This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Welcome!
For Prof. Kohl: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques-Louis_Monod —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.120.12.169 ( talk) 01:42, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Hello, Jerome Kohl, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
I have read your edits to Karlheinz Stockhausen with great interest.
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
Wikipedian! Please
sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out
Wikipedia:Where to ask a question. Again, welcome!
Runcorn 18:07, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Glad to have you working on the serialism page - good edits and well done. Stirling Newberry 04:03, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
You should do your user page, so people know more about your interests and experiences. Stirling Newberry 12:46, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Good thought. I've only been registered since early August, and am still finding my way around the system. Jerome Kohl 17:48, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
I noticed your edits to the Pierre Boulez page regarding analyses of Le marteau. Would you consider adding what you know to the Le marteau sans maître article as well? - Rainwarrior 15:27, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
It has been done. Thanks for the suggestion. Jerome Kohl 17:45, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
I noticed that you "corrected" the name "Robert Fink" in this edit, though I am wondering if it might have been in error. There is a UCLA musicologist named Robert Fink who has written extensively on 20th century music (e.g. his book "The Language of Twentieth Century Music"). I think there is confusion as to whether it was this Robert Fink, or the Bob Fink who had been inserting links to his website into the article at a later date. You can see in this edit that the original reference to "Robert Fink" was made by Stirling Newberry, and the links to Bob Fink's greenwych.ca website were added much later. I think it is more likely, however, that the original reference to Robert Fink was actually intended as the musicologist who specializes in 20th century music. (That said, it still needs a "citation needed". When I can get to a library I'll probably look up Robert Fink.)
I only noticed this because I have been having recent problems with Bob Fink, who has been inserting material from his self published books, and links to his website into pages all over wikipedia, and I've been trying to clean them out, so I've been doing a lot of digging through page histories lately. - Rainwarrior 21:30, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
I noticed you added some calls for citations at Trio theory. That page, though, is just a duplication of material Bob Fink inserted into Musical acoustics, so you might want to give that a look over too since it's the same stuff. (If you feel adventurous you might take a look at the talk page, but it's got pages and pages of Mr. Fink's argument on it.). - Rainwarrior 07:30, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
To Jerome Kohl:
Hello Jerome. I happened to notice some of the work you've been doing and would like to point you to my user page where I've collected very basic information (birth/death dates, nationalities) on about 40 composers that I feel should have more Wikipedia representation. Perhaps you will find some of the work that I've already done useful. I hope so. — Middlepedal 16:41, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Have you considered moving over to Citizendium? Things are really nice over there. I used to spend so much time on WP deleting simple vandalism I never had time to actually produce content, but on CZ one can dedicate one's time entirely to writing, see my articles on Norgard for example. Also, since you appreciate formal music scholarship, CZ with its philosophy of heeding recognized experts above Joe Random might impress you. CRCulver 08:48, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Hello. I see that you added back those hideous "[page number]" bits to the Cope references on the Experimental Music article. I agree that page numbers are needed, and I am intending to add them (I've got a hold on Cope's book at the library that I'm waiting on). In the mean time, I just thought those tags made the page look awful, and I think a more effective means of getting references fixed is to ask the person who added the quote to do it (perhaps you did?), or get it yourself. Anyway, I hope soon to have page numbers for the references, and then everyone will be happy, and the page won't look like crap. Cheers, Doctormatt 20:08, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
As you seem to know this subject if you have time could you compile a selected discography of Stockhausen please? I am interested in getting to know his work and wouldn't have a clue where to start. Thanks in advance. SmokeyTheCat 08:34, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Greetings! Have you ever heard of this? It gets three Google hits aside from Wikipedia itself, but is being persistently pushed into counterpoint and another article by a series of anon IPs. I've had a creepy feeling I'm the only one with counterpoint on his watchlist, but I noticed you edit the article once in a while--and also have some expertise in this area. I keep reverting him, but I just want a reality check to make sure this isn't something significant that's new. Thanks, Antandrus (talk) 01:55, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Why is that not overtagging? Have you read the references in the references section? Not everything needs a cite, especially not some uncontroversial ones as you have tagged. If you believe some statements are false, remove them or mention them on the discussion page. But this seems overtagging and also (minor point) makes the article look ugly. Garion96 (talk) 10:31, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi - thanks for the improvements at Electronic music (classical). I thought I should inform you there might be an unresolved copyright issue with that article and some of your improvements may be to parts of the text involved in the question.
I'm not sure about this, someone else just informed me; and I don't think it's clear yet. Here is the link to my talk page where I was told about this.
At first I misunderstood the post and responded a different aspect - the copyright issue is clarified in the 3rd indented reply.
