User talk:Gerda Arendt: Difference between revisions

Bells of Beyond

Requiem

Max Reger (1873–2016)
Requiem, op. 144b

Archive of 2009 · 2010 · 2011 · 2012 · 2013 · 2014 · 2015 · 2016 · blushing

Hello Gerda!

Merry Christmas and a happy new year! I have checked 365 of the articles created by you for typos, please check if my edits are correct. I noticed two more problems, but I am not sure how to fix 'em, would you be so kind to take a look?

• Salve Regina (Latry) contains " It ends like bellsDer letzte Ruf ."
• String quartets (Waterhouse) contains "movement threeOpening of"

Ciao ciao, The Quixotic Potato (talk) 06:06, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

That is amazing, the checking I mean! Thank you so much! I fixed the first. The second: someone added the sound file of the basis by Lassus, I removed it as misleading,but if wanted it should be clarified that the sound is not what the article is about, just the inspiration. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:05, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, here is a list of the edits I made on articles created by you. Feel free to undo/improve my edits. Have a nice day, The Quixotic Potato (talk) 07:26, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Islossningen i Uleå älv

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Frank Stähle

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Quotes

While searching for quotes I found this gem:

“ Come back. Even as a shadow, even as a dream. ” — Euripides

The Quixotic Potato (talk) 17:29, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:32, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

No, thank you, for being 100% human in this computerized world. The Quixotic Potato (talk) 17:57, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

blushing --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:07, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

I found this gem: "death, sleep, a journey of departure, peace and consolation are some of the intertwined themes and images" of Mit Fried und Freud ich fahr dahin, BWV 125, for 2 February. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:13, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

I remember back when I was so young I wasn't allowed to use the recordplayer and I had to beg my sister (3,5yrs older) or parents to do it for me. I must've heard the Brandenburg Concerto No. 3, Peter and the Wolf and Peer Gynt at least a million times, and I still listen to them regularly. Peer Gynt. Suite No. 1, Op. 46 is probably the saddest music ever, but hauntingly beautiful. My userboxes aren't very informative (although it is true that the Brotherhood of Nod is the only army I support, mainly because it is fictional and because it has an awesome backstory) so I figured I should give some insight into who I am by my choice of quotes. I don't think you'll like all of them, but maybe you'll like some of them. The Quixotic Potato (talk) 08:16, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Was Trout Quintet and excerpts from La traviata for me. - I saw Götterdämmerung, conducted by Boulez (see below), - a friend had the ticket which you get only after years of waiting, but didn't care for Chéreau's ideas. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:26, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

I was working on an addendum for my previous comment, but you have already replied! I have updated my previous comment, see above.

That is an awesome friend. Ah, Der Ring! Wagner wasn't a fan of Euripides. I love the idea that they actually created an instrument for Der Ring. Of course my musical taste has expanded, but it hasn´t really changed. I still listen to In the Hall of the Mountain King and Rondo alla Turca but these modern versions are very very different! The Quixotic Potato (talk) 09:18, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Der Ring: Boulez made rather modern music of it, that was fascinating, different! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:59, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Ainsi parla Zarathoustra (Boulez)

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Pierre Boulez

I've re-added the infobox. GiantSnowman 06:52, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for trying, but see also. Quote: "Indeed, if the "wars" could begin to end here it would be a great start in a new year!" (written in 2014) On the same page: "Reversions" (trying to change the guidelines) and "A Statistical Note on Infoboxes". Your help is most welcome, but you probably can use your time better ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:28, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

I was a bit confused about the infobox-situation, but after reading for 5 minutes I decided it is probably best to ignore it. The Quixotic Potato (talk) 10:00, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Only 2 more minutes: It's best for your health to ignore it. I often mentioned a friend who told me "ignore ignore ignore". If you add an infobox to Pierre Boulez, that is a bold edit. If you take away an infobox on Laurence Olivier that has been there for years, that is improving the article. The same friend who told me to ignore protected LO because of an edit war over the hidden notice about the new lords of the article not wanting an infobox. He was desysopped. May he rest in peace. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:31, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

