User talk:78.26

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

WikiCup 2015 launch newsletter[edit]

Trophy.png

Round one of the 2015 WikiCup has begun! So far we've had around 80 signups, which close on February 5. If you have not already signed up and want to do so, then you can add your name here. There have been changes to to several of the points scores for various categories, and the addition of Peer Reviews for the first time. These will work in the same manner as Good Article Reviews, and all of the changes are summarised here.

Remember that only the top 64 scoring competitors will make it through to the second round, and one of the new changes this year is that all scores must be claimed within two weeks of an article's promotion or appearance, so don't forget to add them to your submissions pages! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAN, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs), Miyagawa (talk · contribs) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs)
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list or alternatively to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Opted-out of message delivery to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:51, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Interview for The Signpost[edit]

This is being sent to you as a member of WikiProject Articles for creation

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Articles for creation for a Signpost article. 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. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Thanks, Rcsprinter123 (confabulate) @ 20:31, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Electrical transcriptions[edit]

Thanks for your comments about the article on Electrical transcriptions. The pictures that you mentioned will be a good addition to it. After reading the Transcription disc article, I felt that something needed to be done to focus more on the programming and distribution aspect of ETs. Having one longer article that encompasses both aspects sounds good. I don't know how to merge articles, but if you would like to do that, it's fine with me.Eddie Blick (talk) 15:45, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

This probably should be discussed on the talk pages of the relevant articles. I'll move the discussion there. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 15:51, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
You were busy while I was away from my computer! Thanks for moving forward with the proposal. I posted my agreement under your comment on "Talk:Electrical transcription." What is the next step? Does Wikipedia have guidelines about how long to wait after proposing this kind of change?Eddie Blick (talk) 16:18, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
I actually don't know. I think perhaps a week, to give others a chance to comment, they may have angles I don't see. I notified another user who I think would have particular interest, but AVarcheologist hasn't been active here for about 6 months. I also notified wikiprojects Radio and Record Labels. Do you know of any others that are pertinent? 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 16:20, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
How about posting something on Talk:Transcription disc to catch the attention of anyone reading that article? And I noticed there a reference to Wikipedia:WikiProject Professional sound production. Should something be posted there? Just a couple of thoughts.Eddie Blick (talk) 16:28, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
I posted a merge notice in the article space there, I am under the impression that is the "proper way". I think a notification to the sound production project would be a good idea. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 16:54, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks! I can't think of any other places to post. If I can help you with the process, please let me know.Eddie Blick (talk) 17:25, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi 78, I haven't logged in since early December and so just got your heads-up (for which thanks) about the proposed merger. The Transcription disc article as it now stands is 80 or 90 percent my verbiage, for better or worse. As I recall, like much of my work in these climes, my editing was reactionary in the literal sense of the word: IIRC, when I first saw it, "transcription disc" was effectively equated with "acetate [sic] disc" and various irrelevant applications thereof, and the article bristled with major and minor problems screaming out for surgical intervention. As usual, once I got started nipping and tucking, it was hard to stop, which is why I ought to confine myself to short articles that won't take years to work through. I've been unusually short of discretionary time and energy the past two months and am now finally attending to some unfinished business elsewhere in Wikipedialand, so I've barely scanned the new "Electrical transcription" article yet, but it is plainly the product of considerable work.

