User talk:Kleinzach/Archive 16

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

Is this what you are looking for?

16 October 1994 "XV Bellini D’Oro 1994" Bellini Prize - Awarded by the Sicilian Tourist Authority at the Teatro Massimo Bellini in Catania with the following comments: “Salvatore Fisichella continues in the great singing tradition of the provinces around Etna. Gifted with extraordinary ease of voice and vocal brilliance, especially in the top range and extreme top range as demanded by Bellini’s scores, he is worthy of full honours as being the only tenor of this century to have played and sung the major opera roles of the cigno catanese Bellini.”

>It was a prize (a plaque) awarded to him by the Sicilian Tourist Authorities (in Sicily, the island/region where he was born/ raised and currently resides) during the mid 90's. It is also where Vincenzo Bellini, the composer, (in Catania) was born. And so, the Sicilian Tourist Authorities must have been quite sure in asserting this when they awarded Salvatore Fisichella this honor at that time.

This is also inserted under Accolades, Awards and disctinctions.. . and it has always been there. I just re-worded it to fit the present. I hope this clarifies. Thank you. Very best regards, --Luis Miguel31 (talk) 07:43, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Also for your information, Number of Bellini operas performed by a tenor (as per wikepedia)

Alfredo Kraus – 1 (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfredo_Kraus)

P. Domingo (who claims to have performed the most number of tenor opera roles ever ) - 1 (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Placido_Domingo)

Pavarotti –

Has done Arturo (Puritani), Pollione (Norma), Elvino and Orombello (Beatrice) -probably more --Kleinzach 10:59, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

> yes, probably, probably not, otherwise the Sicilian Tourist Authorities (in Italy) would have awarded this to Luciano Pavarotti instead. The recognition was given to Salvatore Fisichella. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Luis Miguel31 (talk • contribs) 11:15, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Carlo Bergonzi – 1 (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlo_Bergonzi_%28tenor%29)

Rockwell Blake – 2 (source: http://www.bruceduffie.com/blake.html)

Jose Carreras: 2 (Source: http://www.josepcarreras.com/operaroles_josepcarreras.php)

Enrico Caruso – 2 (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enrico_Caruso)

Miguel Fleta – none

Other tenors (younger ones)

Juan Diego Florez – 3 (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juan_Diego_Fl%C3%B3rez)

Salvatore Fisichella: 7

It is a major tenor role, please refer to I Capuleti e i Montecchi

Hmm. I wrote a large part of that article. --Kleinzach 11:14, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

He also played the the role of Romeo in this opera.

> You should also be aware that this role can be played by a tenor.

So - when and where did he sing Romeo? --Kleinzach 13:42, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Romeo is a mezzo role - sung by a woman. --Kleinzach 11:14, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
  • -- Missa seconda in sol min. (Bellini)

Thanks,

--Luis Miguel31 (talk) 09:30, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for this information. I think we can forget about Domingo, Bergonzi, Caruso, Fleta, as these aren't Bellini singers. Kraus, Pavarotti, Giuseppe Di Stefano, Tito Schipa, Nicolai Gedda, Florez and perhaps a few others would be possibilities.
Note that there are 10 Bellini operas: one is La Sonnaumbula (Elvino) which SF hasn't apparently done. Also Adelson e Salvini (Salvini), Bianca e Fernando (Fernando), and Zaira (Corasmino). --Kleinzach 10:57, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

>>>> Yes, you are correct. Please refer to SF's repertoire. Best regards,--Luis Miguel31 (talk) 11:10, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

I think I have supported and justified the claim well and adequate already. If you still want to contest it, I suggest you contact the Sicilian Tourist Authorities (IT). You can help me by re-formulating/ re-wording. Thank you. Im having lunch now. Enjoy the rest of the day:-) Best regards,

--Luis Miguel31 (talk) 11:25, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm not convinced that (1) SF has sung all the main Bellini roles (it seems he has sung six not seven), or (2) the Sicilian Tourist Authorities are notable in any way as judges of singing. --Kleinzach 13:42, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Hello again,

I refer to your message above, which is noted. I have added some more references to support the said entry. For the sake of good order, please also note the following.

