User talk:Voceditenore/Archive 16

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

yet more past topics...

ABOUT MY ARCHIVES
Past topics I · Past topics II · Past topics III · Past topics IV · Past topics V · Past Topics VI · Past Topics VII · Past Topics VIII · Past Topics IX · Past Topics X
Past Topics XI · Past Topics XII · Past Topics XIII · Past Topics XIV · Past Topics XV · Past Topics XVI · Past Topics XVII · Past Topics XVIII · Past Topics XIX
Past Topics XX · Past Topics XXI · Past Topics XXII · Past Topics XXIII · Past Topics XXIV · Past Topics XXV · Past Topics XXVI · Past Topics XXVII
Schoolwork · AfC · DYKs etc. · Resolved notices

Thanks

for tidying my talk page. I actually raised the issue of these edits at WP:CNB#Needs to be turned into English but no one has looked at it. If you have time, perhaps you could help. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 10:56, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Luca Antonio Predieri

This hook surprised me — I've heard of the opera Il sogno di Scipione, but by Mozart. Are the two related (e.g. Mozart derived it from Predieri), or are they totally different except for their title? Talkback, please. Nyttend (talk) 12:04, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Mozart used the same libretto by Metastasio, albeit 40 years later. Metastasio was the court poet to the Hapsburgs and wrote it originally for the 1735 birthday of the Emperor. Poor old Predieri, no one remembers him anymore, but his score for Il sogno di Scipione is one of the few of his that has survived. Voceditenore (talk) 18:07, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

October 2011

Hi. Thank you for your help with the vital work of patrolling new pages. I noticed that you are not marking some of the pages you've reviewed as patrolled. Please do remember to click the 'mark this page as patrolled' link at the bottom of the new page if you have performed the standard patrolling tasks. Where appropriate, doing so saves time and work by informing fellow patrollers of your review of the page, so that they do not duplicate efforts. Thanks again for volunteering your time at the new pages patrol project. — Abhishek  ^Talk 10:24, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

• I am fully aware of the need to mark a page patrolled, as you could have easily seen here. I missed this one. While you're at it, how about reading Wikipedia:Don't template the regulars. Voceditenore (talk) 10:39, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello Voceditenore. You tagged "Easypano" for speedy deletion, but you did not notify the article's creator that it had been so tagged. There is strong consensus that the creators of articles tagged for speedy deletion should be warned and that the person placing the tag has that responsibility. All of the major speedy deletion templates contain a pre-formatted warning for this purpose—just copy and paste to the creator's talk page. Thank you. — Abhishek  ^Talk 10:25, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

• I did notify the creator, at the same time you were posting here [1]. I edit manually, not with Twinkle. How about waiting a few minutes please before "warning" me, and while you're at it, how about reading Wikipedia:Don't template the regulars. Voceditenore (talk) 10:38, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

John Easterlin

Hi Voce. I nearly deleted this as a creation by a sock, but I AGF'd and PRODDed instead. I have left a message at user talk:4meter4. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:42, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Just got back and had a look at it. The original article created by User:Nrswanson, was very short and had a reference for the Grammy [2] Subsequently a series of IPs, who I strongly suspect are the subject and/or his management have filled it with the promotional junk, and have been repeatedly removing maintenance tags, refs, cats, etc. I just restored the latest tags and have left a note on the article's talk page. Voceditenore (talk) 17:31, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Just to let you know that 4meter4 and I have buried the hatchet and I've helped out on some of his stubs. Nrswanson was one of his socks. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:31, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

That's great! By the way, I know who all the sox were—I wrote the page.;-) In this case, there really were no grounds for prodding the article on the basis of non-notability. It would have been a decisive "keep" at an AfD. Also, my understanding of deletion policy is that an article by a sock can't be summarily deleted unless it's by a sock of a banned user, and this was not the case here. Besides, if it's an article on a valid subject, what's gained by deleting it rather than reverting to a better version? All of which reminds me, that I need to take a large red pencil to the current schlock Chez Easterlin. Voceditenore (talk) 05:38, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

In the course of wielding my red pencil, I've discovered something very odd! User:Atj97 had been doing a lot of tag removing, reverting etc. on this article, but no obvious vandalism. At first I thought he was COI editor, but when I checked his edits in other articles, I found some quite unpleasant and blatant vandalism, e.g., [3], [4], [5], [6]. I then noticed that he had added spurious persondata to the Easterlin article [7]. I suspect he picked all four articles at random. Anyhow I've left him a Level 4 vandalism warning and removed the persondata from the Easterlin article. Let's hope he loses interest and/or gets blocked soon. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 14:57, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the much improved article!4meter4 (talk) 17:48, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

I've checked those diffs and now also have the articles on my wl. He hasn't vandalised since your final warning, but if User:Atj97 makes just more disruptive edit or vandalism, don't waste time with ANI, let me know if I don't see it first and I'll block directly. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:35, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Adam Fong article

