User talk:Meneerke bloem

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

A Belgian physician-naturalist?[edit]

Dear Prashanths,

Thank you for your message. As you can see from my userpage, I have a good friend, Ivo Pauwels, a well-known geen author and journalist, whose office is Antwerpen-Berchem. We will next month with a small group of garden freaks visit some interesting gardens in the centre of France.

Best regards, --Réginald (To reply) 08:56, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your message! I read about Ivo Pauwels on your user page. I wish you well for your 'garden tour' and your time on wikipedia! Nice to know other physicians with an interest in natural-history. My interest in in birds. :)Have an nice time in Paris. Prashanthns (talk) 09:52, 6 May 2008 (UTC)


Hi, Réginald! Sorry about the confusion, but the "proper venues" to get rid of an invalid redirect in the English Wikipedia is to alert administrators that the redirect needs to be deleted. This, however, is achieved not by blanking the redirect (which would alert admins alright, except that they most likely suspect vandalism and revert blanking as I did), but by either listing the invalid redirect on WP:RfD, or by prodding it, or by contacting someone directly. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 13:41, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Could you, please, provide me with links to the category/image that need to be deleted? I am having trouble finding either Category:Crocus aureus or an image with a similar name. Thanks!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:36, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
Reg, you'll need to ask someone at the Commons to delete those. I am not a Commons administrator, so I don't have a capability to delete anything there. My first impression was that you needed these deleted here, in the English Wikipedia, where I would have been able to help you. Sorry!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 12:36, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Incorrect wikilink[edit]

Reg, not sure what you want me to do. If you need the link removed from your userpage, I can, of course, do it for you, but since it is your userpage, it would be more appropriate if you removed it yourself. On the other hand, if you need the page to which the link leads (or the redirect itself) deleted, I, again, cannot do it because I am only an admin here in the English Wikipedia, and cannot delete pages in Wikipedias in other languages. If I misunderstood your request completely, could you, please, clarify what you need? Thanks!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:14, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

OK, mystery solved :) The problem was with the {{User doctor}} userbox which you have on your userpage. Someone added the Arabic interwiki link to it improperly, so it showed up on all pages using the userbox instead of being contained in the template. Fixed. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 17:34, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Incorrect link, part 2[edit]

Someone incorrectly added an interwiki link to {{User de-2}} instead of placing it on the documentation page, which lead to that interwiki link showing on userpages of all users who have {{User de-2}} displayed. I have corrected this. If it weren't for you, this oversight might have gone unnoticed for who knows how long, so thanks! Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 15:26, February 20, 2009 (UTC)

thank you for the picture[edit]

thank you for uploading the picture of the cyclamen graecum, it's one of my favorite autumn flowers :) —,—User:Kkostagiannis

Commercial links[edit]

Hi, Réginald! Linking to commercial websites is not exactly prohibited, but should only be done when no free alternative is available. In this case, the site provides fairly good pictures, yet we already have pictures in the article, plus the first link in the list ( leads to more pictures hosted on a website of a non-commercial entity. Thus, we have plenty of images to illustrate the subject, so linking to a commercial website is unnecessary. I have removed the link in question, as well as the other link leading to a tree nursery site. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 13:48, June 10, 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the id[edit]

Of the Aristolochia. Shyamal (talk) 08:03, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Crocus image[edit]

Sadly, I don't know where it was taken. Nor am I a botanist. Best wishes. Saravask 22:14, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Cyclamen photos[edit]

I have been looking for good photos of cyclamen species on forums and asking permission from the picture-takers for upload to Wikimedia, so hopefully we will have photos of Cyclamen intaminatum and the others, eventually. So far I have obtained permission for photos of a Cyclamen africanum tuber, an all-white Cyclamen coum, Cyclamen parviflorum in its natural habitat, and a silver-leaf Cyclamen purpurascens: more to come. — Eru·tuon 00:13, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Does Mark Griffiths have a photo of a fully opened Cyclamen alpinum? The current photo doesn't represent the species well, since it shows not-quite-opened flowers. — Eru·tuon 13:54, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

I thought that the picture Berne Botanic garden Cyclamen repandum.jpg was peloponnesiacum, not vividum, because peloponnesiacum is said to be light pink with a much darker nose, while vividum is dark all over, with only a slightly darker nose. The photo, along with the photos by Mark Griffiths (which will hopefully be able to be uploaded again...), fits the peloponnesiacum description best. — Eru·tuon 22:25, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

I was aware that Cyclamen alpinum's petals do not reflex as much as other cyclamens, but the flowers in the photo (at least the two on the left) have petals that are not reflexed outwards as most Cyclamen alpinum, suggesting that they've just come out of bud. I guess Mark Griffiths is thinking of the one on the right, which is more fully open.