"New lords of the article"? Your incivility towards others who do not automatically bow down to your opinion is what got you (mercifully) constrained by Arbcom previously, and yet it appears you still haven't learnt, given the several comments recently about other editors who don't agree with you. Good thing Dreadfulstar was desysopped: they acted utterly inappropriately and deserved the full censure of both ANI and Arbcom for their actions under the influence of red mist. – SchroCat (talk) 11:48, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

I am not restrained by Arbcom. What else did you miss? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:25, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

I've missed nothing: you were constrained by them. – SchroCat (talk) 12:27, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Good advice. I was surprised that no one seems to have mentioned the fact that you can easily hide parts of the Wikipedia interface you dislike. For example, if you do NOT want to see infoboxes then you can use CSS to hide them, like so:

.infobox {display:none;}

Unfortunately that doesn't really work the other way around.

My time is better spent checking the rest of the articles you've written. I've checked 365 of them (because of the new year) so I have 285 to go. WP:QAI's focus on quality articles is good for me, because I prefer articles like this one over articles like this one because of this reason. Let's "ignore ignore ignore" non-productive stuff. The Quixotic Potato (talk) 11:57, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes, on Sundays, because of this reason (using {{diff}}), --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:22, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

It's Monday, the discussion is now at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Composers. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:27, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

I'll bear it in mind, thanks! GiantSnowman 12:27, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Quite a contrast to much of your surroundings

'A gem, you are|-

Thank you for being here, Gerda. You persist and make your presence felt, like a lovely waterlily that blooms in a swamp. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 15:57, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, - did you know that swamp is close to my thoughts, and WP:Great Dismal Swamp? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:09, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

I had seen some of your swamp work, not all. Highly commendable and valued, but it must be hard (not "draining", clearly). One learns to understand some of the special lingo here mostly by stumbling across it. Very best wishes to you Gerda. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 16:26, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

I helped PumpkinSky writing Great Dismal Swamp maroons while he was blocked. Four years since the original meditation on what the blocking of content editors means. The article became a GA (my first) before he was unblocked two months later ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:34, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

I hadn't seen all that sad story. Have seen some of how contentions FA and DYK and Wikicup and RFA still are. I mostly stay away from those and just slog away at adding citations and trying to move pages away from the view that science depends on authority rather than evidence or citations. Great Dismal Swamp maroons is one of the great ideas for an article; a different sort of encyclopedia could be built from such inspiration. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 16:56, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

User:Pablo X

These are not real categories. I thought we were supposed to remove them? And surely user pages should not be in categories?Rathfelder (talk) 23:02, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

They are an expression of categories the user thinks he is in. I have two red links on my user page myself, and when someone turned one blue, I got furious and changed it. Red is to signal: "exception!", "I don't belong!" - This has nothing to do with useful user categories such as what language(s) a user speaks. - General rule: don't touch other user's user pages. Period. Unless it's vandalism, which you can check in the history: when someone else edited. (As - sorry- I handled yours.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:37, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

ps, for clarity: vandal users on their own user pages are of course a different story, - if you see that: act and/or report, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:35, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Befreit

Gatoclass (talk) 14:37, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Der Mensch lebt und bestehet

On 11 May 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Der Mensch lebt und bestehet, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Max Reger had the proofs of his eight-part motet Der Mensch lebt und bestehet open next to his bed when he was found dead on 11 May 1916? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Der Mensch lebt und bestehet. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Der Mensch lebt und bestehet), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:11, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Brainguard

Thank you. I wish I could hire you as a "brainguard" (a bodyguard for the brain) to protect me against stupidity and evil (simply by reminding me every once in a while that my time is too limited to deal with that stuff). Sometimes I feel like I am living in a different universe than certain other people, I see things they cannot see, and they see things that do not exist (or are clearly different) in my universe. The Quixotic Potato (talk) 00:44, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

