User talk:Smerus/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. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 |
Help me!
 | This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
An RfC is ongoing at Template talk:Infobox officeholder. The crux of the discussion is whether certain options in the template should, or should not, be optional. The discussion does not appear to have been noted at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion. Should it be? And if so, how should it be introduced? Thanks,
Smerus (talk) 12:55, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
- "Templates for discussion" is (unfortunately) almost a synonym for "Templates for deletion". In the officeholders' case, only parameters are discussed, not the whole template, so I think it doesn't belong there. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:03, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks Gerda. I think I therefore need to find the right page to launch a discussion: "Are there any guidelines as to use of parameters in templates? Specifically, are parameters to be regarded as optional or compulsory? And, where differences in opinion arise over the use of parameters, should these be determined locally (at the article where they arise), or at the Talk page for the relevant template?"--Smerus (talk) 13:09, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
- Well, I don't know. So far I thought nothing is compulsory on Wikipedia, - I wouldn't know a single parameter in {{infobox person}} that is compulsory. Sometimes we just don't know when a person was born, or died, to just mention basics. We might still know what the person did. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:21, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, I see that, and voted that way, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:20, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello Smerus . Would you mind commenting on these move discussions? The former is about whether Gladstone should be made into a redirect to William Ewart Gladstone, and the latter is whether D'Israeli should redirect to Benjamin Disraeli as {{R from alternative spelling}}. Thanks.--Nevé–selbert 07:19, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
Brahms and counterpoint
Hello Smerus. I looked to see if the RfC at Talk:Johannes Brahms was ready to be closed. It might save me some time if I knew if counterpoint had ever been mentioned in the article lead. I do see this edit where someone is changing a mention of counterpoint down in the article body, but I suppose that it not what the RfC is asking about. So part of the reason for the RfC must be a disagreement over including the phrase 'master of counterpoint' in the article at all. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 18:11, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
- @EdJohnston: I am trying gradually to rewrite the article: I am not so concerned about the various opinions expressed at the RfC, many of which seem to be simply of the I like/I don't like variety (and some of them imo very ill-informed). I have not so far edited the lead as far as I recall. Brahms certainly was a master of counterpoint and there is an enormous potential of citeable sources to support this (many of which I have to hand). But he was not only a master of counterpoint. Generally when rewriting an article I leave the lead till last. When I have finished rewriting the 'Music' section of the article, which will deal with counterpoint amongst other things, I will rewrite the lead. I would hope to get the whole thing up to GA level. By that point, whatever the RfC might have said may well be be more or less irrelevant. Best, --Smerus (talk) 19:16, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
- @EdJohnston: I suppose what I mean to say is that the lead should contain a summary of the article. And can reflect whatever the article says, particularly if those reflections are cited.--Smerus (talk) 08:43, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
Buone Feste!
.jpg)
May you have very Happy Holidays, Smerus
and a New Year filled with peace, joy, and beautiful music!
Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 13:26, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
A curiosity
Those who apparently take an interest in my meanderings may be interested in a curiosity here.--Smerus (talk) 05:02, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
DYK for The Red Shoes (ballet)
On 17 January 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Red Shoes (ballet), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that The Red Shoes dance in part to the strains of Citizen Kane? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Red Shoes (ballet). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, The Red Shoes (ballet)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
Books and Bytes - Issue 20
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 20, November-December 2016
by Nikkimaria (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), UY Scuti (talk · contribs), Samwalton9 (talk · contribs)
- Partner resource expansions
- New search tool for finding TWL resources
- #1lib1ref 2017
- Wikidata Visiting Scholar
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:59, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 10:19, 30 January 2017 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
North America1000 10:19, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
Please refrain from removing relevant and well-sourced content from this article. This is totally inappropriate during a deletion discussion. Thanks. Aymatth2 (talk) 11:57, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
@Aymatth2: - Please refrain from posting your pompous opinions on my talk page. Please read the header on Stefanie Rabatsch which makes it clear that the article can continue to be appropriately edited. Try to understand that Wikipedia articles should contain relevant materials. And that neither you, nor I, WP:OWN the article and that ceterus paribus my opinion of what should or should not be in the article is quite as valid as yours. Keep the discussion to the article talk page and deletion page, and don't pester me here with ominous threats. Best, Smerus (talk) 18:49, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
GA Reassessment
Stefanie Rabatsch, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Chris Troutman (talk) 01:18, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
Books and Bytes - Issue 21
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 21, January-March 2017
by Nikkimaria (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), UY Scuti (talk · contribs), Samwalton9 (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs)
- #1lib1ref 2017
- Wikipedia Library User Group
- Wikipedia + Libraries at Wikimedia Conference 2017
- Spotlight: Library Card Platform
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:54, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
Choirs
Two choirs are given in a Gramophone review as Bratislava Slovak Chorus and Bratislava City Chorus. Is there any corresponding Slovak article? I wrote about a German choir and ran in strange notability and BLP questions. Is a choir a BLP when no members' names are mentioned? Can it be not notable when mentioned in a Grammy nom? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:17, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
DYK for The Great Friendship
On 8 May 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Great Friendship, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that The Great Friendship had distinctly unfriendly consequences? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Great Friendship. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, The Great Friendship), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Vanamonde (talk) 05:23, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
Great friendship! - see also --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:31, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
 | |
| Four years! |
|---|
Fond memories of four years ago ;) - Impressive stats for the above! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:41, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
Nomination of Hospital trust for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hospital trust is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hospital trust until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Rathfelder (talk) 14:31, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
Monteverdi
Further to the details I left on the Opera Project talkpage, I've another couple of potentially useful books on my shelves: Baroque Music (2nd ed. 1981) by Claude V. Palisca (dryly academic but provides useful context info) and Opera before Mozart (2nd ed. 1972) by Michael Robinson (good stuff on the earliest operas). Having checked my records, I see that I got the Whenham Cambridge Companion from ILL; I've now reordered it – it's an important text. Do you have other book sources in mind? Also, how do you see my help being most effective? I could fill various roles, from co-author to mere fact-checker and source provider – whatever suits you best. On timescale, something fairly leisurely would suit me if I'm to be a significant contributor. Brianboulton (talk) 14:31, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
- @Brianboulton: Brian, thanks for this. I'm just back and will review my own resources (I do have JSTOR access by the way). I was thinking definitely of doing this on a slow and steady basis - if you are willing to be co-author that would of course be fantastic. Normally on this sort of thing I start by doing the biography, and then look to the music as the former often gives hints tot he structure of the latter. Although sometimes I get stalled at the life (e.g. Johannes Brahms where I have waited a while until I find the necessary divine inspiration to deal with the music, which seems slow in manifesting itself.....) Which aspects (if any) do you fancy leading on?--Smerus (talk) 20:27, 22 May 2017 (UTC).
