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 18:14, 3 September 2015 (→‎Is Gossip Mongering Allowed on Wikipedia?: enough). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.



    If you leave a message here, I'll answer it here. If I left a message on your talk page, please reply there. I'll watch your page and reply as soon as I can.

    Notes to self

    • [[File:SMirC-smile.svg|25 px]] [[File:SMirC-sad.svg|20px]] [[File:SMirC-crazy.svg|25px]]
    • [[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
    • http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:<Website URL>

    George Jackson (conductor)

    I'm concerned about George Jackson (conductor). It is an article about a conducting student with no merits outside the academic training world, just has won second prize in a minor conducting competition. The article was started by George Jackson himself. It was nominated for deletion and the result was Delete, but it hasn't been removed yet. What can we do? These things should not be on Wikipedia. I've talked about it on the talk of the article... I'd very much like to hear your opinion. Thanks.--Karljoos (talk) 11:38, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    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]

    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]

    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]

    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 [6], 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]

    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]

    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 [7], [8], [9]. 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]

    Caldara +

    Thank you for the Caldara opera, here's another: La concordia de' pianeti [10], --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]

    *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]

    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]

    Sharon Ruchman

    Thanks for your recent cleanup/removing promotional/un-encyclopedic information from Sharon Ruchman. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 19:27, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi David. I'm away until the end of April, but I'm rather minded to PROD it or take it to AfD. But I'll need to do a little research first. I had a look at the talk page of the reviewer who had accepted it. Dear Oh Dear. :) Best, Voceditenore (talk) 17:05, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Review of new article

    Hi, I've created a new article, except that this time I've achieved as much in four days as I did in six weeks. Also, I have chosen a subject for which it is much easier to prove notability. When I created the page it seemed to go immediately into article space, so I'm hoping to avoid the AfC route. Would you have time to review Northern Lights (song), please, and give me the benefit of your opinion on it? Hopefully, there aren't any silly mistakes like disambiguations this time. In particular, could you check the way I am loading the images, please? Do I need to do more to create a fair use rationale? Thankyou. CaesarsPalaceDude (talk) 14:11, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Thanks

    Hey, thanks. Some of the articles on Gluck's major operas need more work, but I'm probably not going to touch them until next year. I thought I'd produce a bunch of stubs on the Baroque and minor Classical works then add to them bit by bit. I noticed you discovered the Gluck Gesamtausgabe online, a very useful find. Some of the information is very interesting. For example, I don't think there can be many operas where the entire cast was made up of archduchesses and the work was conducted by a future emperor.

    BTW I think La danza (Gluck) is beyond start-class, at least C. There's not much you can really say about an opera Julian Rushton dismisses as "a slight work". The Penguin Guide to Opera on CD doesn't even bother trying to give synopsis, saying there is "no plot or development whatsoever." Having read the libretto, I can sympathise with that! Cheers.--Folantin (talk) 10:32, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Article on Leela Bordia

    Hi

    I have made some further inputs to the said Article on Leela Bordia. Please have a look at it and give me your suggestions on whether i am on the right path and plz guide regarding corrections if any, since i am just a beginner.

    Regards

    The iWriter ```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by The iWriter (talk • contribs) 12:51, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Hello, The iWriter. I assume you mean the draft User:The iWriter/sandbox? I'll have a look at it later today or tomorrow. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 13:06, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Hello Voceditenore

    Yes plz and thanks

    ```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by The iWriter (talk • contribs) 13:09, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Longy Autumn 2014

    Ada Cherry Kearton

    You may remember doing some work on Ada Cherry Kearton. I thought you would like to now that the BBC now link to it, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/features/desert-island-discs/castaway/06c4739d#p009y95q - Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:49, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi Andy. Thanks for letting me know. By the way, I haven't forgotten about David Ward, I've just been a bit busy with other stuff. I hope to get to it in the New Year. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 09:06, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Could I get ...

    ... a massage as well? ;) Cf. your own observation at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Worldchampion2014/Archive. -- Sam Sing! 10:13, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Oh yes, Sam, it's quite obvious what's going on . So far, they're sticking to inane comments on the talk page, but the minute they attempt editing the article, I'm off to SPI. Voceditenore (talk) 10:36, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I was checking those three links yesterday in Archive.org, but you beat me at adding {{dead link}}. No versions were archived of the two of them, and the one cite that already included an archived_url had been deleted in Archive.org. What do we do in such cases? Add the cite, then quote the full text in a cot/cob on the talk page and have two other editors confirm it before somebody gets the source deleted? -- Sam Sing! 10:49, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Sam, per WP:Link rot (Do not delete cited information solely because the URL to the source does not work any longer. WP:Verifiability does not require that all information be supported by a working link, nor does it require the source to be published online.), we leave them for now. For one thing Focus is also a print magazine, and theoretically, anyone could find those articles in a library. On the other hand the other existing refs are also more than adequate for verifying what is actually in the WP article. I'm also collecting multiple other sources as backup and having them archived + the relevant quotes. Beans-wise, perhaps let sleeping dogs lie for the moment? Voceditenore (talk) 11:55, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    It's one of a million articles I wouldn't return to for a second, were it not for the whitewashing. :) -- Sam Sing! 10:18, 13 February 2015 (UTC) P.S. Your two former messages did not show up on my notifications list. Could that be because of the piped plain link? Could you try to reply using [[User:Sam Sailor|]], please?[reply]
    I had piped it as you suggest. How odd! OK, here's a non-piped link, User:Sam Sailor, let me know if that works. Anyhow, my feelings are exactly the same concerning that article. UGH! In my most recent reply on the talk page, I quite explicitly pointed them to read WP:SOCK. We'll see what happens. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 08:31, 14 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Hmm, I didn't get a notification there either. Yesterday over on WT:MATH, {{Reply to}} didn't work as well. Something is rotten in the State of Ping, the Vaterland of Ms. Butterfly. ;) Enjoy your weekend. -- Sam Sing! 12:12, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi Sam. The non-pinging pings were/are an ongoing saga and are seemingly unpredictable in their bad behaviour. See the Village Pump here for the latest. And speaking of bad behaviour... All seems to have gone quiet on the "massage" front. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 14:43, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I got this one loud and clear. Weird. The WMF are surely pulling our legs here. ;) -- Sam Sing! 14:44, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Message from Lisaby