I could perhaps be your heartguard? - Life on Wikipedia is much better if you observe what wise people intended to give me for a restriction: 2 comments max in per discussion. It's actually giving you more freedom, better for your heart. (If only it was observed by more users ... - In the discussion that was mentioned on AE because I made a third comment, just for fun count the contributions of the others. Then same in the discussion mentioned further up,) I can't protect you against stupidity but I can recommend that you don't try to fight it because the fight can't be won ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:02, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Everyone on this planet needs and deserves a heartguard. I love constrained writing; one of my favorite books is Exercises in Style by Raymond Queneau! The Quixotic Potato (talk) 18:13, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

looks interesting, thank you --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:24, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Appeal of decisions

Regarding appealing on behalf of another editor: as I commented elsewhere, I feel it is unfair to sanctioned editors to preempt their plans to decide if or when they wish to appeal. A badly-worded request from a poor advocate can ruin the opportunity for receiving due consideration of an appeal. As the ones who have to live with the consequences, sanctioned editors should remain in control of any appeal. This can include deferring to someone else to make the request, but it ought to be done with full approval and support of the editor in question. isaacl (talk) 03:57, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

That's all right. In the case of someone who is too proud to appeal a sanction that was nonsense kafkaesque from the beginning, and has no plan to ever appeal, it's a bit different. I was too proud myself for years, so knew the feeling. I have no plans to do it again, but feel that Befreit was my greatest success here. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:29, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

As long as they approve of the appeal, I don't think there is an issue. However if someone doesn't wish any appeal to take place, then I believe their wishes should be respected. isaacl (talk) 12:27, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

In my case, had I asked, Andy would have said no. He thought that I was crazy and had no chance ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:05, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Personally, if I were in that situation, I'd be upset at my desire being ignored. Contrary to your statement that there's not much to lose, there's community goodwill that is used up, and the opening of old wounds, and I feel it would be my prerogative to decide if the potential benefit outweighed the costs. Naturally each specific case has its own circumstances; nonetheless, I don't think it's good general advice for editors to start appeals without explicit approval from the sanctioned editor. isaacl (talk) 01:37, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

spirale of justice

I learned to better stop after two comments to a discussion, - that recipe was not kafkaesque (linked above), - if only all participants in controversies followed ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:53, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

ps (repeating): all you say is right. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:02, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2016-06-15/Blog

"...no good, once given, can be lost". (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 01:20, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for this meaningful message, and the background! Especially meaningful when you lost an article with good content and name. - go outside --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:11, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Lol

Did you thank me for a dumpster fire? ;) I tried to find a bigger flamier one, but commons is inexplicably undersupplied on dumpster fires. Opabinia regalis (talk) 06:33, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

I thanked you for the edit summary ;) - Just worked on an article about a lyricist, was interrupted by the notification and afraid it was more to ignore ignore ignore, - so nice to find LOL instead! Any cat for me? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:07, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Catching up on the news, current status somewhere between

and

;) Opabinia regalis (talk) 19:33, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for black smoke under a tree. I love trees. Two under "blushing", above. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:22, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Petite messe solennelle

On 27 June 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Petite messe solennelle, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Rossini (pictured) scored the last of his "sins of old age", the Petite messe solennelle, for twelve singers, two pianos, and harmonium? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Petite messe solennelle. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Petite messe solennelle), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 16:35, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Thank you

Time and time and time again, I see you doing your best to comfort editors who are in distress, to acknowledge their valuable contributions, and to try to make peace. I thank you for all of that, even though you cannot possibly be successful all the time. But you keep trying and often you succeed. I thank you for it. You are a good person, and we are lucky to have you here on this project. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:20, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! You are right, lack of success will not stop me ;) - (For watchers who don't follow my contributions: this was probably prompted by a reminder to us all of The Reader and Good Faith.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:33, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

kismet?

