User talk:DavidRF/archive 1

Welcome message

Welcome!

Hello, DavidRF/archive 1, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. 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 need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!

Dlyons493 Talk 22:43, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mozart Piano Concerto 19

Hi, many thanks for tidying up my Mozart Piano C. 19 effort! I will do some more soon...

Best

Graham Grahbudd 20:30, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Haydn Symphonies

Hi David,

Noticed you penned the article on La Poule - nice job. I have an ongoing project to fill out the symphonies and I am trying to use the same structure for each piece. (Check out my user page for the pathetically small amount I have done so far w/links.) Would you object if I restructured your article along these lines? Or - even better ;) - you could do it yourself. I think it is a good idea to have symmetry among the family of articles. I welcome your thoughts or opinons if you feel the boilerplate I have set up could be improved. Eusebeus 00:08, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent. I feel quite lazy now, since a cleanup of the existing articles has long been something I intended to get around to, so thanks for making a solid start on this. I keep toying with the idea of setting up a project template. Your question about the harpsichord continuo is a good one. AFAIK, Haydn conducted all the symphonies in London from the Harpsichord, although as you note the practice was falling out. Robbins-Landon would certainly have the answer. I am in a music program and may pop down to the library this afternoon to see if I can track down the answer. Meanwhile, to atone for my sins of laziness I will pen the #84 article. Eusebeus 08:46, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all your work. I have posted a comment on the composer's project talk page suggesting the template be applied generally to articles on symphonies, or classical period ones at least. Eusebeus 16:07, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Page move

Hi there, I thought I'd let you know that I reverted your page moves at London symphonies and Paris symphonies because Wikipedia:Naming conventions says not to capitalize second and subsequent nouns unless they're proper nouns. Thought you'd want to know why I did this, so there you are. See you around later! Glad to meet another Haydn fan! Heimstern Läufer 22:17, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Classical music

Thought you might like to check out the wikiproject on classical music. -- ßott e siηi ^(talk) 20:30, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oops! Looks like you're already a member. -- ßott e siηi ^(talk) 21:48, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I just signed up after you asked me to check it out. Let me know what the wikiproject details are. DavidRF 22:06, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sunderland Symphony Orchestra

How is this a Classical composition stub? — superbfc [ talk | cont ] — 00:07, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - I've change the stub template to {{Orchestra-stub}}, is that okay? — superbfc [ talk | cont ] — 00:12, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hoboken numbers

Hey there, I admit I'm ignorant as to how Hoboken numbers work. From the ones you've added, I'm guessing that for a Haydn symphony, the number is I/x where x=the No. of the symphony. Is that right? Heimstern Läufer 00:36, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I reckon it's a good idea to include the Hoboken numbers, but until recently I didn't know how. From now on I'll make sure I add them to the stubs I'm making. Thanks for your help! Heimstern Läufer 03:47, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Major/minor Conventions

I also posted this on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (pieces of music).

You recently changed my edit on the Brahms Works page from Op.34b, Sonata for 2 Pianos in f minor to Op.34b, Sonata for 2 Pianos in f minor. Since your edits seem to indicate that you are quite knowledgeable in the area of music, I was wondering what you think the formatting should be for pieces that are minor vs. major. I was always taught that Major uses an uppercase 'M' and minor uses a lowercase one. Furthermore, I have a theory book that states that the key letter should also follow the same capitalization convention, thus my capitalization of the Brahms edit. In your edit summary for the "correction", you stated that it was only a minor typo fix, implying that you are knowledgeable of the convention on Wikipedia. I see a mixture of uppercase and lowercase, and I would gladly correct any errors that I find in them if I knew what convention was accepted best. Asmeurer (talk • contribs) 01:39, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PC 14 449

Go right ahead- any further work I can edit in. If you don't have access to the article I quote and wish to make more use of it, I can access JStor and have a further look at it (including some of the footnotes, eg the original article making the claim that the first movement sketches date back two years? earlier.) Thanks! Schissel | Sound the Note! 05:16, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tchaikovsky symphonies category

Oh, I wasn't aware of the hierarchy in place for those categories. Yeah, go ahead and revert back to what it used to be. Sorry, and thanks for pointing that out to me!

