User talk:Voceditenore/Archive 10

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page.
If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page

Evelyn Peers Williams, aged 3. married 3rd Duke of Wellington.JPG

still more past topics...

Salad Days, etc.[edit]

Well, it's on my watchlist because I played the Minister of Pleasure and Pastime (duet with Constable Boot: "We're looking for a piano") in a college production back in 1968 (eek!) and tidied up the article some time ago. Editing others' contributions to article Talk pages is a bit of a minefield (Talk:William Shakespeare is currently a bit of a laugh - or, better, a bit of a cry - if you like that sort of thing, and I feel as if I've been reverting things around there for about a week now) but this was clearcut.

The Wexford list is taking longer than I expected (rather fiddly, at least ten minutes per opera), and I'll be away from early tomorrow to late Sunday, but I'll reply to your and Peter's comments on the WPO talk page this evening. Best. --GuillaumeTell 18:25, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

L'ange FAC[edit]

Hello, I believe I have addressed your concerns at the FAC for L'ange de Nisida. --Andy Walsh (talk) 22:29, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi there. I've added my support but did mention one fact that you ought to check concerning the nationality of Juliette Bourgeois and suggested a change from a footnote to text as an intro to the Roles section, although the latter is not essential. By the way (and not for the WP article), in my peregrinations around the 'net, I learned that Opera Rara has plans to reconstruct and record L'Ange and are offering PhD. bursaries to students wanting to help with the research. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 10:24, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
Another tidbit, although not for the article and I didn't want to clog up the FAC... Some contemporary (and obviously economical with the truth) PR appearing in Musical World, 7 May 1840:
"The Renaissance struggles manfully against the tide of ill-fortune which seems to flow against that luckless theatre. It is now opened by the performers, who form a species of republic. Ruy Bias is advertised to be revived ; and L'Ange de Nisida, the opera composed for this house by Donizetti, is announced as in rehearsal. Mme. Anna Thillon will support the principal role."
Best, 10:45, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
Great, thank you for the additional suggestions and information. I have copied this into my userspace to keep an eye on—clearly it will be an item to track. --Andy Walsh (talk) 17:47, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Il ritorno d'Ulisse in patria - expansion in progress[edit]

I wonder if you can help. I am working on the above article expansion, and am having some difficulty in compiling a schedule of 20th century revival performances. My problem is in fixing the date of the first British staged performance. Kobbé says this was the Glyndebourne/Leppard production of 1972, but the Concise Oxford Dictionary of Music refers to a London performance in 1965, as does this Observer article from 2002. Neither COD nor the Observer give any further details. The 1965 staging wasn't done by Sadlers Wells or the ROH. Could it have been a private performance, or by one of the London colleges? All Google and book searches have drawn a blank. Do you have any knowledge of this, or suggestions about where I could enquire further? Brianboulton (talk) 12:32, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

(Later): I have traced the performance to St Pancras Town Hall, London, 16 March 1965. Still don't know who staged it (college? music society?) but we/re making progress. Brianboulton (talk) 15:08, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Hi Brian, I'm writing this from a hotel in the US. But had a quick look. See Cyril Eland collection: St. Pancras Arts Festival/Camden Festival (1966-86):
St. Pancras Arts Festival 16-17 March 1965: Monteverdi, Il Ritorno d'Ulisse in Patria (first British staged performance), given by Basilica Productions Ltd and given with the English Chamber Orchestra, conducted by Frederick Marshall.
Best, Voceditenore (talk) 11:46, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
Great! Thanks very much, I'll incorporate this. Brianboulton (talk) 13:57, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Nrswanson back as 4meter4[edit]

(crossposting from Antandrus page); I see that you and Voceditenore have been instrumental in allowing Nrswanson back to WP. I can understand the reasons for this, although I think it's misguided. (He's been given a second chance again and again, and each time the temptation of role playing/vote stacking has been too much for him.) However what I don't understand why he has been allowed to assume a new identity as 4meter4. Surely he should be required to stick with the name of Nrswanson so we all know what is happening, rather than allowing him to slip in under the radar? --Kleinzach 02:50, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

I am abroad with very limited computer acess due to a family medical emergency, so will only comment to say that the decision re his username was made by the administrator who closed the sockpuppet investigation [1]. Voceditenore (talk) 11:18, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Right. I've written to Amorymeltzer about this. --Kleinzach 23:56, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Arena is NOT the Theatre!!!![edit]

How could you confuse Arena di Verona and Roman Theatre in Verona?!?!?! --'''Attilios''' (talk) 08:36, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Many apologies! I was misled by the caption in the photograph and should have looked more carefully. I wasn't aware that opera was also performed in that theatre. Anyway, I'm glad you fixed it, and good luck with expanding the article. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 09:30, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
No problem, sure!!! I also made some of such errors in my wikipast... As for expansion, I am a bit stumbling, as the Italian article has several architecture terms whose equivalent I don't know in English... Can you help? Ciao and good work!!

Here are some of the words:

  • "fondale" = "backdrop"
  • "parascenio = "parascenium" (rooms to the side of the stage usually used for dressing the actors)
  • "dietroscenio" = don't think there's an English word, I'd use simply "rear wall"
  • "pulpito" = "pulpitum" usually synonymous with the raised stage itself

It might be better to work directly from English sources: [2], [3], [4]. There's also this book in Italian: [5]. Voceditenore (talk) 11:25, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Claudia Eder[edit]

Among other red link singers I started that lady and then found her on your user page. Please feel free to expand, I will travel for a week or so. I would like to mention some day how impressive she was in Le Roi David. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:23, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi Gerda. She was only on my notes page because an editor had de-linked a bunch of singers at the Tales Of Hoffmann discography on the (erroneous) grounds that they weren't notable. Rather than get into a tussle, I just kept track of the notable ones in case I ever had time to write articles and re-link. Anyhow, I'm glad you started the article. You can find a bit more information about her opera career, birth date, etc, here. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 14:51, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, started working on it, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:37, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
Approved for DYK, thanks to you! I still wonder if the Hoffmann recording is of 1984 (source 1), 1989 (source 2) or 1990 (Discography)? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:03, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Trouble Down Under[edit]

I was looking for TheRedPenOfDoom (his ink well ran dry?). He was helpful in a prior case of an article with a serious ownership issue now resolved. I then remembered your calming influence. I know you are overwhelmed with operatic edits and I wish this were about Joan Sutherland but it isn't. I have an issue with a New Zealander who owns an article (Russell Crowe[6] a baritone maybe?) and cited material gets reverted if it does suit the New Zealander. A Warning - his understanding of wikipedia concepts is shaky at best. If you could cruise over and take a look as you find the time I'd be most grateful. Eudemis (talk) 01:39, 9 April 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eudemis (talkcontribs)

It is entirely improper to try and raise support by canvassing in this manner. And you are entirely all wet, I am not a New Zealand based editor, I live in the United States, and your continually stating I have ownership issues is a personal attack that simply must stop. I have based my objections to your edits in WP policy, including violations of WP:BLP, so you're all wet on that as well. Wildhartlivie (talk) 03:53, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Excuse me for interrupting, but why don't you two slug it out on your own talk pages? If it's any comfort, Wildhartlivie, I tend to agree with you re giving undue weight, and naming non-notable people. But I wouldn't touch Signor Corvo or his talk page with a barge pole. SMirC-smile.svg Best, Voceditenore (talk) 15:23, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Notability link in category descriptions[edit]

A category description only serves to define what should appear in the category. I do not see how a link for "notable" contradicts that purpose or the function of categories. What I intend for it to do is prevent people adding themselves or other non-notable people to the categories directly ("cruft" as I call it), which is frequently seen if you edit categories enough. In either case, I don't feel strongly about it being there or not. Jason Quinn (talk) 20:51, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, I understand what you're getting at. I deal with a lot of that in my work at WikiProject Opera. But the fact of the matter is that categories cannot be inherently defined by notability. Numerous attempts have failed. The real problem occurs mostly with non-operatic singers, where a lot of unreferenced random guessing, wishful thinking, and fan speculation go on. A random check shows mulitple articles which nowhere mention that the singer has a soprano voice, let alone providing a reference, e.g. Goapele, Anastacia, Patti LaBelle to name a few. I think a better message would be something along the lines of:
This category should only be applied to singers whose articles contain a citation to a reliable source which verifies their voice type as soprano.
Best, Voceditenore (talk) 08:32, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
I like your wording. I will consider using something like it or something like it in the future. I feel strongly that the categories deserve good descriptions and should each have one. Consistency and accuracy in wording are also important to me, as it is for you too. I plan in the future on creating templates that can be applied to many category's sub-categories such that the descriptions are as uniform as possible. Maybe I'll solicit your feedback in a few cases when I get around to this. Cheers. Jason Quinn (talk) 15:05, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

AfD The Irving Literary Society[edit]

Do you get the impression someone sent out an email to his whole fraternity/organization saying "please go and vote on Wikipedia because they are trying to delete our article." I am glad I am not the only one trying to stem the tide here. Thanks. Cornell1890 (talk) 15:28, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome.;-) As you can see, I finally asked for assistance at ANI [7]. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 17:23, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Re: Dubravko Merlić[edit]

Added to my watchlist. Not in great shape but it was partially fixed, so it's not too bad either - I'll do a copyedit within a couple of days hopefully... GregorB (talk) 18:54, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Above in response to [8] - Voceditenore (talk) 08:12, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Hy, no.. I'm interested in tv production, it's ok, i will write about other jurnalists in Croatia! Tnx for recomendation! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anpi (talkcontribs) 08:05, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Above in response to [9] - Voceditenore (talk) 08:12, 22 April 2010 (UTC)


Thanks for working on the list of problem articles I started. I think this is the best way to deal with the issues rather than AfD or PROD (unless there is a blatant need for these). I must clarify that I never actually stated any goal in AfDing those other articles: I truly believed they should be deleted. The problem was that I was dealing with a huge number of articles all at once and never fully investigated the ones I nom'ed. I screwed up, in other words. I withdraw most of them: the one's I left at AfD were actually deleted, I think. Cleanup became the way out of this particular hole but was never the goal per se. Sending to XfD just to force cleanup simply creates massive headaches, especially if 10 are send at once... I note that you and Klein have had something of a disagreement over this issue while I have been on Wikibreak. I apologise if my screw up was the catalyst. I am going to restart working on my list tomorrow and look forward to your feedback. Your considerable skills are appreciated and I look forward to working with you again in the near future. Yours --Jubilee♫clipman 03:11, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi there. When I saw "AfDs (mostly contested but at least this way people are alerted and can improve the article)" I didn't realize that was post hoc.
And don't worry, Kleinzach doesn't need a catalyst to disagree with me.SMirC-smile.svg Anyhow, at the moment I have my hands full with WikiProject Opera trying to fix up Dido and Aeneas, rewriting a copyvio singer article, and referencing the unreferenced BLPs under our project. If you haven't seen the current brouhaha, you can read about it and take a look at how we're handling it here. You might want to think about something similar for the Contemporary Music project. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 11:00, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks and good luck! Looks like quite a nightmare. I have alerted my own project. I have also had a message from a concerned party recently about his (apparently) own unref'ed BLP, so it looks like we have our work cut out... --Jubilee♫clipman 12:54, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

John Andrew Rea[edit]

Wow; thanks for the style tutorial; will use this as a model on my future scratchings. Incredible; and I thought I had dug deep for documentation of his life. Remarkable guy; little is recorded of his spouse, Mary; but the tradition of her life pass to me indicates she was truly amazing. --Cmagha (talk) 14:29, 16 May 2010 (UTC) Cmagha

Thanks on Irving[edit]

The fratspeak remaining was the minimum thought needed to prove existance, which was a big deal first time around. Can easily be dropped to three sentences. And thanks for underscoring the external cite policy, didn't understand that at first. On listing of associations, I was following the guidance of putting them at the end, where applicable, and which is where I typically have seen them in older cyclopedias. Will keep your thoughts in mind. Sometimes I worry that too general an approach will over harmonize our understanding - case in point, Alva Kelley and George James' membership in both house and society was an integral part of their work together; Bentley and O'Leary were very close and so were their wives. At one point in the 1930s -- when literary work in general at Cornell was bottoming -- Paul thought that the writing adults were a dying order, which ties back to some of the themes in the new Irving write-up. By the way, found the most general cite to be from a federal report on education in 1900. Again, thanks. --Cmagha (talk) 10:42, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

The above comment is in response to this. Voceditenore (talk) 09:03, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure who each of these people you are referring to are as you didn't link their articles, especially "Paul". I assume Kelly and James refer to the football coaches? If you provide a reference to published material from a reliable source that verifies that they took an active role in the ILS (not simply the fraternity), fine. If it's just "inside" knowledge via the fraternity, the "personal knowledge" of someone, or extrapolation from the fact that were close friends and also happened to belong to the ILS, it doesn't belong on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not about "harmonizing understanding (or not)" or even truth, it's about Verifiability. This is one of Wikipedia's core content policies, along with No original research and Neutral point of view, and they're non-negotiable. Some editors find this framework too restricting and ultimately prefer to publish their work elsewhere. If you want to continue writing for Wikipedia, then I'm afraid you have to accept that framework. I've left you some concrete suggestions for your ILS draft here. By the way, signatures go at the end of a comment, not the beginning. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 09:03, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Are You There?[edit]

I think you are right, although (coincidentally?) his brother, Lawrence Grossmith, appeared in the 1913 musical. I de-linked the film title. -- Ssilvers (talk) 01:53, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

The above comment is in response to this Voceditenore (talk) 05:45, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Message from WikiProject Children's literature[edit]

WikiProject Children's literature has been invited by the Wikipedia Signpost to feature in the WikiProject Report in the July 19 issue. Please contribute to this report by answering the interview questions here. strdst_grl (call me Stardust) 10:37, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Falls of Cruachan derailment[edit]

The RMT webpage is working OK for me! Mjroots (talk) 12:43, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

I got a 500 error the first time. Works OK now. The website must have been having a momentary problem, but I wanted to make sure the hook had a working reference. You could re-add the original ref as "insurance". Good luck with the AfD. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 17:07, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, but I'll leave it. I think the Scotsman is less likely to suffer linkrot that the RMT website. Mjroots (talk) 17:46, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
As I predicted, the article survived the AfD. (Face-smile.svg. Mjroots (talk) 05:26, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Transformations (opera)[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Transformations (opera) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that 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! Quasihuman (talk) 15:24, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer[edit]

Redaktor Wikipedia 600px.png

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 20:23, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Composer of the month[edit]


I have created the articles Pinotta and Chatterton. Please, can you take a look, I'm not an English nativespeaker and it is possible that some language errors still occur. Many thanks ;) --Mazeppafr (talk) 22:36, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you so much for these! I've made some minor copyedits and formatted the references. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 12:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Heinrich Kreutzer[edit]

Thanks for editing the Heinrich Kreutzer page. I just got access to an online encyclopedia of 1903 that describes German singers (which I added to the reference list). Heinrich's name is spelled there as "Kreuzer", which I believe is the most common one. I started the page using the "Kreutzer" spelling since this is the spelling used for his daughter Elise, when she married Paul Taxis. However, in later years (when she got married to Cabisius), the spelling of Elise's name is "Kreuzer"again. Could you kindly change it accordingly be removing the "t", especially in the title, since I don't know how to do this. Thanks Allancortez (talk) 08:05, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Done, and many thanks for writing the article. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 09:27, 16 January 2010 (UTC)


My internet connection is being a bit mardy, and accessing JSTOR is a real bugger. Can I suggest asking User:Shimgray? He's usually good for such things. Once again, sorry for the delay and lack of articles. Ironholds (talk) 17:46, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind welcome[edit]

Hi Voceditenore! Thank you for the kind words; and also for enriching the delle Sedie page with a nice image. Bel beller (talk) 22:22, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
Oh, by the way: Talk:Bel_canto#Quotations

Many thanks[edit]

Many thanks for the pleasant and kindly welcome to the opera project Eric W. Cook 13:30, 22 April 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eric W. Cook (talkcontribs)

New BLP page[edit]

Hi I've just created Neil Howlett - its not especially well ref-ed atm (and has pretty vague detail) so if you've anything on him to flesh this out, that would be helpful! Thank you almost-instinct 19:32, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! You've done a very thorough job of overshadowing my intial contribution :-) almost-instinct 09:17, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

I just came across Mark Stone (opera singer), very recently created without any references. Firstly, do you think the name of the page is correct? The page has been done very nicely - not sure by who ;-) - with virtually no puffing-up, so would adding the refs from the given sources be enough, do you think? almost-instinct 07:04, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

It does have references for BLP purposes, althought they should be more properly labeled "Sources". There's often a confusion about the use of the term, but as normally used in feature articles, "References" refers to inline citations, normally a shortened form of the full bibliographic information given in the "Sources" section e.g. in Neil Howlett. The singer is notable. Although the article was clearly created by a COI editor, it's well-written without puffery. Unless you're particularly interested in it, it isn't strictly necessary to add the inline cites, although it's desirable. The descriptions of the sources are also a bit vague. Optimally, they should be properly formated as in the Howlett article. Re the title, normally it would be Mark Stone (baritone) but (opera singer) is OK. (There are already 2 other Mark Stones on WP.) Best, Voceditenore (talk) 14:55, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Re: Steve Sexton (composer)[edit]

Thank you for all your hard work ...... nice job (sorry for all the workload, new to this)

Stvsxtn (talk) 01:05, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Re: comments about David Peter Stroh article[edit]

Hi, I am confused about your comments relating to this article. You say that notability is an issue and needs independent third party references. And you say that reliability is in question. I notice that the guidelines here indicate that

  • If the material has been published in reputable peer-reviewed sources or by well-regarded academic presses, generally it has been at least preliminarily vetted by one or more other scholars.

Clearly, all the articles referenced are of this type. So, what is the problem? Do I need to move the references to a separate section called Publications? Would that help?

Would you please point out the difference between the quality of this article and the article on Peter Senge, who was a colleague of Stroh's in the 1990's at Innovation Associates? He is quoted in his own articles and book there. I need a way forward to clear this and make the article correct. Would you please assist? You seem to know a lot about the editing process in Wikipedia, and I am most willing to learn. Kind regards, Mstroh (talk) 21:42, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi there. Thanks for getting in touch. Well, the issue is not that David Stroh's work has not been published in peer-reviewed journals. It obviously has. The problem is that you have listed no reliable published sources, independent of David Stroh, which discuss him and his work. These are required to establish notability per WP:PROF. They don't have to be in peer reviewed journals. They can be from books or newspaper/magazine articles of the type listed in WP:RELY. Stroh's own work can be used to verify that he's written it or to verify the ideas that he expresses in it, but that's all. It does nothing to attest to his notability.
The difference with the Peter Senge article is that it provides independent sources that attest to Senge's notability
  1. named a 'Strategist of the Century' by the Journal of Business Strategy, one of 24 men and women who have "had the greatest impact on the way we conduct business today" (September/October 1999).
  2. his book The Fifth Discipline has sold more than a million copies, with the Harvard Business Review identifying it as one of the seminal management books of the past 75 years.
  3. not added yet, but see Peter Senge's Necessary Revolution, in Bloomberg Businessweek for another example, of a source that attests to notability.
The Stroh (unlike the Senge) article has a lot of promotional language in it which is inappropriate in any case, but especially since it's not substantiated by a reliable independent source which verifies it. For example:
  1. Who has said that Kiefer and Stroh's book is a "transformative view of organization development"? (my underlining)
  2. What evidence is there that Senge's The Fifth Discipline summarized the ideas developed by Kiefer and Stroh? (If Senge explictly acknowledges this in the book, then it needs a page number). If he doesn't, then you need to find someone else who's said it.)
  3. Who has described Stroh as having developed a "practical approach that enables leaders to achieve breakthrough change around chronic, complex problems"?
  4. Ditto that Stroh and Kiefer's rekindled relationship "opened a new door into improving organization effectiveness"
  5. Ditto that Stroh and Paul developed "an innovative approach that enables leaders to transform how they manage time in a 24/7 world"
  6. Ditto that SOL is "committed to developing capacity for inspired results through applying the principles and tools of organziational learning
This kind of wording doesn't really belong in an encyclopedia article, although it's fine for an organization's own website.
I kind of get the impression that you are somehow connected with David Stroh and/or Bridgeway Partners. If so, it's awfully hard to write a neutral article and to stand back and be objective about the subject. The goal of putting the business and the people involved in it in the best possible light usually surfaces in the writing, often unconsciously. That's why Wikipedia strongly discourages editors from writing articles about people or organizations to which they have a personal connection. So you'll have to be especially careful as you edit it.
Hope that helps. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 16:30, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks very much for your extensive reply. That makes perfect sense to me now. I am related to David, being his first cousin. I will be very careful to avoid promotional language and will remove any occurrence from the article. I will obtain the necessary references for statements in the article, otherwise I will remove them. Thank you once again. Kind regards, Mstroh (talk) 22:36, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Voce di soprano - bio missing[edit]

You helped with Claudia Eder recently. Filling red links I now came across Edith Selig, finding traces of recording (Mahler 2nd Symphony) and teaching, but not the slightest biographical information but a double name Selig-Papée (also spelled different ways). I am not even sure she's German, might be Swiss as well. Seems to have moved to Paris. - Can you perhaps find more again? Curious, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:25, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi Gerda. I had a look around, but unfortunately came up with nothing. A very elusive singer.;-) Voceditenore (talk) 17:01, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for looking! She will be on DYK next Sunday. Do you happen to know if there was a better cat as a teacher than that general one. I don't read enough French to know what kind of school it is. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:26, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Deborah Voigt[edit]

What do you think of her? You did such a good job on the smuggling in fiction article, you might want to work on fixing up this one to GA status. Disclosure: my partner and Ms. Voigt have sung together with the collegiate Chorale. Bearian (talk) 17:44, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi there. Thanks for my Smuggling in fiction shiny thing! I hope to add a bit more to the lead in a few days, as well as some other works for the list. Now... Deborah Voigt... I'm afraid she doesn't really "speak to me" as a singer and I tend to avoid editing articles about living singers if I possibly can, unless BLP issues arise. The article's in pretty decent shape now. I'd suggest listing it for a Peer review. It may be that only a few minor adjustments need to be made before you nominate it for GA. If you do list it, leave a note at WikiProject Opera. You might be able to find a reviewer there. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 17:26, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the ideas. Bearian (talk) 16:42, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Taghi Gheisari[edit]

Thank you for your kind work on "Narmina Afandiyeva"s entry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gheisari (talkcontribs) 19:52, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Reduta Theatre[edit]

Hello Voceditenore. Thank you for the clarification at DYK talk and for your copyediting of this article. The main purpose of my DYK nominations is to improve my imperfect English grammar and to clarify possible questions. Usually that works, but in this case I found a really competent editor. I appreciate your help. Best regards. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 06:46, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Conrad Thibault[edit]

Many thanks for your edits on my first attempt at a real article. I'm most pleased with what you did with it. By the way, where did you find the information on his marriages? I looked all over for that information but did not find it. Settlet (talk) 03:34, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi there. You're very welcome. Sorry I'm so late replying. Got caught up in another project. Anyhow, I found the info by carefully checking the texts of the articles that Google News threw up and then doing searches on the women mentioned in the articles. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 12:17, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Milena Kitić[edit]

Hmmm. Yes this is a bit of a difficult one. I admit now that I did redirect the page without thinking much about it, but the basis was that she was born in Yugoslavia. Usually when a subject is born outside the homeland, I leave the format as it is. I am one of those who is permanently pro-diacritics for every scenario, and would dearly love to see much of the policy changed. In the past where usage has been put to a consensus, my vote has been to include them. I realise that Kitić (and that is how I will forever refer to her in discussion) has made most of her professional contribution outside of Serbia and the former Yugoslavia, mainly in the States. That does count for something. However, it is not the case than any Croatian, or Hungarian, or Romanian subject writes his or her name without diacritics. It is simply that when this person moves to another part of the world where the graphemes do not exist, they tend not to be realised by the locals and fewer still would ask why it is there and what does it represent. Her website is not drafted by her as it is presented in the narrative, so it is unclear how she would write her own name. I have used one argument thousands of times however and that is that it is not the case that English does not allow for diacritics, it does, it is that many writers do not know them. With that in mind, just as one would discard the diacritics on Milena Kitić, so too would that same source on Milo Đukanović, Slavko Vraneš, Jelena Nikolić, Vedran Ćorluka, Ana Ivanović and Miomir Žužul (a handful of completely random individuals that sprang to mind from thousands). I challenge anybody to find a source that mixes and matches, rendering some subjects with and others without, because if they did, on what grounds would they do so? If someone tries to argue "ahh, but there is a greater number of sources that give those people with their diacritics" then it stands to reason that those sources are from the subjects' native language, and that raises the question, just how noteworthy are they and should they be given an English language article? So I don't quite know how to go on this one. It is difficult. Evlekis (Евлекис) 18:39, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Above comment in response to this. Voceditenore (talk) 12:09, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
I also am in favour of using diacritics etc. for people's names. However, I do find it problematic when the persons themselves have anglicized their names. Just because the narrative on her official website is in the third person, doesn't mean that she doesn't have full editorial approval. Having said that, it's a minor issue and as long as Milena Kitic redirects, it's fine by me. Voceditenore (talk) 12:09, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for that Voceditenore. In the meantime, if anything else emerges that would positively make Kitic more appropriate, I shall be among those like you that will favour a return to the original (only this time, having Kitić redirecting). Evlekis (Евлекис) 17:54, 22 June 2010 (UTC)


RlevseTalk 18:03, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Reduta Theatre[edit]

Hello Voceditenore. Thank you for the clarification at DYK talk and for your copyediting of this article. The main purpose of my DYK nominations is to improve my imperfect English grammar and to clarify possible questions. Usually that works, but in this case I found a really competent editor. I appreciate your help. Best regards. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 06:46, 14 June 2010 (UTC)