This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
Hi,
in [1] you removed the link to a youtube video [2] showing MJ on the show "Motown 25: Yesterday, Today, Forever". You removed it due to "-duplicate YouTube link" as I could read in the commit log. I think there is no other link to this show on the page or am I wrong? I think this link is very important as it is the show where MJ revealed the move to the world. Not only does this very video show this important moment but also provides a lot of information. I like you re - add it under "External links", if you don't mind. Dan 84.58.153.120 ( talk) 13:10, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
I reverted your edit at Oakhill College.
I strongly recommend you refrain from attempting to introduce this material again. -- Michael Bednarek ( talk) 10:21, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Once an editor has vandalised after a final warning, it is probably best to report them to administrator intervention against vandalism, rather than giving them more warnings. Additional warnings just remove the teeth from the threat of a block, and mean they can continue to vandalise for longer. J Milburn ( talk) 00:07, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
for the moral support on the whole GA thing. All the best, M. -- Myke Cuthbert (talk) 15:31, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your corrections and improvements. Etan Tal ( talk) 11:55, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
No problems with lifting the prod, it was just that I cam across the article which had beeen tagged for some time. Do you want to do the same of her husband John Willison (musician), which is in a similar dire state? Jezhotwells ( talk) 15:09, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
Per a request as part of the RfC you recently !voted in we have changed the style of !voting. Please review that updates and make any changes to your !vote, as appropriate/desired. Thanks for your participation. -- GoRight ( talk) 07:25, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for raising the matter of our content dispute regarding the article on Mimi Macpherson at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard. It will be interesting to see what the Wikipedia editorial community thinks of your continued persistence to include references to the sex tape. Dvj2009 ( talk) 04:13, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Re the minor formatting you did with a recent edit, it seems to have caused some things, like the first of the two Abel symphonies previously listed, to simply disappear. I'm presently too ignorant to fix that, I think... Schissel | Sound the Note! 20:52, 31 July 2009 (UTC) Never mind, I've got it... sorry about that. Schissel | Sound the Note! 10:41, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
I’ve replied to your point
here but I’m conscious we are having this discussion on someone elses lawn, so I’ve continued here.
I wonder, are we talking at cross purposes?
Please understand I am not trying to change anything, at this point; I’m wanting to understand it; or, perhaps , explain my position. And I’m wanting to be clear if you are in some way offended by all this.
I am unclear if Loanword is the same as Lehnwort; also, what is the difference between Lehnwort and Fremdwort? And how do they relate to Anglizismus?
Anglicism seems to have a suggestion of inferiority; that using the English word cheapens the language. The situation seems to be reversed in English; the use of a non-english word seems pretentious. as an (almost) random example , at
this article uses the expression “
Krupp was ordered to design a Bettungsschiessgerüst (firing platform)...", then uses the German expression thereafter. Well, why? "Firing platform" is perfectly straightforward English; using Bettungsschiessgerüst adds nothing and introduces the same confusion that exist in English between “shit” and “shot”.
This is the sort of thing I am objecting to (which I know is really not your concern, but I felt the need to explain).
Moonraker12 (
talk) 10:46, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
I didn't understand your rationale for not having an image at the top of Unguentarium. It's conventional to do so, and the new position seemed graphically awkward. In articles where the only available images don't illustrate the major subject, I'll put images where they're relevant. For example, in a bio, if the only available photo is not of the person, but illustrates some limited aspect of her life, I would put the image not at the top, but in the relevant section. Also, if it's forbidden to specify image sizes, I should review the rules, and sometimes have trouble locating such things. Could you point me to the right link? I may have old-fashioned notions of graphic balance from the print era. Cynwolfe ( talk) 14:11, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
I'm not clear why you think the fact that the image on Ferdinand Raimund is from Commons negates my concerns over its palpably bogus copyright claim. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 14:29, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
I thought "What would be the harm?" and did it. I was given a 'warning' or 'advisory' that few users watch category talk pages. I put the page on my watchlist. Perhaps I'm an exception that proves the rule. James470 ( talk) 02:17, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
I agree that, in article text, endashes should be used for sports results. However, since the news source being referenced uses a hyphen in the article title, I don't see any reason not to copy that. – Pee Jay 15:12, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
What is wrong with Eisenstein (Die Fledermaus) voice? I know that this role played also Thomas Allen, who is baritone or bas-baritone and also Falke told, that Eisenstein was not tenor. (You have very Polish surname... Sorry for my English but if you speak in Polish, I think it should be better, when you'll write to me (if you want to write) in my language (I'm preintermediate in English)). Best regards. CudPotwórca ( talk) 18:08, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
I miss an English page on Siegfried Palm greatly. So I wrote sometime ago. Your response:
Hello Michael
Thank you for the good work you did on the list of noise musicians that I have been trying to maintain. The only exception I would take is in the elimination of Jean Tinguely
See Tinguely recordings here: http://continuo.wordpress.com/2008/11/24/jean-tinguely-bascule-vii/
Would you mind putting him back in?