On general principles, I would agree that the older article should be merged into the new, broader one, after which "transcription disc", referring to the physical medium, should redirect to the appropriate subsection; I'll post comments on the talk page after I have a chance to contemplate the new article properly. However, after an initial spot check just now I note that the paragraph about the introduction of electrical recording rather muddies those waters. I am also surprised not to see any of Elizabeth McLeod's online material cited—or am I overlooking something? I believe it was she who enlightened me that "electrical transcription", which has always struck me as a delightfully bizarre construction, was the official term prescribed (and also created?) by the Federal Radio Commission (the FCC's predecessor) in the late 1920s. Her scholarship, and of course Dr. Biel's, can shine great quantities of light on this subject. AVarchaeologist (talk) 15:55, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Speaking of Michael Biel, for a project I did a couple years ago, I purchased a PDF of his doctoral dissertation (The Making and Use of Recordings in Broadcasting before 1936). I'd be happy to ask Dr. Biel to permit me to send it to anyone who's working on the article, which is something I don't have time to do at present. It's 1100 pages or so, and fascinating for those of us who are fascinated by this sort of thing! ReverendWayne (talk) 05:26, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
Dr. Biel's legendary and alluring but budget-busting tome has long been an object of my perfervid desire, but assuming the generous ReverendWayne will not get permission to disseminate clones (is one not automatically entitled to sell, lend or give away one's own copy, as with a physical book?) the reality is that it would probably better serve Wikipedia in the hands of the new article's author. I only wish Dr. Biel and other real experts on matters phonographic (if I am any kind of one around here, it is only by default) would sign on as Wikipedians and revolutionize the quality level of the related articles. Biel is now retired and ought to have some time to spare, but on the other hand his capacity for suffering fools gladly seems to be minimal to nil and that could generate some heat. AVarchaeologist (talk) 14:24, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
@AVarchaeologist: @ReverendWayne: @Teblick: Thank you for your valuable input. I think I am soon going to make a bold move and try to merge the two articles, the discussion has been open long enough. The delightful thing about this is that the merge should be quite clean, given Transcription disc deals mainly with "hardware" while Electrical transcription deals mostly with "software". I am of course familiar with Dr. Biel and Elizabeth McLeod. Was Biel's thesis officially published? We've discussed this before, but I'm afraid any references to it, even as incredibly authoritative as it is, will be deemed "original research" and deleted. I think McLeod at least has a website, which should be deemed reliable given she's a noted expert on the subject. She's also done work for the First Generation Radio Archives, which is another page that could possibly be referenced for this subject. Apologies for delay, I quite understand regarding "discretionary time". I'd like to put some real energy into this, and bring it to "good article" status, and after the merger I think it has potential for "featured article" status. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 17:41, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Dear 78.26: Thank you for editing, arranging, and approving my first submission to Wikipedia. Just as my college newspaper (GW Hatchet) editor always did, you rewrote my lead sentence. I was surprised to find a topic that wasn't covered in Wikipedia and am honored to spread the good word about Alfred Worcester. Sincerely, AgedCare14 (talk) 02:04, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

You're most welcome. There are lots of subjects that aren't covered yet by Wikipedia. take a look at this list. I look forward to seeing your future contributions. All the best, 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 16:48, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

RfC: AfC Helper Script access[edit]

An RfC has been opened at RfC to physically restrict access to the Helper Script. You are invited to comment. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:49, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated[edit]

Hi, I'm Qwertyus. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Henry Dasson, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 16:26, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Neukirche[edit]

I started, translating from German, and look for sources. Melchior Hoffmann was there, - do you have a precise source for time and office? De has 1705 to 1719. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:28, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Gerda, always good to hear from you. At the time I wrote the article, I included everything I could find. I don't have any reference to his service at St. Matthew, although if the start date is 1705, it looks like he succeeded Telemann in both the Collegium Musicum and this church. Do you know if the two positions were related? In any case, he couldn't have held the position as late as 1719, as he died in 1715. Since writing the article, I have discovered a source at the local library, which has an unusually nice music department for the United States. I'll see if it has anything on Hoffman's tenure at St. Matthew. Cheers! 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 14:14, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for digging. He never worked at St. Matthew, because that name came up only in the 19th century (I didn't know which of six or so possible names I should take, so used a neutral English one.) Best information seems to be in the German Collegium musicum (and yes it has until his death in 1715, I overlooked that), - a translation of at least a stub would be nice, and - more important - a source ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:27, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
I'll try to have something for you later today. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 14:30, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

ANI regarding the Australian Newspapers[edit]

Hello, and thank you for responding to the users from the ANI to inform them not to worry about the discussion. However, take care what you say about other users yourself, to say I "misunderstood" Wikipedia's policies is simply not true. Where is the policy that states, make sure when you're patrolling new pages that you keep in mind it might be a training event? This was simply a situation I hadn't come across before (and I've been on Wikipedia for 9 years), and wasn't sure how to handle. So I thought it was best to ask help from the admin's rather than ignore it. I'll admit I probably should have checked their user pages first, but the thought simply didn't cross my mind. And I was careful in the ANI not to accuse anyone of any wrong doing for the simple fact that I didn't think this was blatant vandalism and didn't want to cause any issues. Unfortunately, some other editors took it badly and in the end I guess I should've have been a better investigator. Anyways, I know your words weren't intended to insult me in anyways, I was just a tad annoyed to see that each person was explained that the reason the discussion started was simply that I don't know Wikipedia's policies. On the contrary I believe that as training events grow more popular this is an issue we need to address in order to better notify the community that they are occurring. Thanks for your time. -War wizard90 (talk) 00:14, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

