43, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Re: Billington: I had missed the info about Carte telling him to retire. Does one of the links shows give that info? If not, can you add the ref that said this?
Re: Vicar of Bray: See talk over there. There are separate articles for the opera and the folk song, and it is not clear to me which one should have which of the historical info. Thanks --Ssilvers 15:45, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
I beefed up Richard D'Oyly Carte and Alfred Cellier. See what you think. --Ssilvers 23:36, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Ann Drummond-Grant is finished. --Ssilvers 08:28, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
The thing is, I would much rather not rename it, because then there would be two articles:
I think you'd agree that this would be more confusing than anything we could do with the text inside the individual articles. I like the idea of merging the two into Chambers Street-World Trade Center (IND Eighth Avenue Line), since they were meant to be one "station" (albeit quite a unique station). Larry V (talk | contribs) 17:49, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Oh, here we go again. Larry V (talk | contribs) 02:01, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
What you're doing would be a hell of a lot easier with non-admin rollback. Search for "god mode light". alphaChimp laudare 20:30, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Hi, just to let you know. You forgot to sign your support at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Alphachimp. Cheers, Garion96 (talk) 01:31, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
Check out Francois Cellier, George Edwardes, and The Cingalee. Also, Basil Hood --Ssilvers 02:17, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
I left a rather long-winded comment on this article's deletion talk page. If you google my name, you will find that I am a member of said group. I certainly understand where you're coming from and don't blame you for targeting the article for deletion; I have, in the past, personally pared down other group members' edits for NPOV, if you take a look at the history of the page. And I actually initiated the deletion process for another music-related article on a unnotable punk rocker named Reeves James or something like that.
I do think it's unfair, though, to delete the article over any of the multitude of other articles up on Wikipedia on other Yale a cappella groups. Let me tell you a little about Yale a cappella.
At the beginning of each year, there is a ridiculous process at Yale (called "rush") by which unwitting freshmen are "tapped," or accepted, into any one of the various a cappella groups out trolling for singers on campus. Because of the number of options freshmen have, groups compete strenuously for talented vocalists. In the past, rush has lasted six weeks plus and has resulted in violence, bribery (freshmen were flown places), etc. In response, a singing group council was set up to regulate the rush process to prevent further abuses. The articles each group has up on Wikipedia probably constitute a rush violation as most of them read right now, and perhaps they all warrant deletion.
I personally think the numerous pages can be combined into one more interesting article about Yale a cappella. But please target all of the groups if you intend to delete the SOBs page (which is what they call commonly call themselves, by the way). I've let the group know their page may be deleted, and I'm sure someone will edit the page for NPOV in the next few days. Mgummess 06:58, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
When 9/9 comes along and those changes to service don't actually occur I wonder if that @#$%^ (sorry) will stop trying to update all those articles. Strange, with all the reversions that have happened, that he isn't getting the message.
--Allan 12:58, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Just to let you know I'm (finally) done with exams. Couple essays to finish up, but now that I can move into year 3, I'll have a little more time for this again.
Er, this was me. Also, did some more work on Victoria and Merrie England - straight-out copying, but it'll do for a start. Adam Cuerden 16:02, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Do you have any ideas on how to edit, nonetheless, read articles with {{NYCS service|A}} on them? Geoking66 04:34, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
I don't understand why the switch in {{NYCS}} is necessary, or how recursive redirects come out of the non-switch version. The switch makes for a longer template, which might run into the 2Meg limitation. Switch statements can be a problem if a template is ever subst'ed. Other than that it doesn't really matter, except for my curiosity. Gimmetrow 13:48, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Happy to explain. As mentioned in various places, we use these templates — among other purposes — to ensure consistent formatting, and not just to create links. For example, on R (New York City Subway service), {{NYCS R}} is used. It displays as just plain R. On any other page, it would display as R (with a link).
Now, on that same page, you'll also see calls to {{NYCS RR}} and {{NYCS RJ}}, which display as RR and RJ, because in the background {{NYCS RJ}} is pointing back to R (New York City Subway service). The WikiMedia software is smart enough not to insert a link when you're already on that page.
However, if you replace those calls with the non-switched version of {{NYCS}}, those template calls will display as RR and RJ. The WikiMedia software doesn't know that RR (New York City Subway service) and RJ (New York City Subway service) link right back to R (New York City Subway service). That's what I meant about a reflexive link.
