Yes it was me, I had entered the wrong info by mistake, have changed it again with reason in edit. Marleau ( talk) 17:10, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi I thought we were putting these people in the Opera crossover cat, not opera cats. What do you think? What should we do with them? -- Kleinzach ( talk) 01:39, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
What is the exact wording of the permissions on this image? Genisock2 ( talk) 12:59, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
I don't know what you see on your screen, but, with the added break command, on my screen the line breaks TWICE, the first time after "gentlemen" and the second after "grisettes" (where your < br > is placed).
Surely, by leaving these chorus/minor roles to run across 3 or 4 columns as appropriate to the roles box, the lines will break according to each individual's page settings. Viva-Verdi ( talk) 14:00, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi there! :-)
Glad someone appreciates it. ;-) Well I know about the "Christmas In Vienna" album not being just by Diana Ross, but if you include all the performers in the infobox it reads Diana Ross, Placido Domingo & José Carreras Chronology - which isn't right either. Or do you prefer that? Either way is fine by me. Any suggestions? Dreamer.se ( talk) 17:50, 18 April 2008 (UTC)dreamer.se
As I said; either way is OK by me. I'll accept any alterations you make.
Peace.
Dreamer.se ( talk) 17:57, 18 April 2008 (UTC)dreamer.se
Question: you prefer the tracklisting without the composers, track lengths and the correct Wikipedia format for song titles?
Dreamer.se ( talk) 18:03, 18 April 2008 (UTC)dreamer.se
Okie doke. Consider it done.
Dreamer.se ( talk) 18:11, 18 April 2008 (UTC)dreamer.se
Question #2: the CD album has 15 tracks, the DVD 20 - do you want both tracklistings?
Dreamer.se ( talk) 18:27, 18 April 2008 (UTC)dreamer.se
OK. Give me two minutes and that will be fixed. Dreamer.se ( talk) 18:31, 18 April 2008 (UTC)dreamer.se
Correction: both have 15 tracks but different running orders and track annotations; no track length available for track 1 on the DVD however.
But now that's all sorted.
Everybody happy now? :-)
Take care
/S
Dreamer.se ( talk) 18:56, 18 April 2008 (UTC)dreamer.se
Hi I'm Immanuel from Hungarian Wikipedia. I created a new Opera Portal logo for Hungarian Opera Portal ( see commons), that was the reason for this change. But, I see You don't liked the new one, sorry :(. -- 85.66.62.70 ( talk) 18:37, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi, A question for you here. Regards, Sparafucil ( talk) 23:22, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
This was recreated and I've put this up for deletion (and blocking) see Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion#Template:Infobox_classical_composer. Thanks. -- Kleinzach ( talk) 02:57, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
The infobox sock-warrior is at it again! Best, Voceditenore ( talk) 20:40, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Well, I don't think I understand this. Why do we have this special portal template? Do we need any banner at all? I'm a bit confused by this. Best. -- Klein zach 14:46, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Istana_Budaya_and_The_Eye_of_Malaysia.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 03:31, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Image:Istana Budaya and The Eye of Malaysia.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{
hangon}}
to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Image:Istana Budaya and The Eye of Malaysia.jpg|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.
ViperSnake151
21:14, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
On Flickr, "public" just means anyone can view it. It doesn't mean that it's public domain. It clearly had a copyright notice. ViperSnake151 02:10, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
His debut as "Radames" was in 1967. Therefore any performances as that role cannot be counted as repertoire. Repertoire is for the list of roles that he has taken, and the official number is 130. - Jay ( talk) 10:42, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
The 'age vandal' is at it again! I've already reverted twice today. Best, Voceditenore ( talk) 14:41, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
The Ashbrook & Powers tome seems fairly clear that Schiller was only used as an initial inspiration (see p60, 61 - see below), and the back cover of the Ricordi score says 'Adami & Simoni adapted from Gozzi'. Linuxlad ( talk) 23:46, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
The lead image in Salvatore Fisichella is a problem yes. The others it could be argued are needed to show a specific point in a person's career. Genisock2 ( talk) 04:35, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Genisock2 ( talk) 23:36, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
I've replied on my page to your general point but I wonder if you have a look at Salvatore Fisichella. The user is currently deleting my comments on the Talk page and the Copy&Paste tag on the article. -- Klein zach 08:08, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi Jay, I left an answer to your queries about the issue, why some images get removed, and the fair use rationales for the images in José Carreras over at Kleinzach's talk page. Best, Voceditenore ( talk) 07:02, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi. There was a problem with the Orange photo so I've reduced and also added 'thumb' frames. Hope this is OK, if not feel free to alter it again. Best. -- Klein zach 01:13, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
You're both half right. Liu, Timur, and I Ministri sing 'La Morte!'. The crowd sing 'Ah!' (ref - p137 of the paperback Ricordi score) Bob aka Linuxlad ( talk) 09:38, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
