User talk:Lampernist

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome from the Opera Project[edit]

Welcome!

Hi. Delighted to see you are posting about opera. We would be pleased if you like to formally sign on to the project on the main page. Let me know if I can help in any way. Regards and best wishes.

Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  - Kleinzach 22:25, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Non-free images[edit]

Hi. I see you have added a CD cover to Ninon Vallin. Unfortunately we are not supposed to use WP:Non-free content. On the other hand the photos may be out of copyright so you might be able to get permission to use that by itself. Regards. -- Kleinzach 17:17, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. The basic idea is that it is OK to use CD/DVD covers if we are reviewing/promoting the recording, but since we are not doing this it's problematic. In this case the photo is probably OK, but the LV cover design would be copyright. Let me know if I can help further. -- Kleinzach 00:57, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Danco1.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Danco1.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 01:43, 17 June 2007 (UTC)


DYK[edit]

Updated DYK query On 28 August, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Pas sur la bouche (2003 film), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Peta 06:07, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

very good work on french cinema. PLease add any films you create or know of to the List of French films thanks. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Talk"? 11:58, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Ha!. You can move my page Carnival in Flanders (film) to yours thats fine as long as we don't lose any images or info. Mostly though I would strongly urge to keep the original French titles. Good work. As I said before please add any films who know of also to the lists. I began adding titles for French films of the 1920s ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Talk"? 18:47, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to put your name down for Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/French cinema task force ok? Its no obligation just for the people we know who are working in this area ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Talk"? 18:49, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use disputed for Image:Passurlabouche1.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Thanks for uploading Image:Passurlabouche1.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:18, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Latlantide.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Latlantide.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 13:32, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Bibliographic formats[edit]

Hello. Could I politely take issue with some of your recent amendments to the reference formats in articles like Madeleine Grey, Maurice Ravel and Piano Concerto for the Left Hand (Ravel)? You have opted for the Harvard format which is different from the style already in use on some of the pages, which means there is now a mixture of styles. And while Harvard works fine in the sciences, it sometimes comes unstuck with humanities references, especially where editions of works are concerned. E.g. the reference for: Ravel, Maurice & Orenstein, Arbie (1989), Lettres, écrits, entretiens, Harmoniques, Paris: Flammarion, p. 189, ISBN 2080661035, OCLC 20025651 - now looks as if it's a joint work by Ravel and Orenstein, because this Harvard format can't cope with the idea of an editor as well as an author.

I would suggest abandoning the "Citation" template and reworking this one as: Maurice Ravel. Lettres, écrits, entretiens; [edited by] Arbie Orenstein. Paris, Flammarion, 1989. p.189. ISBN 2080661035, OCLC 20025651. (The author name only needs to be inverted to Ravel, Maurice, in the alphabetised bibliographies, not in numbered "reflists". The original statement of responsability in French is very elaborate - "réunis, présentés et annotés par..." - and in an English source can be usefully abbreviated to [edited by]. The series Harmoniques is unnumbered and not helpful in the reference. I don't think the ISBN needs to be hypertexted as it doesn't lead to a bibliographic reference - and one perhaps doesn't need to include quite so many of the library links as it makes the list harder to read.)

Sorry to go on so. I can see that the Ravel article has been messy for a long while and you have been trying to bring some much needed order to it. Now that you have done all the work on this list, perhaps a few tweaks would be the most economical way of resolving things. Should I have a go? Lampernist (talk) 12:18, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Hows about:
--Blehfu (talk) 14:00, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that clarifies the main problem, and it's a more economical fix than what I was thinking of. (I would ditch the series title which is just confusing.) I think the Worldcat entries can be obscure because although they have no doubt coded the source data correctly, their output format doesn't seem to allow them to distinguish things like editors and authors.

I think there are still a couple of issues about the Citation template though. (1) It is not a good idea introduce it to existing lists of references (as in Madeleine Grey and Piano Concerto for the Left Hand (Ravel)) because it creates variant styles in the same list. I think a bit of tidying up is needed here. (2) The format of the Citation template is quite restrictive and really not suitable for some types of reference, especially for non-scientific subjects. For example, in the current list of Ravel references, look at the journal and newspaper articles where the date format conflicts with the other entries and is not in proper Harvard style - and the use of italics and quote marks is inconsistent. The book entry for Jankélévitch is also messy because the edition statement comes after the series note and makes no sense there. I know this sounds pedantic but the main requirement for references is that they should be clear, and these unnecessary inconsistencies just increase the possibilities for confusion. The other worry I have is that by making the "[Foot]Notes" section refer to the "References[Further reading]" section, it creates a 2-stage look-up to check what a reference is. I would treat the two sections quite separately and make life easier all round. Lampernist (talk) 20:24, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Hm. Upon doing a little digging, I agree re: the other articles. I'll revert the changes, at least for now. Uniformity is important, but often without my changes in the references, it's already lacking.
As you might imagine from my changes to Ravel, it is some sort of uniformity in the references I'm looking for. I still haven't found a totally satisfactory solution, so perhaps it is best that I try and hash one out now before I mark further changes to articles. I've settled on the Citation and Harvnb templates as they work very well together with automatic CITExxxyyy tags, but I appreciate the limitations of the Citation template. What would you suggest, using the Cite xxx templates? --Blehfu (talk) 22:47, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Faces of Children[edit]

