User talk:Meneerke bloem/Archive 2

Bruckner's Symphony No. 8 and Siegfried motif
Hi. Actually this is very clear in the Development section! Compare here: Siegfried motif (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OS0bwKkXwEU&t=1m06s) and the Exposition of Bruckner's 8th Symphony (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysObwV48C4Y&t=0m02s) or its Development section (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysObwV48C4Y&t=8m23s). Players should be already embedded in these links. It is very clear! --Leonardo T. Oliveira 14:34, 26 January 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leonardo Teixeira de Oliveira (talk • contribs)


 * It's very interesting! But ...listening to the March in D minor I can't identify specifically that main theme from the 1st movement of Symphony No. 8... Is it this same theme derived from this previous work? Could you identify it? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4eWW7_XbdMU. Thanks! --Leonardo T. Oliveira 16:21, 26 January 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leonardo Teixeira de Oliveira (talk • contribs)


 * Now I can see. Well, it's not so similar as the Siegfried motif, but your point turns this Siegfried claim not so pacific to an encyclopedic entry. I can imagine that this main theme, even if similar to another previous work of him, can have been inspired in its design by Siegfried even so - but here we would be speculating. Thank you very much for your information! Best regards. Leonardo T. Oliveira 19:13, 27 January 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leonardo Teixeira de Oliveira (talk • contribs)

Reply
Hi Reginald. Those tags I added are not necessarily critical of the article or you, but are mainly intended to attract attention to the article. People with knowledge of the topic and people who are native English speakers can then copy edit and improve the article. Otherwise there's nothing particularly wrong with it, it just needs to be edited and cleaned up a bit. Thanks for contributing. - Burpelson AFB ✈ 16:40, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * The English in general is correct, but writing style for an encyclopedia is a bit different than writing for a journal article or another publication. Overall the article is good and informative, it just needs a look from other Wikipedia editors. If you disagree I have no problem with you removing the maintenance tags. - Burpelson AFB ✈ 13:59, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Sarah (talk) 15:02, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Improving "List of compositions" articles
I triggered a discussion on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Classical_music about Improving "List of compositions" articles. Along the way we came into the topic Bruckner and I did some prototyping for List of compositions by Anton Bruckner on my user space (see discussion in Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Classical_music). Since you appear to be most active in the Bruckner area, I thought, just to give you a heads up so you could comment as well if you want. I'm pretty new around here, am I correct to put this on your talk page or would I have better put it on the List of compositions by Anton Bruckner talk page or both? LazyStarryNights (talk) 00:39, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Dear,

I have a large discography of Bruckner's works, including non-commercial recordings for some works for which there is no commercial recording available.

I have recently acquired Cornelis van Zwol's book "Anton Bruckner 1824-1896 - Leven en Werken" (782 pages, ISBN 978-90-6868-590-9), in which all Bruckner's works are described in detail - a book every Bruckner-fan should own. Unfortunately the issue is nearly sold out and, for not Dutch-speaking people, it is written in Dutch. Moreover, because van Zwol had no sponsor to support the publication, there will be no second issue and the book will presumably not translated in another language…

Please put your suggestions on my user-talk page.

Best regards from Belgium, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 09:33, 5 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Great you have such passion for and such good sources on Bruckner. I only know some work of Bruckner, but what I do know is beautiful. However, my improvements efforts are not Bruckner specific, but a general improvement of composition lists. See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical music for the relevant discussion and at User:LazyStarryNights/List of compositions by Anton Bruckner for a draft so far. Bruckner was just one of the composers that was suggested to start on. LazyStarryNights (talk) 20:33, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

June 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=560145225 your edit] to Bruckner's early Masses may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:36, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Sanctus of the Messe Kronstorfer Messe.  Total duration: about 10’. The extra fugated Kyrie and Gloria, which were

Bruckner list intro
Thank you for making good sense of the introduction! I think it's much better now. Best. -- Klein zach  02:12, 27 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm now signing off Bruckner, but do let me know if I can help at all in the future. Best regards. -- Klein zach  23:54, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

'No. 0' Symphony in d minor by Bruckner
Hello, bonjour, hallo.