Definitely a musical. How about separately under 'Recordings of musicals' or 'Musical theatre recordings'? We can't use 'Music recordings' because everything is a music recording. Best. -- Klein zach 10:59, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
Got your photo. Where do you want me to send it? Thelmadatter ( talk) 14:05, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know Jay. I will try to stick to the format you are advocating. I will let you know when I am done adding and feel free to edit as needed. Nrswanson ( talk) 17:21, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
I just responded on the talk page. Sorry it took me a while. I was in the middle of another project and I had to pull out my score again. Nrswanson ( talk) 05:18, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
As you've been involved with the opera navboxes, I wonder if you can have a look at Template:Michael Nyman? This is a huge navbox full of red links which is being added to some short articles. I've tried to persuade the editor to remove the red links. His box also duplicates the opera navbox. -- Klein zach 03:18, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps a better template for Bernstein would be entitled "Stage works by Leonard Bernstein" and in that way classsification of the works in question can be discussed on the actual articles. Nrswanson ( talk) 16:06, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
There's even a public domain image you can use: Image:Leonard Bernstein 1971.jpg. Best, Voceditenore ( talk) 16:12, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi, Jay. The musicals project always uses the "skinny horizontal" templates. Best regards, -- Ssilvers ( talk) 18:32, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
This is also a big cat if you are interested in doing another box: Category:Operas by Emmerich Kálmán. Best. -- Klein zach 10:09, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
Sorry to delete your Cimarosa additions in the confusion. I'm wondering whether you could add to the statistics at the bottom of the page when you add works? Would that be OK? -- Klein zach 01:46, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
hi!
i agree, you were right to revert it. The version that that other user posted was EXTREMELY poetic, and for the most part had nothing to do with the libretto itself.
however the current version is hardly better. I will write my own translation, which would be a direct, line-for-line translation. Sounds good? -- OettingerCroat ( talk) 04:08, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I'll hold off on getting too involved in it. I was asked to close the June debate by a WP:Opera member and it seemed to me the strength of the arguments in the preceding paragraph outweighed the struggle to come to a consensus at the bottom which didn't seem all that clear. If it was a clear speedy close then I'm not sure why I was asked to close it when anybody could have. I don;t think any of my edits this morning are as controversial as has been reported and is acting well within stub sorting guidelines except the language ones which I haven't got around to sorting yet because of the disapproval. I thought it was what the project wanted. If I was mistaken or I tagged some beloeved start class articles by mistake I apologise, but every edit I made wa sin good faith and trying to help organize what is actually a very good project on here. I also think the opera biography stubs is perfectly reasonable if not solely for composers, for opera directors and opera critics which also require development to reach their potential. Regards The Bald One White cat 12:55, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I don't know whether you might have time to look at this? It's been neglected since July or longer. As you have had experience doing the Opera one perhaps you will know how to fix the layout etc. Best. -- Klein zach 02:59, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I've responded on my talk page, as I prefer to keep discussions on the page where they started. Best, Voceditenore ( talk) 16:03, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
Stop adding the met category, if you insist to continue, please discuss in Wiki Project Opera - Jay ( talk) 04:57, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
I have the Manon cleanup about half done (lots of clicks and pops, but the underlying recording is pretty good), but I'm feeling ill and need to lie down a bit. I'll finish it when I've rested.
Shoemaker's Holiday (
talk)
17:33, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Shoemaker's Holiday ( talk) 00:38, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
There's also a Caruso recording of "On J'appelle Manon" (think that's right, my French is appalling), that I think I'll do as well. There's also this and this which don't seem worth it. Shoemaker's Holiday ( talk) 00:48, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Looks good, though I did a formatting tweak, because it was looking a tiny bit untidy. Might I suggest one addition, though?
Of course, a Caruso-Farrar duet is probably capable of standing on its own. =) Shoemaker's Holiday ( talk) 15:47, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
It might be best to do Puccini for December/January - his birthday is December 22nd, which may well push us into early January before the peak dies down. I've made a list of about 16 high-quality recordings and a couple maybes - mainly La bohème, Madama Butterfly, and Tosca.. =) Shoemaker's Holiday ( talk) 05:13, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
I know, I should be doing Tosca, but, well, thought I'd finish up what I had started first. Can you give me your thoughts on this restoration?
I need to make sure that I got that right before I move to the next step, because it'll be hard to backtrack once I start on the removal of that rhythmic skipping/scraping noise.