Can you tell my why you deemed the link you removed as inappropriate?Canticle (talk) 11:09, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Because it's a form of advertising and unencyclopedic to say "Many of Fong’s scores as well as sound files and videos are available on the work page of his web site". The article already links to his website twice. It doesn't need a third link. Readers who are interested in finding out what's on his website can simply go there. You'll notice that I've also tagged the article for having only primary sources and notability issues. Frankly, unless you can find significant coverage about him in completely independent published reliable sources (I looked and couldn't), or he can fulfill one of the other criteria at WP:MUSICBIO, this article is highly likely to go up for deletion. Voceditenore (talk) 12:37, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Landscape photography and Ansel Adams

Hello again, on a different topic. I see that you're interested in landscape photography and have The Tetons and the Snake River by Ansel Adams on your page. I am a bit of an Ansel Adams buff myself, and have written articles about two of his close associates, Cedric Wright and Fred R. Archer. If you have the time, take a peek and let me know what you think. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:18, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

• Replied here. Voceditenore (talk) 18:24, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Category:Opera seria Talk:Opera seria

Hi Voceditenore--

I've left a note at the talkpage for Category:Opera seria questioning whether any Rossini operas are properly included there. A message at the top of that page warns that no one ever looks at it, so I thought I might bring it to your attention here. If this question is outside your own area of expertise perhaps you might refer me to a different editor interested in opera seria. Thanks very much. Milkunderwood (talk) 05:29, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Question and discussion now moved over to Talk:Opera seria, a more logical place for it. Milkunderwood (talk) 17:42, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi Mike, I just got back from a week travelling and have commented at the new place. I would tend to agree that the article as it now stands is a bit too hard and fast about the cut-off date. Left some potentially useful sources there as well. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 19:07, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Copied from my talk page, since I'm not sure if you saw my response there

Ansel Adams and his friends

Hi Jim, I really enjoyed those articles! I see you're in Napa. Makes me homesick. Although I've lived in London all my adult life, I grew up in San Francisco. My husband and I still go back there every year, and always to Glen Ellen too, where my grandparents lived for many years. At one point they also had a resturant in Santa Rosa. And my great-grandmother, well, she was quite a character. This restaurant was named after her (more about her on p. 2 of the article). Best, Voceditenore (talk) 18:18, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Oh my gosh. Not only did I eat at Dago Mary's many times, it was there that one of the most dramatic 24 hours of my life began. On December 13, 1984, I was halfway through a business lunch when a waiter said my name and told me there was an emergency call. My pregnant wife had gone into early labor, and the next morning my son was born 10 weeks early at 3 lbs 1.5 oz. Fortunately, he flourished, is tall, confident and healthy, and now works in my family business. We'll celebrate his 27th birthday in a few weeks. The restaurant was wonderful and full of the old working class San Francisco traditions. I almost always ate fresh fish there.Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:49, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Anne Sharp

The soprano with the pretty fair use image died. I formatted the refs a bit, but wonder if the obituary should be used more as a ref in the article. I hesitated to change "passed away", a bit sad remembering how the article developed, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:53, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

How sad! I think it probably could be used more as a reference, but what's there is fine now. Technically "passed away" shouldn't be used, but I didn't have the heart to change it either. Voceditenore (talk) 10:07, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Sorry to butt in, just can't help wondering why "passed away" shouldn't be allowed? Is it not just a synonym for "died"? Or am I missing something? almost-instinct 12:05, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

See Manual of Style/Words to watch#Euphemisms. I know of several editors who regularly search WP for instances of "passed away" and cchange them to "died". They also look for things like "tragic death". I once got that treatment in an opera article I had created because the other editor didn't realize it was part of a synopsis, not a comment on a real person. Ah, the joys of Wikipedia. . Best, Voceditenore (talk) 12:14, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

"Passed away" is a euphemism?! Someone needs to re-write the King James Bible then: "And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are dead". In my Webster's New Collegiate the third definition of "pass" (after move and depart) is die. I shall go and take my ire elsewhere ;-) almost-instinct 14:15, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Opinion requested

Would you please comment on the current discussion at Talk:Falsetto. Thanks.4meter4 (talk) 03:17, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Voced, I know you may not want to step into a messy conversation, but I am dealing with editors who are advocating removing sourced content to push their own agenda. The content is cited to multiple references and they still want to change it.4meter4 (talk) 12:19, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the much needed guidance!4meter4 (talk) 12:32, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Doctor Ox

Hi,

I do intend to address both the points you have raised but I have a rather more busy week coming up. The programme I have includes the libretto, so a synopsis will come when I next have insomnia. I've also googled and searched NewsBank for reviews. I am considering whether "mixed" will be too positive a spin on the work. It certainly is the most negative of all the new(ish) operas about which I have created articles. And I don't think it is a coincidence that it is the last of all the works of which I have programmes on which I have created an article. I'lllet you know when it is ready for an upgrade.--Peter cohen (talk) 23:55, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi again. I've now added the sections you thought were missing. It should be a WP:DYK on the front page in the next 24 hours. Can you let me know if you think it's worth a go at GA?--Peter cohen (talk) 17:21, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Just FYI

Noticed your post at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council - just wanted to let you know it seems that the conversation has moved to Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Create a special status for project-level style guidelines. Moxy (talk) 08:24, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi Moxy, my post there was to correct a specific misapprehension pertaining to that particular discussion, not the broader issue at the Village Pump. I'm giving that one a miss, I'm afraid. Like virtually all discussions on that topic it's unlikely to lead anywhere and in my view is using the proverbial sledgehammer to crack a nut. Voceditenore (talk) 15:06, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Les pêcheurs...