Whether the flowers are fully open or not, the photo looks somewhat odd, since it shows the top of the flower — we can hardly see the nose of the flower. This is confusing, since other photos of cyclamen species on Wikipedia are at more of a side angle, showing the nose and the outward (or bottom) side of the petals. It is harder to compare Cyclamen alpinum to other cyclamen species if the photos are very different. Photos of Cyclamen alpinum at a more natural angle are, for example, here. — Eru·tuon 13:57, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Modest Barnstar.png The Modest Barnstar
Thanks for your recent contributions! -Mike Restivo (talk) 20:06, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
And I thank you specifically for mentioning that new CD remastering of Bruckner's Missa Solemnis. James470 (talk) 16:35, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
Ah yes, I've been meaning to get the Letocart completion of the 9th. James470 (talk) 17:34, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Symphony No. 5 (Bruckner)[edit]

That could be the case, it would not surprise me. I get the feeling that most of the people in Classical Wikiproject are morons who mostly listen to bubblegum pop and think owning a single multi-volume classical reference they bought at a garage sale makes them experts. Anyway, your expertise might be going to waste at Wikipedia. Perhaps you could write an article for something like the Bruckner Journal? James470 (talk) 18:58, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Bruckner's Psalms[edit]

Dear Reginald,
My German leaves a lot to be desired, as your correction ("odemhat") showed. I did find it strange that Bruckner would use the text from the Lutheran Bible, but perhaps Bruckner would find it strange that I (a Lutheran) am so interested in Catholic liturgy pre-1960s. I think perhaps the Bruckner Journal could use an article on this specific issue. James470 (talk) 17:37, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
Who wrote that line? Look in the article history. James470 (talk) 19:06, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
Dear Réginald, yes, I wrote it, so that line is based on my limited understanding of German and German Bible translations used in Austria during Bruckner's lifetime. Maybe I understand the topic better than the majority of morons who edit Wikipedia, but it seems to me that you understand this particular topic a lot better than I do. James470 (talk) 01:36, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Those are good looking articles. Take this as a compliment: Wikipedia doesn't deserve you. James470 (talk) 06:30, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Bruckner's organ compositions[edit]

Dear Reginald

Many thanks for pointing me at the few organ works by Bruckner - I shall listen to them with interest. Maybe you would like to add information on them to the article itself? PhilUK (talk) 10:00, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Mass No. 1[edit]

Thank you very much for writing that article. This is perhaps the only words of thanks you will receive for it from anyone on Wikipedia. You ought to write articles about Bruckner for a publication whose entire readership would actually appreciate them. James470 (talk) 05:40, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

German Bible used by A. Bruckner[edit]

That actually raises more questions than answers. If you look in the Bruckner Gesamtausgabe, Psalm 150's text is almost the same as the Luther Bible except for a few small spelling differences. The translation you've cited is for some verses very different, e.g., the wohlklingende Cymbeln. James470 (talk) 03:10, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Bruckner's Symphony No. 8 and Siegfried motif[edit]

Hi. Actually this is very clear in the Development section! Compare here: Siegfried motif ( and the Exposition of Bruckner's 8th Symphony ( or its Development section ( 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 (talkcontribs)

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? Thanks! --Leonardo T. Oliveira 16:21, 26 January 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leonardo Teixeira de Oliveira (talkcontribs)
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 (talkcontribs)


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)

Science lovers wanted![edit]

Science lovers wanted!
Smithsonian logo color.svg
Hi! I'm serving as the wikipedian-in-residence at the Smithsonian Institution Archives until June! One of my goals as resident, is to work with Wikipedians and staff to improve content on Wikipedia about people who have collections held in the Archives - most of these are scientists who held roles within the Smithsonian and/or federal government. I thought you might like to participate since you are interested in the sciences! Sign up to participate here and dive into articles needing expansion and creation on our to-do list. Feel free to make a request for images or materials at the request page, and of course, if you share your successes at the outcomes page you will receive the SIA barnstar! Thanks for your interest, and I look forward to your participation! Sarah (talk) 01:28, 19 April 2012 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Meneerke bloem. You have new messages at SarahStierch's talk page.
Message added 15:02, 19 April 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

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

Improving "List of compositions" articles[edit]

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)


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[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that 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 my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • ''Sanctus'' of the ''Messe Kronstorfer Messe''.<ref name="Williamson 1"/><ref name="Roelofs 3"/>[ Total duration: about 10’. The extra [[Fugue|fugated]] ''Kyrie'' and ''Gloria'', which were

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:36, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Bruckner list intro[edit]

Thank you for making good sense of the introduction! I think it's much better now. Best. --Kleinzach 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. --Kleinzach 23:54, 27 June 2013 (UTC)


Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg

flowering Bruckner
Thank you for, passionate lover of flowers shown in excellent pictures, for the quality of your continuous care (passio continuo) for articles on the works by Anton Bruckner, full of music, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:25, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

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)

A year ago, you were the 581st recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, thanks for great help and inspiration, - I love flowers and music, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:13, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

'No. 0' Symphony in d minor by Bruckner[edit]

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)

Formal mediation has been requested[edit]

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Rondo in C minor (Bruckner) and Intermezzo in D minor (Bruckner)". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 16 September 2014.

Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by MediationBot (talk) on behalf of the Mediation Committee. 00:52, 9 September 2014 (UTC)