Best Regards
Valueyou ( talk) 17:52, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
Perhaps fixing the syntax errors would be more prudent than reintroducing unreferenced material. Also, If you had noticed, other people had pointed out the article was unreferenced. I'll be undoing your edit, though I'm not sure how to fix the syntax error. Be constructive and either tell me how or fix it yourself. ;—Preceding unsigned comment added by Noreference ( talk • contribs) 03:46, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
</ref>
tag; it would also be helpful if you could work that fact into Castro's article (and maybe expand his biographical details generally). --
Michael Bednarek (
talk) 13:34, 13 September 2009 (UTC)Wikiproject: Did you know? 12:43, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
How can I know for sure that a Youtube video doesn't violate copyright? (concerning this discussion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Joseph-Nicolas-Pancrace_Royer)
Thank you 77.232.1.171 ( talk) 15:50, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
The international music term is from Italian, not generally from the Romance languages.
The article is about musical terminology derived from Italian word maestro.
Wikipedia is not a dictionary. So other language's meaning is unnecessary. Che829 ( talk) 03:35, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello Michael Bednarek, I've just seen you have reverted the inclusion of sound media samples in the article. I understand that, being in a block, it did interfere with the article layout. However, I invite you to reconsider some kind of media inclusion ( it can be in smaller one sample blocks): notice that this is an article about a musical genius, which gave space to every picture of Bach and family. Although a lot of people know exactly how Bach sounds, its music is the issue here, and it would also be kind for the not so much "connoisseurs" - or not so interested in digging it -to be able to hear it there. (the same occurred in Mozart article, and I look forward to some answers/opinions). Please tell me what do you think. Thank you-- Uxbona ( talk) 08:38, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
Although not agreeing on the "precedent reversions" reason, I understand your point and would not insist on it now. Thank you for such a clear answer.-- Uxbona ( talk) 12:04, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
I'll have to check the source when I get home, but I have a feeling that's how he was listed in Ewen's book, which at the time was my only source. Never mind - the move can be fixed. If I can't do it manually I'll request it. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa? Lo dicono a Signa. 13:27, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
I support your suggestion to move Melos Ensemble of London to Melos Ensemble. Should I do it? Grammy Hall of Fame question is still open. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 12:23, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
(copied from
User_talk:Bearcat to keep discussion unfragmented)
I'm baffled by
your removal of the
Category:Children's novels from the article
Emil and the Detectives; n.b. you left the
Category:Children's novel stubs. Is it that the categories "Children's novels" and "Children's novel stubs" shouldn't be in the same article, or do you think
Emil and the Detectives is not a children's novel? --
Michael Bednarek (
talk) 05:10, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi - looks like you need to review the policies you cited. They refer to contributors who have added to Wikipedia, I was referring to people who might at some point in the future remove material from an article. There's a big difference. To apply those policies, you need to identify the editors or contributions to which I referred - which is obviously impossible, since they don't yet exist ( and may never do so).
I find that this is a common error - people happily cite Wikipedia policies by name without actually reading or understanding them or how and when they apply - but the less it happens, the better it is for all. Regards
-- 121.209.160.121 ( talk) 06:40, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
My statement may make several assumptions, or it may make none at all - just saying so doesn't let me or anyone else figure out what on earth those assumptions may be (if indeed it makes any at all). I think you're not seeing the wood for the trees on this one. The policies are all fine and good - and I think they work well when they apply; they just don't apply to what I wrote. I think you would be better off stepping back from the policies and see the bigger picture. On the other hand, if you would like to keep citing the policies, I don't mind and have absolutely no right to tell you shouldn't. It is just not going to have the slightest influence on how I see things. -- 121.209.160.121 ( talk) 07:24, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I was wondering where you got the text for your lengthy addition to Line 70 of the Faust (opera) article (made on 5 Apr 09)? The reason I ask is that I recently heard much of the same information on a radio program, which made me look it up the article on Wikipedia. Even some of the phrases used were suspiciously similar to the article. Did the radio program get the information from your edit or did you both get it from the same place?