    Hello Voceditenore. You may remember me from the Alessandra Marianelli bio.

    I'd like to create one now for Sylvia Schwartz.

    The main problem with my first attempt was that I didn't know how to evaluate the various sources of information I found. You considered many that I proposed as inadequate.

    For Sylvia Schwartz, could I send you a list of the sources I've found (not their contents), so that you could tell me which to exclude?

    Many thanks for all you do for Opera on Wikipedia,

    Lisaby 18:29, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

    Hi Lisaby. Many apologies for this late reply! I suggest that you list your proposed sources at User:Lisaby/Sylvia Schwartz. I'm about to be travelling for the next two weeks. But I will definitely have a look when I get back. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 16:40, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Philip Brunelle Page

    I wanted to take a moment to thank you for the edits and work put into this page. I felt they were very necessary, clearly sourced, and helped save a page from deletion (due to the entire page being directly copy-pasted from a copyrighted source). Jcmcc450 (talk) 18:11, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Thank you, Jcmcc450. Yes, even if it hadn't been copyvio the rampant puffery was completely out of order. I wish I could convince COI editors (and the article had several of them) that writing like that detracts badly from the subject's image rather than enhancing it. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 16:54, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Verismo & Puccini

    Hi, I did a fairly extensive rewrite of the Verismo (music) page, following up on our discussions on the talk page there almost 2 years (!) ago. I think it could still use some more quality citations, but I wondered if you'd provide any other suggestions. I left the section on verismo singers pretty much alone, although it is not well cited and I have some doubts about what it is saying. Also, I've been chipping away at the Puccini page, and would welcome suggestions there. Specifically, in terms of structure. The Puccini article has a chronological account of his works, followed by about 5 or 6 sections that address some aspect of his life non-chronologically. I can't help but wonder if it wouldn't be better to integrate this material into the main chronology, as in the Verdi page, but that would require a very substantial rewrite. Thoughts? David.thompson.esq (talk) 00:29, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi David. Sorry for my tardy reply. I got quite sidetracked this past month, mainly by my runaway librettist. I'm about to be travelling for the next two weeks. Will definitely have a look when I get back. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 16:30, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Caterino Mazzolà

    Thanks for the extra stuff. I've been working through what Grove has to say, and there are things that I still need to deal with, hopefully tomorrow, but then I'm off to Grewelthorpe or thereabouts for a few days of folly from Tuesday, then back to York on Friday, then off to the ROH for King Roger and next (would you believe it) I've been summoned to spend a couple of weeks (11 May +) for jury service. Oh, well, it might (or might not) be interesting. Best (User talk:GuillaumeTell) 00:12, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Template:OotMProposed

    First Verdi restoration...

    Thanks for the tweak. I'm not as active on the opera project as I should be anymore, because I've moved into image work so much, so I don't know all the conventions of the page. By the way, you might be interested in User_talk:Crisco_1492#Request - there are quite possibly other illustrated vocal scores where those come from. By the way, if there's anything I can do to make the OotM stuff work better, let me know - I know a lot more about templating now than when I wrote it. Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:33, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    In other news, my Verdi project in honour of Viva-Verdi will likely get us five new Verdi FPs, which should be a boon to the Opera portal - for his importance, Verdi is very underrepresented. Adam Cuerden (talk) 10:46, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    This is brilliant,. Thanks so much! You're right about Verdi being seriously underrepresented on the portal. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 11:16, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Bit of a snag in that the Rigoletto and I Lombardi images have four supports out of the five-vote quorum, and may thus fail to pass at this time, but I'll renominate them. My current work is on the Aida cover, which is gorgeous and difficult - I've done an initial mockup at File:Giuseppe Verdi, c. 1872 Aida vocal score cover - Restoration.jpg, and if that looks pretty damaged, don't worry: this is the original: Progress is actually quite good. Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:38, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    File:Giuseppe Verdi, Lombardi alla prima crociata. Libretto, 1843 - Restoration.jpg

    This is now a featured picture, and should probably get added to Portal:Opera. I'll try to do so soon if you don't. =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 12:17, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi Adam. Done! By the way, it's definitely the libretto for the premiere. "Carnevale 1843"=February 1843. Note also the cast list just before Act 1 in the libretto of which this is the title page. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 13:04, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Excellent! I know all of these are very early editions, but I want to be careful, as, for example, I have scores that I know full well aren't first editions that have cast lists for the originators of the various roles. I'll add that to the image description page. "Title page of an 1843 libretto of Giuseppe Verdi's I Lombardi alla prima crociata. Very early edition, possibly first edition, dating to the time of the opera's première." is good, right? There's sometimes multiple editions in the first run of something (Usually along the line of some typo fixes), so I don't want to say first. Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:11, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]