Shoemaker's Holiday (
talk)
23:19, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
Sorry I haven't communicated with you about this for a while - I have been doing some work, but have been having a lot of second thoughts about whether it was as good as it could be. I put a couple on WT:OPERA - they're not in articles yet - see what you think, and if you have any advice? Shoemaker's Holiday ( talk) 01:14, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi Jay,
Thank you for explaining your reasons for redoing the changes to the roles tables. I apologise for not having extended the same courtesy to you when I first undid them. However, even after consulting the opera guideline that you recommended, I still have serious reservations.
First, it seems to me that the opera guideline doesn't really mandate the use of the American date format, rather, it simply gives an example to show the appropriate layout of a roles table, which just happens to use that format. Making any particular date format mandatory directly contradicts other well established guidelines such as WP:MOSNUM and is a decision that is unlikely to achieve consensus.
Secondly, the guidelines for choosing a date format are clearly laid out in WP:MOSNUM#Full_date_formatting:
Strong national ties to a topic
I'll wait a couple of days in case you disagree with what I've said or you want to point out something I've overlooked; however, unless you do, I'll make my changes again. The Stickler ( talk) 15:39, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi again Jay,
Sorry to be slow to reply, but I've been away for the last week.
Thanks for sorting this out so quickly. I'd be happy to help if you think I could be useful. However, I'm not sure that I could keep up with you - you seem to have boundless energy.
Cheers, The Stickler ( talk) 14:29, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
I think I can get all the Tosca (or at least one for each song) done in time for December 1st. There's about a dozen La bohème recordings, so that'll probably just be highlights. The Gianni Schicchi, and Manon Lescaut just have one or two each, so they should be doable. Madame Butterfly doesn't have any yet, though, so I'm going to have to get at least a couple of those done before going back to Tosca and La bohème.
I don't think I'll make my goal for the full two dozen or so (Total so far: 6, though it must be said that in that time I also did four or five Massenet, some Donizetti, some Sullivan, and so on) in time for the portal update, but I think I can still manage to do far more than you're willing to let me include in a single update. Shoemaker's Holiday ( talk) 05:38, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Tosca
Having already done it, I am certain I can get Tosca done by December 1st. Gia mi dicon venal is the weak link in that set, but I'll poke at its restoration a bit more. I thought I'd do some Madame Butterfly next, since I have two or three La bohème. Shoemaker's Holiday ( talk) 08:19, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi Whjanyg, I see that you added the Narrator to the cast of the discography. This is correct, since those recordings include the voice of the Narrator, but maybe it should be pointed out that the opera hasn't a Narrator as a character and that it's a mistake to declaim those verses, since Fontana wrote them only for the reader. -- Al Pereira (talk) 00:25, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Info Boxes - It seems to me that the consensus FOR info boxes is just as strong and compelling, and even though some editors claim there is a consensus on the issue (against them), the jury is still out. I Support info boxes. I truly believe that infoboxes, in addition to the lead paragraph, are valuable and useful for people not familiar with the subject. They can glance at the infobox, read the lead, and decide for themselves whether the rest of the article is worth reading or not. It seems to me that as far as this argument of yea or nea..... I totally agree with Andy Mabbett there is, still, clearly no consensus on this issue. The claim on the project page is bogus.
On top of that, Jules Garcin was a violinist/conductor (first and foremost), and there are still many infoboxes on existing "historic" violinists articles. I have created the article on Jules Garcin, I feel it provides the look of a real Encyclopedia (with an info box). Many find that informative info boxes add rather than detract . Milliot ( talk) 18:36, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Hello, this is a message from
an automated bot. A tag has been placed on
Category:Oratorios composer templates, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be
speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because
Category:Oratorios composer templates is a redirect to a non-existent page (
CSD R1).
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting
Category:Oratorios composer templates, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at
WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the
bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click
here
CSDWarnBot (
talk)
10:40, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
Would six songs be too indulgent? I have a lot of good stuff for Verdi. Of course, we could always come back to him - indeed, there's a LOT of stuff that I'm not even considering for in the six.
As of this moment, there's four songs done (La forza del destino, La traviata, Un ballo in maschera, and Aida), and I thought I'd get Rigoletto (Bella Figlia Dell'amore) and Otello (Sì, pel ciel) to round it out. That still doesn't get half of his notable operas, but, well, we'll come back to him.
Any ideas for next month? Sullivan? Wagner? Donizetti? Bizet/Flotow (I know I have two strong Bizet recordings, but the rest I've tried have been pretty bad, so we'd have to mix him with a minor composer)?
