User talk:Meneerke bloem

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

A Belgian physician-naturalist?[edit]

Dear Prashanths,

Thank you for your message. As you can see from my userpage, I have a good friend, Ivo Pauwels, a well-known geen author and journalist, whose office is Antwerpen-Berchem. We will next month with a small group of garden freaks visit some interesting gardens in the centre of France.

Best regards, --Réginald (To reply) 08:56, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your message! I read about Ivo Pauwels on your user page. I wish you well for your 'garden tour' and your time on wikipedia! Nice to know other physicians with an interest in natural-history. My interest in in birds. :)Have an nice time in Paris. Prashanthns (talk) 09:52, 6 May 2008 (UTC)


Hi, Réginald! Sorry about the confusion, but the "proper venues" to get rid of an invalid redirect in the English Wikipedia is to alert administrators that the redirect needs to be deleted. This, however, is achieved not by blanking the redirect (which would alert admins alright, except that they most likely suspect vandalism and revert blanking as I did), but by either listing the invalid redirect on WP:RfD, or by prodding it, or by contacting someone directly. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 13:41, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Could you, please, provide me with links to the category/image that need to be deleted? I am having trouble finding either Category:Crocus aureus or an image with a similar name. Thanks!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:36, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
Reg, you'll need to ask someone at the Commons to delete those. I am not a Commons administrator, so I don't have a capability to delete anything there. My first impression was that you needed these deleted here, in the English Wikipedia, where I would have been able to help you. Sorry!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 12:36, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Incorrect wikilink[edit]

Reg, not sure what you want me to do. If you need the link removed from your userpage, I can, of course, do it for you, but since it is your userpage, it would be more appropriate if you removed it yourself. On the other hand, if you need the page to which the link leads (or the redirect itself) deleted, I, again, cannot do it because I am only an admin here in the English Wikipedia, and cannot delete pages in Wikipedias in other languages. If I misunderstood your request completely, could you, please, clarify what you need? Thanks!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:14, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

OK, mystery solved :) The problem was with the {{User doctor}} userbox which you have on your userpage. Someone added the Arabic interwiki link to it improperly, so it showed up on all pages using the userbox instead of being contained in the template. Fixed. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 17:34, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Incorrect link, part 2[edit]

Someone incorrectly added an interwiki link to {{User de-2}} instead of placing it on the documentation page, which lead to that interwiki link showing on userpages of all users who have {{User de-2}} displayed. I have corrected this. If it weren't for you, this oversight might have gone unnoticed for who knows how long, so thanks! Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 15:26, February 20, 2009 (UTC)

thank you for the picture[edit]

thank you for uploading the picture of the cyclamen graecum, it's one of my favorite autumn flowers :) —,—User:Kkostagiannis

Commercial links[edit]

Hi, Réginald! Linking to commercial websites is not exactly prohibited, but should only be done when no free alternative is available. In this case, the site provides fairly good pictures, yet we already have pictures in the article, plus the first link in the list ( leads to more pictures hosted on a website of a non-commercial entity. Thus, we have plenty of images to illustrate the subject, so linking to a commercial website is unnecessary. I have removed the link in question, as well as the other link leading to a tree nursery site. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 13:48, June 10, 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the id[edit]

Of the Aristolochia. Shyamal (talk) 08:03, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Crocus image[edit]

Sadly, I don't know where it was taken. Nor am I a botanist. Best wishes. Saravask 22:14, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Cyclamen photos[edit]

I have been looking for good photos of cyclamen species on forums and asking permission from the picture-takers for upload to Wikimedia, so hopefully we will have photos of Cyclamen intaminatum and the others, eventually. So far I have obtained permission for photos of a Cyclamen africanum tuber, an all-white Cyclamen coum, Cyclamen parviflorum in its natural habitat, and a silver-leaf Cyclamen purpurascens: more to come. — Eru·tuon 00:13, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Does Mark Griffiths have a photo of a fully opened Cyclamen alpinum? The current photo doesn't represent the species well, since it shows not-quite-opened flowers. — Eru·tuon 13:54, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

I thought that the picture Berne Botanic garden Cyclamen repandum.jpg was peloponnesiacum, not vividum, because peloponnesiacum is said to be light pink with a much darker nose, while vividum is dark all over, with only a slightly darker nose. The photo, along with the photos by Mark Griffiths (which will hopefully be able to be uploaded again...), fits the peloponnesiacum description best. — Eru·tuon 22:25, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

I was aware that Cyclamen alpinum's petals do not reflex as much as other cyclamens, but the flowers in the photo (at least the two on the left) have petals that are not reflexed outwards as most Cyclamen alpinum, suggesting that they've just come out of bud. I guess Mark Griffiths is thinking of the one on the right, which is more fully open.