- When I collaborated with Tim on various composer biographies (e.g. Holst, Delius, Britten) he generally did the biography stuff while I tackled the music. We worked independently to begin with, coming together when both our contributions were fairly well developed, at which point we would cheerfully edit each other's work to ensure that the two halves melded harmoniously. I don't mind doing the same thing here; my sources are stronger on the music side, but if you've a preference as to what you'd like to concentrate on, I'm fully amenable. We can of course exchange info via email, as necessary. Brianboulton (talk) 18:17, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
- @Brianboulton:, can we then try the same to start off, if that suits? I have and can easily obtain sources for the life. If so I will start thinking about it in earnest.Smerus (talk) 18:42, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
- Yes, we can proceed on that basis. It will be a while before I produce any significant text, as I have to refamiliarise myself with a lot of reading, prepare lists of selected material, etc, and generally think about how to proceed. And, as I say, I am a slow worker these days.... When I am properly under way I'll introduce you to my working sandbox so that you can keep abreast of developments – perhaps you'll do the same for me. Brianboulton (talk) 09:21, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
- @Brianboulton:, can we then try the same to start off, if that suits? I have and can easily obtain sources for the life. If so I will start thinking about it in earnest.Smerus (talk) 18:42, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
- Talking about Brahms: I linked to Die schöne Magelone, and was surprised that we don't have an article on the cycle by Brahms, not even in German. So many works missing ... three Haydn masses without article! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:36, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
- When I collaborated with Tim on various composer biographies (e.g. Holst, Delius, Britten) he generally did the biography stuff while I tackled the music. We worked independently to begin with, coming together when both our contributions were fairly well developed, at which point we would cheerfully edit each other's work to ensure that the two halves melded harmoniously. I don't mind doing the same thing here; my sources are stronger on the music side, but if you've a preference as to what you'd like to concentrate on, I'm fully amenable. We can of course exchange info via email, as necessary. Brianboulton (talk) 18:17, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
A tiny nugget for your Monteverdi project: it:Origini dell'opera includes the information that the Monteverdi's patron was an 'enthusiastic spectator' of Peri's Euridice in Firenze in 1600. There's no specific inline reference for this statement, but it would provide a nice link between the Camerata de' Bardi and Monteverdi if you could find one. Scarabocchio (talk) 06:39, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
- Anyone have any biographies of Vicenzo I of Mantua which might support this?Smerus (talk) 08:26, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
- This book confirms Vincenzo attended the premiere of Euridice although makes no comment on his enthusiasm or lack there of. Several other sources also state that he attended. Voceditenore (talk) 09:00, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
- More relevant - Francesco Rasi sang in Euridice in 1600 and Orfeo in 1607 (Fabbri, Monteverdi, 1994, p. 64.Smerus (talk) 10:48, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
- I liked that particular connection through Gonzaga because it hinted at a causal relationship, or at least an inspiration, from what was happening in Firenze to Monteverdi's work. The connection is entirely missing in enWP. Consider this from the Monteverdi article: "From monody .. it was a logical step for Monteverdi to begin composing opera". Ahem. Scarabocchio (talk) 11:52, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
- Redlich (1952) – who does not have a chatty style – has pages of information about Vicenzo I and his patronage of Monteverdi at Mantua. So does Tim Carter (2002), Ringer (2006) and indeed, any decent book dealing with Monteverdi's life and work, e.g. Whenham. Vincenzo was a key figure in the production of all Monteverdi's early works, although it appears that the Duke did not always treat his protege well; the phrase overworked and underpaid comes to mind. See the shenanigans around the composition of L'Arianna and M's plaintive letter to Striggio quoted in that article. There's stacks of good material available. Brianboulton (talk) 09:21, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
- I liked that particular connection through Gonzaga because it hinted at a causal relationship, or at least an inspiration, from what was happening in Firenze to Monteverdi's work. The connection is entirely missing in enWP. Consider this from the Monteverdi article: "From monody .. it was a logical step for Monteverdi to begin composing opera". Ahem. Scarabocchio (talk) 11:52, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
- More relevant - Francesco Rasi sang in Euridice in 1600 and Orfeo in 1607 (Fabbri, Monteverdi, 1994, p. 64.Smerus (talk) 10:48, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
Update: I have not forgotten my offer to work on the Monteverdi project, but I need the Whenham companion and am still waiting for ILL to provide it. I trust there is no hurry. I'm doing a little work meantime on Alan Bush, the Marxist composer of last century. Brianboulton (talk) 19:28, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
- No problem: I'm just ambling through the life at the moment.Smerus (talk) 06:17, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
- Whenham has arrived. You may like to know that I have opened a Monteverdi sandbox/notebook here, to jot down thoughts, useful links and potential sources. Please feel free to peruse it and use anything there you find useful. Brianboulton (talk) 10:40, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
Liszt
Hi David. I'm very surprised you made this edit. I thought that was really useful detail that one would struggle to find easily anywhere else on the net. But then, I'm no expert. Perhaps a slight trim would suffice? Or perhaps you've got a (long overdue) WP:GA in your sights?? Martinevans123 (talk) 19:54, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for this. Liszt was a virtuoso pianist whom his audiences admired. Of that there is no doubt and Davis's comment reflects this. It can therefore usefully replace the other comments. As I said in my edit comment, no need to labour the point. Whether he was the best ever can only be a matter of personal opinion which cannot I think in any way be judged - and "that no pianist has seriously challenged the legend" is a doubtful hyperbole, an opinion in itself which cannot be substantiated. Davis is not a Liszt expert - actually looking at Davis's own WP article, detail about him seems thin to say the least - and therefore his opinion is not especially to be credited. The article as a whole is very poor, full of WP:UNDUE and marginal relevancies, and I am trying from time to time to knock it into shape. --Smerus (talk) 06:12, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
- Yes, I see. You're right, it will only ever be opinion, unless perhaps someone organized a proper worldwide competition with voting. I just found it informative that he was judged to be "the best in the world" by some people at that time. The statement "Liszt was viewed by his contemporaries as the greatest virtuoso of his time" seemed quite an important one. Is Saffle (1994) not considered a good source for this? Martinevans123 (talk) 07:41, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
- There is nothing wrong with Saffle, I suppose, there are doubtless numerous people who have made this sort of comment in the past. But one comment of this sort is quite enough. Davis's comment makes it clear that there is a case for stating that contemporary audiences thought he was the greatest; why egg the pudding?--Smerus (talk) 18:52, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
- Yes, I see. You're right, it will only ever be opinion, unless perhaps someone organized a proper worldwide competition with voting. I just found it informative that he was judged to be "the best in the world" by some people at that time. The statement "Liszt was viewed by his contemporaries as the greatest virtuoso of his time" seemed quite an important one. Is Saffle (1994) not considered a good source for this? Martinevans123 (talk) 07:41, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
Books and Bytes - Issue 22
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 22, April-May 2017
- New and expanded research accounts
- Global branches update
- Spotlight: OCLC Partnership
- Bytes in brief
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:35, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
WiR focus on music and ballet in July
 Welcome to Women in Red's July 2017 worldwide online editathons. | ||
.jpg) 
|
(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Ipigott (talk) 09:57, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
More Monty
Just to assure you that my recent silence on this matter does not mean inaction. At the moment I'm still reading and copying, while juggling with a few other projects, notably Alan Bush which is approaching reviewability. Some time in August (likely not before) I'll be able to produce a draft (semi-analytical) essay on Monteverdi's music, which we can then amend, discuss, and see how it best fits into the main article. You might meantime pick up a few tortured snippets from User:Brianboulton/Sandbox13.