I am indeed unconcerned with the name of the article: whether 'Symphony in D minor (Bruckner)' or 'Symphony No. 0 (Bruckner)'. I just regard your process as a very serious COPYRIGHT problem because of your copy-and-paste without moving the revision history. In other words, I think that your new article is plagiarism and illegal. The French and Dutch versions are also. (In addition, it seems that consensus has not yet to be reached. It is none of my business...)

So I should like to request to merge them (fix revision history inconsistency) and then move to suitable name. If you object to the merging, I suggest you to
 * 1) deleting the new article 'Symphony in D minor (Bruckner)', and then
 * 2) moving 'Symphony No. 0 (Bruckner)' into 'Symphony in D minor (Bruckner)' by correct method (also Talk page and revision history will be moved).

By the way, why don't you move the other language versions? (ca, de, es, it, ja and pt) --Tijd-jp (talk) 13:05, 9 October 2013 (UTC)


 * There seems to be no response to your suggestion about renaming of the Japanese version. So, instead of you, following the procedure, I have just proposed renaming the article. I will not do anything any more about that. Please you keep watch on the Talk page. The best of British luck to you. --Tijd-jp (talk) 13:52, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Cantata message
Thanks for your cantata message on my talk. Is there a reason why Bruckner's symphonies have infoboxes but his masses not? Looking at Schubert, I wonder ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:03, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Formal mediation has been requested

 * 1) Persoonlijk ga ik hier liefst zo weinig mogelijk initiatief nemen. Weinig interesse, zowel inhoudelijk (Bruckner) als over de uiterlijkheden (infobox enz).
 * 2) WP:DRN, a "lower-level dispute resolution" process, would probably be an appropriate next step. That is, not before the current mediation procedure has been formally closed. Please familiarize yourself with the do's and don'ts of DRN, and with its procedure for filing the request — I mean I hope you can initiate a DRN yourself without others needing to jump in on your behalf. An important issue is to be clear on what would be the scope of the request when you would go DRN (too broad can lead to meaningless discussion, too narrow might fail to give a comprehensive solution to the problem(s)).
 * 3) I no longer believe a limited "gentlemen's agreement" would give a durable solution here. The survey initiative I took on the Rondo talk page illustrates that. --Francis Schonken (talk) 11:26, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

What is it you are hoping to accomplish here, exactly? Nikkimaria (talk) 16:57, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Solving the ongoing dispute by getting a durable gentlemen's agreement:
 * being more respectful for the input of experienced people in the specific field (Bruckner works);
 * refraining from removing their input without a friendly, short exchange of views beforehand;
 * listening to their arguments and being open for discussion; not acting as an obstinate, procedural barrister;
 * accepting that so-called "notability" can be biased by media bias or publication bias, and is not an absolute requirement for putting or not putting a recording into the discography, i.e., allowing to put the première recording, the number of available recordings, and a selection of recordings taking Hans Roelofs' critical review into account; referencing Hans' webpage.
 * accepting that so-called "notability" can be biased by media bias or publication bias, and is not an absolute requirement for putting or not putting a recording into the discography, i.e., allowing to put the première recording, the number of available recordings, and a selection of recordings taking Hans Roelofs' critical review into account; referencing Hans' webpage.

--Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 18:32, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Excellent. Let's work towards that, then.
 * You know Bruckner, but might not be as familiar with Wikipedia policies and procedures (and have unfortunately received some poor advice in that area). I am happy to respect your input if you will also respect mine.
 * Okay, to a point. If something is objectively incorrect, for example, it should be reverted or removed without pre-discussion.
 * Again, happy to listen to your arguments, but this goes both ways, and being called names across multiple pages is not exactly conducive to collegial discussion.
 * While your arguments have merit, this is for the most part not something that can be resolved on a per-article basis. If you want to change the guidelines regarding discography entries, for example, you would need to take that up at the guideline page. More broadly, Wikipedia guidelines are geared towards the creation of articles not intended for experts - this has been the basis of some of my objections to your inclusion of unexplained German text, for example. Non-expert readers do not necessarily share the background knowledge, understanding of the sources, or perception of what is "worthwhile". Nikkimaria (talk) 02:11, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Some thoughts:
 * Re. "objectively incorrect": see WP:NPOVFAQ: when one source says something and another source says something different both views can (and often should) be represented in Wikipedia, provided that both sources count as WP:RS. Indeed scholarship does not always "win" from popular views in this respect. When the popular view is represented in reliable sources readers may expect to find it here.
 * Re. "not ... as familiar with Wikipedia policies and procedures": it is good Wikipedia tradition that the more experienced editor helps the less experienced editor in this respect (WP:BITE). Simply reverting is not showing the ways things are handled in optimal conditions. "Short exchange of views" is a reasonable approach, kudos to the newcomer who realizes that. Besides, the more experienced editor may be unaware of some guidelines/procedures/policies too (see "objectivity" in previous point)
 * Re. "notability": indeed a somewhat tainted concept in Wikipedia. Nonetheless WP:NOTABILITY is currently a guideline, so the concept can be used in that context (unlike "objectivity" which is a no-no). Indeed notability, like neutrality, is founded on a mix of more scholarly and more popular sources, not exclusively the more scholarly ones, nor exclusively the more popular ones.
 * Re. "guidelines regarding discography entries": Didn't know we had guidelines on the topic. I typed WP:DISCOGRAPHY: I see a project, not guidelines. Manual of Style/Lists of works has indeed "these articles should follow the guidelines given by WikiProject Discographies" (so, linking to a page where I can't find any guidelines). WP:DISCOGSTYLE is a dormant proposal, not a guideline. There is something in WikiProject Musicians/Article guidelines, but seems as irrelevant to classical composers as WP:NCM to WP:NCM (well, I added something there as a step to avoid confusion). Same for Manual of Style (lists of works). I'd like some clarification which guidelines are meant?
 * "have unfortunately received some poor advice" seems a somewhat inappropriate slur to me. Comment on edits, not editors please. --Francis Schonken (talk) 05:18, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello Meneerke. As a show of good faith I have now added a link to your recommended discography to all the motet articles under discussion that did not yet have one. Hopefully we may now move forward in a more collegial manner. I apologize if any offense was given by my post above, as none was intended; in particular, Francis' "some thoughts" immediately above offer some good advice. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:56, 28 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Thank you for it. You did not offend me. I became well somewhat irritated, because of the repeated time-consuming, procedural discussion.
 * I propose to change "Discography (German)" to "Commented discography (German)", since Hans is reviewing in it most of the available recordings. OK for you? --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 18:59, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I would suggest either "annotated" or "critical" - "commented discography" reads a bit oddly in English, though the translation is correct. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:36, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
 * OK then for "Critical discography". --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 20:22, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Locus iste
Reading this, I conclude that the composition was not even ready for the dedication of the Votivkapelle?? Article needs a rewrite then ;) - I would think that the pictured chapel is the one, but found no support for it. Do you know? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:27, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
 * As soon as I almost gave up I found something --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:37, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I added a bit and updated the DYK nom. Feel free to add. I will do more later. Anniversary 29 Oct, it should be good by then ;)
 * ps: did you see who wrote the TFA? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:22, 1 October 2014 (UTC)


 * I nominated Locus iste for Good article, a bit premature, but liked our Kirchweih date for it ;) - If you feel like it, you could expand the recordings section, perhaps with reviews which mention things remarkable about the composition. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:20, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Locus iste (Bruckner)
— HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?  12:03, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:17, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Ave Maria will follow in a few hours, pictured, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:34, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Christus factus est, WAB 11 (Bruckner)
Hello! Your submission of Christus factus est, WAB 11 (Bruckner) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 21:38, 1 November 2014 (UTC)


 * I just added two publications, as refs for the two dates. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:21, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Ave Maria (Bruckner)
— HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?  00:02, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Gratias! - Vexilla regis: there's a lot of text and translation now which might better go to the text article. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:50, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I noticed that you edit the free scores. Would you know if you can copy something like the title page of Mit Fried und Freud, BuxWV 76 (Buxtehude, Dietrich) to the commons, and if yes how? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:39, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Dear Gerda
 * I never have done it on Commons. On the en-Wikipedia and the fr-wikipedia we use the template . Unfortunately I have checked that his template does not work on Commons.
 * On the contrary, the wikilink &#x266B;, which provides with the icon "&#x266B;" which links to IMSLP, is well working on Commons.
 * I have tried Mit Fried und Freud, BuxWV 76 ... and it also works on Commpons.
 * Best regards, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 11:26, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Christus factus est, WAB 11
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:03, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Christus factus est, WAB 10
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Os justi (Bruckner)
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Ways to improve Inveni David, WAB 19
Hi, I'm Xcia0069. Meneerke bloem, thanks for creating Inveni David, WAB 19!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Good article !