Mozart Symphony #37

In some ways, it's still known as Mozart's No. 37. See for example, this Naxos disc's webpage. If you click on "About this recording," you'll see the disc's booklet displayed on a separate window. Michael Haydn is not even mentioned anywhere on the outside of the package (and since this disc dates back to 1996, there isn't that little paragraph on the back). Plus the fact that scholars agree that Mozart did write that slow introduction indicates that most people will come to this work because of Mozart (if at all). Maybe it's my POV talking, but I think it would benefit Michael Haydn's promoters to embrace Mozart's contribution instead of trying too hard to prove Haydn's individuality. Anton Mravcek 20:12, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I forgot to say thank you for putting the leading zeroes in the categories. Thanks. Anton Mravcek 22:15, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Classical Music code

Hi, David. Thanks for the feedback. I've figured out that the problem is that the code won’t work inside a container. There's probably a way around that, if I ever have time to work it out. Dropped a note on the designer's page. -- Rob C (Alarob) 19:09, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Etudes

Oh, I won't do it again. I'll try to finish most of them by this week actually. If you have some spare time, please copyedit, expand, whatever to those articles. Also, if you can, please take another look at theTranscendental Etude Articles. They need some wikifying and expansion as well. ALTON .ıl 21:50, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Beethoven Piano Concertos

Firstly I didn't notice you added those 'v.d.e.' things. I thought I had put them in by mistake. Sorry about that, I'll put those back as I see how useful they are. I think the way you added them is fine, you simply add Tnavbar-header and the associated name page at the end. Centy 23:28, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Mendelssohn Violin Concerto

OK, I'm going to make an effort to get this to GA status. This means I'll at some point expand the analysis of each individual movement with a few more technical details required of the violin.

Also, one of us should write the history and background of the concerto and then we should find at least 2 or 3 good books to reference from. Maybe I could write the standard anecdotes about this peace and you could reference them? Hopefully, the article should be finished soon.

Centy 00:06, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, that's great. I actually have a English translation of the letter Mendelssohn wrote to David from a book of Mendelssohn letters. I'll use that for reference too. Centy 11:52, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

OK, I've written the history of the composition of the piece. I don't whether to call it History or Compisition. At the moment I've plummed for the former. I've tried to keep NPOV. The only contentious comment about it being one of the best loved VCs has been triple referenced. I think we also need to find a reference about it being oft performed. Centy 02:30, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

RealPlayer doesn't work on my laptop, so I'm writing the article without listening to the BBC discussion. I'll nominate it for GA soon (I personally think it's nearly there). If there's any you want to add, feel free. Centy 21:14, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Template:ChopinÉtudes

Yeah, I don't really like the design overall. The picture can go, I agree. I'm not sure what other modifications to make, but it just looks funny. I'm thinking a horizontal version like so

Opus 10 No. 1 No. 2 No. 3 etc.

Opus 25 No. 1 No. 2 No. 3 etc.

Three études No. 1 etc.

would be the best use of space. The reason I refrained from a version like that initially, was because it provides absolutely no help finding the one you'd want, and it would look like a big block. I don't know. Do what you want with it, because I know there's something wrong about it, I don't know what. ALTON .ıl 22:32, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re Template:Beethoven concertos

Hi DavidRF,

...you've checked in some navbox changes to the Beethoven Concertos. How do you get those to open up by default?

If I've implemented it correctly, {{Beethoven concertos|state=uncollapsed}} should produce this result (cf the template's own page). Hope you approve, David Kernow (talk) 02:15, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Haydn Op. 76

Just read the article. Fine work! Eusebeus 11:12, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Beethoven Violin Sonatas Template

Here is where I have to disagree with how the templates boxes have been done. Both the Beethoven piano and violin sonatas are named by their number (eg. No. 23 for the Appassionata) in the title of their Wikipedia page, why should navboxes be different? I for one can easily identify the violin sonatas by number rather than Opus numbers. I find in cases where a fixed ordering of the numbers (like the Beethoven piano sonatas) has emerged there is no need to use Opus numbers, especially when some sonatas are bunched as 2 opus numbers etc. I think the numbering 1-10 should stay and I would argue the Piano Sonatas should also use the 1-32 numbers. For example the Beethoven symphonies are numbered 1 to 9 not by Opus number.

I can easily reel of the Sonata number of many Beethoven sonatas, but I struggle to identify any by the Opus numbers. I'm sure this is the same for many people and the whole point of a navbox is to make navigation easier.

Centy 13:20, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

RFA nomination

I have been nominated to be an admin. If you support me, please indicate so on the RFA page. Thank you.