Also, please note that your edit summary was rather inadequate when I was trying to identify the editor. (Spelling of "Siébel" & Méphistophélès; -duplicate blanks; unlinked "Faivre" & "Duclos" (DAB).) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wajlee ( talk • contribs) 04:16, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Just a note to say I've done a bit more work, see here. Perhaps you might have a moment to have a look? I probably won't add many more pages in the future. Best. -- Klein zach 02:39, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
Apologies for my deletion of your edit on Template:Latin outtro, it was a mistake. GintyFrench (talk!) 08:34, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello Michael, thanks a lot for fixing the ISBN. To your question: most of the great opera-houses offer opera-productions for children, which i found a very important and useful step in cultural education; but it is very hard to find good literature versions to awake and to deepen interest for opera. This one i found recently offers a very creative first step for "beginners" towards opera without distorting the plot and because of the illustrations it can also be a pleasant and quick way to recall the story for "experts". Hope i understood your question correctly and hope also to have answered it reasonably.-- Dafx ( talk) 19:35, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
I'm somewhat offended at having a template put on my talk page rather than being given a typed-up question asking about happened on the Kathleen Battle article. For the record, I know exactly how to use the preview button and use it all the time, but when editing the "1990s" section on her article, I missed two too-far spaced references twice even when looking at the preview, and thus, had to re-edit the section to fix them. Acalamari 16:38, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
I happened to see your 2007 question when I tried to challenge the name "Folkwang Hochschule im Ruhrgebiet". Did you see that an impossible sentence got even worse? Lachen oder weinen ... -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 22:36, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
Your revert here was meant well, but is the culmination of a story which I have experienced too often here, with the effect that I'm less and less motivated to spend my time editing Wikipedia articles. I'm writing this to you because you seem to care about classical music, and maybe you'll see what I mean when you look at the history:
I find it ironic and frustrating that an article that has been around for three years without any problems suddenly gets deleted, and all traces of it removed, just after someone tries to make it clearer that it is actually not just a pop song, but a famous aria. — Sebastian 06:01, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
In connection with Kammermusik (Hindemith) and List of compositions by Paul Hindemith, I've been trying to use section links (per List of opera genres) on the former, but it seems they don't work on bullets. Is it feasible, or should i give up on specific links? Thanks. -- Klein zach 04:57, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
You edited something I wrote to read:
IMHO, there are several unobjectionable ways to refer to the Met (or as they seem to be trying to brand it these days "The MET"), but "New York Metropolitan Opera" isn't one of them, because it reads as if that 4-word phase is the name of the company, following the model of New York Public Library or New York Botanical Garden. Better journalists seem to use New York's Metropolitan Opera when they feel a need to specify location. Both The Metropolitan Opera in New York and Metropolitan Opera of New York can work. I used Metropolitan Opera (New York) simply to echo Covent Garden (London) in the previous sentence, in the hope of easing comprehension.
In any case, shouldn't we drop "the" before Covent Garden?
Bmclaughlin9 ( talk) 03:25, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Language question also: turning to him (as the last missing founding member of the Melos Ensemble I know of - so far) I am surprised to find double bass but Category:Double-bassists, not knowing what I should think of it, hyphen or not, or sometimes yes, sometimes no? No hyphen in the terminology. The categories look confusing as well ... -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 18:30, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Michael, I don't know if you are interested in the new 'books', but we are having some technical discussions that will have some bearing on tables, navigation boxes etc. and I thought I should let you know, the main postings are at Wikipedia-Books, see here. Thanks. -- Klein zach 09:59, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:MZ-Screen.GIF. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk) 06:56, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
...of the chap at rec.music.opera. [9]. Sigh! Best, Voceditenore ( talk) 14:53, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
Hi,
in [1] you removed the link to a youtube video [2] showing MJ on the show "Motown 25: Yesterday, Today, Forever". You removed it due to "-duplicate YouTube link" as I could read in the commit log. I think there is no other link to this show on the page or am I wrong? I think this link is very important as it is the show where MJ revealed the move to the world. Not only does this very video show this important moment but also provides a lot of information. I like you re - add it under "External links", if you don't mind. Dan 84.58.153.120 ( talk) 13:10, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
I reverted your edit at Oakhill College.