Whether the flowers are fully open or not, the photo looks somewhat odd, since it shows the top of the flower — we can hardly see the nose of the flower. This is confusing, since other photos of cyclamen species on Wikipedia are at more of a side angle, showing the nose and the outward (or bottom) side of the petals. It is harder to compare Cyclamen alpinum to other cyclamen species if the photos are very different. Photos of Cyclamen alpinum at a more natural angle are, for example, here. — Eru·tuon 13:57, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Modest Barnstar.png The Modest Barnstar
Thanks for your recent contributions! -Mike Restivo (talk) 20:06, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
And I thank you specifically for mentioning that new CD remastering of Bruckner's Missa Solemnis. James470 (talk) 16:35, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
Ah yes, I've been meaning to get the Letocart completion of the 9th. James470 (talk) 17:34, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Symphony No. 5 (Bruckner)[edit]

That could be the case, it would not surprise me. I get the feeling that most of the people in Classical Wikiproject are morons who mostly listen to bubblegum pop and think owning a single multi-volume classical reference they bought at a garage sale makes them experts. Anyway, your expertise might be going to waste at Wikipedia. Perhaps you could write an article for something like the Bruckner Journal? James470 (talk) 18:58, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Bruckner's Psalms[edit]

Dear Reginald,
My German leaves a lot to be desired, as your correction ("odemhat") showed. I did find it strange that Bruckner would use the text from the Lutheran Bible, but perhaps Bruckner would find it strange that I (a Lutheran) am so interested in Catholic liturgy pre-1960s. I think perhaps the Bruckner Journal could use an article on this specific issue. James470 (talk) 17:37, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
Who wrote that line? Look in the article history. James470 (talk) 19:06, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
Dear Réginald, yes, I wrote it, so that line is based on my limited understanding of German and German Bible translations used in Austria during Bruckner's lifetime. Maybe I understand the topic better than the majority of morons who edit Wikipedia, but it seems to me that you understand this particular topic a lot better than I do. James470 (talk) 01:36, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Those are good looking articles. Take this as a compliment: Wikipedia doesn't deserve you. James470 (talk) 06:30, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Bruckner's organ compositions[edit]

Dear Reginald

Many thanks for pointing me at the few organ works by Bruckner - I shall listen to them with interest. Maybe you would like to add information on them to the article itself? PhilUK (talk) 10:00, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Mass No. 1[edit]

Thank you very much for writing that article. This is perhaps the only words of thanks you will receive for it from anyone on Wikipedia. You ought to write articles about Bruckner for a publication whose entire readership would actually appreciate them. James470 (talk) 05:40, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

German Bible used by A. Bruckner[edit]

That actually raises more questions than answers. If you look in the Bruckner Gesamtausgabe, Psalm 150's text is almost the same as the Luther Bible except for a few small spelling differences. The translation you've cited is for some verses very different, e.g., the wohlklingende Cymbeln. James470 (talk) 03:10, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Bruckner's Symphony No. 8 and Siegfried motif[edit]

Hi. Actually this is very clear in the Development section! Compare here: Siegfried motif ( and the Exposition of Bruckner's 8th Symphony ( or its Development section ( Players should be already embedded in these links. It is very clear! --Leonardo T. Oliveira 14:34, 26 January 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leonardo Teixeira de Oliveira (talkcontribs)

It's very interesting! But ...listening to the March in D minor I can't identify specifically that main theme from the 1st movement of Symphony No. 8... Is it this same theme derived from this previous work? Could you identify it? Thanks! --Leonardo T. Oliveira 16:21, 26 January 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leonardo Teixeira de Oliveira (talkcontribs)
Now I can see. Well, it's not so similar as the Siegfried motif, but your point turns this Siegfried claim not so pacific to an encyclopedic entry. I can imagine that this main theme, even if similar to another previous work of him, can have been inspired in its design by Siegfried even so - but here we would be speculating. Thank you very much for your information! Best regards. Leonardo T. Oliveira 19:13, 27 January 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leonardo Teixeira de Oliveira (talkcontribs)


