User talk:Antandrus

Greetings, welcome to my talk page. Please leave me new messages at the bottom of the page. I usually notice messages soon. If I think it is important to keep a thread together I will respond here; otherwise I probably will respond on your talk page.

Dawn, from my back patio.
*Haec dies quam fecit Dominus. Ex ultemus et laetemur in ea.*

Talk page archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16.

Re: Smile

My pleasure! :-) KrakatoaKatie 08:11, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou!

Thanks for shooting down Stalinslovechild, I would offer you a barnstar, but I think this is a bit better: It's people like you that make Wikipedia great. Thanks again. HawkerTyphoon 16:41, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Hawker, appreciate it. Happy to help. Antandrus (talk) 22:12, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indef of SLC

User talk:StalinsLoveChild#Harassment is probably something that you need to explain, given that it seems to be a little bit too complex for anyone else. Seems like the lawyer type, too... Cheers, Daniel .Bryant 11:55, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I answered on your talk page and on AN/I. Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 14:57, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

mail

you have some mail (male?), should you choose to accept it. Mak (talk) 17:51, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of female composers

I've just moved the list back out of my userspace. If you would cast your keen eye on it, with a particular mind to the whole floruit business, I'd appreciate it. Mak (talk) 23:07, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! You're the best! Mak (talk) 00:47, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hum. The List of Renaissance composers seems to be arranged by "first" name, without regard to quality of name. I guess since I'm not willing to re-order the entire freaking list right now, I should just follow that somewhat random ordering? Mak (talk) 01:18, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I hate that ordering. Somebody just went and did it and I let it go with a sigh and a "whatever." I think it should be by date, like it used to be, or at least by century and surname (though as you get back beyond the 16th century, you have to decide if a "surname" is significant or not). It could also be by century and geographic region (Italy, Portugal, Spain, Low Countries, Burgundy ... but even that gets really complicated in the 15th and 16th centuries) Antandrus (talk) 01:24, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should do it by social-security number! ...maybe not. I think birth year might be best. I think with countries/areas we might get some annoying POV pushing and fighting. Maybe not, but whenever you put country in the mix you can get some surprising results. Mak (talk) 01:33, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, is there any reason that all the years on the List of Baroque composers are linked? That's generally one of my least favorite things for people to do. Well, not really, but it does seem pretty silly to link all those years. Mak (talk) 01:43, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's one of those changes in Wikipedia culture that I've noticed in the last year or so. We used to link dates all the time, now almost no one does. I think they should come out--after all, what the heck good do they do? Antandrus (talk) 01:45, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I thought there might be a secret-wiki-reason, that I still hadn't figured out after all this time. Mak (talk) 01:48, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ooh! But I almost forgot that I have a magic date-link-removing script, which meant that that edit just took practically no time! Yay! Mak (talk) 01:52, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cool! Do it to Renaissance composers too if you feel like it. :) Antandrus (talk) 02:02, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Arr! Every list is in a different order! The 20th century composers list is alpha, but my alpha version has absolutely everyone in it. What a freaking pain. Mak (talk) 03:12, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. I'm thinking about ways to do the ordering automatically. I could do it in a couple of different programs -- search for first occurrence of "1" in the line, pull next three characters, put into numeric field, order by ... that kind of thing. I have better tools for this on my PC at work. Doing it by hand is ... uh ... about as much fun as ... pick your metaphor based on worst childhood memory. :) Antandrus (talk) 03:15, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:UW help

Hi Antandrus,

You recently showed some interest with the user message and template harmonistion program. We will be starting the actual changes, we hope within the next week. But prior to that, what we would like from yourself is instead of an evening of vandal fighting or patrolling recent changes, you monitor the RC page for those actually doing the reverts and leaving user page messages. This may involve red wine as you see fit, I'll be quaffing a glass or two for certain this evening. We would like to make as many people aware of the fact that the templates they use are going to change. If you could seek out the RCP's and Cut n Paste the following message to their talk page that would be appreciated, or reworded as you see fit. Cheers. Khukri ^{(talk . contribs)} 09:27, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

==Upcoming template changes==

Hi, I've just noticed that you recently left a templated userpage message. I'm just bringing to your attention that the format and context of these templates will be shortly changing. It is recommended that you visit [[WP:UW|WikiProject user warnings]] and harmonisation discussion [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_user_warnings/templates|pages]] to find out how these changes could affect the templates you use. We also would appreciate any insights or thoughts you may have on the subject. Thanks for your understanding. Best regards ~~~~

John Dowland and...Sting?