— superbfc [ talk | cont ] — 23:41, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Classical Music Barnstar

		The Classical Music Barnstar
		Awarded to DavidRF for tidying and reorganising the contents of Category:Pieces almost immediately after the issue was brought up. Keep up the good work!
		Awarded by Centy at 17:20, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]	Unique ID #0002

Michael Haydn Symphonies template

Thanks for the Michael Haydn Symphonies template. It's already making certain multiple edits a breeze. Anton Mravcek 23:06, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Composer navigational boxes

I appreciate all the effort you've go to in making the symphony template boxes for Mozart and Haydn. However, just to let you know that the naming of these templates should be according to the MoS Template:Composer symphonies with symphony/concerto etc beginning with a lowercase letter and a space between the composer and the type of work. See Template:Mendelssohn symphonies and Template:Chopin ballades for examples. Centy – reply• contribs – 19:24, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We can move the templates to the correct name for now and then change all the redirects when we get the time. Happily, template transclusions take care of the redirects for us. Centy – reply• contribs – 21:12, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Mozart's Haffner symphony

Dear DavidRF,

I appreciate your quick response in removing my contribution for Mozart's Haffner symphony. [[1]]

I just wanted to clarify with you that "No", I havn't copied my research from any source whatsoever - except where I have correctly referenced any quotes throughout the article. This article is the result of much time and research into Mozart's Haffner Symphony I completed for my Music Degree some time ago. My lecturers were thoroughly impressed with the work and accuracy of my research.

I noticed that you were a little uncertain about whether Mozart's SERENADE and his Haffner SYMPHONY are related. Yes, after researching in various books dedicated to the work of Mozart, they are actually related to each other - but please don't confuse the Haffner Serenade with THIS serenade (I am referring to the Serenade presented at the enoblement of Sigmund Haffner - rather than the offical "Haffner Serenade" that was presented at the wedding of Sigmund's sister Elisabeth Haffner.) At first glance, one may not see the connection between the two, but a close investigation will reveal quite the opposite.

Hope you will take this into account, and perhaps allow me to repost my article. you are more than welcome to help "tidy" it up if you believe it needs to be.

Kind regards, Professor in music

Hope to hear your response soon!

--~~from a musician's perspective~~ 12:46, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replied to your talk page. DavidRF 16:20, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Haffner Symphony

Hello, Thankyou for your quick response. What do I need to do in order to "wikify" my article, and then what do I need to repost it again?

Thanks--~~from a musician's perspective~~ 12:28, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Haffner Symphony

Thanks, much appreciated for being willing to "tidy" up the Haffner Symphony article. Kind regards--~~from a musician's perspective~~ 00:07, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of compositions

Hello David, I have noticed that you are an avid contributor to Mozart-related articles, so I was wondering whether you could help me out with something. I recently created this article; it details a fragment composed in 1782 by Mozart to commemorate the Great Siege of Gibraltar. However there is scarcely any information available so I haven't been able to ferret out any more than what there already is the article. Which list of compositions do you suggest I add it to (perhaps under the heading of 'Fragments')? I thought of adding it to List of compositions by Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart but I'm not sure. You probably know better than I do, so any help would be greatly appreciated. Cheers, Chris.B 11:31, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent, I'm glad you liked it.

Thanks, Chris.B 20:16, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Translation or überzeztung

Piano Sonata No. 16 (Schubert) is firstly written up in japanese wiki. Would you translate the article in English? ---Kaori Makube 04:19, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Symphony No. 9 (Dvořák)

Hello, my reply on your questions there isn't clear enough as I was in a hurry that time. I have a complete full score of the ninth published by Dover which written in German or Italian(I am not sure). In the second movement, it indicates "Trombone basso e Tuba" and I don't know what "e" means. Do you know what it means? (Addaick 10:23, 2 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks for your answer:) I have add the notes about the use of tuba in the Nineth, please take a look, thanks. (Addaick 08:42, 5 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Haydn Brothers' symphonies articles

Hi, me again. In recent times Jindřichův Smith‎ and me had argued about the format of Joesph and Michael Hayden symphonies articles. In my side, I think that it should be have a "Date and Scoring" section(In fact, the majority of Joseph Hadyn's have this section). So I changed the remaining articles to be also having th section too. But these were reverted by Jindřichův Smith‎. So I argued with him for a quite long time. At last, we are in same side. We came to conclude that "majority" articles should be uniformized(that means there are no "Date and Scoring" section like Symphony No.53) and I decide to help him to uniformize all those "majority". Do you agree with the uniformation? If so, can you do us a favour? You may take reference here. It is the dicussion between Jindřichův Smith‎ and me, thanks:) (Addaick 14:36, 6 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Colour of templates?