    By the way, Giovanna d'Arco and the three Les Troyens images are all but certainties to pass in the next few days. Carl Nielsen should be fine as well, but there's a little controversy at the FA over documentation, I think partially because carte de visites are a little obscure nowadays, and that's how it was first published. Luckily, I spent some time fixing the images on Nielsen's works to the temporally-nearest good-quality photograph of Nielsen, which gave it a few extra usages. =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:23, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Also, have you noticed that Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Opera#Verdi_image_project keeps getting major setbacks: I keep adding more images to the to-do list, vastly increasing the amount of time it will take to complete. ;) Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:51, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Oh, one other thing. What's your opinion of this? File:Hector Berlioz, Béatrice et Bénédict score cover.jpg It's a first edition - I have a source for that - but it's not particularly illustrative of any scenes in the opera. That vignetting is fixable - don't worry about that, just give me your impression as to how valuable it is. Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:33, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Giovanna d'Arco

    File:Giuseppe_Verdi,_Giovanna_d'Arco,_Vocal_Score_-_Restoration.jpg is now a featured picture. Could you handle this one? I'm worried I'll focus too much on the thing I find most interesting - the looseness of the biographical telling - to the exclusion of things that should be included. Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:50, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Les Troyens

    Three images, all featured. How you want to handle this? Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:21, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Done :). Voceditenore (talk) 08:03, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks! Looks like the next two are Nielsen and La traviata, then probably Robinson Crusoé (because a user suggested I mix it up by, say, doing an illustration to Robinson Crusoe, and I'm evil), and then L'eclair which was almost done when my fiendish plan emerged. Rigoletto will be somewhere in there.
    Any preference after that? Working on the Aida, but realised that such a good opera FP might prejudice people against the monochrome ones. =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 09:26, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Actually, there'll probably be at least three or four Aidas. There's three images in the article I think could be featured besides the one I'm working on. Your call as to how you want to handle that at the portal. Adam Cuerden (talk) 09:27, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Nadine Koutcher

    Thanks for tweaking the article start at Nadine Koutcher. I'm a little skeptical on your source's (De Telegraaf) placing her birth year as 1983. I looked long and hard for that, but couldn't find a source. De Telegraaf got the audience prize wrong, so it's not infallible. I suspect they just subtracted 32 from 2015, which right now only has an evens chance of being right.

    Didn't know persondata has been deprecated. Thanks for that.

    I'll let others expand for a while, but if I see no takers I'll expand it a bit myself. I watched the competition. Totally loved her. c1cada (talk) 19:48, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi c1cada. Re her year of birth, I'm sure the Telegraaf got it from the actual data from International Vocal Competition ´s-Hertogenbosch. Voice competitions almost always list year of birth since they all have an age limit. Cardiff used to list the complete DoB, e.g. [11], but seem to have changed to just giving age in years. See also her birth year here and on a Russian classical music radio station here. The Russian Wikipedia gives her full DoB, although I'm not comfortable with using that, primarily for privacy reasons. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 09:16, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Ah right. Much more familiar with the sources than I am (hugely more!) Thanks for that. Didn't think of checking with the Russian Wikipedia, though I can read it. Agree with you re privacy. Best. c1cada (talk) 09:30, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Les Paladins

    Restored at original title. You are welcome to move it to ensemble if you prefer that, cheers Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:59, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Above is apropos this. Voceditenore (talk) 09:38, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks so much Jim! I've also left a note on the talk page re the excessive quoting from the garbled English version of their website. So, all's well that ends well. It's got five incoming links too. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 09:23, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Museion

    Hello. Thanks for your help about the copyright issues of the page I am trying to create about the Museion. Unfortunately, I don't understand how to move on. Should I use the rewritten paragraph in the original page and then submit it again? Thanks. --Lmelk (talk) 07:49, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi Lmelk. Because that big template was put on the page and you've re-written the whole draft at User talk:Lmelk/Museion (Bozen)/Temp, it needs an administrator to sort out the "paperwork". I've asked Anne Delong [12] to replace the old draft with your new version, and move the whole thing to Draft:Museion (Bozen). I've let her know that I approved the rewrite from a copyright point of view. For now, I suggest you wait until she completes the move before working on either page. It shouldn't take long. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 16:50, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    WOW!! That was fast!! Thanks so much Anne! It's all fixed, Lmelk. You can go head and work on Draft:Museion (Bozen) now. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 16:55, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    (edit conflict)Hello, Lmelk and Voceditenore. I have moved the new draft to Draft:Museion (Bozen) where you can continue to work on it. I suggest adding more citations to independent sources (news reports, magazine article, books, etc.) before resubmitting, to show that this is a well-known museum. Good luck. —Anne Delong (talk) 16:59, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you very much for your help, I will improve the references --Lmelk (talk) 07:22, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    More Opera FPs