...LessHeard vanU (talk) 14:43, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

always ready to moar fromU! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:04, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Max Reger

I found a lot of books about him at the Internet Archive. All are from before 1923, so they're considered to be public domain in the US. Some of the books are set in script type. I've skimmed them and they look like they would be good material. There are a lot of photos in them-his parents and childhood home, his wife and children and even a death photo of him. Using photos from them, I'd suggest they be uploaded here at WP with a Pre-1923-abroad license, since they may not be in the public domain elsewhere. The books can be downloaded from the Internet Archive in PDF format. We hope (talk) 15:11, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

• Max Reger : Abriss seines Lebens und Analyse seiner Werke 1922
• Max Reger und Karl Straube 1907
• Max Reger; Darstellung seines Lebens, Wesens und Schaffens 1921
• Max Reger 1921
• Max Reger; eine Studie über moderne Musik, mit einem Bildnis und vielen Notenbeispielen 1911

Great, thank you! - Help appreciated, I have a few other topics first (even if it doesn't look like it), but it would be good to improve his biography this year! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:31, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Wolkentanz

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:32, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Fauré Requiem

Morning, Gerda. To my mind the anonymous editor's recent change was an improvement, and I think we should keep it. In the rest of the article we use "sopranos" plural when talking of the choir, and "soprano" singular for the treble/soprano soloist, and as the In Paradisum is entirely choral throughout, "sopranos" would be consistent with our practice in the earlier paras on the Introit, Sanctus and Agnus Dei. Now I look at the matter, I think we have not made it clear that the work was originally for all-male voices, and we might add a sentence to that effect, perhaps at the end of the third para of the History section. Somewhere I have a quote, I think, that shows that Fauré tended to prefer a female soloist, given the option, because of lung capacity and reliability of breath control. I'll add that too, if I can find it. Is all this OK with you? Tim riley talk 07:48, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Go ahead, fine. We just talked about Rossini wanting to get a dispense for female voices in a church performance of his Petite messe solennelle, and when not getting it, prohibiting performance during his lifetime. - Every time I hear Pie Jesu I imagine how you sounded ;) - Regarding the Wireless Orchestra, I think we need to decide to have a separate article, or a substantial section within the BBC orchestra, with a bold link in the lead, not somewhere down. I tend towards separate, because it was really a different kind of orchestra, not just a name change. It's mentioned many times already, and more possibilities. - Did you see that the Persian is on the (DYK) market today, pictured? (To come, next set.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:02, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, Gerda. I think you'd struggle to find enough material for an article or even a substantial sub-section about the Wireless Orchestra, which was more a title than an actuality, like later ad hoc ensembles such as "The New Symphony Orchestra of London" and "The National Symphony Orchestra" both much recorded by Decca, but not permanent ensembles. But by all means have a go, and I'll do any digging I can for you at the BL. Meanwhile I'll go and hunt for that Fauré quotation. Tim riley talk 10:13, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Now done. It wasn't quite as unambiguous as I remembered but still worth adding, I think. Please have a look when you have a moment, and see if you agree. Tim riley talk 11:06, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Digital Anthropology research

Hello Gerda Arendt, My name is Stephanie Barker and I am a student at the University of Colorado Boulder. I am currently enrolled in a Digital Anthropology class, which attempts to answer how the digital world affects culture and how culture affects the digital world. For my final project I am doing an ethnography on women Wikipedia users and as a member of the WikiProject Women page I was hoping I could ask you some questions about your experiences editing Wikipedia pages. 1. Have you ever been locked into an intense editing war? If yes, please explain the situation to me. 2. How did you become interested in editing Wikipedia pages and did you have any initial fears/hesitations when you started editing pages? 3. Have you ever been a victim of a mass deletion or other vandalism on Wikipedia? If yes, please explain the situation to me. 4. How would you describe your gender? 5. Is there anything else you would like to share with me about your experiences as a Wikipedia editor? I would like you to know that I am only sharing my research with my professor and the other students in my class. If you would like me to send you a copy of my final project, I would be more than happy to! Sincerely, Stelba90 (talk) 01:14, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for asking. I formatted your questions the Wikipedia way:

1. Have you ever been locked into an intense editing war? If yes, please explain the situation to me.
2. How did you become interested in editing Wikipedia pages and did you have any initial fears/hesitations when you started editing pages?
3. Have you ever been a victim of a mass deletion or other vandalism on Wikipedia? If yes, please explain the situation to me.
4. How would you describe your gender?
5. Is there anything else you would like to share with me about your experiences as a Wikipedia editor?

Answers:

1. No.
2. I noticed a red link and wrote the article, which caused three more red links, which caused ... - I had no fear, my first article was promptly deleted but revived by the help of a fellow editor.
3. No mass deletion. I think it's not a precise question: articles get vandalized, and I repair almost daily. As a user, no vandalism.
4. Female
5. I love the collaboration. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:46, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

DYK for A Requiem in Our Time

On 8 August 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article A Requiem in Our Time, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that as a student, Einojuhani Rautavaara composed A Requiem in Our Time, a work for brass band and percussion? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/A Requiem in Our Time. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, A Requiem in Our Time), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 07:42, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thank you, not only for the lovely award, but also the reminders! I'm sure you've been awarded many things for building community and goodwill through this and all your other work (not to mention your contributions to content!), but please allow me to add this kitten to them in return for all you do!

‑‑Yodin^T 09:20, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

This is a lovely creature, - thank you! Yes, I have received many expressions of thanks, some that made me blush are linked above. But look at Talk:Gustav Holst: I have also been called morbid and running a flash mob rather recently, so appreciate your gift! The flash mob thing: I can take it with humour, but have no amused answer to morbid. I wrote an article. Did you know that yesterday's TFA was likely the first composer presented there with an infobox. On Holst, we still talk about a hidden notice questioning/preventing such a thing. (RfC, every voice welcome, the more distant to previous discussions, the more). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:34, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Berliner Symphoniker

My money (what little there is of it these days) is on the Blüthner Orchestra. From Claude Arnold's discography of acoustical orchestral recordings: "After the Great War it was renamed 'Berliner Symphonie-Orchester'; the formula 'Berliner Symphonie-Orchester (Blüthner-Orchester)' appears for the first time in a Homocord advertisement published in December, 1922." Frieder Weissmann is among the conductors listed in the main body of the discography as having made records with this orchestra. I hope this is useful information! Best, ReverendWayne (talk) 20:46, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, that makes sense. Can you add that to the Blüthner Orchestra article? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:54, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

My internet access is sporadic but I'll update the article in the next day or two. I am also trying to sort out the details of the two different recordings Weissmann made in 1931 of By The Blue Hawaiian Waters. The ten-inch record is listed in one of the Odeon discographies compiled by Christian Zwarg, and he credits the Staatsoper Berlin orchestra and chorus. The twelve-inch version is in a matrix series that Zwarg hasn't got round to yet, but I've seen a label image which credits "Dr. Weissmann mit grossem Symphonie-Orchester und Chor" which is not much help. I'll keep digging. ReverendWayne (talk) 21:58, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Noel Coward

An Englishman going out in the morning sun comes across a truly terrifying infobox he is afraid to touch. (Mad dog not pictured)

Wow, I just checked in on the Noel Coward talk page and believe that the argument is still raging. And that some are threatening to leave WP over it. Incredible that some get so emotional over this stuff. SonOfThornhill (talk) 13:53, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