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Xcia0069 (talk) 11:53, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

WAB 33
What is Musica sacra there? A collection of music? A journal? - Auer quote, given in English: "simpleness"? simplicity? - I would not call it a quote anyway without providing the German original. - Sorry, Afferentur is not expanded enough for DYK, I missed that. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:06, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Mayer Cantata, WAB 60
The DYK project (nominate) 11:41, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Add Cat
Dear Réginald, I took the liberty to add a category to your user page. I am member of the board of WM Belgium and I would like, if it is ok, to have curated list of active wikipedians in Belgium who may be interested in our future activities. Feel free to revert of course. --Alberto Fernández Fernández (talk) 08:50, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Vor Arneths Grab, WAB 53
 Harrias  talk 00:03, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Military march (Bruckner)
 Harrias  talk 12:02, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Iam lucis orto sidere DYK
Hi, Réginald. I just wanted to leave you a note to let you know that I reviewed your DYK nomination, but I have a few questions. Could you please take a look and let me know your thoughts about the concerns I've raised?-RHM22 (talk) 07:36, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Pange lingua, WAB 33
 Harrias  talk 00:03, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Iam lucis orto sidere, WAB 18
Harrias talk 00:41, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Symphonic Prelude
Can you deal with this, please? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:59, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Symphonic Prelude (Bruckner)
The DYK project (nominate) 20:59, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Bruckner and chorale
Connected to Jesus nahm zu sich die Zwölfe, BWV 22, I came across a requested citation regarding Bruckner in Chorale, after a longish sentence that names Bruckner very late. Can you help to reword and reference? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:40, 7 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Always nice to meet your name on my watchlist. Will sing WAB 9! And BWV 29! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:11, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Os justi
To be honest, I don't remember...it's been a couple of seasons since we sang it, so I have to go and dig up the music. When I do I'll let you know.

I believe we're doing Christus factus est next, but I'm not certain of that. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 15:55, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's the one, then - I've never sung the longer version. (I've done the shorter version twice.)


 * I'm quite looking forward to the Christus - I love Bruckner's motets. (Not so wild on the larger stuff, frankly, but the motets are little gems.) -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 18:26, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Autopatrolled
Hi Meneerke bloem, I just wanted to let you know that I have [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=rights&user=&page=User%3A added] the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the patroller right, see Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! Beeblebrox (talk) 19:46, 21 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Happy ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:48, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Type
The type parameter of musical composition was created to say something helpful above the image. To repeat Mass below the header Mass seems not needed. This is different if the title is for example The Armed Man or even Missa in F, for those who don't know that Missa means mass. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:53, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

ps: once I am here, what do you think of this discussion? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:54, 6 August 2015 (UTC)


 * A discussion started at Tannhäuser made me think. I like the links at Bruckner's Secular choral works, - if we agree, you may want to change those from Motet to Motets (Bruckner), and others?

Bach motets
Thank you for starting that article. Please include BWV Anh 159. In case you have more time, find images ;) - Singers at a funeral of the time, accompanied by instruments, would be ideal. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:03, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Beati
I started after singing it today) Beati quorum via (Stanford), which has been compared to Bruckner's motets. Expansion welcome, - I have little time. Also: we have Category:Psalm settings and Category:Psalm-related compositions by Johann Sebastian Bach, but miss Category:Psalm-related compositions which would be more appropriate for a setting of just one verse of 176. Psalm settings should be reserved for settings of one complete psalm (or several). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:42, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
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) 13:45, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Signpost exit poll
Dear Wikipedian, you recently voted in the ArbCom election. Your username, along with around 155 other usernames of your fellow Wikipedians, was randomly selected from the 2000+ Wikipedians who voted this year, with the help of one of the election-commissioners. If you are willing, could you please participate (at your option either on-wiki via userspace or off-wiki via email) in an exit poll, and answer some questions about how you decided amongst the ArbCom candidates?

