Jump to content

User talk:Tim riley: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
G. B. Shaw- mea culpa
Line 50: Line 50:


If anyone with a musical bent who reads this is inclined to look in at [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Composers#Navboxes etc]] and let me have thoughts on the matter, I shall be v. grateful. '''<span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS;">[[User:Tim riley|<span style="color:# 660066">Tim riley</span>]][[User talk:Tim riley|<span style="color:#848484"> talk</span>]]</span>''' 09:59, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
If anyone with a musical bent who reads this is inclined to look in at [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Composers#Navboxes etc]] and let me have thoughts on the matter, I shall be v. grateful. '''<span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS;">[[User:Tim riley|<span style="color:# 660066">Tim riley</span>]][[User talk:Tim riley|<span style="color:#848484"> talk</span>]]</span>''' 09:59, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

==G. B. Shaw/ baronets==
Hi Tim, sorry this piece of information didn't meet with your approval- only reason I put any effort into the matter was because both the articles of Sir Robert Shaw, 1st Baronet and the Shaw Baronets make mention of the link with G. B. S. (no, I didn't add those mentions, in case you're wondering), and without corroboration in HIS article (where a reader might go on to check), I thought the situation seemed quite sloppy. Appreciate views differ and, looking at the article history, you've clearly staked a claim, so fair enough![[Special:Contributions/78.144.76.44|78.144.76.44]] ([[User talk:78.144.76.44|talk]]) 11:58, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Revision as of 11:58, 15 September 2020

Linking to List of compositions by Edward Elgar and others...

Apologies on boldly linking when it does not seem to be standard for composer articles. The reason I'm here rather than the Elgar talk page is because I've been thinking for a while now that quite a few composer articles may benefit from a link such as the proposed one for Elgar, and was wondering your thoughts on the matter. Some examples include the Elgar one, "his 39 operas" in Rossini linked to List of operas by Gioachino Rossini or "Mendelssohn's compositions" in Mendelssohn linked to List of compositions by Felix Mendelssohn. The reason this has come to mind is that after bringing List of operas by Claudio Monteverdi to FL, hopefully Weber next and then expanding out into bigger ones like all of the works of Monteverdi and Beethoven I've noticed that lists like these often seem disconnected from their main article, only receiving a single mention under the music section. Another reason the link may be beneficial is that articles without an infobox do lack such a link in the that an article like Beethoven would have in its infobox, so to make up for that a link in the lead would make sense. (was hesitant to bring up infoboxes at all but I hope you see I'm simply making an observation and not a statement in support or opposition of infoboxes!) Anyways, let me know your thoughts, I would bring it up at Wikipedia:WikiProject Classical music but thought I'd stop here first. Best - Aza24 (talk) 23:49, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A most courteous message – thank you. At first glance I'm not vehemently opposed to the idea, but nor am I persuaded it would be helpful to our readers. To my way of thinking a blue link, taking the reader away from the current page, should be there only if it aids understanding – elucidating a hard word or giving details of a person, place or event etc. I think the findings and advice here are to the point. In short, I wonder how many readers, if any, would click on such a link as you suggest. Others may disagree with me, and it might be an idea to raise the question on the Classical music project talk page (though be warned – I bet you'll get the Every Article Must Have An Info-Box absolutists piling in). Tim riley talk 09:05, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your feedback about Tichborne case

" I don't know what "steampunk" means, but I fear the worst." is the best line I have heard today! Boomcoach (talk) 15:00, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tim, hope you're well. Rather disappointing this article isn't it! † Encyclopædius 16:18, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen better, but I have seen a lot worse. Tim riley talk 10:34, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

With the hopes this comes off in the spirit it's written

I've found a couple files you uploaded in higher resolution, and got them on commons today - the Robinson Crusoé lead and the fly scene from Orphée aux enfers, and was able to document them enough for Commons. If you ever want me to check any uploads you have to see if they're available in larger format, or are suitable for Commons just let me know, aye? I'm quite happy to help. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.4% of all FPs 20:32, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Currently working on Rossini, by the way. Robert Bruce. It's a pastiche half-based on La donna del lago, but it's set around Sterling Castle. And I love Sterling. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.4% of all FPs 20:34, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Adam. You are most kind, as always. I avoid Commons like the plague, having suffered time after time at FAC when Commons pictures I naively assumed were freely usable turned out not to be. As a rule nowadays I upload a local version to avoid such embarrassment, and keep well away from Commons. Tim riley talk 20:39, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No worries! If you ever want help navigating it, though - especially before a FAC - I'd be delighted. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.4% of all FPs 23:13, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of which, have some Rossini! Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.4% of all FPs 23:15, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Please remember when adding a picture to an article (e.g. the Rossini one) that alt text is always wanted for the benefit of users who use screen readers. Tim riley talk 05:23, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ach, of course. Sorry, it's been way too long since I did proper article editing. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.4% of all FPs 16:37, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Good lad! Tim riley talk 16:39, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dame Peggy

An admirable editor has raised a good point here. I have added my two penn'orth, but to anyone kind enough to watch my talk page, your thoughts on the matter would be greatly appreciated. Tim riley talk 21:00, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

Just wanted to thank you for your edits and work on Winifred Lawson!

Javert2113 (Siarad.|¤) 21:59, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, thank you! Most kind. Tim riley talk 09:59, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If anyone with a musical bent who reads this is inclined to look in at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Composers#Navboxes etc and let me have thoughts on the matter, I shall be v. grateful. Tim riley talk 09:59, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

G. B. Shaw/ baronets

Hi Tim, sorry this piece of information didn't meet with your approval- only reason I put any effort into the matter was because both the articles of Sir Robert Shaw, 1st Baronet and the Shaw Baronets make mention of the link with G. B. S. (no, I didn't add those mentions, in case you're wondering), and without corroboration in HIS article (where a reader might go on to check), I thought the situation seemed quite sloppy. Appreciate views differ and, looking at the article history, you've clearly staked a claim, so fair enough!78.144.76.44 (talk) 11:58, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]