Jump to content

User talk:Voceditenore

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Voceditenore (talk | contribs) at 11:15, 15 March 2014 (→A bowl of sweet strawberries for you!: rep). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Notes to self

  • [[File:SMirC-smile.svg|25 px]]
  • [[File:Nuvola apps important yellow.svg|50 px]]
  • {{PD-art-100}}
  • {{link-interwiki|en=Auguste Vianesi|lang=it|lang_title=Pellegrini - Vianesi}}
  • {{AFC submission|d|v|declinets=yyyymmdd|decliner=name of decliner|ts=20120910121121|u=name of creator|ns=5}}
  • {{WP:Teahouse/Teahouse_talkback|WP:Teahouse/Questions|question title goes here|ts=~~~~}}
  • {{lang|it|}} ISO 639-1

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)[reply]

  • 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)[reply]
See also [1]. Voceditenore (talk) 10:26, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Much appreciation

Hi, Voceditenore. Thanks for the beautiful rewrite on John Andrew Rea. I would prefer not having to delete noteworthy articles, but the current backlog at copyright violations leaves me little time to revise much text. (Especially in Moonriddengirl's absence.) I just wanted you to know that I very much appreciate your contributions. Cheers. — CactusWriter | needles 06:21, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome ;-) and you were absolutely right to delete it. If you have time, could you do me a favour? I've re-written Juliette Pochin on Talk:Juliette Pochin/Temp. Would it possible to move it into article space. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 07:33, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Another nice job -- and better still was your discussion with the original creator on the talk page. "...Teach a man to fish..." etc. You're a good teacher. Cheers. — CactusWriter | needles 16:13, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! In my university teaching days, I once had a student who plagiarsed my own book in her essay. But at least it took some effort, bless her. She typed it out from the hardcopy — must have taken ages. Re "teaching how to fish...", I'm not sure how many new fishermen it produces for Wikipedia. In the Opera Project we get a lot of articles for singers, opera companies, etc. created by their agents and PR people, and sometimes themselves. In my experience, the best I can hope for is that they'll edit their article according to the guidelines in future. I have yet to find one who has ever contributed anything else to Wikipedia. Their only interest in the project is as a PR tool. Having said that, at least it results (after much red-pencilling from other editors) in one new article on a notable subject that we didn't have before. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 10:05, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for teaching me also, about every singer to opera and avoiding answers.com! I keep supplying singers to the project who never sing opera, last Dorothee Mields. When I found a Bach singer who also sang opera I nominated that fact for DYK, Franz Kelch, to be 95 this year, no PR involved. Unfortunately the only source for him I found in English reads like a machine translation. Any help in that case? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:50, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
My god, plagiarizing the prof's own book -- that's sadly funny -- the very definition of clueless. I would suggest she switch majors. I know what you mean about bulk of submissions coming from PR types. (It's one of the reasons I refrain from offering copyright violators much opportunity to license the source website -- the promotional text couldn't be used anyway.) But, occasionally, unexpectedly, when the stars align just so... you'll come across a true angler among the crowd of daytrippers. When is that next blue moon anyway? — CactusWriter | needles 19:03, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Assistance Please

Hello Voceditenore. Would you please check my user talk page? Some time ago you were assisting me in the creation of a new page, ".Gabriel". As you requested, I posted my request on that page but haven't heard from you. I understand you are very busy but would really appreciate your help. Thank you!TF537 (talk) 21:35, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

Please see edit request. In the meantime, you can use put the alt in the image parameter. e.g. |image=[[File:example.png|200px|alt=Example alt text]] Racepacket (talk) 21:55, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Coming of Age (BBC TV series)

I would question why the BBC are allowed to vandalise the page and put blatant propaganda on there suggesting that the response to the programme was mixed in some way, when in fact it was universally appalling. Every time real and referenced reviews are put up, they are taken down by some BBC apparatchik dickhead. Why are they not censored? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.67.176.103 (talk) 18:06, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This has nothing to do with "real and referenced reviews" being taken down. You deliberately inserted false and in several cases defamatory content about living people in multiple articles related to this show, as well adding as your personal commentary disguised to make it look as if it were a quote referenced from a reliable source, e.g. [2], [3], [4], [5]. You are going to get your IP, aka Oxford University, blocked if you keep it up. Voceditenore (talk) 18:50, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Travesti/Victorian burlesque

Tim just did a nice job expanding the Victorian burlesque article. Does anything need to be added back and forth between this and the Travesti article that you are working on? Just a thought. All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:28, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think of the current merge proposal at Burlesque (literature)? I wonder if merging it into the poorly-written Burlesque article will destroy any value (or chance at expansion) that it may have. Your comments would be valued at Talk:Burlesque. -- Ssilvers (talk) 02:31, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, V. You may find this article of interest: http://www.jstor.org/pss/3826405 -- Ssilvers (talk) 06:20, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Steve. I'm going to file this away for when I next add to Travesti. I've still got a bit to do re the ballet sections. But I never seem to get the time. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 14:10, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keto and Kote

Many thanks for re-establishing this article. During copy-edit driving I found the previous version a complete copy-and-paste violation from inception; I was the one who tagged for deletion. I have to say your succinct but elegant stub is superb, and should be set as an example of “how to do it”’. I have a tendency to reduce faulty articles to the brusque and barren, so I will log your Keto and Kote as a guiding light. In admiration. Acabashi (talk) 03:24, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Castrato parts

Hehe :) Moreschi (talk) 17:38, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Above comment is in response to this. Voceditenore (talk) 14:08, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Burlesque

Thanks for watching the dead links. It's a big shame that the PeoplePlayUK site went down, as it had a huge amount of info for Victorian articles. I think that most of the content migrated somewhere, but I'm not sure where. Any idea? All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 01:03, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the only dead link was PeoplePlayUK. The other 2 were spam/copyvio. Anyhow, the Theatre Museum's contents are now held by the Victoria & Albert. See the V & A's Theatre and Performance collections page. If you search the V & A collections, the online objects generally come with a lot of informative text in addition to the image. See this, for example. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 11:40, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Carmen

