User talk:VasilievVV

Chanages in RU wiki

Hey, I wanted to work with you and ask you some questions about RU wiki before we roll out changes to it... would you be able to email me? nimish(at)wikimedia(dot)org Nimish Gautam (talk) 20:07, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ANI Notice

Dear VasilievVV, I just wanted to drop you a kind note and let you know that you forgot to inform an involved editor in the thread that you opened on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Don't worry! It's been taken care of. Just wanted to gently remind you to make sure to do so when and if you open a new ANI thread in the future. Thanks! Basket of Puppies 18:29, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I actually intended to notify him (I was forced to be distracted for several minutes immidiately after I posted ANI thread), but it was done before I got to it. Thanks for notifying me, anyway. vvv^t 18:39, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:G&S

Welcome to the G&S project! I see that you are interested in The Sorcerer. Would you be interested in adding a "critical reception" section? There is a collection of reviews of the show here: http://math.boisestate.edu/GaS/sorcerer/html/index.html (scroll down a bit). For good examples of how to write this, see our best G&S opera articles: H.M.S. Pinafore, Trial by Jury and Thespis (opera). Let me know if you have any questions about the project. Best regards! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ssilvers (talk • contribs)

Great job with the Reception section. All the best! -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:31, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I think you are a good writer. I detect the usual difficulty that native Slavic-language speakers have with "articles" in English, but your prose is very nice, and I enjoy proofreading what you are doing. I do not have time to do research on "The Sorcerer"; I am going away for a week, and then I want to work on "Pirates" and then "Mikado". But, feel free to make progress on The Sorcerer. Ainger is a very good reference. I believe that Googlebooks has the Gervase Huges book on Sullivan, and also the Cellier and Bridgeman book, and these would help you with more analysis. There may be other relevant google books. You ask about a citation for 1971 D'Oyly Carte Tour cast. This will be in one of the supplements to Rollins and Witts, and User:Tim riley can get that for us eventualy. You say that "the cut second incantation scene proves that Wells was not intended as sympathetic character", but I don't really agree. Gilbert imbued his operas with certian grotesqueries, and I think that the frightening and dark aspects of Wells are intended as an operatic parody of Faustian characters. Grossmith was a very charming and silly actor, and I am sure that he aroused a lot of sympathy (at least comic sympathy) from the audience. Lytton, I think, probably took the character more seriously. When I say "ce", I mean "copy edit". It is my way of saying that I made a change intended to improve or clarify something, but sometimes I use it when I am just being lazy. LOL. For a list of my favorite G&S references, see the lists of books at the bottom of Gilbert and Sullivan. All the best! -- Ssilvers (talk) 01:06, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, one more thing. I would appreciate it if you did not make a GA nomination until after we discuss it. All the best. -- Sssilvers

Splitting the references in The Sorcerer

I would appreciate it if you would please undo your change regarding the references. I understand what you did, but I think it makes the notes section too busy and actually adds confusion for the reader. I think it is much better to just have the notes in the order in which they appear in the text. We have 430 articles in the G&S project so far, and I have worked hard for the past four years to give them a consistent format in how the notes and references are laid out. So, I hope you can be sympathetic to this request. Thanks. -- Ssilvers (talk) 01:32, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I took out the Stone (Who's Who) refs for the 1971 touring cast. This was a clever idea, but we should use just one ref to the proper R&W supplement. I e-mailed someone asking for the ref. who I know has all 5 supplements. I'll put it in as soon as I get it. All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:41, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done! -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:42, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image; Williamson

Thanks for the new lead image in The Sorcerer. It's much more attractive than our old one. BTW, Williamson's book is poorly researched and sloppily written, and she makes many mistakes about the history of the shows. However, I agree that it is useful, because it is one of the few books that actually discusses and analyzes the words and music of each show at much length. I imagine that we will need to refer to it. However, if we do not actually refer to it, we can remove the ref. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 01:38, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

G&S Societies

Hi. Yes, they do refer to the Gilbert and Sullivan Society, which is an appreciation society that meets in a small room in London. It has a newsletter and several "branch" societies, such as the Gilbert and Sullivan Society of New York, "... of Manchester", etc. Many of our biography articles also refer to it where the person, usually after retirement, became an officer (pretty much ceremonial) of the Gilbert and Sullivan Society. All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:51, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for fixing the historical cast table formatting. All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:18, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Marc Shepherd has all the supplements and Prestige, but I do not want to bother him until it is time to push each article to GA. There is no rush here. We'll do one at a time every few months or so. I think I'd rather ask Marc to check them one at a time, so he doesn't have to look them all up at once. -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:22, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Marc sent me the cites, and I added them to all the historical casting tables. Take a look and let me know if I made any errors. All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:36, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Links Monitoring

Hello, and thank you for the note regarding adding links to pages. I wonder if you would reconsider the removal of the Yale U G & S collection link. The Sidney Rose Collection of Gilbert and Sullivan contains not only materials such as scores and libretti (which are indeed widely available), but also an unusually extensive collection of ephemera, most of it focusing on performances of G & S in the United States. These performances are documented by posters, programs, production photographs, reviews, and a wide variety of other items. Many of these items—especially those having to do with the more obscure performances—may be difficult or impossible to find elsewhere.

Best Wishes from Tjr36 (talk) 17:42, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Baritones

See my talk page. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:20, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Pending changes/Straw poll on interim usage

Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:52, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorcerer

You wrote: "Theatrical critic Allardyce Nicoll compared Gilbert's satirical techniques used in J. W. Wells' speeches to those used by Henry Fielding". OK, what comparison did he draw? Can you give a sentence summarizing what he said, or a short quote of his key analysis? Thanks! -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:27, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is an interesting comparison. I tried to clarify what is meant, but unless a reader looks at the Google book, I don't think it's possible for them to understand in what way Gilbert is being compared to Fielding. Think about whether you think this really adds to the article. I'll let you decide. All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:50, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I'm very sorry, but I reverted the two changes you made today. I discussed my reasons on the Sorcerer talk page. Feel free to disagree there if you think I have made a mistake. Thanks! -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:13, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Kid

You have decided to join the evil wiki? hehe :) --Stemoc (talk) 10:02, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Careful

Just because an IP removes a large section of an article is no reason to slap a vanadlism warning. My edits were clearly explained in the edit summary. 67.8.72.12 (talk) 07:58, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]