Many thanks for picking up the error in the final image caption, and for your support for the article's promotion - neither of which I saw until after the error had been corrected and the article promoted. I wish you all seasonal happiness. Brianboulton (talk) 22:10, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Best wishes

	Bet you wish you were here!
	Warmest greetings from the Land of Smiles, and let's keep smiling together throughout the coming new year. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:12, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Relax to some Wagner and a good bottle of CNDP with your Xmas pud!

And from me

Season's greetings, and thanks for the note. The York Theatre Royal Christmas pantomime The York Family Robinson (with ageless Dame Berwick Kaler) was a great treat last week. Guardian review here, some rehearsal clips on Youtube - and one of the characters is called Robinson Caruso. --GuillaumeTell 11:29, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

And from me too. BTW Thanks for your comments on Dr Ox.--Peter cohen (talk) 13:34, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Me too! Thanks for all your hard work this year, and have a very happy, healthy 2012. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:04, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Do you have access to a source?

Hi. :) I need to find somebody who can compare

Fanning, David. 2001. "Expressionism". The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, second edition.

to this. Naturally, I thought of you! Do you have access to that book? If not, any ideas who might? If you don't, I'll take it to WP:REX, but I thought I'd start here. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:37, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Oh! I just noticed the big note saying that you're away. I'll head over to WP:REX. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:39, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Monteverdi's lost operas

Hi, and I hope you enjoyed your break. Happy 2012! I wonder if you mind my beginning the year with a request for help? I have just created the above, after about two years' work on and (mostly) off. The problem is that if I use the "Monteverdi's operas" template for the lead image, it automatically italicises the article title, which is obviously wrong. I would if possible like to use the template, to maintain compatability with the other Monteverdi opera articles. Do you know how I can do this without invoking italics? Otherwise do you know a technocrat who does? Best wishes, Brianboulton (talk) 17:59, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Don't worry, someone has fixed this problem. (You may like the article, though) Brianboulton (talk) 00:28, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I liked the article a lot! Are you taking it to FA? I gave it a B for the Opera Project, only because we don't really have A ratings. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 16:30, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Giulietta Guicciardi

Perhaps you can shed some light on the obscurity of Beethoven's name/description of his (13th and) 14th piano sonata, dedicated to Giulietta Guicciardi, and discussed in an almost operatic way on the sonata's discussion: did he write "Sonata quasi una fantasia" or "Quasi una fantasia", and - more important - what does it mean? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:49, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Bonamore

Nice work (as usual), Voceditenore. Thanks! Do you think you could find a death year for the architect Henri Prudent (born 1868)? I'd much rather upload scans of Les Salles de spectacle de Victor Louis to Commons rather than the English Wikipedia, if possible. Or maybe I should ask this at the Opera project? --Robert.Allen (talk) 13:02, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind words! I had a good bash at finding out when Prudent died, but, alas, came up with nothing. :( Best, Voceditenore (talk) 14:43, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for trying, I know you're probably plenty busy. If you can't find it on the web, likely nobody else can either. --Robert.Allen (talk) 02:11, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Please use Commons

Hello. Yesterday, I transferred a file which you uploaded to Commons. In the future, please upload unquestionably free use images to Commons, unless you specifically do not want them on Commons, in which case you should use a {{Keeplocal}} tag. Files stored on Commons can be used in Wikipedia the same way you would use them if they were uploaded locally, with the added benifit that other language Wikipedias will also be able to use the image. Thank you. Sven Manguard Wha? 23:37, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I'll use Commons in the future for these. It was basically laziness on my part, as a find uploading images there quite slow and tedious. Voceditenore (talk) 17:54, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

reply

Thanx for the advise!--Cheyenne (talk) 20:39, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Luxembourg

I revised The Count of Luxembourg, expanding the background and plot and adding several references. However, you will note that most of the material information is also contained in the article about the German original, which covers various adaptations and translations. As I read the references, Lamb, Ganzl, Traubner, etc., they *all* treat it as one work of art. I have become convinced that it would make more sense to merge the two articles together - it would entail rather minor changes to the main article - I could do it in an hour. the article still wouldn't be too long, and it would sensibly describe the full history of the operetta and its various adaptations. If you wish to comment on the matter, you can see that I have opened the question at the end of the talk page for the article, so please comment there. -- Ssilvers (talk) 01:51, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Replied here. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 11:41, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. You had planned to expland/improve the non-English parts of Der Graf. I see you did a lot of expansion a year ago. Are you finished with the expansion? Before doing anything about a potential merge, I want to make sure that you have expanded the rest of the article to the extend you're going to do so, so that the proportional size of the English discussion will be easier to guage. Please let me know either way. -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:25, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