Hi Reginald. Those tags I added are not necessarily critical of the article or you, but are mainly intended to attract attention to the article. People with knowledge of the topic and people who are native English speakers can then copy edit and improve the article. Otherwise there's nothing particularly wrong with it, it just needs to be edited and cleaned up a bit. Thanks for contributing. - Burpelson AFB 16:40, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

The English in general is correct, but writing style for an encyclopedia is a bit different than writing for a journal article or another publication. Overall the article is good and informative, it just needs a look from other Wikipedia editors. If you disagree I have no problem with you removing the maintenance tags. - Burpelson AFB 13:59, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Science lovers wanted![edit]

Science lovers wanted!
Smithsonian logo color.svg
Hi! I'm serving as the wikipedian-in-residence at the Smithsonian Institution Archives until June! One of my goals as resident, is to work with Wikipedians and staff to improve content on Wikipedia about people who have collections held in the Archives - most of these are scientists who held roles within the Smithsonian and/or federal government. I thought you might like to participate since you are interested in the sciences! Sign up to participate here and dive into articles needing expansion and creation on our to-do list. Feel free to make a request for images or materials at the request page, and of course, if you share your successes at the outcomes page you will receive the SIA barnstar! Thanks for your interest, and I look forward to your participation! Sarah (talk) 01:28, 19 April 2012 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Meneerke bloem. You have new messages at SarahStierch's talk page.
Message added 15:02, 19 April 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Sarah (talk) 15:02, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Improving "List of compositions" articles[edit]

I triggered a discussion on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Classical_music about Improving "List of compositions" articles. Along the way we came into the topic Bruckner and I did some prototyping for List of compositions by Anton Bruckner on my user space (see discussion in Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Classical_music). Since you appear to be most active in the Bruckner area, I thought, just to give you a heads up so you could comment as well if you want. I'm pretty new around here, am I correct to put this on your talk page or would I have better put it on the List of compositions by Anton Bruckner talk page or both? LazyStarryNights (talk) 00:39, 5 June 2013 (UTC)


I have a large discography of Bruckner's works, including non-commercial recordings for some works for which there is no commercial recording available.

I have recently acquired Cornelis van Zwol's book "Anton Bruckner 1824-1896 - Leven en Werken" (782 pages, ISBN 978-90-6868-590-9), in which all Bruckner's works are described in detail - a book every Bruckner-fan should own. Unfortunately the issue is nearly sold out and, for not Dutch-speaking people, it is written in Dutch. Moreover, because van Zwol had no sponsor to support the publication, there will be no second issue and the book will presumably not translated in another language…

Please put your suggestions on my user-talk page.

Best regards from Belgium, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 09:33, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Great you have such passion for and such good sources on Bruckner. I only know some work of Bruckner, but what I do know is beautiful. However, my improvements efforts are not Bruckner specific, but a general improvement of composition lists. See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical music for the relevant discussion and at User:LazyStarryNights/List of compositions by Anton Bruckner for a draft so far. Bruckner was just one of the composers that was suggested to start on. LazyStarryNights (talk) 20:33, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

June 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Bruckner's early Masses may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • ''Sanctus'' of the ''Messe Kronstorfer Messe''.<ref name="Williamson 1"/><ref name="Roelofs 3"/>[ Total duration: about 10’. The extra [[Fugue|fugated]] ''Kyrie'' and ''Gloria'', which were

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:36, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Bruckner list intro[edit]

Thank you for making good sense of the introduction! I think it's much better now. Best. --Kleinzach 02:12, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm now signing off Bruckner, but do let me know if I can help at all in the future. Best regards. --Kleinzach 23:54, 27 June 2013 (UTC)


Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg

flowering Bruckner
Thank you for, passionate lover of flowers shown in excellent pictures, for the quality of your continuous care (passio continuo) for articles on the works by Anton Bruckner, full of music, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:25, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your cantata message on my talk. Is there a reason why Bruckner's symphonies have infoboxes but his masses not? Looking at Schubert, I wonder ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:03, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

A year ago, you were the 581st recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, thanks for great help and inspiration, - I love flowers and music, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:13, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

'No. 0' Symphony in d minor by Bruckner[edit]

Hello, bonjour, hallo.

