User talk:Voceditenore
Be aware that the the user to whom this page belongs may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself.
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6b/Bundesarchiv_B_145_Bild-F001323-0008%2C_Bonn%2C_M%C3%BCnsterschule.jpg/200px-Bundesarchiv_B_145_Bild-F001323-0008%2C_Bonn%2C_M%C3%BCnsterschule.jpg)
“ | Away from my desk until July 21st | ” |
“ | If you leave a message here, I'll answer it here to avoid too much to-ing and fro-ing. So check back later. If I left a message on your talk page, please reply there. I'll watch your page and reply as soon as I can. |
” |
ARCHIVES
Past topics I
Past topics II
Past topics III
Past topics IV
Past Topics V
DYKs etc.
Resolved notices
Good job on writing this! Sadly, it seems that neither student nor professor is taking any notice of what anyone on Wikipedia is telling them. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 08:31, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
- Yup, kudos. I'm mystified by the classes and professors lack of interaction too. --Bfigura (talk) 16:21, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
Hey
Oi, you haven't put your email into your preferences!
Only reason I noticed is that I usually ask this privately, but anyway...fancy a shot at RFA? I would be happy to nominate you. Best, Moreschi (talk) (debate) 22:02, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
- Oi, Moreschi, I've sent you an email so you'll have my address if you ever need it. Thanks for the offer and your confidence. But... admin-ing would take too much time away from what I really enjoy – writing articles, rescuing worthy kittens from being drowned at AfDs, and helping out on the Opera Project. The latter can provide quite enough wiki-drama as it is. ;-). Best, Voceditenore (talk) 08:58, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Plural of Azione teatrale?
Hi. I think we need a category for 'Azione teatrale'. What is the plural? I can't remember if both words have to agree . . . anyway your Italian is much better than mine. --Kleinzach 03:12, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
- Hmmm. In Italian you need to pluralize both, i.e. azioni teatrali. Alternatively, you could call it something like "Azione teatrale compositions". I don't think the category should be created though, unless there is also an article explaining the term and its uses. And there are some anomalies. In the libretto of its original Vienna performance of Gluck's Orfeo ed Euridice, and in the published score of 1763, it's called an azione teatrale, when it for all practical purposes it's an opera. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 07:20, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
- Not sure why I'm getting the Hmm, let alone a triple . . . The term seems legit., according to Oxford, for a form of opera. It appears on a number of articles. Likewise 'festa teatrale'. Sometimes these terms are explained differently in different books, but that's all the more reason to do an article and give examples. Most Anglo opera goers are completely ignorant about genres and we've made some good progress covering this on WP in a way which is more difficult in a traditional enclyclopedia. (By the way I am on record as saying there should be an explanatory article for each of the genre categories.) --Kleinzach 13:51, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
- The "hmmm" was just me thinking aloud about pluralizing foreign terms. Somehow using the straight Italian plural doesn't sound quite right and it's not really a loan word like "adagio" which can take an English plural ending. Perhaps it would better not to pluralize it. I notice the opera seria and opera buffa categories aren't pluralized. The term is legit enough, in the sense that it appears on the original scores and libretti (librettos?) etc. The only possible problem is that some those original sources don't seem to use the term very consistently themselves. And the definition used in Orfeo ed Euridice doesn't hold up either. Not all works originally labelled "azione teatrale" have dancing in them, e.g. Il sogno di Scipione nor are all of them on mythological subjects, e.g. L'isola disabitata. Here's what Grove says:
- "Term coined by Metastasio to denote a species of Serenata that, unlike many works in this genre, contained a definite plot and envisaged some form of simple staging. The 12 works by Metastasio so described begin with Endimione (1721, Naples, set by Sarro) and end with La corona (1765, Vienna, set by Gluck); Mozart’s setting (1772) of his Il sogno di Scipione is one of the last examples of this short-lived subgenre. One of the most celebrated was L’isola disabitata (1752), first performed in Madrid with music by Bonno. Gluck’s Orfeo ed Euridice, to a libretto by Ranieri de’ Calzabigi (1762), was originally described as an azione teatrale."
