User talk:DavidRF

Jon Meacham edit
DavidRF, on July 18 you removed significant content from Meacham entry. According to Wikipedia rules, content should not be deleted unless it lacks pertinence or appropriate sourcing. The material you deleted was obviously pertinent and sourced. Do you have some relationship to subject of the article, or other conflicts of interest that might be motivating you to engage in this misconduct on Wikipedia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rensy (talk • contribs) 23:29, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
 * All I did was change George H.W. Bush to George H. W. Bush (adding a space) to fix a link so it was not a redirect. I think you have wrong editor.DavidRF (talk) 17:09, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

DavidRF, I apologize to you. Indeed I did have the wrong editor! The person who did the deletions was someone else besides you. Hope you accept my apology... -- Rensy —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.75.242.181 (talk) 01:39, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Symphonies by Pyotr Tchaikovsky
Category:Symphonies by Pyotr Tchaikovsky, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:31, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

WP Classical Music in the Signpost
"WikiProject Report" would like to focus on WikiProject Classical Music for a Signpost article to be published this month. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Also, if you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day! -Mabeenot (talk) 21:43, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Mozart and Haydn project
Hi. You may be interested to see the discussion here. Best. -- Klein zach  01:18, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Britten violin concerto
You asked why one Wanda Wiłkomirska's recording is more important than others? I don't think that is the question to ask. I didn't add it, but found interesting - and not otherwise mentioned in the article -
 * the information on repertory and hall
 * that it was recorded live
 * that an old recording is published now. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:04, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

DavidRF. I have taken time to respond to your actions and would appreciate the courtesy of your taking time to read what I have addressed to you. The following criteria was brought to your attention by another contributor, "content should not be deleted unless it lacks pertinence or appropriate sourcing". You recently removed several links I added, with the intention of providing readers with sound samples that were very pertinent to the subject matter concerned. Perhaps you should have better acquainted yourself with the origin of the references before taking such high-handed actions. For some reason, known only to you, you took great care to search out and remove any edits added by me, whilst leaving untouched similar, adjacent references by other contributors. In every case the sound samples I provided were of a higher standard than those previously existing. I am now 75 years of age and have spent a lifetime devoted to music, without financial reward. I have recently begun to publish some historic CD's for the benefit of true classical music lovers. In my younger days I had the privilege of working for an impresario, by the name of Adolph Borsdorf. I was not paid a penny for very, long hours during which I drove some of the most eminent musicians of the day, in my car at my expense; because of my passion for music. I subsequently represented some important musicians and even the Polish Radio Symphony orchestra in the UK, losing a great deal of very hard-earned money in the process. Being a recording engineer by profession I was asked, by Mr. Borsdorf, to make recordings of concerts in such venues as the Royal Festival Hall. The set up procedure involved a day and a half of very hard work; once again I received no payment for my efforts. A copy of each recording was handed to the respective conductor and I was permitted to retain a copy, which I have used for my own joy over the past 40 or so years. However, I recently decided that the recordings should be made available to others with similar interests to me; that they were too important to die with me; for two very important reasons. Firstly, they were historically important and secondly they are unique, from the sound perspective. The recording technique, particularly from the point of view of microphone positioning was unique. I have since invested a great deal of money into a project that has taken up all my time for the past 3 years. I have no time for retirement, holidays or even to take care of a devoted wife. In each case I provided links on Wikipedia so that readers would have the possibility to hear extended sound samples of the music, subject of the articles in question. You clearly cannot be aware that CDs are not sold by simply making sound samples available. I have added similar links to Youtube and other resources, links that have been accessed thousands of times without a single contact as a result; but, I know from comments posted, that interested parties have taken pleasure in what I have provided. When I promoted concerts by such musicians as Alfredo Campoli, his last public performance in London, I could easily have filled the halls by giving free tickets, I was obliged to give tickets to critics and the like, but it would not be reasonable to give all the tickets away, because by paying for a ticket the buyer confirms a sincere interest. The same applies to the CD's I have published to date. I have subsidised them, in the sense that not one has made a profit; a hard pill to swallow because the loss affects my wife as well as myself - that is unjust, but still I continue because I feel the collection of recording I have must be left to posterity. I know that one day they will receive their just place. Might I suggest that you visit the website, which catalogues the recordings I have accumulated, (www.occds,org) and then perhaps you will appreciate the importance of my work. Incidentally, had the links been posted by Sony or HMV you certainly would not have taken the action you did, of that there is no doubt. The BBC and Gramophone magazine exhibit no interest in the recordings I have published and, along with the attitude in general toward unknown labels, are contributing to the ‘plastification’ of classical music; where a CD carries the name of the conductor, and yet the tempo, dynamics and balance have been controlled by the recording engineer. Where microphones have been distributed amongst the orchestra like confetti, adding further confusion to the sound that is then electronically manipulated so that any human errors are corrected, suggesting that the orchestra is technically perfect. The acoustics are then totally distorted to give the impression that the performance took place in a public convenience. Because the sound quality of modern recordings is so poor the industry is in decline and I believe that researchers and simply interested readers, on a particular matter, should be permitted to have the best material available to assist them. I haven’t, as yet, had time but it is my intention to add an article to Wikipedia describing the process used in the recordings I made, all those years ago, it will be referred to as CNSTR, (certified, natural, sound technique recording). You might care to keep a look out, just in case you continue to disapprove of my endeavor and wish to delete it. Have you noticed that should a pop group produce a new CD, the BBC and media in general provide full information, including publication details? Such a thing could not possibly happen in a case such as mine because that would be advertising! Strange. Alfredo Campoli appeared on more than 1,000 broadcasts for the BBC and yet today they do not respond to my suggestion that his name should be kept alive, he was one of the greatest violinists of all time. He added bel canto and phrasing, passion and romance to the sound produced by his Rocca violin and yet everyone believes it was his Stradivarius, the reason is clear. It must have been a Strad. No one has heard of Rocca. If you wish to interrogate my intentions further I am quite happy to continue via email. Geoffrey Terry Lazinov (talk) 08:54, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Congrats on rewrite of Montpelier
Terrific cleanup re neumes. The use of letter notation and neumes is key to understanding approaches to notation, and clearly destroys the often used idea of neumes "lead to" greater pitch accuracy. The next question, of course, is why one type, neumes in campo aperto was used longer (temporarily) and was preferred over letter notation, and indeed over instances of heightened neumes.