I agree: I can't understand why infoboxes are a hot topic, - for me they are just elements to improve an article, as images and tables. People told my today that I was wiser 6 years ago. Well, of course art can't be captured in a box (as I said then), but we might say the same about the prose, - it can also not do justice to the genius of a composer or the spirit of a composition. We can still put in a box when a piece was first performed or a composer born. - See here for some constructive thoughts. I don't believe in sanctions. The whole problem is only my fault ("Gerda & Co", read today), of course, and you are a member of my flash mob, DYK? - Humour is the only help I see at present. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:07, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

I've never been a member of a mob before. Is there a secret handshake or something. LOL SonOfThornhill (talk) 18:04, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Secret ;) - Everybody seems to know that I am a member of the cabal of the outcasts, some treat me as their leader (Gerda & Co), I must have somehow prompted you to voice my opinion on the RfC, no? - Other members were banned, or vanished. One member wrote today's featured article, one of his more than hundred. Another was declared Wikipedian of the Year ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:45, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Humour and good music, perhaps. But I have no photos of any of the choirs I've been in. All such photos spontaneously combusted upon development. It was a most Fortississimo Flambe. LaughingVulcan 23:56, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

I find this whole dispute amazing. It reminds me of a dispute on the Skyfall article a while back. The article had stated the film's gross as $1,100 Million. Some wanted it changed to $1.1 Billion, in line with other WP articles. The argument against it was that for the British Billion means something else than the rest of the world. Hearing this I opposed the change. But then someone brought up that the British converted to the standard usage of Billion back in the '70s. After looking into and discovering that it was the truth, I switched and supported the change as did several others. When the consensus started swinging against them, those who opposed the change went nuts, even going as far as accusing some who supported the change as being sock puppets. They acted like a group of petulant children because they weren't getting their way. Same seems to be happening with Noel Coward article. It's sad because I expected a high level of behavior here. SonOfThornhill (talk) 10:42, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

... and of course I have to be blamed, for everything including that editors leave. (I wish they'd reconsider.) Expect any absurdity when it comes to infoboxes. Look at this discussion, what do you see? One editor was banned from infobox discussions for a while, guess who? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:00, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Dear Gerda, Perplexing though you, and others, may find it, you cannot have been surprised by the strength of feeling that the debate on infoboxes generated on the Coward page. You have seen such strong feeling on other pages, and contributed to it. As such, you should take some responsibility for the outcome. KJP1 (talk) 22:18, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

I saw strong feelings, and when I did I stopped commenting, there and elsewhere. Life is too short. - I can't help to see the irony though, that it was Tim, whom I miss as one of my dearest and closest colleagues (Messiah, The Company of Heaven, Requiem (Fauré), his review for Magnificat, the first coloratura soprano I heard, and much more, last his comments to my FAC), who improveded the infobox in the Coward article, while I objected to one on Samuel Barber. The little boxes don't deserve so much of our souls. - Where in the arguments is the reader? - I made a list of articles where infoboxes where reverted, for the record, and take responsibility for that. - What do you think of my suggestions to not call each other group names and to edit infoboxes normally, as other article features such as images and tables? I take responsibility for that (but owe the latter thought to Voceditenore), see infobox opera made simple). - I loved to see Falstaff as TFA on the Main page on 1 January, as the symbol of a new time, the year of the reader and of peace, - I archived the burden of infobox-related stuff then. Now I will prepare the article of the wonderful music we'll sing tonight to PR, everybody is invited. The year is not over yet. - You, KJP1, would you be willing to watch over infobox discussions and make moderating comments like on Coward? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:23, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Hey

Hi Gerda... I got my first FL today :) Thought I'll inform you. Lourdes 11:16, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Excellent news! Thank you for the quality work, and for coming over. I am busy with the psalm in the top box. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:19, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you :) Am quite pleased. And good luck with the Psalm. Reads great. Lourdes 11:24, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

My sole attempt at FL died of indifference. I may pick it up at some point. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:27, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