Nice work on expanding this article! Lugnuts (talk) 17:23, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Beauty of the Devil[edit]

Dear Lampernist,

Although, I do not usually talk to users hidden behind screen-names (Slobodan Grasic is my full name), however I think that I should respond to your message. It is true that USA and UK are among the most powerful countries in the World, but they are not the center of the World. Besides, English language has become international language nowadays. René Clair had spent a great part of his life in the USA and had died there, and I presume that he had spoken English well. I don't know if he had been satisfied with the translation of the title of one his masterpieces, but Beauty and the Devil has totally different meaning than Beauty of the Devil. I suppose that you speak French well, since you are interested in French cinematography. Then you should know that my translation is not more exact, but it is the only possible one. Beauty and the Devil (La beauté et diable) signifies one thing, and Beauty of the Devil (La beauté du diable) means something quite different. Beauty and evil may not have any connection, but evil can be attractive and beautiful. Therefore it is only about the translation accuracy, it is about the essence. Things are not unmovable in space and time, and movie editions and reviews in American newspapers that have wrong title translation are insignifficant compared to culture that essentially belongs to the whole World, so the time has come to change it!

With kind regards Slobodan Grasic (talk) 00:28, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Wild Grass[edit]

Excellent work on the expansion of this article! Lugnuts (talk) 18:22, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Alain Resnais[edit]

Nice work on Alain Resnais as well. I would encourage you to bring it to GA level. Best wishes, --Elekhh (talk) 09:26, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

re: Film director templates[edit]

Hello! First I have to say that I really, really appreciate all your work on articles about classic French cinema. But to the point: to be honest, and as you can see in templates I've created, I pretty much shared your view on director navboxes until recently. But looking at some of the best developed navboxes outside the film project (Shakespeare, Scientology, World War II etc) I've realised that what they should do is to only provide navigation, in a concise and as non-cluttered way as possible. Removing the release years means that the navbox provides less info - but if info is what the reader wants, he or she should read the filmography in the director's biographical article, or the individual film articles, not a navigation template. I also don't see why release year should hold a certain position over for example production countries, language, scriptwriter and other info about a movie. I do agree however that the year could be useful for disambiguation when two or more movies share the same title, and I did that for J'accuse in Gance's case. Regarding the Mater dolorosa movies, I think the first one was listed with two alternative titles, and I simply chose the one the article currently is under and deleted the other. If this was a mistake (I'm sadly not familiar with these movies) it's easy to move the article and update the navbox, and add years for these entries. Smetanahue (talk) 13:57, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

I think the key here is to distinguish the navigation templates from the filmographies in the biographical articles (or sometimes in separate articles). The info you rightfully bring up as relevant should be available in the filmographies, and there is no need for the templates to be complete replicas. I view them more as supplements, and the filmography is usually the better starting point when getting into a new filmmaker's oeuvre.
I also don't think the complexity of the template's subject should matter. Abel Gance's template currently only links to his movies, but he could potentially also become a complex subject - if someone decides to write an article about him of Shakespearean proportions, with separate sub-articles for everything imaginable, like one about his upbringing, one about his filmography, his cinematic style, conspiracy theories about him or whatever. These articles would then be linked in the template, but that shouldn't have any significance for the template's filmography parts.
To me it seems like release years mostly are a popular thing to add, and as such have become common in the less developed culture-related templates. But in the well-developed, such as the mentioned Shakespeare or Template:Elvis Presley for that matter, they are a lot more unusual. Smetanahue (talk) 16:39, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

You may be interested in this discussion about director templates. I'm not sure if Smetanahue's viewpoint is supported by others. Erik (talk | contribs) 14:22, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited L'Homme qui voulait vivre sa vie, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Douglas Kennedy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:48, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing my error[edit]

Hello. Just wanted to say thanks for fixing the error that I left in the film date template and again thanks for you additions to the Confessions of a Cheat article today. Although I only saw this film for the first time a couple years ago it quickly became a favorite. Citizen Kane is usually described as a film that broke the rules of filmmaking but I now tell my friends to seek out this film as Guitry broke those rules 5 years before Welles did. Thanks again for your time and work. I do appreciate it. MarnetteD | Talk 00:37, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Great work on Life of Riley's "Reception" section[edit]

Hi. I just wanted to come here to say how the reception section of the final Resnais film you wrote and referenced is one of the best I've seen in all of Wikipedia. Easy and clear to read, nevertheless showing both sides, explaining all views and giving references for each opinion. Truly great work. Simon824 (talk) 19:45, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 23[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Providence (1977 film), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages David Mercer and Claude Dauphin. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:19, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 21[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Chess Player, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Gill. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:01, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Under the Roofs of Paris (disambiguation)[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Under the Roofs of Paris (disambiguation) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unnecessary disambiguation per WP:TWODABS

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Tavix | Talk  19:44, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 27[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Samson Fainsilber, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Providence. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

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) 13:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Lampernist. 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)