User talk:Fred sienkiewicz
Hello, Fred Sienkiewicz, and welcome to Wikipedia! I'm sorry about the terribly late welcome... well, better late than never, right? Judging from the small amount of your edits, you might still find these links useful:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
- Frequently asked questions
- Be bold in updating pages
If you have any questions about Wikipedia or if you need any help on classical music related articles (I am an aspiring pianist and composer :)), don't hesitate to drop a note at my talk page. Regards from Slovenia, -Missmarple 13:53, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Your lastest trick, Dire Straits
[edit]Hello, i couldn't help noticing you play trumpet. I was wondering if you know if any sheet music is available for the Dire Straits-Your lastest Trick? Please reply on my talk page.
Kind regards,
Zesty Prospect 19:08, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Emptying categories
[edit]Hi there. Noticed that you'd been emptying out a couple of categories (Category:Opera oratorios and Category:Handel's Messiah), and just wanted to check what was happening and why. Did you get consensus for these changes, i.e. discuss them and get general agreement? Announcing after the event at Category talk:Opera oratorios "Hey all, I feel like this category is redundant" isn't really the way to go about it! (Incidentally, a Category talk page isn't a great place for discussion, as not many people have the page on their watchlist.)
I'm not saying that you have to discuss all category changes before you do them, but if you want to do something major such as emptying two established categories, I think it would be a good idea to see what others think. The WikiProject on Opera would be a good place to start for Category:Opera oratorios - I suspect they might be interested in one of their adopted categories being emptied in this way - and the WikiProject on composers for the Category:Handel's Messiah. I'm not saying that people will disagree with you at the end of the day, but at least that way, everyone is happy.
If you think a category is redundant and should be deleted (and either you don't think it needs pre-discussion or discussion hasn't persuaded you otherwise), then the way to deal with it is to list the matter at Categories for discussion. The instructions for doing so are on that page. This allows editors to discuss the matter in a principled way for a few days, before an administrator makes a decision whether to "keep", "delete", "merge" or "rename" the category, based on the consensus and arguments.
I'm conscious that, as you say [1], you're relatively new to the Wikipedia scheme, and I do hope that you don't take this as biting. But can I suggest that you undo the changes you have made to these categories and discuss them somewhere? Let me be clear - I don't know whether I agree with your decisions or not, partly because it's difficult to see what used to be in a category, but I think you need to discuss your ideas more. In the meantime, I'm going to undo one change of yours in each category to prevent the category from being speedily deleted as empty. Best wishes, Bencherlite 20:18, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
- No problem. Good luck with the exams! Bencherlite 06:03, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
[edit]Thanks for the kind words.. I hv always been Handel's big fan since i was young (Puccini and Verdi's too)! - Jay 08:16, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Categories redux
[edit]Hi, Fred. I read the above with interest, having discovered the empty (and useless) category for Handel's Messiah this morning. Anyway, I'm not here about that. I'm currently going through Category:Compositions by George Frideric Handel as time permits, removing this cat from articles that are in either the operas by Handel or the oratorios by Handel cats, and I see that you added the category to some of these. If you click the above link for the category, you'll see that it starts with two sub-categories, for operas and oratorios. The "Compositions" category is for everything that doesn't fit into either of the sub-cats, which makes sense if you think about it. At the end, there won't be many articles there, but that's because most Handel articles are about operas or oratorios. The same principle is good for other composers, too. I'm doing this because WP:CM is employing a Bot that picks up compositions that aren't operas, and it gets confused if the categories aren't quite right - see discussions at the CM talk page and the Opera Project sub-page. In passing, I notice that L'Allegro etc is classed as an oratorio and appears in the oratorio navigational box. Is it really? I'm not a great expert on Handel, but it doesn't look much like an oratorio to me (but then, nor does Semele! And Hercules is a bit of a moot point.). Anyway, I left it in the Oratorios by H cat and knocked it out of the Compositions by H cat. Best --GuillaumeTell 14:29, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Elijah
[edit]Hello, I'm a bit puzzled by your recent edit to this article - why is this supposed to be better? Sincerely, Opus33 16:46, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
<Fred S replies on Opus33's talk page.>
Thanks for the thoughtful answer, yours truly, Opus33 15:59, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
Songs category
[edit]Twas a little issue in the category sorting/recursive stubs. I ran a filter to keep out those that just use the "classical" stub, they shouldn't show up. If an article is "double" stubbed (song & classical), and doesn't have a talk page, it will still show up - this is a good opportunity to get rid of the incorrect (song) stub. I'm going to run a sweep just for classical stubs to make sure they're all categorized right on the talk pages. SkierRMH 02:00, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
| Decemmber 8 - Wikipedia Loves Libraries Seattle - You're invited | |
|---|---|
 |
|
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:17, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
[edit]
Hello, Fred sienkiewicz. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
[edit]Hello, Fred sienkiewicz. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
[edit]Hello, Fred sienkiewicz. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)