I'd kind of like to get one recording for every composer on List of major opera composers, barring, of course, the ones still in copyright. Shoemaker's Holiday ( talk) 14:47, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Okay,, I'm going to call that done for now. There's eight, so there's room to cut one or two if you don't think they're good enough, or we could save some for a future Verdi month (I intend to come back to Verdi later this year - there's a lot of high-quality stuff out there that I haven't done any work on. All the major operas could have four or five recordings each.), but for now, I think it's best I move on to other commitments, and composers with less representation in audio.) Shoemaker's Holiday ( talk) 20:39, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
Think it's worth getting this pushed through as a featured portal? We've all been working on it pretty hard. Shoemaker's Holiday ( talk) 19:33, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
(Going by opera name, since they're all different) Un ballo in maschera, La forza del destino, Otello, Rigoletto, Il trovatore, and Ernani. Listening again, the La traviata and Aida sound a bit over-cleaned. I'll want to try them again eventually, and see if I can do better with the sources I have. If you want, do the first three for February, the second three for March. Shoemaker's Holiday ( talk) 16:57, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
The booklet which comes with the Merlin recording says that the opera was finished on 25 April 1902. [p. 16, "Isaac Albéniz's elusive Grail" by Jacinto Torres. (Torres has cataloged Albéniz's works for musical theater.)] Further on p. 18 he states that Launcelot remains in unfinished form, while Guenevere was never written. You may want to modify the list to reflect this information. I think it should probably show "(1902)" as the date for Merlin and "(unfinished)" for Launcelot. (I'm unfamiliar with these templates, so did not want to do it myself.) Thanks. Robert.Allen ( talk) 11:30, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi Jay, Is it just me, or is it now all oddly aligned with great chunks of purple? I think the problem may come from the images in the new Selected Article, and Featured Singer and Composer, especially the image in Pelleas. Would making them a bit smaller help? Voceditenore ( talk) 14:22, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
I've opened a discussion on this at the OP. [5]. All contributions welcome. (I'm notifying all OP members who have participated in the discussions about the portal) Best, Voceditenore ( talk) 10:02, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Jay, I've avoided the debate over the portal because it would probably only create more friction but I have to say I preferred your version. I've learnt from experience to avoid having anything to do with any Wiki process that has the words "Good" or "Featured" in the title. It's not worth the hassle just to get a tiny gold star stuck on the top right of the page. Cheers. -- Folantin ( talk) 09:13, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi. There have been some changes to the Handel template — basically making it collapsible — and a discussion about it. Perhaps you'd like to have a look here? Best -- Klein zach 08:20, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi Jay. I thought you might enjoy this article about Placido Domingo in the New York Times if you haven't read it already: [6]. Nrswanson ( talk) 04:15, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Hello from the Opera Project. I'm writing to all members on the active list to let them know that we could use your input on several issues currently under discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Opera:
Please drop by if you have the time. Best, Voceditenore ( talk) 08:46, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Please see our project's talk page for a discussion of the possible changes to Wikipedia's policy on the biographies of living persons and the implications this will have for many articles under the project's banner. This is especially important if you are looking after or have created unreferenced or minimally referenced opera-related biographies of living people. Voceditenore ( talk) 16:18, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns with the referencing which you can see at Talk:Parsifal/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks. Jezhotwells ( talk) 22:06, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:LeroyAJay.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly hi! 06:25, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
16:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Whjayg. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for creating Genovefa Weber, Whjayg! Wikipedia editor Voceditenore just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
Great job!
To reply, leave a comment on Voceditenore's talk page. Learn more about page curation.
Thanks for creating Celeste Coltellini, Whjayg! Wikipedia editor Voceditenore just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
Thanks so much for this! I'll do a few minor copyedits.
To reply, leave a comment on Voceditenore's talk page. Learn more about page curation.
Thanks for noting the timestamp error. I have updated { Infobox_Town_AT} (see dif455) for "population_as_of=" to get timestamp date by prefix digit ("4") for Gmunden, or when "key < 0" to use date specified in "population_as_of=" (rather than always show timestamp from Metadata_population_AT-1). I have known about that incorrect timestamp, for years, but was continually distracted from fixing it by trivial issues, and I cannot apologize enough for all the frustrations you had trying to view the timestamp for the town populations you had updated. Fixed now, but again sorry for the mindboggling error.