I have finished my work on this. The peer review threw up some interesting suggestions, many of which have been absorbed into the article. It is now at FAC (please take a look), and I am working on improving and extending the discography subarticle. I have not done anything with the "adaptations" which were removed from the older version of the article, and it may be a while before I can get to deciding what should be done here. Brianboulton (talk) 18:16, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations on getting it to FA, Brian! I'm going to be away for the next 2 weeks and wouldn't be able to help with an "adaptations" page anyway. One of the advantages of page like that is to keep all sorts of minor (and often very trivial) distractions out of the main article. A popular work like this is particularly prone to that kind of stuff, often added "drive-by" without references or context. But let's see how it goes. There may not be a need for an "adaptations", at least in the near future. By the way, can you get the Carmen Filmography link to work? I can't and have tried multiple times. :/ Best, Voceditenore (talk) 15:21, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I will continue improving the discography article as time permits. In due course I'll open a rudimentary "adaptations" article for the purpose you describe; it won't be long before the trivia merchants start tampering with the main article. It went through the FAC process so smoothly and swiftly that I can't help an uneasy feeling that something important got missed. Brianboulton (talk) 15:38, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Smithsonian updates website!

Hi Voceditenore! The Smithsonian Institution Archives took notice of your finding about Clara Hasse's death date and will be updating their records, website and Flickr! The changes should take place tomorrow. So thanks for the great find! Sarah (talk) 14:23, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent. It's nice to see that the traffic between Wikipedia and its sources goes both ways. Last year I got the Encyclopedic Discography of Victor Recordings at UCSB to change a glaring error on their database which found while I was researching Stanislao Gastaldon. In the process, I discovered another and even more whopping error in New Grove Dictionary of Opera which had been propagated all over the internet, but that's Grove's problem. OK, now I'm off to give the Harvard library system a nudge over this. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 08:32, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Co-Dependents Anonymous

Please help me get the correct information about Codependents Anonymous to remain on Wikipedia. I don't know your protocols. JBR1970Jbr1970 (talk) 02:17, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for answering in ordinary English. I do not expect to be able to learn wikipediaeze enough to correct the article. The article you are reverting to simply doesn't make sense. Could you at least remove the explanations of codependence from it. I will return in a week. We are leaving home this minute so I am unable to go beyond this at this time. Thank you. JBR1970Jbr1970 (talk) 12:34, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll see what I can do, but probably won't be able to get to it until next week. Voceditenore (talk) 12:53, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tobias

Apologies if this is in the wrong place (finding out how to contribute to Wikipedia is a very steep learning curve and I've only just learnt Joomla, brain hurting!). Huge thanks for the rewriting and reformatting of the article on Dove's Tobias and the Angel. I'd only just discovered it was there and found it was so incomplete and inaccurate it needed some serious input. Having been in the project from the very beginning I felt I had the authority to write on it, and did post some material from my website - hadn't realised this seems to count as conflict of interest. But it certainly doesn't violate copyright which presumably belongs to me, and I'd like to be able to insert a photo of the Birmingham production, would this be allowed? I'd be very grateful if you had time to help me on this. Kate Quartano Brown (talk) 15:56, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Longy redux

Dear VdiT, This autumn's Longy class, my best ever, begins their Wikipedia projects soon. May we impose upon you again, or would you prefer that we hit the Teahouse, which was a big help for the Berklee students this summer--though those who got their work done early very much appreciated your kind help. Welcome back! Yours, Ijmusic (talk) 23:07, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IJ! Great to hear from you again. Yes, I'll be happy to help with the Longy students. I couldn't do much for the Berklee crowd as I was away in August and had computer problems in September. I'm glad they found the Tea House useful, though. I'll keep an eye out for your new brood. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 12:24, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Bless you, dear VdiT. You continue to make Wikipedia a welcoming environment for us Newbies! With thanks, Yours, Ijmusic (talk) 02:43, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
My wife thinks that I should send you a dozen roses. My students and I agree. We appreciate so much your making the posts better and generally guiding us through the Wikithickets. Yours, Ijmusic (talk) 14:38, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Little favour

A while back I did some work de-fluffing Richard Gombrich. I think it still needs some more, but I have a little learning to the most dangerous degree and can't really see the wood for the trees. I'm pretty sure the structure is still hagiographic. May I ask if you could do a quick brisk hacking back of the undergrowth? Am pretty sure that the list of publications goes way beyond the notable, too. Amuse yourself by reading how it looked five years ago almost-instinct 12:07, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Query

I wanted to thank you for your assistance in creating Mr. Strantz's article I spearheaded awhile back. What great insight when you commented that since Wiki is global state abbreviations were unnecessary. I also wanted to ask.. a facebook page was created using the article as a basis.. is this done automatically and how would I find it's creator? Kindest ccard12Ccard12 (talk) 06:15, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I'd forgotten all about that article. It's looking great now. Just one thing, I thought it better to have an image of Strantz in the infobox instead of the golf course and uploaded one with a fair use rationale. I then moved the golf course image to lower down in the article where it lists the courses he designed. Hope that's OK.
Now about Facebook... Facebook automatically creates pages from Wikipedia articles about people. (They copy the latest version and periodically update the page automatically as the article changes.) Since our license permits anyone to freely re-use the articles here, we have no control over it. I have heard of some living people who have objected to these Facebook copies of their articles, but they had to take it up with Facebook if they wanted them removed, and I'm not sure how successful they've been. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 07:05, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I thought the same thing, but suppose initially what came to mind was a course image. Thank you for that, I am in total agreeance. I think the page is done at this point, so thank you once again. I may create future articles on the courses he designed so perhaps I will call on you once again for your expertise if thats alright. Ccard12 (talk) 16:41, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks

I'm grateful for your clear explanation and kind welcome on my first interaction with Wikipedia. The format here is slightly intimidating and I'm wary of breaking taboos or upsetting anyone so your breakdown and reassurance was greatly appreciated. :-)

SonnySonnyWilliamson (talk) 11:27, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Giovanna Gray

DYK gong archived here. Voceditenore (talk) 09:35, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I just wanted to say, nice job on the Giovanna Gray article. Going to the old, foreign language sources is something not everyone can do, and it makes a big difference. David.thompson.esq (talk) 13:01, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, David. I had a lot fun writing that. Most of the articles I write tend to be of this type, e.g., Cristina, regina di Svezia, Mala Pasqua!, Stanislao Gastaldon, Andrea Salvadori, Eugenia Tadolini. I figure that for the really famous composers, operas, singers, etc. there are plenty of online sources, but for these, the only place people will be able to find detailed information, in English, and free of charge is Wikipedia. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 10:07, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Image

http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/ggb2004008982/resource/

What do you think of this image, which also covers an opera singer without photo? Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:47, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's OK, but I'd never use it for Lillian Grenville. The one of her alone will be much better for that article. It's also a much more arresting image than this rather stilted duo. But this one would be good for Gustave Huberdeau and Natoma (kills 2 birds with one stone for that article). Voceditenore (talk) 17:57, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here are some more possibilities for articles and future articles with no images:

The Bain collection is very badly annotated, I'm just plowing slowly through all the images and clicking on ones that likely to be opera singers. I may find some more...