Ok, my grandmother just sent me Songs from the Labyrinth. It's really...weird. It's almost not terrible. I mean, I think it might not be terrible. Then again, it might be. The lutenist has his moments, but I'm really opposed to the multi-tracking of Sting's voice in stuff like "Fine knacks for ladies", it's really just creepy sounding. I don't really understand that. Do people really think they are so good that they need to sing every part? Why? I also don't understand the spoken bits. Paul Hillier does that on some of his recordings as well. I guess they're supposed to give a feeling of mileu... but once again it just sounds to me like someone likes to hear themself too much. Sting's vowels are really strange, I can't quite put my finger on it. I guess part of it is that he lengthens all the diphthongs and uses reflexive rrrrs. Basically, I really do think Dowland's music was meant for singers whose voices were singer-ly, although it's hard to know what that really meant at the time, but Sting definitely sounds like he's been smoking a few packs of cigarettes. I'm also not particularly excited by his text interpretation, although I can imagine a lot worse. Really, it's just weird. Weird that he did it, weird that my grandmother sent it to me, and weird that I'm listening to it. I'm not hating it as much as I expected though, although I did hope for a little more original text interpretation or something.

hm, sorry for the stream-of-consciousness thing on your talk page, I thought you might be interested though. Mak (talk) 22:55, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Very very interesting. I think what's admirable is just that people take risks like that; most of the time the results will be crappy, but it's good to see the creativity at work; once in a while a "crossover" artist does something worth hearing. Do you remember a recording the Hilliard Ensemble did a few years ago -- lovely Renaissance polyphony, and then after a minute or so a soprano saxophone starts improvising? The first time I heard it I thought someone had turned my TV on in the background. Oh, and didn't Linda Ronstadt record opera arias once? (iirc, it was ghastly) And then there's Florence Foster Jenkins ... but she wasn't a pop sensation I suppose. Antandrus (talk) 23:08, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose it's good to take risks. I'm not sure about Florence Foster Jenkins, though... I think maybe she was just delusional. Oh dear, I just listened to one track where it sounds like he's beating his archlute (looks more like a theorbo, but whatever) with a large heavy stick. Also, he committed what I think is sacrilege to "Flow my tears" by having the lute come in about three measures late. I don't think I've heard the Hilliard ensemble/sax album. Which one was it? It's nice that a wider audience might hear Dowland, I just wish that they could hear it done a bit better. Better doesn't have to mean more traditionally, but frankly I expected him to add a bit of excitement and energy to songs which have a tendency to become rather languid and sleepy in the wrong hands, but he only managed to make them sleepier, and then cruelly abuse his instrument (it's not being beaten in a nice way-I can hear it crying)

Ok, so I sort of doubled back on myself, calling his treatment of "Flow my tears" sacrilege while wanting him to do something more exciting. I don't know what to say about that, except that "Flow my tears" is one of the more perfect songs ever created, and it's silly to mess its basic structure unless you're going to do something really awesome, which he didn't. Mak (talk) 23:18, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Poor lute. Poignant; they're so quiet, they suffer so, accompanying awful singers, and then they get beaten besides. --I also think "Flow my tears" is one of the most beautiful things ever written. I just noticed that Wikipedia has an article on the Philip K. Dick novel based on it, but not on the song itself. What??? Guess we're not done yet ... :) Antandrus (talk) 23:26, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you can learn to love all the Dellerisms, my Alfred Deller Dowland is quite good fun. Deller died the next year, poor bastard. It's probably a lot better than Sting. Moreschi 09:21, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't know if I'd even be here, if it weren't for Alfred Deller; he was one of the first "early music" singers I'd ever heard, and one of the most impressive. We've come a long way, in interpretation of old music, since then, but still some of those early recordings are amazing. (Don't bother with his Pérotin though.) Antandrus (talk) 12:18, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