- Then there's there's overlap (or whatever one calls it) with "festa teatrale". In the article on Le cinesi the distinction is made between them by saying that unlike "feste teatrali", "azioni teatrali" weren't meant for specific court occasions, marriages, etc. But, Il sogno di Scipione was meant for the enthronement of an Archbishop and Ascanio in Alba, was written for the marriage of Archduke Ferdinand of Austria and Maria Beatrice d'Este. Yet both are described as "azione teatrali". For more on the headache, see the first page of this article [1] ;-) Best, Voceditenore (talk) 15:13, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
- Well I think this is all par for the course. I'll start the article and perhaps you'd like to add to it what you have put above. It's all interesting info. Incidentally the genre articles probably all need going over. --Kleinzach 15:38, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
- The "hmmm" was just me thinking aloud about pluralizing foreign terms. Somehow using the straight Italian plural doesn't sound quite right and it's not really a loan word like "adagio" which can take an English plural ending. Perhaps it would better not to pluralize it. I notice the opera seria and opera buffa categories aren't pluralized. The term is legit enough, in the sense that it appears on the original scores and libretti (librettos?) etc. The only possible problem is that some those original sources don't seem to use the term very consistently themselves. And the definition used in Orfeo ed Euridice doesn't hold up either. Not all works originally labelled "azione teatrale" have dancing in them, e.g. Il sogno di Scipione nor are all of them on mythological subjects, e.g. L'isola disabitata. Here's what Grove says:
- Not sure why I'm getting the Hmm, let alone a triple . . . The term seems legit., according to Oxford, for a form of opera. It appears on a number of articles. Likewise 'festa teatrale'. Sometimes these terms are explained differently in different books, but that's all the more reason to do an article and give examples. Most Anglo opera goers are completely ignorant about genres and we've made some good progress covering this on WP in a way which is more difficult in a traditional enclyclopedia. (By the way I am on record as saying there should be an explanatory article for each of the genre categories.) --Kleinzach 13:51, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Hey, thanks! =) Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 23:33, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
- Wow, that is simply fantastic work. I've nominated it for DYK here, with a couple options, but, really, that's GA-quality work if you ask me =) Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 02:09, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Thanks from Longy
Your reputation in Longy's 2008 Future of Classical Music class preceded you even before you made your debut yesterday. I appreciated your welcoming the new contributing students and pointing them in the right directions!Ijmusic (talk) 20:26, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
Thanks also from this Longy student. It was really exciting to see your improvements on the page I created (MLT) and witness the Wikipedia process in action! I'm now starting on my summer project which is editing the Dalcroze page. Incidentally, I recently read a fascinating article in JAMS (2002, vol.55, no.3) about Monteverdi and language for musical theater. The author, Mauro Calcagno, approaches the subject through linguistics. Seeing your interest in opera and linguistics, I wonder if you have ever come across this article.J. Schaeffer (talk) 03:01, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Assistance reviewing Italian source?