Best, Voceditenore (talk) 18:11, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Any idea which Stephano the Jacoby is? Niklausse is almost certainly Tales of Hoffmann, but I'm not sure off-hand about a Stephano trousers role. Adam Cuerden (talk) 19:10, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I assume Roméo et Juliette she sang it many times at the Met at around the time that picture was taken [7], and her career was almost entirely at the Met. Voceditenore (talk) 19:20, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, thought that would've been too high for her, since Wikipedia labels it as a soprano part. If she sang it, though, it's probably that. Adam Cuerden (talk) 19:58, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The Met lists her as a mezzo-soprano (rather than contralto), and the role is frequently sung and recorded by mezzos, e.g. Kristine Jepson, Susan Graham, etc. Voceditenore (talk) 10:18, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rosine Stoltz

Some time ago, you started the article on Rosine Stoltz. There is now a discussion about the date of her death. I wonder if you could consult your original sources and let us know. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 11:58, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Replied at Talk:Rosine Stoltz. Voceditenore (talk) 13:32, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

IEP

Hi Voce. I see you're still very much on the ball with the IEP issue. Not that 16 months later has anyone in the Foundation really taken a blind bit of notice of what Torey said. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:12, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notre-Dame de Clignancourt

A most pleasing new article. I'll add the church to my itinerary for a vaguely-planned, Fauré-themed wander round Paris. Don't bother to reply to this: I just wanted to express my appreciation. – Tim riley (talk) 19:50, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Buon viaggio!

Thanks, dear VdiT, for your support this summer. I've come back from a 16-day hospital stay just in time to wish you the best of vacations. My students and I will be frequenting the Tea House next month. Travel safely, Ijmusic (talk) 03:29, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Di Fiorino et al.

Ciao Voce. I hope this finds you well. Our paths once again cross in Mario Di Fiorino, and I notice your work in Gruppo del Rosario. There is a connection between Bridging Eastern & Western Psychiatry, the closely connected, newly created bios Maria Luisa Figueira and Mario Di Fiorino, as well as edits made by the same users in e.g. Davide Lazzeretti, Leonetto Amadei, Ganser syndrome, and Mind control. I reverted in Leonetto Amadei, and left a note on the editor's page, and subsequently tried to add info from the .it article Leonetto Amadei. (It appears that the Italian Leonette Amadei has had additions similar to the ones made to the English.) The English version has had the same material re-added. I restored an older version of Davide Lazzeretti. I have raised attention about this pattern (WP:COATRACK?) on WikiProject Medicine and WikiProject Psycholog, alas, not to much avail. Maybe it is something you would like to look into? Best, Sam Sailor Sing 21:05, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sam, hmmm, yes, I've noticed this interesting little can of worms. On the Italian WP, some of their stuff has been deleted outright, e.g. Mario di Fiorino, Bridging Eastern & Western Psychiatry and Psichiatria e Territorio (also founded by Di Fiorino) or reverted in existing articles, e.g. Leonetto Amadei, Davide Lazzeretti. Often, however, a "new" editor pops up to re-add the stuff, as happens here. The editors also use the same arguments they use here: "It's in the Italian/English Wikipedia so it's ok".
Several of the SPAs active here have been blocked for sockpuppetry at the Italian WP [8], [9], [10]. I'm not sure if they're sock or meat puppets, but without getting into outing, Google searches on their user names reveal that all are from the Pisa/Forte dei Marmi/Viareggio area. A couple are students of Di Fiorino or his colleagues, one works for a hotel in Forte dei Marmi and helps organize functions for Di Fiorino's symposia, two have co-authored articles with Di Fiorino, one appears to be Di Fiorino himself, etc. etc. I would say that just about every red-linked contributor since August to the articles you've cited is in some way connected to Di Fiorino and all their contributions here need checking. Some of them have extensively edited psychology/psychiatry articles in addition to the ones you've mentioned. Note also this sandbox. There's obviously more to come.
Anyhow, here's my take on some of the articles:
If we meet resistance from the "consortium" of Tuscan editors, then we take 'em to WP:COI/N. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 22:24, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Beautiful to see the logic you apply when investigating, I learned a lot. Thanks! Best, Sam Sailor Sing 00:04, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Want me to do {{cite books}} in the Publications section of Mario Di Fiorino? Best, Sam Sailor Sing 09:36, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dauvergne

Hi. I was planning to create more than just stubs for those operas, but I've been too busy/off it recently. I do have the Rousset recording of Hercule mourant, so I'll try to improve that particular article over the next few weeks. Next year I might even be able to get my hands on Dratwicki's full-length biography of Dauvergne (extracts are accessible at Google Books). Cheers. --Folantin (talk) 09:34, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's brilliant that you've created these (stubs or not), thanks so much! I managed to find an illustration for Hercule mourant. I'll see what I can do for Canente and Polixène, if nothing else the title pages of the scores à la Énée et Lavinie. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 10:05, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, thanks - and thanks for the nice image. Have you seen Livrets baroques? They have libretti for all four of these Dauvergne tragedies. Some of those pages contain images of the original costume designs, so they must have got them from somewhere. Also, I'm tempted to create a few other Dauvergne stubs, although it will break with my plan to focus on tragic French opera for the time being. Dauvergne's comédie-ballet La vénitienne was also recorded recently, but I don't have the discs. --Folantin (talk) 10:22, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
(By "some of them", I really mean Canente [11]. Can't see much for the others). --Folantin (talk) 10:29, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hallowe'en returns, as do your Longy fans