I do realize that the switched version cannot be subst'ed, but it is not supposed to be. We want them always to appear in template form, so that formatting remains consistent; and that the links will always be correct if pages are merged or split.
I didn't understand your comment about the 2 meg limit. We don't appear to be in any danger of coming near that. Marc Shepherd 14:11, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Right-o! Won't do it again. By the way, am trying to be really helpful and work on a stub proposal.... I hope this isn't meddling... Adam Cuerden 21:02, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Have modified Template:Gilbert and Sullivan - I hope for the better - and added another template to the project page to try and organise work. Since I feel worried when doing this, best I mention. Adam Cuerden 22:42, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
I made a page on the subway vandals. The Sept 9 thing was pretty blatant, but now they are getting more subtle. Is thisorthis a verror? Any recommendations on how to proceed as this gets more complex over time? Gimmetrow 00:13, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
I actually did that as an experiment. To be quite frank, I'm a little annoyed that the last 50 edits on that page were either vandalism or reverts. I'm not really sure what we can do other than semi protection to get around that....
I'm a little apprehensive to continue protecting the pages, just because it seems somewhat controversial. Let's broach the topic in WP:NYCS. alphaChimp laudare 04:47, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Ayup, it's another new, crappy article from me! Adam Cuerden 16:53, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Right. I think I've removed all POV now. Everything is highly cited - perhaps a little too much, even. Adam Cuerden 18:30, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
You're probably right about these works being low priority, but the Chorley period (and it's probably pretty fair to call it that) was probably more important than it's usually given credit for - let's face it, having a very difficult work to set that early in his career probably did immense good at preparing him for Gilbert's creativity.
However, I do agree, and would like to move on to Gilbert. But, well, I'm not that confident at Wikipedia yet, so I'm a little more comfortable in the shallows of the obscure stuff and the minor parts of the articles at the moment.
And since I'm more of a Gilbert fan than Sullivan (much as I like him), it's easier for me to be working on things I'm interested in, but don't care quite so strongly about whilst I regain my feet. Probably do a nice, short Gilbert piece next - Dulcamara, or perhaps No Cards? Adam Cuerden 20:19, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Oh, aye. Could I e-mail you some images? I don't really have appropriate image-editing softward, but they'd be very good illustrations for... rather a lot of articles. It's a broadsheet for emerald Isle of seven actors (including all the famous ones) in costume, as well as Francois Cellier, and the producer, whose name annoyingly slips my mind. Adam Cuerden 20:23, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
See Marjorie Eyre, John Ayldon, J. C. Williamson, Meston Reid and Alan Styler. --Ssilvers 06:06, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
Date of Mikado film. You wrote 1968 in Godfrey's entry. We have written 1966 and 1967 in various places. This is the first time I saw 1968. Was it recorded in 1966 and released in 1967? --Ssilvers 12:54, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
He's been blocked indefinitely as a vandalism only account. alphaChimp laudare 21:55, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
I finished bios for Elsie Griffin and Ivan Menzies, but I wonder if I am missing anything from her opera career? Google didn't show me much. -- Ssilvers 15:37, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
User pjrs put this notice on my talk page just now:
Thank you for the additions to the Clement Scott page. However, I have some queries and intend making some amendments.... I am a little concerned at the additions of the references to Gilbert and Sullivan - much as I love their work - it shifts the balance of his positioning a bit and I haven't anything in his publications or letters which suggest affinity - though logically there ought to have been, given the time he is writing. I think it much more likely that his desire to be a member of the Garrick was because Irving and other actor managers were, rather then Gilbert and Sullivan.
I am particularly intrigued by your attributing 'Now is the Time' to him. In all my research on this, I can find no evidence that he wrote it. I will check my notes on his travels, but the dates on the song all suggest that somebody used the name long after this Clement Scott's death in 1904. I shall be delighted if you can inform me otherwise.
I note that a certain amount of your information comes from the Rochester Library magazine. They were very helpful there when I went through his papers (with the exception of a couple of the middle years when time defeated me) about three years ago. I felt a need to shift the balance slightly in a number of places - though I have no doubt that Scott was selective in the letters that he kept. pjrs
This was a bear. I'm sure that more needs to be done to this complex bio, but I think I did my share! --Ssilvers 13:14, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Since they stayed with Gilbert at Grim's Dyke often and both wrote about Gilbert and Sullivan, I have beefed him up and added her and added them to people associated with G&S. -- Ssilvers 23:36, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
In the 1902 benefit performance of Trial, which George Grossmith played the Usher? Was it the DOC principal comedian, or was it his son, who had by then made a name at the Gaiety Theatre playing in casts that looked very much like the one listed for this performance? If the latter, at a minimum we need to drop a footnote.