I strongly recommend you refrain from attempting to introduce this material again. -- Michael Bednarek ( talk) 10:21, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Once an editor has vandalised after a final warning, it is probably best to report them to administrator intervention against vandalism, rather than giving them more warnings. Additional warnings just remove the teeth from the threat of a block, and mean they can continue to vandalise for longer. J Milburn ( talk) 00:07, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
for the moral support on the whole GA thing. All the best, M. -- Myke Cuthbert (talk) 15:31, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your corrections and improvements. Etan Tal ( talk) 11:55, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
No problems with lifting the prod, it was just that I cam across the article which had beeen tagged for some time. Do you want to do the same of her husband John Willison (musician), which is in a similar dire state? Jezhotwells ( talk) 15:09, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
Per a request as part of the RfC you recently !voted in we have changed the style of !voting. Please review that updates and make any changes to your !vote, as appropriate/desired. Thanks for your participation. -- GoRight ( talk) 07:25, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for raising the matter of our content dispute regarding the article on Mimi Macpherson at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard. It will be interesting to see what the Wikipedia editorial community thinks of your continued persistence to include references to the sex tape. Dvj2009 ( talk) 04:13, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Re the minor formatting you did with a recent edit, it seems to have caused some things, like the first of the two Abel symphonies previously listed, to simply disappear. I'm presently too ignorant to fix that, I think... Schissel | Sound the Note! 20:52, 31 July 2009 (UTC) Never mind, I've got it... sorry about that. Schissel | Sound the Note! 10:41, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
I’ve replied to your point
here but I’m conscious we are having this discussion on someone elses lawn, so I’ve continued here.
I wonder, are we talking at cross purposes?
Please understand I am not trying to change anything, at this point; I’m wanting to understand it; or, perhaps , explain my position. And I’m wanting to be clear if you are in some way offended by all this.
I am unclear if Loanword is the same as Lehnwort; also, what is the difference between Lehnwort and Fremdwort? And how do they relate to Anglizismus?
Anglicism seems to have a suggestion of inferiority; that using the English word cheapens the language. The situation seems to be reversed in English; the use of a non-english word seems pretentious. as an (almost) random example , at
this article uses the expression “
Krupp was ordered to design a Bettungsschiessgerüst (firing platform)...", then uses the German expression thereafter. Well, why? "Firing platform" is perfectly straightforward English; using Bettungsschiessgerüst adds nothing and introduces the same confusion that exist in English between “shit” and “shot”.
This is the sort of thing I am objecting to (which I know is really not your concern, but I felt the need to explain).
Moonraker12 (
talk) 10:46, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
I didn't understand your rationale for not having an image at the top of Unguentarium. It's conventional to do so, and the new position seemed graphically awkward. In articles where the only available images don't illustrate the major subject, I'll put images where they're relevant. For example, in a bio, if the only available photo is not of the person, but illustrates some limited aspect of her life, I would put the image not at the top, but in the relevant section. Also, if it's forbidden to specify image sizes, I should review the rules, and sometimes have trouble locating such things. Could you point me to the right link? I may have old-fashioned notions of graphic balance from the print era. Cynwolfe ( talk) 14:11, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
I'm not clear why you think the fact that the image on Ferdinand Raimund is from Commons negates my concerns over its palpably bogus copyright claim. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 14:29, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
I thought "What would be the harm?" and did it. I was given a 'warning' or 'advisory' that few users watch category talk pages. I put the page on my watchlist. Perhaps I'm an exception that proves the rule. James470 ( talk) 02:17, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
I agree that, in article text, endashes should be used for sports results. However, since the news source being referenced uses a hyphen in the article title, I don't see any reason not to copy that. – Pee Jay 15:12, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
What is wrong with Eisenstein (Die Fledermaus) voice? I know that this role played also Thomas Allen, who is baritone or bas-baritone and also Falke told, that Eisenstein was not tenor. (You have very Polish surname... Sorry for my English but if you speak in Polish, I think it should be better, when you'll write to me (if you want to write) in my language (I'm preintermediate in English)). Best regards. CudPotwórca ( talk) 18:08, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
I miss an English page on Siegfried Palm greatly. So I wrote sometime ago. Your response:
Hello Michael
Thank you for the good work you did on the list of noise musicians that I have been trying to maintain. The only exception I would take is in the elimination of Jean Tinguely
See Tinguely recordings here: http://continuo.wordpress.com/2008/11/24/jean-tinguely-bascule-vii/
Would you mind putting him back in?
