User talk:M A Mason

Welcome!

Hello, 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 hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: &#126;&#126;&#126;. Four tildes (&#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! -- Francs2000 | Talk 14:05, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style
 * Merging, redirecting, and renaming pages
 * If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also Topical index.

God damn you're good
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Oscar_Wilde&action=history 1 second. How did you manage that?! --81.107.155.142 22:11, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Deleting things
You need to ask an admin (like me) to do it for you. I'll take a look and see if I can work out what you were trying to do. -- Francs2000 | Talk 14:13, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * I have redirected one to the other - is this what you were trying to do? If not, let me know. -- Francs2000 | Talk [[Image:Flag of the United Kingdom.svg|25px|  ]] 14:15, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The Stig's identity
Oops, sorry for reversing that line.. I thought for a moment that the line was referring to the current stig (which we don't have any confirmed clues to who the identity is). Your edit made it more clear ;) 9cds 14:35, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Please help on William Shakespeare
Posted by PruneauT 01:02, 20 June 2006 (UTC) on behalf of the AID maintenance team.

You helped choose this week's WP:AID winner
Draicone (talk) 11:57, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Warning
Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits are considered vandalism. If you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the work of others. Thank you. James Barlow 23:53, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

thanks and you're welcome :)
or in Hungarian, we say köszönöm (thanks) and szívesen (you're welcome). :) I too am a huge Lisztomaniac, I think he's really terribly underappreciated and misunderstood--the man and his music both. I only wish I was a better pianist so I could play his music! :) Indeed, there is a lot of nonsense flying around about his nationality--some Austrians are trying to claim him, and the Slovaks just never seem to give up. That really p*sses me off, especially since Liszt himself was so clear about what nationality he really was. Now when arrogant people try to "correct" Liszt and tell him and us what he "really" was--it's so disrespectful, it makes me so mad! However, the soon-to-be-created WikiProject Hungarian Culture has Liszt on the, um, list of things to do, so stay tuned. :) Cheers! K. Lástocska 17:03, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Zoe7
I have added a "" template to the article Zoe7, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at its talk page. Removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, but the article may still be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached, or if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria. Matt 08:14, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

hi
"Kalappal" is something like "hats off!", so yes, essentially "good luck." :) Can't wait till the auditions are over--actually, I need to get off the computer and finish practicing my Paganini. Once I return, I intend to spearhead a campaign to get our friend Liszt up to Featured Article status--care to join in? (I'll try to drag the rest of WikiProject Hungarian Culture along, but I think so far most of them are literature people.)

See you guys in March....K. Lásztocska 03:15, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

PS--I just nicked your "this user is a Lisztian" userbox, hope you don't mind... :) K. Lásztocska

Liszt again
please help in my war with Anonymous Scholar. I just don't see his logic and I'm getting tired of his condescending attitude. K. Lásztocska 17:52, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

The thing is, his debating skills aren't even much to show off--a really good debater sticks to the points that his opponent presents and demolishes them systematically, clearly, and logically. A.S. has done none of that. He relies on inference, leaps of both faith and logic, assumptions, and his own biases, and he never takes my arguments straight on. Instead he goes off on some irrelevant tangent. It's impossible to argue productively with someone who keeps redefining the argument.

It really makes me angry, sad and disgusted when people try to "prove" that Liszt was wrong all along, he wasn't really Hungarian, he just thought he was. When people such as A.S. try to say that he didn't even really think he was Hungarian, then I just lose my roof. What arrogance! What presumptuousness! I can't help but wonder if the cold and condescending attitude with which these types of "scholars" regard Liszt as a man is related to the longstanding condescension toward him as a musician. You know, I'm sure, that until recent decades he was dismissed (by the general musical public at least) as simply a showy virtuoso, whowas very important for the development of the piano but, with a few exceptions, his music was second-rate at best. Personally, he was considered a one-dimensional man, little more than a self-obsessed, preening, womanizing, pompous charlatan. What A.S. will never admit is, Liszt suddenly got a second chance in popular esteem at around the time that evil man Alan Walker started writing his books. Suddenly everyone realized--hot damn, this is amazing music! This guy was a real genius! And then real Liszt scholarship took off.