I guess you mean non-English and non-German. No, I think what I have there now in the "Performance history" is sufficient at the moment. None of those were as successful or stayed as long in the repertoire in their countries as the English one did, with the possible exception of the French version, but I can't see me adding more to it in the near future. I suspect the early Italian version was a simple translation and not significantly different, ditto the French version (apart from a couple of character name changes). The Spanish versions were pretty obscure. I would have thought a separate section for the English version, ala Falka might be in order. Voceditenore (talk) 15:58, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Falcon and Magluta 1

Hi there.. Two things I need to tell you. First, thank you for giving me advice on my newly created article, 'Falcon and Magluta'. You said on my talk page that you merged my other article, 'Magluta and Falcon' into the article. Just to let you know, I want to delete the 'Magluta and Falcon' which has the reverse name in the title, and keep the 'Falcon and Magluta' article. Please let me know how do to this. Second, theres some idot who keeps repeatingly editing my article without my permission. How do i report him and get him to stop? Thanks and I look forward to your reply. Bldonne (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:48, 26 January 2012 (UTC).

I didn't do the merge. I just flagged it up for an administrator to carry out. An admistrator has now done this. See [8] "Magluta and Falcon" is now simply a redirect page to the new title. See [9]. As for your other complaints, as a new user, you have some serious misconceptions about how Wikipedia works. You need to have a close look at Ownership of articles, and you need to stop referring to people as idiots. The article has some problems. Wikipedia has strict policies concerning articles about living people, even convicted criminals. All articles must adhere to the policies of no original research, verifiability, and neutral point of view, but this is especially true of biographies of living people. You can read the policy at Biographies of living persons. I have brought my concerns about the article to the Biographies of living persons Noticeboard where you are welcome to join in the discussion. Voceditenore (talk) 07:26, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

I assume I am the "some idiot" that you refer to above. In addition to Voceditenore's sage advice, I would urge you to read WP:NPA and think very carefully before you make any more personal attacks or there will be consequences. – ukexpat (talk) 14:15, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Please Review User:Trigger.o.metry/Umbrella Media Worke

Dear editor, i have created an article and would like it to be reviewed by experts. Please review it and give feedback. Your suggestions are required to further improve the article. Thanks and regards, dex 11:44, 26 January 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trigger.o.metry (talk • contribs) 11:52, 26 January 2012‎

• Replied at your talk page. – Voceditenore (talk) 19:06, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Schleifer => slide (music)

Are you an admin or know of one? I'm trying to move an article "Schleifer" to "slide (music)." The problem is that previously, "slide (music)" redirected to "legato." I've removed the redirect, but WP won't let me move to "slide (music)" since it's already been created - but an admin could do it. Thanks for any help. -- kosboot (talk) 15:32, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm not an admin. Try User:Antandrus (an admin) or list it at Wikipedia:Requested moves in the sub-section Technical requests. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 15:43, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

PS. I've reverted your edit to slide (music). It can't be left blank until the move is carried out. Voceditenore (talk) 15:53, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Falcon and Magluta 2

about 2 weeks ago, i wrote an article called, 'falcon and magluta', which a user called, Ukexpat, "edited" or worse (i cant say vandalized because its against diki rules, even though i and others think otherwise). anyway, i would like your answer to a question. on that article, one of the headings was, 'Rise to Power'. he changed it to 'Rise'. can you explain why you think he did this considering that falcon and magluta rose to power when everyone knows that billionaire drug lords are powerful. you dont become a billionaire without becoming powerful. why does the heading, 'Rise to Power,' worry him so much that he had to change it? Bldonne (talk) 04:12, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

An administrator has already answered you quite adequately on your talk page and warned you against personal attacks like this one and others. I will simply point out that several editors worked on the page after I had brought the article to the attention of the Biographies of living persons noticeboard. The change in heading was simply part of a much larger set of edits to bring the article into compliance with Wikipedia's Manual of Style and policy on the biographies of living persons. I'm surprised that you are focusing on the wording of one heading when the entire article was deleted for extensive copyright infringement and plagiarism on your part. Voceditenore (talk) 06:53, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

ok, first off, if the admin you mentioned had answered me adequately, i wouldnt be bringing up this topic again.. this should be easy to comprehend to anyone. and again, i didnt personally attack anyone. you keep focusing on "personal attacks," like i cursed him out or something. if you can quote me on where i "personally attacked" him, i might digress. anyway, how is a heading as simple as, 'rise to power' not in compliance with Wikipedia's Manual of Style? do you see a grammatical error? because i dont. the reason i'm surprised by the small change in the heading is because theres no reason to change it in the first place. and i am even more surprised that you focus all your energy on the respect of an admin more than the content of articles in wiki. it seems that admins possess a higher priority than the content of the articles in wiki. americans are very strange people.