My sole attempt failed because I didn't know enough of the rules. Max Reger works perhaps some day. First sing the heaviest, PR tomorrow ;) - What you also must see is the IB warrior's hitlist? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:18, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

ps: best remembered as a farce or the ultimate boxes (mind the date) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:23, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

If I hear the "I" word again I will probably scream. (and note) Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:25, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

please take note how I avoided it ;) - I promised to go to no article talk with that dirty word, - if you looked at the hit list you saw it. Little Doctorbody and -soul are a must see, - escape is mentioned. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:28, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

I have no dog in this fight but I would willingly retire myself rather than lose an editor of the calibre Tim riley. I feel so proud for him and his Elgar-page-without-an-embellishment and I think of Tim every time I walk past the statue in the centre of my home town over the past few years. It's time for whoever caused him to retire to fall on their sword...Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:47, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Please read my reply above, about missing one of my dearest and closest colleagues, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:52, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Straf mich nicht in deinem Zorn

On 5 September 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Straf mich nicht in deinem Zorn, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that when "Straf mich nicht in deinem Zorn", a hymn by Johann Georg Albinus paraphrasing Psalm 6, was first printed, it appeared with a dance tune? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Straf mich nicht in deinem Zorn. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Straf mich nicht in deinem Zorn), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:02, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

New article improvement drives

Check out the following new article improvement drives/contests. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:57, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

• Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge – aims to reach 10,000 article improvements for UK- and Ireland-related articles
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge – aims to reach 10,000 article improvements for Africa-related articles

Good goals, no time, sorry, - RL and feeling not wanted, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:08, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Oh well. If you find time, or change your mind, etc. the drives will be occurring for a while. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:18, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

It's not my mind which has to change, to make me feel wanted, - just see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Quality Article Improvement/Infobox, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:29, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

I wasn't aware of all this. Well, for what it's worth, I'm often pro-infobox myself. They are functional in providing concise summaries of articles. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:39, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Read a bit above where I was held responsible for precious editors leaving. The project page has been termed the warriors' hitlist. What does that tell us about good faith? No names of people, no diffs of reverts, - I kept and keep it as neutral as I possibly could. Look at Bizet, entered in February, reverted, accepted. An IP added an infobox yesterday, - what have I to do with that? Reverted, of course, pointing to a discussion on the talk, where said that I try to let go, in 2013. I had my say on ARCA, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:52, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Herzlich tut mich verlangen

On 13 September 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Herzlich tut mich verlangen, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the melody for the hymn "Herzlich tut mich verlangen" was taken from a love song and became the tune of "O Sacred Head, Now Wounded"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Herzlich tut mich verlangen. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Herzlich tut mich verlangen), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:01, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Ein Geschenk

Paul Robeson, "Při řekách babylonských". Narky Blert (talk) 00:10, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you

Hello Gerda! This is just to say I have been inactive for a long time from Wikipedia and, until looking through my talk page just now, I'd missed the award you gave me on January 17, 2014. It has been a long time since then, but thank you, deeply, for your kind and considered words at that time. It's clear you take considerable effort to recognize users with this award and I'm honored to have received one. —Brandt Luke Zorn (talk) 08:45, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Hallo..

..Gerda, wie geht's? Can I interest you in this? – FrB.TG (talk) 18:33, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Es geht mixed, see above, I am held responsible for FA writers leaving which makes me sad not happy, - thank goodness we still have you ;) - yes, interested, will post here (where have a peer review open) and look later, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:54, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Frank Stähle

Hallo Gerda, it's great that you did an article about Frank Stähle! Do you have one in German? Are you planning to do one? We are doing a Gedenkkonzert for him on Oct. 5th at the Konservatorium and need a good biography for him in German. There are some online but all rather short. If you have anything please let me know! We'll gladly put your name in the programme as the author! Many thanks! Edmund Brownless (Docent, Dr. Hoch's Konservatorium)