Hi. :) There is an article listed at the copyright problems board with which I am in need of assistance I'm hoping you can supply. Pauly & C. - Compagnia Venezia Murano has been tagged under suspicion of being a direct translation of the history section of this website. (See its listing here.) Direct translations are, of course, derivative works and unusable on Wikipedia. I can see enough similarities to suspect that concerns may be justified, but since I don't read Italian I can't really say how close a translation this is. If you have opportunity to weigh in on this, I'd be ever so grateful. :) If not, please let me know so I can track down another active contributor who is proficient in Italian. I also try to keep conversations in one location, so I'll be watching your talk page. Thanks for any assistance you may be able to offer, even if it's just letting me know that you don't have time atm to offer assistance. :D --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:31, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
- Hi, actually I didn't need to do too much examination, since I found the English version of the site.;-) The History section is here and the bit about the mosiacs (Abraham Lincoln etc.) is here. And yes, it's a pretty close copy. If these links don't work, go the home page and at the very bottom under Language selection click on International. By the way, this is a very famous glass company in Italy and internationally. See, for example [2]. Certainly deserving of an article, although obviously not a copy vio one. Note that article's creator is User:Habanerosrl. Habanero Srl. are the Public Relations company for Pauly & C.. Hope this helps. Voceditenore (talk) 17:02, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
- Genius! :D Thank you very much. Very helpful. I'll check the closeness of copying and address the issue with the creator. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 17:06, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
I'm patrolling new pages in an attempt to find articles that are suitable for WP:DYK. Yours is one of the few that is long enough, but it's lacking inline references. Could you take a look at WP:REF and WP:CITET and add them? I'd love to nominate a fact from the article you created, but the rules require inline citations. (If you have no clue how to do them, just put the authors after the relevant sentences and I'll do the technical stuff) Just let me know on my talk page. - Mgm|(talk) 12:41, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
- Hi, I've added some more inline cites. Note that the pre-existing inline citation at the end of the Performance history section clearly states the source and page number for all data in that section. I personally think Wikipedia is completely over the top in this respect. I am an academic and professional writer of textbooks. We never use inline cites to the excess that they are used on Wikipedia, especially when the material is uncontroversial and appears in multiple sources. Ditto the major reference books on opera, e.g. The New Grove Dictionary of Opera or even general ones like the Encyclopedia Britannica, but never mind...;-) Best, Voceditenore (talk) 14:29, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
- I totally agree. I've even seen people tag something with a fact tag even though if they bothered to read the reference at the very end of the paragraph, they'd noticed it was referenced. I little less paranoia would do the place a lot of good -- espcially when it's easily checkable references. - Mgm|(talk) 19:27, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Wonderful, thank you. Interestingly, I had ordered a DVD from House of Opera (I think it was Stravinsky's Oedipus Rex, and, as with many of their DVDs, it had other operas on it as well, which I hadn't paid for, but which are on it anyway. It was Cyrano de Bergerac, I think, by Paul Danblon. I hadn't heard of him, looked on WP and didn't find him, and the rest was history. I think the author of A Clockwork Orange was also a polymath/part-time opera composer. :) 24.29.238.60 (talk) 00:16, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
Thank you very much
For your help in getting categories and so on for the tasmanian music articles - appreciated SatuSuro 14:18, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for your kind words. I enjoyed learning about some very interesting works. Voceditenore (talk) 17:00, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Benjamin Britten - a suitable case for deletion?
Hi .. Can you clarify your grounds for removing an external link from the Benjamin Britten article? I've read the external links guidelines and am not sure what grounds you thought were relevent. I believe your edit has sensibly reduced the value of the article -- if a reader is interested in the composer, then they should welcome the chance to experience his operas for themselves.
Please let me know because I think the site linked is a valuable one, and one which could and should be usefully linked from many more places within Wikipedia.
Thanks for any light that you can spread, Scarabocchio (talk) 11:19, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
- Well, on second thought, I decided to restore it and the one for Lorenzo Regazzo. I'll bring this up on the Opera Project. By the way, if you're interested in opera and/or classical music, do check out WikiProject Opera, WikiProject Classical music and WikiProject Composers. New members are always welcome! Best, Voceditenore (talk) 13:15, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the suggestion of bringing up this up on the Opera Project. Adding information on current performances would be a really valuable addition to many pages. For me, opera is about live performance, and the function of the WP texts is to supply context and deepen understanding, and to act as a guide and navigation tool for discovering new works and composers, -- basically bringing people to, and giving them a richer experience of, live opera.
- The Operabase link syntax is straightforward, eg for a composer:
- http://operabase.com/oplist.cgi?lang=xx&by=Benjamin+Britten&sort=T
- and for an opera, eg:
- http://operabase.com/oplist.cgi?lang=xx&is=Peter+Grimes&sort=D
- Scarabocchio (talk) 20:40, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
It was a delight...