    I'm not sure how you want to handle Nielsen. Here's my proposal: Portal:Opera/Selected article/37. I edited the article text to focus on opera more. I can get La traviata, though. Adam Cuerden (talk) 12:53, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Adam, I agree the best way to handle the Nielsen picture is in the article blurb itself. However, I have removed Portal:Opera/Selected article/37 from the Portal:Opera/Selected article list. It was already on the portal as Portal:Opera/Selected biography/34. I have also removed the red links on the Selected article list. They are inappropriate. When we get another GA or FA which is an article as opposed to a biography, Selected article/37 can be recycled. Meanwhile, I'll go ahead and make a "Selected picture" page for the Traviata. Voceditenore (talk) 13:30, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh, sorry. My fault. I didn't mean to double up the article, just wasn't paying enough attention to which section I was looking at. Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:43, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    By the way, kind of thinking Portal:Opera/Selected picture/1 is about ready to be retired. It's the least interesting of the ones on the page. Perhaps we could switch it with something else? We have a few other G&S FPs.... Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:45, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Perhaps one or more of File:M. Browne - Herbert Railton - Sydney Grundy - Arthur Sullivan - Haddon Hall.jpg, File:Jules Massenet - Le Cid 3e Acte, 6e Tableau - L'Illustration.jpg, or File:William Russell Flint - W. S. Gilbert - Savoy Operas - Princess Ida 1.jpg? Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:49, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Rigoletto as well, now. I really don' t have time to do the text now, but I've set them up (without increasing the count on the portal), and will finish them tonight if you don't. Adam Cuerden (talk) 09:19, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Done, except for Rigoletto. Will do that later today. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 11:36, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Ooops! I hadn't seen that you'd done Rigoletto. I've tightened up the wording and trimmed it slightly. Anyhow, all 4 are now added to the rotation. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 18:00, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    No problem. I kind of rushed it as I thought you had already added it to the rotation, so was doing it on a tablet, which are not very good for text editing, but I figured it better to make sure that, if it came up in rotation, it would look okay, then copyedit later.
    In other news, L'éclair got promoted; I've set it up at Portal:Opera/Selected picture/64. Checked a libretto because I was worried about the plot summary; wasn't as bad as I thought, honestly: it's one of those relatively simple domestic comedies that centre around who marries whom. No particularly high stakes, but beautiful music and plenty of scope for the singers to charm and pull the audience in. Adam Cuerden (talk) 12:56, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Also set up Portal:Opera/Selected picture/65. Fairly basic adaptation of the article's intro. I believe the next ones are Aida, Aida, Aida, Aida, and Aida, in roughly that order. I spent a lot of time getting really good images for Aida (the article was such a mess of images beforehand, so I tried to up it to far fewer, but better ones), and I think it's going to show at FPC. Adam Cuerden (talk) 12:17, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Maltese

    Hey there, Voce, how are you? Just wanted to confirm Draft:Peter Paul Ciantar and Draft:Harmen Vanhoorne are non-notable. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 20:07, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Also, is Draft:Acoustics of the violin worth working on or should it just be TNT'd? FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 19:58, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi FoCuS! The violin one is a complete non-starter. It's a how-to/essay/OR/buyer's guide, with dubious uncheckable refs and more importantly, any information worth salvaging is almost certainly included already in Violin, Violin construction and mechanics, and String instrument#Sound production. I'll get to your other two chaps later today. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 06:56, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks, Voce. What about this singer? FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:54, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi FoCuS! Yes, he (Draft:Manfred Hemm) is definitely notable. Lots of performances in leading roles in leading opera houses, and the reviews to prove it. He also created the title role in Gottfried von Einem's opera Der Tulifant. Plus a discography that would let him pass on WP:MUSICBIO alone. Not that it adds to his notability, but he used to be married to this lady. Dreadful draft though. Needs cleanup and much better referencing. Shall I put out a call for help at WikiProject Opera? I might be able to get to it myself in a few days if no one else does. Still thinking about the maltesers. Voceditenore (talk) 15:54, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Sure, let's get it up to appropriate standards. Thanks, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 15:57, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    OK, FoCuS, now for the Maltese and the Belgian. Draft:Peter Paul Ciantar is dreadful. I hate "hails from" and the listing of his hobbies, but he may well be notable in... er... Malta. It all depends on that first reference which rather fudges the issue. If he actually has an entry in Dictionary of Maltese Biographies, he might scrape a pass. I haven't got a clue.
    The Belgian (Draft:Harmen Vanhoorne) may be kind of well-known among ...er... cornettists. But there really isn't much about him at all, apart from having won these brass band contests and only one recording on a Belgian label which I've never heard of. But it's probably worth keeping this around for a while in case something else shows up.
    Best, Voceditenore (talk) 16:21, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi FoCuS! The Agim Hushi article is dreadful, but I suspect he's notable and it could be "proved" if one looked hard enough for citations. I'd leave it for now. When I get back from Italy in September, I'll see about de-pufferizing and referencing it. I suspect by the time I'm finished... the article will be a stub that's shorter than its reference section.
    Draft:Elin Soderstrom miiight eventually scrape a notability pass. But it would be a ton of work finding adequate references and the current state of the draft is somewhat akin to a pig pen. This is one of those cases where, unless you are personally interested in putting in a lot of work for very little encyclopedic value, it's better to leave the ball in the draft creator's court. I note that she almost certainly has a conflict of interest. Observe the "role reversal" with the creator of Mary Soderstrom (another very problematic article).
    I see that On Site Opera was accepted and probably rightly so. As for the interesting discussion, I tend to avoid those like the plague. They make my brain hurt . I'm off to Italy next week—a part of deepest, darkest Tuscany with not fab internet connection—and staying a month. Yay! Best, Voceditenore (talk) 11:04, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh, how I envy you! Have the best time possible, and no Wiki-peeking! Cheers, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 14:15, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Name issue at Atilla Kiss B.