I also beefed up Mackerras' bio. -- Ssilvers 03:24, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
No, the bot is not mine. I just saw a bunch of updates to various subway/transit pages today. I started combining those where it had duplicated the project banner, going by those that were listed on the logs as moving from X to Unassessed. I've only got about another 10 minutes of editing time today before I leave to ride the Cumbres and Toltec Scenic Railroad (we're doing the round trip from Antonito to Osier), but I'll be back late tonight and most of the day on Monday; our flight home gets back to Madison around 10.00p. Slambo (Speak) 13:45, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
I have finished merging all of the station complexes that you have listed on the WP:NYCS talk page. Now that these are done, we can get statred on the hard ones. Give me a reply whenever you can. Thanks. --imdanumber1 19:10, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
Hey Marc,
First off, thanks for the positive feedback.
Secondly, I have an idea on how we can get reasonable names on station complexes. For example, the order of the station naming should be IRT station names first, BMT station names second, and IND station names last. One reasonable matter is 74th Street-Broadway (IRT Flushing Line) and Jackson heights-Roosevelt Avenue (IND Queens Boulevard Line) into 74th Street-Broadway-Jackson Heights-Roosevelt Avenue (New York City Subway).
That is just an idea on how it could be, but not necessarily. Drop me a line with your opinion. --imdanumber1 18:18, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Don't forget that we have redirects. We are putting redirects on the articles prior to the station complex move. If a person searches 74th Street-Broadway (IRT Flushing Line), it will redirect to the new title. I STRONGLY believe that we should use all of the station's naming instead of part of it. We shouldn't omit out part of the station's original naming. --imdanumber1 00:04, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your support in my not-so-recent RfA, which was successful with a an overwhelmingly flattering and deeply humbling total of 138/2/2 (putting me #10 on the RfA WP:100). I guess infinite monkey theorem has been officially proven. Chimps really can get somewhere on Wikipedia.
With new buttons come great responsibility, and I'll try my best to live up to your expectations. If you need assistance with something, don't hesitate to swing by my talk pageoremail me (trust me, I do respond :)). The same goes for any complaints or comments in regard to my administrative actions. Remember, I'm here for you. (Thanks go to Blnguyen for the incredible photo to the right.) alphaChimp laudare 01:37, 4 September 2006 (UTC) |
![]() |
Did you make the edit there that you intended to make? The reference to dislike of the libretto is still there. --Ssilvers 17:24, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm finished with her bio, and that concludes my project to input DOC performers into Wikipedia. Of course, a few more may be added, particularly if they turn up as big musical comedy performers or for some other reason, as Evett did. In addition, some of the people who are already there could use expanding, especially with respect to their non-G&S work. -- Ssilvers 18:35, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
I suppose that works, though it still seems a weak joke if it is one. But the original wording definately overstepped.
Still, given it's a show about pirates, it's difficult to claim that it's a joke about theatrical pirates unless there's further evidence for it than the fact it opened around the time that theatrical piracy was occurring. And it seems a bit much to swallow that Gilbert would base an entire operetta around Pirates to poke fun at theatrical pirates, and at the same time would leave no hints of the intent in the libretto.
Where is this coming from? Adam Cuerden 19:37, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
The "joke" is obscure, not actually funny in the least, and has no evidence other than propiniquity and a few books - and given Eden can get his books on Gilbert published, we can't trust every G&S scholar. So, did Gilbert and Sullivan, or anyone contemporary, ever mention these things being related?
It's interesting if true, but it's of the sort of urban myth category that needs primary evidence. shall we leave it in but put a [cite needed]?