  • 1) The prize and the ’motivation’ for the award is an established fact, which is well documented. Please refer to the additional references. There had been important witnesses to the event. Years has passed and nobody has contested this.
  • 2) Please find below the list of recipients of Bellini D'Oro Prize from the time it started until 1994.

Il ’’Bellini D’Oro’’ I Premiati

  • 1968 - Vittorio Gui
  • 1969 - Gianandrea Gavazzeni,

Francesco Pastura (alla memoria)

  • 1971 - Elena Suliotis
  • 1972 - Montserrat Caballe
  • 1975 - Renata Scotto
  • 1977 - Mario Filippeschi
  • 1981 - Alfredo Kraus
  • 1985 - Gina Cigna,

Maria Gentile, Franco Lo Giudice, Gino Marinuzzi (alla memoria), Luciano Pavarotti

  • 1987 - Nicolai Gedda,

Friedrich Lippmann, Giulietta Simionato, Ferruccio Tagliavini,

  • 1988 - Richard Bonynge,

Joan Sutherland

  • 1989 - Fiorenza Cossotto,

Tito Schipa (alla memoria)

  • 1990 - June Anderson
  • 1991 - Mariella Devia,

Giuseppe Di Stefano, Leyla Gencer

  • 1993 - Piero Cappuccilli,

Margherita Carosio, Giacomo Lauri Volpi (alla memoria), Caludio Muzio (alla memoria)

  • 1994 - Salvatore Fisichella (I have already posted above the motivation/ reason for the award)

Francesco Nicolosi

Source - Libro: Premio Bellini D'Oro 1994, Teatro Massimo Bellini, Catania, 16 Ottobre 1994 Azienda Autonoma Provinciale Per L'Incremento Turistico.

Maybe you would like to write an article about this Bellini D'Oro Prize. You may not be convinced that (tenor) Salvatore Fisichella has been the foremost performer of Bellini’s works in the XX century, but an entire awarding body/ organization decided on that. You may not be convinced that the Sicilian Tourist Authorities are notable in any way as judges of singing, and that is fair and well noted, but you should also respect that this is a valid entry as this, in fact, has transpired. Unless you can provide written works disproving this claim, please be so kind to desist from tagging this entry. Thank you again for helping with the editing. Enjoy the rest of the evening.Best regards,--Luis Miguel31 (talk) 20:11, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

This is becoming unproductive. I suggest we move all discussions about this to the article Talk page so other editors can help you with it. My time is limited. --Kleinzach 22:21, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Question about photos in Singer articles

Kleinzach, I hope you don’t mind helping me with my doubt about “fair use” images. The issue is so unclear to me. There was once (many months back), I posted Placido Domingo photos (before I decided to contact Domingo's PR) but all of them been deleted with various reasons such as “you cannot use FAIR USE because this guy is still alive” or “this photo is for his album not for profile” and many more. But what ticks me off is, why other articles can easily get pass all these criteria. Just take a look at Salvatore Fisichella, José Carreras and many more. These 2 are merely examples, there are many more actually. I for one, love our articles to have many photos but I just couldn’t figure out what criteria can be considered as CAN and CANNOT. In José Carreras for example, Image:CarrerasRicciarelliCDBoheme.jpg is allowed but at one time, I posted Domingo album cover and it was DELETED. One more, Image:RomanzaFinalScreenShot.jpg was taken from a scene is allowed but when I posted Domingo in one of the scenes in Turandot, it was deleted with various reasons. I am not questioning Carreras article but only using it as example. Hopefully you don’t mind answering my questions. Thanks. PS- This question is also posted to Wiki Admin who at one time asked me to justify for photos I uploaded. - Jay (talk) 07:41, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