Dear VdiT, Welcome back! I hope that Italy was its accustomed delight. Since this autumn's Longy class begins their Wikipedia projects soon, might you be available to act once more as our Good Angel? The students were charmed when I related to them your connection with us. Hoping you're well, Yours, Ijmusic (talk) 23:08, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A thousand thanks, dear VdiT. They'll be pleased to discover your communications Tuesday, if they haven't happened upon them already. Hope you're well. Yours, Ijmusic (talk) 04:28, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sylvia Shwartz

I looked at the edit dated 20th Feb, and it was essentially the same as the Amazon review, so no copyright infringement. I'm unconvinced that it is ready for submission yet, given the generally hagiographic tone, eg She is the latest of her family to achieve international renown. followed by sections of her family's achievement (notability is not inheritable, so no real point to this), Miss Schartz instead of just the surname, "Career highlights" rather than "Career". Shall I recreate in Lisaby's sandbox? Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:28, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jim, I answered over at the AfC Help Desk where I suggested moving to User:Lisaby/Sylvia Schwartz (a previous redirect to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sylvia Schwartz). It sounds like it needs a good going over for style and tone as well as referencing and I'll try to help the editor with it before they submit it again. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 10:23, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Yes, it's been mad. I was just sick at staring at the red links on this page for years. Writing the Dauvergne pages convinced me it was possible to "blue" them and I happened to have the time this week. I'm now trying to push the coverage of the "tragic" operas as far as the outbreak of the French Revolution, then I'm going to have a bit of a rest. I have about a dozen pages left to do. Cheers. --Folantin (talk) 16:07, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A stumper

Dear VdiT, What happened to the Wikipedia article on kitsch? Once long, it's been reduced to a single page plus an invitation to enjoy its machine-translated Portuguese equivalent. Any ideas? Yours, Ijmusic (talk) 00:22, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IJ. From looking at its history [12], it seems various tangents, trivia, and poorly referenced original research (in the opinion of some editors) have been removed along the way, with a major whacking of the history section last January [13]. See Talk:Kitsch/Archive 2#NPOV and citations for the discussion. This is the version pre-whacking, enjoy! Best, Voceditenore (talk) 06:21, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, VdiT! I now see that, if I'd searched more diligently, I could have found the answer, especially since it was this year! Thanks also for cleaning up the class list, and of course for visiting them. In this morning's class, we'll see how many noticed. Yours, Ijmusic (talk) 12:53, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for helping to get the article Juuso Walden created!

I dont' understand why it was so difficult to get such a substantial and well sourced biographic article created. Obviously many people active on wiki do not read English well... Thank you for backing up and helping with the citation reference list technicalities or what ever was the problem before. Thank you!--62.78.209.179 (talk) 10:09, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to help. The reviewing at Articles for Creation can often be arbitrary, poorly judged, and carried out by very inexperienced editors. I strongly suggest that the article's creator, User:Spespatriae, create any future articles of the same quality directly in article space and avoid AfC completely. Voceditenore (talk) 11:15, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanksgiving thanks from Cambridge, MA

Dear VdiT, The Longy students and I have appreciated your gracious support and intervention; the 2013 Tips will be especially helpful as we tread an increasingly bumpy road. With hopes that you enjoy your Thanksgiving break, and thanks, Yours, Ijmusic (talk) 17:22, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Barnstar archived here. – Voceditenore (talk) 11:42, 27 December 2013 (UTC) [reply]

The Music Barnstar
It is actually we who should be thanking you yet again, dear VdiT, for the time that you lavished on our humble efforts. Please accept my, our!, great gratitude for helping us and for encouraging us so substantively! Thanks also for your beautiful Christmas wish, comin' right back at you on this Eleventh Day of Christmas (cue the pipers), with best wishes for the happiest of New Years. Yours, Ijmusic (talk) 23:49, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Violinist

Hello there! Hope you had a nice rest! Here's a new one for you. Enjoy, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 23:09, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi FoCuSandLeArN. Yes, I had a delightful time. Re the submission, I recommend accepting it. The Yahoo reference isn't ideal, but the others are fine and there are reviews of his performances in the New York Times as well which could be added, e.g. [14]. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 09:10, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

From Zhuying123

Hi, Voceditenore, I'm sorry for the late appreciation. I'm figuring out how to write message here. Thank you so much for visiting my page. I really appreciate your help. Zhuying123 (talk) 03:08, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure, Zhuying, and thanks for creating an article about an important Chinese composer. Voceditenore (talk) 17:03, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

From (Oliveira46 (talk) 15:28, 5 December 2013 (UTC))

Hello, I noticed you deleted most of my work on the Stella and Charles Guttman Community College page, and I would like to know why? Me and my group worked hard on this article, this was made in order to increase the amount of information that already existed on that page. WE DID NOT create the page, thus we aren't creating a brochure!!! The information we found is important, it's the first community college to be created in over 40 years. It's extremely interesting and important to add all this info, understanding the entire process CUNY went through in order to provide better education for students. (Oliveira46 (talk) 15:28, 5 December 2013 (UTC))[reply]

If Voceditenore hadn't done it, I would have. Please see the discussion on the article talk page. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 16:23, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Guttman Community College

I just wanted to reassure you that it was not me who was threatening to delete the article. One user who goes on a yearly spree at around this time to send dozens of school articles to AfD. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 19:06, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I know, Kudpung—I stalk your talk page . That's what prompted me to go clean it up. Hopefully, the students and the instructor (who appears not to have edited a single thing on Wikipedia apart from the course page) will take the advice at Talk:Guttman Community College and the links to the guidelines on board. I've also pinged the online ambassadors for the course. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 19:13, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bradbury/Vedontakal Vrop