I am recently working with the Arnold Bax's symphonies templates. Is there a restriction on the background colour? Which is "tan" in colour? (Addaick 14:51, 12 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks for your reply. Well, by the time I am writing this, only the template page colour is matched. I have to do it once again in every pages. Are there any one-way methods to standardlise it so that I need not do it again and again in every page? (Addaick 03:23, 13 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Ha! I am currently checking my watchlist and I thought that you just simply delete the templates. Please forgive me for this. Well, this proves that my poor knowledge about the editing system of Wikipedia! Anyway, much thanks for your fixing:) (Addaick 11:39, 13 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]

E-mail

Do you mind if I contact you through E-mail? (Addaick 11:50, 13 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]

See you in E-mail:) (Addaick 12:06, 13 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Reicha category

Hello, thank you for creating the category for Reicha's works. I didn't know how to do that and was going to ask for help at the Help Desk; last time I tried creating a category I screwed everything up badly :) So thanks! Jashiin 12:23, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

CfD nomination of Category:Looney Tunes Golden Collection

I have nominated Category:Looney Tunes Golden Collection (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Collectonian (talk) 00:22, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should put back Chip 'n Dale Rescue Rangers DVD releases. Collectonian took off that article without a vote for detetion, she was also very rude to me when I put back my uploaded photos back on the main article and she took them off. The photos were on the main article until early 2007 when they were put on the DVD article. She has deleted that article and has not allowed me to put my photos back on the main article which is unfair. Please do something about her because I have had too many photos deleted because I did not get my way. I put my photos in my sandbox so they would not get those deletion within seven days on them. Please I need your help. Thank You.--Stco23 (talk) 12:28, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stco23, you do realize that asking others to redo your edits can be considered Meat Puppetry and is a warnable (and blockable) violation, right? I was not rude to you. You not liking the enforcement of Wikipedia guidelines and policies is not rude. I removed the photos because they were unnecessary to the article and you messed up the article format with the way you added them. DVD covers are not a requirement in an article nor is it necessary (or normal), to illustrate every DVD release with an image. The table format currently in use is the standard method of listing them per the MOS. The fact that you have had "too many photos" deleted because you didn't get your way goes to show that I'm not the only editor to feel you are trying to add excessive images to articles. Read WP:Image to learn when images are appropriate. Collectonian (talk) 15:40, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cite templates

When using these (as with the Quebec Boccherini pages), it's good, I gather (though I say without sarcasm that I am well aware you are more familiar with Wikipedia:Citation templates and such than I am!...), not to backdate the "accessdate" (unless you did check that the information was on the site on that day and are only just getting around to editing now, that is!)

I generally don't to the extent of creating two different templates for the same page on this site, same book/website/... information etc. ... if they differ only by accessdate- that would prevent the use of the / feature - but on different pages on this site and different information in the template(s), yes. I admit I am not the best with these shortcuts by a farsight(cite), though. Schissel | Sound the Note! 05:53, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ich hatte viel Bekümmernis

Thanks for catching that. I don't know what I was thinking. --AndrewHowse (talk) 16:38, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Piano Quintet No. 2 (Dvořák)

An user has just put a lot of "information" to the Piano Quintet No. 2 (Dvořák) article and he states that the source of the information is from a programme note and CD booklet, I am not sure of this. However, I determine that those information is directly copied from the source without any edition. I don't know what I can do but decides to put those information into two section in order to keep the cleanness of the article. Can you take a look on this and do something? Thanks:) Addaick (talk) 04:01, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why you help him to add reference? I am sure that he didn't know any of these references that you have posted. Addaick (talk) 05:11, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean that changing back to two seperate sections? Addaick (talk) 05:20, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your great help. I may call for your help once again when that users or whoever edit in this way:) Addaick (talk) 06:54, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge discussion for Symphony No. 104 (Haydn)

An article that you have been involved in editing, Symphony No. 104 (Haydn) , has been proposed to be merged into another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. --Pixelface (talk) 05:24, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Expanding the categories for Handel?

Hi. I guess I was planning to expand the categories for Handel (it's in a bit of a mess at the moment). Is it not a good idea to create a category for each of the sections of his compositions (as I've grouped them on List_of_compositions_by_George_Frideric_Handel)? HWV 258 03:21, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nicknames in italics

Hi. I don't mind, but was following what seemed to be the same practice elsewhere (including some of the other symphony templates I've seen thus far). If they're not names given by the composer, perhaps they should be in speechmarks rather than italics? Thanks for your message. Sardanaphalus (talk) 01:11, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think I know what you mean, e.g. when the sloping letters collide with closing brackets or make it look as if there's a space after opening brackets. Maybe there's a consensus somewhere you could apply or try to transform. Sardanaphalus (talk) 01:19, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]