Also I must admit that A.S. is not completely 100% wrong in saying I have an emotional involvement in the war over Liszt's nationality. I'm in a very similar situation to Liszt--I was born and I now live outside of Hungary (in my case, in the United States), I am of mixed ethnicity, I speak Hungarian quite poorly, but if anyone asks me my nationality, I reply "I am Hungarian!" without a moment's hesitation. In fact, I may surely be allowed, in spite of my lamentable ignorance of the Hungarian language, to regard myself as being from birth to the grave Magyar in my heart and mind. :) I've been lucky enough to not have anyone (so far) tell me that I'm not "really Hungarian", but I can imagine how terrible it would feel. With Liszt, when he is not even here to defend himself, it is even worse, like they're spitting on his grave. And in the face of such piles of evidence that Liszt was and felt Hungarian, to contradict all of that! It's just absurd! The terrible disrespect they show that great man, it makes me choke on my own fury! I should point out that I challenged A.S. at least twice to produce one solid piece of evidence (i.e., in Liszt's own words) that he considered himself anything other than Magyar. He has not produced that evidence or anything close to it.

Oh, and as for the German article stating "Liszt war ein ungarischer Komponist"......errr, ah.....well, it said "Liszt war ein deutscher Komponist" until yours truly got her hands on it. :) I better go check the articles in other languages! K. Lásztocska 00:44, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks mate. :) You know I'd defend my beloved Ferenc Franz to the ends of the earth, but what really sent me over the top was A.S.'s insinuation that Bartok's defence of Liszt-as-Hungarian was part and parcel of the rising stink of fascism sweeping Europe in those days. (And that he still can't spell "Rákóczi", lol) I really can't believe that someone with such a poor grasp of the principles of logic and argumentation could be a published scholar--we may have had a troll on our hands. Anyhoo, I'm still laying low for a while, back soon. I have some harmless silliness planned for April Fools Day.... :) K. Lásztocska 20:29, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

A.S. has outdone himself! K. Lásztocska 16:56, 27 March 2007 (UTC)


 * You should stay a little bit closer to the truth. The German Wikipedia-Liszt is quite different from your description, and there are some further points being wrong in your postings. Wikipedia is not a place for insulting attacks against living persons by the way. Concerning the "Rácóczi-march" or the "Rákóczi-march" there are different spellings in use. (A.S.)84.61.27.11 15:06, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Oh no. You're still here? And you're stalking me now? Look, AS, if you have anything to say to me, say it on my talk page. I personally have never seen it spelled "Rácóczi". You're rather bold, though, telling me that Wiki is not the place for insulting attacks, when you have been insulting and dismissing and belittling me since the day you first showed up to show off your vast wealth of infallible knowledge. If you know as much about the Hungarians as you claim to, you will know that we do not and will not stand for being insulted, disrespected, kicked around, bossed about, or generally messed with....(see: March 1848, October 1956, even September 2006 if you like.) K. Lásztocska 00:52, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Saddleworth
Thanks for the references - I was sure they were not bare-faced-lies, but I'm keen on seeing some of these articles start to improve a little. Do you have anymore material which may help?

I've uploaded a map to the infobox also. I wasn't happy with Saddleworth being indicated as being Uppermill specifically. Hope it helps. Jhamez84 18:56, 26 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the contact. I'm glad the map is well received. Yes it would be nice to improve the Saddleworth articles. With enough published print material, and some quality photographs, I think getting Saddleworth up to WP:GA wouldn't be too difficult in all honesty.