Bldonne (talk) 09:08, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

First of all, please note that neither User:Ukexpat nor I are adminstrators. Clearly implying that you consider Ukexpat a vandal while claiming that you are simply not permitted to say so openly, as well as explicitly calling him a vandal here and here are personal attacks. Accusing adminstrators and other editors who have dealt with you of ethnic prejudice is a personal attack, and likewise comments such as "americans are very strange people". You have now been directed by numerous editors to the appropriate Wikipedia policies and guidelines concerning article ownership, biographies of living persons, neutral point of view and copyright infringement—all of which are non-negotiable and none of which you appear to have understood yet. As to your specific question about the revised title of the sub-heading, it was arguably more neutral in tone and was made as part of many edits by that editor and others to bring the article into compliance. However, the point is moot since Falcon and Magluta has been deleted.

If you wish to make further comments about the wording of a sub-heading in a deleted article, that is your choice, but please do so on your own talk page. I will not respond to further queries or arguments on the subject. If you wish to raise the issue of ethnic prejudice by administrators (and other editors) which you claim to perceive, you can take it to the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents, I will not respond to further comments from you on that subject either. Voceditenore (talk) 09:59, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Bldonne, this subsequent edit to my talk page was entirely unacceptable. Please do not do something like that again, either here or elsewhere. Voceditenore (talk) 12:02, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

File:Jean-Vital Ismael on Le Trombinoscope 1877.jpg

Hi Voceditenore! Congrats on another fine article. As an aside, I'm wondering why you did not upload this pic to Commons. Is it because you were unsure of the identity of the illustrator? I never seem to be sure where these things should go. I would have thought this one could go to Commons. Thanks for info. --Robert.Allen (talk) 20:43, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

I see another editor moved it to Commons. I suppose these things are not always clear-cut. I certainly thought there might be a good reason for leaving it on the Wikipedia, since the illustrator might not have died more than 70 years ago. I suppose we will just have to cope with living in an uncertain world (especially when it comes to copyright law!). --Robert.Allen (talk) 22:54, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

PS - I should probably not leave comments at DYK, since I have almost no familiarity with that process. But I liked your article and wanted to support it! --Robert.Allen (talk) 21:17, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

I liked your comment and suggestion and passed it to someone who is good in pics. Keep doing that! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:27, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

hi

Thnx,Voceditenore for having your Views n suggestions on the Article. Shilpa More (talk) 14:12, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Well Polish baritone

Artur Rucinski was everything I was hoping for and more. Were you able to go? If not, brace yourself for a lot of gushing! Which reminds me - I never got round to doing those refs for his page properly.... Tut tut almost-instinct 15:40, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Gush away! I'd love to hear how it went. I didn't buy tickets because... I completely forgot about it. I hang my head in shame.;-) Hopefully, there'll be some press reviews. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 16:24, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

His voice is set up pretty much like Hvorostovsky, so it was no surprise that probably the best thing he did was Yeletsky's - the voice rolls up to the top G beautifully. The other item that suited him best / brought out his best was Valentin's aria, similar range and tone. The programme proper finished with Posa's aria - in it the top notes don't (yet) have the dark weight for Verdi, I thought - but for the first encore he sang Di Provenza (same key, same top notes) and I put away that thought. The programme was pretty heavy anyway: 1st half: 4 Shakespeare sonnets by Tadeusz Baird, arias from I puritani, Don Pasquale and Faust; 2nd half: arias from Marriage of Figaro, Queen of Spades, Onegin and Don Carlos; encores: Germont and Toreador. Halfway through the latter he suddenly looked very tired, but didn't sound it until the very final note (which came after yet another top G) The tone is plusher than Hvorostovsky at the same age, with less of the golden gleam, and the voice is generally bigger. I see that he's singing Germont and also wotsit in I masnadieri this year. I hope he doesn't push into Verdi too fast: he's got plenty of time for the weight up there to develop. What's really lovely about his singing is that there's no overdarkening at all (cf Mariusz Kwiecien), the voice is very true, naturally blessed and used with faultless discipline. Ok. I think I'm done.... ;-) almost-instinct 16:50, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

• Replied here. Voceditenore (talk) 18:24, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

• Me too ;-) almost-instinct 14:15, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Khaua-Mbandjeru Rebellion