His Purcell songs, though, is amazing [1], as is his Oberon in Britten's Dream, on the Modern front. Moreschi 12:37, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, I do have a certain place in my heart for Deller, as well as Purcell, of course :) So, on the subject of the redlink, I think I'm going to write an article, and I can't decide whether to have it at Flow my tears or at Lachrimae and have it be a bit broader in focus. when I was looking it up in Grove, I made a typo and wrote "Flow my teats" :P. Also, I'm trying to decide whether the recording from my recital is good enough to post. People have done it worse, but people (including myself) have done it far better. Maybe I can upload it here secretly, and you guys can tell me whether you think it's worth it. (i.e. whether this particular not-so-great version is better than none) Mak (talk) 17:20, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say "Flow my tears" and have "Lachrimae" as a redirect (specially as Sting seems to have listed it as "Flow my tears", which is now what most people will expect). If you want to use me as a preview for the recording, that fine by me. Moreschi 17:24, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I believe the name of the song is properly "Flow, my tears, fall from your springs", but "Lachrimae" is a book he published later, as well as a number of instrumental pieces based on "Flow, my tears". I'll put up a link if I can convert the recording and upload it. I'll do it here rather than on commons so I can delete it if necessary :P Mak (talk) 17:33, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

<<coming back after breakfast>> Wow, that's quite exciting indeed! I'm looking forward to it.

Are either of you familiar with the use of the tune in George Crumb's Black Angels? (wondering if that will light up blue or not). It's certainly a durable tune and concept, there used in the context of an anti-Vietnam-war piece. Antandrus (talk) 17:38, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

. Mak (talk) 18:04, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice! Use it. :) Antandrus (talk) 18:15, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can you somehow give me the Play in Browser option?? That's the only way these sound clips work for me: my computer seems pathetically unable to handle ogg. Moreschi 18:29, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't figured out how to do that myself yet. I download the file and open it in iTunes (I use a Mac); it's the only way for me. (Maybe Makemi can help us ... :) Antandrus (talk) 18:31, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Flow, my tears

live performance

Problems playing this file? See media help.

How's that? Mak (talk) 18:34, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lovely! Radiant singing. Actually, I'd just figured out how to get it in the browser, which seeming as I'm a complete technofool I was quite pleased with. Too good for Wikipedia. Moreschi 18:42, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, then I guess I'll put it on commons. I keep getting interrupted, or I would have saved the silly article by now. OOOOh well. Mak (talk) 23:22, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article: written, but kinda crummy. Mak (talk) 01:05, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it could definitely use more info. I'm sure someone will add the Sting thing. I've just had it up on my computer all day today, and keep getting interrupted, so I just wanted to save it already. Feel free to add whatever you like. I can't believe I can't find a facsimile online. I'll bet EEBO has it, but I don't have access any more, and they probably wouldn't appreciate us taking their images. But... what the heck is the point of public domain if you can't use any reproductions of stuff? Mak (talk) 01:12, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, I know what a pain it is about the PD issue ... I suspect a lot of the stuff can be used, but don't want to be the one who tries first and gets it wrong. It might be worthwhile doing part of it in Finale (I always say I'll do stuff like this and never get around to it)

I keep getting roadblocked on my writing too; I'm trying to write the Josquin works section but am distracted by everything from football games to just wanting not to be sitting at a computer. Antandrus (talk) 01:14, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

lol, "User:Antandrus is politcally correct and watches football"! Wait... is there football on now? I guess so, since it's the fall. They play football in the fall, right? Mak (talk) 01:17, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, my IQ drops 5 points every time I do, but come fall, I do watch football. Various friends and family members love to make fun of me. "You WHAT???" The beer and chips reside next to the stack of musicology journals. Rah. Go Bears. Go, go, go. Rah. Antandrus (talk) 01:20, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ech, you silly Mensans, you have IQ points to spare :)

Oh! It doesn't have any categories at the moment. Argh. And of course all of the categories are based on pop music, rather than art music, and the WikiProject song people are probably going to give me grief anyway, and want to put an infobox on it. Ok, I'm really whiny today. If a good category occurs to you, stick it in there. I'm going to try to make sense of them now. Mak (talk) 01:30, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's a good question. You know, we don't have all that many articles on individual compositions from the Renaissance (and earlier) -- and I think we should. For example I'm considering redlinking every piece in Josquin's works list and writing articles on them (feeling a little like Kafka's Hunger Artist, but oh well). Start with a cat lute songs, then compositions by John Dowland, maybe. Anyway I'm glad we have the article now. Antandrus (talk) 01:33, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ant, you rock.