I can translate it. I have some unforgettable memories of concerts, including my first Elias which we will sing again on 3 October in Wiesbaden, but don't even know where he was born. Any help with such facts would be welcome. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:59, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

ps: other fond memories are singing Mozart's Requiem in the Lutherkirche (and other places) as part of the student's choir, as mentioned in DYK for Frank Stähle --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:03, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Herzlichen Dank! Hier ist die Information: http://dreikoenigsgemeinde.ekhn.de/startseite/einzelansicht/news/erinnerung-an-frank-staehle.html

Danke, werde es einbauen in de:Frank Stähle und hier. Verbesserungen sind immer willkommen! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:22, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Ich bin sehr dankbar! Das Gedenkkonzert ist am 5.10. im Engelbert Humperdinck Saal am Konservatorium. Es wird u.a. Bach, Haydn, Debussy und Widor gespielt und gesungen.

I will try to come. Thank you for great articles, including the conservatory! If you want to listen to exquisite choral music a capella: 13 October, 7:30pm OREYA in St. Martin Idstein, [1], - I try to find details about the program but will likely follow the scheme Ukrainian/International of 2009. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:35, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

New day: I remember that literary connections were important in rehearsals, such as Kasack's Die Stadt hinter dem Strom ("Was ist Leben? Sterben zu lernen.") for Mozart's Requiem. What do you think of printing the closing chorale of the Kreuzstabkantate in a program for that concert and ask everybody able to sing it, from their seats? He was no friend of words about himself ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:15, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

ps: I added a bit - and found in a source: Edmund Brownless, Tenor ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:19, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Many thanks! I've asked about singing the Chorale together at the end! I like your idea! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.140.192.5 (talk) 09:29, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

I quoted rather abbreviated, and remember that he read the full passage to us:

Robert: Warum plagt man sich so und lernt die halbe Welt auswendig?

Anna: Damit man genügend Vorrat zum Vergessen hat.

R: Immer von neuem?

A: Immer von neuem.

R: Was soll ich tun?

A: Lächelnd die Spur des Lebens ziehen.

R: Und dein Amt?

A: Die Wirklichkeit zu verwandeln.

R: In den Traum?

A: In das Gesetz des Daseins.

R: Sage mir nur noch eins: warum lebt man?

A: Damit man zu sterben lernt. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:42, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Elijah: Wer bis an das Ende beharrt, der wird selig. - I remember how we worked on creating an earthly sound for the first phrase, and ethereal for the second, creating contrasting layers because different parts have the text at different times. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:07, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Anniversary

Thank you, Gerda!! -- Tenebrae (talk) 19:38, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

My pleasure, - remembering is often the most enjoyable part of an editing day, - I do it first to set a good mood, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:40, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Gerda... been thinking about what you said yesterday a lot today as I teased the work systems (over 10+ hours the last two days) back into coherence on what turned out to be two hours sleep last night. And much caffeine, which ain't so good for a heart patient. And I need more sleep, but I also need to wait 2-3 hours to begin my sleep cycle. Anyway, one thing I came up with.... When editors leave, it is much like death. Loss reactions are similar. Grief can be similar on the part of the grieving. Acceptance stages are virtually equal in death and fora loss for those who are close, and even those who aren't so close. So death/grave metaphors hold up on some level. But I fully agree with you: It is a loss, not a death. Most people, either way, understandably have trouble with loss - I do sometimes. Exposing the contrast is only so helpful. And I'm probably preaching to the choir on all of that. :D :D :D

Thanks for not letting me go quietly before. Wish C. could both be civil and have someone do for him what you did for me. (Wish I could just accept C. the way C. was… can’t go there yet, sadly. And apparently we have our crosses to bear if we'll pick them up as offered - dunno if that is necessary.) You possess much wisdom and thanks for sharing it with me. Best, LaughingVulcan ^{Grok Page!} 23:29, 2 October 2016 (UTC)