If you wish, you're welcome to add a note to the discussion on my talk page so we can figure out what to do about the questionable copyright status of the text. Best Wishes... -- Parsifal Hello 18:58, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
... I replied on my talk page to your note about the copyright issue. -- Parsifal Hello 07:42, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Hello, I am very happy for the great improvements at that article, Would you agree to move it to Electronic music (classical and experimental), since there is one named Electronic music (dance and popular)? We should thank User:Susume-eat for having been bold, ha made important changes and now we can see the good implications of his work. he seems no longer active now. Doktor Who 20:36, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi - thanks for cleaning up those references I added. I've never used that streamlined format before. It looks much better now that the booklist can be seen all in one place.
About the [sic] words... two were typos, I've now fixed those. This one: "avante-gardism" - I copied out of the book, that's exactly how they wrote it; I wondered about it but decided not to second-guess the publisher. The one on the Brian Eno reference I didn't add so I don't know about that one. -- Parsifal Hello 22:44, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
The Music Genre page is lacking in sources, and while it may seem minor, it has come up as a major point in a discussion on another page. I am hesitant to link you because most of the valuable information is in Japanese, but more information on "genre" (albeit a controversial topic) would be helpful. (The article we are debating is Visual kei. It is listed as a music genre in the Japanese Wikipedia page, associated with the "Gothic and Lolita" subculture. Unfortunately none of the Japanese articles have sources and one of the editors involves insists that everything be sourced. If you know any Wikipedians with Japanese and music knowledge you could invite to the discussion, it would be appreciated; currently I am the only editor in the discussion with an understanding of Japanese. The article has been in contention for 6 months, and the other editors I have spoken to have "given up" on it. Denaar 05:00, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
I want to take the opportunity to thank you for your edits to the Karlheinz Stockhausen article. Stockhausen and his music (as well as Modernist/avante-garde music in general) are an interest of mine, unfortunately, I do not know enough to make any substantial contributions to the article. I keep the article on my watchlist mostly to deal with vandalism, and to watch the progress of its improvement. Keep up the good work. Cheers! --- RepublicanJacobite The'FortyFive' 22:40, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
What 'Jazz' needs is a lot more sensible, accurate [and 'sober'!] contributors like you, Jerome Kohl. It's currently a 'mess' which seems a great pity and no-longer-an-easy 'mess' to save. Have you the time and energy? It would be good - well done so far! cn —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.42.108.69 ( talk) 10:39, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi. I see you've changed the references on Arnold Schoenberg back to the Harvard method. Is this the most sensible method for Wikipedia? I think it may be confusing to those unfamiliar with reading academic texts, etc. Dancarney 21:23, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for you help with this. Ceoil 07:45, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Since you've been editing the chaconne and passacaglia pages, perhaps you know or have researched this. I've always heard Brahms's 4th's last movement refered to as a chaconne (with the fact that he 'ressurected' the form in the finale of the Haydn Variations). Even Gerard Schwartz in his Musically Speaking series [3] calls them both that, without even referring to passacaglias. So, any of those books you're referencing mention it? ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 19:43, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Good call on removing that bit about Rick Wright from the Stockhausen article. Had I noticed it, I would have removed it myself. I reverted an anonymous user's addition of Wright to the prominent students list earlier today. What I find particularly amusing about all this is that the Rick Wright article (about whom I know next to nothing) claims that he is a self-taught pianist! So, he is both an auto-didact and a prominent student of Stockhausen?! Truly remarkable. Cheers! --- RepublicanJacobite The'FortyFive' 17:24, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi Jerome and RepublicanJacobite - I noticed your discussion and found a couple references with a mention of this, though no further details are included:
I'm on minimal editing schedule currently, so can't work on this further, but I thought you might find the above interesting. -- Parsifal Hello 02:55, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
I realize that it may seem like vandalism, but The Process of Weeding Out is indeed a 12-tone piece, especially the title track. I hope you're not letting any kind of classical bias keep you from letting this stay on the page.
Hi. I intend to write an article about you, as a Stockhausen expert. Do you know if I can use information or even text from your user page? I am referring to WP policies and general copyright laws.-- Atavi ( talk) 18:47, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
I note you reverted my revert?
The revert was because there were apparently attempts to revive it underway.. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 18:04, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
To expand on what Sfan00 is saying, check the IMSLP forum. Quite a number of threads explain that the shut down is only temporary -- that's why the template was changed rather than deleted. Though the two links I see in your history that were removed don't belond at the moment. I'll go stick em on their articles' talk pages. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ ( talk) 18:12, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
Hello Jerome Kohl, I’m glad to meet a fellow Wikipedian who is interested in avant garde music and theory! I’ve set up a Wikiproject to focus on these articles. I thought I’d ask; Would you be interested in joining WikiProject Contemporary music? Cheer, -- S.dedalus 00:43, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Welcome!