I am indeed unconcerned with the name of the article: whether 'Symphony in D minor (Bruckner)' or 'Symphony No. 0 (Bruckner)'. I just regard your process as a very serious COPYRIGHT problem because of your copy-and-paste without moving the revision history. In other words, I think that your new article is plagiarism and illegal. The French and Dutch versions are also. (In addition, it seems that consensus has not yet to be reached. It is none of my business...)

So I should like to request to merge them (fix revision history inconsistency) and then move to suitable name. If you object to the merging, I suggest you to

  1. deleting the new article 'Symphony in D minor (Bruckner)', and then
  2. moving 'Symphony No. 0 (Bruckner)' into 'Symphony in D minor (Bruckner)' by correct method (also Talk page and revision history will be moved).

By the way, why don't you move the other language versions? (ca, de, es, it, ja and pt) --Tijd-jp (talk) 13:05, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

There seems to be no response to your suggestion about renaming of the Japanese version. So, instead of you, following the procedure, I have just proposed renaming the article. I will not do anything any more about that. Please you keep watch on the Talk page. The best of British luck to you. --Tijd-jp (talk) 13:52, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Formal mediation has been requested[edit]

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Rondo in C minor (Bruckner) and Intermezzo in D minor (Bruckner)". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 16 September 2014.

Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by MediationBot (talk) on behalf of the Mediation Committee. 00:52, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

  1. Persoonlijk ga ik hier liefst zo weinig mogelijk initiatief nemen. Weinig interesse, zowel inhoudelijk (Bruckner) als over de uiterlijkheden (infobox enz).
  2. WP:DRN, a "lower-level dispute resolution" process, would probably be an appropriate next step. That is, not before the current mediation procedure has been formally closed. Please familiarize yourself with the do's and don'ts of DRN, and with its procedure for filing the request — I mean I hope you can initiate a DRN yourself without others needing to jump in on your behalf. An important issue is to be clear on what would be the scope of the request when you would go DRN (too broad can lead to meaningless discussion, too narrow might fail to give a comprehensive solution to the problem(s)).
  3. I no longer believe a limited "gentlemen's agreement" would give a durable solution here. The survey initiative I took on the Rondo talk page illustrates that. --Francis Schonken (talk) 11:26, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

What is it you are hoping to accomplish here, exactly? Nikkimaria (talk) 16:57, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Solving the ongoing dispute by getting a durable gentlemen's agreement:
  • being more respectful for the input of experienced people in the specific field (Bruckner works);
  • refraining from removing their input without a friendly, short exchange of views beforehand;
  • listening to their arguments and being open for discussion; not acting as an obstinate, procedural barrister;
  • accepting that so-called "notability" can be biased by media bias or publication bias, and is not an absolute requirement for putting or not putting a recording into the discography, i.e., allowing to put the première recording, the number of available recordings, and a selection of recordings taking Hans Roelofs' critical review into account; referencing Hans' webpage.

--Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 18:32, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Excellent. Let's work towards that, then.
  • You know Bruckner, but might not be as familiar with Wikipedia policies and procedures (and have unfortunately received some poor advice in that area). I am happy to respect your input if you will also respect mine.
  • Okay, to a point. If something is objectively incorrect, for example, it should be reverted or removed without pre-discussion.
  • Again, happy to listen to your arguments, but this goes both ways, and being called names across multiple pages is not exactly conducive to collegial discussion.
  • While your arguments have merit, this is for the most part not something that can be resolved on a per-article basis. If you want to change the guidelines regarding discography entries, for example, you would need to take that up at the guideline page. More broadly, Wikipedia guidelines are geared towards the creation of articles not intended for experts - this has been the basis of some of my objections to your inclusion of unexplained German text, for example. Non-expert readers do not necessarily share the background knowledge, understanding of the sources, or perception of what is "worthwhile". Nikkimaria (talk) 02:11, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Some thoughts:

  • Re. "objectively incorrect": see WP:NPOVFAQ#There's no such thing as objectivity: when one source says something and another source says something different both views can (and often should) be represented in Wikipedia, provided that both sources count as WP:RS. Indeed scholarship does not always "win" from popular views in this respect. When the popular view is represented in reliable sources readers may expect to find it here.
  • Re. "not ... as familiar with Wikipedia policies and procedures": it is good Wikipedia tradition that the more experienced editor helps the less experienced editor in this respect (WP:BITE). Simply reverting is not showing the ways things are handled in optimal conditions. "Short exchange of views" is a reasonable approach, kudos to the newcomer who realizes that. Besides, the more experienced editor may be unaware of some guidelines/procedures/policies too (see "objectivity" in previous point)
  • Re. "notability": indeed a somewhat tainted concept in Wikipedia. Nonetheless WP:NOTABILITY is currently a guideline, so the concept can be used in that context (unlike "objectivity" which is a no-no). Indeed notability, like neutrality, is founded on a mix of more scholarly and more popular sources, not exclusively the more scholarly ones, nor exclusively the more popular ones.
  • Re. "guidelines regarding discography entries": Didn't know we had guidelines on the topic. I typed WP:DISCOGRAPHY: I see a project, not guidelines. Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lists of works has indeed "these articles should follow the guidelines given by WikiProject Discographies" (so, linking to a page where I can't find any guidelines). WP:DISCOGSTYLE is a dormant proposal, not a guideline. There is something in Wikipedia:WikiProject Musicians/Article guidelines#Discography section, but seems as irrelevant to classical composers as WP:NCM#Bands, albums and songs to WP:NCM#Compositions (classical music) (well, I added something there as a step to avoid confusion). Same for Wikipedia:Manual of Style (lists of works)#Discographies. I'd like some clarification which guidelines are meant?
  • "have unfortunately received some poor advice" seems a somewhat inappropriate slur to me. Comment on edits, not editors please. --Francis Schonken (talk) 05:18, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello Meneerke. As a show of good faith I have now added a link to your recommended discography to all the motet articles under discussion that did not yet have one. Hopefully we may now move forward in a more collegial manner. I apologize if any offense was given by my post above, as none was intended; in particular, Francis' "some thoughts" immediately above offer some good advice. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:56, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for it. You did not offend me. I became well somewhat irritated, because of the repeated time-consuming, procedural discussion.
I propose to change "Discography (German)" to "Commented discography (German)", since Hans is reviewing in it most of the available recordings. OK for you? --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 18:59, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
I would suggest either "annotated" or "critical" - "commented discography" reads a bit oddly in English, though the translation is correct. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:36, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
OK then for "Critical discography". --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 20:22, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Locus iste[edit]

Reading this, I conclude that the composition was not even ready for the dedication of the Votivkapelle?? Article needs a rewrite then ;) - I would think that the pictured chapel is the one, but found no support for it. Do you know? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:27, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

As soon as I almost gave up I found something --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:37, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
I added a bit and updated the DYK nom. Feel free to add. I will do more later. Anniversary 29 Oct, it should be good by then ;)
ps: did you see who wrote the TFA? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:22, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
I nominated Locus iste for Good article, a bit premature, but liked our Kirchweih date for it ;) - If you feel like it, you could expand the recordings section, perhaps with reviews which mention things remarkable about the composition. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:20, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Request for mediation rejected[edit]

The request for formal mediation concerning Rondo in C minor (Bruckner) and Intermezzo in D minor (Bruckner), to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

For the Mediation Committee, User:TransporterMan (talk) 16:01, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
(Delivered by MediationBot, on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)

DYK for Locus iste (Bruckner)[edit]

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:03, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:17, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
Ave Maria will follow in a few hours, pictured, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:34, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Christus factus est, WAB 11 (Bruckner)[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Christus factus est, WAB 11 (Bruckner) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 21:38, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

I just added two publications, as refs for the two dates. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:21, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Ave Maria (Bruckner)[edit]