User:Voceditenore uploaded the Carreras jpegs so I think we need to ask her. She knows more about this subject than I do. I must say I thought we couldn't use record covers. As for Salvatore Fisichella, the whole thing is really a potential copyright violation, so I guess the pictures are as well . . . --Kleinzach 08:05, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
I know those photos were uploaded by User:Voceditenore and I have nothing against her. As I said earlier, it is good if we could have all those photos in our articles particularly noted tenors or singers like Carreras, Domingo, Pavarotti and many more. But what puzzled me is, why the admin "disturbed" selected articles only for example, The Three Tenors, Pavarotti, Sherrill Milnes, Maria Callas, Renata Tebaldi, Renata Scotto, Domingo and many more? Look at what happened to The Three Tenors, Pavarotti and Domingo articles, photos in there have been deleted again and again BUT, not in some articles including Carreras? If we want to standardize image rules, we have to make it standard. Since it is allowed in Carreras, I have been thinking to upload photos not only in Domingo's but in other noted articles too. I do not like to argue or find fault, that is why I just keep silent all these while. In Carreras's, there are photos taken from Magazine cover (Image:JoseCarrerasFoundationBulletin.jpg), album cover (Image:CarrerasRicciarelliCDBoheme.jpg), scene from performance (Image:RomanzaFinalScreenShot.jpg) AND photo when he was young (Image:JoseCarrerasAge8.jpg). The question is, are they allowed? P/S: I would seriously thank to God if the admin could confirmed that they are allowed because, I have complete collection of Domingo's recorded opera (DVD and VHS) and hundreds of CDs, imagine if I could take screenshot of all that (include other baritones, tenors and sopranos who performed with Domingo). About photo when Domingo was young, I have photos when he was 6 and 17 and 21. Can I upload that too? You dont have to answer this but just think about what I say - Jay (talk) 03:58, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
A lot of it depends on the way the fair use rationale is written and the documentation supplied with the upload. The Three Tenors album image was deleted because the image lacked a properly argued fair use rationale. Given that Pavarotti is now dead, a properly written rationale would succeed, either for a press image of the 1990 Rome concert on the basis that it captured an unrepeatable historical moment, or for the album, provided there was substantial critical commentary on it. The Renata Tebaldi photo was deleted because it was completely missing a non-free use rationale (otherwise it would have been OK since she is deceased). Renata Scotto and Sherill Milnes are both still alive. (There is potential fair use rationale that could be applied in those cases though. "However, for some retired or disbanded groups, or retired individuals whose notability rests in large part on their earlier visual appearance, a new picture may not serve the same purpose as an image taken during their career, in which case the use would be acceptable." See Wikipedia:Non-free content.)
The fair use photo of Pavarotti as Rodolfo in La bohème remains because it provides full information about the source and a well-argued fair use rationale ("Image is used solely for the illustration of the subject in one of his most celebrated roles, that of Rodolfo in La Boheme. The importance of Pavarotti's portrayal of this role is commented on in depth in the article.") Some of the Maria Callas photos were removed because they had poor or no documentation as to the source and copyright holder - essential for fair use images. The remaining ones were allowed because the documentation was adequate, she is deceased and a free replacement for identification is no longer possible, and/or because they illustrate a significant aspect of her life (at least in terms of the article), e.g., after her weight loss.
The rationale for the Carreras, age 8 singing on Spanish National radio says that it captures an unrepeatable historical moment, and a significant event on the subject's life, which is allowed. (It might also form the basis for keeping the Fisichella photo showing him in his Met debut. (Still under review over at Wikimedia). Likewise, magazine covers and album covers may be used to identify the album or magazine (as opposed to illustrating the article's subject) if (1) the article contains critical or significant discursive commentary on it and (2) the magazine or album does not have an article of its own. They cannot be used however, to simply illustrate a list of recordings. Hence the rationale for the DVD of Carreras in the live performance of Andrea Chenier at La Scala, and the magazine cover in a section devoted to his leukemia foundation and its magazine. An administrator reviewed the screen shot from Romanza Final (a fictionalized account of the life of Julián Gayarre) and allowed it because it illustrated the only movie (as opposed to videoed stage performances) in which he had appeared. However he/she removed that screenshot from the Julián Gayarre article, as it was less germane to that article than it was in José Carreras and already being used there under fair use. The album cover with Ricciarelli is probably borderline, but so far the admins who reviewed the other photos in José Carreras have left it, perhaps because it appears in a discussion about his 13 year artistic partnership with her (and the many recordings they made together for Philips) and says so in the rationale.