For Prof. Kohl: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques-Louis_Monod —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.120.12.169 ( talk) 01:42, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Hello, Jerome Kohl, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
I have read your edits to Karlheinz Stockhausen with great interest.
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
Wikipedian! Please
sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out
Wikipedia:Where to ask a question. Again, welcome!
Runcorn 18:07, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Glad to have you working on the serialism page - good edits and well done. Stirling Newberry 04:03, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
You should do your user page, so people know more about your interests and experiences. Stirling Newberry 12:46, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Good thought. I've only been registered since early August, and am still finding my way around the system. Jerome Kohl 17:48, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
I noticed your edits to the Pierre Boulez page regarding analyses of Le marteau. Would you consider adding what you know to the Le marteau sans maître article as well? - Rainwarrior 15:27, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
It has been done. Thanks for the suggestion. Jerome Kohl 17:45, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
I noticed that you "corrected" the name "Robert Fink" in this edit, though I am wondering if it might have been in error. There is a UCLA musicologist named Robert Fink who has written extensively on 20th century music (e.g. his book "The Language of Twentieth Century Music"). I think there is confusion as to whether it was this Robert Fink, or the Bob Fink who had been inserting links to his website into the article at a later date. You can see in this edit that the original reference to "Robert Fink" was made by Stirling Newberry, and the links to Bob Fink's greenwych.ca website were added much later. I think it is more likely, however, that the original reference to Robert Fink was actually intended as the musicologist who specializes in 20th century music. (That said, it still needs a "citation needed". When I can get to a library I'll probably look up Robert Fink.)
I only noticed this because I have been having recent problems with Bob Fink, who has been inserting material from his self published books, and links to his website into pages all over wikipedia, and I've been trying to clean them out, so I've been doing a lot of digging through page histories lately. - Rainwarrior 21:30, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
I noticed you added some calls for citations at Trio theory. That page, though, is just a duplication of material Bob Fink inserted into Musical acoustics, so you might want to give that a look over too since it's the same stuff. (If you feel adventurous you might take a look at the talk page, but it's got pages and pages of Mr. Fink's argument on it.). - Rainwarrior 07:30, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
To Jerome Kohl:
Hello Jerome. I happened to notice some of the work you've been doing and would like to point you to my user page where I've collected very basic information (birth/death dates, nationalities) on about 40 composers that I feel should have more Wikipedia representation. Perhaps you will find some of the work that I've already done useful. I hope so. — Middlepedal 16:41, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Have you considered moving over to Citizendium? Things are really nice over there. I used to spend so much time on WP deleting simple vandalism I never had time to actually produce content, but on CZ one can dedicate one's time entirely to writing, see my articles on Norgard for example. Also, since you appreciate formal music scholarship, CZ with its philosophy of heeding recognized experts above Joe Random might impress you. CRCulver 08:48, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Hello. I see that you added back those hideous "[page number]" bits to the Cope references on the Experimental Music article. I agree that page numbers are needed, and I am intending to add them (I've got a hold on Cope's book at the library that I'm waiting on). In the mean time, I just thought those tags made the page look awful, and I think a more effective means of getting references fixed is to ask the person who added the quote to do it (perhaps you did?), or get it yourself. Anyway, I hope soon to have page numbers for the references, and then everyone will be happy, and the page won't look like crap. Cheers, Doctormatt 20:08, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
As you seem to know this subject if you have time could you compile a selected discography of Stockhausen please? I am interested in getting to know his work and wouldn't have a clue where to start. Thanks in advance. SmokeyTheCat 08:34, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Greetings! Have you ever heard of this? It gets three Google hits aside from Wikipedia itself, but is being persistently pushed into counterpoint and another article by a series of anon IPs. I've had a creepy feeling I'm the only one with counterpoint on his watchlist, but I noticed you edit the article once in a while--and also have some expertise in this area. I keep reverting him, but I just want a reality check to make sure this isn't something significant that's new. Thanks, Antandrus (talk) 01:55, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Why is that not overtagging? Have you read the references in the references section? Not everything needs a cite, especially not some uncontroversial ones as you have tagged. If you believe some statements are false, remove them or mention them on the discussion page. But this seems overtagging and also (minor point) makes the article look ugly. Garion96 (talk) 10:31, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi - thanks for the improvements at Electronic music (classical). I thought I should inform you there might be an unresolved copyright issue with that article and some of your improvements may be to parts of the text involved in the question.
I'm not sure about this, someone else just informed me; and I don't think it's clear yet. Here is the link to my talk page where I was told about this.
At first I misunderstood the post and responded a different aspect - the copyright issue is clarified in the 3rd indented reply.