I took a 24hr break since I was very disappointed by your course of action (this is actually the first of my 8900+ edits here which was reverted in good faith), and I thought I am having a burnout and just need to calm down. However, even now I still feel very much disappointed. Let me explain how it looks in my perspective. Yesterday morning, I saw the message left by Maggie on the administrator noticeboard. Even though I am not an administrator, I decided that since people are begging for help, they actually need help (especially since I have a great respect for Maggie), and followed to the project page. I could not find there anything which would obviously fit my expertise, but inspecting the oldest available day (Feb 2) I found an article which was written on a topic which interested me and where I really could help. Fine, I went to the article, discovered indeed that its large part was made of quotations, and the last edit was made exactly on Feb 2. The quotes were essential since they contained part of the story. Then I started re-writing it. Things went slowly, since this was my working time, and I could only do it during short breaks I have, but I was planning to finish it in the evening (which I made clear in the comments to my edits). I did not just remove the quotes, but took the essential information to them to the article. Then you came and, seeing that I am working on the article, removed the remaining quotes. I explained on the talk page that for me it was more convenient to work on the article when quotes are there - for some reasons, I prefer to have only one window open for Wikipedia, and I hate working in the text editor - and restored the quotes, promising again explicitly to finish the work by the end of the day. (And I immediately continued working). You reverted within five minutes, claiming the quotes are copyvio and may not stay in the article even for a second. (They stayed for three months before that, and for 12 days after the notice was posted, and nobody cared). Then I felt unwelcome and stopped editing the article. After all, this is not my topic, and I have no interest in the topic, I just came to help. It is great that you have finished editing the article, but I believe your course of action was suboptimal. I just fail to see why do you insisted on editing the article at the same time it was obvious I am already working on it, and I had no delays. Well, I understand your reasoning, but to me it looks like you went a formal way in the situation when this formal way is detrimental. At this point, I do not feel like ever returning to Wikipedia:Copyright problems to help, though things obviously may change. I know other places around here where I had more welcoming experience. However, you may want to understand what went wrong, since the next user is unlikely to have the five-year editing and administrating experience which I have, and he/she will just walk away without saying anything. And then we will continue complaining about low editor retention rate.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:25, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Ymblanter, I'm sorry you found this upsetting, and I hope that you will return to working on copyright clean up. I know it seems a very technical approach to have taken, but I thought pretty carefully before I reverted you. Wikipedia claims protection under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) as an online service provider, and our right to do so has not yet been successfully challenged. However, there have been arguments put forth that we are not a service publisher, but a publisher, and that accordingly we cannot take safe harbor when our contributors infringe copyright. Our best defense is to be scrupulous about due diligence in complying with the DMCA. That is, as soon as we discover an infringement we remove it, no matter how long it had previously sat there undiscovered. I weighed that up against the possible inconvenience to editors wishing to re-write, in that they would have to either open two windows or work on the re-write off line, and decided that it was best to err on the side of caution, and I'd do it again if a similar situation arises. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 08:54, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Sergio Franchi

Hi There. You helped me once before on the Sergio Franchi pages I am developing. I need help on developing a Category "American Musicians Template" on his name space and cannot find out how to do so. I have tried querying the Help Desk, FAQ, and posted a request for help on the main Sergio Franchi Talk space. I have received no help there. Do you have suggetions on how to create and use? Appreciate any help you can suggest. CatherineCathlec (talk) 03:55, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Cathlec. Wikipedia doesn't use templates for categories. That's taken care of by simply adding the category to the foot of the article. The reader then clicks on the category link and can see all the articles in that category. There is Category:American musicians templates but that's a maintenance category which contains all the individual templates for each singer, e.g. Template:Connie Francis. But the template category itself is never placed in the article only the individual template. That's done by adding {{Connie Francis}} to the foot of the article. (This only works if there is an existing template).

Are you trying to make a template similar to the Connie Francis one? If so, you can do that by following the model of one of the existing templates. Copy and paste the code into your user space and then change the various entries, etc. to the relevant ones for Franchi. But you should work on the template in your user space, not in the main Wikipedia space. And if you do manage to make one successfully and transfer it to Template space, e.g. at Template:Sergio Franchi, you have to be very judicious as to what articles you add it to. For example, not to every article that remotely mentions Franchi, and certainly not to every song he has ever sung or recorded. For example the Connie Francis template appears on Who's Sorry Now? because the song is very closely associated with her and she made it a hit, but not on Volare. You can also get help on the talk page of WikiProject Templates.

About categories in general, I have removed some of the categories in the Sergio Franchi article as they are redundant. You don't put both the super and sub category in, only the most specific. For example, Category:American tenors goes in the article but not its super categories, Category:American male singers, Category:American singers, or Category:American musicians. The page Wikipedia:Categorization has more guidance on this. Hope that helps. Voceditenore (talk) 07:17, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

I am trying to think all you have communicated to me, but at this point I am still a little befuddled. Got it about not working on the template on the article space and working in the sandbox of my user space. Do I use my browser to copy the relevant lines and then paste to my sandbox?? Is this the proper way? I already know, and have drafted how I want his American Musicians template to look.

The second big issue is regarding Albums, Singles, Songs, etc. I have been looking at the Connie Francis template because it seems relatively simple and similar. However, all of her entries have internal links "title" which means the Songs , Albums, Singles, have already been developed in Wikipedia pages. I do have plans to enter his Albums, Songs, Singles later, but do I NEED to do it first?

Also, I do know about being judicious in adding songs, as I already made that mistake, and just deleted the Sergio Franchi Songs category. I have tried to get started on that again as a project, but have been told by Wiki that since it was deleted, I need permission to add it back. That is a separate issue I would like to address in the future. For many of his associated songs I need to make Song pages. Like I need to create Album pages. I wanted to do these 2 projects after I substantially complete his biography article...but want to work on the template while I am analyizing how to coherently present my biography research.