Best Regards
Valueyou ( talk) 17:52, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
Perhaps fixing the syntax errors would be more prudent than reintroducing unreferenced material. Also, If you had noticed, other people had pointed out the article was unreferenced. I'll be undoing your edit, though I'm not sure how to fix the syntax error. Be constructive and either tell me how or fix it yourself. ;—Preceding unsigned comment added by Noreference ( talk • contribs) 03:46, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
</ref>
tag; it would also be helpful if you could work that fact into Castro's article (and maybe expand his biographical details generally). --
Michael Bednarek (
talk) 13:34, 13 September 2009 (UTC)Wikiproject: Did you know? 12:43, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
How can I know for sure that a Youtube video doesn't violate copyright? (concerning this discussion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Joseph-Nicolas-Pancrace_Royer)
Thank you 77.232.1.171 ( talk) 15:50, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
The international music term is from Italian, not generally from the Romance languages.
The article is about musical terminology derived from Italian word maestro.
Wikipedia is not a dictionary. So other language's meaning is unnecessary. Che829 ( talk) 03:35, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello Michael Bednarek, I've just seen you have reverted the inclusion of sound media samples in the article. I understand that, being in a block, it did interfere with the article layout. However, I invite you to reconsider some kind of media inclusion ( it can be in smaller one sample blocks): notice that this is an article about a musical genius, which gave space to every picture of Bach and family. Although a lot of people know exactly how Bach sounds, its music is the issue here, and it would also be kind for the not so much "connoisseurs" - or not so interested in digging it -to be able to hear it there. (the same occurred in Mozart article, and I look forward to some answers/opinions). Please tell me what do you think. Thank you-- Uxbona ( talk) 08:38, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
Although not agreeing on the "precedent reversions" reason, I understand your point and would not insist on it now. Thank you for such a clear answer.-- Uxbona ( talk) 12:04, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
I'll have to check the source when I get home, but I have a feeling that's how he was listed in Ewen's book, which at the time was my only source. Never mind - the move can be fixed. If I can't do it manually I'll request it. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa? Lo dicono a Signa. 13:27, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
I support your suggestion to move Melos Ensemble of London to Melos Ensemble. Should I do it? Grammy Hall of Fame question is still open. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 12:23, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
(copied from
User_talk:Bearcat to keep discussion unfragmented)
I'm baffled by
your removal of the
Category:Children's novels from the article
Emil and the Detectives; n.b. you left the
Category:Children's novel stubs. Is it that the categories "Children's novels" and "Children's novel stubs" shouldn't be in the same article, or do you think
Emil and the Detectives is not a children's novel? --
Michael Bednarek (
talk) 05:10, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi - looks like you need to review the policies you cited. They refer to contributors who have added to Wikipedia, I was referring to people who might at some point in the future remove material from an article. There's a big difference. To apply those policies, you need to identify the editors or contributions to which I referred - which is obviously impossible, since they don't yet exist ( and may never do so).
I find that this is a common error - people happily cite Wikipedia policies by name without actually reading or understanding them or how and when they apply - but the less it happens, the better it is for all. Regards
-- 121.209.160.121 ( talk) 06:40, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
My statement may make several assumptions, or it may make none at all - just saying so doesn't let me or anyone else figure out what on earth those assumptions may be (if indeed it makes any at all). I think you're not seeing the wood for the trees on this one. The policies are all fine and good - and I think they work well when they apply; they just don't apply to what I wrote. I think you would be better off stepping back from the policies and see the bigger picture. On the other hand, if you would like to keep citing the policies, I don't mind and have absolutely no right to tell you shouldn't. It is just not going to have the slightest influence on how I see things. -- 121.209.160.121 ( talk) 07:24, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I was wondering where you got the text for your lengthy addition to Line 70 of the Faust (opera) article (made on 5 Apr 09)? The reason I ask is that I recently heard much of the same information on a radio program, which made me look it up the article on Wikipedia. Even some of the phrases used were suspiciously similar to the article. Did the radio program get the information from your edit or did you both get it from the same place?
Also, please note that your edit summary was rather inadequate when I was trying to identify the editor. (Spelling of "Siébel" & Méphistophélès; -duplicate blanks; unlinked "Faivre" & "Duclos" (DAB).) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wajlee ( talk • contribs) 04:16, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Just a note to say I've done a bit more work, see here. Perhaps you might have a moment to have a look? I probably won't add many more pages in the future. Best. -- Klein zach 02:39, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
Apologies for my deletion of your edit on Template:Latin outtro, it was a mistake. GintyFrench (talk!) 08:34, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello Michael, thanks a lot for fixing the ISBN. To your question: most of the great opera-houses offer opera-productions for children, which i found a very important and useful step in cultural education; but it is very hard to find good literature versions to awake and to deepen interest for opera. This one i found recently offers a very creative first step for "beginners" towards opera without distorting the plot and because of the illustrations it can also be a pleasant and quick way to recall the story for "experts". Hope i understood your question correctly and hope also to have answered it reasonably.-- Dafx ( talk) 19:35, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
I'm somewhat offended at having a template put on my talk page rather than being given a typed-up question asking about happened on the Kathleen Battle article. For the record, I know exactly how to use the preview button and use it all the time, but when editing the "1990s" section on her article, I missed two too-far spaced references twice even when looking at the preview, and thus, had to re-edit the section to fix them. Acalamari 16:38, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
I happened to see your 2007 question when I tried to challenge the name "Folkwang Hochschule im Ruhrgebiet". Did you see that an impossible sentence got even worse? Lachen oder weinen ... -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 22:36, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
Your revert here was meant well, but is the culmination of a story which I have experienced too often here, with the effect that I'm less and less motivated to spend my time editing Wikipedia articles. I'm writing this to you because you seem to care about classical music, and maybe you'll see what I mean when you look at the history:
I find it ironic and frustrating that an article that has been around for three years without any problems suddenly gets deleted, and all traces of it removed, just after someone tries to make it clearer that it is actually not just a pop song, but a famous aria. — Sebastian 06:01, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
In connection with Kammermusik (Hindemith) and List of compositions by Paul Hindemith, I've been trying to use section links (per List of opera genres) on the former, but it seems they don't work on bullets. Is it feasible, or should i give up on specific links? Thanks. -- Klein zach 04:57, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
You edited something I wrote to read:
IMHO, there are several unobjectionable ways to refer to the Met (or as they seem to be trying to brand it these days "The MET"), but "New York Metropolitan Opera" isn't one of them, because it reads as if that 4-word phase is the name of the company, following the model of New York Public Library or New York Botanical Garden. Better journalists seem to use New York's Metropolitan Opera when they feel a need to specify location. Both The Metropolitan Opera in New York and Metropolitan Opera of New York can work. I used Metropolitan Opera (New York) simply to echo Covent Garden (London) in the previous sentence, in the hope of easing comprehension.
In any case, shouldn't we drop "the" before Covent Garden?
Bmclaughlin9 ( talk) 03:25, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Language question also: turning to him (as the last missing founding member of the Melos Ensemble I know of - so far) I am surprised to find double bass but Category:Double-bassists, not knowing what I should think of it, hyphen or not, or sometimes yes, sometimes no? No hyphen in the terminology. The categories look confusing as well ... -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 18:30, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Michael, I don't know if you are interested in the new 'books', but we are having some technical discussions that will have some bearing on tables, navigation boxes etc. and I thought I should let you know, the main postings are at Wikipedia-Books, see here. Thanks. -- Klein zach 09:59, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:MZ-Screen.GIF. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk) 06:56, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
...of the chap at rec.music.opera. [9]. Sigh! Best, Voceditenore ( talk) 14:53, 12 December 2009 (UTC)