Centuries ago I was a student of Leo Treitler, who made his name on this sort of stuff. Shlishke (talk) 03:30, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

MOS for title of an article about a recorded album?
Hi David- A couple of weeks ago you visited a page then titled Mozart: Violin Sonatas (since moved by me to the more specific title taken from the CD cover art displayed at Amazon), and left the following message: I won't mind adding the parentheses if that's appropriate, but I've been unable to find this formatting instruction in a MOS - could you please post a link here? Thanks. In the meantime I've also fixed the redirects, so a search term Mozart violin sonatas directs to that listing instead of to this Hahn disc. Between fixing both the article title and the redirects, basically that problem is now solved, and I'm not sure the parentheses are still necessary unless wanted by the MOS.
 * Parentheses should be added to the title so that its clear this is not a general article about the sonatas but a very specific recording of a small subset of those sonatas by Hilary Hahn.DavidRF (talk) 22:29, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

(Separately, I've also questioned the notability of this album, and recommended the article itself for deletion - see the discussion there.) Milkunderwood (talk) 09:11, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Mozart Divertimento
Your recent edit: do we know if Mozart wrote it for four parts or for a string orchestra or if he didn't care? His late Divertimento K 563 is certainly a string trio. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:34, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I responded on the talk page for the "list of works" page.DavidRF (talk) 17:22, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Derek Boogaard
So quick to be Mr. Wikipedia that you didn't give people a chance to source things. Settle down, Sally. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.179.239.56 (talk) 02:43, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Mozart: Violin Sonatas K. 301, 304, 376 & 526
Hi David-- Back in April you came across this page, which is nothing more than a bare track listing of one specific and not particularly "notable" recording of four miscellaneous Mozart violin sonatas. A month later I came along, using the search term Mozart violin sonatas, and this was the first Search suggestion that popped up. That was a WTF? moment for me, and still is - even today, as soon as I type in nothing more than Mozart v this same thing pops up. I did move the page to display the K. numbers, and also said on its talk page that I was recommending the article for deletion -- except that I have no idea how to delete, or even how to request it. The article contains no discussion or any other kind of useful information -- not even the track timings. It may or may not be a 2005 recording; this is more likely to be the release (P) date.

I'm not opposed in principle to having separate articles on individual recordings, but surely there must be some justification for them, in terms of their notability and how informative the discussion is. Nor would it matter particularly if the thing were not so aggressive in popping up in a search. Can you please either delete it yourself, or recommend it for deletion? I don't know the procedure. Thanks for your help. Milkunderwood (talk) 07:23, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Deletion request is now set up. Milkunderwood (talk) 20:58, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Beethoven piano trios
David, thanks very much for coming along behind me and trying to clean up my messes. I was half asleep when I was trying to fix those articles naming individual trios by trio numbering only. And I have no idea how I just skipped over Op. 44, so all my references to "Beethoven's eleven piano trios still need to be changed to twelve. Also adding commas where not yet done, still move Nos. 1-3 to Op. 1, which I neglected to do, and recheck everything again. I'll get to all this sometime in the next few hours.

I also hate the brackets and "(?)" that I had added, and am still not happy with my phrasing in the note I put at the top of the piano trios in the List of Compositions. And one other thing is to see if I can make the explanation of "Gassenhauer" a little clearer. Today Michael Bednarek has added a requested explanation, but also Antandrus has now given me a useful link with a fuller explanation as meaning "street song" or "popular song" - I had guessed it was somebody's name. Give me a while to get this done - I'm all tied up for most of today. Again, thanks.