Readded reference to the Zoo, but added a quote from the linked article as hidden text (it's not directly relevant to the Sapphire Necklace, or I'd have included it as a full reference) Adam Cuerden 18:13, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
A couple of comments... First, I understand the concerns and I'm not taking anything personally here either (kind of hard to convey body language and inflection via the keyboard). Yeah, most of the subway station articles will have very little to them and some may be destined to never have more than a few sentences, but they can all include at least one photo and references pointing at external sources of information (I don't consider External links to be the same as References; "External links" to me means "here are some sites with more information" while "References" means "this is the source material used for this article"). I do a quick check for the presense of attributes like these and assign a quick rating. Obviously, I'm not spending a whole lot of time on each article when I put an assessment rating on it, and I know very little about New York's system and even less about London's system, so it's very likely that many of the assessments should be modified. If there are specific ratings that you disagree with, by all means change them (you can leave article-specific ratings comments in the /Comments pages [linked from the template] or on the talk pages). My main goal is to assess the articles in Category:Unassessed rail transport articles so I can get back to tagging and assessing the articles in the Category:Rail transport category tree (I got up to the articles in Category:Railway companies → Category:Railway companies of the United States → Category:Maryland railroads, so there's quite a few more to look at). Last weekend's fiasco with bot tagging is one reason why I'm doing this completely by hand (I'm also finding items for the Portal's Did you know section this way).
I haven't updated {{TrainsWikiProject}} to add the importance ratings yet. I thought it would be better to get through with this first round of assessments first and then start discussion on talk:WP Trains to define the importance levels. I'd like to have some buy-in from other project members before starting on that path, especially since an article like A (New York City Subway service) would have different importance levels between WP Trains and WP NYCS (even though it was the subject of Duke Ellington/Billy Strayhorn's "Take the A Train," it probably wouldn't be higher than Mid importance to WP Trains). Adding importance ratings will take some more advanced template mojo so that the subprojects can assign their own importance levels.
That's all I can think of right now, I've got to get to a doctor's appointment now. I should be back online later tonight. Slambo (Speak) 21:03, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Somebody did a lot of work on this today (yesterday for you). I copy edited some of what he/she did, but you'll want to consider it. I didn't edit the following, which I think you will want to work on:
Yip Harburg? -- Ssilvers 15:07, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your edits. I added more info this afternoon, so if you have time, please take another look. Thanks! -- Ssilvers 22:57, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Someone's buggered up the references, and I've been getting iller and iller all day. Could ye have a look? There's things in the wrong places. Adam Cuerden 16:00, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
The G&S Discography says "I have not heard the score by F. Osmond Carr, but others tell me it is terrible." Do you want to update that? http://www.cris.com/~oakapple/gasdisc/he.htm -- Ssilvers 12:47, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm afraid your presumption they're all collected in Foggerty's Fairy is very much incorrect. He wrote reams of stuff for Fun, maybe half Bab ballad, an eighth short story, an eighth chatty series, and a quarter parodies of book and theatre. Adam Cuerden 19:44, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
Hello. I wanted to let you know that I quoted your post about Jimbo Wales' reaction to another one of these lists on Talk:List of major opera composers where a discussion is going on concerning NPOV issues and sourcing. A discussion using reference lists already in place has begun and you might be interested in following this. Thanks for bringing this up! Musikfabrik 16:41, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Hello again and thank you for participating on these discussions. I think that we're working for the same thing and I wanted to explain why I did indeed think that it was right to put an unsourced tag on this article. My rational is at the Wikipedia policy page Wikipedia:Verifiability#Burden_of_evidence which basically says that if any editor feels that a piece of information should remain, the specific phrase must be sourced. According to the way this reads, general references do not replace specific references as "Burden of evidence".
Eh, I'm washing my hands of this article. If only me and MusikFabrik are collecting lists, why should I bother? Adam Cuerden talk 14:00, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
I see that you've begun the assessment project. Before we assess Ruddigore thru GD, could you add the "historical casting" tables? I find those really helpful and fascinating. Regards, -- Ssilvers 14:35, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
I was afraid that the vandals were coming back. I have reported the issue to Larry V, Cecropia and Alphachimp. I hope they can do somethhin about this. Glad we have more sysops on the team. --Imdanumber1 ( Talk | contribs) 22:45, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
Look Moreschi moved this to List of opera composers considered major according to the formulation given by Jimbo Wales in the statements you quoted. I first tried to move it to a non-POV name (typing the name incorrectly, which lead to the problem) and THEN the site went down. When it was back up, I reverted the whole mess into List of major opera composers, but I will NOT take the responsiblity for this mess. If Moreschi hadn't moved it in the first place, this wouldn't have happened. And under the circumstances, it should not have been moved.