    I would love to know your thoughts. See Talk:Atilla Kiss B. Best.4meter4 (talk) 23:38, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Replied there. Voceditenore (talk) 13:04, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Draft:Némethy, Ella (1895 - 1961), mezzo-soprano

    I just discovered this article on a notable mezzo that completely lifted word for word the material from Grove. I put quotes around some of it and rewrote some of it to avoid copyright concerns. I haven't checked for copyright issues in the lower unwikified paragraphs. Given the user name, I am guessing the article creator is a relative of the subject.4meter4 (talk) 20:54, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    For an article title, the name in English order would be enough, this is probably similar, see also Baba Macnee and recording Lohengrin, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:05, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, it appears that the whole article was a copy paste/close paraphrase job. I have re-worded things to avoid too close of a paraphrase and added more content and refs. The article is in ok shape now other than the title. I have marked the article as patrolled. I'm not sure what the process is for moving draft articles to main space. Can you help with that Voceditenore?4meter4 (talk) 01:13, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks so much 4meter4! Great job! I've moved it to article space as Ella Némethy and created a redirect for the spelling without the diacritic. I'm now going to leave a note to the draft's creator about the copyright issue. I think you're right given the username. They probably won't be creating other articles, but just in case, better to head off future trouble. It's possible they were planning to work on it further and add references before submitting to Articles for Creation, but even so it's a bad idea to copypaste and then try to fix it up later. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 05:31, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    You're welcome. And thank you for your help!4meter4 (talk) 05:35, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Laura Giordano

    Dear Voceditenore, thanks for editing the article on Laura Giordano. I made further changes and cuts, which hopefully eliminate some of the remaining issues and improve the readability. Could you go over the article once again? Thanks!

    ParideVezzoso (talk) 15:15, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi Paride (great name). I'll try to take a look this week. If I run out of time before I leave for Italy, I'll ask for volunteers at WikiProject Opera. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 10:23, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks! ParideVezzoso (talk) 12:43, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi Paride. I had a quick look at it and it's much improved. When I get back in September, I'll look at it more in more detail. Meanwhile, if you need more help or just have any questions, drop a message at WikiProject Opera. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 17:14, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Great, thanks. Meantime I made a few new little tweaks to the article. Hope it's not too much to ask, but could you also check Nino Surguladze? Was looking for her on Wiki, but the logs said the article was deleted twice in the past for copyright violations (copy/paste from the official biography). So I had to start from the scratch. Cheers, ParideVezzoso (talk) 18:30, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Realmmb

    Hi, this message to you isn't that important that you waste your time to read you, but still please have a read. You regarded the page Djair Miranda Garcia as my page which isn't true and I had some personal reasons which made me the first "Page Maker" in my wiki friend society. So that wasn't either my page nor were my points, and those info were collected by me only. So please don't grow any enmity with me and all I did my placing wrong tags was due to my inexperience but I tried to make myself comfortable with those tags. So please forgive me. Thank You, RealmmbCon.Talk 15:19, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Replied on your talk page. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 18:06, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Portal:Opera

    I've done a few FP descriptions myself, but I'm not sure about some of them. Could you have a quick look? I also prepared the next couple, but don't put those live until they actually pass.

    Note there will likely be five or six Aida FPs, so I'm trying to treat each one differently. Adam Cuerden (talk) 04:46, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Gloria Davy

    I have completely re-written the article on soprano Gloria Davy. Her obituaries didn't do her justice; completely leaving out her European career with major houses, and many of her achievements outside of the Met in her early career. Would you mind reading through just to make sure there aren't any typos, etc.? Thanks.4meter4 (talk) 23:31, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi 4meter4! I'll be happy to have a look. It might not be for a couple of days as I'm in the midst of expanding the ripping yarn that is the La magicienne synopsis and don't want my aged brain to lose its momentum. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 10:15, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you! No rush. The article is not going anywhere.4meter4 (talk) 13:16, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Opera#Verdi_image_project

    Could you not archive this? I mean, I know and understand why you did, but I'm actually actively using it. The Stage 2 discussions are because it's running low on Verdi and need to replenish it, but they don't replace it. Although, if the images are getting too much, we could archive the "done" section or turn it into a link list. Feel free to archive the Stage 2 section in a week or so, though. If people don't respond by then, they're not going to. I'll make sure to move the results up. Adam Cuerden (talk) 11:13, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Sorry, I thought you had finished with that one. I would appreciate it, though, if you could turn it into a link list. As I've mentioned before, excessive numbers of files (and overly large individual ones) make the page long to load. Voceditenore (talk) 11:26, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Will sort that out later today. It's useful to have the To Do as images, as I've been using them to grab images, but we could easily lose the images in "Done", maybe just posting them as temporary additions to the page every five featured or so, or.... Hmm
    You know what, why don't I just put the finished images onto a subpage? Then people can click through, and it won't slow loading if they don't. Done. Adam Cuerden (talk) 11:30, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    You can archive the Aida images section. I offered people a chance to object to what I planned to do Aida to get the images in line with good practices; and, at this point, it's nearly a month since I made the changes I proposed. At this point, if they don't like what I did, well, take it up at Talk:Aida; bit late to object to the proposal now. =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 11:40, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I got it. Think that's got 27 images off the page. Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:51, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    La circassienne

    Hi, voceditenore. There appears to be a slight mistranslation in the lead paragraph. "Morte d'amour" can't mean "death of love"; French for "death" is "la mort", and "death of love" would be "la mort de l'amour". "Morte d'amour", where "morte" is the feminine of the past participle of "mourir", translates as "[woman] dead of love". I'm telling you here because I don't seem to be able to follow it up, or at least I don't see it in Casaglio's Almanacco, which is where the link goes. Cheers, Awien (talk) 23:07, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi Awien. Thanks so much for that! Amadeus revamped their website last year, and the links to the almanac entries all changed. Grrrr! We're trying to fix them all, but quite a few have slipped through the net. Anyhow, I've fixed the the link, and it is "Morte," and you're absolutely right about the translation. I've fixed that too. I went for "Died of Love". Best, Voceditenore (talk) 05:23, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    You're welcome ^_^ Awien (talk) 11:08, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Barnstar