Oh, by the way, you might want to chime in at Wikipedia talk:Notability (music), a newly opened RfC carrying on the discussion immediately above it on that page. Milkunderwood (talk) 19:45, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Music
Do you have a reply to send me? Please leave it on my talk page. Thanks!

List of solo piano compositions by Joseph Haydn
Hi David--

I've just now posted a question at the talkpage for this list article, and was not sure whether you (or anyone) may be watching for posts there. Thanks. Milkunderwood (talk) 10:16, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Johann Tost
I've left a note at Talk:List of string quartets by Joseph Haydn in response to you and Ravpapa. Milkunderwood (talk) 20:42, 30 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi David-- Thank you for posting the explanation of who Tost was. As with the Bartolozzi situation, your succinct wording was far preferable to my clumsier suggestion. I very much hope I haven't given any offense in our disagreement; I think I understand where you were coming from. I'm not a musician at all - if you care to look at my user page, that might help explain my own outlook. I have great respect for your opinions and have also taken the liberty of having copied a quote of yours, without having asked you first, at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical music/Guidelines. Cheers, Milkunderwood (talk) 16:45, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Bartolozzi
Yes, thanks, your solution was much better. Milkunderwood (talk) 22:43, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Piano Concerto (Grieg)
Hi David--

If you might know anything about the Piano Concerto (Grieg), I've posted a question on that talkpage concerning what appears to be garbled tempo markings for the third movement. I doubt if talkpages like this one are regularly patrolled by anyone. Thanks. Milkunderwood (talk) 08:19, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Mozart Symphonies
There is a problem with both K. 98 and K. 111+120 being labelled as "48". Is one of them a typo for "49"? Double sharp (talk) 11:59, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Very interesting. What GA numbers are used in that book? Are there only 42-56 (without 49 and 53)? Double sharp (talk) 13:19, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Moonlight Sonata
David, please see my note underneath yours - I'm sure you meant to say Support rather than Oppose. Milkunderwood (talk) 01:57, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Per my request, User:Antandrus has now closed the parallel discussion at Sonata No. 8, with a pointer to the Moonlight talkpage, as both you and Kleinzach had suggested. Milkunderwood (talk) 17:03, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Symphony No. 4 (Schubert)
I think the Beethoven material you removed was substantially different from the mention of thematic similarity below. I'm willing to rewrite the section to combine the latter into the paragraph you reverted, but I think it did contain valuable content that I would like to work on restoring. Would you be willing to work with me on it? I can post a draft here rather than edit the article itself a bunch, or do so on its talk page. Thanks! Ra56 (talk) 03:32, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

RE: Guideline talk
Am I allowed to thank you for debating in a polite, reasoned and on-topic way? That's an approach I'm gradually trying to foster by looking at specific cases which bring out slightly different pertinent issues (I agree with you of course about the difference between Beethoven's 6th and Eine Kleine). Cheers, MistyMorn (talk) 16:25, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Precious
A year ago, you were the 53rd recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, you are an awesome Wikipedian! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:22, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

FA status in Piano music of Gabriel Fauré
Does this article deserve FA status? Please see this comment. Best wishes, Gidip (talk) 14:24, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Stock index charts
great work on the Log type charts of the Dow jones industrial average. id like to see the charts get updated very soon to refect the DJIA reaching 13000 points recently. also if its not too much trouble could you create 2 of these for the Nasdaq composite? preferably both in log form? 76.244.154.251 (talk) 16:02, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

copyright problem
Only you don't know it. It is serious. If you are a professional pianist, are you going to be a pianist without any income? Other pianists are angry about it. This Ishizawa's case is a fake. It is on the business. It is not voluntary. It is paid. It is not free. The performance is not bad, But not to be heard. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iorijapan (talk • contribs) 14:28, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Notification of automated file description generation
Your upload of File:BeethovenOp80-theme.png or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 13:04, 30 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Another one of your uploads, File:BeethovenOp125-finale-theme.png, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 13:07, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:56, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:22, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Six years now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:18, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

... and seven years: thank you for consistent clean-up of flowery language! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:58, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

... and eight --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:54, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Bach cantatas
Template:Bach cantatas has been nominated for merging with Template:Cantatas, motets and oratorios by BWV number. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. --Francis Schonken (talk) 09:44, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

2019


Die Zeit, die Tag und Jahre macht

Happy 2019

begin it with music and memories

Not too late, I hope ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:51, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:06, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Long time ago, you helped with Kammermusik (Hindemith) - look again ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:36, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Who
Who is this DrF?? 73.103.60.44 (talk) 18:07, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Always precious
Ten years ago, you were found precious. That's what you are, always. Thank you for your work in Classical music. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:00, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Britten cantatas
Template:Britten cantatas has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Aza24 (talk) 01:15, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

pre-paid legal tender better than post-paid legal tender
how can I be better with you 174.253.193.102 (talk) 03:48, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

"Angloise" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Angloise&redirect=no Angloise] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Jay 💬 07:45, 27 January 2024 (UTC)