I fail to understand how a group of editors, even if new, creating well-sourced and neutrally worded articles about notable topics could be a problem. My intent was certainly not to disparage you, but to do the little bit of good I could by potentially keeping a productive new editor "in the fold", as it were. I abjectly apologize, however, for not using language wholly unoffensive to yourself. Cheers! 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 17:32, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Valentine Greets!!![edit]

Wikilove2 new.png Valentine Greets!!!

Hello 78.26, love is the language of hearts and is the feeling that joins two souls and brings two hearts together in a bond. Taking love to the level of Wikipedia, spread the WikiLove by wishing each other Happy Valentine's Day, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person.
Sending you a heartfelt and warm love on the eve,
Happy editing,
 - T H (here I am) 11:59, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Valentine Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Many thanks, that is very kind! 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 17:33, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Mattheus Le Maistre[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on WP:AN#Closure review: Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/RfC to physically restrict access to the Helper Script[edit]

Hello! You have been selected to receive an invitation to participate in the closure review for the recent RfC regarding the AfC Helper script. You've been chosen because you participated in the original RfC. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. This message is automated. Replies will not be noticed. --QEDKTC 14:20, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Your nonsense vandalism warnings[edit]

Jerome Kersey's death has been reported by local news sources and various sports reporters. You could have spent the 2 seconds it took me to confirm his death, but rather you had to go on a power trip and warn someone about "inserting incorrect information." You should be ashamed of yourself. 68.80.26.166 (talk) 04:02, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

You "couldn't find any evidence of his death?" A Yahoo NBA reporter verified it 48 minutes before. https://twitter.com/SpearsNBAYahoo/status/568247003521511424 Portland news stations reporting it 28 minutes before. https://twitter.com/KGWNews/status/568249829115228160 Yes, Twitter is full of hoaxes, but those are both verified accounts. If you want to err on the side of caution when reverting, fine, but don't say "I couldnt find any evidence" when you obviously didn't even look for any, and don't accuse someone else of vandalism because you didn't feel like looking. 68.80.26.166 (talk) 04:07, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
Baloney. In fact, I went to to google news, and the Oregonian, to try to confirm. I spent 30 minutes looking. No one added a citation to make the information verifiable. Please use citations in the future, and all will be good. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 11:38, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Blalock, Oregon[edit]

Coffee // have a cup // beans // 12:02, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

High five! Valfontis (talk) 18:25, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Again, thanks for all you've done for this article. This is why I volunteer at Wikipedia: I learned information about a subject I previously did not know enough about. Plus, I got to meet and collaborate with a delightful person. High Five! 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 19:39, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015 March newsletter[edit]

One of several of Godot13's quality submissions during round 1

That's it, the first round is done, sign-ups are closed and we're into round 2. 64 competitors made it into this round, and are now broken into eight groups of eight. The top two of each group will go through to round 3, and then the top scoring 16 "wildcards" across all groups. Round 1 saw some interesting work on some very important articles, with the round leader Australia Freikorp (submissions) owing most of his 622 points scored to a Featured Article on the 2001 film Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within which qualified for a times-two multiplier. This is a higher score than in previous years, as Smithsonian Institution Godot13 (submissions) had 500 points in 2014 at the end of round 1, and our very own judge, Colorado Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) led round 1 with 601 points in 2013.

In addition to Freikorp's work, some other important articles and pictures were improved during round one, here's a snapshot of a few of them:

You may also wish to know that The Core Contest is running through the month of March. Head there for further details - they even have actual prizes!

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), Miyagawa (talk · contribs · email) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email)

Thanks for your assistance! Miyagawa (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiCup.