Please suggest an orderly method to achieve these goals..Template, Albums, Songs, and (By the way.. I need to research how to add "Articles" so I can include them in the template later. Is this done on Wiki Commons like Photos? Yes I do plan to add Photos to the three related articles.) Hoping to learn from your experience. By the way, does it make a difference that you moved the Category "American tenors" to the end of categories? or was that just placed at the end to eliminate the "American musicians template" category for now?? Hopefully soon to be enlightened. Thanks, CatherineCathlec (talk) 18:14, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

One item you mentioned I did not yet address. I do not plan on adding the template to any Songs pages at this time. I only wish to have his template appear on the main pages..Biography, Discography, and Filmography. Is this accaptable? Cathlec (talk) 18:22, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Have a look at my sandbox. I have copied and changed Some of the relevant material. Why is it not showing the Typical Bod format?? CatherineCathlec (talk) 18:48, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your help in solving the puzzle about how to fix the American Musicians Temple. So simple for someone with your experience. CatherineCathlec (talk) 13:19, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Could you pease have one more look at the Sergio Franchi template on my talk page sandbox? I almost succeeded in completing, but have a problem I cannot find anywhere! Need fresh eyes. Appreciate, CatherineCathlec (talk) 23:51, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Found the problem after a good night's sleep. Template completed and moved. Thanks again for your help. CatherineCathlec (talk) 18:24, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Help Me! An authorized person has removed my templates from the Sergio Franchi Discography and Filmography pages and has made other changes on the main pages. Please look at this and let me know if it is vandalism, and how do I fix!!! The person name says there is no user page!! CatherineCathlec (talk) 20:12, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

• Replied at your talk page. Voceditenore (talk) 07:23, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks very much for your help regarding this matter. The process was a bit bumpy, but you and the editor in question have both made very valuable contributions to my editing skills.. and to the related articles.CatherineCathlec (talk) 14:36, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Gender gap connected to conflict aversion and lower confidence among women

The Gender Gap hub on Meta.

Since January 2011, Wikipedia's "Gender gap" has received much attention from Wikimedians, researchers and the media – triggered by a New York Times article that cited the estimate that only 12.64% of Wikipedia contributors are female. That figure came from the 2010 UNU-MERIT study, which was based on the first global, general survey of Wikipedia users, conducted in 2008 with 176,192 respondents using a methodology that had raised some questions (e.g. about sample bias and selection bias, other studies found similarly low ratios). A new paper titled "Conflict, Confidence, or Criticism: An Empirical Examination of the Gender Gap in Wikipedia" has now delved further into the data of the UNU-MERIT study, examining the responses to questions such as "Why don't you contribute to Wikipedia?" and "Why did you stop contributing to Wikipedia?", finding strong support for the following three hypotheses:

• "H1: Female Wikipedia editors are less likely to contribute to Wikipedia due to the high level of conflict involved in the editing, debating, and defending process." ("Controlling for other factors females were 26% more likely to select 'I got into conflicts with other Wikipedia contributors' as a reason for no longer contributing. The coefficients for being afraid of being 'criticized' [31% higher probability to be selected by female users as a reason against becoming more active in Wikipedia], 'yelled at', and 'getting into trouble' are all significant".)
• "H2: Female Wikipedia editors are less likely to contribute to Wikipedia due to gender differences in confidence in expertise to contribute and lower confidence in the value of their contribution. "
• "H3: Female contributors are less likely to contribute to Wikipedia because they prefer to share and collaborate rather than delete and change other's work."

A fourth hypothesis likewise tested a conjecture that has been brought up several times in discussion about Wikipedia's gender gap:

• "H4: Female contributors are less likely to contribute to Wikipedia because they have less discretionary time available to spend contributing".

However, the paper's authors argued that this conjecture was not borne out by the data, instead finding that "men are 19% more likely to select 'I didn't have time to go on' as a reason for no longer contributing."

source: Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2012-02-27/Recent research Bonne réflexion pour vous, --Cordialement féministe ♀ Cordially feminist Geneviève (talk) 01:48, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

• Responded here and here – Voceditenore (talk) 18:03, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Greetings!

I noticed some cleanup work for Matt Abts! So...

Come help! Cheers! --Leahtwosaints (talk) 21:16, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi Leah. I do add references when I find unreferenced articles in the course of my editing, but my work at WikiProject Opera and Wikipedia:Copyright problems doesn't really leave me enough time to work systematically in this area too. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 13:27, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

New Page Triage engagement strategy released

Hey guys!

I'm dropping you a note because you filled out the New Page Patrol survey, and indicated you'd be interested in being contacted about follow-up work. This is to notify you that we've finally released both the initial documentation about the project and also the engagement strategy, which sets out how we plan to work with the community on this. Please give both a read, and leave any comments or suggestions you have on the talkpage, on my talkpage, or in my inbox - okeyeswikimedia.org.

It's awesome to finally get to start work on this! :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 02:04, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Help us develop better software!