Hi there! I gave up on the image after Future Perfect's intemperate blast, but I don't see that this is a 'clear' NFCC violation, as you noted when re-removing the image (which I suppose was restored by some kind soul hoping to get me blocked). It is FP who in the discussion on this was imo 'wikilawyering', by stating his interpretation, and then declaring that it was the right and only interpretation, before getting on his high horse of denunciation. Not that I can be bothered to take it any further. Best, --Smerus (talk) 11:01, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Smerus. The IP who kept restoring it is trolling and highly likely to be doing so because of a dispute with the administrator who removed it, rather than with you. They're probably a sock of a blocked user to boot. The image use in Vedontakal Vrop quite clearly violates Criterion 8. of Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria: "Contextual significance. Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding." Not having a picture of the author of the novel in which the opera is mentioned is in no way detrimental to the understanding of the topic, i.e. the opera. The administrator who removed it is highly experienced in image licensing issues and is also an License reviewer on Commons. They aren't "wikilawyering", although I can see why editors who don't work in that area might perceive it as such. As someone who does a lot of work in copyright and fair use issues related to text, I know from experience that our actions can be unpopular with some editors, and there's a tendency to shoot the messenger . Best, Voceditenore (talk) 12:23, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for this, a little bit of context makes a lot of difference! (although I still think FP@S could have used a bit of the old AGF). Anyway as I am presently in Kiev, there's a lot more exciting going on than WP.......Best, --Smerus (talk) 13:22, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Er... a lot more exciting! Stay safe, Best, Voceditenore (talk) 13:55, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
On my walk to work this morning......--Smerus (talk) 14:51, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Cripes! Voceditenore (talk) 17:36, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Berlin Philharmonic Chamber Orchestra

I've just declined a CSD-Advert on this. (The NPPer seems very unsure of their tagging). If you have time, you may like to do some of your musical magic on it. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:07, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kudpung. Well, I found a ref, fixed it so it made a bit more sense, and tagged for further copy-editing. It's a rather bad translation (by a pretty obvious COI editor) from the German WP article. Hopefully someone else who knows German will improve it more. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 14:26, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I tried a bit, tending to trim the long lists of names, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:50, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Gerda. Name-dropping is an awful but all too common feature of classical music articles. Has worked with such renowned artists as..., Has sung under the baton of such renowned conductors as... Blah blah. Who cares? . Zap it. Voceditenore (talk) 15:07, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) I established two redirects from the German names, one of them was a red link. Who uses this English name at all? Move? - Names: in our concert programs, we have no bios, not even of Andreas Scholl, because if they don't sing well the bio doesn't help, if they sing well, it's not needed. - I hope I understand zap right and will get rid of a few, - names help only if they are known, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:12, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
done - amazing how many names I never heard of have articles. - I didn't check if they were also added like this one, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:22, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I was tempted to move it to its current German name myself. As long as there are sufficient re-directs, it probably doesn't matter. By the way, it appears that there was an earlier chamber orchestra also called Philharmonisches Kammerorchester Berlin, just to make things more complicated. See this 1968 article in Der Spiegel. Re the spam links by this editor, they've all been reverted (the last one by me). - Voceditenore (talk) 15:31, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Gabriele Schnaut

An IP added "future engagements" to Gabriele Schnaut, - revert as not encyclopedic, ask for source, format? What would you do? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:59, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway, I formatted a bit, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:17, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I removed the totally unencyclopedic "upcoming performances" (UGH!) to the talk page and left a note there as to why. The only time a future performance should be mentioned is if it has received significant coverage in independent sources. That's another big problem with opera singer articles. The subjects, their agents, and their fans treat them like the singer's homepage. Lorenzo Regazzo was once "owned" by a user who insisted on this appalling section and reverted any attempts to remove it. I gave up in 2009. But I see another editor finally took the scissors to it a year ago and so far hasn't been reverted. Voceditenore (talk) 09:17, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! (was my first choice) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:32, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much!

I see that my article on SORNE has been published. I should really say "our article on SORNE" because you've done so much for it! Thank you so very much for all your help. Your generosity has been immense. Best wishes, DEL1025 —Preceding undated comment added 23:24, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure, DEL! Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 09:55, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of Interest?

Dear Voceditenore, I have just found an article about Opera Lyrica (a company that I'm involved in) on Wikipedia (which was a very nice Christmas surprise!) and I notice you've done most of the editing. Thank you! I thought I would ask you if it was against the rules for me to do any editing at all on the page because of a conflict of interest. There are just a couple of errors that I would like correcting if possible, as well as some more information about previous productions, the fact that we're a charity and also to add a few more secondary sources. I think I'm fairly capable of writing neutrally, but is this something I can do and you can look over and check, or should I give everything to you to write up if/when you have a chance? Thanks so much for your help, Nick PS: I'm really sorry if I've got any formatting wrong. I'm completely new to this. 17:38, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nick, I did do a fair amount of editing to it but only to bring the article up to a reasonable standard, remove the fluff and waffle that had originally been there, and add some references. I'm not convinced that it passes our notability criteria at the moment, see Talk:Opera Lyrica. So if you have more secondary sources to add, that would be helpful. Re the COI, as long as you stick to simple factual additions, it should be OK. Just make sure that your additions are referenced, and that you don't add future performances, only ones which have already taken place. A useful writing guide is Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch. I've got the article on my watchlist and can always copy-edit your additions if they need tidying up, so don't be afraid of making mistakes. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 06:52, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Voceditenore. Thanks, I'll have a go at it now! I've left a message for you on the Opera Lyrica talk page. All the best, Nick 14:14, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Italian translation question

Hi: A question has come up about translation of the Italian imperfect tense in E lucevan le stelle -- I was hoping you might be able to provide an answer. The question is whether the use of 'the gate was creaking' for 'stridea l'uscio' is more correct than 'the gate creaked', or whether both are wrong and we should be using 'the gate used to creak', or something else (See Talk:E lucevan le stelle). We are comparing the literal translation of the aria here with the current version. I've also asked user: al pereira. Any help you can provide would be appreciated. David.thompson.esq (talk) 16:29, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Replied at Talk:E lucevan le stelle. – Voceditenore (talk) 12:12, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Belated Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

Thank you of thinking of me. It was so wonderful to get your message. I hope you and your family are enjoying this holiday season in London. Best wishes.4meter4 (talk) 15:07, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Great to hear from you, 4meter4! We go back a long way on the Opera Project. I often think of you and glad to see you're still editing once in a while. All the best, Voceditenore (talk) 15:38, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What a coincidence