...to read this brilliant piece. And I wasn't even looking for it; I came here to thank you for backing me up on the GA issue on Egardus, since that's something that's been bugging me for a while and had to get off my chest. But your essay was spot-on. Oops, there I go again, pretending to be an adult! Need to get a bouncier, animated signature ... Antandrus (talk) 23:02, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
- I'll make you one if you promise to give me three barnstars. ;-) Seriously, though thanks for the kind review. I wrote that when WP was in the midst of an invasion by a particularly... er... time-consuming... bunch of 13 year olds. At one point there was even a WikiProject (now deleted) that was awarding them barnstars for every 1000 edits, every 50 AfD's "voted on", every 5 (hapless) editors they adopted, etc., etc.. For a while, I and a couple of other editors spent all our time running around cleaning up after them, until they lost interest and/or got blocked. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 07:49, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
Pavarotti
Voceditenore, I refer to your recent re-edit on my entry that Pavarotti represents an all-time Great in the history of tenors. I am not quite sure what it is you object to? Perhaps, rather than repeating my position, I would draw your attention to the "talk page" of the Pavarotti article itself. I note your brevity: "correct tense and punctuation. The rest of the sentence is inappropriate and clumsy, but I'm not going to edit war about it" Perhaps I could hear some elaboration on your actual meaning here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.180.229.181 (talk) 05:59, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
- Hi, I've responded on the Pavarotti talk page. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 07:09, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
- Voceditenore, I entered the following post under Pavarotti some days ago.
- As you stated you would probably not be returning I have taken the step of bringing the comment to you: 'If you can't take Mohammad to the mountain ...' and all, you know:
- Voceditenore, again I thank you for your reparation of my unsuccessful attempt at maintaining indentation on here. I managed to get them working the first few paragraphs, but then they stopped responding to the same command. So I don't know how you succeeded ... but thanks.
- I do want to apologize to you and say to you that I am of your mind on this, but I do not know of published references which could back up that statement to which you were alluding: re one of the best of the 20th Century; surely my wording was somewhat loose there. I know the entire sentence needs re-vamping, because all I did was to disturb the original as little as possible ... and you will probably see this if you compare the change with the former. Partly, I have simply left it as is to see if you wished to make some suggestions of your own as to the type of re-wording you envisioned; but I see you haven't touched it.
- Anyway, if you have such a reference as you were speaking of, or some thoughts on the new format of the sentence, I would be interested to hear them. Thank you.
- PS I too, have personally heard him sing. Well, you didn't think I'd miss his voice personally, for all the tea in China! Did you?? :) Kindly,(Denidowi (talk) 00:29, 8 June 2009 (UTC))
- I've responded on the Pavarotti talk page today. Voceditenore (talk) 08:15, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you very much, Voceditenore. Yes, that sentence sounds quite reasonable to me.
- One thing I can say about his singing: he had a head voice virtually incomparable. I believe some of this extraordinary capacity in sound may have been due to the dome breadth and resonance capacity of his skull (which acts as a sound board for the voice). But even here, you have to use that potential physical advantage very skilfully. That he certainly did. I have never heard a tenor use the breadth of vocal texture and control as well as he - from soft, delicate - even heady - notes right through to powerful, rich, raw soaring sonority.