 * I managed to get Shaw and Crompton upto this standard - if that's possible, then certainly any article written about this part of the world should be able to attain this. If you wish to collaborate on Saddleworth, feel free to lift ideas from the S&C article. Thanks again, Jhamez84 13:27, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Liszt.... yet again
Yes, Doborjan, the Austrian Empire would be best. I presumed Raiding was the correct name because, well... because it`s the German one :) Weird correlation, but it kind of makes sense. Anyway, I will change it back to Doborjan. Menuetto 08:05, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Liszt- German/Hungarian
Hi Michael- it seemed like a sensible compromise to me. There wasn't really a Hungarian state at the time (as also many other present day states did not exist) so questions of nationality are quite complicated. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 20:36, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

thanks :)
Köszönöm nagyon szépen a jóságot. :) It's good to be back, though I am still treading rather gingerly to be sure I don't lose my head again or get mired in any more nasty fights or personal disputes. I've got a few things to work on before I can get back to Liszt (mainly, a massive revamp to Joseph Szigeti that's been stewing in my word-processor for a few months--I've finally almost finished it, might even get it onwiki later today) but I had an idea I wanted to run by you: I'm still planning to finish that series on Liszt's symphonic poems; once we've done that, what do you think of the idea of having one article, Symphonic Poems of Franz Liszt, for all of them? (We can make redirects to each section on each piece.) I thought that since they are such an important body of work, linked together by the very concept behind their creation, it would make most sense to treat them as a cohesive unit (also, then we wouldn't have twelve weird little stubs floating around.) I've got more detailed ideas, but let me know what you think before I go on and on and on. :) K. Lásztocska 19:54, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: twaddle
It's not my fault, mate. :P Just go listen to Les Préludes for a while and get back on that Wikibreak. :P &mdash; $PЯING  rαgђ  08:04, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Oldham categories at Cfd
The question of whether 'Oldham' cats should be renamed to 'Metropoloitan Borough of Oldham' has been taken to CfD, see Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_June_9. As far as I can tell, this renaming proposal would apply to Wigan, Stockport and all other metropolitan boroughs - UK-wide - that share a name with a town. Your contributions would be welcome. Mr Stephen 15:36, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

A question abiout titles
The list of the actual studies in the article Transcendental Etudes—

The individual articles' names are T. E. No. 1 in C Major; T. E. No. 2 in A minor, but shouldn't they be something like T. E. No. 1 and T. E. No 2., especially since for (for example) Liszt's concerti we have Piano Concerto No. 1 (Liszt) and not Piano Concerto No. 1 in E flat (Liszt)? &mdash; $PЯING  rαgђ  20:18, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

P.S. I am horrible at expressing myself, so just ask me if something's not clear. :) 20:19, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi
Thanks. I've been back for a while. Not so easy to leave the wiki. :-) Maybe I should edit articles about music and not take part in debates on history and geography. We'll see. Have a nice day. --Koppany 12:20, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi, I sort of meant k. Lasztochka lol, sorry about the confusion! Should've been mmore clear, but hey I'm glad you're back as well :) M A Mason 13:21, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Lol. OK. --Koppany 16:15, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Hooah
- Thanks for picking up that one! Scar ian Talk  22:31, 22 August 2007 (UTC)


 * No worries, my friend. Keep up the good work on the Nirvana articles! Always a struggle to improve them, what with so few reliable sources around! Take care. Scar ian Talk  22:58, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Saddleworth
Thanks for adding the navigation template to the various Saddleworth settlement articles - much appreciated! I think it will aid in raising awareness of the article's existence, and hopefully attract some more contributors. Not sure if you've noticed too, but Shaw and Crompton is now a featured article! Jza84 00:45, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Manchester - FA push
Hello fellow WikiProject Greater Manchester participant! T=You may or may not be aware that our Manchester article has recently obtained official good article status! This is a great acheievement, but we don't want to stop there! We're hoping to spend the next few weeks as a team to raise the standard of this article to featured standard! It will only be possible if we work together, and hope you can take a moment to look both at the FA criteria, and the Manchester article and aid us in this feat! Any problems, feel free to raise them at Talk:Manchester! Good luck! Jza84 23:19, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

WPGM Newsletter
Onnaghar  talk ! ctrb ! er 17:37, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

WPGM Newsletter - November 2007
Rudget Contributions 17:16, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Murray link, consensus 2009
As you were involved in the previous consensus in 2006, I think it would be appropriate for your input in a RfC on the matter. A local consensus was once again reached a few weeks ago but it now has now gone to a wider consensus.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Andy_Murray

Mark7144 (talk) 08:48, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:00, 23 November 2015 (UTC)