I just took a look at it. I'm so confused at what happened... I can't find the history of the page anywhere in the deleted edits, but I suspect I'm looking in the wrong place. Could you give me a list of pages to check (for history). thanks, alphaChimp(talk) 00:53, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
I've added plays to it as well - but this is hopefully a temporary solution - it shouldn't take more than a few days to get the list of works page up to date. We could, perhaps, give those with articles links at the top. Adam Cuerden talk 02:47, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
I have finished merging most of the articles listed at WP:NYCS talk. However I am against one specific merge that you are supporting. You said you would support merging of 14th Street (IND Sixth Avenue Line) and Sixth Avenue (BMT Canarsie Line) into 14th Street-Sixth Avenue (New York City Subway) but you would exclude 14th Street (IRT Broadway-Seventh Avenue Line) from it. You also said that because of a non-confusing name, which would turn out as 14th Street-Sixth and Seventh Avenues. I do not think that the Seventh Avenue segment of the name should be added anyway. We can still call the article 14th Street-Sixth Avenue. But all of the articles (IRT Broadway-Seventh, BMT Canarsie and IND Sixth) should be added. There is no name 7th Avenue included in the complex. Only 14th Street and Sixth Avenue, since the IRT and IND stations stop at 14th street, while Canarsie trains stop at Sixth Avenue. So the Seventh Avenue segment of the name shouldn't be added, but we can still include all three of the articles.--Imdanumber1 ( Talk | contribs) 02:24, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
It'll be more work, but might I suggest W. S. Gilbert, as the top-importance article most in need of work, would possibly be the best choice for our first GA-class push? Adam Cuerden talk 04:24, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Ha! Adam Cuerden talk 15:15, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
I have changed the table seen at my sandbox (click here), to make it show when 5 trains run. I stopped at East 180th Street, but the table seems worse than before. Putting text that shows when trains stop at a specific station doesn't seem to work, just like what Marc said. This is why I want to upload those bullets seen on the MTA website and make those substitute the text. --Imdanumber1 ( Talk | contribs) 20:25, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
The subway bullets were uploaded from Wikimedia Commons, and so will these denotations. Just need to find out ho to do it! --Imdanumber1 ( Talk | contribs) 00:19, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
Good news Marc! I have created a Wikimedia Commons account (so ironically, is called Imdanumber1, hahahahaha!), so now I can upload those denotations. Actually, I already uploaded them, or at least a couple. I have already inserted them into my new table, so feel free to take a look at my sandbox page. And you were right; the column that shows these denotations are so narrow that it doesn't matter. --Imdanumber1 ( Talk | contribs) 01:56, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
Hello Nice to see that some new faces have recently become interested in commenting on the article. However, I am interested to know how you became involved with the page? It would seem that someone came along and changed the title without any discussion. Then someone started a debate about a different title. A number of people I have never seen comment on a Harry Potter page then opposed the proposed further move. This is quite extraordinary attention for a HP page.
No one has yet explained the grounds for changing the page from its original title. Can you explain why this was done? It was also done by someone who had never edited the page before and was pretty inexperienced. A justification was given, but not explained. Then an anon deleted the debate. Also very strange. Why would anyone do this? Sounded like someone wanted to avoid discussion. While I do not think it likely that people would have opposed the page title change if it is satifactorily explained, this has still not been done. I do not see how any change of title can be discussed or considered unless someone explains why it needed to be moved in the first place. Sandpiper 07:58, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
I see that you have been a major contributor to Textual criticism. So, this is just to let you know that I have submitted in to QP:GA. See Wikipedia:Good_article_candidates#Other_5. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 00:14, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
I certainly see your point, Marc. Anyone who takes this project seriously feels that way at least occasionally. Take some time off but keep this in mind: do or don't do exactly what you want on Wikipedia. Trying to enforce a quality standard is an exercise in madness but still outstanding contributions help the reader who is not into Wikipolitics. I myself have given up on political articles long long ago and earlier this year I walked away from intense work on WP:RFA. But I still contribute now and then to transit articles when it moves me, and I do work on some literary articles that please me. Every now and then I correct egregious attempts at POV, and my NPOV-ing usually sticks (for awhile, anyway). For all the people who have no respect for quality, there is a "silent majority" that appreciates it, and they remember the quality editors, even if they're not always throwing bouquets. :) -- Cecropia 17:12, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
Sorry to see you go Marc. Although we had that little dispute over NYC Subway Service V), I am sad to see you leave. Nos opto bonus tidings praecessi vestri via --Anthony 18:42 17 Oct 2006 (UTC)
I departed the Wikipedia community on September 20, 2006. Messages left on this page will not be looked at or responded to. See my user page for the reasons behind my departure. Marc Shepherd 18:29, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
I've done a bit of research, but can't find what exactly was the tipping point that caused your Wikipedia relationship to become so acrimonious. Surely an argument about redirects can't, on its own, be important enough to be worth such acrimony.