Also, I should note new population
Template:EWZ count and
Template:EWD date timestamp, for use within the text of an Austria town page, as done on
German WP, except {EWZ} will show population totals with comma as thousands separator. For example
Gmunden could use {{
EWZ|AT|40705}}
to show population count {{EWZ|AT|40705}}. Thanks again for noting the frustrations about the date timestamp. -
Wikid77 (
talk)
16:20, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
Yes it was me, I had entered the wrong info by mistake, have changed it again with reason in edit. Marleau ( talk) 17:10, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi I thought we were putting these people in the Opera crossover cat, not opera cats. What do you think? What should we do with them? -- Kleinzach ( talk) 01:39, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
What is the exact wording of the permissions on this image? Genisock2 ( talk) 12:59, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
I don't know what you see on your screen, but, with the added break command, on my screen the line breaks TWICE, the first time after "gentlemen" and the second after "grisettes" (where your < br > is placed).
Surely, by leaving these chorus/minor roles to run across 3 or 4 columns as appropriate to the roles box, the lines will break according to each individual's page settings. Viva-Verdi ( talk) 14:00, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi there! :-)
Glad someone appreciates it. ;-) Well I know about the "Christmas In Vienna" album not being just by Diana Ross, but if you include all the performers in the infobox it reads Diana Ross, Placido Domingo & José Carreras Chronology - which isn't right either. Or do you prefer that? Either way is fine by me. Any suggestions? Dreamer.se ( talk) 17:50, 18 April 2008 (UTC)dreamer.se
As I said; either way is OK by me. I'll accept any alterations you make.
Peace.
Dreamer.se ( talk) 17:57, 18 April 2008 (UTC)dreamer.se
Question: you prefer the tracklisting without the composers, track lengths and the correct Wikipedia format for song titles?
Dreamer.se ( talk) 18:03, 18 April 2008 (UTC)dreamer.se
Okie doke. Consider it done.
Dreamer.se ( talk) 18:11, 18 April 2008 (UTC)dreamer.se
Question #2: the CD album has 15 tracks, the DVD 20 - do you want both tracklistings?
Dreamer.se ( talk) 18:27, 18 April 2008 (UTC)dreamer.se
OK. Give me two minutes and that will be fixed. Dreamer.se ( talk) 18:31, 18 April 2008 (UTC)dreamer.se
Correction: both have 15 tracks but different running orders and track annotations; no track length available for track 1 on the DVD however.
But now that's all sorted.
Everybody happy now? :-)
Take care
/S
Dreamer.se ( talk) 18:56, 18 April 2008 (UTC)dreamer.se
Hi I'm Immanuel from Hungarian Wikipedia. I created a new Opera Portal logo for Hungarian Opera Portal ( see commons), that was the reason for this change. But, I see You don't liked the new one, sorry :(. -- 85.66.62.70 ( talk) 18:37, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi, A question for you here. Regards, Sparafucil ( talk) 23:22, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
This was recreated and I've put this up for deletion (and blocking) see Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion#Template:Infobox_classical_composer. Thanks. -- Kleinzach ( talk) 02:57, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
The infobox sock-warrior is at it again! Best, Voceditenore ( talk) 20:40, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Well, I don't think I understand this. Why do we have this special portal template? Do we need any banner at all? I'm a bit confused by this. Best. -- Klein zach 14:46, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Istana_Budaya_and_The_Eye_of_Malaysia.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 03:31, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Image:Istana Budaya and The Eye of Malaysia.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{
hangon}}
to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Image:Istana Budaya and The Eye of Malaysia.jpg|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.
ViperSnake151
21:14, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
On Flickr, "public" just means anyone can view it. It doesn't mean that it's public domain. It clearly had a copyright notice. ViperSnake151 02:10, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
His debut as "Radames" was in 1967. Therefore any performances as that role cannot be counted as repertoire. Repertoire is for the list of roles that he has taken, and the official number is 130. - Jay ( talk) 10:42, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
The 'age vandal' is at it again! I've already reverted twice today. Best, Voceditenore ( talk) 14:41, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
The Ashbrook & Powers tome seems fairly clear that Schiller was only used as an initial inspiration (see p60, 61 - see below), and the back cover of the Ricordi score says 'Adami & Simoni adapted from Gozzi'. Linuxlad ( talk) 23:46, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
The lead image in Salvatore Fisichella is a problem yes. The others it could be argued are needed to show a specific point in a person's career. Genisock2 ( talk) 04:35, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Genisock2 ( talk) 23:36, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
I've replied on my page to your general point but I wonder if you have a look at Salvatore Fisichella. The user is currently deleting my comments on the Talk page and the Copy&Paste tag on the article. -- Klein zach 08:08, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi Jay, I left an answer to your queries about the issue, why some images get removed, and the fair use rationales for the images in José Carreras over at Kleinzach's talk page. Best, Voceditenore ( talk) 07:02, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi. There was a problem with the Orange photo so I've reduced and also added 'thumb' frames. Hope this is OK, if not feel free to alter it again. Best. -- Klein zach 01:13, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