This may not apply to the Domingo article, but stamps can be used in an article, not to identify the subject, but to illustrate a particular stamp which is discussed in the article. See for example its use in Juan Diego Flórez. Likewise the fair use rationales for Image:JoseCarrerasStamp.jpg and Image:Joan Sutherland Stamp.jpg.
Hope this helps. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 06:37, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Addenda Another aspect of fair use images on Wikipedia is that preferably they should have already been published online elsewhere. A scan of a copyright image (from a book or the actual photo) which has never been published online is much less likely to succeed unless it has a strong rationale. Also, there should be judicious use of fair use images in a single article, and the number should be proportional to the length of the article. Galleries of fair use images are never acceptable. Voceditenore (talk) 07:45, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for such a detailed exposition. Does this modify the view in Wikipedia:WikiProject_Opera#Images_and_fair_use and if so does the latter need rewriting? I'm wondering whether we can create a new subpage with all the detailed explanation. Perhaps Wikipedia:WikiProject Opera/Images, copyright and fair use? Would you like to create the page and then ask the Project to approve it? I think that might be the easiest way to go about it. --Kleinzach 11:35, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your explanation. I used the same reason "it captures an unrepeatable moment" for Domingo's screenshot as Cavaradossi because we all know that at his age now, there is no way for him to play the role anymore - it was deleted. It goes the same with screenshot as Calaf. And the cover of Parsifal refers to his debut in 1995 at the Bayreuth Festival as written in the first paragraph - it was deleted too with reason "Album covers are not allowed!". Some of the reasons given by the admin are too basic, they keep talking about legal and rights while in the same time, the very same type of photos are allowed in other articles. This is the part I don’t get it. However, I will try again to upload some of the photos that I think deserve to be in the article. And let see what they have to say. Sometimes I feel like they have special radar to sniff photos related to "Jay" and "Domingo"! When I uploaded 2 photos given by Mr. Domingo PR, I had a hard time with the admin despite telling them that I have the written permission from Placido Domingo’s public relation officer. I have to justify again and again, and finally the admin in Wikipedia accepted it (after long arguments), but I lose in WikiCommons. Those 2 photos were removed from WikiCommons but they are allowed in Wikipedia, strange!. That is why I just wonder how photos in Carreras articles can stay when photos in Domingo and many other articles have to go through all the troubles before they could be granted "citizenship" to be in Wiki. - Jay (talk) 12:29, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Jay, as I pointed out above, in the non-Domingo articles, the problems were almost exclusively lack of detailed copyright information and/or a fair use rationale. With your Domingo photos, it may have to do with the way your rationales were written and the amount of text in the article devoted to the particular subject illustrated by the image. Also, it's hard to make the case for a screen shot of him as Cavaradossi or Calaf as a unique historical event in Domingo's career since he sang those roles many times. Likewise, unless there is critical commentary about the Parsifal album itself, it's not an apt illustration for commentary on his Bayreuth stage debut. So that may also be part of the problem. If I were you, I'd avoid uploading screen shots and album covers altogether at the moment, as these raise alarm bells with admins, some of whom take a very generic approach, especially for fair use images uploaded after the end of March 2007 when the Wikimedia Foundation Licensing Policy Resolution was adopted. If you are determined to add another photo, I would try one production photo first, making sure it was highly relevant to the article, in a highly significant performance in terms of his career, with plenty of article text devoted to that subject and providing a well-written, detailed rationale for its use. You may still have problems though, as arguably Otello is his signature role, and there is already is a photo of that in the article.