For what it's worth, the Wikipedia page on redirects is a guideline. As noted here, "Guidelines are not set in stone and should be treated with common sense and the occasional exception."
Another FWIW: The Service History section of 1 (New York City Subway service) isn't very good, and could certainly use a thorough rewriting. Part of the problem is that the history of the various IRT services (except the 7) really needs to be one narrative. Practically every combination of northern and southern terminals that is physically possible has been used at one time or another. A historical narrative that tries to cover one service in isolation doesn't really do it justice.
Third FWIW: The name change from "IRT Eastern Parkway Line" to "IRT Eastern Parkway and New Lots Line" was an error, and should be reverted. There is no such thing as the New Lots Line. As noted in the article New York City Subway chaining, there is a single Chaining Line from Borough Hall to New Lots Avenue. Physically, the line remains under Eastern Parkway past the point where the Nostrand Avenue Line branches off. The book Tracks of the New York City Subway confirms this. If anyone can find a source that contradicts this, I'd love to see it.
I'm retired from editing, but if you'd like to state concretely what it is you disagree about, I'd be happy to try to suggest a resolution or middle ground. Marc Shepherd 00:48, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
By the way, you can get a good idea of his view at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/1 (New York City Subway service): "NE2 persists on systematically instating redirects into articles and refuses to engage in a consensus to get an invoice from other users to agree on the article's styleage. I find this disruptive, because it is not normally one's nature to put redirects into articles..." --NE2 03:17, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
For what it's worth (pardon me for intruding, Marc), here are my thoughts about whether a link that redirects should be changed to the redirect's target (as a piped link) or should be left alone. Some things are implied by WP:REDIRECT, but others may not be.
In prose, if a [[link]] currently points to another page (the redirect), and you're thinking if you want to change [[link]] to [[redirect|link]] (notice the pipe):
In addition, be conservative whenever you change links that redirect: only make such an edit when necessary. There are special exceptions and circumstances that come to mind, but I want this to be a simplified view in order to hopefully gain some agreement. To both parties, does all of this make sense? I purposely gave non-MTA related examples for each of these so both of you may come to your own conclusions. I am also withholding my opinion on the 1 service article until further comments are said. Tinlinkin 02:35, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Imdanumber1 has chosen to ignore the above: [1] --NE2 19:10, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
It continues on 1 and Q. Something tells me Imdanumber1 has not decided to listen to us. --NE2 03:57, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
You're the one that doesn't listen to anyone, NE2. Your trollish behavior has better stop, or else I will take it to corrective actions. Marc, I'm sorry if I drove you into this mess, but NE2's behavior has got to change or else I will report him. He has a history of insubordination and doesn't listen to anyone. –Imdanumber1 (talk • contribs • email) 12:51, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
You said you have retired from Wikipedia, but why are you editing and discussing many users' talk pages? The Legendary Ranger 20:38, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
C. William Morgan *OWNED* the role of 1st Yeoman! Woo hoo! Thanks for the "Yeomen" effort today! -- Ssilvers 03:26, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Hety, Marc! Good to see you around! Not much change, I fear - slowly gaining GAs and FAs... Adam Cuerden talk 18:29, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Fair enough. I'll watch 'em and try to notify you of the more interesting issues that could use your attention. Meanwhile, I think that adding the the Gondo production/casting info would be a good next project, whenever you can get to it. Be well, -- Ssilvers 19:37, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Do you think that he should get a WP:G&S tag? Regards, -- Ssilvers 04:11, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
I don't see how to illustrate these except (e.g. Cello concerto) for 1. A picture of Sullivan; or 2. A scan of the cover of the score. Any other ideas? -- Ssilvers 21:25, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Good day, Marc. There is a First Annual New York Wikipedian Picnic taking place at Central Park. R.S.V.P. @ Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC. Thanks, –Imdanumber1 (talk • contribs • email) 14:43, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi there,
You seem to be a good source for help, so I thought I'd ask. If the following appears in an article source:
{{-}}
What does that do? Marc Shepherd 15:50, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
{{tiw}}
from inside any edit window 'preview' like this: Hope that helps // FrankB 22:24, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the message. It looks like Adam was trying to respond to some comments at the FA review. By all means, please go ahead and fix the writing that has become less effective. If you explain what the problem is on the talk page, it will help us reach a consensus on a better expression of the sentences involved. Thanks! -- Ssilvers 16:10, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Marc, since you have had some space on this article, would you please give me comments on what you would do to the article optimally to make it FA quality? Thanks for any thoughts. -- Ssilvers 21:14, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