You're both half right. Liu, Timur, and I Ministri sing 'La Morte!'. The crowd sing 'Ah!' (ref - p137 of the paperback Ricordi score) Bob aka Linuxlad ( talk) 09:38, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
Definitely a musical. How about separately under 'Recordings of musicals' or 'Musical theatre recordings'? We can't use 'Music recordings' because everything is a music recording. Best. -- Klein zach 10:59, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
Got your photo. Where do you want me to send it? Thelmadatter ( talk) 14:05, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know Jay. I will try to stick to the format you are advocating. I will let you know when I am done adding and feel free to edit as needed. Nrswanson ( talk) 17:21, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
I just responded on the talk page. Sorry it took me a while. I was in the middle of another project and I had to pull out my score again. Nrswanson ( talk) 05:18, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
As you've been involved with the opera navboxes, I wonder if you can have a look at Template:Michael Nyman? This is a huge navbox full of red links which is being added to some short articles. I've tried to persuade the editor to remove the red links. His box also duplicates the opera navbox. -- Klein zach 03:18, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps a better template for Bernstein would be entitled "Stage works by Leonard Bernstein" and in that way classsification of the works in question can be discussed on the actual articles. Nrswanson ( talk) 16:06, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
There's even a public domain image you can use: Image:Leonard Bernstein 1971.jpg. Best, Voceditenore ( talk) 16:12, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi, Jay. The musicals project always uses the "skinny horizontal" templates. Best regards, -- Ssilvers ( talk) 18:32, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
This is also a big cat if you are interested in doing another box: Category:Operas by Emmerich Kálmán. Best. -- Klein zach 10:09, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
Sorry to delete your Cimarosa additions in the confusion. I'm wondering whether you could add to the statistics at the bottom of the page when you add works? Would that be OK? -- Klein zach 01:46, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
hi!
i agree, you were right to revert it. The version that that other user posted was EXTREMELY poetic, and for the most part had nothing to do with the libretto itself.
however the current version is hardly better. I will write my own translation, which would be a direct, line-for-line translation. Sounds good? -- OettingerCroat ( talk) 04:08, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I'll hold off on getting too involved in it. I was asked to close the June debate by a WP:Opera member and it seemed to me the strength of the arguments in the preceding paragraph outweighed the struggle to come to a consensus at the bottom which didn't seem all that clear. If it was a clear speedy close then I'm not sure why I was asked to close it when anybody could have. I don;t think any of my edits this morning are as controversial as has been reported and is acting well within stub sorting guidelines except the language ones which I haven't got around to sorting yet because of the disapproval. I thought it was what the project wanted. If I was mistaken or I tagged some beloeved start class articles by mistake I apologise, but every edit I made wa sin good faith and trying to help organize what is actually a very good project on here. I also think the opera biography stubs is perfectly reasonable if not solely for composers, for opera directors and opera critics which also require development to reach their potential. Regards The Bald One White cat 12:55, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I don't know whether you might have time to look at this? It's been neglected since July or longer. As you have had experience doing the Opera one perhaps you will know how to fix the layout etc. Best. -- Klein zach 02:59, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I've responded on my talk page, as I prefer to keep discussions on the page where they started. Best, Voceditenore ( talk) 16:03, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
Stop adding the met category, if you insist to continue, please discuss in Wiki Project Opera - Jay ( talk) 04:57, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
I have the Manon cleanup about half done (lots of clicks and pops, but the underlying recording is pretty good), but I'm feeling ill and need to lie down a bit. I'll finish it when I've rested.
Shoemaker's Holiday (
talk)
17:33, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Shoemaker's Holiday ( talk) 00:38, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
There's also a Caruso recording of "On J'appelle Manon" (think that's right, my French is appalling), that I think I'll do as well. There's also this and this which don't seem worth it. Shoemaker's Holiday ( talk) 00:48, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Looks good, though I did a formatting tweak, because it was looking a tiny bit untidy. Might I suggest one addition, though?
Of course, a Caruso-Farrar duet is probably capable of standing on its own. =) Shoemaker's Holiday ( talk) 15:47, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
It might be best to do Puccini for December/January - his birthday is December 22nd, which may well push us into early January before the peak dies down. I've made a list of about 16 high-quality recordings and a couple maybes - mainly La bohème, Madama Butterfly, and Tosca.. =) Shoemaker's Holiday ( talk) 05:13, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
I know, I should be doing Tosca, but, well, thought I'd finish up what I had started first. Can you give me your thoughts on this restoration?
I need to make sure that I got that right before I move to the next step, because it'll be hard to backtrack once I start on the removal of that rhythmic skipping/scraping noise.