By the way, I can see why you had problems with the Otello photo, especially at the Commons. In looking at the Image:Domingo OtelloJ2.jpg page, you did not explictly state that a copy of the permission from Domingo's PR people is on file with Wikipedia. Did they or you mail their detailed permission and type of license to permissions-en@wikimedia.org? If so, you should state that on the image page. Also the page doesn't state who the photographer was nor does it state that Domingo actually owns the copyright to the photo. He may well not actually. It's obviously by a professional stage photographer and looks extremely similar to one that I bought for my mother. Also are you sure it's from the ROH? It looks much more like a photo from a La Scala production that I bought for my mother.

Kleinzach, I'll be happy to write that new page, but it may take me a couple of days to get around to it as I'm currently in the process of updating my own web site. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 14:59, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Absolutely no hurry as ever. Best. --Kleinzach 15:02, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
About commons, I was too tired to explain to them. They claimed that the note under the main photo is a "problem". According to them, it is not a free-use when users have to keep the "credit to photographer's" part. When Wikipedia admins have accepted both photos here, I just let them delete it. And, regarding the Otello's photo, according to the lady PR, it is "Otello 1992 at Royal Opera House opposite Kiri Te Kanawa and Sergei Leiferkus. The photo was taken for the opera promotion, not on stage". I do not plan to upload Cavarodossi or Calaf screenshot at the moment, but I'm thinking of (still thinking) uploading Domingo's photo with his father when he was 16, and then his photo performing on stage with his mother <<these are historical events, unless if the admins think otherwise - Jay (talk) 15:29, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Please help!!!

I am in an edit war on the Kathleen Battle page. I would appriciate your input.Nrswanson (talk) 23:37, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

"Comic Opera"

In English, this is a widely accepted term - although I agree it is a rather silly one. The operettas of Arthur Sullivan (especially the ones with libretti by W.S. Gilbert) were for commercial reasons NOT called "operettas" (this was Victorian England, and operettas were widely considered "naughty") but "comic operas". This seems to have cemented the term in English, as a very close synonym for operetta, but one which many enthusiasts of English music, especially Sullivan, still seem to take very seriously. On the whole, I can't be bothered arguing this point any further - but all the same if The Mikado is a "comic opera" then Die fledermaus is definitely another! I don't think mentioning both terms together hurts, but... I let it rest.

May terminology be the least of our worries! --Soundofmusicals (talk) 01:48, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, I agree with everything you say - except the last point about Die Fledermaus which (dare I say) is backwards logic. If you have a look you will see the J Strauss works are all described as operettas. Also note there is a special genre Category:English comic operas but not one for comic operas because there is no such genre. Thanks for giving me the opportunity to explain. --Kleinzach 02:00, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

From Cg2p0B0u8m

Kleinzach I am not sure how to reply to your message, so I hope this reaches you. Yes, I will try to contribute more to Wikipedia - many musical subjects, but I have had broadband problems and have been travelling a lot, but hope to put more things online soon. I will try to learn the rules as I go along rather than mug up before I put things on the page. G —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cg2p0B0u8m (talk • contribs) 16:41, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Andy Vores' operas

Hello! Thank you for your message on my Talk Page regarding my entry for Andy Vores. I had no immediate plans to write articles on his two operas, although I did include mention of "No Exit" within the existing article on the Sartre play. You are more than welcome to cover those topics. Thank you for your feedback! Ecoleetage (talk) 12:23, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

I can get to them - I just put them on my "to do" list. No need to delete. Ecoleetage (talk) 14:12, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Actually, I just created them -- starting as stubs, with room to expand. At least there are no more red links. Thanks! Ecoleetage (talk) 15:44, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Maestro

Hi! I didn’t make the redirect, I think; when I came across the page, Ustad redirected to Maestro, which is just wrong, and I tried to correct that, maybe I messed up – Bossk-Office (talk) 20:41, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Kathleen Battle

A concern

Perhaps I am being a bit paranoid but I am somewhat concerned as to the motives of Hrannar. If you look at his/her edit log the only article that he/she has contributed to is the Kathleen Battle page. The edit history seems to also indicate a desire to sugar coat the Met firing from the very begining and make Battle appear in the most positive light. Given the edit history, I suspect Hrannar is either a die hard fan with a personal agenda or perhaps even Battle heself. I'm probably just being silly.Nrswanson (talk) 14:46, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. I don't see a huge disagreement here so I'm hoping we can resolve the issue. Perhaps the voice articles (many of them needing urgent cleanup) are actually more important than the Battle battle? --Kleinzach 00:02, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Help now please!

Kleinzach please pay attention to the Kathleen Battle discussion. Things are not going well and I am begining to lose confidence in reaching a solution with Hrannar. If things continue as they are then I may have to go up to the next level in conflict resolution. Thank you for your help.Nrswanson (talk) 03:00, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

How do I restore discussions appear modified, that were unintentional?

As a wikipedia expert, can you tell me how to revert a talk page (after several edits have already been done) back to a particular state. The changes made were not additional discussion; rather, they were changes, user indicates they were unintentional, to my own responses.