    The Copyright Cleanup Barnstar
    For remedying previously unidentified, major copyright concerns within Jerome Myers. Excellent eye for it. Keep up the good work! fdsTalk 23:09, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you very much for your kind words, Fdssdf. It appears that all's well that ends well there. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 10:11, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Portal:Opera/Selected picture

    Hate to be a pain, but could you help with 69-72? Meant to get them all done, but it's been a bad week. Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:01, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Sure, Adam. I'll try to get to it in the next two days. I'm in the process of tying up a lot of loose ends before my annual month-long sojourn in deepest, darkest, Tuscany where I pretty much take a vacation from the internet. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 10:09, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Upon your return

    What better way to forget about Italy than reviewing? Ha ha!

    On another note, can't believe Piano Concerto No. 1 (Chopin) is such a poor article, considering it's one of the most played romantic pieces of all time. I'll see if I can do something about that. FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 18:59, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    A Barnstar for you

    The Barnstar of Diplomacy
    For tirelessly editing and improving René Bazinet, and thereby resolving an issue over the use of photographs from Wikimedia Commons. Woodlot (talk) 13:27, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you, Woodlot. That's very kind of you! I quite enjoyed writing it, an activity infinitely more pleasant than "listening" to the verbal onslaught over there which had reached truly operatic proportions. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 14:11, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Opera portal

    A thought: We currently have 19 featured articles on operas and theatres/companies in our project's remit (plus another 13 on composers). I believe that doesn't include the Gilbert and Sullivan and Wagner; Wagner gets us one general article and two biographies (Category:FA-Class_Richard_Wagner_articles) and - ignoring Creatures of Impulse, which isn't really an opera - Category:FA-Class Gilbert and Sullivan articles gives us three operas and a biography.

    We could also use Category:FL-Class_Opera_articles and Category:FL-Class_Richard_Wagner_articles selectively

    Should we just switch to fully featured? It'd mean losing some good articles, but it wouldn't be that big of a switch. Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:18, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi Adam. I see you've been busy with the FPs for the portal. Thanks! I'm not sure what you mean by "Should we just switch to fully featured?" Do you mean using only FA/FLs in the portal? I'm not in favour of that. I think it's important to present a wide variety of stuff, frankly. The goal is to interest people in the subject and show them what's out there. I think we should keep the GAs and the selected B class articles. There's no upper limit on the number of articles in rotation. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 17:48, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Good point. Just an idea. I suppose that some day, when we have a good variety of FAs and FLs, then it'd be worth reconsidering, but, for the moment, we'd get a very biased sample. Speaking of which, Aida will be very well represented, but I'm trying my best to make sure each description takes a different tack. It comes down to one simple thing: Aida was such a mess image-wise that someone needed to fix it up, and I did - and I know where to find good images. If it gets too much, we could leave one or two out, or reduce the frequency they're shown (simple matter, basically, use {{Random portal component}} within, say, Portal:Opera/Selected picture/5. But I think we have enough other images that it doesn't matter that much. Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:57, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    René Bazinet

    I don't know how to reference this information, but his birthday is plainly listed, on his own Facebook account, as follows: https://www.facebook.com/rene.bazinet2/about and I believe it looks better as the exact date, too. Can you please change it? Also, please change the photo caption back to how I edited it, as listing his name, again, is redundant and it's more accurate the way I listed it, as the photo wasn't taken during a workshop session. It was taken at the Studio Bizz workshop facilities, while -No- workshop was in progress. I believe it looks better the way I listed it, too. It would be the respectful thing to do, as well, considering it's the caption to my picture. I didn't change any of your lovely article, out of respect for your work and I'd appreciate you doing the same for me. Thank you, again, for composing such a very nice article. Blythe Spirit (talk) 13:32, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Hello Blythe Spirit. I have changed "during" to "at". However, the standard style for the infobox caption is to state the subject's name and in the style I used. The word "photographed" is even more redundant since it is obviously a photograph, and we never separate words with hyphens as you had done. The fact that you took the photograph is irrelevant, as is the fact that I wrote most of the article. Editorial decisions are made with reference to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. It has nothing to do with "respect". It's about complying with Wikipedia's Manual of Style. As for the date of birth, that is a content issue and should be discussed on the article's talk page. Please see my comment at Talk:René Bazinet#Full date of birth, and comment there if you wish. Voceditenore (talk) 06:15, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    I believe you have some sort of personal vendetta, which you're now playing out against my making -any- edits to your work. This is unfortunate and it makes no sense. I have given you praise and thanked you for the lovely work you've done on Mr. Bazinet's page, as a direct result of my picture Deletion Request, and was only endeavoring to make the area - beneath my picture of him - appear accurate. His DOB is substantiated on both his own Facebook page, which is 'publicly' accessible and also on the IMDb site, which is used as a reference for his article, here. There should be no problem including it beneath his picture. Besides which, surely you can see that it looks strange and unprofessional the way it stands. Moreover, I do not see the relevance of discussing the -personal- problem(s) you appear to have, with me, on the article's talk page.Blythe Spirit (talk) 15:37, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    This is not a personal issue. Your comments to that effect are both unconstructive and unwarranted. I do not have "personal problems" with you. I consider your edits inappropriate per Wikipedia policies and guidelines. As I said before, and as you have been told elsewhere by at least one other editor, please take this discussion to Talk:René Bazinet where it belongs—minus the personalised commentary. I will not discuss it any further here. Voceditenore (talk) 18:19, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    The Lute Player (Orazio Gentileschi): attribution of Francesca Caccini as the lutenist?

    For reasons I don't understand, the editor Haspajen nominated this picture for Featured Picture as a portrait of the Italian 17th lutenist and composer Francesca Caccini, editing in Wikipedia and Commons at several places as preparation for his nomination. Two editors, the second myself, pointed out that there is no evidence whatsoever for this attribution. Moreover, the attribution has never been suggested to my knowledge. The holding museum, the National Gallery of Art in Washington makes no mention of Caccini on their webpage and neither does any of several standard reference works I have consulted. Hafspajen's error appears to arise from the fact that CDs of Caccini's music, which is still performed today, are commonly illustrated by one of several paintings, among which Gentileschi's painting. But of course that doesn't imply she is the sitter. The attribution is, moreover, extremely implausible because the painting is an allegory in which the young lutenist is portrayed with the bodice of her kirtle loosed, the tassle dangling provocatively, suggesting matters amorous as well as musical, an ages-old alliance. Of course no sitter of the age would have allowed herself to be portrayed in this way.

    For a period of some days Hafspajen declined to comment. It was only when an administrator intervened and commented that the attribution simply couldn't go forward in Wikipedia's voice as it stood, that Hafspajen made a revision. He now say the painting possibly depicts (his bolding) Caccini. The administrator is satisfied, but I demur. Hafspajen directs me to you. I should be glad if you would clarify. Thank you. Ayesha23 (talk) 15:54, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Replied at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Orazio Gentileschi - Il suonatore di liuto (National Gallery of Art).jpg. - Voceditenore (talk) 06:20, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Draft:Íride Martínez

    Hello, Thank you very much for updating the talk page of Draft:Íride Martínez. I would like to ask for advise on article review. Would you know where I could ask to have the article reviewed to see if it can be moved to the mainspace. Your help with this would be greatly appreciated.Besenok (talk) 19:26, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Hello, Besenok. I'm abroad at the moment with not terribly good internet access. But I'll try to review the draft when I get back in September, if I don't manage it before then. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 06:18, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Callum James Greens

    You PRODded this, and it was deleted. Undeletion has been requested at WP:REFUND, so I have restored it, and now notify you in case you wish to consider AfD. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 09:32, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Thanks, I've commented at the AfD which another editor has opened. Voceditenore (talk) 18:26, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    The Golden Rule

    Hello! I am new to this forum, however I wanted to say I admire the way you dealt with such an unpleasant circumstance concerning the "onslaught" you were subjected to concerning your edits of Rene Bazinet's page. It just so happens that I "know" the identity of the "person" who gave you trouble; suffice to say that "she" DOES NOT have a relationship with RB, DOES NOT speak for RB, nor does she have RB's "ear" or approval for anything concerning his page (with the exception that she did indeed take the photographs that were in dispute). She is misleading everyone here, giving the impression she "knows all" and has the inside track concerning RB... I assure you (as one who knows RB personally), she does not....

    Thank you for your time Voceditenore. Parenchyma18 (talk) 15:06, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Thank you for your kind words, Parenchyma18. Your assessment of the situation is pretty much what I had also assumed. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 06:52, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you! The best to you as well....Parenchyma18 (talk) 12:55, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Is Gossip Mongering Allowed on Wikipedia?

    To clarify things, Voceditenore, the person who is spreading this gossip does not have an intimate relationship with René Bazinet. She is simply a fan, who has recently begun to develop an acquaintance with him. Conversely, René and I spent a significant amount time together, throughout the years, but ultimately had a falling out over very personal issues, which are really no one’s business other than ours. Talking about them is not suitable in a public forum, such as this.

    Parenchyma18 is guilty of a falsehood by stating that I do not know René personally. In point of fact I know him far more personally than she. Suffice it to say, he is extremely unhappy about how our relationship ended and is still quite bitter about it. Therefore, I have prevailed upon the help of another person to try and get through to René, for me, in regard to the matter of his birthday, which he is apparently unwilling to change on the FB page, due to not knowing how.

    It is unfair and inequitable to talk about me behind my back and I consider it quite offensive, too. I’m only going to mention this once and not attempt to defend myself against any future messages between the two of you. Please understand, however, that if Parenchyma18 really believed in "The Golden Rule" she would not be posting gossip about private matters, which are none of her affair and that don’t concern her, in the least. Moreover, I don't believe Wikipedia should allow it anywhere in its venue. Blythe Spirit (talk) 13:12, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    • Utterly incorrect, Blythe Spirit....
    You presume I "gossip", when in fact I merely point out to others who are unaware of your history, that you pass yourself off as Mr. Bazinet's "spokeswoman". Gossip is when one talks behind one's back to others... this is an open forum, no hiding behind curtains here...
    I am neither a "fan" or "acquaintance" of Mr. Bazinet - I have a friendship that long pre-dates your supposed "significant time". The fact that I know your identity does not equate to you knowing mine... a Chester Cat never reveals his true identity... nor did I reveal yours. You make personal, rude and disparaging remarks to others but have the audacity to lecture about impropriety? You opened the door, I merely closed it.
    One should suggest you retire your personal qualms with (it seems) several of the Users here on Wikipedia, the appearance of such is very unbecoming. Parenchyma18 (talk) 13:39, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    What pray tell is a "Chester Cat?" When did you meet René -- was it pre 2002? I think not. You are who I think you are, too, and you just met him last year. Furthermore, you have not had a romantic or any other such personal involvement with him. I have had a personal relationship, which I do not mean to sound boastful about, because I actually regret it. My identity is on my pictures and I have not passed myself off as anyone's "spokeswoman." That's your misconception and if anyone else got that impression, that's their misconception, too. Please stop posing as an authority, on René Bazinet, while putting me down and as previously mentioned, telling falsehoods - about me - as neither is at all in keeping with "The Golden Rule." Blythe Spirit (talk) 14:02, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Blythe Spirit, I could not care less about whatever relationship you claim to have with the article's subject, although I do have my doubts about some your claims. You have repeatedly said outright or implied strongly that he has been in direct communication with you about the article and the photographs, e.g.,
    "I deleted my article and the pictures, because Mr. Bazinet did not want it on Wikipedia".
    And...
    " Mr. Bazinet and I are embarrassed to have the images of him representing such a collection of inferior, inaccurate, text"
    Most recently you wrote:
    "I know and have been associated with Mr. Bazinet, starting in 2002, which the photos I supplied - to supplement my initial article, on him, and one of which still adorns his page - prove. Therefore, I can personally confirm his date of birth."
    It does not prove a thing about his date of birth nor the veracity of your claims to an ongoing relationship since 2002, nor your claim that you are relaying his express wishes in your comments about the article. More importantly, it has no relevance whatsoever to Wikipedia's policies which are the only ones which will inform article content. All of this has been explained to you numerous times. Nor do I care about whatever relationship Parenchyma18 may have with him, let alone who he or she "really is". That is why I closed the discussion at Talk:René Bazinet before you say something you'll regret. Both of you should now drop the stick. The only person who matters is René Bazinet himself. As I pointed out at Talk:René Bazinet, he has avenues where he can express concerns about both the article and the talk page comments by you and others, if he has any. Voceditenore (talk) 14:39, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    You are correct, Voceditenore, my apologies. Thank you for your input and advice, this subject is of no further interest to me, and I shall refrain from any further discussion concerning this matter. Parenchyma18 (talk) 14:54, 3 September 2015 (UTC) Oh, BTW, I meant "Cheshire Cat"... autocorrect substituted the wrong word... technology trying to out-think one!Parenchyma18 (talk) 15:02, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Ha Parenchyma18, that's nothing compared to a student I had who submitted an essay on Jean Piaget and allowed her autocorrect to change his name repeatedly to "Jean Piglet". But it got worse—she also let the autocorrect change her own name at the top of the paper. Anyhow, if you ever decide to turn your hand to article writing and need some help, just give me shout. Despite the occasional kerfuffles and shenanigans, it's actually a lot of fun especially if you stick to long-dead people, like this lady and this chap, and recherché 19th century shows like this one. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 15:27, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • All the passages you quoted are true, Voceditenore. Although I may not have been in direct contact, with René for quite some time, that doesn't mean I didn't have help from others, who conveyed his thoughts to me. During the 'Deletion Request' process adding all that would have been too convoluted and I didn't see the need to. Additionally, my five (5) hours of taped interview, with René, in 2002 when the photo shoot took place, include his date of birth. You are of course free to believe whatever you like. People generally do. I know the truth and that's all that matters. I still believe that you and Parenchyma18 are missing the most pertinent point, here. If Parenchyma18 actually knows him and wants to do something significant for René, instead of just spreading rumors and putting me down, why doesn't she persuade him to change his FB birthday info to make it accessible to the Public rather than Friends of Friends? It's something I haven't been able to successfully do through proxy. Blythe Spirit (talk) 15:13, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Thank you, Voceditenore, I may explore the options I have before me to contribute something worthwhile in the future! I am a "Babe in the Woods" here, so to speak, but quite a few subjects interest me (The Civil War, French literature and History..), so I will definitely seek your guidance and assistance in the future! Most gracious offer, thank you again!Parenchyma18 (talk) 16:08, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    • Better yet, Voceditenore, since both of you apparently have no respect for me, whatsoever, and Parenchyma18 claims to have known René “personally” for “decades” she must have some very nice pictures of him that could be uploaded to Wikimedia to take the place of mine. That would solve my whole objection to the incomplete, unprofessional looking -year of birth- caption, beneath my current image that I've been so persistent about. I really would like nothing better than to delete that image, along with my other two, from Wikimedia and not be concerned with how they're used, any longer. If you’d just do me that courtesy, Voceditenore, I guarantee everyone would be much happier, including René, himself. Unfortunately, Parenchyma18 is ignoring both valid suggestions, which I've also added to her talk page, about persuading René to change his FB birthday info to make it accessible to the Public and/or uploading a pic or two, to display on his page. If Parenchyma18 actually has at least one good picture of René that she’s collected over the decades and I can’t see why she wouldn’t, it would be the perfect solution don't you think? My pics are nearly 13 years old so she should have some more current ones, in fact. Blythe Spirit (talk) 16:40, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Blythe Spirit, you have repeated your views and unpleasant, personalised commentary multiple times, in multiple places, to multiple editors who have all told you the same thing. For the last time, please drop the stick. It's not going to happen. Voceditenore (talk) 18:12, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Voceditenore&oldid=679296981"