- I just came across this Richard Cowan (bass-baritone) by accident and it turns out to one of 4meter4's barely notable, but reasonable articles. I'm sure the subject is notable but my searches have turned up nothing more than his singing schedule for next year. Can you sprinkle some of your magic opera dust on it? Oh, and HNY and all that  :) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:08, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kudpung! I'm in deepest, darkest Tuscany with not very fab internet access. Will sprinkle the opera dust when I get back to London on the 9th. Happy New Year to you too. Or I guess I should say Felice Anno Nuovo. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 06:50, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, Toscana - pangs of nostalgia! Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:42, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Kudpung, somehow I doubt this was a "coincidence" since you and I had words over what was then a brief stub of an article more than 3 years ago. You were just as rude and uncivil then as you are now. How you can seriously add a notability tag (again I might add after it was removed in 2010) is beyond me given the plethora of online sources revealed in a quick google search. I wonder exactly how you are doing these supposed "searches" that yield nothing. I agree the article needs better sourcing in its current state given that other editors have added lots of unsourced content since the article was created by me in 2010. The notability tag is woefully inappropriate since the info in the Chicago Sun article alone is enough to satisfy the criteria at WP:N. That said, thank you voceditenore for agreeing to help the article improve. I would work on it myself if I wasn't busy moving into the new house I bought and gearing up to sing in a concert with my local symphony this weekend. Best.4meter4 (talk) 14:17, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Both, someone with a pretty probable COI added the copyvio removed a while back, plus more material which had not been in the original article. I've cleaned up some of the remaining problematic material and added 2 more references, but there are numerous more out there. I'll add them when I get back. However, I've removed the notability tag. He clearly passes, and have left a note to this effect on the talk page. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 07:47, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hampstead Village Voice

Hi, and thanks for your help with the above. Very new to all this. FTR: The Press Gazzette's (ref 5) is not entirely correct. It was not a spoof edition but spoof front page on p.17 of Hampstead Village Voice edition 4 in 2008 (ref. Hard copy of Hampstead Village Voice edition 4). Also the Camden Review is a section of the local paper, Camden New Journal. I will try to prune and improve on existing as suggested but a bit of a Wikipedia novice, so all help much appreciated. Please have another look at it when you can. Kind regards, Sebastian Wocker. wocker@btinternet.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.90.35.166 (talk) 21:29, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Sebastian, I've moved you message down here to the bottom of this page. (New talk page threads go at the bottom of the talk page. More about that at Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines.) Anyhow, I'm in Italy at the moment with very limited internet access. I'll have a look when I get back on the 9th. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 06:50, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Phoenicia International Festival of The Voice

Dear Voceditenore, just a quick note to thank you for your guidance re Phoenicia International Festival of The VOice.. I am discovering teh do's and don'ts and understand what you share about neutrality and conflict of interest. your Editing is perfect. thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Voicefestfoundation (talk • contribs) 18:16, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Caldara +

Thank you for the Caldara opera, here's another: La concordia de' pianeti [15], --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:25, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gerda. You're welcome :). I've added quite a bit more to it now. Apparently, Tito e Berenice was part of contest! I might do La concordia once the German performance actually takes place. In the meantime, I'll be working on creating the other two Operas of the Month, by papa Scarlatti and his son. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 19:07, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. After I closed my shop completely (see my talk, - I kept the ironing lady) I suddenly feel very busy with a man whose boss is the pope and a painter stub, not mentioning the GA nom for Chéreau. Did you see that I mention singing as occupation in my own (bzzt, unspeakable)? (Derived from "Singen, singen" in the Christmas Story by Schütz). In choir, we will concentrate on Schütz and Rutter, Magnificat by both, I hope I will get in the mood until July / October / November. Certainly not if we keep losing a great editor every week, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:31, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Question about images

Hello Voceditenore. I hope you are well. I'm wondering if you could offer any advice about some difficulty I'm having. I want to post an image to the page for SORNE. I contacted him and he gave me an image that he said I could use. He said that it is his property and I'm free to use it. This doesn't seem to meet the requirements, however, for Wikipedia's proof of legality. It asks for me to give a web address that shows that the image is legally free to use. I don't know of one and Morgan Sorne wasn't able to tell me where I could find that either. I also don't know the date that it was created and I don't think that Morgan has that record either. It seems very difficult to get an image on here. Any advice on this or am I just at a dead end? Thank you, DEL1025 —Preceding undated comment added 19:45, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DEL. Yes, the process of getting photos onto Commons if you haven't taken them yourself is very complicated. If the photo isn't already on line, you can email photosubmission@wikimedia.org with an email from SORNE (with an email address that shows clearly that it comes from him, such as mgmt@sorne.com) and the picture attached stating that he owns the copyright and that he releases the image under the the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 license, accompanied by your original request. More about this method at Wikipedia:Contact us/Photo submission. This process can take several weeks before it gets acted on. Alternatively, he could upload it to Flickr and license it with the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike or post the image on his website with the license displayed, or post it on his Google+ page, again with the license. If he doesn't want to put the license directly on his Google+ page, he can simply link to the photo in his email. But if he does, he'll have to include proof that phototographer has released it to him (unless it was a "selfie"). Hope that helps. Voceditenore (talk) 07:20, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much! You have been so helpful as always. I will contact him again with this information. Thank you, DEL1025 —Preceding undated comment added 16:15, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

COI at Frédéric Bednarz

I recently discovered this article which needs some help. I believe it has some obvious COI issues.4meter4 (talk) 05:07, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 4meter4. It wasn't too bad, considering the main editor. I've done a bit to it. It's basically OK now. Voceditenore (talk) 14:47, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bayreuth Festival

User:Threefoursixninefour had added the info below and now asks me to reconsider my revert with a note on the Festival's Talk page I wonder if you'd mind taking a look there and responding to him/her in your usual diplomatic way? I think that it would be better not coming from me.... All the best, Viva-Verdi (talk) 23:26, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contribution to the discussion on the article's Talk page. Viva-Verdi (talk) 16:15, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ticket prices

− Retail ticket prices for the general public and the Society of Friends, for the 2014 festival season, range from €320 for a front row stalls seat, down to €45 for a gallery (third level) back row seat. In the past some tickets were available for seating with no or a limited view of the stage for as little as €10, but these are not currently available. Prices do not vary between productions, the same price being charged for the shorter Rheingold or Der fliegende Holländer as for the longer Götterdämmerung or Die Meistersinger von Nürnberg. Neither does the price vary with the timing of the performance within the Festival calendar, although the first performances of any opera are the more prestigious. Tickets for Der Ring des Nibelungen can only be purchased as a set of four for the complete cycle.[1]