- Voceditenore, it'll probably take me some days, but I'll try to go over your references. I'd like to get rid of the "Days of our Wives" effect in the article also. But I don't know how much luck I'll have - people love their gossip mags too much today ... despite that this is supposed to be encyclopaedic. ;)(Denidowi (talk) 13:52, 10 June 2009 (UTC))
Just wanted to thank you for your work in helping locate the actual source of the article, which will make it easier to clean up just the actual infringement and not the stuff that was mirrored later. This looks like it's going to be a big job. I hate the collateral damage that good articles are going to suffer during the process. :/ --Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:12, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
- Is there a Hercule Poirot barnstar? You deserve it x100. ;-) Actually, now that you've found the NYT obit, I see there was even more copyvio stuff until a later editor removed it (ironically) as POV. And quite naughty of the creator not to at least list the NYT article as a source. Hard to make an argument that it was inadvertant copyvio. I had a look at the long list of articles he/she created. Geesh! What a mess. Voceditenore (talk) 14:31, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
- If I could utilize the accent, I'd be happy to be Poirot. :) If our new version of the ContributionSurveyor program is correct, clean-up on this is not going to be as challenging as it first seemed, since the vast majority of this editor's contributions seem to have been reverting. Keep your fingers crossed! --Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:35, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
Amber Witch
Just wanted to tell you that I really like your work on The Amber Witch. It was my first wiki hence the problems you noted. I didn't think copy and paste from out of copyright sources are a problem since it was from an encyclopedia listed in the References. Wolf2191 (talk) 19:39, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks! Since you're more experienced now, I probably don't need to say this, but just in case...;-) Even if the text is from a public domain source, it should still be attributed. Also, the text pasted from bellaonline was not public domain, and that's a real no-no. The last thing you want is to find yourself here. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 16:17, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
Opera
I'll be honest: I'd like to help, but I don't feel able to deal with all the administrative bullshit on here right now. I'll try to come back for the Purcell push, particularly if someone e-mails me nearer the time of the final push. [[User:Shoemaker's Holiday|]] (talk) 12:45, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
I suspect that the work you did on the Peter Fraize article will wind up saving it from my AfD. Excellent work; you should be proud! — X S G 15:10, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you for the kind words. I see it has now been closed as keep. If at all possible I try to rescue articles about musicians (especially classical ones) from AfD. Having said that, I've argued for deletion in quite a few where they simply aren't "rescue-able", e.g. [3], [4], [5]. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 07:42, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello voced. This http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Hip-Hop_Violinist&redirect=no article was deleted and now redirects. I think it should stand as an article. Miri is so talented! What do you think? 173.79.58.33 (talk) 21:27, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
- Hello there. I'm afraid I don't know her work at all. The only edit I made to the article was to revert vandalism last December. Maybe one of the problems was that there were no references or reviews in reliable sources to establish its notability. There's more about that here. The article isn't really deleted. The redirect can be reversed. Perhaps you should get an opinion from WikiProject Albums. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 05:00, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks a lot. I am dealing with inline citations right now and still struggling to understand how to make it right in order to get rid of the red question box in the middle of this article! My desperate question is: do I need to provide inline citations for every single source listed in my "bibliography/sources" listing, or it is enough to give just a few of them (two-three)? I will continue experimenting with it, and if I fail (almost sure!) I will wait for your return, so many thanks for all! (Dina Azrikan) User:Rozochka (talk) 15:56, 7 July 2009 (UTC))
- Dear Voceditenore, while you are away I continue writing to you as our attempts to learn inline citations are at the high point! I have done some of them and was so happy to see the red question out but I think that I have to take the cited references out of "sources". However, it is only my guess and I will wait for your return, and will follow all your instructions/advices/editing - so many thanks to you (Dina Azrikan) User:Rozochka (talk) 16:57, 8 July 2009 (UTC))
- Hi, I'm not leaving til tomorrow morning. ;-) Don't worry about the duplication for now, and don't take the sources out. When I get back, we can tackle making shortened footnotes. If you want to see what I'm talking about, look at how I did the referencing for Teresa Saporiti or Hjördis Schymberg. Also, if you want to use your real name, you still need to sign with your user name too so that people know how to contact you and there's a record of which user said what. That's why the robot added it. To do that just type ~~~~ (four tildes) at the end of your message. You user name etc. will automatically appear when you click save. More about that here. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 17:46, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
- Hello, so great to hear from you, thanks. I won't take anything out and will wait for your return. I looked at both singers edited by you and recognized the format I read so much about (I printed tons of instructions how to do it, and this "shortened" was among them). Looks great, I would love to have it. Have a safe trip and we will continue upon your return. Dina Azrikan 14:39, 9 July 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rozochka (talk • contribs) Dina Azrikan 14:42, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
- Something did not work for me with "tildes", sorry. I will learn it (Dina Azrikan 14:44, 9 July 2009 (UTC))