(Opt-out Instructions) This message was send by Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:54, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Notification of edits[edit]

A notification of thanks from you showed up today shortly after I added the record information to Abbott and Costello. After a bit of a delay, I'm curious as to how you knew so quickly about the edit. Did you happen to look at the page, or did you get some kind of notification? Eddie Blick (talk) 02:40, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

I was on watchlist patrol. Your edit summary was "discography", so knowing you and knowing my favorite subject, I immediately went to see what you added. Abbot and Costello also released a later record of "Who's on First" for Enterprise Records, as a benefit for the Lou Costello Foundation. I'll add it if I can find a reliable source. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 11:21, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
Will either of these sites qualify? I found the record listed for sale at popsike.com and at RareRecords.com. Both have good images of the label (Castle 1253). Also, Billboard has an interesting article about the record on page 19 of its June 5, 1948, issue. It reports on a lawsuit involving Castle and United Artists Records. Eddie Blick (talk) 14:36, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
I wouldn't use either Popsike or RareRecords as a reliable source, and as the images aren't critical to the understanding of A&C, probably don't qualify for fair use. The Billboard piece is perfectly acceptable. What an interesting article. If we found another source like it, we could create an article on that record in and of itself, and then the images from popsike/rarerecords would be fair use. Although I'll bet I could get one of my record buddies to scan a label from their collection. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 15:54, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
I'll try to stay alert for other articles related to the recording, especially the legal case. If I come across anything along those lines, I'll let you know. Eddie Blick (talk) 14:27, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 March 2015[edit]

Re: Laurie Anders[edit]

Let me see what turns up when I look for her. You know, it's funny-today I was looking at some new news stories for Elmo Tanner and was wondering if you might want to work with me to take a shot at a GA for him. We hope (talk) 20:38, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

I would be most honored, not to mention it sounds like fun! Funny thing on my end, I was just thinking of trying to get that to Good Article status myself. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 20:51, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
Great minds think alike--let's see if we can make Tanner into a GA! :-) We hope (talk) 20:58, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Laurie Anders 1953.JPG How's this? We hope (talk) 04:51, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

That's perfect, of course. Laurie will have to wait now that you've got me chomping on the bit to tickle Elmo. Where do you want me to start? 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 21:05, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Anywhere is fine. I need to get some news stories clipped (don't know if you have Newspapers.com or not) so we can both use them. His second wedding was written up a bit more. Seems he did everything while he was working. Between a couple of acts, he got the marriage license, between the next 2, he bought her a ring and between the next 2, they said "I do". There's also a story that when he received the offer from Ted Weems, he was also "in negotiations" at the Chicago radio station. The station was aware that Weems had made him an offer and they were countering with the same amount of money to stay at the station. However, when Weems offered $100 a week, Elmo took it so quickly, he forgot to notify the radio station that he wouldn't be back. We hope (talk) 21:55, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Right now, I only have newapapers.com--the MUSE is on the way-just approved. I added what was there re: newspapers.com and while there, found something interesting which I included as a footnote. Tanner was listed with 2 record companies as having made some "race records". It appears that he, like Gosden and Correll and many others, was an imitator of African-American dialect. The 1935 description of him is that he was wonderful with dialect and that his "Negro imitations bring down the house". I expanded on "Heartaches" because there's more to it than we previously had in the article. Went into that there were two records-one with Victor in 1933 and another with Decca in 1938; Tanner and Weems re-cut the song when someone forgot to choose a "B" side for the record they were planning on making. Tanner cut the song one more time in 1953 for Dot, but not with Ted Weems. Didn't go to OTR but did check to see if U of Wisconsin's "Lantern" had anything in their old media magazines. Found a bit more of Tanner's "movie career" (with Weems) and added that. Would love to see anything you might find at JSTOR, or the others! We hope (talk) 15:06, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
Good job finding the dialect reference. Often straight-ahead white music was issued on Race records, even on Black Swan Records. I figured he sang it straight, but I've never heard one of his Paramount or Vocalion "race" disks. Haven't seen one either, they are very uncommon. Now I'm really curious. I'll look on JSTOR. I just got access, several months after being approved. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 15:47, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
It looks like his imitations were part of the Weems show at one time. It also looks like he and Red Ingle, when they were both with Weems, often teamed up for comic skits. They were mentioned re: the short The Hatfields and McCoys and Ingle was many times thought of as a "wild man" with his comic bits. Let me also take another turn at Lantern, as there are many years worth of back issues of Variety there. There might be something additional on the comedic aspect. Have thought about signing up for JSTOR but am wondering if the subscriptions will be extended, as they end in June. We hope (talk) 15:58, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 March 2015[edit]

.

DYK nomination of Harry Yerkes[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Harry Yerkes 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! Viriditas (talk) 00:57, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost – Volume 11, Issue 12 – 25 March 2015[edit]