SandyGeorgia suggested that the reviewers may be holding off until I (the person with the most edits) give the article an unequivocal endorsement. Paradoxically, I don't really feel comfortable doing that until I have a critical review of it by a person who is not as close to the article as me (and I imagine your months off have probably given you the fresh perspective to do this). For instance, the section from Patience to Gondoliers is relatively pithy (and perhaps so is the discussion re: Pinafore and Pirates). It describes the period when the partnership produced six of its important shows. There is much that one could say about each show, but that is said in their own articles. One could also say more about the significant bumps and potholes on the G&S roadway during that period (clearly Mike Leigh found that very interesting), but the section does cover the historical highlights in broad strokes. Do you think it ought to have more detail there? Finally, again because I am so close to the article, I have trouble deciding what further referencing is needed, if any. FYI, the Gilbert article recieved detailed comments by at least a half dozen reviewers. Then, people oppose or support it. Thanks! -- Ssilvers 00:32, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
I've just trimmed down the lead. Please don't hate me for it: everyone was upset at the length, so I tried to cut only the worst-written parts. (Though I did lose one rather good sentence, if not a well-worked-in one. Adam Cuerden talk 01:09, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Okay, I will definitely put in some time on it. It will need to be an evening when I have a couple of hours to set aside...which isn't right now! Marc Shepherd 01:19, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the re-write of the intro. I'll focus on the expansion later in the week. If you have any time to help out, I'd rather that you work on referencing, and I'll go into the various opera articles and get some info for the expansion. Best regards, -- Ssilvers 14:02, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Hello, Marc. I've begun the expansion. Please check the write ups for Patience, Iolanthe, Ida and Mikado in the G&S article. BTW, are you satisfied with the intro now? Also, note the new article for The Happy Land. Best regards, -- Ssilvers 05:36, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
When you split the Fulton Street Transit Center article, I wonder why you didn't just put the station article at Broadway-Nassau-Fulton Streets (New York City Subway), where it was most recently, and then move the article to the new name? The merge and unmerge would have been recorded in the edit histories, and also your notation of a consensus-led name would have been noted. Plus you would have avoided an eventual need to merge the histories anyway due to the GFDL. Tinlinkin 05:48, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
So we have to make sure that the line templates are consistent as possible. I've created one for the 42nd Street Shuttle and Dyre Avenue Line. Feel welcome to make any changes, but don't forget to use Template:Railway line legend as a guide to maintain consistency. –Imdanumber1 (talk • contribs • email) 18:45, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the notice. Sometime back, I did the same thing-insert en dashes. But in April, there was a guideline stating that the hyphen couldn't be used in article titles, and the articles were moved back hyphens. This was at WP:NC#Special characters in April. I guess they fixed it now. Again, thanks for the notice, and I will move all articles back to en dashes or insert dashes that don't have. —Imdanumber1 (talk • contribs • email) 20:44, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Please take a look at WT:NYCPT#Rollsign template. I agree that they are over the top and a reconfiguration can be possible. —Imdanumber1 (talk • contribs • email) 20:48, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
I would like to ask why you chose to post a useless and confusing topic here that I removed from the page because I considered it vandalism. Bella Swan(Talk!) 21:24, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for today's corrections. Not that I think you might forget, but these are the areas that I think most need your attention whenever you can get to them:
I'm off to Buxton on Friday. Best regards! -- Ssilvers 16:23, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
Why are you editing other editors' discussion? That seems to me like a remarkably bad idea. [2] Claudia 19:47, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
Please do not add fair use images to the userspace. It is blatantly against WP:NONFREE. Thank you! — Moe ε 15:41, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for calming the fire, Marc. I don't know where these people came from. Everything was fine before. There was no trouble then, and I don't know why there is any trouble now. I am almost finished with the article. I just need to fix up the station table before I put it up on the main article. Thanks again. —Imdanumber1 (talk • contribs • email) 22:04, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Taking a lead from {{PATHmap}}, I have a solution for the interaction problem on IND Sixth Avenue Line. Geoking66talk 01:50, 18 August 2007 (UTC)