Amber Witch

I am nonplussed by your revert of my edit of The Amber Witch and intend to revert it. Nowhere in WP:MOS does it state that the lead section of an article must be crammed into a single graf in the off-putting "block of text" style (this is a common misconception among Wikipedia editors). Furthermore, your version does not read smoothly and is in no way more "coherent" than mine. In addition, I have added information about the hoax that belongs in the lead. Wahrmund (talk) 19:55, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Wahrmund, apart from adding a bit more about the hoax (marginally useful), I disagree with you that the chopped up 1-sentence "paragraphs" are an improvement. Likewise the gigantic image size you have forced. You might want to read WP:IMGSIZE. But if you feel that strongly about it, go ahead and restore your version. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 20:22, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I have reduced the picture size. I had originally planned to do more with the article, and will probably do so in a day or two. Wahrmund (talk) 19:42, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

*taps microphone*

Is it safe to come back....? almost-instinct 15:48, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yep :) Great to see you, A-I! I miss those happy hours we spent de-pufferizing articles. I had to whack this one all by myself. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 15:56, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Mmmm maybe not so safe after all.... almost-instinct 13:43, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, you mean below? I think you'll be OK . I only mention it if I'm specifically asked. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 07:09, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's not you I'm worried about ;) almost-instinct 11:19, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

163.247.53.2

I have no opinion on the matter. Doing RCP and noticed that the anon was changing text, leaving no ES and I couldn't make sense out of it. Seems to have other problems such as this midges -> midgets that so many midgets bother the public with their tenacious buzzing... here as 'gnats' Would you be willing to go through his edits? Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 06:20, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Jim1138. I've had a look at their edits back to October, and they all appear to be in good faith, and most are useful corrections. The "midget" one is an anomaly, but I see it as good faith mistake. The editor is hampered by an imperfect command of English as can be seen from this edit. I'm going to leave them a note about edit summaries and referencing, though. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 06:42, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for looking into that and the feedback. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 08:31, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

Barnstar from FoCuSandLeArN archived here

Thank you FoCuS! That's very kind of you and I'm always happy to help. I've been doing a bit of archiving today, so if you have any more you want an opinion on just start a new section here. I've archived my past AfC draft advice on a dedicated AfC page. Best. Voceditenore (talk) 13:40, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Domingo Marcos Durán

Dear Voceditenore:

Thank you so much for approving my article on Domingo Marcos Durán. From time to time I'll continue to work on it and make it better. My dissertation was a translation and commentary of this historic Spanish music theorist, and I was surprised to see that there wasn't an article about him on Wikipedia.

I must confess that I had difficulty working on the article since I hadn't worked with an html-type format for a long time, and there are specific quirks in the wikipedia format for sending requests, so there was a learning curve for me. Consequently, I did send the article for review before I had gotten it to a state that I was satisfied with it.

Don't be too hard on The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80. Although I didn't understand why he rejected it twice, I do think that in attempting to address the objections my article was improved.

Thank you again,

Sincerely,

Rogcraigvogel — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rogcraigvogel (talk • contribs) 20:06, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for submitting such a good article! Yes, the Wikipedia markup is a bit different from HTML and can be a bit daunting; Here's something you might find useful. The AfC process can prove particularly difficult for new editors, and that's something we're working on improving.
You have a point there, however I prefer to contact people knowledgeable on the subject before I decline a submission such as this. We all make mistakes.
Thank you both once again for your contributions! FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 12:38, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment from Cowhen1966

Thank you! Did not know that a discussion was going on ? Thank you very much there are still good people here on WikipediaCowhen1966 (talk) 15:01, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure why you say you didn't know that an AfD discussion was going on (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cecil Jay Roberts). You contributed there several times yesterday. Anyway, I'm glad you found it helpful. Voceditenore (talk) 15:15, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Juliette Pochin

Hi Voceditenore. I am not sure if I am going about this message the correct way?. You kindly assisted me some time ago with the construction of he page for Opera singer Juliette Pochin. On that page is a subsection....Morgan Pochin. Juliette has suggested that the main page should now be Morgan Pochin , with a sub section for Juliette Pochin as she is doing less individual work and more as part of Morgan Pochin. I have no idea how to implement such a complex change and wonder if it is possible to enlist your assistance please. There should also be a "link" so that if a search on the name James Morgan is made it refers to Morgan Pochin. I realise it is a big request but I am nowhere near skilled enough! Regards David Church- <email address redacted>. Pochinfan (talk) 21:48, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pochinfan. Sorry for the delay. It would need an administrator to move it back over the re-direct Morgan Pochin. There's a procedure for requesting this. There is more about the process at Wikipedia:Requested moves#Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves. However, I would strongly advise against it at this point, for two reasons:
1. In terms of significant coverage/notability, Juliet Pochin is still the primary subject. The notability of the partnership Morgan Pochin is far less well established (in the Wikipedia sense).
2. The article would need a complete re-write and restructuring from top to bottom if it were to be moved to the new title. Leaving it as it is and simply changing the title leads to a nonsensical presentation of the information in relationship to the primary title.
I've taken the opportunity to do a fair amount of copy-editing and reference improvement to that article today. You really have watch treating it as an alternative website for her and for Morgan Pochin, rather than an encyclopedia article. Especially watch the used of time-sensitive wording like "latest", and the announcement of "future plans" unless they have received coverage in a completely independent source.
What I will do for now is create a re-direct page for James Morgan that redirects to the article. By the way, I have redacted your email address above. It's not a good idea to place your address where it is publicly viewable (including by potential spammers). I see that you have email enabled. If Wikipedia editors want to get hold of you via email, they can do so by clicking on the "Email this user" link in the sidebar at your user page. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 12:23, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for all your advice and rewriting...I will take your advice. Little by little I am (hopefully) learning ! Pochinfan (talk) 20:58, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Huh?