I hope you enjoyed the election. I certainly did. Brianboulton (talk) 22:48, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
- Well, I got some good exercise out of the election. I have been recovering since in Slovakia, but now that I'm back in London I'm returning to the biography. I might just finish this before end-July.--Smerus (talk) 08:18, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
You've got mail
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Etan J. Tal(talk) 21:21, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
DYK nomination of Achilles (opera)
Hello! Your submission of Achilles (opera) 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! Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:51, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
Yet more Monty
Later today I'll be bringing the first parts of my "Music" section text into the article proper. This should facilitate discussion and contribution from other editors, which I would like to see. It's still in late draft stage, and there may be further mutual adjustment to ensure that the text is compatible with the Biography section. I am concentrating mainly on the nature of the music and its evolution from the formal exercises of Monteverdi's extreme youth to the musical language he was using in his final Venice years, with a little context where necessary for clarity. I will be eventually be ditching most if not all of the present "Works" text, which is largely unsourced and out of step with the approach I'm taking, but I'll be leaving it for the time being.
I will temporarily remove the image of Monteverdi's tombstone, which is very awkwardly sited at present. We can restore it when the article is in a more developed state. I am also adding a short section at the beginning of the biography, dealing with issues of nationality and culture, a matter that among critics only Anthony Pryer seems to have raised. If you think this is problematical we can discuss.
Now I am more or less done with Alan Bush I'll be able to give more time to the Monty project, but I do have various distractions forthcoming in July and August which will mean progress is still likely to be slow but steady. Brianboulton (talk) 09:38, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
- Excellent news. I am trying to work out the last section of the biography and hope to have that up soon as well. (I got diverted by the Women in Red project, as I am a sucker for anything that distracts me from other responsibilities). I am touching marginally on the nationality issue in the Venice bio section (as regards his ongoing connections with Mantua and the accusation that M. was a Habsburg spy), but let's get everything up and we can sort it out later. Many thanks, Cite error: There are
<ref>tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).- Done for the moment. I have got to the end of the life. Parts may still need expansion of course. I'm off now to Slovakia to organize my music festival there, (no Monty alas, or even Bush), but can still tinker and interfere from there.--Smerus (talk) 13:52, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
DYK for Melanie Lewy
On 17 July 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Melanie Lewy, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Melanie Lewy had to sell some of her clothes to pay for her husband's funeral? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Melanie Lewy. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Melanie Lewy), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
IronGargoyle (talk) 12:01, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
DYK for Achilles (opera)
On 21 July 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Achilles (opera), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in a gay version of Achilles, the hero is introduced as a cross-dresser? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Achilles (opera). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Achilles (opera)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
IronGargoyle (talk) 12:56, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
DYK for Hannah Norsa
On 22 July 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Hannah Norsa, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the story of Hannah Norsa (pictured) has been described as "an archetypal tale of how stage stardom might lead to social transformation"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hannah Norsa. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Hannah Norsa), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Alex ShihTalk 00:42, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
Hannah Norsa
Your edit summary makes no sense, and neither does your reversion, which is in violation of multiple policies/guidelines... GiantSnowman 13:11, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
- How very rude. I have responded here (and indeed here, where the editor concerned made a similar edit), so that the issue to which he apparently objects can be properly discussed.--Smerus (talk) 14:40, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
Monteverdi peer review
Do you want to open this? As the initiator of the artricle's expansion, perhaps you should, but I'll do it if you like. Brianboulton (talk) 09:21, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
- OK I've kicked off, and will give notice to WP:OPERA and WP:Classical Music etc. Best, Smerus (talk) 16:09, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
- and how/ where does one make comments/ give feedback? Scarabocchio (talk) 11:54, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
- (watching:) you follow the link and edit that page, starting with a level4 header Comments from Scarabocchio). I will get there, hopefully soon. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:04, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks, Gerda. Just to be explicit, the page is Wikipedia:Peer_review/Claudio_Monteverdi/archive1.--Smerus (talk) 12:22, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
Survey Invite
I'm working on a study of political motivations and how they affect editing. I'd like to ask you to take a survey. The survey should take 5 minutes. Your survey responses will be kept private. Our project is documented at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Wikipedia_%2B_Politics.
I am asking you to participate in this study because you are a frequent editor of pages on Wikipedia that are of political interest. We would like to learn about your experiences in dealing with editors of different political orientations.
