User talk:Iadmc

This user has semi-returned due to Wikipedia issues and other personal reasons...
(User talk · Email me · Subpages · All logs)

"I don't want the truth! I want something I can tell Wikipedia!" - Jim Hacker Yes Minister "The Writing on the Wall" (paraphrased)

Category:17th-century Franco-Flemish composers has been nominated for merging

Category:17th-century Franco-Flemish composers has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:10, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

May music

story · music · places

Thank you for your support for Haydn! - Today's story mentions a concert I loved to hear (DYK) and a piece I loved to sing in choir, 150 years old (OTD). - Five links to composers in that one hook, DYK? -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:15, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

I noticed that! Not my favourite composers, though.... I'm actually listening to the Haydn string quartets at the moment. Some georgeous music there.— Iadmc♫^talk  21:29, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Agree. - Five composers, and four have an infobox ;) - The Zemlinsky opera I heard has some gorgeous music. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:42, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Today's focus is Ethel Smyth (per the TPF), written by many, also with an infobox, and I wonder if it could become GA if not FA even. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:05, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

I don't think the Composers group is as acrive as it once was. Certainly the militants - if we can call them that - are all gone. Ethyl Smyth is an interesting composer. What can we do to make it GA? — Iadmc♫^talk  06:02, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

June music

story · music · places

I just wrote to you on Mahler, and want to get a bit more personal. Ethel Smyth: I just found her article well sourced, but don't know much about her. My only contrib so far was the infobox ;) - I like to give prominence to woman in music.

Infoboxes: some users think nothing changed, and I believe things changed, but not those users. There is a general acceptance now for infoboxes for people who also composed classical works - most of them also being musicians, conductors, teachers ... - but not for articles written by those users, Mahler being one of them. I described my approach a while ago, in a nutshell: add an infobox (directly in the article), but if it is reverted walk away ;) - Adding: it may also help not to think of colleagues as "militant". Listening to music is much better! -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:37, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt Thanks. My approach is to ask. But Bold Revert Discuss works too. — Iadmc♫^talk  14:22, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Ask, and you'll get the same no by the same people. I just received one on Mahler (and here I tried to explain in detail ...) - ignore ignore ignore. If you visit my user page, there are two related discussion, about how to mention works in composer's infoboxes (because: see. Mahler), and about a possible MoS change. Perhaps read those to get a feeling for the minefield that these harmless boxes have become (and I don't know why, must have happened before I even joined, and thought it was over in 2015 when the Beethoven compromise was found). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:35, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

The infoboxes thing has been going on since the beginning of Wikipedia. The composers group was especially vocal against them. Read through the various discussions and the RfC... Also, read the composers' advice on their project page. — Iadmc♫^talk  14:41, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

ps: Kafka died 100 years ago OTD, and some discussions look kafkaesque to me ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:37, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt lol — Iadmc♫^talk  14:41, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

You may know that I was "sentenced" in the infoboxes arbcase, and Kafka and Bach were my replies ;) - I was FA conom for Kafka for FAC, DYK? (And guess what: I also didn't change.) I was a FAC conom with the leading writers Brian Boulton and Tim Riley for Messiah (Handel), and that's why Tim's responses take more effort to ignore than those of others. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:48, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Ah. OK. History. Me too: I was Jubileeclipman until I scrambled my password and moved away from it all. I returned as me now to see if anything had changed and it seems some things have, others not... I initiated the infobox RfC, so some of the old guard generally dislike me... — Iadmc♫^talk  14:59, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

I like you. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:12, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! — Iadmc♫^talk  15:16, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the new boxes! As explained for Leighton: you can keep it simple, just add a box and unwatch. It will stay or not, who cares ;) - Of the hundreds I added, few were reverted, typically the featured articles, and Stockhausen. In today's story, I list four composers, one too short for a box (would need translation from French first), two had one, and I added one. I recently had a DYK with five composers, and Mahler was the only one without. The infobox wars were over by 2015 (with Beethoven), or 2023 (with Mozart), only some users refuse to accept it. - The basic misconception is that the box has to "sum up", - I said already in the Beethoven discussion that not even the lead can do it. No, it just has to provide key facts at a predictable place. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:52, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Is the composers group still active? No word of objection or support from there! A shame if it is dead. — Iadmc♫^talk  07:56, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm the wrong person to ask ;) - I was a friend of Jerome Kohl (wrote his article, read his talk: we missed the same people). He liked infoboxes for compositions, and came to accept those for composers, - see Aaron Copland. I never lost the respect of Brian Boulton who gave me great feedback in the FAC for Kafka and other articles. After they both died not much seems left of the "group". I was never a member but run the cabal of outcast ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:09, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

That's the first I knew JK and Brian are dead. :( I guess we are all getting on... Kohl helped me start the 21st-century classical music article and guided me on other things. Requiem in Pace — Iadmc♫^talk  08:17, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

GuillaumeTell is dead too as is SlimVirgin. Both sorely missed! — Iadmc♫^talk  08:29, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

I met GT, Andrew Cooper, just after the infobox RfC. Great guy. — Iadmc♫^talk  08:30, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Yes, missed much. I keep the memory of Jerome and Brian on my talk whenever there's a Recent death on the Main page (which is almost daily), - cheating a bit today, because Hugues Gall was yesterday, but that was Kafka's day - 173k views even the day before (no stats yet for yesterday). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:37, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

New pics of spectacular weather, with Donner. Another interesting person: Alexander Lang. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:08, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I saw that article. Looks interesting — Iadmc♫^talk  21:10, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

And hail, fire and brimstone here today! — Iadmc♫^talk  21:11, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

Today's story is about a tune used by Bach and Mozart. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:00, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

That's lovely! Thanks — Iadmc♫^talk  20:47, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! Bach and Mozart use the compromise introduced in 2013 for Percy Grainger, by Brian, with a neutral list of works as a summary of a composer's achievements. After stability for more than a decade, it was recently removed for Grainger and for Schumann, which makes me sad, but I am not the person to be heard in the matter. You seem to be more in favour ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:33, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Not quite sure what you mean by "a neutral list of works as a summary of a composer's achievements". The blocks of paragraphs at Percy_Grainger#Music is a bit daunting though! — Iadmc♫^talk  12:43, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

As you will recall, a key objection to an infobox for classical composers was that their achievements cannot be summarised (and let's not debate if a summary is even needed). Brian, however, introduced a link to the List of works by Percy Grainger in his attempt to find a compromise, which seemed clever and reasonable to me, and remained stable until now. I believe that the infobox would be more meaningful with that link. Same for FAC article Schumann. The list was there since 2020, and stable until last week. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:59, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Ah! I thought it was standard to link to the List page. obviously not @Gerda Arendt— Iadmc♫^talk  15:59, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

I added the list of works back to Grainger's infobox and raised the issue for Schumann at FAC — Iadmc♫^talk  16:10, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. I had typed some explanation but you seem to be good at mind-reading and don't need it ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:39, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Today I wanted to write a happy song story, on a friend's birthday, but instead we have the word of thunder on top of it, which would have been better on 2 June, this year's first Sunday after Trinity. The new lilypond - thanks to DanCherek - is quite impressive. As my 2 Jun story said: Bach was fired up. - Today's Main page is rich in music, also Franz Liszt and a conductor. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:11, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Great about main page - except the Eurovision! — Iadmc♫^talk  15:06, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Still great. I checked the histories for Grainger and Schumann in more detail. Grainger: it may interest Tr that our friend Brian pursued the "rotten idea" (which had been the key idea of infobox classical composer if you ask me) in his first approach for a compromise in 2013. It stayed until someone else removed it in 2016 (which I didn't see then). I restored it because it was in the first design. Schumann: the infobox is old, but I added the "rotten idea" when I brought Clara Schumann to GA. It remained stable until very recently, - with dozens of edits per day in the process of bringing it to FA, I didn't see that either until later, or I could have reverted it on the spot as a bold edit. Your turn ;) - You may remember that Brian wrote this essay. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:42, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

I'll not disturbe Schumann while it's at FAC. Maybe later. The arguments by Tim against the list going in the infobox are ludicrous: it links elsewhere (bad), Bonn, Clara etc being in the body already is OK, though... Hm, they still link elsewhere! Makes no sense. Anyway, I don't want to start an edit war or anything so I'll wait — Iadmc♫^talk  15:50, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Don't edit war in the article, but complete the discussion during the FAC. These FA writers love to cite "the agreed FA version" as if it was something holy preventing changes. I don't want to enter because I feel uninvited from their reviews. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:58, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Hm. The problem is Tim seems to run the show no one else has commented on the issue. Oh well I'll crack on — Iadmc♫^talk  16:20, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Normally people don't even look at the comments of others. He can be such a gentleman, and was to me, and I have no idea what changed that (in 2016, not in the early days of infobox discussions). I certainly didn't change, nor my attitude towards accessibility ;) - When I look at the the stats for Schumann's works I think I see when the link to the list of compositions left the infobox, - is that really what we want? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:46, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Here no explanation except "additional info and refs; rem uncited material". I'll bring it up. — Iadmc♫^talk  17:02, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Did you read the Forcelink discussion linked from my user page which clearly said it's not a breach of MoS? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:59, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

I have now. Interesting — Iadmc♫^talk  02:18, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

I worked on Kafka, and find it kafkaesque to disconnect a composer from his works. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:55, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

I'm out today. Short question: what do you think of the Aaron Copland compromise? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:03, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Sneaky... LOL — Iadmc♫^talk  15:09, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Today is "the day" for James Joyce, also for Bach's fourth chorale cantata (and why does it come before the third?) - the new pics ("places) have a mammal I had to look up. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:37, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Why does Beethoven's 2nd piano concerto come before the 1st? Haha! — Iadmc♫^talk  15:49, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Well, in 1724, there was St. John's Day (#3) before the Third Sunday after Trinity. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:46, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Now confused.com... LOL — Iadmc♫^talk  18:47, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Trinity moves with Easter. In 1724, the first Sunday after T was 11 June (18, 25). In 2024, it was 2 June (9, 16). St. John's is always 24, which was before the third in 1724, but is after the third in 2024. - New pics of food and flowers come with the story of Noye's Fludde (premiered on 18 June), written by Brian Boulton. I nominated Éric Tappy because he died, and it needs support today! I nominated another women for GA in the Women in Green June run, - review welcome, and more noms planned. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:33, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your support for Tappy, on the Main page and my story today! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:43, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

No problem! — Iadmc♫^talk  15:48, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

Dvořák might be a candidate for a bold infobox, looking at the contributors. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:22, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

I just cited all the premieres! Might just try that... Not just yet though I'll check it out — Iadmc♫^talk  12:24, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Laudonia (ensemble) (June 7)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by SafariScribe was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Laudonia (ensemble) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 23:33, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Iadmc! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 23:33, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mystagogy of the Holy Spirit has been accepted

Mystagogy of the Holy Spirit, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Ca ^{talk to me!} 04:10, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

BLPPROD

I saw your comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chiel Meijering about sources and BLPPROD. While normally personal websites are not sources, BLPPROD has a different interpretation of sources. The second sentence of BLPPROD says "To be eligible for a BLPPROD tag, the entry must be a biography of a living person and contain no sources in any form (as references, external links, etc., reliable or otherwise) supporting any statements made about the person in the biography." The composer's website is a source for the purpose of BLPPROD. His website confirms he is a composer, so it is ineligible for BLPPROD. ~ GB fan 18:54, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Oh OK thanks. Never knew that. I'll watch for the future — Iadmc♫^talk  19:23, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to climate change, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 20:43, 20 June 2024 (UTC)