User talk:Voceditenore/Archive 4

This 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

more past topics...

Le duc d'Albe
I deleted it because it might not a 100 percent copyvio but the order of the information and some sentences were almost identical. (albeit translated) It was too much a case of Plagiarism. Also, the original editor has a long history of copyvio's and was recently blocked for that. It took a long time for many editors to clean his copyvio's, this was one of them. Garion96 (talk) 17:27, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Good job, your new article is, besides not a copyright violation, definitely an improvement over the older article. Garion96 (talk) 11:45, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Le duc d'Albe DYK nomination
Hi, I've nominated an article you worked on, Le duc d'Albe, for consideration to appear on the Main Page as part of Did you know. You can see the "hook" for the article at Template talk:Did you know where you can improve it if you see fit. Thanks, MeegsC 08:16, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Your "hook" seems fine too. All the Best, Voceditenore 15:02, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

List of Wagner singers
Hi, I am working on a list of Wagner singers for the Wagner project. If it's not too much trouble I wonder if you could have a look and give me some ideas/comments/whatever? The list is here. -- Kleinzach 01:04, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Ciao, Voceditenore! Useful set of remarks. I think one cannot leave anyone off that list who has performed a whole Wagner role on stage. Charles Santley (eg), one of my victims, was famed for his Vanderdecken and therefore he must be a Wagnerian singer, even though he never did the Wolfram he wanted, or possibly any other role... I do hope the list will have the pre-recording folk on it (and the non-recorded ones) as that will make it much more useful. It is almost as if people think musicians don't matter unless they make gramophone records! Pah!! and forsooth. I look forward to collaborating with you on some singers before long... best wishes, Dr Steven Plunkett 19:12, 30 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much for your reply (which I will respond to on my page to keep the conversation together). As you will have seen I've added an introduction which I hope answers some of the points you and Steven raised. Incidentally the reason I asked was the excellent Erik Schmedes article you contributed. -- Kleinzach 06:56, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Kath Battle
Thanks for taking a lead on this and also spending so much time sorting it out. Much appreciated. -- Kleinzach 08:48, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Refimprove tags on translations from German wiki
I've just realized that you are now putting tags on Cricketgirl's translations for us from the German wiki. This would be a new departure for us, i.e. asking for refs beyond those required for the original article. What is the logic for doing this in your view? As you may have gathered from the discussion with DrFluffy, I have misgivings about suddenly putting the bar up high for new articles when we have had it so low for the mass of pages in the past. Best. -- Kleinzach 07:04, 1 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I only put them on two, Angela Denoke whose German article has no references whatsoever and Wolfgang Brendel whose German article has his official web site as the sole source. If the original articles aren't adequately sourced, I don't see how that changes when they are translated into English. I don't think that's raising the bar at all. But if you disagree and think that the fact that an article has appeared in a foreign language Wikipedia, regardless of whether the original article was adequately sourced, qualifies as a verifiable reference, go ahead and remove the tags. If you don't want me to tag translated articles whose originals are unsourced or inadequately sourced, just let me know and I'll leave them alone. Best, Voceditenore 07:25, 1 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Re Brendel, I suppose it depends on whether you regard the German Wikipedia as a separate publication or not. If it is separate then it is presumably as good as any other source might/could be (for example we don't demand references from the Oxford Dictionary of Opera). (Denoke was an error on our part- now corrected.) However I don't think I should be sending you notes asking you not to tag pages! If we are going to adopt stricter criteria perhaps we should explain on the project page, so that translators are not put off by the tags? (Cricket Girl has been doing some great stuff and I hope she continues.) Best. -- Kleinzach 10:20, 1 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I do consider the German Wikipedia as a separate publication, and one whose articles are very variable in their quality, accuracy, and referencing. I honestly don't think it can be treated as equivalent to professionally written reference works like the Oxford Dictionary of Opera. When articles on non-English Wikipedias have no sources at all, e.g. Angela Denoke, or only a single primary source produced by the article's subject, e.g. Wolfgang Brendel , readers have no way of knowing how accurate or true they are - just as they have no way of knowing this on inadequately referenced English Wikipedia articles, or on amateur opera web sites, the use of which, if I understood correctly from past opera project discussions, is rather discouraged. I don't see refimprove tags as a reflection on the translator's work at all. It's not the translator's job to provide further references - it's already a lot of work just to provide a translation. I see the tags as helpful flags which might attract others, especially in the opera project, to add some further references. Nevertheless, in future, I'll ignore entries from the new articles bot which are translations from other Wikipedias. So the problem shouldn't arise again. Best, Voceditenore 11:03, 1 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Update I've now added further English language sources to Angela Denoke, Deborah Polaski, Gottfried Wagner, Wolfgang Brendel, and Dorothea Röschmann. I also took the liberty of adding Much of the information in this article comes from the German-language Wikipedia article to the Röschmann article. Feel free to remove it if you don't think it's appropriate. Best, Voceditenore 19:03, 1 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks as ever for patiently explaining your opinion. There are all kinds of issues involved here, some of them big ones. I've always thought that the strength/weakness (depending on your viewpoint) of the Opera Project is that it is trying to set a higher standard than many other projects, in particular the Biography one. How far can, and should, we push that standard up at this early stage of development?