With regards to this edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bronco_Wine_Company&diff=596455712&oldid=596442217

I agree with the removal, but how does WP:BLP apply? It's not a biography, and the indevidual is not living. Taco Viva (talk) 20:45, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Taco Viva. BLP policy applies everywhere on Wikipedia where a living or recently deceased person is mentioned. In the latter case, primarily as a protection/courtesy for the deceased person's relatives, particularly with respect to the policy at Wikipedia:BLPNAME. Having said that, I now realise that the incident happened in 2008. So no, BLP doesn't strictly apply. Nevertheless, I think it's appropriate to leave the name out, as it has no real bearing on the issue. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 10:30, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

AfC submission

Not ready for article space. She's reasonably notable via the productions she's appeared in (several of them in leading roles) and her discography, but the article is completely unusable in this state. It's referenced to his private communications with her (absolutely cannot be used, and everything referenced to that needs to be removed), a blog (only useful as an external link, not for referencing), ditto Operabase, plus various potted biographies on the websites of the theatres where's performed and Naxos Records—none of which are independent of the subject. The creator needs use reviews etc. in independent, non-self-published sources. These links provide a lot of material he can use [16], [17], [18]. Virtually all of them are in Italian. But he should be able to get the various gists with google translate. Voceditenore (talk) 16:15, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Not ready for article space. Reasonably notable, i.e. would scrape a pass at an AfD if a lot of other editors put in the work to "save" it. But the referencing makes this a non-starter at the moment. Two of the references are to books about the chap he studied under, which I suspect do not mention him at all and there are no page numbers or quotes. The third one is to the completely unreferenced Italian Wikipedia article it:Pier Paolo Pacini. There are references out there, but the creator needs to do the work. Voceditenore (talk) 16:39, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Not ready for article space, one potted biography from Malmo Opera House, and an article about a children's opera in which he created the title role where he is given a brief mention. So far, the career is not a particularly significant one. He'd need leading roles in several leading opera houses. Malmo Opera is not one of them and/or a discography of two recordings singing significant roles on notable labels. The AfC draft is simply a paraphrasing of this. He has an equally poor article on the Swedish Wikipedia sv:Samuel Jarrick, basically copied from this. Voceditenore (talk) 17:41, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi FoCuS. Above are my latest verdicts. I don't think any of them would be loss to Wikipedia if they weren't created. Hence I'm not prepared to do anything to improve them, and neither should you. They're not hopeless, although in the case of Jarrick, it may be impossible to clearly establish notability, but the editors need to do a lot more work. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 17:41, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate you help, as ever. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 15:13, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
One of the authors replied with a follow up on sourcing: User_talk:FoCuSandLeArN#Rejected biography of Alessandra Marianelli: a question about sources. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 13:08, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Anna Schoen-René

Hi voceditenore. I just read some interesting articles on this lady and thought you might enjoy penning an article on her. Here are some potential sources:

Best wishes.4meter4 (talk) 02:37, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! She sounds like quite a character, 4meter4. I'm sort of up to my eyeballs at the moment, but I'll keep this here to remind me to get 'round to it eventually, if someone else doesn't first. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 17:44, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Hi, Voceditenore. Many thanks for your assistance in creating Paolo Giubellino's article. I'm grateful for your clear explanation and helping to fix the citation reference problem. Your help is really appreciated and encouraging for new users. Great work! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pcharito (talk • contribs) 10:17, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Books & Bytes, Issue 4

Full newsletter. – Voceditenore (talk) 11:14, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tosca image

I looked at it. It's not a copyvio, apparently. I wouldn't mind seeing it discussed, but I have no strong view on it as of now.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:48, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's not a bad picture. I also checked to see if it was already on the web somewhere and it isn't. Who knows? Maybe it's a good idea to leave it. I'm not fussed either way. Voceditenore (talk) 16:44, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That was my conclusion after thinking about it. We could possibly use more of those if he is minded to do more.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:09, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted ANI edit

Regarding this edit [19], it was a slip of the finger by me that I didn't even realize I'd done. Thanks for reverting my fat-fingered mistake. JoeSperrazza (talk) 16:34, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, Joe :). I had a feeling that's what happened. I've done it myself several times. I used to have a super-sensitive mouse. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 16:41, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A bowl of sweet strawberries for you!

Thankyou so much for your help with the Cafe Jacques article. You are a very bright star in the Wikipedia constellation! I certainly will enjoy investigating, and using the references.

I'm feeling a bit humble over here, because my research skills need to be honed to a sharper edge. Then again, you have given me some clues with your refs. By the way, I found your user page quite interesting. Have a great day. CaesarsPalaceDude (talk) 08:35, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your kind note, CaesarsPalaceDude! If you need any more help with your draft, do let know. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 11:15, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Longy in the Spring

Dear Voceditenore, Longy offers my course in the Spring now. May the students and I impose upon your kindness this semester? We'd be grateful if we might. With hopes that you are well and not feeling too soggy after your record winter rains. Yours, Ijmusic (talk) 02:25, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IJ! I'll be happy to keep an eye on your brood, as always, although I'll be "away from desk" from April 1–23 with very limited internet access. When are their assignments due? All the best, Voceditenore (talk) 10:56, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You Very Much!

Dear Voceditenore,

Thank you very much for welcoming me to Wikipedia and to the Wikipedia pages of Ijsounds and The Future of Classical Music class! I am pleased to make your acquaintance, and I hope to write a substantial article or a section for this class with integrity and without any bias, unprofessionalism, or malice.

Sincerely,

Classicalized — Preceding unsigned comment added by Classicalized (talk • contribs) 17:07, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Classicalized. I'm looking forward to your contributions. All the best, Voceditenore (talk) 10:58, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing the Egg butter!

Just what the headline says. The references probably weren't the easiest to find - and hopefully someone will add more to the article. --Sander Säde 13:47, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure, Sander Säde and many thanks for your kind note. Voceditenore (talk) 11:01, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Request your help

Hi Voceditenore, I just submitted suggested revisions for the Stetson University College of Law page. I'd edit this page myself but I work for Stetson University and there's a COI. Thanks for your help in the recent past! 24.73.119.194 (talk) 18:58, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See my replies at Talk:Stetson University College of Law#2014 program and ranking updates. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 11:11, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ Bayreuther Festspiele: "Spielfolge/Programme 2014" leaflet, issued September 2013
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Voceditenore&oldid=599707860"