If you decide to participate in this exit poll, the statistical results will be published in the Signpost, an online newspaper with over 1000 Wikipedians among the readership. There are about twelve questions, which have alphanumerical answers; it should take you a few minutes to complete the exit poll questionnaire, and will help improve Wikipedia by giving future candidates information about what you think is important. This is only an unofficial survey, and will have no impact on your actual vote during this election, nor in any future election.

All questions are individually optional, and this entire exit poll itself is also entirely optional, though if you choose not to participate, I would appreciate a brief reply indicating why you decided not to take part (see Question Zero). Thanks for being a Wikipedian

The questionnaire
Dear Wikipedian, please fill out these questions -- at your option via usertalk or via email, see Detailed Instructions at the end of the twelve questions -- by putting the appropriate answer in the blanks provided. If you decide not to answer a question (all questions are optional), please put the reason down: "undecided" / "private information" / "prefer not to answer" / "question is not well-posed" / "other: please specify". Although the Signpost cannot guarantee that complex answers can be processed for publication, it will help us improve future exit polls, if you give us comments about why you could not answer specific questions.
 * Q#0. Will you be responding to the questions in this exit poll? Why or why not?
 * Your Answer:
 * Your Comments:


 * Q#1. Arbs must have at least 0k / 2k / 4k / 8k / 16k / 32k+ edits to Wikipedia.
 * Your Numeric Answer:
 * Your Comments:


 * Q#2. Arbs must have at least 0 / 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7+ years editing Wikipedia.
 * Your Numeric Answer:
 * Your Comments:


 * Q#3. Arbs...
 * A: should not be an admin
 * B: should preferably not be an admin
 * C: can be but need not be an admin
 * D: should preferably be an admin
 * E: must be or have been an admin
 * F: must currently be an admin
 * Your Single-Letter Answer:
 * Your Comments:


 * Q#4. Arbs must have at least 0 / 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7+ years of experience as an admin.
 * Your Numeric Answer:
 * Your Comments:


 * Q#5. Completely optional, as all these questions are completely optional:  which candidates did you support this year, and why?
 * Your List-Of-Usernames You Supported:
 * Your Comments:


 * The Quick&Easy End. Thank you for your answers.  Please sign with your Wikipedia username here, especially important if you are emailing your answers, so we can avoid double-counting and similar confusion.
 * Your Wikipedia Username:
 * General Comments:


 * Q#6. Completely optional, as all these questions are completely optional:  which candidates did you oppose this year, and why?
 * Your List-Of-Usernames You Opposed:
 * Your Comments:


 * Q#7. Are there any Wikipedians you would like to see run for ArbCom, in the December 2016 election, twelve months from now?  Who?
 * Your List-Of-Usernames As Potential Future Candidates:
 * Your Comments:


 * Q#8. Why did you vote in the 2015 ArbCom elections?  In particular, how did you learn about the election, and what motivated you to participate this year?
 * Your Answer:
 * Your Comments:


 * Q#9. For potential arbs, good indicators of the right kind of contributions outside noticeboard activity, would be:
 * A: discussions on the talkpages of articles which ARE subject to ArbCom sanctions
 * B: discussions on the talkpages of articles NOT subject to ArbCom restrictions
 * C: sending talkpage notifications e.g. with Twinkle, sticking to formal language
 * D: sending talkpage notifications manually, and explaining with informal English
 * E: working on policies/guidelines
 * F: working on essays/helpdocs
 * G: working on GA/FA/DYK/similar content
 * H: working on copyedits/infoboxes/pictures/similar content
 * I: working on categorization e.g. with HotCat
 * J: working on autofixes e.g. with AWB or REFILL
 * K: working with other Wikipedians via wikiprojects e.g. with MILHIST
 * L: working with other Wikipedians via IRC e.g. with or informally
 * M: working with other Wikipedians via email e.g. with UTRS or informally
 * N: working with other Wikipedians in person e.g. at edit-a-thons / Wikipedian-in-residence / Wikimania / etc
 * O: other types of contribution, please specify in your comments
 * Please specify a comma-separated list of the types of contributions you see as positive indicators for arb-candidates to have.
 * Your List-Of-Letters Answer:
 * Your Comments:


 * Q#10. Arbs who make many well-informed comments at these noticeboards (please specify which!) have the right kind of background, or experience, for ArbCom.
 * Options: A: AE, B: arbCases, C: LTA, D: OTRS, E: AN,
 * continued : F: OS/REVDEL, G: CU/SPI, H: AN/I, I: pageprot, J: NAC,
 * continued : K: RfC, L: RM, M: DRN, N: EA, O: 3o,
 * continued : P: NPOVN, Q: BLPN, R: RSN, S: NORN, T: FTN,
 * continued : U: teahouse, V: helpdesk, W: AfC, X: NPP, Y: AfD,
 * continued : 1: UAA, 2: COIN, 3: antiSpam, 4: AIV, 5: 3RR,
 * continued : 6: CCI, 7: NFCC, 8: abusefilter, 9: BAG, 0: VPT,
 * continued : Z: Other_noticeboard_not_listed_here_please_wikilink_your_answer
 * Please specify a comma-separated list of the noticeboards you see as important background-experience for arb-candidates to have.
 * Your List-Of-Letters Answer:
 * Your Comments:


 * Q#11. Arbs who make many comments at these noticeboards (please specify!) have the wrong kind of temperament, or personality, for ArbCom.
 * Options: (same as previous question -- please see above)
 * Please specify a comma-separated list of the noticeboards you see as worrisome personality-indicators for arb-candidates to have.
 * Your List-Of-Letters Answer:
 * Your Comments:


 * Q#12. Anything else we ought to know?
 * Your Custom-Designed Question(s):
 * Your Custom-Designed Answer(s):


 * The Extended-Answers End. Thank you for your answers.  Please sign with your Wikipedia username here, especially important if you are emailing your answers, so we can avoid double-counting and similar confusion.
 * Your Wikipedia Username:
 * General Comments:

Detailed Instructions: you are welcome to answer these questions via usertalk (easiest), or via email (for a modicum of privacy). Processing of responses will be performed in batches of ten, prior to publication in the Signpost. GamerPro64 will be processing the email-based answers, and will strive to maintain the privacy of your answers (as well as your email address and the associated IP address typically found in the email-headers), though of course as a volunteer effort, we cannot legally guarantee that GamerPro64 will have a system free from computer virii, we cannot legally guarantee that GamerPro64 will resist hypothetical bribes offered by the KGB/NSA/MI6 to reveal your secrets, and we cannot legally guarantee that GamerPro64 will make no mistakes. If you choose to answer on-wiki, your answers will be visible to other Wikipedians. If you choose to answer via email, your answers will be sent unencrypted over the internet, and we will do our best to protect your privacy, but unencrypted email is inherently an improper mechanism for doing so. Sorry! :-) We do promise to try hard, not to make any mistakes, in the processing and presentation of your answers. If you have any questions or concerns, you may contact column-editor GamerPro64, copy-editor 75.108.94.227, or copy-editor Ryk72.  Thanks for reading, and thanks for helping Wikipedia.  GamerPro64  14:38, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * If you wish to answer via usertalk, go ahead and fill in the blanks by editing this subsection. Once you have completed the usertalk-based exit poll answers,, leave a short usertalk note, and click save.  The point of leaving the usertalk note, is to make sure your answers are processed and published.
 * If you wish to answer via email, create a new email to the Signpost column-editor by clicking Special:EmailUser/GamerPro64, and then paste the *plaintext* of the questions therein. Once you have completed the email-based exit poll answers,, leave a short usertalk note specifying the *time* you sent the email, and click save.  The point of leaving the usertalk note, is to make sure your answers are processed and published (not stuck in the spam-folder).

2016 year of the reader and peace
Thank you for your support and wishes, returned with my review, and the peace bell by Yunshui! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:42, 31 December 2015 (UTC)