Thought it would be more fun to get really, really weird instead of hanging another warning template. However, this explains why I'm not a rapper. Yo. - Lucky 6.9 00:57, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would you do anything about this

Or would you just figure it's some silly kid who will get sorted out eventually, and hopefully not too many people will come across the page and get too annoyed? Or would you MfD it? Mak (talk) 00:07, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh god. I wish the people who casually slap swastikas on their user pages would pick up a damn book and read about just who the Nazis were and what they did, or maybe even read the Wikipedia articles on the topic. 55,000,000 people died who did not need to die, due to the people who fought under that flag and symbol, and this kid invokes that most offensive of all insignia because he's pissed about USERBOXES.

Have I used the F-word yet on Wikipedia? Probably not. Just came close. Antandrus (talk) 05:28, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SB Courthouse Photos?

I'm going to write an article on the Santa Barbara courthouse. "The Courthouse has been called the most beautiful government building in America. Designed by William Mooser III, the Spanish-Moorish style building was completed in 1929, after the 1925 earthquake ruined much of the city. It occupies a square block in downtown Santa Barbara." Its one of the most important examples of California Spanish Moorish design. SB Courthouse Do you have any more photos of it which you could upload? Thanks Fairness And Accuracy For All 04:09, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: "Goldilocks" in the Philippines

Hello! I made a comment on the Philippine talk page, but I've thought of re-posting it here...anyway, I would just like to ask why "Goldilocks" was removed in the section about Filipino culture. There is a real Goldilocks fastfood/bakeshop chain here in the Philippines (just like Jollibee, Greenwich and Chowking), and it's found in most major cities in the Philippines. It also has television commercials and print ads in major TV stations and serial publications. And most children's party here in the Philippines usually have cakes that were ordered from Goldilocks. If an article (even if only a stub) needs to be created for this, I'll be happy to start researching about Goldilocks. --- Tito Pao 21:38, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thanks for removing vandalism from my page :) --Ali K 22:52, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're very welcome! I want Wikipedia to be a friendly place. Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 23:08, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		For dedication to improving and expanding Wikipedia. Good job! Sharkface217 02:14, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are quite welcome.

How!?

How do i add myself to wikipedia?! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nick Johnston281990 (talk • contribs) .

Why...

Actually, i do have a myspace, but i want to be known around the world, see, i am looking for new ways to present myself to the world for sponsors and stuff like that. I feel that Wikipedia is the perfect place for this... I hope you understand. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nick Johnston281990 (talk • contribs) .

Raimondi

Hi. I posted this on my talk page, but thought I'd better add it here too, in case you're not watching that. --Rbraunwa 03:58, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad I could help out. I don't really know anything about him, except what I read in the article. But I try to add images when I stumble across them. Here's a web page you might find helpful. --Rbraunwa 03:57, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for blocking the vandal

While I was busy reverting his changes, I see you blocked him. Kudos for getting there before I thought about it. Bobo . 05:10, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. It was just one of the standard trolling types. Happy editing! Antandrus (talk) 05:12, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for the user page revert. =) -- Gogo Dodo 05:12, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! Happy to help; I want this to be a nice place. :) Antandrus (talk) 05:13, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know anything about range blocks?

I think that's what we need for this Aaron Copland vandal fellow. Otherwise I guess we could semi-protect. Mak (talk) 18:17, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, Xaosflux did it. Mak (talk) 18:20, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Elgar edit war??!?!??

Hi there: This page (Enigma_Variations) seems to be going back and forth a lot between me and someone else; I have no idea why the other person wants to insist on his/her revision, which makes no sense. Suggestions? Thanks! --Wspencer11 (talk to me...) 20:15, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ant,

Could you remove your "delete" vote on "Brad Hines" entry as the criteria you sited has since been fixed?

kindly,

UtzChips--Utzchips 02:56, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ps. when I wrote "I own this photo, I meant on behalf of Brad Hines, I work for Yum Domains.--Utzchips 02:56, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]