WOULD LIKE RESTORED BACK TO THIS 0RIGINAL DISCUSSION PAGE: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kathleen_Battle&diff=231508143&oldid=231507773

CURRENT VERSION (where several key discussions are no longer available and current discussions are, as user stated unintentionally, modified) http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kathleen_Battle&diff=231518895&oldid=231518773

For a clearer example of how convesation between us (and my own comments look very edited) please open both versions referenced above in separate windwows, than scroll down to the bottom. See the placement of my comment in the original discussion page. That's just one example.

I have already addressed it with user and let him know I would seek how to restore it so the inadvertent changes he made are repaired. Hrannar (talk) 20:28, 12 August 2008 (UTC)Hrannar

  • In investigating the matter further Hrannar himself made the changes and not me to the conversation. See here:[1] and intermediate edits all by Hrannar. Obviously inadvertently sense he is now complaining. I never moved or altered his words in any place according to the edit log which I have now reviewed thoroughly. If Hrannar wishes to change something back he can. I did do I direct copy paste from the talk page to the archive without moving or altering anything. The purposes for doing this were to avoid two simultaneous conversations now that the discussion has moved to another page. An archive is useful not only for back reference but for avoiding spliting of the conversation off onto multiple pages. This seems not only reasonable but essential for fruitful discussion.Nrswanson (talk) 21:11, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Nrswansson and kleinzach, i am very sorry and embarrassed at my error. My confusion came from the fact that fairly substantial text I had written had been copied. When I saw the copied text in another location and below a response I had written to something else, I believed the response had been moved. I did understand that it all had been inadvertant and was in no way blamatory to you. Which is why I came here for help. Again, please accept my apologies, especially you nrswansson. And KLEINZACH, please ignore my request for help here. It was my misunderstanding. Thanks. Hrannar (talk) 21:27, 12 August 2008 (UTC)Hrannar
No problem. Mistakes happen.Nrswanson (talk) 21:39, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Is everything OK now? I'm on a different time zone here so I will probably be sleeping when you are both active. --Kleinzach 22:43, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
No. Hrannar refuses to archive the discussion on the KB talk page which now makes for two open discussions. Could you please talk to him about the wisdom of keeping everything on one page. Thank you.Nrswanson (talk) 00:38, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Kleinzach - I just saw this conversation. I taught two classes yesterday and one today. And I don't access the computer late evenings, if you haven't already noticed. I have already apologized and said there is no need to restore the conversation. On that point, to answer your question, Kleinzach, this is ok. As I said, please ignore my request for help here. Hrannar (talk) 21:55, 13 August 2008 (UTC)Hrannar
No. I think you both have to work this out. I also see you have not had any response at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard. Unfortunately you have both been writing too much. This is a disincentive for anyone else getting involved. It simply takes too long for anyone to work out what you are both trying to say. --Kleinzach 00:47, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
For what it's worth, kleinzach, nrswansson did not really allow the us both to work it out, as you suggested. Of course, I have work during the day and sneak in editing from time to time during breaks and lunch. I had to teach today and spent the majority of the day preparing. And I am not at the computer usually after 7pm EST. For example, I will sign off soon, but will be back tomorrow. Hrannar (talk) 21:55, 13 August 2008 (UTC)Hrannar

BTW archiving is normal when a page gets to 30K+. The archives are still accessible, although they can't be edited. New topics can always be started as necessary. --Kleinzach 00:51, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

To be honest Kleinzach, I don't see a way to make this work. I am going to give up. Hrannar fights me on everything and I'd rather spend my time doing something constructive to the encyclopedia.Nrswanson (talk) 00:54, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Yes, maybe a good idea to give it a rest for a couple of weeks. Good opportunity to work on all those voice articles that have all the tags on them! --Kleinzach 00:58, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Kleinzach - Have you seen the current Kathleen Battle talk page? Is this appropropriate for an wikipedia editor to make comments of another editor in this way? It just doesn't seem right to me. Hrannar (talk) 21:55, 13 August 2008 (UTC)Hrannar
As I wrote above, perhaps it would be best to give it a rest for a couple of weeks? Best. --Kleinzach 22:58, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Kleinzach/Archive_16&oldid=236824842"