Thanks to all of you for commenting on the NOINDEX RfC :). It's always great to be able to field questions like these to the community; it's genuinely the highlight of my work! The NOINDEX idea sprung from our New Page Triage discussion; we're developing a new patrolling interface for new articles, and we want your input like never before :). So if you haven't already seen it, please go there, take a look at the screenshots and mockups and ideas, and add any comments or suggestions you might have to the talkpage. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 16:47, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Torture during the 2011–2012 Bahraini uprising

I'm currently in the progress of re-writing the whole article. I would appreciate if you would give me time to do so. Bahraini Activist ^{Talk to me} 16:30, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

• Replying at your talk page. Voceditenore (talk) 16:34, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Can you take a look at the rewrite? Bahraini Activist ^{Talk to me} 15:10, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Responded here. Voceditenore (talk) 07:46, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

You have a response at the Teahouse

Our goal is to keep things as simple as possible. Obviously my response is wrong, but now it looks pretty hectic in response to Googly. I suggest perhaps we can rewrite the instructions for Googly and remove what is now appearing really overhwhelming (even for me and I'm a long time Wikipedian!) Also, if you have interest in participating as a host, you can learn more here. Thanks for visiting the Teahouse! SarahStierch (talk) 16:35, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Portal:Arts in this month

Care to help out with some of these? I'd really appreciate any of your contributions to this section of the portal, swapping out/in some various entries, etc. ? — Cirt (talk) 15:21, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Replied at Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Arts. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 15:29, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

No worries, — Cirt (talk) 15:48, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

William Tell Overture + definition of an intellectual.

I see that you say you are keeping an eye on the William Tell Overture trivia to stop it getting out of hand. You, like me, must know the famous definition of an intellectual as "someone who can listen to the William Tell Overture and not think of the Lone Ranger." I assume it is notable enough to be included but has no source to cite. I read this http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17489142 today and wondered if it was an acceptable source.

I am not an experienced editor and do not want to add this myself if the source is not valid. MidlandLinda (talk) 18:02, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi. The source is OK, although not the oldest attribution of the gist of the quote. I've added it to to the article with subsequent modifications. See Talk:William Tell Overture for more. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 14:51, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for finding the earlier sources, I felt it needed inclusion, but it needed doing with care, as you have done, to avoid opening flood gates of trivia. MidlandLinda (talk) 12:08, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Carmen revamp

I am still toiling at this, and hope to have something broadly reviewable in about a week. I have removed the exhaustive list of films and other adaptations, most of which have little or nothing to do with Bizet's opera, and have replaced it with a brief prose summary (in the "Recordings and adaptations" section. It may be worth reassembling the list and linking to it, but I would rather concentrate on the main article for the present. Brianboulton (talk) 21:08, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Oxford Georgian Society

Hello. A new editor, AktadG, has prepared a page for the Oxford Georgian Socieyt in his sandbox. A previous attempt I believe got deleted; this version looks, to me, very fine. I'm about to give it a quick copy-edit and have asked G.Tell to cast his eye over it. Since (a) AktadG is for the time being primarily concerned with making notability clear (b) you're very good in that area, could I ask you to take a look too, please? Thank you! almost-instinct 17:44, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

GT has immediately pointed out that the text is one big copy-vio....which immediately puts me out of my depth. I recall seeing something like it being possible for copyright on the original material to be opened up somehow. Yes I'm feeling very out of my depth. I've been having a chat with AktadG on his talkpage....could you join us? Thank you! almost-instinct 18:56, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your time and effort almost-instinct 10:52, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

I wish I could have given him a more positive response, but thought it would be better to be realistic. I'm afraid the notability problems are still as bad as they were in the original AfD. The main issue is that all that stuff about Oliver Wardrop and his sister is immaterial. The societies he was involved in had nothing to do with this one, and if you read the references (apart from the claims on the club's web page), there's nothing to connect them and no evidence at all that this society had or has anything whatsoever to do with the notable collection in the Bodleian. There's a bit of fudging in the text to give a different impression, e.g. "The origins of the first Georgian Society go back to the turn of the 20th century when a Georgian Society was founded by Sir John Oliver Wardrop". As far as I can see, Wardrop founded his Georgian Society in Tblisi and also was invovled in the Georgian Committee (London) and the Georgian Historical Society (London). Best, Voceditenore (talk) 11:28, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

No, thank you the realism. I came across him when he was asking for help on the talk page of an editor who I knew was on a wikibreak almost-instinct 11:54, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

I've just G12'd it as an obvious copyvio but I can confirm that the sandbox version and the version that was AfD'd are pretty much identical apart from some minor wording changes. They have the same references and the same information. It would definitely be a G4 candidate and I say that as someone that thinks that criteria is severely over used, so even if we got permission it wouldn't be usable. Dpmuk (talk) 13:50, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, Dpmuk! I thought as much. I also suspect there's more to this whole business than meets the eye. The editor in question was quite clearly not new to Wikipedia. Voceditenore (talk) 18:13, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for having dragged you into this time-sink :-/ almost-instinct 22:23, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't mind at all. :-) Quite interesting really. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 17:01, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

At least I can always cite this as an example of my ability to assume good faith ;-) almost-instinct 21:05, 14 March 2012 (UTC)