Talk:Charles van Lerberghe

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Charles van Lerberghe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060828171556/http://www.francophonie.philo.ulg.ac.be:80/CWB.VanLerberghe to http://www.francophonie.philo.ulg.ac.be/CWB.VanLerberghe

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:15, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Eva Ruth Spalding
is engaged in a campaign "to include more women and people of color in wikipedia", as well as to boost hits for an article he created yesterday. He does his cause no good by simply adding the name of his chosen composer, described as "a somewhat obscure figure" in the first source he cites, to a sentence beginning "Some single settings from Entrevisions have also been notable". This particular setting is not, or it would have been noted and performed more frequently. Sweetpool50 (talk) 13:52, 20 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Eva Ruth Spalding was hardly obscure. She was published by Maurice Senart. Her works were premiered on BBC by pianist Margaret Kitchin. She is frequently performed today by violinist Shulah Oliver. Serious researchers will want to know that she set text by Charles van Lerberghe to music. It’s unfortunate that they will have to learn this on the article talk page instead of in the article.

T. E. Meeks (talk) 14:09, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

"Serious researchers" want to know accurate information. The song cited was from Chanson d'Ève, not Intimations. Such thoroughly slipshod work in the two edits I've encountered puts all your editing in doubt.

On another note,, WP is not the place to cram every snippet of information your happen to come across, instead of the subject's most notable highlights. I suggest you revisit your core article and give proper sources (and dates) for all the settings you cite; that's the proper and most useful place for your research. Sweetpool50 (talk) 15:48, 20 January 2022 (UTC)