Shoemaker's Holiday (
talk)
23:19, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
Sorry I haven't communicated with you about this for a while - I have been doing some work, but have been having a lot of second thoughts about whether it was as good as it could be. I put a couple on WT:OPERA - they're not in articles yet - see what you think, and if you have any advice? Shoemaker's Holiday ( talk) 01:14, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi Jay,
Thank you for explaining your reasons for redoing the changes to the roles tables. I apologise for not having extended the same courtesy to you when I first undid them. However, even after consulting the opera guideline that you recommended, I still have serious reservations.
First, it seems to me that the opera guideline doesn't really mandate the use of the American date format, rather, it simply gives an example to show the appropriate layout of a roles table, which just happens to use that format. Making any particular date format mandatory directly contradicts other well established guidelines such as WP:MOSNUM and is a decision that is unlikely to achieve consensus.
Secondly, the guidelines for choosing a date format are clearly laid out in WP:MOSNUM#Full_date_formatting:
Strong national ties to a topic
I'll wait a couple of days in case you disagree with what I've said or you want to point out something I've overlooked; however, unless you do, I'll make my changes again. The Stickler ( talk) 15:39, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi again Jay,
Sorry to be slow to reply, but I've been away for the last week.
Thanks for sorting this out so quickly. I'd be happy to help if you think I could be useful. However, I'm not sure that I could keep up with you - you seem to have boundless energy.
Cheers, The Stickler ( talk) 14:29, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
I think I can get all the Tosca (or at least one for each song) done in time for December 1st. There's about a dozen La bohème recordings, so that'll probably just be highlights. The Gianni Schicchi, and Manon Lescaut just have one or two each, so they should be doable. Madame Butterfly doesn't have any yet, though, so I'm going to have to get at least a couple of those done before going back to Tosca and La bohème.
I don't think I'll make my goal for the full two dozen or so (Total so far: 6, though it must be said that in that time I also did four or five Massenet, some Donizetti, some Sullivan, and so on) in time for the portal update, but I think I can still manage to do far more than you're willing to let me include in a single update. Shoemaker's Holiday ( talk) 05:38, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Tosca
Having already done it, I am certain I can get Tosca done by December 1st. Gia mi dicon venal is the weak link in that set, but I'll poke at its restoration a bit more. I thought I'd do some Madame Butterfly next, since I have two or three La bohème. Shoemaker's Holiday ( talk) 08:19, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi Whjanyg, I see that you added the Narrator to the cast of the discography. This is correct, since those recordings include the voice of the Narrator, but maybe it should be pointed out that the opera hasn't a Narrator as a character and that it's a mistake to declaim those verses, since Fontana wrote them only for the reader. -- Al Pereira (talk) 00:25, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Info Boxes - It seems to me that the consensus FOR info boxes is just as strong and compelling, and even though some editors claim there is a consensus on the issue (against them), the jury is still out. I Support info boxes. I truly believe that infoboxes, in addition to the lead paragraph, are valuable and useful for people not familiar with the subject. They can glance at the infobox, read the lead, and decide for themselves whether the rest of the article is worth reading or not. It seems to me that as far as this argument of yea or nea..... I totally agree with Andy Mabbett there is, still, clearly no consensus on this issue. The claim on the project page is bogus.
On top of that, Jules Garcin was a violinist/conductor (first and foremost), and there are still many infoboxes on existing "historic" violinists articles. I have created the article on Jules Garcin, I feel it provides the look of a real Encyclopedia (with an info box). Many find that informative info boxes add rather than detract . Milliot ( talk) 18:36, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Hello, this is a message from
an automated bot. A tag has been placed on
Category:Oratorios composer templates, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be
speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because
Category:Oratorios composer templates is a redirect to a non-existent page (
CSD R1).
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting
Category:Oratorios composer templates, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at
WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the
bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click
here
CSDWarnBot (
talk)
10:40, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
Would six songs be too indulgent? I have a lot of good stuff for Verdi. Of course, we could always come back to him - indeed, there's a LOT of stuff that I'm not even considering for in the six.
As of this moment, there's four songs done (La forza del destino, La traviata, Un ballo in maschera, and Aida), and I thought I'd get Rigoletto (Bella Figlia Dell'amore) and Otello (Sì, pel ciel) to round it out. That still doesn't get half of his notable operas, but, well, we'll come back to him.
Any ideas for next month? Sullivan? Wagner? Donizetti? Bizet/Flotow (I know I have two strong Bizet recordings, but the rest I've tried have been pretty bad, so we'd have to mix him with a minor composer)?