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:02, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Gratias! - Vexilla regis: there's a lot of text and translation now which might better go to the text article. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:50, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
I noticed that you edit the free scores. Would you know if you can copy something like the title page of Mit Fried und Freud, BuxWV 76 (Buxtehude, Dietrich) to the commons, and if yes how? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:39, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
Dear Gerda
I never have done it on Commons. On the en-Wikipedia and the fr-wikipedia we use the template {{IMSLP2|id=Mit Fried und Freud, BuxWV 76 (Buxtehude, Dietrich)|cname=Mit Fried und Freud, BuxWV 76}}. Unfortunately I have checked that his template does not work on Commons.
On the contrary, the wikilink [[Scores:Mit Fried und Freud, BuxWV 76 (Buxtehude, Dietrich)|♫]], which provides with the icon "♫" which links to IMSLP, is well working on Commons.
I have tried [[Scores:Mit Fried und Freud, BuxWV 76 (Buxtehude, Dietrich)|Mit Fried und Freud, BuxWV 76]] ... and it also works on Commpons.
Best regards, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 11:26, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Christus factus est, WAB 11[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:03, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Christus factus est, WAB 10[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Os justi (Bruckner)[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Ways to improve Inveni David, WAB 19[edit]

Hi, I'm Xcia0069. Meneerke bloem, thanks for creating Inveni David, WAB 19!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Good article !

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Xcia0069 (talk) 11:53, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

WAB 33[edit]

What is Musica sacra there? A collection of music? A journal? - Auer quote, given in English: "simpleness"? simplicity? - I would not call it a quote anyway without providing the German original. - Sorry, Afferentur is not expanded enough for DYK, I missed that. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:06, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Mayer Cantata, WAB 60[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 11:41, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Add Cat[edit]

Dear Réginald , I took the liberty to add a category to your user page. I am member of the board of WM Belgium [1] and I would like, if it is ok, to have curated list of active wikipedians in Belgium who may be interested in our future activities. Feel free to revert of course. --Alberto Fernández Fernández (talk) 08:50, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Vor Arneths Grab, WAB 53[edit]

Harrias talk 00:03, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Military march (Bruckner)[edit]

Harrias talk 12:02, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Iam lucis orto sidere DYK[edit]

Hi, Réginald. I just wanted to leave you a note to let you know that I reviewed your DYK nomination, but I have a few questions. Could you please take a look and let me know your thoughts about the concerns I've raised?-RHM22 (talk) 07:36, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Pange lingua, WAB 33[edit]

Harrias talk 00:03, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Iam lucis orto sidere, WAB 18[edit]

Harrias talk 00:41, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Symphonic Prelude[edit]

Can you deal with this, please? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:59, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Symphonic Prelude (Bruckner)[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 20:59, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Bruckner and chorale[edit]

Connected to Jesus nahm zu sich die Zwölfe, BWV 22, I came across a requested citation regarding Bruckner in Chorale, after a longish sentence that names Bruckner very late. Can you help to reword and reference? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:40, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Always nice to meet your name on my watchlist. Will sing WAB 9! And BWV 29! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:11, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Os justi[edit]

To be honest, I don't's been a couple of seasons since we sang it, so I have to go and dig up the music. When I do I'll let you know.

I believe we're doing Christus factus est next, but I'm not certain of that. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 15:55, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, that's the one, then - I've never sung the longer version. (I've done the shorter version twice.)
I'm quite looking forward to the Christus - I love Bruckner's motets. (Not so wild on the larger stuff, frankly, but the motets are little gems.) --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 18:26, 30 May 2015 (UTC)


Wikipedia Autopatrolled.svg

Hi Meneerke bloem, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the patroller right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! Beeblebrox (talk) 19:46, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Happy ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:48, 21 June 2015 (UTC)


The type parameter of {{musical composition}} was created to say something helpful above the image. To repeat Mass below the header Mass seems not needed. This is different if the title is for example The Armed Man or even Missa in F, for those who don't know that Missa means mass. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:53, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

ps: once I am here, what do you think of this discussion? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:54, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

A discussion started at Tannhäuser made me think. I like the links at Bruckner's Secular choral works, - if we agree, you may want to change those from Motet to Motets (Bruckner), and others?

Bach motets[edit]

Thank you for starting that article. Please include BWV Anh 159. In case you have more time, find images ;) - Singers at a funeral of the time, accompanied by instruments, would be ideal. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:03, 9 September 2015 (UTC)


I started after singing it today) Beati quorum via (Stanford), which has been compared to Bruckner's motets. Expansion welcome, - I have little time. Also: we have Category:Psalm settings and Category:Psalm-related compositions by Johann Sebastian Bach, but miss Category:Psalm-related compositions which would be more appropriate for a setting of just one verse of 176. Psalm settings should be reserved for settings of one complete psalm (or several). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:42, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

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) 13:45, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Signpost exit poll[edit]

Dear Wikipedian, you recently voted in the ArbCom election. Your username, along with around 155 other usernames of your fellow Wikipedians, was randomly selected from the 2000+ Wikipedians who voted this year, with the help of one of the election-commissioners. If you are willing, could you please participate (at your option either on-wiki via userspace or off-wiki via email) in an exit poll, and answer some questions about how you decided amongst the ArbCom candidates?

  If you decide to participate in this exit poll, the statistical results will be published in the Signpost, an online newspaper with over 1000 Wikipedians among the readership. There are about twelve questions, which have alphanumerical answers; it should take you a few minutes to complete the exit poll questionnaire, and will help improve Wikipedia by giving future candidates information about what you think is important. This is only an unofficial survey, and will have no impact on your actual vote during this election, nor in any future election.

  All questions are individually optional, and this entire exit poll itself is also entirely optional, though if you choose not to participate, I would appreciate a brief reply indicating why you decided not to take part (see Question Zero). Thanks for being a Wikipedian

The questionnaire[edit]

Dear Wikipedian, please fill out these questions -- at your option via usertalk or via email, see Detailed Instructions at the end of the twelve questions -- by putting the appropriate answer in the blanks provided. If you decide not to answer a question (all questions are optional), please put the reason down: "undecided" / "private information" / "prefer not to answer" / "question is not well-posed" / "other: please specify". Although the Signpost cannot guarantee that complex answers can be processed for publication, it will help us improve future exit polls, if you give us comments about why you could not answer specific questions.

Detailed Instructions: you are welcome to answer these questions via usertalk (easiest), or via email (for a modicum of privacy).

We do promise to try hard, not to make any mistakes, in the processing and presentation of your answers. If you have any questions or concerns, you may contact column-editor GamerPro64, copy-editor, or copy-editor Ryk72. Thanks for reading, and thanks for helping Wikipedia. GamerPro64 14:38, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

2016 year of the reader and peace[edit]

peace bell

Thank you for your support and wishes, returned with my review, and the peace bell by Yunshui! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:42, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Meneerke bloem![edit]

Charles R. Knight New Years's Card.jpg
Godt Nytaar! 1916.jpg
(Unknown artist, Norway, 1916)

Der Mondabend[edit]

Hi! Thanks for your note. I hope I didn't jump in too quickly - and the changes were only small ones.

For a general comment, just to be aware - in the translation of the text of the poem from German to English (which I think is very good as it is now), there's a slight translation difficulty between singular and plural, as follows:
First, for 'Der Himmel', in German: In English, the word 'Heaven' is used without 'the', and contains the idea of 'Heaven where God dwells', the realm of the divine. The plural form has the article - ' the heavens' - and usually only means 'the sky' or 'the firmament', and especially the night sky with the stars. 'The heaven' is not a normal expression in English. So you could write, 'The heavens laugh' in verse 1, and 'The heavens are fair and noble' in verse 4. In German, the same word serves both meanings, but in English the use of singular or plural forms differentiates one meaning from the other.
Second, for 'Das Auge', in German: I think you are right to put this in the plural in English. English does have the same poetic usage (singular for plural) in the 17th century - Herrick, for instance, says 'Stay but till my Julia close her life-begetting eye' (meaning both eyes) in To Daisies, not to shut so soon - but the repetition in Der Mondabend (verse 2 and verse 4), and particularly the importance of the final line, would put an unfortunate emphasis on the idea of only one eye. So (after all this explanation) my advice is to keep 'the eyes' in the plural - as you now have them.

It's a nice article - thankyou, and best wishes. Eebahgum (talk) 14:23, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

I have provisionally made the alterations to 'The heavens'. It's slightly tricky because this poem plays upon the dual meaning of 'Der Himmel', just as it plays with the sphere of heaven magically transmuted into the orb of Sylli's eye. If you prefer something else, please change it as you like. Eebahgum (talk) 15:02, 2 January 2016 (UTC)