Sincere thanks for your help! Porteclefs (talk) 19:41, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
Adolescence and the 17, 18th, 19th, and 20th centuries
I made those edits removing references because referring to someone as an adolescent in this time period is technically incorrect; adolescence is not a universal concept; not only was it not existential until 1945, but adolescence itself is only perpetuated by cultural factors. This seems incorrect, but if you look at the history of adolescence it will say the same thing I am now.
Historically speaking, it would be more accurate to refer to someone age 13-19 before 1945 as a child or an adult, based on their age (except in cultures where adulthood starts at say, age 13). We should not be encouraging the use of historical anachronisms; as an encyclopedia, Wikipedia should be using adjectives and descriptions that reflect the lives of the subjects and the time periods they occurred in, and not using adjectives and descriptions that are only accurate if they were a certain age in a future time period. --Thenewguy34 (talk) 12:49, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
- I think the thing is that in the cases where I reverted, precisely the age range 13-19 is what was meant. And moreover that is exactly what the word 'teenager' would convey to the reader. (OED definition: " One who is in his or her teens; loosely, an adolescent.") It would indeed be an anachronism if we put the word 'teenager' into the mouths of, e.g. Sheppard or Mendelssohn. It is not an anachronism if we use the word ourselves to describe them at that period of their lives, just, in these cases, an accurate description. The same would apply in my opinion to use of the word 'adolescent'.--Smerus (talk) 14:54, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
De-prod of Harry G. Pellegrin
Hi Smerus. Just wanted to let you know that I re-removed the prod template you added to Harry G. Pellegrin . I did so not because I disagree with your assessment of the article, but for procedural reasons: a prod template should not be re-added when it has been removed, even in bad faith, unless you are claiming the removal was a case of obvious vandalism. No justification for de-proding really needs to be given and the IP which removed the prod does appear (at least on the surface) to be making a good faith attempt to improve the article. So, if you still feel the article deserves to be deleted, then the next step would be to nominate it for deletion per WP:AFD. I know your prod was in response to my post at WT:CM#Harry G. Pellegrin, so I believe we are in general agreement about the state of the article. I did a little WP:BEFORE back in April, but came up with nothing. Do you think there's any possibility of WP:NEXIST? If not, then AfD may be the best option. The article will be either improved appropriately and kept, or it will be deleted. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:50, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
- OK, I have sent to AFD. Best, Smerus (talk) 10:07, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
Kingdom of Greece - Suggestions
Hi! I learnt that you are a mentor interested in history. Well, I was wondering if you could provide any suggestions regarding that page. I have nominated it for Good article already and I am open to suggestions and ideas to improve it.
Thank you a lot! --Morretor (talk) 13:50, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
- This topic is outside my area. But I can see that the article needs substantially more citations! There's nothing at all in the culture section and hardly anything in the history section, for example.Smerus (talk) 10:11, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
Books and Bytes - Issue 23
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 23, June-July 2017
- Library card
- User Group update
- Global branches update
- Spotlight: Combating misinformation, fake news, and censorship
- Bytes in brief
Chinese, Arabic and Yoruba versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:03, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
FA Monteverdi
Hey, well done for getting him up there! That must have been years of hard work... brilliant! — Iadmc♫talk 15:14, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for this but it was a joint effort with User:Brianboulton, who had already done a great solo job on Lost operas by Claudio Monteverdi - we blitzed Claudio for a few weeks to get a result!! Best, Smerus (talk) 15:53, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
Hike
Today we hiked in the valley above the waterfalls, - great! Will procede to Levoča tomorrow and think of you ;) - My friend wrote her dissertation on the altar, - small world. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:18, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
- Sorry to miss you - I am just back in London. My house in Levoca is at Klastorska 36, green house on the corner just behind the main square, opposite the Gymnasium. Posters for the music festival are just going up, you should see them in some of the windows in the main square and at the Congress Hall. Try to look in the theatre, it's a hidden gem. Best, Smerus (talk) 23:23, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
- On our way to there right now, but only for a short visit, thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:53, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
- Back from the excursion to a lovely town full of history! I took a picture of the altar which isn't good at details but shows the immense size. The lady guarding the theatre could not be talked into showing it to us, but we had a drink in the cafe in front. Thank you for Monteverdi for FA! - I had no connection last night in rural Slovakia ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:06, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
- Forgot to say that we didn't see the festival posters yet, but overheard an English-speaking guide mentioning it when she prepared her group for a visit of St. James. Can't believe that church and altar have no article! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:36, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
- Could you translate (a bit of) this? ... and/or this? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:39, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
- My Slovak is almost non-existent! I might try doing it from scratch.Smerus (talk) 20:49, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
- For personal reasons, I'd like at least a stub on the church on 21 August, will start in user space, please keep an eye on it. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:38, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
- This site offers a lot, is it reliable? How would I find an official site and name of the parish? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:25, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
- It's not official, but I think reliable, run by this guy, who is knowledgeable and keen on the region. The Levoca town page is not too good, it's being revised in the near future. Here's the page about the catheral, in the Levoca parish website. I will also check the literature I have here. Best, DC Smerus (talk) 12:34, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
- My Slovak is almost non-existent! I might try doing it from scratch.Smerus (talk) 20:49, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
Started at St. James, Levoča. Could you recommend a few more of the literature entries to take over? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:17, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you for what you added! - de has no article about the church yet but this (4 of them, by street). It will change soon, - no article about the church, I mean. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:26, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for including me as joint creator on DYK!Smerus (talk) 08:07, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
- Just found this ;) - German article will appear tomorrow. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:17, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for including me as joint creator on DYK!Smerus (talk) 08:07, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you for what you added! - de has no article about the church yet but this (4 of them, by street). It will change soon, - no article about the church, I mean. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:26, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
5778
To the 63 watchers of this page (and anyone else who drops by), I wish you all a happy, healthy and fulfilling 5778. Best, Smerus (talk) 16:27, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
Hi. Thankyou for your participation in the challenge series or/and contests. In November The Women in Red World Contest is being held to try to produce new articles for as many countries worldwide and occupations as possible. There will be over $4000 in prizes to win, including Amazon vouchers and paid subscriptions. If this would appeal to you and you think you'd be interested in contributing new articles on women during this month for your region or wherever please sign up in the participants section. If you're not interested in prize money yourself but are willing to participate and raise money to buy books about women for others to use, this is also fine. Thankyou, and if taking part, good luck!♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:10, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
DYK for Basilica of St. James, Levoča
On 17 September 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Basilica of St. James, Levoča, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Basilica of St. James in Levoča contains the world's tallest carved wooden altar (pictured)? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Basilica of St. James, Levoča), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Alex ShihTalk 00:02, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
 |
- Thank you for what did for it! Please check the German version. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:47, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
- Great, looks fine to me! Well done. I have some other source material for the English version and will get round to expanding it at some point.....Best, Smerus (talk) 11:29, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
- Now in German, - they straightened the pic ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:17, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
- Great, looks fine to me! Well done. I have some other source material for the English version and will get round to expanding it at some point.....Best, Smerus (talk) 11:29, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
Speedy deletion declined: Christina and Michelle Naughton
Hello Smerus. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Christina and Michelle Naughton, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: coverage in multiple RS is clear indication of significance. Thank you. SoWhy 07:38, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
MA Cambridge 1975
Good one! Narky Blert (talk) 21:02, 22 October 2017 (UTC) (B.A. Cantab, M.A. Cantab (failed))
- TY for your contributions to the discussion on "Herr Christ, der einig Gotts Sohn". It looks as if WP:CONSENSUS may have been reached :-) Narky Blert (talk) 20:15, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
Michael Portillo
Hello Smerus. You have done a commendable job in improving the Michael Portillo article, and I think you should consider nominating the article for WP:GAN.--Nevé–selbert 13:05, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
- Many thanks for your comment, but imo it is still a very long way from GA.Smerus (talk) 13:29, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
- Sorry, I should have said WP:PR. Worth noting that Assassination of Spencer Perceval was nominated there before it became a featured article.--Nevé–selbert 19:24, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
I am importuning close colleagues to look in, if they are inclined, at the peer review for Arthur Sullivan. Ssilvers and I are planning to take the article to FAC, and if you are inclined to look in at the peer review and give us your comments, it will be esteemed a favour. – Tim riley talk 22:57, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
Sullivan again
As no good deed goes unpunished, we are alerting everyone who was kind enough to contribute to the peer review on Sullivan that Ssilvers and I now have the article up for FAC. If you have the time and inclination to look in, we shall be most grateful. Tim riley talk 11:58, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
FAC
I hope you don't mind that I was inspired ^_-☆ by your FAC nomination statement for this FAC I just opened! Double sharp (talk) 14:59, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
- Wow! Metallurgy etc. is a bit beyond my scope but I will read the article as everyone surely needs to know about thorium. --Smerus (talk) 15:05, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
Liszt
Let's see. You think that was controversial and unsourced? Is the statement disputed? Thanks. SPECIFICO talk 20:02, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
- What I think about it is WP:OR and irrelevant. The statement is unsourced. Find a source that says that. Or quote some appropriate authority (sourced) as saying it. And read WP:WEASEL, which makes this quite clear. Simple as that. --Smerus (talk) 20:16, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
- Actually, I think it's an OK lede summary of the content of this section of the article content: [1]. Someone had put in a bit about how he was "greatest ever", which is nonsense, and I tried to replace it with something uncontroversial and needing no further citation beyond what's already in the corpus of the article. It's not really what we mean by WP:WEASEL. SPECIFICO talk 22:44, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
- What is in the lede needs to be in the article. So if it's not in the article, and cited properly there, it shouldn't be in the lede. I don't see it anywhere in the section 'Liszt as a pianist' - which in any case is poorly written, and is inadequately cited. Frankly the whole article is god-awful in my opinion, and generally undercited, but the thought of rewriting it gives rise to feelings of black despair.--Smerus (talk) 23:07, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
- Actually, I think it's an OK lede summary of the content of this section of the article content: [1]. Someone had put in a bit about how he was "greatest ever", which is nonsense, and I tried to replace it with something uncontroversial and needing no further citation beyond what's already in the corpus of the article. It's not really what we mean by WP:WEASEL. SPECIFICO talk 22:44, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
Season's greetings
|
Seasonal Greetings and Good Wishes | |
| Seasonal greetings for 2017, and best wishes for 2018. Heartfelt thanks to you for your contributions, which have done much to enhance the encyclopedia and make me feel it's worthwhile to keep contributing. So here's to another year's productive editing, with old feuds put aside and peace, goodwill and friendship for all! Brianboulton (talk) 23:39, 14 December 2017 (UTC) |
Auguri
Happy Holidays, David ...
and a New Year filled with peace, happiness, and beautiful music!
Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 07:17, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
- Dear VdT, many thanks for your kind wishes which are warmly reciprocated. As it happens your remarks are extremely à propos, as I have just been chosen to be the next Chairman of Hampstead Garden Opera (whose article I am am now subjecting to a long-needed rewrite), so will be snowed under with beautiful music and its organizational concomitants for the coming year.....Best, --Smerus (talk) 11:41, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
- Congratulations, David! I see what you mean about rewrite, "2014 will be ..." - All the best to you, - my playlist on my talk (ignore Reger please) will hopefully grow to a "card" on the 24th when joyful singing begins in our tradition. Light the candles! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:51, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
Seasons
For your contributions and long standing non negotiable integrity, a tune [2]. Ceoil (talk) 22:03, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
Mendelssohn tks
- Thanks for taking that to FAC. I have no background or education in music. One of the few pure, unalloyed benefits I rec'v from Wikipedia is being introduced to beautiful music through reading articles about composers. Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 00:51, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
DYK for Die schöne Melusine
On 17 January 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Die schöne Melusine, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Felix Mendelssohn was so fascinated by a particular singer playing the role of a mermaid that he was inspired to write the overture The Fair Melusine (legend pictured)? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Die schöne Melusine. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Die schöne Melusine), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 16:02, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Good news
Sir Arthur Sullivan sends his respectful greetings to Herr Felix Mendelssohn on the occasion of the latter's promotion to FA. (per pro, Tim riley talk 21:25, 15 January 2018 (UTC))
So would Psalm 100 if you'd not be allergic to the composer ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:02, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
ps: TFA 3 February 2019? Or this year? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:06, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
- Likewise, congratulations on the FA promotion! Double sharp (talk) 00:19, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
- On behalf of Herr Mendelssohn, I am requested to thank you for your kind greetings, and to hope that you may continue to enjoy his contributions to the art of music. --Smerus (talk) 08:54, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you, but no answer ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:20, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
- I'd go for 2019. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:42, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
- I added Melusinen to P:DE, where we have a specifically musical set right now, including Manon in bed with her lover ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:22, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Books and Bytes - Issue 26
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 26, December – January 2018
- #1Lib1Ref
- User Group update
- Global branches update
- Spotlight: What can we glean from OCLC’s experience with library staff learning Wikipedia?
- Bytes in brief
Arabic and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:36, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
I see that back in the dawn of time you contributed to this article, and I venture to mention that I have enlarged it and now have it up for peer review. If you have time and disposition to look in, it will be esteemed a favour. Quite understand if not, naturally. Tim riley talk 16:47, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
Wagner Members of the Bavarian Maximilian Order for Science and Art
Hello Smerus, Wagner was Members of the Bavarian Maximilian Order for Science and Art. You asked for a citation for this. Here it is: http://periodika.digitale-sammlungen.de/zblg/seite/zblg47_0345 from Körner, Hans (1984). "Der Bayerische Maximiliansorden für Wissenschaft und Kunst und seine Mitglieder". Zeitschrift für Bayerische Landesgeschichte (in German). 47: 299–398. Retrieved 24 July 2012. Grimes2 (talk) 13:50, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
- Many thanks for this, I've now incorporated it in the article and reverted my reversion.--Smerus (talk) 19:51, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
встречного?
.jpg)
Apologies for the out-of-the-blue question, but (still reeling from my first reading of 1984) I have brief need of a russophone for this:
- English: Yakov Guminer's 1931 poster reading "The arithmetic of an industrial-financial counter-plan: 2 + 2 plus the enthusiasm of the workers = 5"
- Русский: Плакат Якова Гуминера "Арифметика встречного промфинплана: 2+2 плюс энтузиазм рабочих=5 " (1931)
The translation of встречного промфинплана is counter-intuitive (not "counter-intuitive", but just very unlikely). Any thoughts, comrade? Scarabocchio (talk) 04:49, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
- I would have translated it as "of an alternative industry-finance plan"; встречно carries the sense of 'coming from the other direction'. "Counter-plan" seems to me to suggest (in English anyway) something which should be put into action to defeat an existing plan, whereas the intention here is to suggest a different way of thinking. Now I must run off for this morning's two minute's hate.--Smerus (talk) 10:07, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
- Plusthank. The best way of fixing the target text looks to be to replace with the bare word 'plan'. Scarabocchio (talk) 12:43, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
- Curses, my brain must have been off. I looked at "alternative plan" and failed to consider that it could be alternative to a five-year plan that actually lasted five years. The word did add valuable extra info, so thanks for filling in the missing info over at 2+2=5 ... (leaves room backwards, grovelling) Scarabocchio (talk) 03:37, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
While the book is still fresh in my mind, I'm gathering my strength to make some minor edits to Newspeak and other 1984-related articles. It looks a subject area that attracts unthink interventions from axegrind unreaders. With plusage, I have to fight off the temptation of an ownlife, in favour of canutewise truthspeak. Perhaps a small Victory gin first ... cheers! Scarabocchio (talk) 08:01, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
- Aargh! The opening para was a triple-plus-ungood thoughtcrime, worthy of Goldstein himself. I couldn't resist taking the liberty of tinkering with it, but leave the rest to you. May Big Brother be with you!--Smerus (talk) 10:58, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
- All of the 1984-related articles are cretin magnets. Never has the word 'unwatch' seemed so relevant (or welcome). Scarabocchio (talk) 18:25, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
- I feared it was bound to be so - but, never fear, elsewhere keep the aspidistra flying! --Smerus (talk) 19:13, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
- All of the 1984-related articles are cretin magnets. Never has the word 'unwatch' seemed so relevant (or welcome). Scarabocchio (talk) 18:25, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
- Aargh! The opening para was a triple-plus-ungood thoughtcrime, worthy of Goldstein himself. I couldn't resist taking the liberty of tinkering with it, but leave the rest to you. May Big Brother be with you!--Smerus (talk) 10:58, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
Back before the dawn of time you reviewed this article for GAN, and when passing it you rashly added, "I will be interested to see the article's further progress". Well, it's progressed to FAC after an eight-year hibernation, and if you were minded to look in, it would be esteemed a favour. Quite understand if not, of course. – Tim riley talk 12:30, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
- I say! The grass doesn't grow under your feet. Thank you so much for your swift response and helpful comments. We shall regard the prospect of "further niggles" with equanimity, not to say gratification. Tim riley talk 16:12, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
Ford Piquette Avenue Plant FAC
I nominated the Ford Piquette Avenue Plant article for FA status here: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ford Piquette Avenue Plant/archive1. I saw on the Wikipedia:Mentoring for FAC page that you have an interest in history, so I believe the subject of this article may interest you. This building played a huge yet mostly unknown role in the early years of the automotive industry in the United States. Any input that you would be willing to provide on its review page would be helpful, but what will help the most is confirming whether it meets the FA criteria. Thanks in advance. Jackdude101 talk cont 02:39, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
- thanks for contacting me, but I know nothing about auto history and really don't feel qualified to comment. Best --Smerus (talk) 08:05, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
John Stump's Faerie’s Aire and Death Waltz
I saw this and thought of you. Scarabocchio (talk) 04:10, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
- You were right. I have a copy of the original which I bought in California 50 years ago and it hangs in my music room above my piano. Happy May Day!--Smerus (talk) 08:00, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
- I am seriously, but seriously, impressed ... not surprised, of course, but impressed! Scarabocchio (talk) 10:46, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi. I saw that you're interested in popular culture and mainly in ex-Soviet countries, so I thought you could help me. I have listed the article "Iveta Mukuchyan" (Armenian singer-songwriter, actress) for peer review and as soon as it's closed I'll nominate it for an FA status. I was wondering if you would be willing to have a look at it. The article is already GA but I think it might have some issues. Thanks. Harut111 (talk) 07:01, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
Precious five years!
| |
| Five years! |
|---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:45, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Michael Portillo
Hi @Smerus: Thanks for not reverting all my changes on Michael Portillo. I appreciate there has been a long discussion regarding the contents of Portillo's infobox, however I don't believe that any of my changes broke consensus on the two areas of dispute, namely political offices held and television programmes presented? Phinn (talk) 11:49, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
- As this (like many other aspects of the article) has been an issue of contention you had best raise it on the talk page if you want to take it further. My personal view, which I would express any conversation, is that the material I deleted was trivial in the context of the article, and should not be highlighted at its head. Best,--Smerus (talk) 15:25, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
File:Rampalgrave.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Rampalgrave.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination.
ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 23:55, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Me again. I have M. Debussy up for peer review, and if you have time and disposition to look in, it will be esteemed a favour. Best wishes, as ever, Tim riley talk 13:12, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
- I have thanked you on the PR page for your superb re-write (and retitling) of the "Musical idiom" section, but I want to thank you here too. I am enormously grateful for what you have done. Tim riley talk 13:31, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
Meyerbeer and Mendelssohn: Pour le Merite
The references for the membership of Meyerbeer and Mendelssohn in the order Pour le Merite can be found here: http://www.orden-pourlemerite.de/plm/mgvita/meyerbeer1791_vita.pdf, http://www.orden-pourlemerite.de/plm/mgvita/mendelssohnbartholdy1809_vita.pdf. But I'm quite sure, that this fact is not mentioned in the articles of both composers. Grimes2 (talk) 18:18, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
- Well it should be in the articles if it's to be in the categories. I'll try to get round to editing them accordingly. Thanks for the references.--Smerus (talk) 19:01, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
File:Rampalgrave.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Rampalgrave.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination.
ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 23:55, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
Debussy
Me again. The peer review is winding down now, and I am thinking in terms of going to FAC. Now, as you (and Dmass) have made substantial (and superb) contributions to the article you won't be eligible to comment at the FAC, and I am wondering if I can suborn you into being a co-nominator? The hours will be part-time, there will be free parking and I will see if Luncheon Vouchers can be offered. Please contemplate this suggestion. Tim riley talk 13:45, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
- The free parking is nigh-irresistible. I accept.--Smerus (talk) 13:47, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
- Whoopee! I was expecting a polite No, am and delighted! 13:49, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
Advice on Shiukashvili
Hello, this article looks like a CV rather than an relible wikipedia article, what do you think? Please check it out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valerian_Shiukashvili
I don't think it is appropriate to be written in such way. Thanks a lot! Sausa (talk) 07:13, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
FA
I see Debussy has been promoted to FA. My thanks and congratulations: having two such excellent co-nominators has made the process a lot easier than usual, and I'm hugely grateful. Very best wishes, Tim riley talk 16:39, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Congratulations, both! - TFA for 22 August? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:47, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
The credit must go to Tim for initiating the quest - now on to Gioachino Rossini! (d. 1868) --Smerus (talk) 16:50, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
- Not before you answer the question ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:52, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
- Well I'm happy to put it up for TFA if Tim is.....--Smerus (talk) 17:16, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
- No objection at all, though the August date is not an important anniversary (a pity we didn't start in time for the March one, looking back). Are you happy to do the honours, Smerus? Tim riley talk 19:00, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
- I'm quite willing to step forward once the star is official. Debussy is one of the themes of our regional festival, which runs until the beginning of September, and probably of others as well, - yours too, Smerus? Heard in that context La Mer and the Faune, François-Xavier Roth conducting his Les Siècles, and the piano version of the latter
will followplayed by Benjamin Grosvenor was exceptional, to be followed by the Suite bergamasque by a different pianist. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:39, 13 July 2018 (UTC) - You were faster ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:15, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
- I'm quite willing to step forward once the star is official. Debussy is one of the themes of our regional festival, which runs until the beginning of September, and probably of others as well, - yours too, Smerus? Heard in that context La Mer and the Faune, François-Xavier Roth conducting his Les Siècles, and the piano version of the latter
- No objection at all, though the August date is not an important anniversary (a pity we didn't start in time for the March one, looking back). Are you happy to do the honours, Smerus? Tim riley talk 19:00, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
- Well I'm happy to put it up for TFA if Tim is.....--Smerus (talk) 17:16, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Rossini
I'm limbering up, and have extensively raided the Victoria music library's R section. As you were kind enough to work with my early Bronze Age referencing system chez Debussy I am attempting to reciprocate by learning how to use your preferred sfn system (a.k.a. Babylonic cuneiform). Early attempts may be inspected here. (Tips, corrections etc warmly welcomed). I'm slowly assembling the material for the Life section, but will be perfectly happy to switch to the Works if you prefer. – Tim riley talk 08:55, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
- Bravo - wil comment more tomorrow but am having a fraught period in the immediate future in organizing this - which of course you and indeed any other editors are most welcome to attend (we are quite broadminded in North London). Some Rossini is featured, along with Mozart, Bernstein, Tom Lehrer and others.....--Smerus (talk) 21:30, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
- I just came across this diary, amused when reading about the first Rhine maiden rehearsal which cured the diarist. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:31, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
safely seat?
Let me understand English better. I read (Portillo) "hitherto safely ... seat", reading safely as qualifying "seat", and don't know what it means. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:15, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
It was 'hitherto safely Conservative' (in everyday English parlance) - i.e. 'safely' qualifies 'Conservative'.Smerus (talk) 14:37, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
- There are days when I think I'll never learn this language. Thank you. Music is better, off to listen to some Bach. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:03, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
Claude Debussy scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that I've scheduled Claude Debussy to appear on the main page as today's featured article on 22 August 2018. If you need to make tweaks to the blurb, it is at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/August 22, 2018. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:45, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
- Smerus, Dmass – Brace yourselves, gentlemen! Debussy hits the front page two days hence. Following Brian Boulton's wise advice, while any FA I am responsible for is on the front page I ignore all the changes made by the assembled trolls, vandals, well-meaning ninnies and others until after the article has become yesterday's front page, at which point I go in and clean up. Several stalwart colleagues keep an eye open for obvious vandalism while an article is on the front page, and what we need do is decide afterwards which good-faith changes, if any, ought to be kept. Of course if you prefer to stand guard with pitchfork I shall not object, but I shall be in bed with the duvet over my head. Tim riley talk 19:42, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for the tip, I'm rather fascinated now to see what happens! Dmass (talk) 21:04, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
- Another tip: watch a TFA in which you are not involved, one more chance tomorrow. I do it every day, reverting eventual vandalism, and many others seem to do the same (most often it's reverted already when I see it) - nothing particularly exciting ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:35, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
- Gentlemen, thank you for the article! - I am happy to report that nothing serious threatened the Master for most of his day. Smerus, thank you for the image pour le piano! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:04, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for the tip, I'm rather fascinated now to see what happens! Dmass (talk) 21:04, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
(I apologise if I'm entering this in the wrong place - what I'm trying to do is to write asking for advice, and possibly engaging in a private discussion. I have no wish to start some controversy. If there's a better way of doing this, I would be grateful if you could advise me.) Wagner's anti-semitism seems to be a controversial topic in Wikipedia. Most of the material on this issue appears to have been excluded from the main article [Wagner - Racism and Anti-semitism] to the separate article on his anti-semitic publication Das Judenthum in der Musik. (Some while ago I tried to add to the main article a link to the text of this publication - that was quickly reverted). Both the main article on Wagner and (rather more fully) the article on Das Judenthum in der Music refer to Wagner having friendships with Jews. The way this is currently drafted in the Das Judenthum article suggests that Wagner's anti-semitismm was for public consumption but that in private he was not (or may not have been) anti-semitic. The scholar Leah Garrett, author of 'A Knight at the Opera: Heine, Wagner, Herzl, Peretz and the Legacy of Der Tannhäuser' (2011), after reading Wagner's diaries and correspondence in the course of researching her book, wrote : "It wasn’t until I read Wagner’s diaries and letters that I realised his antisemitism overshadowed nearly all facets of his daily life and was undoubtedly one of his most serious obsessions". I think that the Wikipedia article on 'Das Judenthum' is inaccurate at present in suggesting that Wagner's anti-semitism was a matter of public statement which may not have reflected his private opinions. How do you think it would be best to handle this issue? Alan Griffiths Gwedi elwch (talk) 02:06, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for these comments. I don't think there is anywhere in the article in DJHIDM the suggestion that "Wagner's anti-semitism was a matter of public statement which may not have reflected his private opinions." Indeed Wagner is referred to as a Jew-hater but not as an anti-semite, which he wasn't in the strict sense of the political movement of the 1870s and beyond. I hope the article conveys that he was a Jew-hater, who made exceptions for a few Jewsih friends (a state of mind which is still visible in some public characters today). Awkward as it may be for those who want to have a clear-cut narrative, Wagner did in fact have many Jewish friends and even in later life many Jewish admirers. Garrett is in my opinion one of the many lustreless academics who seek to gain audience by sticking 20th-century style anti-semitism to Wagner as a major motive in his life (and her grotesque exaggeration in the sentence you quote is an example of this) - but that again is only my opinion. I think your comments above come down to the personal opinions of you, me and others, which I have tried to avoid during my contributions to the articles by trying to state the facts and allowing the readers to come to their own conclusions.WP:NPOV. I have certainly not sought to excuse Wagner for his vile opinions, but they should (again imo) be set in an appropriate context. Wagner was a musician not a politician. The horrors of 20th century actions by others shouldn't, I think, be read back inappropriately to impugn him - at least not in articles which seek to have encyclopaedic status. Writers like Garrett can of course say what they want, and face whatever comment comes their way. Best regards, Smerus (talk) 21:24, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
Chopin
Hi Smerus - in response to this revert, is the article spelled in the Oxford style? Thanks, Zingarese talk · contribs 23:43, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
- See Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Spelling#British_English_with_"-ize"_(Oxford_spelling). These spellings were approved when the article obtained FA status, and should only be altered after discussion and consensus.--Smerus (talk) 06:27, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
 |
Did you know ...
... that in his Berceuse,
Chopin created
a lullaby for piano
in 16 continuous variations
on an ostinato ground bass?
(13 October)
Thinking of you ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:38, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
Slavedriver
See Domenico Cimarosa. Tim riley talk 15:52, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
Camille Saint-Saëns article
I don't understand why you (and Tim Riley) have undone my change to the article on Saint-Saëns. My change seems to be very minor and adds extra information and evidence on Saint-Saëns's prodigiousness as a child. Could you please explain the reasoning behind your decision to remove it? Thank you.
- I see that User:Tim riley has beaten me to it, on his talkpage, as regards explanation. I agree with him. We should always use reliable information to back up what we post on Wikipedia. Best,--Smerus (talk) 17:07, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
DYK nomination of Hebrew Melodies
Hello! Your submission of Hebrew Melodies 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) 23:09, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
TFAR
Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/Felix Mendelssohn, with best wishes --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:39, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
- good thinking, Gerda, thanks!
Books & Bytes, Issue 31
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 31, October – Novemeber 2018
- OAWiki
- Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
- Global branches update
- Bytes in brief
French version of Books & Bytes is now available on meta!
Read the full newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:34, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
Buone Feste!
May you have very Happy Holidays, Smerus ...
and a New Year filled with peace, joy, and beautiful music!
Best wishes and many thanks for all your work at Project Opera, Voceditenore (talk) 08:33, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
Merry Christmas!
|
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2019! |
|
Hello Smerus, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2019. Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. |
DYK for Hebrew Melodies
On 26 December 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Hebrew Melodies, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Lord Byron was called a "melancholy rat" for writing the Hebrew Melodies? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hebrew Melodies. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Hebrew Melodies), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Mifter (talk) 00:02, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
DYK for Die Göttin der Vernunft
On 24 January 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Die Göttin der Vernunft, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Johannes Brahms attended the premiere of the operetta Die Göttin der Vernunft by Johann Strauss, but the composer himself did not, and heard about its reception only by telephone? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Die Göttin der Vernunft. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Die Göttin der Vernunft), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
PanydThe muffin is not subtle 00:03, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
2019
 |
Die Zeit, die Tag und Jahre macht
Thank you for your help last year, and your good wishes! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:44, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
Please check out "Happy" once more, for a smile, and sharing (a Nobel Peace Prize), and resolutions. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:50, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
I am happy that reason prevailed in the below, giving me reason to mention it on Portal:Germany, in the good company of Henri Hinrichsen. - Next time: the day before, watch both Errors, TRM and Main page, if you mind your hook being distorted. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:07, 24 January 2019 (UTC)