I'd kind of like to get one recording for every composer on List of major opera composers, barring, of course, the ones still in copyright. Shoemaker's Holiday ( talk) 14:47, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Okay,, I'm going to call that done for now. There's eight, so there's room to cut one or two if you don't think they're good enough, or we could save some for a future Verdi month (I intend to come back to Verdi later this year - there's a lot of high-quality stuff out there that I haven't done any work on. All the major operas could have four or five recordings each.), but for now, I think it's best I move on to other commitments, and composers with less representation in audio.) Shoemaker's Holiday ( talk) 20:39, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
Think it's worth getting this pushed through as a featured portal? We've all been working on it pretty hard. Shoemaker's Holiday ( talk) 19:33, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
(Going by opera name, since they're all different) Un ballo in maschera, La forza del destino, Otello, Rigoletto, Il trovatore, and Ernani. Listening again, the La traviata and Aida sound a bit over-cleaned. I'll want to try them again eventually, and see if I can do better with the sources I have. If you want, do the first three for February, the second three for March. Shoemaker's Holiday ( talk) 16:57, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
The booklet which comes with the Merlin recording says that the opera was finished on 25 April 1902. [p. 16, "Isaac Albéniz's elusive Grail" by Jacinto Torres. (Torres has cataloged Albéniz's works for musical theater.)] Further on p. 18 he states that Launcelot remains in unfinished form, while Guenevere was never written. You may want to modify the list to reflect this information. I think it should probably show "(1902)" as the date for Merlin and "(unfinished)" for Launcelot. (I'm unfamiliar with these templates, so did not want to do it myself.) Thanks. Robert.Allen ( talk) 11:30, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi Jay, Is it just me, or is it now all oddly aligned with great chunks of purple? I think the problem may come from the images in the new Selected Article, and Featured Singer and Composer, especially the image in Pelleas. Would making them a bit smaller help? Voceditenore ( talk) 14:22, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
I've opened a discussion on this at the OP. [5]. All contributions welcome. (I'm notifying all OP members who have participated in the discussions about the portal) Best, Voceditenore ( talk) 10:02, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Jay, I've avoided the debate over the portal because it would probably only create more friction but I have to say I preferred your version. I've learnt from experience to avoid having anything to do with any Wiki process that has the words "Good" or "Featured" in the title. It's not worth the hassle just to get a tiny gold star stuck on the top right of the page. Cheers. -- Folantin ( talk) 09:13, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi. There have been some changes to the Handel template — basically making it collapsible — and a discussion about it. Perhaps you'd like to have a look here? Best -- Klein zach 08:20, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi Jay. I thought you might enjoy this article about Placido Domingo in the New York Times if you haven't read it already: [6]. Nrswanson ( talk) 04:15, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Hello from the Opera Project. I'm writing to all members on the active list to let them know that we could use your input on several issues currently under discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Opera:
Please drop by if you have the time. Best, Voceditenore ( talk) 08:46, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Please see our project's talk page for a discussion of the possible changes to Wikipedia's policy on the biographies of living persons and the implications this will have for many articles under the project's banner. This is especially important if you are looking after or have created unreferenced or minimally referenced opera-related biographies of living people. Voceditenore ( talk) 16:18, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns with the referencing which you can see at Talk:Parsifal/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks. Jezhotwells ( talk) 22:06, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:LeroyAJay.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly hi! 06:25, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
16:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Whjayg. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for creating Genovefa Weber, Whjayg! Wikipedia editor Voceditenore just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
Great job!
To reply, leave a comment on Voceditenore's talk page. Learn more about page curation.
Thanks for creating Celeste Coltellini, Whjayg! Wikipedia editor Voceditenore just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
Thanks so much for this! I'll do a few minor copyedits.
To reply, leave a comment on Voceditenore's talk page. Learn more about page curation.
Thanks for noting the timestamp error. I have updated { Infobox_Town_AT} (see dif455) for "population_as_of=" to get timestamp date by prefix digit ("4") for Gmunden, or when "key < 0" to use date specified in "population_as_of=" (rather than always show timestamp from Metadata_population_AT-1). I have known about that incorrect timestamp, for years, but was continually distracted from fixing it by trivial issues, and I cannot apologize enough for all the frustrations you had trying to view the timestamp for the town populations you had updated. Fixed now, but again sorry for the mindboggling error.
Also, I should note new population
Template:EWZ count and
Template:EWD date timestamp, for use within the text of an Austria town page, as done on
German WP, except {EWZ} will show population totals with comma as thousands separator. For example
Gmunden could use {{
EWZ|AT|40705}}
to show population count {{EWZ|AT|40705}}. Thanks again for noting the frustrations about the date timestamp. -
Wikid77 (
talk)
16:20, 13 December 2016 (UTC)