If you wish, you're welcome to add a note to the discussion on my talk page so we can figure out what to do about the questionable copyright status of the text. Best Wishes... -- Parsifal Hello 18:58, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
... I replied on my talk page to your note about the copyright issue. -- Parsifal Hello 07:42, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Hello, I am very happy for the great improvements at that article, Would you agree to move it to Electronic music (classical and experimental), since there is one named Electronic music (dance and popular)? We should thank User:Susume-eat for having been bold, ha made important changes and now we can see the good implications of his work. he seems no longer active now. Doktor Who 20:36, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi - thanks for cleaning up those references I added. I've never used that streamlined format before. It looks much better now that the booklist can be seen all in one place.
About the [sic] words... two were typos, I've now fixed those. This one: "avante-gardism" - I copied out of the book, that's exactly how they wrote it; I wondered about it but decided not to second-guess the publisher. The one on the Brian Eno reference I didn't add so I don't know about that one. -- Parsifal Hello 22:44, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
The Music Genre page is lacking in sources, and while it may seem minor, it has come up as a major point in a discussion on another page. I am hesitant to link you because most of the valuable information is in Japanese, but more information on "genre" (albeit a controversial topic) would be helpful. (The article we are debating is Visual kei. It is listed as a music genre in the Japanese Wikipedia page, associated with the "Gothic and Lolita" subculture. Unfortunately none of the Japanese articles have sources and one of the editors involves insists that everything be sourced. If you know any Wikipedians with Japanese and music knowledge you could invite to the discussion, it would be appreciated; currently I am the only editor in the discussion with an understanding of Japanese. The article has been in contention for 6 months, and the other editors I have spoken to have "given up" on it. Denaar 05:00, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
I want to take the opportunity to thank you for your edits to the Karlheinz Stockhausen article. Stockhausen and his music (as well as Modernist/avante-garde music in general) are an interest of mine, unfortunately, I do not know enough to make any substantial contributions to the article. I keep the article on my watchlist mostly to deal with vandalism, and to watch the progress of its improvement. Keep up the good work. Cheers! --- RepublicanJacobite The'FortyFive' 22:40, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
What 'Jazz' needs is a lot more sensible, accurate [and 'sober'!] contributors like you, Jerome Kohl. It's currently a 'mess' which seems a great pity and no-longer-an-easy 'mess' to save. Have you the time and energy? It would be good - well done so far! cn —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.42.108.69 ( talk) 10:39, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi. I see you've changed the references on Arnold Schoenberg back to the Harvard method. Is this the most sensible method for Wikipedia? I think it may be confusing to those unfamiliar with reading academic texts, etc. Dancarney 21:23, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for you help with this. Ceoil 07:45, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Since you've been editing the chaconne and passacaglia pages, perhaps you know or have researched this. I've always heard Brahms's 4th's last movement refered to as a chaconne (with the fact that he 'ressurected' the form in the finale of the Haydn Variations). Even Gerard Schwartz in his Musically Speaking series [3] calls them both that, without even referring to passacaglias. So, any of those books you're referencing mention it? ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 19:43, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Good call on removing that bit about Rick Wright from the Stockhausen article. Had I noticed it, I would have removed it myself. I reverted an anonymous user's addition of Wright to the prominent students list earlier today. What I find particularly amusing about all this is that the Rick Wright article (about whom I know next to nothing) claims that he is a self-taught pianist! So, he is both an auto-didact and a prominent student of Stockhausen?! Truly remarkable. Cheers! --- RepublicanJacobite The'FortyFive' 17:24, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi Jerome and RepublicanJacobite - I noticed your discussion and found a couple references with a mention of this, though no further details are included:
I'm on minimal editing schedule currently, so can't work on this further, but I thought you might find the above interesting. -- Parsifal Hello 02:55, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
I realize that it may seem like vandalism, but The Process of Weeding Out is indeed a 12-tone piece, especially the title track. I hope you're not letting any kind of classical bias keep you from letting this stay on the page.
Hi. I intend to write an article about you, as a Stockhausen expert. Do you know if I can use information or even text from your user page? I am referring to WP policies and general copyright laws.-- Atavi ( talk) 18:47, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
I note you reverted my revert?
The revert was because there were apparently attempts to revive it underway.. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 18:04, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
To expand on what Sfan00 is saying, check the IMSLP forum. Quite a number of threads explain that the shut down is only temporary -- that's why the template was changed rather than deleted. Though the two links I see in your history that were removed don't belond at the moment. I'll go stick em on their articles' talk pages. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ ( talk) 18:12, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
Hello Jerome Kohl, I’m glad to meet a fellow Wikipedian who is interested in avant garde music and theory! I’ve set up a Wikiproject to focus on these articles. I thought I’d ask; Would you be interested in joining WikiProject Contemporary music? Cheer, -- S.dedalus 00:43, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |