Jump to content

User talk:Kosboot: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 807: Line 807:
</div></div>
</div></div>
<!-- Message sent by User:LivingBot@enwiki using the list at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Tools/Spamlist&oldid=643199373 -->
<!-- Message sent by User:LivingBot@enwiki using the list at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Tools/Spamlist&oldid=643199373 -->

== Yakov Kreizberg page ==

Hello kosboot: yes, I do understand that you wrote most of the Yakov Kreizberg Wikipedia page. I instantly deduced that from the degree of your presence on the historical list of editors. As well, your citation of your own blog entry from the New York Public Library as a reference (which, BTW, is not acceptable citation practice on Wikipedia, as that is a conflict of interest, but I digress) also pretty much gives away the game, where you note that you and he were classmates and best friends. But putting that aside for now, I can only conclude from your reversion of my edits that, to put it rather bluntly, you did not notice a single detail in the edits that I made. Let me point out some examples, where my edits improved on information in the article, either by corrections of facts, or clarity of presentation:

1. Kreizberg's LA Philharmonic debut was in 1993, not 2000. The Bernheimer review from the LA Times that I found, with link, proves it. Is there something wrong with this?</br>
2. Chicago Tribune was misspelt Chicago "Tribute". I also found a link to von Rhein's review as well. Is it harmful to correct the newspaper's spelling and add the link?</br>
3. I found the closing year for Kreizberg's tenure as principal guest conductor of the Vienna Symphony, from that Vienna Symphony reference, as the closing year was missing in the earlier version. Is adding this closing year objectionable?</br>
4. For many of your citations from the New York Times, I found the links to the on-line versions of those articles. Adding those links makes those citations more accessible to people than simply citing a page number in a hard-copy version, which most locations will not have access to in any case. Is adding these links a bad thing to do?</br>
5. I tracked down other (many other) legitimate, 3rd party citations on such matters as his award from the Austrian government. What is the harm in adding new, valid references and links?</br>
6. My reformatting of many of the references that you put in puts those references in the current, preferred reference presentation format for Wikipedia articles. What is objectionable about that?</br>
7. Several of those references had broken links. The link to the Thomas Valone citation, for example, no longer works. Likewise, two of the Gramophone citations are broken. But I was able to find a link for the Richard Wigmore review of the Mozart album, and revised that reference to include that link.</br>
8. References like the Naxos or Classics Online pages, or blog entries, in general are not acceptable as references on Wikipedia, especially commercial sites like the Naxos page. They are acceptable as external links, but in general, references must be objective, 3rd party sources that have no vested interest in a given subject.</br>
9. I added to the succession box information about his Krefeld tenure, with predecessor and successor. It was not there before. Was this addition a problem?</br>
10. Other references had URL's that were still active, but the actual URL's had changed. The RM Campbell article from the Seattle Post-Intelligencer is one instance, where, by the way, I clarified the parent source there as well. What is objectionable to updating old URL's?</br>

There are many more examples, but these will suffice for now. My point is that I made none of my edits out of malice aforethought, or any ill will. I saw that information gaps existed and needed to be filled in this article.

So I pose this general question to you. With respect to references or actual, verifiable facts, what in my edit was inaccurate, inappropriate, or objectionable? In other words:

a. What was wrong with the new references, or my reformatting of older references?</br>
b. What was incorrect with new information that I added, such as the simple addition of his middle name, Mayevich, which is his brother's middle name? On a more complicated level, the addition of the details about just how Kreizberg and his mother were able to emigrate helped to clarify that aspect of the story. I found that fascinating, as I did not know about that until I read the Independent obit by Martin Anderson. What was so objectionable about including such material?</br>
c. Are any of the new references that I added invalid? If so, what makes them invalid?</br>

I understand completely that you put in a great deal of effort into this page. Kreizberg was your classmate and a great friend, and he died much, much too young. That was a terrible thing to happen, and who wouldn't sympathise? It is clear that you have a great deal of emotional investment in his page, which is completely understandable. However, there is a standard 'boilerplate' passage on Wikipedia that goes as follows:

<blockquote>"....if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible."</blockquote>

I have no such emotional investment or close connection to Kreizberg. I have seen him conduct, but that's it. The fact that I have no close connection or emotional investment in him makes me the more objective writer of the two of us, with all due respect. Not necessarily "better", just more objective. But you do have this close affiliation, and that is undoubtedly a factor here.

I acknowledge that you have put a great deal of your time and work into this page. So have I, albeit in a more concentrated time frame. I did much web searching to track down good, solid on-line sources for all the edits that I made. I care about accurate facts and citations. I have no personal interest or axe to grind, except in the general academic sense of proper citations, objective tone, and well-presented narrative.

I would ask of you a thought experiment: please go back and look through my edit carefully, to see the changes that I made in detail. Put my version and yours side by side, and note the differences, again in fine detail, which of course is very easily done by one simple click. I went through the article very, very carefully, literally line by line, in the version prior to my changes. My edits were very carefully placed and designed to improve the article, in the terms of which I spoke earlier: proper citations, objective tone, and clarification of the narrative.

The article remains as it is currently, because that will lead to unconstructive edit wars which would serve no purpose. This leads to the other aspect of the situation, regarding puffery, which is a subject for another day. Suffice it to say that I can very easily prove, paragraph by paragraph and section by section, that what I removed from the earlier version was indeed puffery/peacock text, although again, that can be for another day. But just to note some small technical points on the presentation on a different level:

(a) You quoted the long panegyric about Kreizberg's conducting technique, which begins "He has since been consistently praised....", twice, almost identically. Why repeat it? There is no need for such a long passage to occur twice.</br>
(b) I moved the details that were in the "Personal" section in the prior version to earlier in the article, about his family ancestry, because those belong at the beginning and not halfway through. As well, from the new citations, I added nothing to my new edit that was compromising or personally offensive.</br>
(c) In general, I tried to linearise the narrative to prevent a sense of jumping around between different years not in sequential order. Why is that so objectionable?</br>

I can elaborate in much detail much further, but to be honest, viewing the different versions side-by-side will do that task for me. None of my changes show any disrespect or speak ill of Kreizberg in any way, and: '''much of the overall content and form that you had put in remains'''. I again realise that because of your close connection to Kreizberg, it's quite understandable if you might feel that this edit is somehow personal, perhaps even an affront. Given the work that both of us have invested in this article, it is perhaps not the easiest thing all around to remain detached in this situation, although I surmise that it perhaps is easier for me. I can only assure you as a honest wikipedian that the edit is not personal at all, nor is it an affront in any way, if that means anything. I even made some edits to my first edit after reading comments from you on the talk page. Perhaps down the line, we could take "the best of both worlds" and meet somewhere in the middle.

As I said, I read through the article with very great care before I made my changes. IMHO, it's quite reasonable to ask that the same respect be granted for myself. I don't think that this is asking too much. Cheers, [[User:DJRafe|DJRafe]] ([[User talk:DJRafe|talk]]) 06:16, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Revision as of 06:16, 26 January 2015

Please add new comments at the bottom of the page, otherwise I can't locate them.

Kudos and insertion arias

Hello, I checked to see who had done such a nice job improving "Schleifer" and it was you. This led me to spot your notes on insertion arias, which suggest a really interesting article once you are done. A possible nugget you might enjoy for this purpose is the history of Luigia Polzelli, the mediocre soprano who was the cause of Haydn's composing several insertion arias. Happy editing, Opus33 (talk) 17:47, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks! I'm not done with Schleifer yes, and I've only begun "Interpolated/insertion" (name to be decided), not to mention I'm still working on Ziegfeld Follies of 1919, and, and.... :) -- kosboot (talk) 19:03, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Schleifer, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jean Rousseau (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:09, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Help with source?

Hi Kosboot! I'm trying to help someone over at WP:ASTRONOMY. They're looking for an obituary of Priscilla Fairfield Bok which was published in: Sky & Telescope, vol. 51, p. 25 (1976). I've tried the databases I can access from home, but without luck. :-( Is that accessible through the digital database on-site in your library system? The record for the online database isn't clear about how many years it goes back. If all else fails, I'll stop at the library and copy it from microfiche. Thanks in advance for any help! Cheers, AstroCog (talk) 02:52, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I should be able to get it at work tomorrow - will let you know! -- kosboot (talk) 03:54, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh well - the material online is only from 1993 on, so I guess one would need to go to the originals or microfilm. -- kosboot (talk) 14:15, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for looking anyway! Cheers, AstroCog (talk) 15:00, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ruddigore

Good luck, and have fun! -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:41, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! -- kosboot (talk) 15:43, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Leading-tone Triad

I was asked not to at User_talk:Devin.chaloux#Leading-tone_Triad. Hyacinth (talk) 00:08, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Read that section again; my suggestion of reverting was endorsed. -- kosboot (talk) 00:42, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not comment on other users language skills. Comment on the content, not the contributor. Hyacinth (talk) 01:24, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
When others ignore what is said, it's valid to question their language skills. -- 02:21, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

You're invited to Wiki-Gangs of New York @ NYPL on April 21!

Wiki-Gangs of New York: April 21 at the New York Public Library
Join us for an an civic edit-a-thon, Wikipedia meet-up and instructional workshop that will be held this weekend on Saturday, April 21, at the New York Public Library Main Branch.
  • Venue: Stephen A. Schwarzman Building (NYPL Main Branch), Margaret Liebman Berger Forum (Room 227).
  • Directions: Fifth Avenue at 42nd Street.
  • Time: 11 a.m. - 5 p.m. (drop-ins welcome at any time)

The event's goal will be to improve Wikipedia articles and content related to the neighborhoods and history of New York City - No special wiki knowledge is required!

Also, please RSVP!--Pharos (talk) 19:43, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited New York Public Library for the Performing Arts, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Edmund Morris (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:02, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Loves Libraries at Wikimania

Hi I noticed that you signed up for attendance at the WLL event at Wikimania. It'd be great if you could fill out this doodle to help use schedule when exactly the event will be. Maximiliankleinoclc (talk) 16:59, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - not only did I sign up already - I'm supposed to give one of the talks at the GLAM session. Gotta figure out what to say. -- kosboot (talk) 18:37, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia New York City Annual Meeting Sat Jun 30

Join us at Jefferson Market Library on Saturday starting at 1pm for our annual meeting and elections, details at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC!--Pharos (talk) 17:31, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Minetta Creek

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 16:03, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Minetta Creek, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Sewer and Riverbed (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:03, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimania

Yeah, it's a pity - the post came up too late to get funding sorted, and I'd already decided I coudln't afford to go this year on my own account. On the plus side, I'm getting a lot done this week ;-)

Please do spread the word about the project to anyone you meet who might be interested - it's settling down a bit now, but it would be good to get more feedback before it closes. Andrew Gray (talk) 12:34, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Drexel Collection

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:03, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Seeking Diagram Sketch from Wikimania 2012 Grand Ballroom

Great meeting you in person at Wikimania. At the NYC table, there was a diagram on the tablecloth. Can you help me understand what it described? Thanks. 96.239.227.123 (talk) 10:27, 27 July 2012 (UTC) Please reply via:[reply]

Hello, Kosboot. You have new messages at DutchTreat's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Citation Source

Talkback at outreach:User talk:Maximilianklein#Use of Wikipedia in Academia

Your DYK nomination for Drexel 4257

Congratulations on an impressive article. You have nominated a hook for DYK, and I have raised some minor issues. Your citing is also very good, but I notice there are a number of duplicated references. There are ways of avoiding this. Some editors use <ref name=xxx>citation</ref> on the first occasion, and <ref name=xxx/> thereafter. More recently I have used Template:Sfn, which takes a bit of learning, but it is elegant, and it automatically combines any duplicate references. If you would like to see a simple example of how this works, have a look at F. X. Velarde. Good luck.--Peter I. Vardy (talk) 14:18, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks. This Sfn templates is exactly what I've been looking for (and I've been too lazy to use the other "rp" technique). I'll try to learn it and fix what's in the article (also standardizing my inconsistent use of British/English. -- kosboot (talk) 14:24, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the note about this - it's a very impressive article, and my congratulations on it! I think the BL copy is probably Add MS 32339 - "SONGS set to music by John Gamble; the words attributed to Thomas Stanley. Paper; ff. 57. Late XVIIIth cent. The name, of Elizabeth St. John is scribbled on the fly-leaf. Belonged to Bishop Percy." This doesn't mention Rimbault, but two others (Add MS 24889 and 53723) are definitely from his collection.
I'm not sure if 32339 is likely to be suitable for an article - it's a lot shorter and there doesn't seem to have been much scholarly work on it - but as a companion volume, perhaps it'd be appropriate for a section on the main work? By strange coincidence, I have two images of Add MS 32339 on my desktop at the moment - I spent this afternoon preparing an upload of various music MS images, which should be up in the next couple of days! Andrew Gray (talk) 22:10, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a bunch! I think of it as "Wikipedia uniting collections that once belonged together." So any additions/emendations you care to make are welcome. I'll check my sources to see if they specifically mention which BL manuscript(s) are the allied ones. Thanks! -- kosboot (talk) 22:18, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Lo and behold - commons:Category:John Gamble. The RISM catalogue entry for this MS (which is more detailed than the BL one) is here. This is a very long way from being my field, but hopefully there's enough there to confirm if this is the MS in question or not. :-) Andrew Gray (talk) 23:48, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Drexel 4257

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 16:03, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Editor's Barnstar
For your superb efforts in writing Drexel 4257 which surely has FA potential. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:54, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Heinrich Schenker, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cotta (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:59, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Your free 1-year Questia online library account is approved ready

Good news! You are approved for access to 77,000 full-text books and 4 million journal, magazine, newspaper articles, and encyclopedia entries. Check your Wikipedia email!

  1. Go to https://www.questia.com/specialoffer
  2. Input your unique Offer ID and Promotional code. Click Continue. (Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive).
  3. Create your account by entering the requested information. (This is private and no one from Wikipedia will see it).
  4. You'll then see the welcome page with your Login ID. (The account is now active for 1 year).

If you need help, please first ask Ocaasi at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com and, second, email QuestiaHelp@cengage.com along with your Offer ID and Promotional Code (subject: Wikipedia).

  • A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a Questia article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free Questia pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:Questia/Citations.
  • Questia would love to hear feedback at WP:Questia/Experiences
  • Show off your Questia access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/Questia_userbox}} on your userpage
  • When the 1-year period is up, check the applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi EdwardsBot (talk) 05:08, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]


File permission problem with File:Wikipedia Goes To The Movies.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Wikipedia Goes To The Movies.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:53, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, Boy! (musical)

Hi! I think this text file at the NYPL should have a copyright notice at the top. You'll see that the creators licensed the library to display it and make it available for research but retained all other rights. -- Ssilvers (talk) 00:55, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll ask about it - thanks! -- kosboot (talk) 02:01, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Goes to the Movies in NYC this Saturday Dec 1

Wikipedia Goes to the Movies in NYC

You are invited to Wikipedia Goes to the Movies in NYC, an editathon, Wikipedia meet-up and workshops focused on film and the performing arts that will be held on Saturday, December 1, 2012, at the New York Public Library for the Performing Arts (at Lincoln Center), as part of the Wikipedia Loves Libraries events being held across the USA.

All are welcome, sign up on the wiki and at meetup.com!--Pharos (talk) 07:23, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Real Life Barnstar

The Real Life Barnstar
I award you this Real Life barnstar for helping to organize and manage Wikipedia Goes to the Movies on December 1, 2012, and for your librarianship. AstroCog (talk) 13:52, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for David Chan (violinist)

Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Precious

music library
Thank you for quality articles on music, such as David Chan and New York Public Library for the Performing Arts, and for adding your professional knowledge to the discussions of the music projects, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:45, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse invite for IP editor

Sent! Thanks for pinging me, Kosboot. HostBot actually only sends invites to newly registered editors who meet certain criteria, but I posted a standard Teahouse invite on the IP's talkpage. You should also feel free to use these invites anytime you find someone who could use a little direction. Cheers! - J-Mo Talk to Me Email Me 20:35, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Wikipedia Day Celebration and Mini-Conference in NYC Saturday Feb 23

Doing the "Open Space" thing at one of our earlier NYC Wiki-Conferences.

You are invited to celebrate Wikipedia Day and the 12th anniversary (!) of the founding of the site at Wikipedia Day NYC on Saturday February 23, 2013 at New York University; sign up for Wikipedia Day NYC here, or at bit.ly/wikidaynyu. Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues!

We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience!--Pharos (talk) 02:27, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tour of Consumer Reports' laboratories

Wow! Laboratory tour!

On Tuesday January 15 at 3pm Wikipedians are invited to join a tour of laboratories at Consumer Reports in Yonkers. If you would like to attend please RSVP at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/January 2013. If you have questions feel free to ask on that page or contact me on my talk page or by my office phone at 914.378.2684. Thank you. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:39, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]


DYK for Drexel 4041

The DYK project (nominate) 09:47, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

The King and I is at FAC

Hi, Kosboot. I hope you're doing well! The King and I has been nominated for FAC. It would be great if you could take a look at the article and give comments at the FAC. Thanks for any time you could spare! -- Ssilvers (talk) 00:21, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion on the AFT5 Request for Comment

Hey Kosboot - this is to notify you that there is a discussion starting on the Article Feedback RfC talkpage that has ramifications for the RfC itself. Your input is much appreciated :). Thanks! and apologies if I've missed anyone Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 16:43, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]


GA review of Minetta Creek

Hi. I notice that there has been no activity on Minetta Creek since 10 February, and wondered if you were still interested in getting it to GA. Regards. Bob1960evens (talk) 18:55, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am - just haven't had the time and was sick all last week, and I have an important deadline on Monday. But I plan to start resuming work on it by Tuesday March 5 - is that ok? -- kosboot (talk) 19:27, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes that's fine. I'll keep it on hold. Bob1960evens (talk) 21:55, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your patience! :) -- kosboot (talk) 22:27, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I have failed the GA review, as it has been on hold for two months and the suggested time limit is seven days. As mentioned at the bottom of the review, if you can get the issues sorted, then renominate it, and if you want me to conduct the second review, drop me a note and I will be happy to do so. Regards. Bob1960evens (talk) 23:03, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at WikiProject Opera

I'm writing to members of WikiProject Opera who have been active on the talk page over the last year. We currently have a proposal to add infoboxes about individual operas to their articles. As this would involve a fairly major change from our current practice, and lead to a potentially lengthy transition, it would be helpful to hear the views from as many project members as possible. The discussion is at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Opera#Opera infoboxes. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 09:04, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Meetup NYC this Sunday April 14

Hi Kosboot! You're invited to our next meeting for Wikipedia Meetup NYC on Sunday April 14 -this weekend- at Symposium Greek Restaurant @ 544 W 113th St (in the back room), on the Upper West Side in the Columbia University area.

Please sign up, and add your ideas to the agenda for Sunday. Thanks!

Delivered on behalf of User:Pharos, 18:11, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Libraries!

Hi! Yes, I'm excited to work on this. I replied on my talk. best, -- phoebe / (talk to me) 21:59, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, You signed up to participate or view in this month's GLAMout. We'll be using Google Hangout, but unfortunately the link to the Hangout won't be available, until 15 minutes beforehand. We'll post the link as soon as possible at Wikipedia:GLAM/GLAMout#Link

Time: 12pm-1pm Pacific Time (3pm-4pm ET | 19-20h UTC) Coordinator: Merrilee Proffitt, OCLC Anchor topic: VIAFbot and authority control in EN:WP, and on Wikidata.


South Pacific (musical)

Please comment on our PR for this important musical at the PR page, here. We are on the way to FAC -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:34, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Libraries

Replied on my talk. I'm working on cleaning up the outreach pages... am thinking that can be the multilingual/global portal/collection of past resources. -- phoebe / (talk to me) 04:12, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Opera Project stuff

Hi Kosboot, I'm writing to members who participated in the March 2013 discussions about the possibility of developing an opera infobox. We now have a reasonably stable and usable box with examples of how it would look in articles at Template:Infobox opera and a new discussion re its potential addition to the project's Article Guide as an option for opera articles. The discussion is at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Opera#Opera Infobox update. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 08:00, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comment there, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:27, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

E-mails

Hi, Kosboot. I've sent you a couple of e-mails. Would you kindly respond one way or another? All the best! -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:44, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Takes Brooklyn! Saturday September 7

Brookln Public Library
 Please join Wikipedia Takes Brooklyn scavenger hunt on September 7, 2013!
Everyone gather at the Brooklyn Public Library to further Wikipedia's coverage of—
photos and articles related to Brooklyn, its neighborhoods and the local landmarks.
--EdwardsBot (talk)

Article Feedback Tool update

Hey Kosboot. I'm contacting you because you're involved in the Article Feedback Tool in some way, either as a previous newsletter recipient or as an active user of the system. As you might have heard, a user recently anonymously disabled the feedback tool on 2,000 pages. We were unable to track or prevent this due to the lack of logging feature in AFT5. We're deeply sorry for this, as we know that quite a few users found the software very useful, and were using it on their articles.

We've now re-released the software, with the addition of a logging feature and restrictions on the ability to disable. Obviously, we're not going to automatically re-enable it on each article—we don't want to create a situation where it was enabled by users who have now moved on, and feedback would sit there unattended—but if you're interested in enabling it for your articles, it's pretty simple to do. Just go to the article you want to enable it on, click the "request feedback" link in the toolbox in the sidebar, and AFT5 will be enabled for that article.

Again, we're very sorry about this issue; hopefully it'll be smooth sailing after this :). If you have any questions, just drop them at the talkpage. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) 22:01, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Inno delle nazioni

The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 3 September 2013 (UTC)


Howard brothers

If you could get to it right away, we can get it on DYK. -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:06, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is a lot of disagreement among the sources about exactly what the brothers did up to about 1904. When you look into this, see if you can comb it out. Right now, in the article, I have chosen the facts given by what seem to me to be the most persuasive sources, but if you look deeper, you may be able to give the early years more certainty. For example, which amateur nights did they compete in? What professional performing, if any, did they do between 1897 and 1900? -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:44, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Great job expanding the article. Is the clipping that you refer to from a newspaper or a magazine? Let's specify. Also, there are a few places where you added a cite to a newspaper article, without a page number. I've tagged those. Can you take another look and see if you can find a page number for them? If there is no page number available, just remove my "page needed" tag. Thanks! -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:31, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks - they're all newspaper clippings. In many cases there were no page numbers apparent. I did the easy part. There were lots of articles that had discussed their kind of comedy and had selections from their comedy routines, but that's going to take longer. Eventually the part about Willie is going to be much longer since he had the longer and more prominent career. -- kosboot (talk) 15:49, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Is there an online archive for the New York Herald Tribune that might help you find the page numbers, and also give urls? -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:05, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nope - the NY Times owns the Herald Tribune but I think they are deliberately withholding making that archive accessible online. I could go to check microfilm but that's a lot of time that I don't have. -- kosboot (talk) 16:09, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Yeah, unless this eventually goes to FAC, going into the microfilm would be beyond the call of duty!  :-) Happy editing! -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:12, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia NYC Meetup! Saturday October 5

Jefferson Market Public Library
 Please join the Wikimedia NYC Meetup on October 5, 2013!
Everyone gather at Jefferson Market Library to further Wikipedia's local outreach
for education, museums, libraries and planning WikiConference USA.
--Pharos (talk) 22:03, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You know who

Yes. We would need Dr. Emma Sculate (formerly of TIT, the Texas Institute of Theory, http://web.archive.org/web/19990127234125/ccwf.cc.utexas.edu/~bogo/tit/home.html) to solve the case, but I think she retired quite some time ago. -- Hucbald.SaintAmand (talk) 08:21, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Ways to improve Julia Gerity

Hi, I'm Sulfurboy. Kosboot, thanks for creating Julia Gerity!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. orphan tag. otherwise great article. thanks.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Sulfurboy (talk) 04:00, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Pluggers" vs. "demonstrators"

I believe these are different things, that song pluggers went around to publishers, while song demonstrators worked in department stores, singing songs to encourage people to buy the sheet music. If I'm incorrect, do you have a source saying so? Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:21, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No I don't have a source specifically defining the difference, although I've never heard of people going around to different places in order to plug a song. -- kosboot (talk) 20:57, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, let me see if I can find anything. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:05, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Julia Gerity

The DYK project (nominate) 16:03, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

E-mail

Hi, Kosboot. Please check your e-mail. -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:25, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia NYC Meetup- "Queens Open History Edit-a-Thon" at Queens Library! Friday December 6

Queens Library
 Please join Queens Open History Edit-a-Thon on December 6, 2013!
Everyone gather at Queens Library to further Wikipedia's local outreach
for borough articles on the history and the communities.
Drop-ins welcome 10am-7pm!--Pharos (talk) ~~~~~


The Wikipedia Library Survey

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi t | c 15:59, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Kosboot. You have new messages at Template:Did you know nominations/Dorle Soria.
Message added 12:38, 22 December 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Matty.007 12:38, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Precious again

music library
Thank you for quality articles on music, such as David Chan and New York Public Library for the Performing Arts, and for adding your professional knowledge to the discussions of the music projects, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:45, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A year ago, you were the 344th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize. Thank you for precious help during the last year, looking forward to more music, some today! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:27, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Two years ago, you were the 344th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:54, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Gerda!! kosboot (talk) 11:50, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Dorle Soria

Harrias talk 12:04, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nice to see her, thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:12, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kat Walsh

I made a small request to you at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kat Walsh Smallbones(smalltalk) 20:12, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Saturday: NYC Art And Feminism Wikipedia Editathon

Jefferson Market Public Library
 Please join Wikipedia "Art and Feminism Editathon" @ Eyebeam on Saturday February 1, 2014,
an event aimed at collaboratively expanding Wikipedia articles covering Art and Feminism, and the biographies of women artists!

There are also regional events that day in Brooklyn, Westchester County, and the Hudson Valley.
--Pharos (talk)


WP Countering Systemic Bias in the Signpost

Comment below is reposted. Djembayz (talk) 22:58, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Countering Systemic Bias for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. –Mabeenot (talk) 00:52, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This Month in GLAM: January 2014



Headlines
  • France report: Public Domain Day; photographs
  • Germany report: WMDE-GLAM-Highlights in 2014
  • Netherlands report: New Years Reception; 550 years States General; Content donation University Museum; Wikipedians in Residence; OpenGLAM Benchmark Survey
  • Sweden report: Digitization; list creation
  • Switzerland report: The Wikipedians in Residence of the Swiss National Library have started their work
  • UK report: Voices from the BBC Archives plus Zoos, coins and Poets
  • USA report: GLAM-Wiki activities in the USA
  • Open Access report: Open Access Media Importer; Open Access File of the Day
  • Calendar: February's GLAM events
Read this edition in full • Single-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Subscribe/Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 02:39, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Incomplete lists

You mentioned List of compositions for piano duo, I met today String sextet repertoire, - I guess such lists have some value even knowing they will never be "complete". They might be more useful if sortable. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:54, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gerda! Did you see the one reference? It was to IMSLP - meaning only scores that they have (silly reference). I don't see the value in such lists - users would be better told to go to a comprehensive library - and even there you can't be sure you have all the works of a particular medium. People spend months/years writing books attempting to include all the works of a medium. I think it's silly to do it on WP unless one really tries to make it "almost" complete. -- kosboot (talk) 00:00, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Upcoming Saturday events - March 1: Harlem History Editathon and March 8: NYU Law Editathon

Upcoming Saturday events - March 1: Harlem History Editathon and March 8: NYU Law Editathon

You are invited to join upcoming Wikipedia "Editathons", where both experienced and new Wikipedia editors will collaboratively improve articles on a selected theme, on the following two Saturdays in March:

I hope to see you there! Pharos (talk)

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by removing your name from this list.)


Konzentrationslager

While I am well aware of their extermination functions, both Auschwitz and Majdanek were Konzentrationslager in title as well as also functioning in that capacity. Is there something in the context of that film that requires the term "death camp", for example does it focus only on victims being gassed?Hoops gza (talk) 21:24, 7 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen the film many times and even did a shot-by-shot analysis and even have a copy of the musical score. What I'm saying that today, in 2014, Wikipedia is making a very clear distinction between Nazi concentration camps and Extermination camp. If you read the article on concentration camps, it's about political prisoners--that's not what the film is about. It mentions political prisoners, but all the 1955 footage is from Auschwitz and most of the b/w film footage is also from Auschwitz. -- kosboot (talk) 21:38, 7 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Berge a woman

Is it possible? The first name sounds feminine, with the "ee" at the end, and, looking for a source for the film music thing I found this, which says she was virtually the only woman in the profession of writing silent film music:

  • Rick Altman (2007). Silent Film Sound. Columbia University Press. pp. 356–. ISBN 978-0-231-11663-3.

That might make interesting material to expand the article a teensy bit, but it's essential to figure out whether Berge was a man or a woman. Here's another source suggesting woman:

— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 16:22, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, when I first started working on the person I assumed it was a woman. But that he was married and that many of the little notices I found specifically mentioned "him" I think it's unquestionably a man. -- kosboot (talk) 16:35, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
BTW, thanks for that Sanderson reference - I will incorporate that. -- kosboot (talk) 16:38, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I see. I misread the Sanderson thing. The "she" there refers to Sanderson, not Berge. And Altman just has it wrong, clearly.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 16:55, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
OK, it'll be good to go as soon as you can add an inline citation for the film music thing.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 17:33, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Argh - I'm editing right now and just lost a passage due to an edit conflict. -- kosboot (talk) 17:38, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Finally made it! Congratulations!— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 22:35, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And thank you so much for your help & assistance! -- kosboot (talk) 22:47, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


DYK nomination of Irénée Berge

Hello! Your submission of Irénée Berge 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! — Maile (talk) 12:19, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Irénée Berge

Orlady (talk) 08:57, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Thinking about coming back

How's it going? I've been thinking about coming back over the summer, but I need to know how the environment is around the WP:MTH is. Do you know perchance? I'm mostly concerned about our "friend." Do you know how we can recreate the watchlist for the project too? It seems to be broken now, but I am not good with these things...— Devin.chaloux (chat) 03:13, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

April 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to The Witch 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:
  • away", text by Middleton, music attributed to [[Robert Johnson (English composer)|Robert Johnson)]] as it appears in [[Drexel 4175]]]]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:01, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Drexel 4175

Hello! Your submission of Drexel 4175 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! Gamaliel (talk) 23:25, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

kosboot, it's been over two weeks since Gamaliel pinged you, confirming that you do need to do a quid pro quo (QPQ) review for this nomination if you wish it to be promoted to the main page. You will need to do one soon, and keep us apprised of your progress on this nomination's template. Please let us hear from you. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:27, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I know I need to study up on what to do. I'll try to learn tonight. -- kosboot (talk) 00:54, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@BlueMoonset:After going through the documentation I realized it's a bit too much for me to take on at this time. Can you point me to how I can withdraw the DYK nomination? -- kosboot (talk) 13:11, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
kosboot, I'm sorry to hear that. All you need to do is post that you're withdrawing on the nomination page itself; we'll take care of the rest. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:11, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Drexel 4175 not a GA

I removed the "GA" marking from Talk:Drexel 4175. We have a WikiProject that organizes the evaluation of nominated articles for good article status. Chris Troutman (talk) 14:43, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The editor who reviewed the DYK suggested I submit it for GA status. -- kosboot (talk) 15:08, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, you should. The instructions are at WP:GAN/I. In order to nominate it, add {{subst:GAN|subtopic=music}} to that talk page. A GA reviewer will (in time) start the review and post any comments or recommended changes before acceptance. Please ask if you have any questions about the process. Alternatively, you can always ask a member of WikiProject Classical Music for an individual review for B-class before nomination to GA. Chris Troutman (talk) 15:21, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the instructions. -- kosboot (talk) 15:22, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

E-mails

Hi, I just wondered if you've been receiving my e-mails? -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:54, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

eek - yes - sorry I've not responded. Problem is all my sundays are taken until June! -- kosboot (talk) 16:56, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
A weekday evening, perhaps? -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:22, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

May 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to List of fictional literature featuring opera 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:
  • [[Fortuné du Boisgobey]] || ''Le crime de l'opera'' translated as: ''The Crime of the Opera House'') ||Paris, E. Plon et cie, 1880||
  • |[[René Fülöp-Miller]] || ''Katzenmusik'' translated in English as ''Sing, brat, sing'') ||New York: Holt, 1947 ||First published in German in 1936

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:05, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops

I think I accidentally deleted that category. Wholly unintentional! Sorry about that. OR drohowa (talk) 21:21, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And the List of fictional...etc. Not a problem! -- kosboot (talk) 21:25, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Also with the other List of fictional literature featuring opera! ughh I guess I reverted your edits. Not sure why I would do this. It's possible that my mouse or keyboard is out of whack and has been selecting things. I have noticed some weird page directs just now. Checking it out. I was merely looking at your recent edit history to check out NYPL Performing Arts articles bc Metro is making a little Wiki-book via Pedia Press of articles worked on by Metro members. I'll just send you an email instead. Thanks. OR drohowa (talk) 21:26, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Drexel 4175

Materialscientist (talk) 21:07, 31 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Greg Kohs and WikiConference USA

Dear Kosboot: Is this report accurate: WikiConference USA bans critic from open meeting? If it is accurate do you know if a response from the conference organizers is forthcoming? I won't spend time explaining exactly how upsetting this is and how very bad it looks on its face until the accuracy of the report is confirmed. It looks really bad, though, and I really hope there's a plausible explanation. Note that I'm not asking about the rejection of Kohs's presentation, but only about the allegation that he was barred from an event touted as "open to all participants, regardless of previous level of involvement with Wikipedia or the Wikimedia projects. We welcome the curious, the skeptical, and others wishing to engage in meaningful conversation about the Wikimedia movement in the United States, free culture and digital rights, advocacy and outreach, community building, and technology." I posted the same question on Newyorkbrad's talk page, but he declined to respond substantively. I am also leaving it on the talk pages of the other conference organizers.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 14:45, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

e-flux Article

Hi Bob, I'm wondering if you can take a look at the article User:Morelcasares/e-flux draft 2. User:Morelcasares has asked me to review this article draft, which is written for the eventual article, e-flux. My concern, beyond the biasing language which can be changed is that the article is too long and that some sections like 'publications' are a little too specific and that the length is not proportional to the content. I'm going to be helping this user out today so let me know if you get around to looking at this. Thanks, OR drohowa (talk) 13:52, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sunday July 6: WikNYC Picnic

Sunday July 6: WikNYC Picnic

You are invited to join us the "picnic anyone can edit" in Central Park, as part of the Great American Wiknic celebrations being held across the USA. Remember it's a wiki-picnic, which means potluck.

1pm–8pm at southwest section of the Great Lawn, north of the Delacorte Theater.

Also, before the picnic, you can join in the Wikimedia NYC chapter's annual meeting.

11:30am-12:30pm at Yeoryia Studios, 2067 Broadway.

We hope to see you there!--Pharos (talk) 16:51, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by removing your name from this list.)

A page you started (Susan T. Sommer) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Susan T. Sommer, Kosboot!

Wikipedia editor Animalparty just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Please consider moving or mentioning the most noteworthy/important aspects of Sommers life in the first paragraph to clearly indicate the person's notability.

To reply, leave a comment on Animalparty's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Thanks for coming!

 Thank you, partner!
Thank you for helping out and participating at the RBMS edit-a-thon this weekend. Myself, and Las Vegas' own Vegas Vic hope you come back real soon! Merrilee (talk) 19:49, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sunday August 17: NYC Wiki-Salon and Skill Share

Sunday August 17: NYC Wiki-Salon and Skill Share

You are invited to join the the Wikimedia NYC community for our upcoming wiki-salon and knowledge-sharing workshop on the Upper West Side of Manhattan.

2pm–5pm at Yeoryia Studios at Epic Security Building, 2067 Broadway (5th floor).

Afterwards at 5pm, we'll walk to a social wiki-dinner together at a neighborhood restaurant (to be decided).

We hope to see you there!--Pharos (talk) 15:57, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by removing your name from this list.)


Francis Tregian the Younger

Hello Kosboot, and congratulations for your edits on Francis Tregian the Younger (an article I started as a stub years ago). The new section you introduced ("How Tregian's name became associated with music") is a pleasure to read and wonderfully informative. Thank you very much. Nick Michael (talk) 08:11, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! My intention is to create an article on Drexel 4302 but once I began to work on it, I realized it would be easier to put all that information in the Tregian article. -- kosboot (talk) 10:38, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

September 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Francis Tregian the Younger 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:
  • hypotheses by means of handwriting alone."{{sfn|Smith|2002|p=9}} (This is a [false premise]] since Thompson used handwriting as only one of many elements to her analysis.) Where Thompson

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:25, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Israel Amter 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:
  • of [http://www.nypl.org/research/lpa/lpa.html The New York Public Library for the Performing Arts].)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:56, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 03 September 2014

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Kosboot. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by PrimeHunter (talk) 12:18, 12 September 2014 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

Greetings from Brooklyn College theater history class

Hello Kosboot! My name is Haruki, MFA performing arts management student taking Professor Hughes' Theater History course at Brooklyn College. Thank you for helping us in our project, and I look forward to working with you! Decafespresso (talk) 22:45, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, Defacespresso! I look forward to helping and working with you! -- kosboot (talk) 06:52, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings!

Hi Kosboot,

I am a student in Professor Hughes's Theatre History to 1642 course. Thank you in advance for all the support and advice!

Jcbjaw12 (talk) 00:05, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there Jcbjaw12! I look forward to working and helping you! -- kosboot (talk) 06:51, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Another Brooklyn College Theatre History to 1642 student

Hello Kosboot,

I am a first-year MA candidate for theater history and criticism. Many thanks for helping our class with the Wikipedia project. I appreciate your support!

Marni Mcraab123 (talk) 00:38, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, Mcraab123 - I look forward to helping and working with you! -- kosboot (talk) 06:53, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello from BC Student

Hello! My name is Lindsay and I am a MFA in Amy Hughes History of Theater class this semester. Thank you for helping to guide us through this new wiki world! --Lindsay M. Roberts 23:23, 14 September 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by MissJoyProductions (talk • contribs)

Hi there MissJoyProductions - I look forward to helping and working with you for the class. Generally on Wikipedia, people don't use their real names (unless they chose a username which is their real name). There's an easy way to sign your contributions to dialogues like this: use 4 tilde signs ~~~~. This will produce your signature with the date and time you left it, like this: kosboot (talk) 00:07, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings from another Brooklyn College Student

Hello! I am Julia Sattler and I am in Professor Hughes Theater History Class. Thank you in advance for helping us out this semester. I have a question about the time stamp. Mine does not seem to be syncing up with the correct New York Eastern Time. Is that normal? Do you know how I can change that? Jsattler07 (talk) 15:22, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there Jsattler07! (Generally people refer to others by their username, keeping their real name private if desired.) You can change the timestamp by going into your preferences (one of the selections on the top right of the screen after you've logged in). In Preferences, there should be eight tabs; the second one is "Appearance." Select that one, and the third "box" within that tab should be "Time Offset" where you can set your local time as "America/New York." Then click save at the bottom left of that tab page and you should be ok! -- kosboot (talk) 16:54, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Hello from Brooklyn College

Hi Kosboot. Thank you for helping us out this semester. I have tried my hand at editing an article and I am excited to be a part of this grand project. I have to say, I've been stumped on how to use the Talk Page for days!! Then I remembered to think simple, and remembered the video where the woman said that you always ignore the little EDIT button. Wouldn't you know... Anyway, I look forward to the next few months. Best, OrangeZabbo (talk) 17:48, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia, OrangeZabbo (it's amusing to think of what an orange zabbo would look like). Yes, your talk page--as well as others, such as mine--is how you communicate with other users. Every article has its own talk page--that's where people can discuss the article. In any case, I'm looking forward to working with you and helping out on Wikipedia--not just for the next few months, but hopefully beyond that. :). -- kosboot (talk) 18:45, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again Kosboot. Amy and I were discussing a project I'd like to take on, and she suggested I run it by you. There is a Downtown Theater, Soho Rep., whose Wiki page is severely lacking. I would like to work on improving their page as their past productions and staff are integral to the Downtown Theater scene's evolution over the past 30 years. I can gain access to their archives for some of this information, much can be found at the Performing Arts Library documenting past productions, and of course the NY Times has been reviewing their work and writing articles about their staff for many years. Since 1975 their theater has changed location multiple times, been run by influential Artistic Directors who have moved on to have significant international careers, and most recently (under Sarah Benson) have been produced back-to-back-to-back critically acclaimed and award winning work, making them a pinnacle location for boundary pushing theater in New York City. What do you think? Is this a good idea? Do you think I will have enough legit sources? Thanks for your help. OrangeZabbo (talk) 14:49, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi OrangeZabbo (apologies for not getting back to you sooner!) Actually I think the current article on Soho Rep is a good start (compared to many organizations that have just a few lines). With a 30-year career and extensive coverage in the press, my guess is that the challenge one of curation - going through all the available material to come up with a narrative of the history of the organization, its goals and perhaps any influence it has had (and other notable features of the organization). Note that even though you may have access Soho Rep's archives, Wikipedia requires that any source used must be published or widely available (see WP:SOURCE - especially the note about unpublished sources). Given the plentiful amount of information (almost too plentiful), you might want to limit the scope to just the history or other aspect of the organization that interests you. Let me know what you think. (Note that responses begin with a colon; each successive response adds another colon so that your response should begin with three colons). kosboot (talk) 00:57, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Manuel Klein

Hi, Kosboot. If you want to use American dates and spellings/idioms in the Manuel Klein article, I would support you, but you can't change just one date, you have to change all of them, plus implement American spellings/idioms throughout, plus change the templates at the top to US instead of Br. Let me know if you do this, and I'll check it for you. All the best! -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:11, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Notes to students in THEA 7212X Theater History to 1642 (Fall 2014)

Hi folks - I'll be offline until Sunday morning. If your questions can wait an answer until then, please feel free to post them to this page and I'll respond to you when I get back. kosboot (talk) 21:46, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Citing Foreign Language Sources

Hi Kosboot! Are there any restrictions on citing sources not in English? Because I'm Japanese and I'm planning to edit an article on Noh, I'm thinking it'd be more effective to use Japanese source materials in addition to English. Decafespresso (talk) 16:03, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There are no such restrictions—you can cite sources in any language, although you should probably transcribe it into typical characters. (And bravo for doing Noh which I studied a bit about years ago!) kosboot (talk) 18:29, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much! Could you elaborate on transcribing into typical characters that you mentioned? Do you mean citing titles and names phonetically using English alphabet rather than actual Japanese? Decafespresso (talk) 20:54, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
My knowledge Japanese is not very great, but I do know that there is a standard way of transcribing the characters. Alternatively, what you might want to do is indicate the Japanese name and then follow it with a transcription, like: 邦楽ジャ-ナル, Hōgaku jānaru, Monthly music magazine, hogaku journal, (..rest of citation). Does that help? kosboot (talk) 05:58, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I see what you mean now. Thank you Kosboot! Decafespresso (talk) 17:06, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Kosboot. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by ///EuroCarGT 19:12, 12 October 2014 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

Data on RBMS edit-a-thon 2014

Hi Kosboot, my name is María, I am community liaison of Program Evaluation & Design team at WMF. I reach out to you to ask about the [:en:Wikipedia:RBMS edit-a-thon 2014|RBMS edit-a-thon 2014]]. I would like to know if you are thinking of including the data you gathered from that meet up on the second round of data collection. This voluntary program reporting helps us build an overview of Wikimedia program. Please reach out to me on my talk page or email me at mcruz [at] wikimedia [dot] org so I can tell you more. Thanks! MCruz (WMF) (talk) 21:20, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Bob, I'm with the Program Evaluation & Design team at WMF. I'm following up on Maria's note about program data for the RBMS Editathon. There are still a few bits of missing data we'd like to fill in before Nov 26th. I've posted them over on the event talk page, could you please respond with any data you have, or "Don't know" for the answers you do not have, within the next week? If you have any questions, please do contact me through my talk page or at abittaker at wikimedia dot org. Thanks so much, this really helps our program learning and capacity building for future editathons! --Abittaker (WMF) (talk) 01:40, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thursday December 4: NYC Wiki-Salon and Skill Share

Thursday December 4: NYC Wiki-Salon and Skill Share

You are invited to join the the Wikimedia NYC community for our upcoming wiki-salon and knowledge-sharing workshop in Manhattan's Greenwich Village.

6:30pm–8pm at Babycastles, 137 West 14th Street

Afterwards at 8pm, we'll walk to a social wiki-dinner together at a neighborhood restaurant (to be decided).

We hope to see you there!--Pharos (talk) 07:11, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by removing your name from this list.)

Happy Holidays from London

May you have very Happy Holidays, Kosboot...

and a New Year filled with peace, joy, and beautiful music!

Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 18:19, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your good wishes Voceditenore which I send to you in return! kosboot (talk) 23:47, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The GLAM Directory

Hi Kosboot, thanks for fixing the links to the US pages on the GLAM Directory but the redlinks were deliberate as the directory pages are based on a standardised template. The info about how they work is at the bottom of the page. Don't sweat the misunderstanding :) Cheers! PatHadley (talk) 20:20, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Got it - thanks for the clarification. kosboot (talk) 21:26, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 21 January 2015

Yakov Kreizberg page

Hello kosboot: yes, I do understand that you wrote most of the Yakov Kreizberg Wikipedia page. I instantly deduced that from the degree of your presence on the historical list of editors. As well, your citation of your own blog entry from the New York Public Library as a reference (which, BTW, is not acceptable citation practice on Wikipedia, as that is a conflict of interest, but I digress) also pretty much gives away the game, where you note that you and he were classmates and best friends. But putting that aside for now, I can only conclude from your reversion of my edits that, to put it rather bluntly, you did not notice a single detail in the edits that I made. Let me point out some examples, where my edits improved on information in the article, either by corrections of facts, or clarity of presentation:

1. Kreizberg's LA Philharmonic debut was in 1993, not 2000. The Bernheimer review from the LA Times that I found, with link, proves it. Is there something wrong with this?
2. Chicago Tribune was misspelt Chicago "Tribute". I also found a link to von Rhein's review as well. Is it harmful to correct the newspaper's spelling and add the link?
3. I found the closing year for Kreizberg's tenure as principal guest conductor of the Vienna Symphony, from that Vienna Symphony reference, as the closing year was missing in the earlier version. Is adding this closing year objectionable?
4. For many of your citations from the New York Times, I found the links to the on-line versions of those articles. Adding those links makes those citations more accessible to people than simply citing a page number in a hard-copy version, which most locations will not have access to in any case. Is adding these links a bad thing to do?
5. I tracked down other (many other) legitimate, 3rd party citations on such matters as his award from the Austrian government. What is the harm in adding new, valid references and links?
6. My reformatting of many of the references that you put in puts those references in the current, preferred reference presentation format for Wikipedia articles. What is objectionable about that?
7. Several of those references had broken links. The link to the Thomas Valone citation, for example, no longer works. Likewise, two of the Gramophone citations are broken. But I was able to find a link for the Richard Wigmore review of the Mozart album, and revised that reference to include that link.
8. References like the Naxos or Classics Online pages, or blog entries, in general are not acceptable as references on Wikipedia, especially commercial sites like the Naxos page. They are acceptable as external links, but in general, references must be objective, 3rd party sources that have no vested interest in a given subject.
9. I added to the succession box information about his Krefeld tenure, with predecessor and successor. It was not there before. Was this addition a problem?
10. Other references had URL's that were still active, but the actual URL's had changed. The RM Campbell article from the Seattle Post-Intelligencer is one instance, where, by the way, I clarified the parent source there as well. What is objectionable to updating old URL's?

There are many more examples, but these will suffice for now. My point is that I made none of my edits out of malice aforethought, or any ill will. I saw that information gaps existed and needed to be filled in this article.

So I pose this general question to you. With respect to references or actual, verifiable facts, what in my edit was inaccurate, inappropriate, or objectionable? In other words:

a. What was wrong with the new references, or my reformatting of older references?
b. What was incorrect with new information that I added, such as the simple addition of his middle name, Mayevich, which is his brother's middle name? On a more complicated level, the addition of the details about just how Kreizberg and his mother were able to emigrate helped to clarify that aspect of the story. I found that fascinating, as I did not know about that until I read the Independent obit by Martin Anderson. What was so objectionable about including such material?
c. Are any of the new references that I added invalid? If so, what makes them invalid?

I understand completely that you put in a great deal of effort into this page. Kreizberg was your classmate and a great friend, and he died much, much too young. That was a terrible thing to happen, and who wouldn't sympathise? It is clear that you have a great deal of emotional investment in his page, which is completely understandable. However, there is a standard 'boilerplate' passage on Wikipedia that goes as follows:

"....if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject. All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible."

I have no such emotional investment or close connection to Kreizberg. I have seen him conduct, but that's it. The fact that I have no close connection or emotional investment in him makes me the more objective writer of the two of us, with all due respect. Not necessarily "better", just more objective. But you do have this close affiliation, and that is undoubtedly a factor here.

I acknowledge that you have put a great deal of your time and work into this page. So have I, albeit in a more concentrated time frame. I did much web searching to track down good, solid on-line sources for all the edits that I made. I care about accurate facts and citations. I have no personal interest or axe to grind, except in the general academic sense of proper citations, objective tone, and well-presented narrative.

I would ask of you a thought experiment: please go back and look through my edit carefully, to see the changes that I made in detail. Put my version and yours side by side, and note the differences, again in fine detail, which of course is very easily done by one simple click. I went through the article very, very carefully, literally line by line, in the version prior to my changes. My edits were very carefully placed and designed to improve the article, in the terms of which I spoke earlier: proper citations, objective tone, and clarification of the narrative.

The article remains as it is currently, because that will lead to unconstructive edit wars which would serve no purpose. This leads to the other aspect of the situation, regarding puffery, which is a subject for another day. Suffice it to say that I can very easily prove, paragraph by paragraph and section by section, that what I removed from the earlier version was indeed puffery/peacock text, although again, that can be for another day. But just to note some small technical points on the presentation on a different level:

(a) You quoted the long panegyric about Kreizberg's conducting technique, which begins "He has since been consistently praised....", twice, almost identically. Why repeat it? There is no need for such a long passage to occur twice.
(b) I moved the details that were in the "Personal" section in the prior version to earlier in the article, about his family ancestry, because those belong at the beginning and not halfway through. As well, from the new citations, I added nothing to my new edit that was compromising or personally offensive.
(c) In general, I tried to linearise the narrative to prevent a sense of jumping around between different years not in sequential order. Why is that so objectionable?

I can elaborate in much detail much further, but to be honest, viewing the different versions side-by-side will do that task for me. None of my changes show any disrespect or speak ill of Kreizberg in any way, and: much of the overall content and form that you had put in remains. I again realise that because of your close connection to Kreizberg, it's quite understandable if you might feel that this edit is somehow personal, perhaps even an affront. Given the work that both of us have invested in this article, it is perhaps not the easiest thing all around to remain detached in this situation, although I surmise that it perhaps is easier for me. I can only assure you as a honest wikipedian that the edit is not personal at all, nor is it an affront in any way, if that means anything. I even made some edits to my first edit after reading comments from you on the talk page. Perhaps down the line, we could take "the best of both worlds" and meet somewhere in the middle.

As I said, I read through the article with very great care before I made my changes. IMHO, it's quite reasonable to ask that the same respect be granted for myself. I don't think that this is asking too much. Cheers, DJRafe (talk) 06:16, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Kosboot&oldid=644214223"