 * The German Wiki is at least a group effort so I do think it's on a different level than a basically un-edited solo amateur website. I'd also say that the Oxford book - by two authors - is itself not on the same level as Grove (which uses specialists). I haven't found factual errors in the Oxford, but explanations of terms and genres etc can be quite different from those in Grove. I don't think they are altogether accurate - and they are unreferenced.


 * At some point I think you should give a masterclass in finding references! Your skills go far beyond mine! I'd really like to know where you find some of them! Best -- Kleinzach 01:08, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Your several posts to User:Futureclass
Thank you, VdT, for your instructive and helpful posts to our pages. We appreciated your input. Ijmusic 21:44, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Nathan Granner
Go ahead and remake the article at will. Adam Cuerden talk 13:54, 28 November 2007 (UTC)


 * If the temp page can be deleted, just add at the top of the temp page. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 14:37, 28 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Done. Many thanks for the tip. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 15:10, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

New Article Help
Greetings Voceditenore! Enjoy your holiday! I just wanted to bring to your attention an article I have been working on for the Future of Classical Music project. I will be posting it soon in its own page, as I feel that it is large enough to stand alone. It is currently in my sandbox if you get this before I'm done tweaking. I will post the link to the article here once its finished. Feel free to comment either on the sandbox page or my user page to save space in this forum. Thank you! Deep-fried twinkie (talk) 16:02, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Your advice would be appriciated
I want to propose a merger but I am not sure how to go about doing it. The pages in question are falsetto register and falsetto. I think we should keep the falsetto register page and move the falsetto page as the register page is in keeping with the other vocal registers. Also the falsetto page takes a highly vocal pedagogist perspective whereas the falsetto register page incorporates more speach pathology as well as vocal pedagogy. The vocal register pages should encompass speach as well as musical uses. Nrswanson (talk) 10:39, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Hmmm. I've no experience in merging articles or proposing mergers, so couldn't advise as to process. although the article Merge seems to cover it. Having read both the falsetto articles, I think there's an argument to be made for combining them on the falsetto register page, but I can't be sure. Maybe once the Christmas holidays are over, you could start a discussion on the Opera Project talk page to get some other views. One thing I did notice is that the lead paragraph in the falsetto register article is probably too technical to be of use the average reader, and can be quite off-putting. The style used in the lead paragraph in falsetto is much better in this respect, as is the structure where the more technical aspects are covered further down. In this respect the guidance in this section  of the Wikpedia Guide to Writing Better Articles is useful, as is this sub-section . Best, Voceditenore (talk) 14:57, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Aida: Thanks.
Thanks for your cite on authorship of Aida. The only other time I've gotten such a quick response to a query was from WikiProject Comics. Not at all sure what that might mean. :-) -- Writtenonsand (talk) 16:20, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry
Re the case you recently commented on, this is a very strong sock or meatpuppetry going on here. I very strongly urge you to avoid such activity in the future. If such behavior reoccurs, I will not hesitate to block all involved. For reference the case is archived at Suspected_sock_puppets/Archive/January_2008. — Rlevse  •  Talk  • 01:25, 8 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Hello Rlevse, I just got back from a week in Italy to find your message on my talk page and have read the further comments on the Nrswanson Sockpuppetry case since I last commented there (before the checkuser results came in). It's now pretty obvious that sockpuppetry was going on, especially now that I've found this very odd spelling mistake (appriciated made by Nrswanson) here and (appriciate by Ringnpassagio) here. Needless to say I am very disappointed in Nrswnanson's behaviour and regret having initially defended him. However, at the time I couldn't believe that a long-time contributor to the Opera Project would all of a sudden start doing something so out of character. Live and learn! Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 06:24, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I almost blocked them, but I went with the warning. Thanks. — Rlevse  •  Talk  •  —Preceding comment was added at 10:53, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Telemann
Thanks for the work on the Telemann compositions. I had mentioned them at WikiProject Music/Noticeboard a few weeks ago when I first found them. Thanks for the link to WP:CM, which I was unaware of before. Olessi (talk) 09:14, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism Warning
I just got a vandalism-warning here. I normally work for the German Wikipedia, and I did only some edits here in the english one as user:IKAllmer. I never did any vandalism. I assume another user was vandalising using the same IP as me. So, what can I do to avoid being blocked?--IKAllmer (talk) 19:52, 21 February 2008 (UTC) (User:IKAllmer)


 * Don't worry. That's an IP with probably thousands of users. Wikipedia won't block it. I put the warning there so we could keep track of the person who has been continuously vandalizing the Placido Domingo page. They always edit as anonymous IPs - this time from Austria. Before it was Germany. Instead, the administrators have semi-protected that page so it can't be edited anonymously. Of course, every time the protection expires, he/she comes back and it starts all over again. Even so, it's probably a good idea to log in when you edit to avoid confusion. Best Wishes Voceditenore (talk) 07:30, 22 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the assuring answer. Best Wishes --IKAllmer (talk) 15:26, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Baritone
If you have a spare moment I wonder whether we might have your opinion on the referencing on this article? Nrswanson and I differ as to how to handle it, so a fresh pair of eyes may help resolve the issue. Best. -- Kleinzach (talk) 23:52, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your input. -- Kleinzach (talk) 10:28, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Welcome notice for the opera project
I've been thinking we might have a welcome notice for new people signing on to the project. I've done a quick draft, however I think you are much more skilful than I am at this kind of thing. Can I show you so perhaps you can polish it up to have all the right nuances? Best. -- Kleinzach (talk) 09:03, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Jenny Lind
Hi Voceditenore,

Many thanks for your comment and advice. Very helpful! I am working on a new draft for the 'Early life and career' of Jenny Lind, which hopefully will be better. Jean de Beaumont (talk) 13:59, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi again, I have put a question at the Jenny Lind discussion page concerning her alleged "suitor George Jones". Would you be able to respond?  Thanks. Jean de Beaumont (talk) 11:11, 17 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your follow-up on which I have made a comment / question at the Jenny Lind discussion page. Jean de Beaumont (talk) 06:48, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Singer categories
I know it's a bore - and I know you've been busy with the excellent 'Online research' page but I'm wondering if you could have a look at my suggestion here to work towards removing this problem? Thanks.--Kleinzach (talk) 02:07, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Big Thanks
Thanks for catching the Brindabella National Park copyright violations. That was a fine catch. Unfortunately, the article is a bit empty again. I guess it would be possible to add that stuff if one contacted WP:OTRS, but that would be a huge hassle. I'll talk to a friend I have in it, though, just to see if a letter can be sent to the Australian government. Again, thank you. -- Sharkface T/C 18:48, 25 April 2008 (UTC)


 * The Australian government would have to release the text under GNU and given their copyright statement here, I'm pretty sure they won't. But why waste all that time asking for permission? Simply use the original page as your source of information and re-write the material in your own words. I rather doubt if Pavlen666 will. He did the same thing with Cal-Neva and promptly deleted both my warnings about it from his talk page (as well as comments from 2 other editors re the copying), . Best, Voceditenore (talk) 09:47, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, it's a bit unfortunate that some editors are adverse to criticism. I will add this article to my already extensive to do list, unless of course you wish to undertake it's overhaul. The information from the Australian government site will be helpful, it will just require a good deal of rewording. Thanks again for the heads up. -- Sharkface T/C 19:13, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

AWC Input
Thanks for the input on the AWC talk page. I strongly sympathize with the opinions of yourself and Friday and I understand that the project has really gone awry. In the coming weeks I hope to implement some major changes at the Award Center that will structure the page are make it closer to a real wikiproject. -- Sharkface T/C 19:27, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Your removal of my speedy-deletion tag
I just wanted to say thanks for removing the tag from one of my subpages. I was a little surprised that subpages could be nominated in the first place, and I thank you for correcting the situation. The Moridian  09:23, 28 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi, I was happy to help. The editor who placed it has become quite problematic in his use of tagging, and I've now warned him twice about it. User pages sub-pages can be speedily deleted but only in very limited circumstances, none of which applied in this case. They cannot contain copyright text or images, blatant advertising or violations of Blp (biographies of living persons) policies. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 09:59, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Re:User:Pavlen666 and 'speedy delete' tagging
I'll have a talk with him. Thanks for letting me know.  Alm ighty  Clam  15:33, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

My Sympathies
I will shortly be notifying the sponsors of the challenges you suggest get axed at the Award Center. I am highly sympathetic to your complaints of junior editors jumping into editing Wikipedia with tags, AFD votes, etc. without taking the time to read the manual (and become familiar with the job they're undertaking). Sadly, I can say that I was once one of them and am still not immune from mistakes. I also understand the role of the Award Center in contributing and possibly aggravating the problem, and as such I have taken steps towards making the Award Center based around the mainspace rather than the behind-the-scenes bureaucracy. Whatever you do, just make sure that the improvement of articles always occupies the majority of your time on Wikipedia: everything else is just soul-destroying bureaucracy. Keep up the awesome work and don't get disheartened by this crazy place. We need to retain all the article editors we can. -- Sharkface T/C 19:43, 28 April 2008 (UTC)